is it really possible that Donald trump could be president????? [Part 3]

[Lweji]

Continuing the thread, and in reply to the two last posts of thread 2

Today 08:15 OhYouBadBadKitten

I don't think it is about Trump taking risks, its more that he is a narcisstic sociopath. He feels untouchable in what he says and has no regard for the consequences.

Today 06:53 fourmummy

To be fair, voters know that all political rhetoric mostly comes to nothing (rhetoric = argumentation and persuasion, elevated to an art from in Ancient Greece). Why do you imagine Labour want to introduce votes for 16 year olds? They know that people don't become "more conservative" as they get older-they become wiser to the political process and its lies rhetoric. So what's different with Trump? Why hasn't his unbelievably unlikeable public and private persona sunk him?

Answer=risk

He is not a ready-rolled, ready-prepped and ready-to-go politician (think Blair's son parachuted into a constituency; MIliband brothers, Clintons). These are not risking much because they were cast in the role when they were made. We know that this is the case with, certainly, Clinton (numerous interviews with aides attest to this; ditto for the others). Voters are doing a risk assessment of his risks and have decided that he is worth something. It's not as simple as suggesting that if someone votes for him then they must be racist or sexist, as I've seen journos assert. Voters are effectively doing a risk assessment and deciding that given the enormous costs both to him (energy, health, time away from family, reputation, financial, career, historical implications, ) and to his voters (risk of being viewed as sexist, racist, intolerant, asshole), the benefits must outweigh these costs. Very unwise to dismiss ordinary voters as simplistically sexist and racists, as many, many journalists have (shortsightedly) done. Even non-experts are very good at performing cost/benefit analyses

As I said I don't see anything of what he says as taking a risk. Because he is saying what many people want to hear.
As for personal cost, he is clearly someone who enjoys the power, the limelight, the adoration. All that is missing for him is the ultimate power, particularly as he sees other true billionaires taking central stage.
But he doesn't have the heart to be Gates.
So, he's going for the highest office, and on the back of American voters most primal fears.

But...
He's not averse to risk. He's built his empire on it. He's had four bankruptcies. Anyone should be worried about the way he manages risk.

Trump seems to have been vary amateurish about delegate selection - he's only just cottoned on to how important this would be if he doesn't win outright, or just shaves it. The others are pros and have concentrated on this from the beginning.

I suspect the GOP would try for Kasich, with Cruz safely tucked away as Veep, if Trump slips on winning a majority of delegates beforehand. I agree it would look a grossly unfair political "fix" to all voters - not just Trumpers - if they deny him if he goes there with even a narrow majority.

'aren't most delegates then cut free ?'

Yes, but apparently Trump is in talks already behind the scenes. He is saying he would like to include Rubio and most of the others but not all of them in his team. He may do a deal with Rubio or Kasich that takes him over the edge. Basically, Trump will do everything to win because he did not go through all of this with the entire Establishment desperate to stop him in order to lose at the end. He will win because he wants to save America. Nothing will stop him now.

The problem he has got is that there are forces that will try t trick him and put their opuppet in to replace him further down the line. However, Trump knows the game and has some extremely hardball political operatives on his side who know the game. He will make it, then he will make mincemeat of the Clintons in a firework display the likes of which the world has never seen.

Trump may even do a deal with Cruz. Anything is possible, but Trump has to always watch his back because the Edtblishment is capable of stitching him up.

In my opinion both Rubio and Kasich are a threat to Trump as VPs, because the Establishment would like nothing better than to put them in over Trump after Trump wins.

Cruz will do as he is told by the Establishment in general, but they aren't sure about him as much as they are about Rubio and Kasich.

In my opinion, Trump should do a deal with Cruz as that would be safer for him.

Trump says he won't "tone it down" whereas his new manager, Manafort, who is supposed t be an election expert, says that Trump will tone it down.

In my opinion, this is classic Trump media management. All the media is talking about is will Trump "tone it down" and be "more presidential" and Trump is just playing them along to dominate the airtime over this issue. Trump won't tone it down because he knows that the crowds love it.

I think this article in the leftwing Daily Beast gets it about right. Trump only needs and wants one term, he hates being a "politician", "all talk no action", but he has to do it to save America.

He will save America and change the world so fast it will be unreal. The "world leaders" are terrified, they will watch their whole world change and the laughter of the people will echo around the universe for centuries to come.

"Republicans Think They’ll Outfox Trump? Think Again
...

Before the first Republican delegates cast votes in Cleveland, Trump could approach Cruz with a deal creating between them an alliance of outsiders to beat the insiders at their own game. Trump can suggest they run as a ticket, promising he’ll support Cruz downstream. Failing that, Trump may even publicly declare he’ll serve only one term devoted to getting the country back on track, then throw it to Cruz to complete the assignment.

Their slogan, recognizing their currently tepid image ratings: “You may not love us, but you’ll like what we’re going to do for America.”

As of today, Trump and Cruz together hold the cards. Apart, neither one may ultimately hold the winning hand. Trump gets it; Cruz soon will. And America will watch as both write the next and greatest chapter in The Art of the Deal."
...
If you know anything about Donald Trump, he’s already thinking three clicks down the road about how to make all of this happen in Cleveland, before the unsuspecting brokers of GOP power.

One thing is certain: Trump—the dealmaker—won’t go quietly into the night."

www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/18/republicans-think-they-ll-outfox-trump-think-again.html

Claig I strongly disagree with your 14:27 comment
"Trump has huge cross-party appeal."

Among all voters, he has 63% favourable rating vs 25% unfavourable, so net 38% negative - huge !
He trails Clinton by 21 % among women, no surprise.

In contrast, Kasich has 26 % fav vs 21% unfav, so overall slightly positive.
He genuinely has wide cross-party appeal - his problem is he is far behind Trump with Republican voters, so would struggle in the convention, but would have at least an even chance of beating Clinton in November.

Clinton has one of the highest ever negative ratings for a mainstream candidate, averaging 20 %, with 54% currently unfav.
It's women and African Americans who save her from total disaster. Her problem is with white men

Overwhelmingly, voters who don't like her cite
. dishonest or corrupt (58%)
. only 6% say it's because of her policies

For Trump, top 3 negative reasons chosen in polls, each 14%:
. he has a big mouth and doesn't think before he speaks
. he is an egocentric narcissist
. his comments are racist and anti-immigrant

'In contrast, Kasich has 26 % fav vs 21% unfav, so overall slightly positive.'

Yes, but as Trump says no one knows anything about Kasich because no one has run any negative ads against him whereas the Republican elite has spent millions of dollars running non-stop negative ads against Trump. Also, don't forget that the "world leaders" have been applauding the entire US media Establishment which has been desperately trying to stop Trump for 9 months now by accusing him of all sorts which has affected voters, particularly the Democrat ones who have not been condemned for their violent pinata hitting of a candidate. Trump will turn it all around when he unloads on Crooked Hillary and when the public hears unfiltered what he has to say.

'He [Kasich] genuinely has wide cross-party appeal '

Trump got 25% of the African-American vote in one poll, and gets more African-American votes than any other Republican candidate. The Stump for Trump sisters ditched and switched from Democrat to Republican only to vote fro Trump, they would not consider voting for any of the Republican puppets.When Trump goes into African-American communities and spreads his message of jobs and employment by bringing jobs back from Mexico and China by scrapping the trade deals, which Hillary is not allowed to do as she is Wall Street controlled, then he will get lots of African-American votes. Trump said yesterday on TV that he has lots of African-American friends who phone him and tell him, you are going to pick up so many African-American votes. Trump will unload on Clinton and that will change the entire landscape.

'It's women and African Americans who save her from total disaster. Her problem is with white men '

Trump said on TV last night, that women is the only thing Crooked Hillary has got going for her, but that that will all change when he unloads on her. Without women, he said, she is finished and he will finish her.

You have to remember that Trump is like no other "politician", he is not politically correct, which is why Trump fans love him. Kasich is as touchy-feely, Tony Blair, Gordon Bennett, politically correct as it gets which is why no one likes him except for the leftwing media and probably Cameron and Hillary Benn.

Trump will unload and will devastate the entire landscape which will rock the world and is why our politically correct "world leaders" are terrified and why Trump fans are having a ball.

When the "world leaders" see a Trump Finally Balls shirt, it has the same panic effect on them as a clove of garlic had to Dracula.

Trump hasn't started yet, but when he does, as he says "we're gonna have so much fun".

In contrast, Kasich has 26 % fav vs 21% unfav, so overall slightly positive.
He genuinely has wide cross-party appeal - his problem is he is far behind Trump with Republican voters, so would struggle in the convention, but would have at least an even chance of beating Clinton in November.

This isn't correct actually, because you are not comparing like with like. Kasich remains relatively unknown, which tends to lift his favorability ratings - people don't know enough about him to dislike him. In comparison almost everyone will have an opinon on Hillary by now.

Of all the candidates, Kasich's favorability would be likely to change the most if he were nominated. Because he is more conservative than his current image, and general election voters prefer moderates, it's not unreasonable to speculate that his ratings might worsen. Mitt Romney also looked like a boring but safe candidate at one point.

I'm sure Kasich's rating would worsen if he were chosen.
However, he's not really done much to make people hate him and there isn't much time after the convention to work up hatred from scratch.

In contrast, Clinton has had decades of sleaze coming out and Trump has just spouted hate from the start of his campaign.
Their net unfavourability ratings are unprecedented for mainstream party candidates.
The previous highest negative rating was Bill Clinton in 1992, btw, but he was only -18.

The whole GOP is very right wing, but since they aren't going to nominate a Democrat, Kasich seems the least offensive option, miles better than Cruz.
Who else there is "moderate" - surely not resurrecting Jeb Bush or Romney ?

choc the GOP is very right wing (or at least it's most active wing is), but general election voters aren't.

I can see the attraction to the GOP of electing Kasich - he won't offend the evangelicals (he has a strong pro-life record) but he's such a nonentity that he probably won't offend anyone else too much either.

That's the theory anyway - I think in practice the backlash would be huge, if they manoeuvred into position a man who patently almost no one wants as the candidate (they've had the chance to vote for him, and they haven't), in place of one who has widespread and passionate support.

It does beg the question - how do you persuade general election voters to vote for your candidate, if the candidate can't even persuade his own party to vote for him? I think that rules out pretty much all the candidates to date apart from Trump and Cruz, both of whom can legitimately claim to have grass roots support.

If the GOP did decide to parachute in a "consensus" candidate, it has surely has to be someone not tainted by a failed nomination campaign (Romney?). But I can't see that happening without blowing up the entire party.

Aren't primary voters a very small subsection of general election voters?
I wonder how representative they are.

if they manoeuvred into position a man who patently almost no one wants as the candidate

No one wants in GOP.

I think as a party they lost track and the shift right has fundamentally damaged them. They need to push the Democrats towards the left.

'I think as a party they lost track and the shift right has fundamentally damaged them'

The party has been led by fake conservatives for years (just like our conservative party here) and the Republican voters want some real conservatives which is why the Tea Party and Sarah Palin gained popularity to the extent that now over 70% of Republican voters back antiestablishment conservatives (Trump and Cruz) against the politically correct fake conservatives.

The party bosses are trying to manage their voters but no one is listening - they want Trump or Cruz, and the difference is that Trump will bring in millions of independents and Reagan Democrats and Cruz can't.

So far
23 million people have voted in Republican primaries
17 million in Democrat ones

The Republican ones have seen record turnoys sometimes over 100% increases and it is all down to Trump who has electrified the campaign and given Fox and CNN debate audiences of 24 million where just 4 years ago, the debates got 1 million viewers.

The Republican elite have no way back, they will have to embrace Trump and come to an agreement with him.

Trump at a rally just now said to the Trump fans

"you wouldn't believe the calls I am getting now for the past 4 weeks and particularly since New York from people who said bad things about me before. I asked them out of interest how they could say they now support me after what they said, and they said "I'll just say I changed my mind". That's politics, folks. You'll see them coming out soon."

So I think that is it and Trump will win, they have had to accept reality.

Aren't primary voters a very small subsection of general election voters?
I wonder how representative they are.

About 30% of eligible voters vote in primaries. (Note that "eligible" means different things in different states). I don't know what the share of the electorate is, but I think it would be incorrect to call it "very small".

Claig I think the UK and US public both prefer more moderate leaders than the party activists - at least unless the "real" leader convincingly has something special that appeals to ordinary people,
e.g. Thatcher with subsidised ownership of council houses, life-changing for millions.

Trump doesn't have anything concrete like that to offer, just more "trickle down", really

The UK Tory Party tried rightwing "real" conservatives as leaders in the naughties for at least 2 General Election and were totally hammered by Labour.
Then they selected Cameron from the Tory centre-left (right of centre wrt the country) who did some fluffy Huskie-Hugging and won the next GE.

Similarly, Labour selected the "real" socialist - and very talented - Michael Foot for the 1983 GE, who ran on "the longest suicide note in history" and was humiliated. Labour kept losing until they selected Blair (Labour furthest right = centre in the country) who won 3 GEs.
The next 2 leaders went left and lost.
Despite Tory sleaze, Corbyn's prospects still look grim, unless Brexit or something causes another economic crash here.

The GOP has moved very far to the right compared even to Nixon (yes, old gimmer alert, I remember him well ) so their candidates since Reagan may not seem "real" to the activists, but the GE voters only seemed to go for "unreal" Bushes.

'I think the UK and US public both prefer more moderate leaders than the party activists'

Absolutely, but Trump doesn't appeal to party activists, they like Cruz like all the ones at CPAC and the Republican elites. Trump is appealing to ordinary Republican voters who pack out his rallies.

If you compare it with one of our party rallies, for the Conservatives you would find nearly only bussed in party activists abd careerists on the make out of university etc, and hardly any ordinary non-paying members. At a Trump rally, there are no bussed in activists, just ordinary voters.

'Trump doesn't have anything concrete like that to offer'

Trump has something much better than thatcher, because she did not have the common touch. Trump calls himsel a "blue collar billioanire", ordinary people think he is one of them, just like Farage. Trump offers non-politically correct talk, jobs brought back, end of free trae deals, America First and Make America Great Again. He offers hope, antiestablishmentarianism and putting ordinary people and America First. His Finally Balls shirts spell out his return to common sense which will put things right for the ordinary people again - "Trump 2016 - Finally Someone with Balls" unlike all of the controlled puppets.

'The UK Tory Party tried rightwing "real" conservatives as leaders in the naughties for at least '

No, none of them had the common touch, they are all Oxbridge, they were all politically correct and just shafted people for big business. They offered nothing for ordinary people because they had nothing in common with ordinary people. They don't share the hardworking common sense ethos of real conservative ordinary people. Farage is the one who offers that.

'Then they selected Cameron from the Tory centre-left (right of centre wrt the country) who did some fluffy Huskie-Hugging and won the next GE.'

Only because their time had come because the people couldn't take any more Labour and Gordon Bennett and because Murdoch abandoned Bennett.

'Labour kept losing until they selected Blair (Labour furthest right = centre in the country) who won 3 GEs.'

Only because Murdoch backed them and because their time had come after 18 years of Tory rule which ended up in sleaze. I voted for Blair too in that landslide.

'Corbyn's prospects still look grim'

Corbyn is finished because he has been shown to be weak and without common sense. The people would have backed him if he had been brave and had offered stunning change, but he is just incremental more of the same and totally devoid of common sense. It is over for him and the Blairites will eventually take over again, but no one likes them either so they will have to wait years until their time comes if it ever comes because a PR voting system would finish them forever.

'The GOP has moved very far to the right compared even to Nixon'

I think it has moved populist and against conservative ideology of Wall Street, globalism, international aid, humanitarian wars, UN agreements, climate change etc etc i.e. it has returned to what conservatives were years and years ago before the billonaire left wing Rockefellers created the Rockefeller Republicans like Mitt Romney's father and the Bushes who obey the globalist philosophy of free trade and Wall Street. Trump is appealing to the ordinary people and to America First which is why all the "world leaders" are terrified because their entire game will be up - climate change and all the rest of it.

The people are cheering Trump on in their tens of thousands. it remains to be seen whether Trump will trick us and sell out to the globalists, but I don't think he will. He is on a mission to save America and will only need a 4 year term. Today again he said to the Trump fans "wouldn't it be nice to get along with Russia?" No one else would ever say that. He has gone against all of the globalists and money power.

Trump is not even a conservative, all Trump fans know he is a liberal at heart, but at least he is not a politically correct one and is a populist.

As Greg Gutfield, a liberal conservative host who doesn't like Trump as a lot of the Fox commentators don't, said on Fox yesterday, it is quite amazing how real conservatives will accept any liberal thing that Trump says, such as his statement over the bathrooms, and the things he will say in the future as he will soon transform himself into more of a liberal.

The people will aceept it from Trump because they trust him to be on their side. One day if he goes too far and if he lets people down, then they will abandon him. But we are a long way off from that yet.

Cruz is now hitting Trump with an ad accusing Trump of being politically correct and part of the "PC police". But people like Trump and they don't like Cruz, so it won't have any effect on Trump.

Thatcher has no charm, but when you give away council houses at knockdown prices you don't need charm.
That's something real.
Trump is another version of hopey changey thing, but for angry white men. Nowhere near as real as giving them a house at a fraction of its value.

had no charm. Well, still doesn't after burial of course

I think the reason many GOP activists hate Trump is because he certainly isn't a "real" conservative, just a populist, a complete opportunist
He only chose the Republicans because they are an empty shell; the Democrats might have been a better fit, but they are a functioning party (he would've turned the hate speech onto bankers say)