Saturday, January 30, 2016

Regarding certain condemnations of Donald Trump

At this point, it makes more sense to answer these things with gimmicks like this.


12 comments:

Andrew W said...

Interesting observation:

In an non-compulsory voting system (e.g. the US), it's about how many people sympathetic to your candidate that you can convince to turn out to vote (vs the turn-out for the opposition).

In a compulsory voting system (e.g. Australia), it's about how many "undecideds" you can convince to vote for your candidate (vs voting for the opposition).

Not a value judgement as much as understanding a key difference in the electoral process and the consequences for how campaigning is done.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

I am not sure what to do with Trump? I was a Cruz man then I started to warm too Trump but then he skipped the last debate & I was like "Bad move". OTOH I thought Cruz had a bad night at that debate & I thought maybe Trump did himself a favor?

Now as I write this Trump came in second with Rubio a close third and Cruz has taken Iowa. I don't know who to root for or who should win?

Well at least the top 4 GOP contenders are very much to the right. Even the token Establishment guy Rubio was a Tea Party guy at one point. Bush crashed and burned so I am happy about that. I think the Establishment is taking a pounding which is well deserved because 2012 was their last change and like Milo Yiannopoulos alone in a room with a black guy they blew it.

Crude said...

Ben,

My preferences are Trump, Cruz, and then 'I do not care.' Rubio, I have little care of - I do not consider him conservative in any way that matters. I am suspicious of Cruz because he's way, way too 'clever'. But I would regard a Cruz presidency as at least a step forward.

The best news of the night is that Sanders fought Hillary to a draw.

B. Prokop said...

I read that both Huckabee and O'Malley have now suspended their campaigns. Has anyone besides those two gotten out as well?

The Deuce said...

Eh, I'm suspicious of BOTH Trump and Cruz for being "too clever." I mean, Trump's had some very different positions from what he espouses now, including very recently. He's still in favor of Eminent Domain abuse AFAIK, which is just as worrying as Cruz' ties to Goldman Sachs.

They are my two favorites though. Which of them I prefer depends on the day. I wouldn't even vote for Rubio in the general. That's how much I'm sick of the Republican establishment dictating terms.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

Yeh and that tells us the Dems aren't thrilled with Madam Hilarity & our top 3 candidates are like Clubber Lang in his first fight with Rocky. HUNGRY!


This is assuming she is not indited and the super-delegates choose Uncle Joe which will piss off the Sanders crowd.

Crude said...

Deuce,

Eh, I'm suspicious of BOTH Trump and Cruz for being "too clever." I mean, Trump's had some very different positions from what he espouses now, including very recently. He's still in favor of Eminent Domain abuse AFAIK, which is just as worrying as Cruz' ties to Goldman Sachs.

That's entirely fair. I admit, Eminent Domain doesn't concern me as much, only because I see it as a remote concern in practice. It can be abused, but the ways in which it can be abused seem very secondary to other issues. In that sense, I don't think it compares to Goldman Sachs - bankers and corporate influence are imminent problems.

Let me be clear: I intensely dislike globalists and bankers, because I see them as part of the cultural problem. When Walmart and Apple bans confederate flags and demands that LGBT activists have the right to sue small businesses into oblivion for not catering a same-sex wedding, my concern for them is gone.

That said, I can understand being suspicious of Trump. As I've said before, I'm not sold on his sincerity. But let me point out one thing: Trump did what few others have been willing to do, and stood up to the most withering assault for his immigration views. He did so even while his businesses were being attacked. Don't tell me that he was a billionaire and was thus insulated from that damage - that's true to a point, but other billionaires have buckled under far less.

Likewise, I cannot help but notice that Trump is despised by the GOP establishment to a tremendous degree. Tell me Cruz receives the same heat, and I'll say - Cruz just won Iowa against popular expectation. Shall I expect to see him despised at the same level Trump is? If he isn't, why is that?

None of that speaks to Trump's conservative bonafides. But the fact that Trump showed sturdiness of character where so many others buckle - and that the other conservative candidates only discovered their balls once Trump stood triumphant in the face of that assault - does speak well of him in another way. Without his example, I strongly suspect we'd currently be hearing Cruz talk about how we need a secure border 'but we need to balance that with some compassion and common sense' or the like.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

It's hard to make the jump to Trump when he shoots himself in the foot again.

Trump thinks he lost Iowa because he skipped the debate. Ok, you live and you learn.

When he lost Iowa he was very classy about it(&that made him look good) now he is kvetching that Cruz "stole" Iowa?

Does he want to lose NH? What if he pulls this in the General election facing Lady MacBeth/Hilarity?

Dude has got to firm up & control himself.

Crude said...

When he lost Iowa he was very classy about it(&that made him look good) now he is kvetching that Cruz "stole" Iowa?

It's politics, but Trump smells blood in the water. It doesn't help Cruz that he had to apologize to Carson, that he was called out by other factions in Iowa for 'tricks', etc.

That said, I know this is in part political nonsense. I favor Trump over Cruz, but I'm not holding anything against Cruz on this front.

malcolmthecynic said...

Also, I'm very surprised Trump is admitting that skipping the debate is a mistake. I disagree. The problem is that the new voters who came out voted specifically to keep out Trump - hence the Rubio support.

But besides that, Trump is right to call out Cruz's bullshit, though calling for a re-vote is typical Trump rhetoric.

I thought Trump would lose Iowa, but I think he's going to win in New Hampshire fairly easily.

Son of Ya'Kov said...

>It's politics, but Trump smells blood in the water. It doesn't help Cruz that he had to apologize to Carson, that he was called out by other factions in Iowa for 'tricks', etc.

It wouldn't help in a race with Demorats since they have no honor and if you read that Breitbart article on why Milo Y is winning you know Demorats use the Chivalry of Republicans against them.

It makes him look bad & he is wasting time whining about Iowa when he should be moving on to NH. Chris Christie was in NH asking "Where is Trump?". God forbid Bush finds a way to gain in NH. The establishment as much as the left needs to be beaten like a $2 hooker by her pimp and treated with less respect.


>That said, I know this is in part political nonsense. I favor Trump over Cruz, but I'm not holding anything against Cruz on this front.

I really don't care about any of them in the end. I just want to win. I just don't want another anti-Catholic leftist fascist piece of shit in the Whitehouse.

Still I hold a pure Darwinian view of this. If Trump in spite of being Trump pulls a hat trick then I take everything I just said back.

We will see....

Peace dude.

Crude said...

I really don't care about any of them in the end. I just want to win. I just don't want another anti-Catholic leftist fascist piece of shit in the Whitehouse.

See, that's the thing. If my choice is between the anti-Catholic leftist and the Catholic supplicant to the left, I choose the anti-Catholic leftist. I can no longer endorse 'sly' people who are craven.