Sen. Ted Cruz could still conceivably win. But there’s no soft landing in this scenario. No rapprochement. No team-building exercise is going to fix the 2016 iteration of the Republican Party. There is only going to be a crackup, no matter who captures the nomination. If that’s true, and if it means one side has to prevail, why not save your party from a hostile takeover that could potentially cost it both the Senate and the House?
“State legislatures should consider whether to retake [the authority to choose electors] in the 2016 election in an effort to stop Trump,” he says. “Many could consider this proposal, but the Texas state legislature is a natural place to start. It could easily pass a law returning power to the legislature. On Election Day, the legislature could decide whether to vote for Trump or Mitt Romney, the prior Republican nominee; former Texas governor Rick Perry, who dropped out of the 2016 race early on; a popular GOP figure such as Condoleezza Rice, whose name has recently been floated as an alternative; or their own junior Sen. Ted Cruz, presently trailing Trump in the Republican Party delegate count.”
A sample, from the Twitter @LitCritTrump account:
“Sad little man Gatsby can’t get anyone to like him. Maybe he’s not as rich as he thinks. NOT GREAT AT ALL”
Advisers? Donald Trump doesn’t need no stinkin’ advisers.
At least that’s what Gary Johnson, the former Republican governor of New Mexico who is currently vying for the Libertarian presidential nomination, is saying.
Recently asked for his opinion on the Trump candidacy, Johnson said: “[He]is no small-government conservative. As that reality sets in, more and more Republicans should, and hopefully will, take a serious look at the Libertarian candidate in November.”
In other words, Johnson believes that once the GOP’s honeymoon phase ends with Trump and Republicans begin seeing that his bluster lacks substance, conservative voters will look for another option.
Less than a week before what may be the most important week of the campaign, Donald Trump is in very good shape. Marco Rubio and John Kasich? Not so much.
He has multiple lines of attack –
But although Trump is unlikely to obtain the exact set of changes he outlines, the outburst is psychologically revealing. Donald Trump has been filing and threatening lawsuits to shut up critics and adversaries over the whole course of his career. He dragged reporter Tim O’Brien through years of litigation over a relatively favorable Trump biography that assigned a lower valuation to his net worth than he thought it should have. He sued the Chicago Tribune’s architecture critic over a piece arguing that a planned Trump skyscraper in lower Manhattan would be “one of the silliest things” that could be built in the city. He used the threat of litigation to get an investment firm to fire an analyst who correctly predicted that the Taj Mahal casino would not be a financial success. He sued comedian Bill Maher over a joke.
Leaving aside for a moment the undeniable legal, political, and economic hurdles to unilaterally imposing a 45 percent tariff on all Chinese imports, as well as the utter gibberish at the end of Collins’ response about inflation and the federal budget (seriously, I have no idea), let’s take the plan at face value. According to Team Trump, their import tax would (i) force American consumers to pay 10 to 15 percent more for food, clothing, shoes, electronics, and other basic necessities; and (ii) thereby assist American manufacturing companies and their workers.
Put another way, Team Trump has now freely admitted they want to indirectly subsidize U.S. manufacturers via higher prices that American families and businesses would be forced to pay for these domestic producers’ goods.
Voters who still score high on authority/loyalty/sanctity and low on care — even after accounting for all the demographic variables — are significantly more likely to vote for Donald Trump. These are the true authoritarians — they value obedience while scoring low on compassion.
Too late? –