home

Is Trump Taking Supporters for Granted?

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2016
Posted on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 06:36:50 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Donald Trump:

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone and I wouldn't lose any voters. Okay? It's like incredible."

I don't even know how to respond to this. If you do, feel free to weigh in.

< ISIS Threatens UK in New Video About Paris Attacks | Obama: Media was harder on Clinton than me in 2008 >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Is Trump Taking Supporters for Granted? | 62 comments (62 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Why it's not funny (5.00 / 6) (#5)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 07:43:42 PM EST
    Not that hardly anyone here would think it was but apparently many do.   I've been reading it all afternoon.

    I have been saying for months, long before most here were taking him seriously, that we should take him seriously.   That was in part because of conversations I had with a very old friend of mine who very early on was making comparisons with a certain notorious historical figure who will here remain nameless because 1.) the comment would probably be deleted and 2.) many might dtop reading if it was.
    But stay with me for just a minute
    It is my opinion that we are at this point dangerously deep in personality cult.  It was often said that Obanas support was more or less a personality cult.  Particularly by those on the right but also by more than a few right in these threads.  This is BS of the highest order IMO but in a way the constant harping on it probably helped pave the way for an actual honest to god personality cult.  IMO
    Obama had actual policy proposals.   Plenty of them.  What policy has Donald proposed?  In fact what of any substance has he ever said about anything.  Tell me the last time a person was expected to be the nominee of a major party, or even a minor  one, with saying one single solitary thing of substance about anything.

    If this is not the definition of personality cult I don't know what would be.

    My old friend made a few points about Donald.  He has picked  an ethnic group to be the enemy within and to blame all the countries problems on.  Mexicans.    And he has picked an enemy without to whip up fear and loathing.  Muslims.   Like this other person people are not taking him seriously.  This allowed this person to take power while most people were still joking about it being possible.
    Finally there is this.    In a 1990 Vanity Fair interview Ivana Trump said he kept a collection of Hitlers speeches by his bed.    The book is called My New Order and it was the sequel to Mein Kampf.  This was later confirmed by Donald himself in a separate interview.

    Look, I know it's not 1939.  I'm just sayin.

    It is quite unsettling, Capt. (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by caseyOR on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 08:05:05 PM EST
    We have had this type of xenophobic demagoguery in our politics before, but I don' t think ever in a candidate with such a real chance to be elected president. Unnerving.

    If Trump wins the GOP nomination, but loses the general election to either Clinton or Sanders, I expect all hell to break loses among his supporters. And given how many of them, I fear, are armed, well. . . . .

    Parent

    lol, did you read that story? (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Mr Natural on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 10:26:16 PM EST
    Donald Trump had Roy Cohn, the Picasso of the inside fix. "Cohn taught Donald which fork to use."

    I thought about the ten years since I had first met Donald Trump. It is fashionable now to say that he was a symbol of the crassness of the 1980s, but Trump became more than a vulgarian. Like Michael Milken, Trump appeared to believe that his money gave him a freedom to set the rules. No one stopped him. His exaggerations and baloney were reported, and people laughed. His bankers showered him with money. City officials almost allowed him to set public policy by erecting his wall of concrete on the Hudson River. New York City, like the bankers from the Chase and Manny Hanny, allowed Trump to exist in a universe where all reality had vanished.


    Parent
    At this time in 2008 (none / 0) (#8)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 09:17:39 PM EST
    what detailed policy proposals had Obama put out?

    Parent
    IMO (none / 0) (#12)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:46:10 AM EST
    personality cult thing started after 9/11 and the comparisons of George W. Bush to Jesus. Trump has just taken it to the nth degree.

    Parent
    Check out (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 08:49:52 AM EST
    the trend lines

    Cruz is now leading in only one poll.  By 2.  Trump is leading in 5.  By 11 in two different polls.

    538 has him at 55% in the poll race And 2 points behind Cruz in the magic fairy dust poll.

    Alllllll aboard.  Trains leavin the station.

    Parent

    Sorry (none / 0) (#16)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 08:52:35 AM EST
    working link

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#30)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 12:29:16 PM EST
    if that CNN ORC poll is as bad on the GOP side as it was on the Dem side I don't know that I would count it however it does seem to be good news for Trump in IA. I guess we shall see if his people actually show up or not fairly soon and all the guessing will be over.

    Parent
    a few things about (none / 0) (#32)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 12:59:30 PM EST
    the cnn and fox polls, they both show huge leads among first time Caucus goers for Trump and Sanders, so those newbies will have to show for those numbers to verify.
     note the first question on the Fox poll (my bold)
    How likely is it that you will attend one of the Iowa caucuses scheduled for February -- will you definitely attend, probably attend, probably not attend, or definitely not attend

    Reword that "go to an overheated auditorium next Monday night to listen to a bunch of church ladies extolling the virtues of Rick Santorum and the rest for 2 hours" and you might get a lower level of enthusiasm.

    Also the fox poll shows Cruz barely leading Trump 31/29 among evangelicals, that just doesn't ring true to me.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:21:31 PM EST
    that's the $64000 question. Certainly there is going to be new caucus goers but nobody knows for sure exactly how many are actually going to show up and I have to say some of these polls saying 75% new are out there. I read where Obama got 57% new in 2008 and so I'm not sure there's going to be close to 20% more new caucus goers.

    The only time I have had close contact with a caucus was when I lived in SC in 1988 and was going to caucus for Gore. I didn't want to go by myself so I tried to get a friend to go and she would not. So I didn't end up going.

    Parent

    And They Can't Poll... (none / 0) (#36)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:35:29 PM EST
    ...the weather, it one thing to say you are going, it's quite another do actually go if it's below zero, in a foot of snow, or both.

    Parent
    I don't get that (none / 0) (#43)
    by sj on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 02:58:17 PM EST
    This isn't an accusation, because you are not alone at all in wanting some sort of moral support at caucus. But that attitude is exactly what makes a caucus "inherently undemocratic".

    It drove me crazy when I was running and promoting them. To me, if you have a point of view, and if you really care strongly about even one issue, then what the he||? Why on earth wouldn't you go? To me, it was even more important than voting because you could be heard. Your voice made a difference.

    At caucus, to the motivated goes the prize. I won't follow polls and I won't project. The only thing that matters is the outcome. I'll watch it play out.

    Parent

    Well, Easy... (none / 0) (#44)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 03:10:47 PM EST
    ...my grandma didn't like leaving the house when there was a risk of falling and breaking her hip again.  

    People without transportation who might normally take the bus or walk might not want to stand outside.

    And of course people who would simply rather stay home because it's GD cold outside.  In a democracy, that is a viable option, and so is not having any opinion or passion about politics.  Or you just might not want to listen to a bunch of nitwits arguing whose gonna nuke the ME first, Trump or Cruz.

    The federal government is closed today because of the weather, not really, but people don't have to work in DC.

    Do they close businesses during the caucus, if I worked 2nd shift is it a guarantee that I could go, or can you cast some quasi-vote ?

    Parent

    Oh don't get me wrong (none / 0) (#46)
    by sj on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 03:36:26 PM EST
    I understand your Grandma's issue. And if cold weather keeps you away at caucus it is likely to keep you away on Election Day as well.

    Look: I'm not trying to promote them as a concept because frankly, you are not saying anything new. And, when I was a Democrat, I was trying to promote them as the available vehicle to be heard. Not as a concept.

    Georgia didn't go because her friend didn't go, not for any of the reasons you mentioned. What I was saying is that that particular reason is very common, and I don't get it.

    But then I have gone to opera and rock concerts and movies and symphony and art shows alone if I couldn't get someone to go with me. So you see, I really mean I just don't get it.

    Parent

    I Know You Know... (none / 0) (#52)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:26:43 PM EST
    ...but is there an alternative for the caucus or does someone who is working simply not get to 'vote'.  Say the police or a nurse, someplace where someone has to be on the job.

    What is very hard is to motivate myself to vote here in Texas.  I don't know that I would wait in line to be part of the minority, but early voting means no lines and I take advantage.  What really sucked, last time around my GF wanted to go and would not go alone, so I had to wait with her even though I already voted.

    Sonofa...

    Voting is not in anyway from and I would imagine a political debate is even worse.  Personally I don't want to know where my neighbors stand, I already dislike most of them, no need to lose respect as well.  But it would be nice to say, 'you did this' when Trump pulls a GWB.


    Parent

    Not really an alternative, no (none / 0) (#59)
    by sj on Tue Jan 26, 2016 at 12:23:42 PM EST
    I Know You Know... (none / 0) (#52)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 03:26:43 PM MDT

    ...but is there an alternative for the caucus or does someone who is working simply not get to 'vote'

    Sadly, you really do have to attend in person.

    Parent
    I Would Think... (none / 0) (#60)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jan 26, 2016 at 12:34:01 PM EST
    ...at some point in time someone would have sued because essentially they are being denied their right to be counted.

    Certain jobs require people work 24/7, so they are guaranteeing that say emergency room workers or air traffic controllers do not get to participate.

    If you have time, can you summarize the process and how it wraps up to the convention and how many people participate in each caucus.  I assume you have to go to the designated one for your area.

    Parent

    Here is a link (none / 0) (#61)
    by sj on Tue Jan 26, 2016 at 07:45:48 PM EST
    Some stuff that isn't clear here:

    • Attendance is open to any registered member of the Party. (At least that's  true for Democrats; I'm not sure how the GOP handles it.) It isn't enough to be a registered voter.

    • After candidate (and candidate advocate) speeches, attendees are broken up into precincts and all work happens at the precinct level.

    • The number of delegates per precinct is predetermined and cannot be affected by attendance, or lack thereof. The only thing that can be affected is the apportionment of those delegates to the candidates for each office. These are the delegates that go on to the County Convention (for Presidential races) and County Assembly for all other races. Delegates to the State convention are chose at the County.

    • Voting on resolutions receives just part of sentence in that write-up but can be kind of a big deal.

    The days of holding a caucus in someone's living room are long gone. Nowadays accessibility is a major consideration. No ramp, no meeting. And rather than finding and vetting individual locations for each precinct we opted to arrange locations at the district level. That meant that candidates or candidate advocates could speechify to the entire district at once instead of trying to attend each precinct gathering. That was good.

    We chose schools because they already met the accessibility requirement and because they would provide access to rooms other than the gymnasium or auditorium for the precinct break outs. They had to be paid of course. And heating or air conditioning was extra. This the Party did pay for.

    Each district captain was responsible for finding and negotiating/reserving the location. In reality, this wasn't that hard once we went to schools. It made payment an easier proposition as well.

    According to the link, the "fun" begins at 7:00. Two to three hours is not uncommon for the entire process. And of course there was clean up. It was much better for the process that the schools had a "must be done by..." hard deadline for school use.

    Anyway, I don't know if I (or the link) have answered of your questions.

    Parent

    Thank You (none / 0) (#62)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jan 27, 2016 at 12:37:46 PM EST


    Parent
    I had (none / 0) (#47)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 03:57:20 PM EST
    never been before and was unsure how they operated. As far as I knew there was nobody I knew there.

    Truly if I had known exactly what was involved from the sound of it I might have even been less inclined to go. I don't know. I also was in my 20's back then and pretty much unreliable as a voter like most people that age are.

    Parent

    Yes (none / 0) (#17)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:13:23 AM EST
    even I am starting to lose faith in Cruz pulling it off. I still think the polls are overstating Trumps support by a bit, but the trend lines are hard to ignore.

    Parent
    As I said (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:15:09 AM EST
    I wanted you to be right

    Parent
    I am (none / 0) (#19)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:26:41 AM EST
    not as scared of Trump in the general as you are.
    From the Fox poll there is whopping 20% of likely Republican voters would not support him in the general against any Dem. Other polls have shown similar numbers.

    Parent
    Once again (none / 0) (#20)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:38:27 AM EST
    I hope you are right

    :)

    I really really do.   But I think one of the reasons the "establishment" is coming around is they also are beginning to think.....hmmmmmmm

    He might not win but who thinks anyone else in the clown car has a better chance.

    I would just say be careful what you wish for

    Parent

    Or (none / 0) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 11:12:50 AM EST
    they might be joining to take him down. Who knows. Put a mole inside his operation. I would not put it past them.

    Parent
    Rick "the Dick" Perry (none / 0) (#29)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 12:13:23 PM EST
    Endorses Cruz.

    GAME CHANGE!!!!

    Parent

    As soon as he finds out that (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Anne on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:12:36 PM EST
    he isn't now entered to win a free cruise, he'll probably go all "nevermind" on it.

    Not the brightest bulb in the pack.

    Parent

    What can you say? (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 06:50:36 PM EST
    Everything he's said so far and a lot of it has been pretty bad has not only not lost his supporters but gained him supporters.

    He'd better check first. (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 07:02:45 PM EST
    What if he shoots one of his supporters?

    Parent
    Well that's... (none / 0) (#25)
    by kdog on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 10:31:07 AM EST
    a souvenir...a bullet autographed by Trump's muzzle.  Fetch a pretty penny on Ebay I'm sure...as long as the bullet can be removed and it doesn't kill 'em.

    Parent
    The reaction to this (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 07:03:51 PM EST
    Has been interesting.   Supporters say of course he was kidding.  
    A.). I'm not entirely sure he was
    B.)  he's probably right

    Stand your ground and all.

    I checked (none / 0) (#4)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 07:21:27 PM EST
    with a Trump supporter on facebook and no mention of it.

    Parent
    He is trolling (none / 0) (#7)
    by Kmkmiller on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 08:20:05 PM EST
    The Republican Party and American Democracy.

    Seriously if democracy was a subreddit he'd be banned by now, but the media loves the headlines oh well.

    Hey! Trump stayed overnight at (none / 0) (#9)
    by oculus on Sun Jan 24, 2016 at 09:27:00 PM EST
    a Holiday Inn Express and attended church in Muscatinebthis morning!

    Parent
    Matthew 7:3-5 (none / 0) (#11)
    by ragebot on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 12:44:54 AM EST
    3 "And why worry about a speck in your friend's eye when you have a log in your own? 4 How can you think of saying to your friend, `Let me help you get rid of that speck in your eye,' when you can't see past the log in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First get rid of the log in your own eye; then you will see well enough to deal with the speck in your friend's eye.

    Hillary claimed to have been subject to sniper fire on landing in Bosnia when the truth was a small child met her and read a poem about peace.

    On a more serious note, even if Hillary discounts it, the FBI is investigating security breaches connected with Hillary's private email server.

    When authorities start investigating Trump for shooting some one let me know.

    Could you clarify? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Repack Rider on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 05:25:41 AM EST
    Are you a Trump supporter?

    I prefer Bernie to Hillary, but Hillary to any of the GOP klowns.

    Parent

    Not really a Trump fan (none / 0) (#14)
    by ragebot on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 06:49:41 AM EST
    You seem to have missed my point.

    I could list lots of things I don't like about Trump, but his off hand comment about shooting someone in Time's Square would be way down on the list.

    I could also list lots of things I don't like about Hillary and the wide spread view that she is not trustworthy would be way up on the list.

    In general I don't trust any pol and the same goes for folks who blindly support pols based on their party affiliation.  Maybe the worst example of a pol is the former Republican governor of Florida who ran for senator against Rubio and when he lost in the primary ran as an independent and later changed his party affiliation to Democrat.  Even now Charlie is in the mix for possible state or national level office in Florida as a Democrat.

    IMHO giving a pass to folks based simply on party affiliation while ignoring their warts have a log in their eye.

    Parent

    Yeah I missed your point, too (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by sj on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 11:37:29 AM EST
    And I was looking really hard for it. I'm still not seeing it because you are all over the place trying justify your opposition to Hillary (although you call it the "widespread view" yadda yadda. Nice use of passive voice btw). At least I think that's what I think you're doing. Who knows.

    You don't need to tangle yourself up so tightly to justify your view.

    But thanks for the insight into how GOP voters could find a way to get into the mental space necessary to actually support a Trump candidacy. I'll watch your trajectory with interest over the next few weeks/months.

    Parent

    Majority of voters think Hillary untrustworty (none / 0) (#39)
    by ragebot on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 02:11:20 PM EST
    link

    As the link points out even with 54% of the voters not trusting Hillary sixty percent support her for the nomination.

    That is what I would call a log in the eye of Democratic voters, just as I think Republican voters have a log in their eye overlooking Trump's faults.

    Parent

    Have (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 02:13:26 PM EST
    you looked at the GOP numbers on those same issues? Talking about a log in your eye. Only 28% of the country even has a positive opinion of the GOP according to Gallup. Trump is really helping that one along it seems.

    Parent
    of course (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by FlJoe on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:00:05 PM EST
    of she polls as untrustworthy, we have had a constant drumbeat of Clinton cash, Benghazi, E-mails and other negative stories for months upon months. The press let dozens of questions hang in the air when it turned out there was no there. Meanwhile the Republicans continue to fling their ridiculous claims about Benghazi and the rest with almost no pushback.

    That's not a log in your eye, that's sand thrown in your face by the Republicans and smoke blown in your eye by the media. If you can't see through that, then you are part of the problem not part of the solution no matter who you support.

    Parent

    link (none / 0) (#40)
    by ragebot on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 02:11:51 PM EST
    to above post

    link

    Parent

    Your (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 11:43:04 AM EST
    comment really is ridiculous. You talk about how Hillary has a "trust" issue and then you talk about how you shouldn't trust politicians. Talk about circular apologia and blame shifting.

    Parent
    Again and again (none / 0) (#21)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:44:27 AM EST
    Many of you folks either still don't get it or you don't want to admit it.

    The Tea Party is not and was not "conservative."

    It was and is all about the failure of DC to:

    Stop illegal immigration.

    Stop the flow of jobs to other countries.

    Obama's failed foreign policy.

    In 2010 and 2012 the Repubs promised to fix that. They haven't. The insider candidates are paying the price.

    You like to talk about Trump not submitting "policies" for review.

    No one but policy wonks expects or even wants that.

    Trump has announced his policies.

    Stop illegal immigration.

    Stop the export of jobs.

    Change Obama's foreign policy by stopping the influx of Muslim immigrants/refugees and committing to winning the wars in the ME.

    Now, there were some side issues. They are pro military. I can't think of a single member who has not served. Many have family currently in the service.

    Many are religious and attend church regularly. They see the current DC and media culture as anti-Christian. They do not trust Muslims and see politicians supporting Obama's various statements as stupid at best.

    They admire competence above "nice." As one Vietnam vet told me, "The best LT I ever had was a pure as$hole.

    All of these things play straight to Trump. They don't care if he shoots someone in the middle of he street...the dufus probably deserved it. They don't care if he's changed his positions. Smart people do that. And they flat out don't care if some TV talking head who has never had a "real" job lectures Trump about being conservative.

    As for Bloomberg running as an Independent the only votes he would take are Democrats/Socialists.

    OK Jim... (5.00 / 4) (#24)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 10:25:41 AM EST
    ...the party that decided to form because they were embarrassed to be called republicans after the GWB debacle, whose members are to the right of most Republicans.
    Good one.

    If they aren't conservatives, why does everyone they elect end-up being far more conservative than the republican party.  Ted Cruz was their guy until they found a lunatic to get behind, and trumps biggest failing is not being religious enough.

    This is the same S you try to sell about yourself, 'I am not conservative, but I vote for nothing but conservatives'.  What you believe affects me in no way, who you vote for does.  You are a conservative, just like the tea party is conservative.

    Spare us your in depth 'analysis', we are liberals, not conservatives, so we believe our eyes, not Fox News.
    -------------------------

    How about staying on the topic at hand, Trump stating he could shoot someone and not lose support from the idiot brigade.  Remember, he said, we did not, he knows the people that support him are tools.

    Defend that instead of changing the subject.

    Parent

    et al (1.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:02:43 PM EST
    Howdy:
    It will be very interesting to see how true that is when wins the nomination and pivots to the center

    It is always okay for someone to change and agree with you. Not so much otherwise.  Maybe we have seen a small test over his support for ethanol in Iowa. The conservative view is against subsidies so it follows that his announcement should have hurt him. Yet it doesn't seem to have done so.

    Scott, I think I am correct in stating that you have never attended a meeting so what you are basing your belief on is what you have read in the media by all the usual pundits plus what some self appointed Tea Party "leaders" have said.

    I mean you don't even know there is no such thing as a "Tea Party."

    The failures of who they supported in the past are a key driver in today's world.

    And you fail to understand that their votes, as mine are, were pragmatic. They voted for whom they thought would be best for the country.  You, as a Leftie, disagree. Too bad you can't do so without the insults. Limited vocabulary is a problem,eh?

    If they were true by the book conservatives they would not support Trump.

    Not that you are the Table Captain but I am happy to comment on:

    "I have the most loyal people, did you ever see that? I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot people and I wouldn't lose voters," he said.

    Trump made the comments as he laid into National Review, the conservative magazine that published a series of essays criticizing him.

    That's probably true.

    Parent

    Well Jim... (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:54:45 PM EST
    ...I didn't go to a 'Earth is Round Meeting' either...

    They are the unhinged branch of the republican party, and when you vote in November, I am a thousand percent sure their will not be a 'T' next the candidate you, or any of the other TP, vote for.

    Pragmatic, yeah Jim, the first word I think of when I think of you.  I about feel off my chair I was laughing so hard.  

    Good ole pragmatic Jim...

    For the record, I am not ashamed to say I am a democrat and a liberal.  The tea party, not so much, you just spend 8 paragraphs explaining why tea partiers(you) aren't republicans when everyone on both sides knows they are.  When there is a 'T' on the ballot we can talk, until them save for a Fox News viewer.

    Good thing NR has never laid into anyone else, because that certainly explains why Trump used murder as the example to prove just how blind they are.

    Parent

    The issue in question, (2.00 / 1) (#41)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 02:12:34 PM EST
    as Jeralyn pointed out, is the reputed view of how Trump views his supporters.

    Obviously he sees them as very loyal.

    I tried to point out why I think he does and why he is correct in my comment #21.

    Howdy somewhat agreed.

    You don't. I see that my attempt to explain further was useless.

    I'll try one last time.

    His supporters see the "insiders," both Repub and Demo, as Obama enablers.

    And the see Obama as the root cause of the problems I listed.

    They see Trump as someone who will fix the problems.

    'nuff said. Have a nice day.

    Parent

    So which is it? (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 03:23:40 PM EST
    is there "no Tea Party" (that supports Trump), or is it the Attack of the Tea Party Clones you describe in which everyone uniformly "served" and everyone supports policy positions A, B, C, D, and E as dictated by the bloviating one?

    Because this no-party sounds somewhat like a party of Amazonian bullet ants all moving in one direction and on command.

    I suppose if Trump shot one, the rest would just use the body for food..

    Parent

    If Trump Shoots Someone... (5.00 / 2) (#53)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:29:42 PM EST
    ...the smart money would be on a brown person, and the even smarter money would be on a brown person not being in the tea party.

    Parent
    Oh well.. (none / 0) (#55)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:37:19 PM EST
    they're not even conservatives.

    Why wouldn't there be a diverse mixture of folk from every walk of life in the Tea Party?

    Plus the Tea Party are surprisingly creative folks: they have as many words for the color white as the eskimos do.

    Parent

    And (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:42:35 PM EST
    Just as many for black

    Parent
    but one predominant one (none / 0) (#57)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:51:14 PM EST


    Parent
    Well, (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:13:18 PM EST
    Bless your heart.  Aren't you special?

    Parent
    I somewhat agree (none / 0) (#51)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:16:20 PM EST


    Parent
    And if you understand (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by Zorba on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 05:33:44 PM EST
    what these phrases really mean south of the Mason-Dixon Line, I'm sure that you do agree.   ;-)

    Parent
    Yes Jim... (none / 0) (#54)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 04:33:42 PM EST
    ...and HRC and every other democratic candidate will be enablers, making them ultra-conservatives.  I mean seriously, Bush and Rubio enabled Obama...

    It is funny that you think their lunacy is Obama specific.

    Parent

    stay on topic Jim (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 12:53:57 PM EST
    the topic is the comment referred to in the post. Don't hijack the  thread.

    Parent
    Didn't see your comment (none / 0) (#34)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:12:53 PM EST
    until I posted the above.

    I am trying to point out why Trump is being supported and why his statement won't harm him.

    Parent

    That they've already had a serious debate (none / 0) (#37)
    by jondee on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 01:39:19 PM EST
    about whether or not allow him in England means that it's harmed him already.

    And he's just getting that wild-swinging, reckless, embarassing Trump mouth warmed up.

    The country will eventually reject him the way the family doesn't want the drunken creepy uncle to come for Thanksgiving.  

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 09:56:51 AM EST

    They don't care if he's changed his positions. Smart people do that.

    It will be very interesting to see how true that is when wins the nomination and pivots to the center kicking all these fine folks you are talking about under the bus and running to the middle.

    Actually my fear is it will be true.   You may actually become an useful barometer of such things.

    Parent

    Trump Plus... (none / 0) (#23)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Jan 25, 2016 at 10:13:32 AM EST
    ...Nixon's proclamation about Presidents equals Dick Cheney.

    SNL did an excellent segment on this in their news.

    Is Trump Taking Supporters for Granted? | 62 comments (62 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment