What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Has Trump Peaked?

g5000

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
95,207
Reaction score
16,765
Points
2,180
Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>


If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.
 

Rustic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
58,771
Reaction score
5,881
Points
1,940
Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>


If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.
Whatever happens let's hope it's the destruction of progressive career politicians like bush and kasich...:dance:
 

LoneLaugher

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2011
Messages
61,304
Reaction score
9,443
Points
2,040
Location
Inside Mac's Head
I'm not convinced he will win NH. It's going to be a long week for him.

He faked a gracious speech last night.....but his tweets today are vintage Trump.
 

Siete

Platinum Member
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
34,325
Reaction score
3,975
Points
1,130
he peaked long ago ... he's been stuck on 25% - 28% for months.
 

Timmy

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
22,432
Reaction score
2,825
Points
290
He has evolve the act . People need to hear specifics, not just brash boasts .

Sure he's entertianing , but that doesn't mean he gets votes. Hell, I'd go see Him in action but I wouldn't vote for him.
 

HappyJoy

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
28,046
Reaction score
4,090
Points
290
I don't think Trump is a lock in NH but as of today he's the odds on favorite. If he wins then I think Iowa is just yesterdays news. If he loses New Hampshire then he quits.
 

Rustic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
58,771
Reaction score
5,881
Points
1,940
He has evolve the act . People need to hear specifics, not just brash boasts .

Sure he's entertianing , but that doesn't mean he gets votes. Hell, I'd go see Him in action but I wouldn't vote for him.
wenn2670528.jpg
 

Soggy in NOLA

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
40,569
Reaction score
5,353
Points
1,830
Just because he lost the Hawkeye Cauci doesn't mean he's done.
 

Rexx Taylor

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
30,328
Reaction score
2,361
Points
1,170
Location
Sarasota, Florida
The south is Cruz/Rubio territory. I am assuming that Rubio will win the Cuba Corkus and Cruz will win the Puerto Rico Primary
 

the_human_being

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
15,277
Reaction score
2,740
Points
290
Yes, he's finished. He's toast. It's all over. He may as well pull out. LOL!!!
 

Gracie

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
64,584
Reaction score
23,677
Points
2,290
Location
Wandering Nomad
Trump has gotten the leverage he has for one reason....people like watching him thumb his nose. It's been entertaining to see. However, those going to his speeches, watching when on tv, etc also remember his antics when it's time to vote. Is he REALLY potus material? No.
 

tinydancer

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
51,846
Reaction score
12,813
Points
2,220
Location
Piney
Cruz won because his campaign spread a rumor that Carson was going to quit the race and swung Carson supporters to Cruz.

That dropped not only Carson's numbers but check this out. Really dirty trick.

"Carson finished a distant fourth in the nation's first nominating contest, and observers at two caucus precincts told DailyMail.com that he lost supporters to the Cruz camp when Republicans speaking on behalf of Cruz said Carson was suspending his campaign.

It turned out not to be true, however, and Carson himself complained Tuesday about 'shameless tactics and dirty political plays' that pushed Cruz to victory on the strength of political sabotage.

Cruz won the caucuses by a total of 6,239 votes over Donald Trump, less than four Republicans in each of the state's 1,681 precincts – representing the number Cruz's forces would have had to 'flip' at each caucus location in order to overcome what had been a strong Trump polling lead going into Monday night."


Read more: Ted Cruz ADMITS his staff spread rumor that Ben Carson was quitting
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

tigerred59

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2015
Messages
21,277
Reaction score
2,857
Points
290
Trump will probably win New Hampshire. But will it all be downhill from there? He doesn't appear to have the necessary machine in place to go the distance. His entire campaign has been built on keeping the media interested in him. He gets the vast majority of the air time, for free. The others have to shell out big bucks on campaign ads and go begging for media interviews, whereas a Trump interview is a score for a journalist.

I know the imminent implosion of the Trump campaign has been predicted on a daily basis since he announced, and I admit I am quit surprised at how far he has made it.

Is he finally done?

Do you know what the Trump phenomenon reminds me of?

This:

In the first instance, it is probably true that in general the higher the education and intelligence of individuals becomes, the more their views and tastes are differentiated and the less likely they are to agree on a particular hierarchy of values. It is a corollary of this that if we wish to find a high degree of uniformity and similarity of outlook, we have to descend to the regions of lower moral and intellectual standards where the more primitive and "common" instincts and tastes prevail. This does not mean that the majority of people have low moral standards; it merely means that the largest group of people whose values are very similar are the people with low standards.

<snip>


If, however, a potential dictator had to rely entirely on those whose uncomplicated and primitive instincts happen to be very similar, their number would scarcely give sufficient weight to their endeavours. He will have to increase their numbers by converting more to the same simple creed.

Here comes in the second negative principle of selection: he will be able to obtain the support of all the docile and gullible, who have no strong convictions of their own but are prepared to accept a ready-made system of values if it is only drummed into their ears sufficiently loudly and frequently. It will be those whose vague and imperfectly formed ideas are easily swayed and whose passions and emotions are readily aroused who will thus swell the ranks of the totalitarian party.

It is in connection with the deliberate effort of the skilful demagogue to weld together a closely coherent and homogeneous body of supporters that the third and perhaps most important negative element of selection enters. It seems to be almost a law of human nature that it is easier for people to agree on a negative programme, on the hatred of an enemy, on the envy of those better off, than on any positive task. The contrast between the "we" and the "they", the common fight against those outside the group, seems to be an essential ingredient in any creed which will solidly knit together a group for common action. It is consequently always employed by those who seek, not merely support of a policy, but the unreserved allegiance of huge masses. From their point of view it has the great advantage of leaving them greater freedom of action than almost any positive programme. The enemy, whether he be internal like the "Jew" or the "Kulak", or external, seems to be an indispensable requisite in the armoury of a totalitarian leader.


Our country has fallen in love with left and right totalitarian demagogues before, during other hard times. But we always seem to veer away from the abyss at the last moment.
For the first time in my voting life, I am thankful for people like Trump and Bernie Sanders.....they are forcing their opponents to own up to what they truly stand for and the hell with the fake pandering and lying to get votes....either say what you mean or shut the fuck up...both Trump and Bernie do that. Neither man will win, but for the first time, Fox News and Rush Limpballs have been shut down and for me, that's a breath of fresh air. Sanders isn't allowing Hillary to flow with her well rehearsed bullshit bylines, he's making her own her rhetoric, something she hasn't done for years. She's always been a middle of the road play it safe candidate.....now she's claiming to be a damned progressive, which in itself is an irony to me.
 

Eaglewings

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
15,452
Reaction score
3,499
Points
350
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Trump lost to an evangelical grassroots state..He looked concerned last night , but people have been calling him over since the beginning..
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$515.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top