Republicans Will Not Learn Much From This Election
Although at the present time it's kind of hard to believe, there is a faction of the Republican Party which looks towards the future and sees some very problematic demographic shifts awaiting it. These forward-looking types tried to educate the rest of their party after they got shellacked in the 2012 presidential race, dissecting the festering corpse of Mitt Romney's campaign in an autopsy, and then issuing a post-mortem document pleading Republicans to begin instituting some basic changes. Mostly, these changes can be boiled down to: "Don't badmouth minorities so blatantly, because if you do so it is very hard to convince them to vote Republican." Also pointed out was the fact that young Americans are much more inclusive than the Republican Party as a whole, and losing an entire generation of voters is going to hurt for decades to come.
Of course, almost none of this advice was followed. A quick overview of the Republican presidential nomination race proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt. The big problem for Republicans now is that they certainly didn't learn their lesson the last time around, and it is almost impossible to believe that they will this time, either. The dynamics of the race pretty much guarantee that there will be a built-in excuse for the faithful to latch onto, should the Democrats win in November.
In the most recent losing presidential contests on the Republican side, staunch conservatives always fall back on the same excuse: "If only we had nominated a true conservative, we'd have won." The "establishment" candidate always seemed to win the nomination, which was the heart of the problem (for true conservatives). It wasn't that Mitt Romney couldn't reach out to independent voters, it was that he didn't do enough to excite the base. If only a real conservative had won the nomination, this thinking goes, they would have won in a landslide.
This time around, however, the built-in excuse will be: "Donald Trump upset the apple cart, so no real lessons can be drawn because it was such an abnormal election." If Trump hadn't run, and if someone like Ted Cruz had become the nominee, then it really would have put the "nominate a dyed-in-the-wool conservative and you'll win in November" theory to the test. If, in this alternate universe, the Democrat had beaten Cruz badly, then the establishment could have put the theory to rest once and for all. "See?" they'd say, "That was as bad as Barry Goldwater -- next time, you'll nominate a good establishment figure and we might win."
But Trump did run. And then he won. And won and won and won. He's now headed straight for the nomination, in fact. This guarantees that absolutely no lessons will be learned by Republicans in the aftermath. Play out every possible ending, and they all wind up at the same place: Republicans bickering about what happened, and putting all blame on Trump himself.
If Trump wins the nomination outright and then goes on to lose to Hillary Clinton, the response will be: "Trump was not a true conservative -- heck, he wasn't even a true Republican." If Trump is denied the nomination at the convention, the candidate who does get the nod will be seen as flawed by roughly half the party, and the built-in excuse if he loses will be: "Trump caused all this mess, next time around will be different." If there is a third-party candidate (either Trump, after being denied the nomination at the convention, or a third-party conservative who runs against Trump in the general election), then the excuse for losing will be obvious: "It was the third party's fault!" If Trump actually beats Hillary to win the general election, then there will be no post-mortem and the party will instead learn a very dangerous lesson indeed: demagoguery works.
In none of these scenarios is it possible to see the Republican Party doing serious self-examination afterwards. Donald Trump is his own faction. He's leading a cult of personality, not an ideological crusade. Because of this, no firm conclusions will even be possible afterwards. Oh, sure, the Republicans might overhaul their primary process to avoid this ever happening again (maybe they'll even take a page from the Democrats' playbook and introduce the superdelegate idea?), but this won't be the election to bury the "let's nominate a real conservative" idea. Far from it. In fact, things are so bizarre with Trump in the race that Ted Cruz is now the reasonable alternative for establishment Republicans. Having Ted Cruz be the "reasonable alternative" to anything or anyone just shows how bizarre things stand in the GOP right now. Absent Trump, Cruz would be the one party bigwigs were running ads against, desperately trying to stop him. Instead, he's now the last chance they have to stop Trump.
If Donald Trump becomes the GOP nominee and goes on to lose to Hillary Clinton, the post-mortem afterwards will be nothing more than the establishment Republicans loudly telling their own base voters: "We told you so!" Trump is so far out of the usual divide between the establishment and conservative wings of the party that no real lessons will be learned -- or even possible.
Democrats, to be fair, seem like they're going to postpone a similar reckoning in their party as well. If Bernie Sanders falls short of his goal, then the counter-argument from the left ("Let's nominate a true progressive and we'll surely win!") will continue into the next election cycle. If Bernie had won, Democrats would have had a chance to test the proposition this year, but after last night that doesn't seem very likely. This argument has been raised multiple times in recent years (by supporters of Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, and John Edwards), and its appeal appears to be growing stronger. Bernie might lose, but he'll lose by a lot smaller margin than Dean, Kucinich, and Edwards lost. This shows the growing dissatisfaction within Democratic ranks with their own establishment, and next time around the progressives might actually win the nomination (when Hillary Clinton is not on the ballot, perhaps in 2024 after her second term). So it's an argument that will take place in a future year among Democrats, as well.
Getting back to the Republicans, though, while it might not seem like it now, the party is fully capable of evolving when it sees its best interests threatened. Case in point this time around would be how they talk about gay marriage. Mostly, they don't. This is a monumental shift from the past two decades, when Republicans would eagerly attempt to use gay rights as a wedge issue among voters (which they were wildly successful at, it must be admitted). But since the Supreme Court has effectively ended the argument, Republicans this time around realized that the fight was lost and the more they brought it up the more damage they did to their chances of winning over young voters.
This evolution isn't complete, of course, and it wasn't prompted by a change in heart in any way. Republicans just realized it was a losing issue for them, and dropped it. No post-mortem from a previous election convinced them to do so, instead it was the Supreme Court. Still, it was a blow to those within the party who had been fighting gay rights for years.
Perhaps Trump losing will cause a similar movement within the party on issues such as immigration (perhaps after watching 80 percent or more of the Latino vote go to the Democrat). There may not be ideological shifts, but instead tactical ones. Whatever the issue, Republicans might realize "our position is losing us voters and any chance at the Oval Office," and start ignoring the issue rather than demagoguing it. Perhaps not. Either way, this is more of a tactical response than a fundamental lesson learned by the party at large. But this is really the only type of lesson it will even be possible for Republicans to learn. "Don't be like Trump," though, does not really show all that high a degree of self-examination. Maybe if Trump loses and then the party nominates Ted Cruz in 2020, real lessons can be drawn. But with Trump in the mix, any lesson learned (as with everything else about the Republican nominating process this year) will be entirely about Donald Trump -- and not about fixing the demographic problem the Republican Party still faces in the near future.
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Today's anecdote -- and somewhat relevant to Chris' post! -- today I spoke to a very well-preserved, early-60's white couple doing a powerwalk around the neighborhood. When asked their views about the election season they both laughed, but not cheerily, more in disbelief.
The woman then said the election season to date has been "entertaining" -- said sardonically. The man said he's watched several debates and, yes, "they'd been entertaining." He added he was glad Hillary has started "pulling her own votes" and that "the republican party is (using finger quotes) effed up." I think he was too nice to swear.
I think that the true blue democrats will be happy - if Trump loses, and I fully expect him to, and Cruz bombs in 2020 as I would expect, then it will be 2024 before Republicans maybe give us a visionary center right candidate that can address the many Democratic excesses.
This is way too long, we haven't had a serious opposition since 1992 (GW Bush was a joke).
The country needs two rational parties. At least two rational parties.
@neilm wrote:
it will be 2024 before Republicans maybe give us a visionary center right candidate that can address the many Democratic excesses.
That will require the Republicans to end their "have nothing in common with the Dem's" policy for their candidates so that they don't confuse their voting base! Look what happened in both 2008 and 2012: the moderate candidate won, only to be transformed into an ultra-conservative the moment they secured the nomination! Any position that they held that was even remotely similar to Obama's position had to change so that they opposed everything that Obama was for. How else could they convince their supporters that Obama was evil if they weren't against every single thing that he supported? It will be impossible to get a central candidate as long as they continue with this game plan.
@Listen [3]
Interesting take. I think that Romney went into 2012 as the centrist and had to pivot sharp right to see off the clown show lined up against him. In the general election he was trying to dogwhistle right and embrace left - a failing proposition.
Where is the tea party? Are they Trump, or is Trump them? If not, why not? I mean, we've known for some time that the GOP has had competing factions, and that one of those factions is so awful that Paul Ryan was deemed to be literally the only man in the country that could control them. Really.
And yet McConnell is acting as if nothing has changed, and that 'just say no' is the answer to the party's problems. I don't think Trump is the outlier that they'd like you to believe he is. He is, rather their own obstinate politics turned back at them.
Democrats, to be fair, seem like they're going to postpone a similar reckoning in their party as well. If Bernie Sanders falls short of his goal, then the counter-argument from the left ("Let's nominate a true progressive and we'll surely win!") will continue into the next election cycle.
Huh? We know how to win presidential elections: nominate a good candidate. We just don't have any this time.
What we have no clue about is how to get anyone but the Republican base to actually vote for any office other than president.
If Trump actually beats Hillary to win the general election, then there will be no post-mortem and the party will instead learn a very dangerous lesson indeed: demagoguery works.
Alternatively, and more in keeping with reality, the very sane lesson will be...
Political Correctness sucks purple panther piss..
"So say we all"
-Battlestar Galactica
:D
Michale
Listen,
That will require the Republicans to end their "have nothing in common with the Dem's" policy for their candidates so that they don't confuse their voting base!
As opposed to the Democrats' policy of we "have nothing in common with the Rethugs"??
Why must Republicans "end" their policy?? Why can't Democrats meet Republicans in the middle and BOTH Partys alter their policies???
I'll tell you why. Because ideological slavery forbids it..
Any position that they held that was even remotely similar to Obama's position had to change so that they opposed everything that Obama was for.
Yea.. And perish the thought that OBAMA would be part of the problem. :^/ Obama is as pure as the driven snow...
Balthasar,
Not sure if you read it, so allow me to bring my comment forward..
--------------
And a shout-out to our newest Weigantian citizen, Balthasar...
A SUPERNATURAL fan, per chance?? :D
As I am wont to do..
"WELCOME TO THE PARTY, PAL!!"
-John McClane, DIE HARD
:D
-----------------
I don't think Trump is the outlier that they'd like you to believe he is. He is, rather their own obstinate politics turned back at them.
I completely agree..
Trump is NOT the outlier that Weigantians want him to be..
But you are incorrect insofar as thinking he is a product of GOP politics..
Trump is a result of complete and utter ineptitude in governing by Obama and the Democrat Party..
Trump is a reflection of the frustration of middle class Republicans **AND** Democrats who have been ignored, belittled and shat upon by the current Administration and Democrat Party..
Americans demanded jobs.. Democrats gave them TrainWreckCare..
That is just one of a multitude of examples of Democrats putting the agenda of their Party and themselves ahead... WAY AHEAD of the people they were elected to serve...
This is the reason.. the ONLY reason... why we will have President Trump...
Obama and the Democrats made their bed. And Trump is going to slam them over their collective heads with it..
Michale
And, just so we don't get TOO intense...
http://tinyurl.com/hweg3ed
:D
Michale
Regarding the most recent Super Tuesday...
It's probably a huge stroke of luck for Trump that Kasich won Ohio...
If Kasich had lost, then he would have likely dropped out...
A 3-way race serves Trump a LOT better than a 2-way race...
Michale
Michale:
Americans demanded jobs.. Democrats gave them TrainWreckCare..
You're bubble-spouting again. Obama delivered <5% unemployment, and when you describe Obamacare to Republican voters but call it the ACA they love it.
Trump is a response to Republicans promising to roll back our culture to "Leave it to Beaver" days, and repeatedly failing, but being very effective giving everybody's boss a big raise. And globalization. But mostly losing on gay marriage, religious bigotry, general bigotry and just about every other social issue except limiting abortion in deep red states.
A 3-way race serves Trump a LOT better than a 2-way race...
Couple of unintentional take-aways from this statement:
1. If Trump had won Ohio and Kasich had dropped out his supporters would have been gloating. Trump would be so far ahead of Cruz the battle would have been over. Ohio was a loss, Trump-spin only works in Trump-world.
2. Trump supporters think a split opposition is required for Trump to win (pity for Trump that Bloomberg walked away).
Trump threatens Mexico with war. Also Mark Zandi (who I presented with at NYSE a few years ago) takes down Trump's dreams that the trade deficit can be leveraged to build the wall.
Oh - and Trump has his Rick Perry moment - tells us he has 5 ways to make Mexico pay for wall but only lists 4 - National Review snarkily claims that Trump supporters won't notice because they can't count that high anyway.
Republican-on-Republican violence continues.
Trump threatens Mexico with war. Also Mark Zandi (who I presented with at NYSE a few years ago) takes down Trump's dreams that the trade deficit can be leveraged to build the wall.
Oh - and Trump has his Rick Perry moment - tells us he has 5 ways to make Mexico pay for wall but only lists 4 - National Review snarkily claims that Trump supporters won't notice because they can't count that high anyway.
Republican-on-Republican violence continues.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/donald-trumps-bogus-war-with-mexico-2016-03-16
You're bubble-spouting again. Obama delivered <5% unemployment, and when you describe Obamacare to Republican voters but call it the ACA they love it.
AT THE TIME...
If you WANT to look at the here and now??
How about them stagnant wages... How about over 100 million Americans OUT of the work force..
If the Democrat Party is truly happy with his sluggard economy??
Well, that says a lot about the standards of the Democrat Party...
Trump is a response to Republicans promising to roll back our culture to
"You keep thinking that.."
-Will Wheaton, BIG BANG THEORY
:D
But I get it..
It's ALL the GOP's fault..
Democrats are pure as the driven snow...
Yea, I get it.. Rinse, repeat ad nasuem... :D
Michale
Democrats sound alarm against Trump
Top liberals and leading progressive groups perceive the GOP front-runner as a dangerous and unprecedented threat.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/democrats-donald-trump-alarm-220910
"THAT'S RIGHT!!!... Iceman.... I *AM* dangerous..."
-Tom Cruise, TOP GUN
:D
PHOENIX — Leading liberals and progressive groups are turning their gaze away from the Democratic primary and toward efforts to unite the left against Donald Trump, framing him as a dangerous and unprecedented candidate who poses an existential threat to the progressive movement and the nation.
You see, that's how the Left Wingery thinks...
It's ideology first.. And the country second..
That is EXACTLY the problem...
Michale
Charles Pierce is on fire today re: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a43111/flint-hearings-republican-hyprocisy/
Leading liberals and progressive groups are turning their gaze away from the Democratic primary and toward efforts to unite the left against Donald Trump, framing him as a dangerous and unprecedented candidate who poses an existential threat to the progressive movement and the nation.
You see, that's how the Left Wingery thinks...
it's also how right wingers think, and centrists, and they're all a hundred percent right. trump is a threat to liberalism, conservatism, centrism, and the credibility of the united states of america. at best he could be an andrew jackson, at worst... well, the center of the earth's the limit.
JL
1. If Trump had won Ohio and Kasich had dropped out his supporters would have been gloating. Trump would be so far ahead of Cruz the battle would have been over.
Oh sure, that's the way Trumpeteers would have spin'ed it...
But it would be just spin..
The reality is, is that because it's a THREE person race, the Anti-Trump vote is split in half...
Advantage:TRUMP
2. Trump supporters think a split opposition is required for Trump to win (pity for Trump that Bloomberg walked away).
No.. Not "required"...
But a helluva lot easier as the facts clear show...
How are things going with the Democrat Coronation?? :D
Michale
At least the Republicans are actually having a REAL primary...
As opposed to a coronation for the Queen Bee... :D
Michale
CW,
Chad Sa
"For Democrats, Bernie Sanders has the best night of his campaign and wins Illinois, Missouri, and Ohio." - LOL
Like · Reply · 1 · Mar 16, 2016 2:48pm
Michale ·
Hay, give CW a break.. He ain't god...
Just god-like.. heh grin emoticon
Like · Reply · 2 hrs
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/predicting-tuesdays-prima_b_9464224.html
Don't worry.. I got yer back.. :D
Michale
JL,
it's also how right wingers think, and centrists, and they're all a hundred percent right. trump is a threat to liberalism, conservatism,
I'll agree that Trump is a threat to liberalism and conservatism..
But he's a boon for Independents and NPAs like myself. :D
and the credibility of the united states of america.
Yea, and Clinton's BJ in the oval office did wonders for that???
You can tell how GREAT Trump is going to be by the hysterical reactions of the foreign governments who has been using the US as their patsy, their piggy bank, their welfare agency AND their police force.....
Trump is gonna put a stop to that...
I would have thought the Left Wingery would LOVE Trump for that.. :D
Let's face reality.. The ONLY group that is truly at risk from Trump are those that worship the Political Correct gods....
Michale
Let's face MORE reality...
In 2008, the political wonkers were up in arms saying much the same thing about an OBAMA POTUS-ency that people today are saying about a Trump POTUS-ency..
It was just a big lot of hooey fear-mongering back then...
And today is the same.. Just a big lot of hooey fear-mongering...
Michale
You want to talk about the credibility of the United States of America??
http://time.com/4261487/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-instagram-dog/
Yea... HILLARY is the answer..... NOT!!!
Michale
Michale: the fact that you can, on any basis whatsoever, attempt to defend Trump as a reasonable, nay, positive choice in this election, cements my impression that you should never be taken seriously. Not that I needed to be convinced.
Michale: the fact that you can, on any basis whatsoever, attempt to defend Trump as a reasonable, nay, positive choice in this election, cements my impression that you should never be taken seriously. Not that I needed to be convinced.
And yet, Trump is kicking ass and is well on the way to becoming President Of The United States..
I respect and appreciate your opinion... See comment #21
But the facts and reality seem to indicate you are wrong.. :D Just like everyone was wrong (somewhat) about Obama.. :D
Michale
How to cope with anxiety caused by Donald Trump: experts lend advice
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/16/election-anxiety-stress-advice-trump-clinton-sanders
I mean, come on!!!
This is what almost 8 years of Obama/Democrat rule has wrought..
A nation of wussies!!!
"Jeezus, what a bunch of pussies!!"
-Tommy Lee Jones, UNDER SIEGE
Safe Spaces and Trigger Warnings...
That's Obama's legacy.... :^/
Michale
How about them stagnant wages... How about over 100 million Americans OUT of the work force..
How about you prove that those 100 million want a job. That they aren't retiring early (a lot of my friends in their late 50's are, and they count in your 100 million number), that they aren't staying in school longer because a masters is the entry point for most jobs my kids' generation want, etc.
You are spot on regarding stagnant wages however, here is a link to an article that is from 'The Haves and Have Nots' by Branko Milanovic - there is a chart that shows income in 5% increments (at PPP) - the top 5% in India earn the same as the bottom 5% in the U.S. - it totally blew me away. I work with many excellent Indian engineers, and they are at the level our lowest 5% need to complete with for fungible jobs.
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/the-haves-and-the-have-nots/?_r=0
@CW - have I done something to piss off the Net Nanny? Most of my comments are getting trapped recently. This is getting frustrating.
Michale: (24) And yet, Trump is kicking ass and is well on the way to becoming President Of The United States.
First, yes, he's kicking ass on your side. This is a topsy turvy year and anything can happen, but I really think he's going to go down badly in the general if he get's the nod. People on my side are genuinely appalled by him -- indeed -- he may be exactly what Hillary needs to pull out the not-insane anti-Hillaryists and get them to hold their noses and vote for her. Everything about him that attracts you utterly repulses lots and lots of other people. Even is constant TV presence may ultimately contribute to his undoing because his antics are getting such massive airplay.
But whether I turn out to be right or wrong, the fact that he's winning on your side should not make you happy. He is not the answer. He is the anti-answer. He is not good for this country or for the world. He does not stand for anything constructive or positive, except in the most vague, egotistical way: "I'll be fanstastic".
One way I evaluate people in these situations is to ask myself: If I was seriously ill and my choice of Doctor was (in this case) Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, who would I think would make the best M.D.? and Why?
But that's just me.
I'll agree that Trump is a threat to liberalism and conservatism..But he's a boon for Independents and NPAs like myself.
I don't think Trump is a threat to conservatives, except to the extent that they've discovered that the Tea Party is far less Republican than they thought it was.
Nor do I think he's a threat to Liberals at all. To the contrary, he makes Bernie Sanders look moderate.
Now I do think he's been branding the Independents as more extreme than they actually are as individuals. After Perot, Palin and Trump, perhaps they should call it the Dilettante Party.
As for Trump being the Anti-answer, he does have 666 delegates. Now, I'm an atheist, so I don't think that means anything at all. I'm just sayin', if I have to believe anything, it could be that Trump is the anti-answer.
First, yes, he's kicking ass on your side. This is a topsy turvy year and anything can happen, but I really think he's going to go down badly in the general if he get's the nod.
But, as you say, "anything can happen"...
But whether I turn out to be right or wrong, the fact that he's winning on your side should not make you happy. He is not the answer. He is the anti-answer.
Says you.. :D I believe he is EXACTLY what this country needs after the horrendous ignore-the-middle-class-in-favor-of-a-country-destroying agenda that Obama and the Democrats have wrought..
He does not stand for anything constructive or positive, except in the most vague, egotistical way: "I'll be fanstastic".
No.. He stands for making America fantastic again...
One way I evaluate people in these situations is to ask myself: If I was seriously ill and my choice of Doctor was (in this case) Donald Trump or Ted Cruz or Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, who would I think would make the best M.D.? and Why?
I would go with Ben Carson because he is, yunno.. a doctor. :D
But here is how I would look at it..
If I am living in a country where the economy is schessie, who would I want to lead..
The answer is simple. The guy who literally wrote the book on business success...
It's really that simple..
Michale
As for Trump being the Anti-answer, he does have 666 delegates. Now, I'm an atheist, so I don't think that means anything at all.
Heh.. THAT was funny.. :D
The funny thing about Trump is, if he had a '-D' after his name, hardcore Left Wingers would be swooning..
A guy who loves Planned ParentHood, who wants to help the middle class and who is richer than god so he is not beholden to ANY lobbyist or interest group??
Trump is a Left Wingery wet dream!!
As is blatantly obvious, Trump is a Right Wingery worst nightmare..
Michale
Neil,
@CW - have I done something to piss off the Net Nanny? Most of my comments are getting trapped recently. This is getting frustrating.
Try sacrificing a virgin goat under a full moon and saying three time, "MICHALE IS AWESOME"...
Or is that a chicken??? :D Try 'em both to be sure...
Michale
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/03/16/wake-up-ted-its-time-to-make-phone-call-to-trump.html?intcmp=hphz01
If only Cruz had the integrity...
Michale
You're bubble-spouting again. Obama delivered <5% unemployment, and when you describe Obamacare to Republican voters but call it the ACA they love it.
Yea, well Republicans are morons...
The simple fact is where you call it ObamaCare or the ACA, it's STILL TrainWreckCare...
Exchanges are going bankrupt left and right.. Health care costs are SKYROCKETING..
And, of course, there is that little thing where MILLIONS of Americans lost their healthcare plan they were PROMISED they could keep...
No matter WHAT you want to call it, Obama scrooed the pooch when Americans were SCREAMING for jobs and Obama and the Democrats gave us TrainWreckCare...
Michale
Rubio supporters (and voters for other not-Trump candidates) are disproportionately college-educated, longtime GOP voters. Trump voters are disproportionately blue-collar (which, in practice, sometimes means no collar, plus tattoos), and some said they'd never voted in a GOP primary before.
Some weren't Republicans at all. “I'm an independent,” said Richard Patronik, 67, of Coral Springs. “I can't vote in the primary. But I'd vote for Trump if I could.”
Ask Trump supporters why they back him, and you hear different versions of the same litany: He's not a politician. He's a businessman who can get things done. He doesn't bow to “political correctness.”
“He's a billionaire,” explained Deborah Patronik, Richard's wife.
“He's saying a lot of things that we're thinking,” said Gil Brown, 54, an African American businessman from Lakeland. “It's so refreshing to hear somebody say things clearly.”
(Brown said he wasn't worried about Trump's views on race. “I've been on the receiving end of racism. I know what it's like,” he said. “I'm not hearing it from him.”)
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0316-mcmanus-trump-rubio-florida-20160316-column.html
This article has ME written all over it!! :D
That's the part ya'all don't get about Trump.. He is appealing to a LARGE and DIVERSE cross-section of the American people.. ESPECIALLY that long-sought-after group, the first time voter group..
Trump is winning amongst Right, Left, Center and New...
Hillary doesn't stand a chance.. Even WITHOUT the indictment hanging over her...
Michale
That's the part ya'all don't get about Trump.. He is appealing to a LARGE and DIVERSE cross-section of the American people.. ESPECIALLY that long-sought-after group, the first time voter group..
Trump is winning amongst Right, Left, Center and New...
The last time something like this happened was when some unknown no-experience black guy named Barack Obama ran for President..
And we all know what happened then..
History is set to repeat itself...
Michale
and the credibility of the united states of america.
Yea, and Clinton's BJ in the oval office did wonders for that???
ha. that probably IMPROVED our standing in france!
It's really that simple..
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong"
~HL Mencken
http://gizmodo.com/flying-drone-billboards-are-the-future-we-deserve-1765626310
Ohmygods, how kewl is THAT!!!??? :D
Michale
ha. that probably IMPROVED our standing in france!
True... But then again, it's FRANCE.... So...... :D
Michale