Donald Trump for president?

[mchepp]

The tin foil hat theory is that Trump will attack the other GOP nominees and party (starting with the debate tomorrow night) to the point that there will be no way for him to win the GOP nomination and at that time he will run as an independent.  He'd never get the airtime or invite to the debate if he started out as an independent.

The GOP can't control Trump so there's no way they want him to represent their party.

I think that it will be something more on the order of the opposite you stated. Trump is the frontrunner, a lesser known candidate would love to have a "one on one" debate with Trump to make it seem like it is them versus Trump. Thus improving their lowly status.

I am not old enough, but what was everyone saying when Reagan was running for president. Wasn't it viewed in a bit of the same way as this where the thought was he is an actor and not presidential? I wonder if there are any parallels to this.

[newtogolf]

I think that it will be something more on the order of the opposite you stated. Trump is the frontrunner, a lesser known candidate would love to have a "one on one" debate with Trump to make it seem like it is them versus Trump. Thus improving their lowly status.

I am not old enough, but what was everyone saying when Reagan was running for president. Wasn't it viewed in a bit of the same way as this where the thought was he is an actor and not presidential? I wonder if there are any parallels to this.

Reagan was more moderate than the hard right GOP but he played by the rules.  Trump is a chameleon, he has flip flopped his political allegiances over the years and will say and do whatever he thinks will get him elected.   I can't imagine the GOP backing him, regardless of his popularity rating, out of fear that once he gets into office he will not follow their direction.

[boogielicious]

Donald Trumps tweets are magical!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-post-debate_55c47bb5e4b0d9b743dbb88d?kvcommref=mostpopular

[GolfLug]

I think that it will be something more on the order of the opposite you stated. Trump is the frontrunner, a lesser known candidate would love to have a "one on one" debate with Trump to make it seem like it is them versus Trump. Thus improving their lowly status.

I am not old enough, but what was everyone saying when Reagan was running for president. Wasn't it viewed in a bit of the same way as this where the thought was he is an actor and not presidential? I wonder if there are any parallels to this.

From last nights debate.. I would say you nailed it. Most of them unintentionally mostly fed the Trump train fuel tank.

Trump continues to be the wild card (wilder each day) but I have to admit begrudgingly his continued protracted views from mainstream politicians is increasingly making him a very legit threat.

His overall demeanor continues to be high handed suggesting - 'you need me much much more than I need you'.... To paraphrase an old saying - 'even god fears a man who fears no loss'.

Yet to hear/see true substance. Not sure what that is but it is still bordering on a reality show.

[Gunther]

I don't understand how the polls are reflecting that he won that debate; I thought he came off horribly, notwithstanding a couple of effective zingers. He doesn't have any specifics, he doesn't know anything!

[Mr. Desmond]

I don't understand how the polls are reflecting that he won that debate; I thought he came off horribly, notwithstanding a couple of effective zingers. He doesn't have any specifics, he doesn't know anything!

Don't know about polls, but according to NYT,

Rubio

Mr. Rubio, the senator from Florida, has a good a case to be considered the debate’s top performer. A weaker Mr. Bush probably benefits Mr. Rubio as much as anyone, and if Mr. Bush raised questions about whether he would be a great general election candidate, then Mr. Rubio added yet more reason to believe he could be a good one. Mr. Rubio still has the challenge of figuring out how to break through a strong field in a factional party.

With so little time having passed after the debate, it’s impossible to know whether the media will deem him the sort of overwhelming winner who will get the attention necessary to make a big jump in the polls. But even if this is not the moment he breaks through, he surely advanced his case among the many electability-minded and conservative party elites with reservations about the abilities of both Mr. Bush and Mr. Walker.

Kasich

Mr. Kasich also advanced his cause. He entered as a largely unknown candidate outside of Ohio, where he is governor. But he was backed by a supportive audience, he deftly handled tough questions, and he had a solid answer on a question about attending same-sex weddings. His answer might not resonate among many Republicans, but it will resonate in New Hampshire — the state where he needs to deny Mr. Bush a path to victory and vault to the top of the pack.

Walker

Mr. Walker won by not losing. In a lot of ways, the moderators’ tough, specific questions played to Mr. Walker’s weakness. He got no opportunities to make his pitch about fighting unions in Wisconsin. But he handled several tough questions — on abortion; on relations with Arab nations; what he would do after terminating the Iran deal; race; and his employment record — without appearing flustered or making a mistake. His answers were concise and sharp. (they questioned his lack of personality dynamics -- implication was that a more dynamic personality could overtake him)

The Loser:

It was Donald Trump , though, who might have had the weakest performance. No, it may not be the end of his surge. But he consistently faced pointed questions, didn’t always have satisfactory answers, endured a fairly hostile crowd and probably won’t receive as much media attention coming out of the debate as he did in the weeks before it. If you take the view that he’s heavily dependent on media coverage, that’s an issue. Whatever coverage he does get may be fairly negative — probably focusing on his unwillingness to guarantee support for the Republican nominee.

[David in FL]

It's often said that the media picks the a Republican nominee, not the voters. ;-)

[Gunther]

I put NYT on the same level as Huffpo and Daily Kos and they prove it again here (although I couldn't read the article as posted). Trump was not the loser, he was the clear winner according to all the polls. I just don't understand why, I thought he looked like an imbecile. Cruz and Carson had the best performances in my mind, and Rubio did well too. Rand Paul was the big loser last night.

[Mr. Desmond]

I put NYT on the same level as Huffpo and Daily Kos and they prove it again here (although I couldn't read the article as posted). Trump was not the loser, he was the clear winner according to all the polls.

I just don't understand why, I thought he looked like an imbecile. Cruz and Carson had the best performances in my mind, and Rubio did well too.

Rand Paul was the big loser last night.

That was a good laugh.

You partially agree with the NYT, lol, but slam them because they don't agree with the polls.

I think the key here is in your mind regarding Cruz and Carson - fringe right wing candidates who take themselves too seriously -- and that's always dangerous.

Yep, the NYT is only the #1 newspaper in the world.

If you actually read it, you'd be surprised at how much news they have all over the spectrum, although you won't find extremist right wing views, and the arts, food, health, world news, is great. That, and The Economist.

[Mr. Desmond]

NYT on Cruz and Carson, since you commented on it:

"The rest of the field — Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, Ben Carson, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee — probably didn’t bolster their cases. Few made mistakes. All had their moments, especially Mr. Carson on race and Mr. Cruz on ISIS. Many of those moments might have been good enough to earn credit among their natural supporters. But I doubt any of them did so well as to earn the media attention or grass-roots energy necessary to move from the middle to the top of the pack."

The Donald is merely the voice of frustration for the extreme, right wing fantasy driven electorate.

[rkim291968]

I watched some of the debate.  From what I saw, Trump, Carson, and Bush didn't do well.  Given Trump's lead on poll, I think he had most to lose but we will see what the latest polls say.   Even Trump's McCain comment didn't hurt him on polls.

[Gunther]

[COLOR=333333]The Donald is merely the voice of frustration for the extreme, right wing fantasy driven electorate.[/COLOR]

Trump is the farthest thing from an extreme right wing candidate. He is a voice of frustration for all Americans who are sick of the status quo, politically correct nation we've become. He's getting a lot of Dem support. In truth, the far right does not support him because of his social views, which are left of center. Another example of the NYT getting it wrong.

[acerimusdux]

Trump was not the loser, he was the clear winner according to all the polls.

What polls? I wouldn't put too much stock in internet polls, like Drudge. Trump did really poorly with the Fox News focus group watching debate, run by Frank Lutz.  I'm not convinced he'll do well when more traditional representative sample polls are available.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunther

Trump was not the loser, he was the clear winner according to all the polls.

What polls? I wouldn't put too much stock in internet polls, like Drudge. Trump did really poorly with the Fox News focus group watching debate, run by Frank Lutz.  I'm not convinced he'll do well when more traditional representative sample polls are available.

Trump looked out of place among other candidates.  He stumbled on answers.  What sounded good in 1 on 1 interviews, and one way announcements looked un-presidential in the debate.  He should skip future debates if he wants to keep his poll numbers.  He literally has most to lose by mixing up with other candidates who are far behind him on polls.

[Gunther]

What polls? I wouldn't put too much stock in internet polls, like Drudge. Trump did really poorly with the Fox News focus group watching debate, run by Frank Lutz.  I'm not convinced he'll do well when more traditional representative sample polls are available.

I agree, I thought he did poorly, which is why I'm confused by the polls. I love his message but don't want him to be POTUS.

[Mr. Desmond]

Trump is the farthest thing from an extreme right wing candidate. He is a voice of frustration for all Americans who are sick of the status quo, politically correct nation we've become. He's getting a lot of Dem support. In truth, the far right does not support him because of his social views, which are left of center. Another example of the NYT getting it wrong.

Well, you should know.

Trump changed his positions over the years from moderate to conservative based. He sounds like an extreme right winger because he make statements that have little basis in truth ... like Fox News or Huckabee or any pol that spouts without facts -- right or left.

Has anyone challenged him on those changes and asked "Why?"

I don't mind anyone changing their mind as long as they include a truthful "why."

[newtogolf]

I watched the debates last night and was impressed with everyone but Trump, Christie and Bush.

• Trump didn't say anything new, you can't debate in sound bites.  We get it, the US is losing to China, Mexico and everyone else, but how do we start winning?  How is he going to turn the US into a manufacturing country, how is he going to improve the border security?  Anyone can identify problems, we need someone to fix them.  I am mixed on his decision to not support the RNC nominee.  I don't believe you should blindly support whoever wins, but he's also leaving the door open to kill the entire election for the GOP if he doesn't get his way.
  
• Christie came off like the obnoxious NJ resident he is.  His retort to Paul was on point but his in your face tactics won't play well in the rest of the country.  I did appreciate his take on social security, btw, when did social security become an entitlement, last time I checked, that was my money, so why is it being thrown under the same label as welfare?  It's obvious the government "stole" our money from SS and while I'd like them just to return it, I don't see that as a feasible option.  Christie has a realistic approach to fixing it.
  
• Bush is another career politician and should have had better answers to some of the questions.  He and some of the others have to leave God out of the debates, religion isn't going to fix the problems we have.

Paul is an outlier, he doesn't fit the GOP mold but I like much of what he says.  He hurt himself going after Christie they way he did, the cheap shot about hugging Obama during Sandy was uncalled for.

Carson was clearly the most intelligent person on stage, I loved his answer on race and his decision to not just cheap shot Obama on Syria but instead provided an answer that indicates he understands the problem with our military and how weak it is today.

Rubio and Cruz are good candidates but I'm tired of all of them trying to tell their sob story about how poor they were growing up.  I don't care if their father was a mailman, bartender or construction worker, they're not poor anymore so let's not pretend they are.

Huckabee, Walker and Kasich are decent candidates but they are afterthoughts.  Kasich benefitted from home field advantage but overall he didn't belong on the stage with the rest of them, I'd have rather seen Fiorina on stage.  Huckabee and Walker need to distinguish themselves or they will be forgotten.

[newtogolf]

Well, you should know.

Trump changed his positions over the years from moderate to conservative based. He sounds like an extreme right winger because he make statements that have little basis in truth ... like Fox News or Huckabee or any pol that spouts without facts -- right or left.

Has anyone challenged him on those changes and asked "Why?"

I don't mind anyone changing their mind as long as they include a truthful "why."

You get offended when we use the term liberal media but you don't stop taking shots at Fox, fact is the liberal media is ignoring the stories on Benghazi, Fast and Furius and Hillary's e-mail servers so while Fox takes positions to the right the rest of the media just refuses to cover stories that don't fit their agenda.  As Carson said, Hillary is depending on people being ignorant to the facts and the liberal media makes it easier for them to remain ignorant.