|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
pretty sure trump is just trolling the fk out of the gop by appealing to their predictably crazy base on the immigration issue.
|
|
|
As Jeb Bush and his team laid plans for the Republican primaries, they set out to have the best-financed superPAC ever. And for a time, they did. Right to Rise USA raised $118 million, and spent $94 million, even as Bush never came close to winning a primary.
Now the question is: How could so much money get so little return?
The fundraising strategy was audacious: Pull in millions of dollars in unlimited contributions before Bush even became a candidate. That way he could hit up donors himself, something that the law would prohibit once he announced.
The campaign strategy was audacious, too. Jeb! 2016, the official campaign committee, essentially outsourced its media operation to the supposedly independent superPAC. This was more responsibility than any other presidential superPAC had, either this cycle or in 2012, the first presidential election after federal courts sanctioned superPACs.
It was an arrangement with "the candidate sort of doing a lot of the groundwork, and visiting and talking with people, but the superPAC doing a lot of the media," said Michael Franz, a political scientist at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine, and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project, which tracks TV advertising in the presidential campaign.
He added, "That model doesn't seem to be one that will likely be replicated."
That's because it backfired. "The sort of nimbleness is lost when you're doing the division of labor," Franz said in an interview. "Even though there's a lot of money coming into the superPAC and it's unconstrained, that doesn't necessarily mean the messaging is going to be effective."
The superPAC's biggest failure: Like Jeb! 2016, Right to Rise USA took months to figure out how to deal with Donald Trump's precedent-breaking candidacy. Other candidates were equally slow on the uptake. In the Bush operation, the result was that as Trump grabbed all the media attention, Right to Rise USA was spending its TV budget on soft-sell biography spots when it could have been attacking front-runner Trump.
Source
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
that russian mole in the nsa is basically flaunting it now.
|
Add “how the justice system works” to things Trump does not understand.
|
On February 23 2016 23:12 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +As Jeb Bush and his team laid plans for the Republican primaries, they set out to have the best-financed superPAC ever. And for a time, they did. Right to Rise USA raised $118 million, and spent $94 million, even as Bush never came close to winning a primary.
Now the question is: How could so much money get so little return?
The fundraising strategy was audacious: Pull in millions of dollars in unlimited contributions before Bush even became a candidate. That way he could hit up donors himself, something that the law would prohibit once he announced.
The campaign strategy was audacious, too. Jeb! 2016, the official campaign committee, essentially outsourced its media operation to the supposedly independent superPAC. This was more responsibility than any other presidential superPAC had, either this cycle or in 2012, the first presidential election after federal courts sanctioned superPACs.
It was an arrangement with "the candidate sort of doing a lot of the groundwork, and visiting and talking with people, but the superPAC doing a lot of the media," said Michael Franz, a political scientist at Bowdoin College in Brunswick, Maine, and co-director of the Wesleyan Media Project, which tracks TV advertising in the presidential campaign.
He added, "That model doesn't seem to be one that will likely be replicated."
That's because it backfired. "The sort of nimbleness is lost when you're doing the division of labor," Franz said in an interview. "Even though there's a lot of money coming into the superPAC and it's unconstrained, that doesn't necessarily mean the messaging is going to be effective."
The superPAC's biggest failure: Like Jeb! 2016, Right to Rise USA took months to figure out how to deal with Donald Trump's precedent-breaking candidacy. Other candidates were equally slow on the uptake. In the Bush operation, the result was that as Trump grabbed all the media attention, Right to Rise USA was spending its TV budget on soft-sell biography spots when it could have been attacking front-runner Trump. Source Fate gave him an election where his connection with a political dynasty was a weight around him. I don't know how much money period was spent attacking Trump, but Jeb adding to the pile would've done little.
|
No one, except for republican elites, wanted another Bush. This was clear when Jeb first floated his name as a candidate. Still, the warning was ignored.
|
I really question how much of the Republican establishment is aware that people really hated the Bush administration. Even Republicans. One half of my family was Republican before that administration. Almost none identify as Republican any more.
|
Is it likely that Trump knows things he says aren't even remotely possible/true but he chooses to say them because he knows his target voter base wants to hear them?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 23 2016 23:53 Sent. wrote:
Is it likely that Trump knows things he says aren't even remotely possible/true but he chooses to say them because he knows his target voter base wants to hear them?
obviously lol. guy never set foot outside of new york and has managed to take evangelical votes away from batshit cruz
|
On February 23 2016 23:53 Sent. wrote:
Is it likely that Trump knows things he says aren't even remotely possible/true but he chooses to say them because he knows his target voter base wants to hear them?
Yes, that's what they all do. Republican debates are about personas, not facts. In that regard, Trump is the best because he has the most reality TV experience.
|
United States44244 Posts
On February 23 2016 12:21 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2016 12:07 Plansix wrote:On February 23 2016 12:07 oBlade wrote:
Excuse me, but you said "tens of millions of Americans." Would you mind clarifying this - you consider people who enter and live in the USA illegally to be Americans? Are you going somewhere with this amazing line of questioning? There are people who think that the illegal immigrants should have a path to citizenship as long as they are not horrible criminals. Which is better that the people who want to deport everyone because they like wasting money on useless shit. I am suggesting that, despite what the post at the top of the page would have us believe, Trump has no stated interest in exiling American citizens, or if the miscommunication is elsewhere, that illegal immigrants aren't Americans, which while it may be obvious to you, is a misconception someone is apparently laboring under. You may want them to stay here (perhaps because it's easier if nothing else), you may want a path to legalization, you might even want a path to citizenship - which to me is an insult to everyone who is observing patience and diligence and waiting to immigrate to the US legally - but they're not Americans.
Trump wants to not let Muslim citizens back into the US if they leave and try to come back, such as any Muslims serving in the US army who might be stationed abroad. If you're Muslim you can't enter. He also wants to end birth citizenship and deport the children of illegal immigrants who are legal American citizens. He really does want to deport citizens. I know that sounds crazy but that doesn't mean it's not something he said, he just says crazy shit.
|
United States44244 Posts
On February 23 2016 23:47 xDaunt wrote:
No one, except for republican elites, wanted another Bush. This was clear when Jeb first floated his name as a candidate. Still, the warning was ignored.
I'd take Bush over the rest of the Republican crowd. Although given where I lean on most issues that means I don't disagree with the Republicans who don't want him about where he stands.
I'd have taken Mitthew in 2012 over any of them though.
|
I think that Trump is due for some real scrutiny soon. The media gave him a pass because he was good for ratings early on as-is, and they didn't want to push too hard and kill his campaign while he was still consolidating his support and his frontrunner status was more tenuous. Jeb is out, and it'll be awhile before the other candidates can mount any sort of real move against him. Still, I'm sure the media has dozens of investigative journalists digging through archives and interviewing people to find ammo for Operation: Stump the Trump. It may not kill his campaign, but it's gonna sting.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
unless he's a serial killer in a past life i doubt it will trump all the public stuff he's done just this year
|
United States44244 Posts
Even if he is a serial killer he'll just describe it as being tough on victims.
|
Nothing is going to dissuade his current supporters, but a recent gallup poll put independents at nearly 40% of the population nationwide. He is only invincible during this primary process. I doubt it will carry over to the general election where people are far less committed to a single party.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
he will run to the left of hillary on trade come general and get a bunch of low skill voters
|
Establishment Republicans are reckoning with something they thought would never happen: That it might soon be too late to stop Donald Trump.
With the controversial businessman the clear front-runner heading into Nevada and next week’s Super Tuesday contests, there’s an emerging consensus that the odds of dislodging him are growing longer by the day. Whispered fears that Trump could become the Republican nominee have given way to a din of resigned conventional wisdom – with top party officials and strategists openly wondering what the path to defeating him will be.
“If anyone else in this field had gone second-first-first in the first three contests, we would all be saying that it’s over,” said Mike DuHaime, a former Republican National Committee political director who guided Chris Christie’s presidential bid.
“I think it’s uphill, and Washington underestimates how uphill it is – and that’s because they’ve persistently underestimated Trump,” said former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who sought the Republican nomination in 2012. If he wins Nevada, Gingrich added, “What is it that’s supposed to stop him?”
The biggest hurdle confronting the mogul’s four rivals is that they continue to divide support among themselves. In each of the three contests that have been held so for, the anti-Trump field has fractured, making it impossible for any single contender to surpass him. A similar dynamic could play out again in Nevada, with Trump failing to win a majority of support but still earning more than his opponents.
While the field has winnowed somewhat in recent days, the compressed nature of this year’s Republican primary calendar means there is precious little time for the anti-Trump field to consolidate. Should Trump notch his third consecutive win on Tuesday, some foresee him steamrolling through Super Tuesday a week later, when a quarter of the party’s delegates are awarded. A batch of newly released polls show him with sizable leads in several of those states, including Massachusetts and Georgia.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
