Even if Trump can paint Hillary as a Wall Street puppet, she can much more easily paint him as Wall Street. If you don’t want the rich guys to have so much influence, then don’t vote for the rich guys. Watching Trump try to campaign against Wall Street is like Sideshow Bob for Mayor.
If your point is that Trump is unlikely to be the nominee, I agree. But Iowa is really a side issue. The winner in Iowa in the last caucus was the homophobic theocratic idiot Santorum. Cruz may win Iowa just based on the strength of his campaign there.
Was thinking it might have been the clear and undeniable mandate of half a million less votes.
And get the Rebellion to pay for it.
But is there enough space to the right of Lincoln on Mt. Rushmore ?
Not relevant. Trump would build a separate mountain for his likeness alone. It would be bigger than Rushmore. It would be higher than Rushmore. And you know what? It would be a great mountain!
I’m a little worried but Trump will not do well with women or latinos. I don’t think he can win w/o support among them (I’m going to assume he does at least 1-2 points worse than Romney did among these 2 groups).
The only hope for Trump is that working class whites show up in droves to make up for it. I don’t know if that’ll happen.
We can build more mountain and get the New Mexicans to pay for it.
Suppose he chooses a latina running-mate ?
Thing is, if Trump walks back all this “Mexicans are rapists”, “I love Mexicans, I employ lots of them as maids and landscapers at my casinos” stuff, and starts talking about all the middle class issues you wish he would, what would make you think he was going to fight for the middle class issues you care about?
I mean, he tricked the anti-Mexican voters into supporting him, right? He wasn’t really anti-Mexican, he was just posturing for their support, and once he had that support he does whatever he wants.
Except what does he really want? Is he just pandering with the racist blowhard stuff? Of course he’s pandering! And whatever he says about free trade or income inequality will be equally pandering.
The only thing we know for sure about Trump is that he loves, loves, loves to hear himself talk, he loves to be the center of attention, he loves it when people talk about him, he has good comedic instincts, and understands the modern media circus. Oh, and he loves making money and declaring bankruptcy.
Other than that, he’s a cipher. Unless you choose to believe the things he’s been saying. He’s only a cipher if you think he’s pandering about that, and isn’t really the straight-shooter who speaks his mind. But what if he’s really serious about all that?
He can’t be both–the straight shooter who tells it like it is, and the demagogue who has no ideology other than running to get out in front of the crowd so he can lead it.
He didn’t say “Mexicans are rapists,” that is just hyperbole.
If I am wrong, please correct my ignorance with a quote from Trump using those exact words.
How, exactly, do you interpret this quote:
Not to defend Trump but if you parse generously he is saying some people who come illegally from Mexico are rapists and some are good people. It’s not “Mexicans are rapists”.
So, am I must assume that you are unable to produce the quote I requested and all you can produce is your own interpretation of what was said?
Nor is it “Mexicans are bringing drugs” or “Mexicans are criminals”. You’ve got to be really generous to accept that “Some, I assume, . . .” means he’s not attacking them.
I want your interpretation. I didn’t interpret anything. I gave you an exact quote. What, precisely, do you think Trump was trying to tell us?
That Trump is an asshat?
I was was not asking for interpretations, I was asking for a source for the quote “Mexicans are rapists.” I am not aware of Trump saying that specific quote. Is it too much for me to try to clarify what was actually said by Trump before forming an opinion or am I supposed to just take all uncited quotes as facts without questioning?
I think the quote given is more open to interpretation than what was originally stated by Lemur866. YMMV, but I think knowing the actual words of what someone says has a certain level of importance, it’s just how I am.
He’s only said it 3 or 4 times, that’s probably why you missed it.
*When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”
*
In what way is it an unreasonable assumption to believe that Trump was saying "[Mexicans] are rapists?
As I have shown, I know exactly the actual words that Trump said. I’m waiting for you to tell me what you think he meant by those words, if not “[Mexicans] are rapists”.