It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Donald Trump using Colorado and other recent loses just to fire up his base?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Exactly.

Cruz claims to be anti-establishment, yet he is using his role in establishment to get elected. He is a fraud.

Trump is successful where the voters are choosing him. He is not so successful where it takes an establishment person to work the game. Trump may be a successful businessman, and knows how to work the system from the outside, but he is not an insider. And I think that is refreshing, and we need that.




posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Don't worry, he'll probably earn more delegates from NY than Cruz did with Colorado and Wyoming combined.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

No leadership skills...hmmm...so tell us, how is it that he has so many delegates if it is so poorly organized? That is why I stated this. To many, it looks like Cruz, the anti-establishment is sucking up to the establishment to ride the NoTrump train. How long can that last when he is killed in the next 5-6 primary states? People have called Trump dumb since day one and he is still here, in the lead and the lead story.

He is also changing. He was fighting back running with 16 other candidates. Now, it is time to polish his image. It will not be that hard. It has already started. New people in place.
edit on 04pm30pmf0000002016-04-18T13:01:07-05:000107 by matafuchs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bennyzilla
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't think anyone honestly believes their candidate to be without any ties to the establishment.

Anti-establishment nowadays has taken on a meaning of being against the current establishment as opposed to this "tear it all down" attitude you've attributed to it. (And attributed it correctly I will add because thats what the word means).


"Tear it all down" is literally the message the GOP "anti-establishment" candidates are preaching. If you don't see this, you are naive. Though I'm pretty sure you are just being obtuse here.


I think it's one of those things where the real meaning of the word really doesn't have much meaning anymore.


As is the case for most words or phrases co-opted by politics. So agreed on this point.


Trump gets called anti-establishment but I mean look at him he's a businessman, he's about making money, it doesn't get more establishment than that.

Well perhaps being a career politician like Bernie Sanders is up there too.


Like I said, no such thing as anti-establishment.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 01:08 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Well not exactly. Trump is just as establishment as Cruz is. He just got caught with his pants down on the caucus thing, so his ego causes him to deflect blame. Hell Trump has admitted to playing the game, so I refuse to believe that he is anti-establishment or even "a breath of fresh air" as you say. Why would I want to vote out the middle man only to vote in the guy who tells him what to do?



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I'm so sick of hearing "anti-establishment". It's like being in grade school and a new "cool word" is being used by everyone because all the kids want to fit in.

Can't we just call it "the man" instead? I think that sounds better.

Trump claims he's against "the man"...? Now doesn't that have a much better ring to it? It certainly amounts to the same thing.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

I don't think Trump could say "I'm against the Man" without his head exploding. After all, he thoroughly believes that HE'S the Man.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   
Trump had people on the ground for those states but, they were disorganized and poorly lead. Something that has been common in his campaign. So many screw ups could have avoided if he has advisers he listened to. Their was time when he did ok with women, now he scores at a 70% disapproval with them. Just because he could not resist keeping calling women ugly, fat or stupid instead countering what they were saying. Somebody is his camp had to tell him at some point to stop doing that. Somebody had to explain how primaries work. If he can not manage this then how will he ever understand how the nation and the world work. I do not think anybody has even explained about the 3 branches of Government and how it works or he would stop saying he was going to do things he can not do. I think he just like to talk and actual work is beneath him.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



Maybe never. Ron Paul was as close as we came.


The "establishment" sure did a number on Paul last time around. Same tactics being used all over again. On the up side, at least Trump's son won't be endorsing Romney. The Paul's are far more "establishment" than you think as Rand proved without a doubt.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 03:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nucleardoom
The Paul's are far more "establishment" than you think as Rand proved without a doubt.


I never said anything about establishment. I said I wanted someone who acted like an adult. Ron Paul does, Donald Trump does not.

I would take Ron Paul on his worst day over that dips*** Trump on his best day.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: syrinx high priest

No leadership skills...hmmm...so tell us, how is it that he has so many delegates if it is so poorly organized? That is why I stated this. To many, it looks like Cruz, the anti-establishment is sucking up to the establishment to ride the NoTrump train. How long can that last when he is killed in the next 5-6 primary states? People have called Trump dumb since day one and he is still here, in the lead and the lead story.

He is also changing. He was fighting back running with 16 other candidates. Now, it is time to polish his image. It will not be that hard. It has already started. New people in place.


when he had a chance to show leadership skills in Chicago, he ran away and threatened to arrest everybody. He only has 2 go to moves when he has a challenge. Threaten arrest or threaten a lawsuit. That won't work as president. He is incompetent on the most basic levels.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




I never said I needed someone to be the most tactful. I want them to act like adults and have real world, implementable, practical policies.


Yea, because repairing our crumbling infrastructure, building a wall to keep out the benefit bandits, and abolishing common core are just flight of fancy pipe dreams right? Please.
I've cited just three of the many examples of Trump's policies he's been campaigning on. Your falling for the MSM lies, or promoting them (I'm not sure which) because the aforementioned polices I listed are completely unpractical and unimplementable right? I guess it's commonplace to be a Billionaire dealing with thousands of business deals over the course of your life while acting (as you suggest) like a child. Please spare us the propaganda already.

edit on 18-4-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nucleardoom
Yea, because repairing our crumbling infrastructure, building a wall to keep out the benefit bandits, and abolishing common core are just flight of fancy pipe dreams right?


Apparently you are as confused as Donny Dorito Skin. The President cannot build a wall, repair infrastructure or abolish common core, that is Congress's job.


I've cited just three of the many examples of Trump's policies he's been campaigning on. Your falling for the MSM lies, or promoting them (I'm not sure which) because the aforementioned polices I listed are completely unpractical and unimplementable right?


They will remain impractical since the President does not pass legislation and there is a little thing called a Senatorial filibuster which, unless there is a Republican super majority (which it appears there will not be) none of his pipe dream nonsense will ever get through.

The guy cannot even get his campaign to function properly, why would I think he could be the Chief Executive?



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Show Leadership skills in Chicago? I guess you mean the rioting outside that shut down his event, and the 1st amendment rights of all of himself and his supporters. He showed leadership by cancelling and not putting people in harms way. It was smart. He still won 38% of the vote and 54 delegates. Obama is a senator from Chicago where there have been over 800 shootings so far this year and crickets...leaving people in harms way....

The incompetence is the GOP and not getting behind him after Jeb dropped out.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus




Apparently you are as confused as Donny Dorito Skin. The President cannot build a wall, repair infrastructure or abolish common core, that is Congress's job.


Has nothing to do with who's job it is, you wanted "implementable" policies. I provided you with three. Now that you're proven wrong your barometer has changed from "implementable" polices to "who's job it is"?


Yea, it's congress's job, you're damn funny. I have a two word retort: Executive Order.

Oh, and as far as your fancy filibuster is concerned here's another two words: National Security

With those four words alone a wall can, and will, be completed.

Game, Set, & Match.

edit on 18-4-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
And it is the chief executives job to get those below him to work together, as it has happened in the past and could happen again.

It is not about EO's to get it done. The wall is already in place and was funded with the Secure Fence Act of 2006. Stopped by funding in 2010. All they have to do is refund it. Trump can find the right people to build it, not suck on the tit of the gov't contractors like Boeing.

and finally, on the he is crazy note....

A July 29, 2010 Rasmussen Reports nationwide poll revealed that Americans favored building a fence along the U.S. border with Mexico, with 68 percent in favor and 21 percent against...people have wanted it for awhile. This is nothing new.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
or, is this just a cheap way to fire up his base? To show those who are on the fence for the general election that he is talking to the voter, not the delegates. He has had such an unorthodox campaign so far it could be...or maybe he mistook how to beat Cruz in those states but he can change it. He knows the system. He could have bought all of those delegates but that is not who he is and people still do not see that. He is the man who is blamed for being too rich but if he used those resources he would be, to me, buying the election like the rest.





Hahahaha! That's a good one!

Did it 'fire up' Hillary voters, in 2008, when the DNC 'gifted' Obama with 59 delegates from Michigan? No...no, it did not.

Obama went on to win the general election....TWICE.

Trump is just helping the RNC and Cruz set the stage for a brokered convention, so he can look like he had no choice to break from the party and make it look like it wasn't the plan all along.

But it is the plan -- always has been. It's always been the plan that another big domestic spending budget...errr....democrat wins in November 2016.

With the Bush 'War on Terror' money-making scheme in full swing, the Establishment won't be needing another conservative warhawk for a while.

What they *need* is that big domestic spending plan AND A MANDATE TO SPEND THE MONEY. Trump will help deliver that. By 'firing up' his base, he'll take so many conservative votes with him when he parts from the RNC, that democrats will win with a YUUUGE MANDATE.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs

Great points you made. The only reason I brought up EO's & NS is to prove the wall is an "implementable" Trump policy even with the fiercest of opposition. Like you stated it's partially there already just needs the funding to finish the job.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Nucleardoom
Has nothing to do with who's job it is, you wanted "implementable" policies. I provided you with three. Now that you're proven wrong your barometer has changed from "implementable" polices to "who's job it is"?


How are they implementable when the President does not enact laws? Explain to me how Donny Dorito bypasses Congress and sets aside money to build a wall or repair infrastructure and also eliminates common core without Congress revising the law?



Yea, it's congress's job you're damn funny. I have a two word retort: Executive Order.


Ah, so we want a tyrant who avoids the Constitution and the separation of powers it delineates? I suppose we did not get enough of that with the last two assholes.


Oh, and as far as your fancy filibuster is concerned here's another two words: National Security


Maybe we can have a nice little Reichstag fire while we are at it.


With those four words alone a wall can, and will, be built.


I would wager every single penny I have that Trump's Wall will never get built. Every penny.



posted on Apr, 18 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: matafuchs
Was this a shortcoming or something he could allow a small amount of delegates to be given to show, no matter the rules of the GOP, you, the voter with only two true choices, makes no difference in some states and in reality, nowhere at all?

He knows the system. He could have bought all of those delegates but that is not who he is and people still do not see that.




No way would someone seriously running for the nomination (and hoping to then run for president) FORK OVER the momentum to another candidate intentionally!

The fact is, Trump does know the system -- his handlers certainly know the system and every rule in every flipping state.

But Trump is not seriously running for POTUS. He is running to lose.

Trump doesn't have a socialist record and didn't marry TWO communist women because, gee wilikers, he is just suddenly a conservative, after all these years. He has a socialist record and is friends with the Clintons because...HE IS AN INSIDER AND A POLITICAL OPERATIVE WHO CANNOT BE TRUSTED. He is also a republican (although oddly he has done nothing but hate on the party since day 1).

Even if I was wrong about this^^^^ (and I really do not believe I am), then Trump STILL hasn't done anything to earn the benefit of the doubt. He has done nothing to earn the kind of trust his supporters are giving him. He has done nothing but embarrass them and set them up to have all of their HOPE (for CHANGE) utterly rejected, utterly...and completely...and utterly.




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join