Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 43 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: Really, how hard is any this to understand? Robert, With Ben Carson? The man loves the country. With him, the cynical way you parse him is extremely hard to understand. Try coming from being a black person in poverty to a world class brain scientist based on servant-master jockeying and vindictiveness. I can't think of a better formula for failure at becoming a surgeon. People can do that in politics because a politician doesn't need any skills. The producer mindset is different. Trump's a producer. Carson's a producer. That's why they click. It's not because Carson is pissed at Cruz. I believe Carson actually is miffed at Cruz, but it's minor compared to his love of America. It's not a deal-killer. I always see you have difficulty believing that people resonate with the morality and values Trump lives by. But they do. In fact, you refuse to even see his morality and values, which is probably why you don't understand this resonance. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 2 hours ago, Peter said: Peter ASP - Ayn's Special Peter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Adam thought of the acronym, “ASP - Ayn's Special Peter?” What she did in her off hours is hers to keep privates. Get the “s” at the end? Heh. I am glad John stayed in the race to keep Trump from stealing the Convention. So a Bronze medal to Kasich. IF Cruz doesn’t win Wisconsin is it over? A local talk show guy, Duke Brooks thinks it is. It will be tough for his math, if Cruz doesn’t win there. Are they on central time? It probably won’t be predictable or projectable until after 9pm est. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: The producer mindset is different. Trump's a producer. Carson's a producer. That's why they click. It's not because Carson is pissed at Cruz. I believe Carson actually is miffed at Cruz, but it's minor compared to his love of America. It's not a deal-killer. I always see you have difficulty believing that people resonate with the morality and values Trump lives by. But they do. In fact, you refuse to even see his morality and values, which is probably why you don't understand this resonance. Michael, Apparently Donald Trump the politician and Donald Trump the producer are not even like Mister Hyde and Doctor Jekyll. The two Donald Trumps are entirely different people. But most of us, in our unclued state, wrongly persist in confusing them. Cause otherwise, we'd have to note that Trump the politician trashed Ben Carson's life work as a neurosurgeon. Also claimed, if memory serves, that Carson is mentally unstable. Carson has entirely forgiven Trump, then, because Trump the producer has unwaveringly respected Carson the producer, and all that unpleasantness was merely the work of Trump the politician trashing Carson the politician. Forgive me for being skeptical. See, I'm pretty sure Donald J. Trump is all one person. It wouldn't be unusual, actually, if politics brought out the worst in a guy who otherwise had quite a few redeeming features. I've always thought Mitt Romney was both productive and a genuinely nice guy, outside of politics. Getting mixed up in politics made him a ditherer and a panderer, not to mention downright unconvincing to the average potential voter. So I don't see why getting mixed up in politics couldn't be bringing out the worst in Donald Trump: the vaunting, the boasting, the compulsive putdowns, the vindictiveness, the demands for humble servitude or else, the nonstop lying, the pulling of "perfect statistics" out of his rear end, the presumption that if elected President he'll be reigning as Emperor. Except, apparently, I've been mixing up the productive Donald Trump with some imposter. Was Donald J. Trump separated at birth from an evil identical twin? It would make for great show-biz, if nothing else. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 The brilliant Robert Campbell wrote: Apparently Donald Trump the politician and Donald Trump the producer are not even like Mister Hyde and Doctor Jekyll. The two Donald Trumps are entirely different people. end quote Hmmmm? . . . and Spock makes four. Now that we are all here, I wish you all luck in your impersonations of 21st Century Americans. Spock: Thank you Captain. Time travel and the possibility of changing this terribly wrong instance in history is exhilarating. Kirk: Is everyone’s disguise perfect? Spock: Aye Sir. They are all prepared to take the places of Trump, Cruz, and Kasich just before the fist fight begins after the Wisconsin primary. And I of course, will be the interviewer, Bret Baer. Kirk: It's known as The Night the Republicans Lost the Election, ushering in eight years of despotism with Hillary and VP Bernie at the helm. Spock: Yes Sir. It was a dark day. They should never have been in the same room after the results came in. As we descend, the real candidates will be beamed into a state of stasis and will remember nothing. Kirk: Gentlemen, remember to bring your wood. Beam them down, Scotty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Trump as Emperor. Michael: "What beautiful clothes!" Robert: "The Emperor is naked!" Brant: "WTF?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 4 hours ago, Robert Campbell said: The two Donald Trumps are entirely different people. Robert, I never said Trump was entirely two different people. You just did. You set up the strawman, attributed it to me (by insinuation), then went about discussing it. You also said: "But most of us, in our unclued state, wrongly persist in confusing them." From the rest of your comment, I take this to mean you don't see the producer values in Trump's personality and life, or you're downplaying them or something. But there are a hell of a lot of Trump supporters who see them and they are growing. I keep pointing this resonance out to you. How do I know it? Because I live it. I am it. And you continue to resist this knowledge. And this, I submit, is the root of your "unclued state." (I realize you were being sarcastic, but your comment is actually correct on this point.) Granted, none of this fits the Trump monster storyline you seem to like, but I know what I am. And so do Trump supporters. Most of this growing mass of American producers are not in an unclued state about resonating with Trump. They are producers and they recognize others who are, too. The feeling is like coming home. (Rand called this the American sense of life.) Did I mention this group is growing in the election? btw - Trump and Carson talked through the nastiness of the election. From the way both spoke about it, I don't think either of them relish the nastiness, but they recognize it for what it is. Unlike folks who don't want to see Trump win the election, they don't attribute it with more meaning than it has (election bullshit). The anti-Trump folks think this is an indication of all kinds of evil and the true true nature of Trump's true evil truth, which is frozen in time and fixed for eternity. Including Carson as the supreme sellout. Except it isn't. It's just a sign of our media times where pro-wrestling and action movies are far more popular than symphony orchestra concerts. Frankly, evolutionary psychology, brain structure, neuroscience, or however you want to characterize the nature of the limbic system on down explains this appeal, so from that lens, it's neither good nor bad. It just is. Producers like Carson and Trump recognize when there is more than just fighting and that's the higher-level part they relish in each other. The other stuff is like going to the bathroom. You can't avoid it, but you can decide if it is pleasurable or disgusting. Trump decides to enjoy it. Carson doesn't. But they both know when it's over and they move on. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I never said Trump was entirely two different people. You just did. You set up the strawman, attributed it to me (by insinuation), then went about discussing it. You also said: "But most of us, in our unclued state, wrongly persist in confusing them." From the rest of your comment, I take this to mean you don't see the producer values in Trump's personality and life, or you're downplaying them or something. But there are a hell of a lot of Trump supporters who see them and they are growing. I keep pointing this resonance out to you. How do I know it? Because I live it. I am it. And you continue to resist this knowledge. And this, I submit, is the root of your "unclued state." (I realize you were being sarcastic, but your comment is actually correct on this point.) Granted, none of this fits the Trump monster storyline you seem to like, but I know what I am. And so do Trump supporters. Most of this growing mass of American producers are not in an unclued state about resonating with Trump. They are producers and they recognize others who are, too. The feeling is like coming home. (Rand called this the American sense of life.) Did I mention this group is growing in the election? Michael, If you can't see Donald Trump the politician (he's been a constant, inescapable presence since July of last year), you must be thinking that somehow Trump the politician is a different person from Donald Trump the producer. What has Donald Trump's nearly full-time activity been, these 9 months or more? He has been markedly exceeding any of his rivals in doing the worst things thet American politicians are prone to do. Surely all of his lying is not an expression of his producer values. Surely all of his vindictiveness is not an expression of his producer values. Surely his unending egocentrism is not an expression of his producer values. You can say that Trump supporters are still growing in number, and I can say they probably are not. Neither of us will really know till June 7, possibly not till well after that. What we know, on this particular day, April 5, is that Donald Trump has lost the Wisconsin primary to Ted Cruz, who is ahead of him by nearly 20% with 40% of the votes counted. We won't know, till returns come in from all over that state, whether Trump has merely lost to Cruz, or has had his ass handed to him. What we are definitely not seeing, in April in the state of Wisconsin, is growing support for Donald Trump. There is some interesting material in the early exit poll analyses for Republican primary voters. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/live-republican-primary-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=38164180 "nearly four in 10 GOP primary voters in Wisconsin say they'd [be] "scared" of what Trump would do in office if elected president — hitting nearly six in 10 among Cruz and Kasich supporters. Those are far greater than the levels of concern among Trump supporters we see about Cruz or Kasich (fewer than two in 10 Trump supporters are scared of a Kasich win, a quarter for Cruz)." "Many more people think Trump has run the most unfair campaign — more than half say so, vs. a quarter for Cruz and one in 10 for Kasich." (Bolding is mine.) I don't know whether ABC asked a question about the primary candidates' attitudes toward Scott Walker. If so, the results haven't been reported yet. (Unless all of the polling was designed by fools, some organization's exit polls did include such a question.) But the proposition that Trump ran an unfair campaign has to be related. It doesn't look as though re-stomping Scott Walker—misrepresenting his record as governor to voters in his own state, running him down with "perfect statistics" that many Republicans in Wisconsin must have realized Trump was pulling out of his rear end—was a winning strategy. Is the re-stomping of Scott Walker an expression of producer values? Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 22 hours ago, Robert Campbell said: What we are definitely not seeing, in April in the state of Wisconsin, is growing support for Donald Trump. Robert, Are you kidding? With the entire machine of Wisconsin against him and he still pulls off the numbers he does? You don't see that as growing? In other words, you don't see this state going to him in a general election? I would be very interested to see the Republican establishment machine tell Wisconsin voters to vote for Hillary. To vote for anyone but Trump like they are doing now (see here for instance). It's easy to surf on a win and proclaim the other has no growth value. Let's see how this works after New York. Cruz is having a good moment. He needs to enjoy it because I doubt it will last. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 22 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, Are you kidding? With the entire machine of Wisconsin against him and he still pulls off the numbers he does? You don't see that as growing? In other words, you don't see this state going to him in a general election? I would be very interested to see the Republican establishment machine tell Wisconsin voters to vote for Hillary. To vote for anyone but Trump like they are doing now (see here for instance). It's easy to surf on a win and proclaim the other has no growth value. Let's see how this works after New York. Cruz is having a good moment. He needs to enjoy it because I doubt it will last. Michael Michael, You imagine there's a Republican machine in Wisconsin. I suppose Donald Trump does, too. One of the things neither your candidate nor his supporters have gotten their heads around is that, for many in Wisconsin, Paul Ryan is a guy who has supported Scott Walker and other Republicans at the state level when they needed it. People from the rest of the country now see him solely as the handpicked successor to John Boehner, the architect of Congressional surrenders on spending, and so on. Then they project Ryan's Washington establishment connections back into the state. If there were a Republican machine in Wisconsin, run by and for the benefit of interests in Washington, DC, and it was what got Scott Walker elected, got him through a recall with a bigger margin than he'd first been elected by (he's the only governor to be subject to a recall who won the recall election), then got him reelected, you'd think that same machine could have arranged for Mitt Romney to carry Wisconsin against Barack Obama. It couldn't and it didn't. You'd think that machine could have propelled Tommy Thompson into the US Senate, over Tammy Baldwin. It couldn't. Somehow a critical subpopulation of Wisconsinites were a lot more enthusiastic about Walker than they were about Mittens, or about a guy like Thompson who should have stayed retired. If Donald Trump is the nominee, I don't know whether he'll be able to carry Wisconsin. We'll see how whether Trump meets current expectations in the New York primary, but I'm thinking he might actually have a better shot at beating Hillary Clinton in New York than in Wisconsin. What I do know is that, if he gets nominated and then loses in Wisconsin, it won't be because Karl Rove or Trent Lott or Mitch McConnell said "Better Hillary than Trump." Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 10 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: What I do know is that, if he gets nominated and then loses in Wisconsin, it won't be because Karl Rove or Trent Lott or Mitch McConnell said "Better Hillary than Trump." Robert, That was my point. The establishment machine, which is run on "anyone but Trump" right now (definitely not "pro-Cruz" at root), will not be able to keep that up in the general. What little support they still have with the public will evaporate if they try that. Maybe I should have written that clearer. And, yes, I am convinced there's a Republican establishment machine in Wisconsin. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted April 6, 2016 Author Share Posted April 6, 2016 55 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: You can say that Trump supporters are still growing in number, and I can say they probably are not. Neither of us will really know till June 7, possibly not till well after that. What we know, on this particular day, April 5, is that Donald Trump has lost the Wisconsin primary to Ted Cruz, who is ahead of him by nearly 20% with 40% of the votes counted. We won't know, till returns come in from all over that state, whether Trump has merely lost to Cruz, or has had his ass handed to him. What we are definitely not seeing, in April in the state of Wisconsin, is growing support for Donald Trump. Robert, I'm with you... The national GOP race is now Trump and Cruz neck and neck, within "the margin of error." That does not reflect "growing support for Donald Trump." Wisconsin was Trump's to lose several weeks ago, and he lost it BIG. True, he shot himself repeatedly in the foot the last couple of weeks, and SP's screetchy voice and wacked-out syntax hasn't worked its previous magic. But people seem to be catching on, and they are making their choice. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 3 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: And, yes, I am convinced there's a Republican establishment machine in Wisconsin. Michael, What Mitch McConnell (or ... fill in the establishment Republican you most love to hate) says they ought to do isn't going to have any discernible influence on Wisconsin voters in November. Such admonitions might have some effect somewhere else. Each state has its own political dynamics. But if you think there is a Republican establishment machine in Wisconsin in 2016, you don't know the first thing about Wisconsin. You're in good company, I suppose; your candidate doesn't either. From Donald Trump is not part of the Republican Establishment (True) it does not follow that Anyone who opposes Donald Trump is part of the Republican Establishment (False). Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted April 6, 2016 Author Share Posted April 6, 2016 4 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: Each state has its own political dynamics. If Drumpf doesn't win New York by at least...or, let's say...20 points, does that mean that his victory (if he even wins the state) doesn't mean that much? What percentage would Drumpf supporters take as a "bad sign" in the NY primary results? Or would even a loss be shrugged off as unimportant? Just curious. All day long, we were hearing that if Cruzafix doesn't beat Drumpf by double digits, his chances were over. Well, he got TWICE double digits. So, how the Drumpf supporters interpret THAT? As a sign that Drumpf's support is still GROWING! WTF??? I thought this was OL, not LOL. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Roger, I don't know what margin Trump needs to win by in New York, if he is to meet expectations. Presumably a very large one. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 15 minutes ago, Robert Campbell said: What Mitch McConnell (or ... fill in the establishment Republican you most love to hate) says they ought to do isn't going to have any discernible influence on Wisconsin voters in November. Robert, This is the second time you are saying something like this, so I have to make a comment. Just because an establishment Republican machine exists, that does not mean it is stronger than the establishment Democrat machine. And just because I know that doesn't equate to me not knowing the first thing about Wisconsin. Something to think about. Here, let me help you with understanding the existence of the machine in Wisconsin: stop trump movement in wisconsin They threw everything including the kitchen sink at Trump in Wisconsin and you know it. I wish Trump would have won, but I'm proud of what he did get with that much effort against him. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Michael, Self-handicapping ain't going to cut it here. Neither will a second Dolchstosslegende. Trump wants to believe that Iowa was his, till Lyin' Ted stole it from him. Now, what's it going to be? Lyin' Ted ganged up with Charlie Sykes, Paul Ryan, Scott Walker, Karl Rove, Mitch McConnell and Bob Dole to steal Wisconsin from him? Any adversity he faced was largely self-generated. Most Wisconsin Republicans didn't like or trust him to begin with. I expect they saw him as nasty, full of BS, endlessly self-aggrandizing, unrelentingly vindictive, uninterested in most of the issues that mattered to them, who the hell knows what he actually stands for, who the hell knows what he'll actually do? And you don't have to take my word for any of this. Let's see the complete exit poll analyses. Then when he went in to re-stomp Scott Walker, it was time to put a fork in him. By the way, if you think the placement of advertisements by national organizations necessarily determines the outcome of a political contest, have you forgotten how much money American Crossroads pissed away in 2012? You seem incapable of realizing that, for every convert Donald Trump has made, he's alienated, pissed off, or scared the pants off two or three times as many people. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Robert, Trump said something bad about Scott Walker. This is why he didn't win Wisconsin. All the negative ads and campaigns by the establishment had no effect on it. Yeah, right. If you say so... I ain't buying it. I saw lots of people interviewed who were for Ted Cruz say they would be fine voting for Trump if he wins the nomination. The man in the street says that, not the pundits. Oh.. I forgot... Trump said something bad about Scott Walker... poof Those people no longer exist. Enjoy your fleeting moment. There won't be many such. Doth thou like crow? Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted April 6, 2016 Author Share Posted April 6, 2016 From HuffandPuff Post... Cruz's Wisconsin Win Could Put Nomination Out of Trump's Reach by Tory Newmyer April 6, 2016, 12:45 AM EDT Senator Ted Cruz embraces his wife Heidi Cruz during a campaign event in Milwaukee, Wisconsin on April 5, 2016 Bloomberg via Getty Images Trump now faces a steep climb to clinching the nomination before the convention. For once, Ted Cruz and the Washington professional class he claims to loathe agree on something: The Texas Senator’s win in Wisconsin represents a watershed moment in the Republican presidential sweepstakes. The candidate’s convincing Badger State victory — he romped over frontrunner Donald Trump statewide by roughly 15 points — raises the likelihood that the contest will tumble all the way into the national convention in Cleveland. That spells terrible news for Trump, whose recent run of wild statements on both foreign and domestic policy have helped rally Republican opposition to his candidacy and increased the urgency for party leaders to block his nomination. “Tonight is a turning point,” Cruz said in his victory speech. “It is a rallying cry. It is a call from the hardworking men and women of Wisconsin to the people of America. We have a choice, a real choice.” Cruz went on to cast his win as a call for “unity” and for “hope” — a message of uplift plainly meant to contrast with the severity of Trump’s appeals. Trump helped drive home the distinction himself by issuing a cascade of insults against Cruz in a written statement in lieu of a public appearance. Rather than congratulating Cruz, the Trump campaign’s statement called him “worse than a puppet — he is a Trojan horse, being used by the party bosses attempting to steal the nomination from Mr. Trump.” Trump faces a more immediate challenge from the cold, hard delegate math. Once the Wisconsin delegates are apportioned, he’ll need close to 60% of those remaining to reach the 1,237 delegate threshold to clinch the nomination. And Trump’s campaign organization doesn’t appear up to managing a contest that will now be fought in significant part at the level of Congressional districts — to say nothing of mastering the arcane rules, gamesmanship, and delegate-wrangling necessary to prevail at a contested convention. The next contest, two weeks away in Trump’s home state of New York, offers the businessman the potential for redemption and to twist momentum back in his favor. But since the state awards its delegates on a proportional basis, only a lights-out performance there across every corner of the state would inch him closer to his goal of wrapping up the race before Cleveland. And that kind of win looks increasingly remote after his Wisconsin defeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
From HuffandPuff Post... Cruz's Wisconsin Win Could Put Nomination Out of Trump's Reach by Tory Newmyer April 6, 2016, 12:45 AM EDT
Peter Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Thanks to the clear thinking folks in Wisconsin. Now, if Trump persists in his smear campaign against Cruz and his family or if Trump LIES and calls Ted “Lying Ted” one more time I will be tempted to support the stop – Trump group, “Our Principles PAC.” Is it legal? Yes. Is it fair? Yes, especially since it seeks to keep a dangerous ignoramus from cheating (or as Trump calls it, dealing) his way to the White House. Michael wrote: I ain't buying it. I saw lots of people interviewed who were for Ted Cruz say they would be fine voting for Trump if he wins the nomination. end quote As always if all else fails and Cruz loses, we patriots and Objectivists will pull the pin on the grenade and help to elect Donald Trump. But if you want to stop Trump, please read the following. Peter The article: Stop-Trump group found Trump’s weakness and is using it, 04/05/16 03:59 PM—Updated 04/05/16 05:59 PM group282By Leigh Ann Caldwell The most robust group working to stop Donald Trump from winning the Republican presidential nomination, Our Principles PAC, is shifting its focus from stopping Trump at the polls to limiting his success in acquiring delegates, a major weakness for the Republican front-runner. The group is using complicated Republican Party procedure to outmaneuver Trump in the tedious delegate selection process necessary to win the party’s nomination. “Moving beyond Wisconsin, we’re not focusing on statewide wins as much as the delegate mass,” co-founder of Our Principles PAC, Katie Packer, told NBC News. “We’re going to be working very aggressively to elect delegates that aren’t for Trump.” The super PAC has been using its resources to persuade voters against Trump through television, digital and mailed advertising, but as the delegate selection process becomes critical in the three-person race for the nomination, the group is using the process to beat Trump. As state Republican parties hold their delegate selection committees over the next two months, Our Principles PAC is deploying people and resources to ensure that delegates selected to nominate the party’s nominee at the GOP convention this summer in Cleveland are not Trump supporters. “It’s an Achilles Heel for him,” Packer said, referring to Trump’s inability to secure supportive delegates. “They just don’t have the organization you have to have to be the nominee.” For instance, Colorado, which didn’t hold a primary, has been holding its delegate selection meetings in each of its counties over the past two weeks. The group has been “communicating with” party activists there to make sure they know who the non-Trump delegates are. Of the six delegates selected so far, Packer said, none are Trump supporters. The state’s delegate selection process should be complete Sunday. Michigan is another state they will be watching closely. It holds its party convention to elect delegates next week. It’s a tactic that proved successful already. The group worked diligently at North Dakota’s state convention last weekend. In addition to anti-Trump mobile digital ads targeting the convention’s attendees, they called all registered participants to sway them away from Trump. Combining their efforts with the organized campaign of Sen. Ted Cruz, it worked. Of the 25 delegates elected to represent North Dakota at the Republican National Convention this summer, Trump came away with no committed delegates. While only a fraction of states have awarded delegates, Trump has been out-maneuvered. It’s a complicated process where Republican Party activists in each state gather to elect delegates for the Republican Party’s national presidential nominating convention in July. According to officials at the Republican National Committee, more than 90 percent of delegates are bound to the winner of the state’s primary or caucus. But if no candidate achieves a majority - 1,237 delegates - then balloting at the national convention goes to a second round where most of those delegates become unbound - they are free to support whomever they want. So a bound Trump delegate can support Cruz or any other person in a second round, possibly making this delegation selection process critical. Trump has called the system “corrupt,” but an outsider who has few political veterans working for him, he has been disorganized and undisciplined on the critical delegate selection process. He is trying to catch up by hiring Republican strategist Paul Manafort to run his state convention operation. Packer, meanwhile, is a presidential campaign veteran with experience at state conventions. She was deputy campaign manager for Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential run and even though he secured the nomination in April through the voting process, he took no chances and worked the state conventions to ensure that his supporters won delegate slots. Our Principles PAC’s focus on state conventions isn’t a complete replacement for their focus on primary voters. They will simultaneously work to ensure that Trump doesn’t obtain 1,237 delegates, because if he does then it would make the entire focus on the states’ delegate contests moot. Packer believes that if Trump loses Wisconsin, which is voting Tuesday, there is no way that he can obtain enough delegates through the voting process, making a second round of balloting at the national convention necessary. “By our count if he loses Wisconsin, he does not get to 1,237, period,” Packer said, making Wisconsin a critical juncture in the campaign. They have been “literally saturating” talk radio with anti-Trump ads in the state. They’ve aired issue-specific television in ads in smaller markets, including one on Trump’s position on eminent domain. They also have been targeting voter lists of people who supported Gov. Scott Walker and 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney. The group has spent more than $1.2 million in Wisconsin on television advertising, according to advertising tracking group SMG Delta and NBC News, bringing their primary spending to more than $10 million, according to SMG Delta and filings to the Federal Election Commission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted April 6, 2016 Author Share Posted April 6, 2016 3 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: Trump faces a more immediate challenge from the cold, hard delegate math. Once the Wisconsin delegates are apportioned, he’ll need close to 60% of those remaining to reach the 1,237 delegate threshold to clinch the nomination. And Trump’s campaign organization doesn’t appear up to managing a contest that will now be fought in significant part at the level of Congressional districts — to say nothing of mastering the arcane rules, gamesmanship, and delegate-wrangling necessary to prevail at a contested convention. But...but...but...I thought that Herr Drumpf was "the master of the deal." Well, I guess that name-recognition and rudeness only take you so far. And then, the need for brains and understanding the system kicks in, and we find out who has done their homework and who has not. (That, I suspect, will turn out to be Brother Cruzafix - or, perhaps we Randy folk could call him Brother Hugh Astfurrit. ) REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 The anti-Cruz vote exceeded his total which clearly shows that Cruz is not favored by the rank and file Republicans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 5 hours ago, Selene said: The anti-Cruz vote exceeded his total which clearly shows that Cruz is not favored by the rank and file Republicans... Adam, I believe there is also a huge number of anti-Cruz voters who voted for Cruz last night, not to elect Cruz, but to stop Trump. Oddly enough, I don't believe they are all establishment Republicans. I believe there is a huge contingent who are people susceptible to the establishment Republican kind of message and, maybe, afraid of change. They like the status quo, are not totally against change, but they need to be sold on it. Their default is that life is not so bad as it is. Trump didn't do the selling, but instead took time off for Easter and the birth of his grandson, and then got sidetracked a couple of times. I don't have any data, but I would wager that these voters are also very socially conservative and, to put it simply, Cruz won a battle last night with the National Enquirer. (From the indications I have seen on line, he didn't win the war yet.) These voters are not swayed too much by that stuff unless there is 100% proof or a confession. And even then, they are disgusted by the whole thing. So they got turned off by the mess and transferred their ire to Trump for varying reasons (including the barrage of propaganda from the establishment). Cruz deserved his victory last night because he used his arsenal well, but it was not a pro-Cruz night. It was an anti-Trump night. Let's see how both deal with this reality. Cruz is wicked smart, so I don't think it will go to his head, although it might. And Trump is wicked wicked smart, so let's see what he does. I predict he will start out timid just to show the tut-tut-tutters around him that the soft sell doesn't give immediate results, then get colorful as all hell. Then I expect a brawl. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 6 hours ago, Roger Bissell said: Brother Hugh Astfurrit. Just look at the stuff I have to put up with. Go on, rub it in... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Dolchstosslegende #2: http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/275304-trump-cruz-worse-than-a-puppet Quote “Ted Cruz is worse than a puppet — he is a Trojan horse, being used by the party bosses attempting to steal the nomination from Mr. Trump,” the Trump campaign said in a statement given to Washington Post reporter Robert Costa. Trump did not congratulate Cruz on his win in Wisconsin, something customary on primary nights. He also did not appear in public, a departure for the GOP front-runner who has usually held press events the nights of primaries and caucuses. Neither Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski nor spokeswoman Hope Hicks would return calls, emails, or messages on Tuesday night. Nor would they provide the statement tweeted by Costa. And Trump's own Twitter feed was uncharacteristically quiet more than an hour after Cruz's victory was projected. The Trump campaign portrayed Cruz's win — expected to be by more than 10 points — as illegitimate and unfair. He also accused Cruz of illegally coordinating with supportive super-PACs, but he did not provide any evidence to support the charge. “Lyin' Ted Cruz had the Governor of Wisconsin, many conservative talk radio show hosts, and the entire party apparatus behind him,” the Trump campaign statement read. “Not only was he propelled by the anti-Trump Super PAC's [sic] spending countless millions of dollars on false advertising against Mr. Trump, but he [Cruz] was coordinating with his own Super PAC's [sic] (which is illegal) who totally control him.” If Donald the Entitled doesn't get his act together, pronto, he'll be best advised to drop out of the race. Robert PS. Trump's people must be sorry that the Wisconsin legislature abolished the office of one of the key figures in those "John Doe" investigations. Otherwise, they could demand that a "John Doe" be launched against Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, and 50 PACs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now