The 'Donalds' Running Mate?

ZEB · July 28, 2015, 11:21pm

[quote]BPCorso wrote:
I have to hand it to Donald Trump. I always knew it was his main skill but he’s been truly masterful at garnering himself attention. He’s successfully managed to get people who hate his guts to help push him to the top of the GOP polls.

No matter what he says or does, the media and political establishment eats it up and lets the public know about it. It was ridiculous how many editorials the WaPo dedicated to him. For about a week, he had 2 or 3 OpEds a day dedicated to him. That was probably common among other major papers. He’s been a hot topic at all the cable news stations and political radio. I’m not impressed with his ideas or business accomplishments but I am impressed at how he plays politicians and the US media to his own benefit. I don’t think anyone predicted he would poll better after his John McCain episode, but he did.

I don’t see why he would quit. He is winning and although he’s had to take some lumps (NBC, Univision, etc) I think he’s going to end up richer for the effort. He makes money through his name and his name will continue to get bigger if he continues this spectacle.

It’s doubtful he’d have any personal problem playing spoiler as an independent. Why would he? I doubt he gives a shit if its Hillary or Walker who ends up as POTUS. He already feels disrespected by the GOP. Sure there’s some hassle re: running as an independent but there’s not a compelling reason why he couldn’t successfully do it.

I’d be worried if I was dead set on having the GOP win in 2016. Trump cares about himself and his net worth. He could give a fuck about the GOP and its future. It could be myopic to assume he’s just going to go away. I thought he was too much of a clown from the start, yet here he is, king of the polls and media presence.[/quote]

I think you hit the nail on the head: “Trump cares about himself and his net worth.”

Running a third party candidacy would cost a great deal of money. Difficult to estimate but back in the 90’s when Ross Perot did it he spent something over 1 billion dollars in order to be viable. And that was 20 years ago. If Trump is in it to expand his brand in order to make money that is not the way to do it. He has to firs recoup the 2 plus billion he will spend.

Also his third party candidacy will tick off about half the country if he hands the election to Hillary. That certainly does not expand his wealth as that half of the country will never buy a Trump product as it has become sullied. He’s too smart to do something like that.

Right now with his gigantic ego he thinks he can win the Presidency. As it becomes clear that he can’t win with dropping poll numbers, he will no longer be a factor. And as he drops from the lime light he will bow out gracefully and support the nominee.

That is my scenario let’s see if I’m right.

MaximusB · July 29, 2015, 1:01am

I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

anon50325502 · July 29, 2015, 12:02pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

[/quote]

(Tin foil hat on) Perhaps that is why, in part, she wiped her server?

MaximusB · July 29, 2015, 1:43pm

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

[/quote]

(Tin foil hat on) Perhaps that is why, in part, she wiped her server? [/quote]

(Puts tin foil hat on even tighter). Could be, for Hillary to wipe a server knowing the blowback she would receive means there is some pretty damning information on that server.

Not to derail, but when investigators asked Tom a Brady for his cellphone regarding Deflategate, and he destroyed the phone and the SIM card, it doesn’t exactly scream innocence.

ZEB · July 29, 2015, 1:58pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

[/quote]

It is not uncommon for business people to donate to both parties. He has admitted such in the past.

There is nothing the democrats, or republicans could give him that would cause him to act as their stooge.

anon50325502 · July 29, 2015, 2:22pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

[/quote]

(Tin foil hat on) Perhaps that is why, in part, she wiped her server? [/quote]

(Puts tin foil hat on even tighter). Could be, for Hillary to wipe a server knowing the blowback she would receive means there is some pretty damning information on that server.

Not to derail, but when investigators asked Tom a Brady for his cellphone regarding Deflategate, and he destroyed the phone and the SIM card, it doesn’t exactly scream innocence.
[/quote]

It is odd behavior, but in Tom’s defense he wasn’t nor is he running for office.

MaximusB · July 29, 2015, 4:38pm

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I heard any interesting opinion where Trump could be a plant by Democrats, and if any one of these GOP boobs had a brain, they would ask Trump a) why he was for single payer, and b) why he donated to Hillary in the past.

[/quote]

(Tin foil hat on) Perhaps that is why, in part, she wiped her server? [/quote]

(Puts tin foil hat on even tighter). Could be, for Hillary to wipe a server knowing the blowback she would receive means there is some pretty damning information on that server.

Not to derail, but when investigators asked Tom a Brady for his cellphone regarding Deflategate, and he destroyed the phone and the SIM card, it doesn’t exactly scream innocence.
[/quote]

It is odd behavior, but in Tom’s defense he wasn’t nor is he running for office. [/quote]

True, but it does lend to one’s credibility, or lack of.

BPCorso · July 29, 2015, 6:40pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

I think you hit the nail on the head: “Trump cares about himself and his net worth.”

Running a third party candidacy would cost a great deal of money. Difficult to estimate but back in the 90’s when Ross Perot did it he spent something over 1 billion dollars in order to be viable. And that was 20 years ago. If Trump is in it to expand his brand in order to make money that is not the way to do it. He has to firs recoup the 2 plus billion he will spend.

Also his third party candidacy will tick off about half the country if he hands the election to Hillary. That certainly does not expand his wealth as that half of the country will never buy a Trump product as it has become sullied. He’s too smart to do something like that.

Right now with his gigantic ego he thinks he can win the Presidency. As it becomes clear that he can’t win with dropping poll numbers, he will no longer be a factor. And as he drops from the lime light he will bow out gracefully and support the nominee.

That is my scenario let’s see if I’m right.

[/quote]

That’s a reasonable assessment and outlook. I think you generally underestimate Trump’s potential impact but there’s nothing illogical about the scenario you just posted. For the GOP, the key is to evolve the current strategy of managing the Trump threat. So far it’s been failing and has emboldened Trump and his supporters. It’s interesting that candidates like Trump and Carson will be included in the first debate while someone like Kasich having a good chance to be excluded.

Trump’s already shunned by many of the organizations set up to assist GOP candidates (e.g.; the Koch apparatus) so there won’t be a huge transition to independent candidate. I do appreciate your point about how much of his fortune he’s willing to part with. Could be he accomplishes what he set out to accomplish (causing a stir, building his brand) and bows out on his own accord.

I predict he’ll show well in at least the first debate. He’s made for TV and is sharp enough to remember enough talking points to not be made a fool of. 10 candidates is busy so it’s hard to predict how much opportunity anyone will have to catch him with his pants down.

Not relevant to the post I’m quoting but I agree with the assessment that Hillary’s crappy personality provides the GOP a big opportunity.

treco · July 29, 2015, 8:27pm

Trump said that he contributes to both sides as a good business practice. The Kochs don’t have to care as they are industrialists (consumers don’t even know what they sell) with 30x + as much $ as Trump - who basically is a marketing name.

He also says a third party would get Dems back in White House, which the country couldn’t take (agreed here).

I wonder if it isn’t just a chance to get massive publicity on the relative cheap.

MaximusB · July 29, 2015, 8:45pm

I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.

anon50325502 · July 29, 2015, 9:09pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

ehhh, I don’t know. I don’t really think he’s that great of a speaker. Dude repeats himself a lot and says “oh and by the way” way to freakin much.

I think if Fiorina can get in she’ll do very well.

ZEB · July 29, 2015, 9:21pm

[quote]BPCorso wrote:

That’s a reasonable assessment and outlook. I think you generally underestimate Trump’s potential impact but there’s nothing illogical about the scenario you just posted.[/quote]

None of us know for sure how much impact Trump will have ultimately. I am only looking at history, (and the man himself) and stating that by the time November of 2016 rolls around he won’t be a factor for the reasons previously stated. Could I be wrong? Absolutely! But, given Trumps mouth, his political tone deafness and a hostile press, I see pain and defeat in his political future. How does he avoid it? I don’t think he can. That and the fact that I don’t see “The Donald” throwing some 2 billion dollars into a national campaign where he can only play the role of spoiler at best. All of this makes him a non-entity by the time November of 2016 rolls around.

I don’t think the GOP was ready for Trump to jump in and immediately take the lead. I also don’t think Trump was ready for that either. But, now that things have settled in I don’t see it as a major problem. In fact, it may help the GOP because Trump is a huge mouth piece for things like illegal immigration. As you know that is an issue that is now front and center because of Trump. Things like that only help the GOP in the long run. It pulls more attention to the party and the eventual nominee (which won’t be Trump).

That makes sense to me.

Good point, but be careful making predictions on T Nation. If you are correct not one single soul will give you a pat on the back for being right. But, if you are wrong every single member on the political threads will remember and remind you of how very wrong you were. Ha ha…I keep predicting anyway

As for his showing in the debate. It only takes one moment where he does not know the leader of a country’s name, or confuses one region with another etc, and he will be branded as an idiot, or someone with no depth. There will be plenty of opportunities like that. But as you say maybe with 9 others on the stage it won’t matter as much.

Well…it makes sense to me. When someone says “she’ll win because she’s the first woman” They need to be reminded that Obama DID NOT win because he was the first Black. He won because he was a really great candidate with loads of charisma. Being a woman certainly is a positive thing. Hillary will not lose because she’s a woman. She’ll lose because she’s a lousy candidate with absolutely no political skills. Unlike her husband she gives off a vibe of actually not liking people. along with being a bad looking woman with no charisma. Not to mention her boat load of scandals which are yet to be completely revealed.

As I have said on many threads she is the worst candidate to run for President since Michael Dukakis, who lost to George H.W. Bush in 1988. She will get the nomination (most likely). But, if the GOP puts up the proper ticket she will suffer a crushing electoral defeat. Even if the GOP puts up a reasonable ticket she is not going to win. People do not like her and the more they see her the less they like her. I actually expect her negatives to climb as next November approaches and they are already at or over 50% depending on which poll you look at.

ZEB · July 29, 2015, 9:24pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office.

pittbulll · July 31, 2015, 2:25pm

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates

ZEB · July 31, 2015, 9:22pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates [/quote]

They’ve always been fed up with establishment candidates. Yet, every four years we elect an establishment candidate. Odd how that works…

MaximusB · August 1, 2015, 2:29am

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates [/quote]

They’ve always been fed up with establishment candidates. Yet, every four years we elect an establishment candidate. Odd how that works…
[/quote]

Except in 2008.

ZEB · August 1, 2015, 2:46pm

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates [/quote]

They’ve always been fed up with establishment candidates. Yet, every four years we elect an establishment candidate. Odd how that works…
[/quote]

Except in 2008.[/quote]

I don’t know about that Max. He is simply a left wing version of an establishment candidate. Like Reagan was a right wing version.

Sure Obama is the worst modern day President, perhaps the worst President in history, but I think he’s still an establishment candidate.

pittbulll · August 2, 2015, 8:43am

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates [/quote]

They’ve always been fed up with establishment candidates. Yet, every four years we elect an establishment candidate. Odd how that works…
[/quote]

Ron Paul was marginalized by the media , I think we have learned something since then . Social media has to be 2 or 3 time what it was in 2008

ZEB · August 2, 2015, 3:41pm

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I think Trump is going to eat everyone’s lunch in the first debate.[/quote]

I guess that depends on your definition of “eating everyone’s lunch”

Will he be loud, offensive and interrupt other candidates? Absolutely!

Will he demonstrate more knowledge on world affairs than the other candidates. Absolutely not!

So…I guess it depends on what type of person people want in the Oval office. [/quote]
no one knows , you have to remember when Schwarzenegger won Cali or Ventura won Minn. I think the American people are fed up with Establishment Candidates [/quote]

They’ve always been fed up with establishment candidates. Yet, every four years we elect an establishment candidate. Odd how that works…
[/quote]

Ron Paul was marginalized by the media , I think we have learned something since then . Social media has to be 2 or 3 time what it was in 2008[/quote]

Oh Pitt…Ron Paul was a loser from day one. An old man with zero charisma is not going to win the White House. Social media could be 100 times what it was in 2008 someone like Ron Paul will never win…ever. Have you learned nothing from me over the years?

pittbulll · August 2, 2015, 5:12pm