How far will Trump go?

Original post by demx9

No, the problem is not America's preconceived notion of Socialism, the problem is Sanders is too weak, he had multiple occasions where he could attack Clinton, but he didn't .. how does he expect to win just by being nice ?

Anyway that's good, if Trump has Hillary as the opponent, it's going to be an easy win.

Running on his policies and not devoting time to attacking other candidates makes him weak?

His "being nice" has done enormously well for him, he's the only other democratic candidate with a remote chance of challenging Hillary without resorting to attack ads and with a comparatively minuscule amount of corporate backing, but it's likely that no amount of attacking her would tip him over the edge. Even if the media who are financially invested in Clinton decided to give him equal representation, Hillary's dirty laundry has been airing for months now anyway.

Reply 27

demx9

3

If he can't even handle protesters on a stage, how can he deal with leading the most powerful country on Earth ?

Reply 28

Original post by demx9

If he can't even handle protesters on a stage, how can he deal with leading the most powerful country on Earth ?

Ah yes, dealing with protesters jumping onto your stage. The ultimate qualification for any president.

But seriously, what were you expecting him to do when twelve people jumped onto the stage and took the microphone from him, chuck them back into the crowds himself? What do you think the headlines would have said if he had resisted, would have been praised or would it have been given a racist spin? He's got poor choice in security, that's for sure, but I don't think any sane person is going to judge his capacity for office based his inability to remove a dozen people from a stage.

You also ignored the points I raised in my last reply.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 29

Zargabaath

There are no brakes on this train, for the Trump cannot be stumped.

Reply 30

demx9

3

Being nice isn't why he's high in the polls, he's got support thanks to his policies, even though his polls have been decreasing recently .. The point is that being nice and having socialist policies is not enough to win, he needs to get a much more aggressive stance against Hillary.. And there would be so much to criticize

Reply 31

DylanJ42

18

I hope with all my heart he wins

Reply 32

Fullofsurprises

OP

It's amazing the extent to which the main media in the US exclude him from all coverage. Anyone who argues that big business conspiracies don't exist would have to explain how a candidate who moves from one packed out hall to another across America everywhere he goes cannot get a minute of national airtime. The US is run by powerful self-interested cabals.

Reply 33

nulli tertius

Original post by Fullofsurprises

Either way, will Trump last long beyond NH? Does he really have what it takes, or is he just another pre-Primaries flash in the pan who will burn and fizzle out shortly?

Iowa has a very sophisticated electorate. It isn't the general run of voters. It comprises Republican activists for the most part. Trump will find it hard to appeal there.

Do candidates need a large organisation to get the vote out or to raise money? That isn't clear because in virtually all Presidential elections they have needed to do both. Trump has few boots on the ground but no need of money.

Reply 34

Original post by demx9

Being nice isn't why he's high in the polls, he's got support thanks to his policies, even though his polls have been decreasing recently .. The point is that being nice and having socialist policies is not enough to win, he needs to get a much more aggressive stance against Hillary.. And there would be so much to criticize

Again, I don't see how attacking Hillary more frequently would make a significant difference to his polling chances. Hilary has already weathered several significant controversies since the campaign trail started, anyone who would have turned against her for that has probably already done so. It's not like he stands around quietly during debates without ever criticising Clinton and her positions. Spending more time and resources attacking Hillary won't provide any real improvement to his chances while she's got most major (pro-democrat) mainstream media outlets heavily supporting her by limiting Sander's scope and reporting that she unanimously wins every debate, contrary to polls and research from multiple other sources. Of all the criticisms I've heard of Sanders, him being too passive is not one of the big ones.

Reply 35

Fullofsurprises

OP

Original post by nulli tertius

Iowa has a very sophisticated electorate. It isn't the general run of voters. It comprises Republican activists for the most part. Trump will find it hard to appeal there.

Do candidates need a large organisation to get the vote out or to raise money? That isn't clear because in virtually all Presidential elections they have needed to do both. Trump has few boots on the ground but no need of money.

What reportedly happens in every election is that the bigwigs of the big party machines take a view (or sometimes a view split between two main rivals) on which candidate 'should' take on the party mantle. They then manipulate, spend and drive with all resources towards the goal of getting that person in. (If it's a split, they have to do some infighting first to figure out who they want.)

It's clear that on the Democrat side, Hilary has long been this person and nothing will change her being selected. She can win the Presidency, so you can see their point, but on a policy level I think she is well to the right of what many younger Democrats now want.

On the Republican side, we don't yet know who has been 'chosen' but I suspect we will soon. My opinion is that it was Jeb Bush but he has been disappointing and so there is a bit of a casting around for a replacement. Rubio and Cruz are probably the two.

Reply 36

ChaoticButterfly

Original post by Fullofsurprises

What reportedly happens in every election is that the bigwigs of the big party machines take a view (or sometimes a view split between two main rivals) on which candidate 'should' take on the party mantle. They then manipulate, spend and drive with all resources towards the goal of getting that person in. (If it's a split, they have to do some infighting first to figure out who they want.)

It's clear that on the Democrat side, Hilary has long been this person and nothing will change her being selected. She can win the Presidency, so you can see their point, but on a policy level I think she is well to the right of what many younger Democrats now want.

On the Republican side, we don't yet know who has been 'chosen' but I suspect we will soon. My opinion is that it was Jeb Bush but he has been disappointing and so there is a bit of a casting around for a replacement. Rubio and Cruz are probably the two.

So basically the Party of Wall Street runs everything. The two party system is basically juts a schism within the single party.

Reply 37

Radical Don Juan

2

He's going all the way

like a virgin, touching America's heart

Reply 38

Original post by Fullofsurprises

What reportedly happens in every election is that the bigwigs of the big party machines take a view (or sometimes a view split between two main rivals) on which candidate 'should' take on the party mantle. They then manipulate, spend and drive with all resources towards the goal of getting that person in. (If it's a split, they have to do some infighting first to figure out who they want.)

It's clear that on the Democrat side, Hilary has long been this person and nothing will change her being selected. She can win the Presidency, so you can see their point, but on a policy level I think she is well to the right of what many younger Democrats now want.

On the Republican side, we don't yet know who has been 'chosen' but I suspect we will soon. My opinion is that it was Jeb Bush but he has been disappointing and so there is a bit of a casting around for a replacement. Rubio and Cruz are probably the two.

It's not even a case of "reportedly" really, the American electoral system pretty much allows the country's largest businesses and conglomerates to openly pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into the campaigns of their favoured candidates, and in return these businesses normally get some sort of "totally unrelated" windfall should those candidates make it to office.

It's one of the big reasons Sanders has gained so much popularity despite holding views that sit farther left even America's liberal wing normally lean- people are waking up to the level of influence these businesses are having, and he's the only candidate not influenced by Wall St in any real capacity and the only one who is intent on severely limiting their influence of the political system.

Reply 39

Fullofsurprises

OP