-
The Forgotten Art of Thinking About the Bomb
December 5, 2012 | 5 comments
-
The Deadly Arithmetic of Nuclear Proliferation
October 15, 2012 | 91 comments
-
Neo-Disarmament
February 10, 2012 | 40 comments
-
Nuclear Terrorism Sinks Savannah — and U.S. Civil Society
January 6, 2012 | 54 comments
-
Can Israel Save America?
September 9, 2011 | 98 comments
Another Perspective
Donald Trump’s Miracle Presidential Win
Here’s how it happened — and why.
Pundits chuckled when Donald Trump claimed presidential ambitions, calling him unserious. But events in 2011 dramatically reframed the picture, vaulting Trump from unlikely nominee to contender. If a dour Ross Perot won 19 percent in 1992, the supremely self-assured Trump might double it in far worse times.
When the two major parties failed to agree on a deal to raise the government’s debt ceiling, frustration turned to horror as global market reaction to Uncle Sam’s first-ever default sent shockwaves rippling through the financial system. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 2,000 points before trading was halted, with key individual stocks crashing more than 50 percent. Scared straight, so to speak, the two parties cobbled together a fix with cosmetic changes to assuage both parties’ wings. Markets rebounded, but not to their pre-default levels, and Uncle Sam’s credit reputation was permanently damaged.
Then came Donald Trump’s decision to exit the Republican Party and declare that he would run as an independent candidate. Trump, who had been a member of each party, denounced them both as hopeless cases, caused by Republicans who would not raise any taxes and Democrats who would not cut any entitlement spending. It was time, he thundered, for real change. He would run as the anti-politician. (It also helped that Trump discarded his “birther” mantra.)
Freed from the problem of navigating a Byzantine path through party primaries, courting individual party regulars in caucuses and shaking hands at county fairs and subway stations in others, Trump exploited his 96 percent name recognition, which obviated the need to use the primary process to gain name identity. He spurned federal funding, stating that he would supplement Internet fund-raising with his own personal fortune. But his Internet funding proved prolific, and thus he needed little of his own personal funds. Raised from contributors, not his chums, he proudly declared he could govern without owing favors to donors.
In running as an Independent, Trump jettisoned much of the baggage he accumulated in having publicly switched positions on major issues several times. He ran as a pragmatist who, unencumbered by ideology of any stripe, could manage the government, bring true fiscal discipline and regain respect abroad.
His domestic policy was to cut entitlement spending, without which budgetary control would be impossible; shifting from defined-benefit to defined-contribution plans would restrain financial over-promising and enable workers to plan for retirement. He turned on his Wall Street friends, urging those who profited hugely while their firms imploded to give back ill-deserved gains. He promised a re-write of financial reform to reward genuine entrepreneurial capitalism instead of corporate clubhouse cronyism. Cries of hypocrisy from critics were drowned out by manifest public enthusiasm for Trump’s reformist stance.
He promoted school choice and competition, excoriating President Obama for sending his kids to posh private schools while standing with the teachers’ unions in opposing school choice for the poor. He promised, if elected, to name Michelle Rhee as his secretary of education. He vowed to restore full patient choice to health care, and ditch ruinously expensive Obamacare.
He would cut taxes, and ignore calls to “soak the rich” as economically counter-productive; but he made a voluntary higher personal income-tax payment as a symbolic gesture. High taxes would kill prospects for a strong recovery.
On foreign policy he vowed to select diplomats schooled in “the art of the deal” and negotiate tough deals protecting American interests. He chastised both parties for “kowtowing to China” instead of driving a tough but fair bargain. China was, he said, “getting away with financial murder” by undervaluing its currency and subsidizing cheap imports, while stealing American intellectual property.
He would control illegal immigration by a fence, if need be, but otherwise by removing the financial incentives employers have to import cheap, illegal labor. He would greatly expand H-1B immigration to allow in more skilled workers.
He promised that NATO would either pay its fair share or America would pull out — no more would the U.S. fund operations and do all the fighting. Allies who would not fight would at least pay those that do. He would remove protection from Arab countries that continued to charge cartel prices for oil. His negotiators would not “go in the tank” on missile defense when dealing with the Russians.
He vowed to hold up U.S. payments to the UN unless it reforms. If the UN did not like this it could, Trump said, move to another country and free up valuable New York east side real estate. And there would never be, he vowed, a mosque anywhere near Ground Zero.
As the primary season opened Trump stood at 25 percent support. After a dreary primary season that produced Mitt Romney as the GOP nominee Trump stood at 35 percent, as GOP voters angry with Romneycare as well as Obamacare defected from the GOP. His campaign slogan, adapted from a similar theme from an ad used by Ed Koch in New York City’s 1977 Democratic mayoral primary, was: “After eight years of the clubhouse (G. W. Bush photo) and four years of charisma (Obama photo), why not try competence (Trump photo)?”
In the summer of 2012 America, already in a double-dip recession, saw a sharp rise in unemployment. The housing market plunged again. Bankruptcies in Portugal and Spain and a surprise slowdown in China made for a weakening world economy. In September, right after the Labor Day campaign kickoff, Iran conducted an underground nuclear test. Iran’s announcement triggered an instant nuclear arms race in the region, yielding a record $208 per barrel for Saudi benchmark crude. The Saudis and Pakistan made a nukes-for-petrodollars swap. Other commodity prices soared, as inflation joined recession in making for global stagflation. The Dow plunged 3,000 points and did not recover.
Confident that a nuclear Iran made its position stronger and America’s weaker, Hezbollah and Hamas launched a two-front war against Israel that month. Their thousands of rockets overwhelmed Israel’s nascent short-range missile defense capabilities. Israel’s counter-attack brought Russian action at the UN Security Council: a resolution condemning both sides and calling for an immediate ceasefire and resumption of Arab-Israeli peace talks. President Obama supported the move, saying the violence on both sides must stop. His move won plaudits from Arab-American groups. Jewish voters, as liberals, mostly stayed with the President, but some New York Jews defected to Trump, who promised never to allow the UN to stop Israel from defending itself against aggression.
Jon M| 4.25.11 @ 6:38AM
The author seems to still be hurting from President Obama's resounding victory. Keep dreaming.
INstigator| 4.25.11 @ 6:47AM
Remind me again what was accomplished by this "resounding victory"?
Ryan| 4.25.11 @ 8:15AM
A resounding victory - nearly true enough - but it also must face the reality of the 2010 election cycle.
vtwin| 4.25.11 @ 4:12PM
Barbour said, "I will not be a candidate for president next year.”
Not unsuspected given white southern men's fear of one-on-one confrontation with black men
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 5:50PM
Typical race-baiting Lefty.
Barbour would have wiped the floor with the Punk-in-Chief.
Alan Brooks| 4.25.11 @ 9:12PM
"Not unsuspected given white southern men's fear of one-on-one confrontation with black men"
They are afraid of a black man getting
one on one with a white woman. In 1964 a white guy in N. Carolina told me he feared miscegenation though he didn't use the word, I was far too young; yet his meaning was clear.
Today it is different, they don't fear it-- but they don't much like miscegenation.
Alan Brooks| 4.25.11 @ 9:14PM
.. if you substitute fear for like, you get the message.
JustJP| 4.25.11 @ 9:43PM
Correction: 1/2 white man
Alan Brooks| 4.26.11 @ 12:43AM
"Correction: 1/2 white man"
right, Obama is the best of both worlds; we ought to encourage more mulattos. Finally we agree-- hallelujah!
JmsA| 4.25.11 @ 8:22AM
Enjoy it, Jon M. He has a record now, if one can actually call it such, and won't be fooling many, other than, of course, sycophants like you.
Maddox| 4.25.11 @ 10:31AM
The entire country is and will continue to be hurting from that victory for decades.
Alan Brooks| 4.25.11 @ 9:16PM
"The entire country is and will continue to be hurting from that victory for decades."
We are still suffering from the Kennedy assassination-- 47 years ago.
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:20PM
Not as much as you idiot Leftists say we are. JFK was a pig and a horndog. What's with you Democrats and your dirty leaders?
emo| 4.26.11 @ 6:57PM
You mean the guy who accomplished nothing. You should read Jeff Greenfield's Then Everything Changed. He makes ther case pretty well that had LBJ been President in 1961 instead of 1964, all the liberalism that happened in 64-65 would have happened in 1961.
PsychoDad| 4.27.11 @ 7:02PM
What? More like we're still suffering from 100 years of Ted the Souse in the Senate.
Shamus| 4.25.11 @ 12:26PM
The US can't catch a break with political leaders. First we have George Bush and then Barrack Obama (who are both complete morons).
Alan Brooks| 4.25.11 @ 8:47PM
He LOOKS like a president. And when his hair becomes grayer he will look like a heavier version of Andrew Jackson.
But he has no chance, he wont be forgiven by so cons for his marital record; he said "adultery is no sin" at the time of the Marla Maples headlines.
It doesn't bother me- however "adultery is no sin" doesn't play in Peoria or anywhere in the Bible Belt.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.25.11 @ 6:46AM
Donald Trump will not need those disasters you mentioned to make headway. America has enough disasters on its own through internal means.
We have a political class who thrives on deceiving the public and Trump has recognized the value of having principles.
Whether Obama was born in America or not or qualifies as a natural born citizen or not, it's an issue of principal. The media tries to attack anyone who brings it up as a birther but many in the public wonder why Obama won't release the long form. It's way past time for that, and it also plays into the fact that Obama has spent several million concealing his past. Trump is right to bring it up and he has an advantage over the others in bringing it up,, i.e., he's not a career politician.
That fact alone may explain some of his popularity but it goes further. It's the art of the deal.
Why doesn't America charge for military services? Trump has a valid and perhaps winning point that we don't need to give it away. Frankly, that's a winning issue with veterans and their families and that's a huge voting segment.
His comments on seniors not having their benefits touched may be disingenuous on the surface, but if he can figure out a way to pay for it without adding to the deficit, then he has his bases covered while both political parties find themselves mired one way or the other by reining in entitlements.
One other factor is that Trump is not weak like Perot. He could go toe to toe with any politician and put them right in their place with the facts.
That's his advantage and its a big one.
In short, he doesn't need much help to make his case. The ruling class has made it for him
The ruling class is full of incompetents (We're now on the second Gang of Six, and the third Kabuki dance lead by Biden, a moron if there ever was one) and Trump could claim rightly he won't need a Gang of Six or Seven or Five.
Trump appears confident and triumphant at a time when almost every candidate has negative political baggage. He may have baggage, but it's personal not political.
Trump also appears to be very pro-American at a time we have an anti-American President. Don't underestimate that either.
Grzmlyk| 4.25.11 @ 9:09AM
Well, Bill, I usually agree with you hands-down. But Trump is NO conservative; in fact, for most of his public life, he has supported typical liberal causes. He was for the Kelo decision, he was for universal health care, he's flip-flopped on gay marriage, Bush's presidency, Obama's ability, abortion, taxing the "wealthy," and on and on.
As for the banks, I wonder what the author of this article was smoking when he invented that bit about Trump turning his back on them. Why the hell would he do that? They're the ones who made Trump.
In addition, his foreign policy pronouncements are beyond foolish; they betray no understanding whatsoever of the complex realities that obtain around the globe. You can't exactly start threatening China or the Middle-East countries, or allies or our trading partners. We are not negotiating from a position of power any longer, and just as Obama pretty quickly wore thin with world leaders - once the expiration date on his platitudes and obiesance passed - Trump will also fail to impress for very long those for whom Celebrity Apprentice has no meaning.
Not to mention his well-publicized contributions to liberals - and not just where he does business; he's praised Pelosi and donated to the execrable Harry Reid.
Trump would find himself a callow naif - just as Obama is - drowning in inxperience, and, unlike Obama, Trump would have to dog paddle to which ever party would pull him out of the water. He would play go-along-to-get-along faster than you can say "you're fired."
Trump wants to be loved - that's what this is about; and there's no better way of saying, "love me, love me" than playing Santa Claus with the public treasury in order to keep the gravy train running for constituents, lobbyists, cronies and other stakeholders he would require to be on board in order to appear successful.
The only thing that will save this country - and, frankly, I believe it's beyond saving - is a principled conservative; an individual whose rudder has never wavered; a person who understands the difference between reality and the magic spell of false consciousness this country has fallen under. That ain't Trump.
Trump's only principle is Trump. While certitude and bluster may inspire confidence in one's followers, I think Obama's own certitude and bluster show how quickly that evaporates when someone has to start actually governing. If the media were not collectively intoxicated by their "courage" in supporting a black president, Obama's approval rating would be in the twenties.
And think of the difficulty Trump would have in getting any legislation passed if no party had fealty for him? He'd be at the mercy of whatever the critical mass of Congress would be after 2012.
Trump is not in any way the real deal. I love what he's doing with the Obama birth certificate thing, but somewhere along the way, he began reading his own press clippings.
The man would be an incompetent disaster as president.
When I went away to college as a naive freshman, I immediately fell head over heels in love with this gorgeous girl who was a free spirit, a zany, sensuous, slightly hedonistic beauty. I wooed her carefully, spending three years laying the groundwork, patiently biding my time as she went through a string of unserious boyfriends. Eventually, senior year, I saw my opportunity and made my move. And, as the fates would have it, we became a couple.
Within a month, I realized that all of the traits I found so attractive about her from afar were annoying the crap out of me, and in fact betrayed serious pathology, irresponsibility, immaturity, narcissism and intellectual sloth.
After another month, the idyllic relationship that had possessed me utterly for three years was dashed against the rocks of reality. It was over.
So it will be with Trump.
USSAlabama| 4.25.11 @ 10:01AM
It's great that the White House is likely trembling in their shoes at the prospect. For the same reasons that those who answer polls choose him.
However, all one needs (imho) to make a real choice on the reality of actually casting a vote for him is knowing his position on Kelo.
Development is one thing, over-development
another.
Summed up pretty well by:
http://www.marklevinshow.com/A.....spid=32364
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.25.11 @ 10:16AM
To: Gyzmlyk, I never stated that he was a conservative. In fact, he isn't. I'm only considering his popularity and how that makes him more electable than the wooden cigar store Indians normally put forth by the Republican establishment . As we observed with Obama popularity as opposed to facts can get someone elected.
Grzmlyk| 4.25.11 @ 11:16AM
Well, Bill, I cannot dispute your depressing conclusions about the GOP's nominees. It is a long and depressing tale.
I remember when George Bush won the nomination - I was shocked and despondent. After 09/11, I became a fan - but that faded, and by his second term, well . . .
If we are to survive at all, we MUST have a conservative in there - popularity like Trump's is fleeting; we have over two years before the election. The minute Trump is subjected to serious scrutiny - and it's just beginning - I think it'll be over for "The Donald."
And, like Obama, I think the idea of winning the presidency is alot more attractive to Trump than would be the day-to-day battles large and small that governing entails.
I think that while Palin is a lightning rod, she'd be a true conservative. Ditto Bachmann. Possibly Marco Rubio, although I'd like to see him get more seasoning. I'm not so keen on Christie; he's too wobbly on other conservative issues. I'm still kind of a fan of Jindal, too, but he's terrible in front of the cameras. I don't think Haley Barbour could win. I like John Bolton a lot, but he's inexperienced in domestic policy and more than a dark horse. I'm nervous about Pawlenty, Daniels, Jeb Bush and others I believe would be go-along-to-get-along types.
And Romney,w hile a good manager, is utterly feckless as a conservative. And I'd rather vote for Hillary than Huckabee.
One thing you can say for Palin - she's no cigar store Indian. And although I'd be more comfortable if she had more depth, I think she has courage, excellent conservative instincts and, anyway, how much worse than Obama - or Bush, or Clinton, or Bush 41, or Carter, or Ford, could she be?
Sadly, I don't think it really matters who the GOP nomine is, ultimately. The die is cast - the collapse of the dollar is now baked into the cake, and, with it, the third-worldization of this country.
And, in that event, maybe a Trump would be entertaining enough to keep our minds off of our inevitable decline and fall.
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:49AM
Grzmlyk, nice to see that you are still posting. Once again, excellent observations and insight. I do believe that we can put forward OUR candidate and do not have to settle for what they tell us is legitimate.
Grzmlyk| 4.25.11 @ 12:00PM
Thanks, Simon - I don't get as much opportunity these days to post.
The whole Trump thing fascinates me; in fact, he fascinates me. I think he proves how far "fake it until you make it" - one of his business tenets - can go.
I think Trump is definitely savvy, unquestionably sharp and always entertaining, and sometimes - as in the whole "birther" thing - I appreciate his going where no politically correct figure will dare to go.
But he's also very, very sketchy, even as a business man; I believe that his knack for self-promotion, combined with an uncanny ability to leverage his "brand," have made him appear to be a far more successful, far wealther, far more innovative operator than he really is.
I believe that if you put Trump up against other business titans - Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, IBM's former CEO Lou Gerstner, etc. - they would be eating his lunch by breakfast time; these people turn out products whereas Trump sells . . . well, I'm not sure, exactly. An image, I guess.
But he is living proof of just how far self esteem can carry a person!
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 2:50PM
Grizzly bear,
Still an admirer.
You keep it real.
As to Trump~ I think he's our next Perot. I admire his business savvy~ who couldn't? But as you mention~ his foreign policy is the clincher. He's appealing to the Libertarians among us for it, but because of it he is disqualified.
Hawks-R-Us, baby!
The Commander-In-Chief of the U.S.A. still needs a President strong on defense~ that will never change. And it's a big part of what being a true conservative actually means.
Enough with the lily-livered weak Obamas on foreign policy. They are a danger to the country. If it takes a woman (Sarah Palin) to do a man's job~ then so be it!
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:22PM
Still crazy as ever Bible beater freak lady.
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 11:56PM
Awww, what's a matter, "Connor"?
Was I speaking out too harshly against your lover-boy, Obama?
gaetano| 4.29.11 @ 8:21AM
Lets try to keep in mind that it takes a team to win. All of the team . Not just one person. Obama's team are all radicles and muslim socialist. Trump is , for sure an American patriot, and believes in America. All his team would have the same values of the true American way of life. It doesn't matter who , runs republican of all the above , their team would be all true American Patriots.
Occam's Tool| 4.25.11 @ 1:35PM
Nice Post, Mr.G.
Pete| 4.25.11 @ 10:30AM
I know we aren't there yet, but should Trump be the only candidate that emerges to challenge the Mocha Messiah, I'd like to remind folks that a 3 week old clump of cat feces would make a better president than we have now. That is all.
Teaghan| 4.25.11 @ 10:57PM
And so it is with obama.
Alan Brooks| 4.26.11 @ 12:52AM
"Why doesn't America charge for military services? Trump has a valid and perhaps winning point that we don't need to give it away."
Charge inside America, too. A defense tax means you pay for defense-- you don't soak the rest of us to protect your property.
emo| 4.26.11 @ 6:59PM
I am surprised a liberal would fall for such folly. Even conservative economists acknowledge that national defense is a "public good" subject to the "free rider" problem, making pay as you use or benefit, impossible.
Red Bubba| 4.25.11 @ 7:17AM
Trump is a career salesman. The country elected one of those last time, and if we are fortunate enough to have an election in 2012 [what if WI was a dry-run?], we need to elect someone with leadership, not salesmanship, training and experience.
Trump made his fortune from corporate welfare and subsequently by promoting the Trump brand. Now he is simply selling "tough and smart" to the right the way obama sold "hope and change" to the left.
l5j6| 4.25.11 @ 7:31AM
Not bad but increase H-1B visas for so called "high skill" immigrants? For what reason? With over 10% unemployment in our country, why import for foreigners?
Besides, the H-1B visa program is portrayed as allowing "Einsteins to come to A-mair-ee-ca" but in reality, the H-1B visa program is just another back-door, mass immigration, family re-unification program, mainly for Indians and Chinese.
Build a triple layer fence along the southern border and no increase to the scam of the H-1B visa program. China and India are growing their economies like crazy, why don't their citizens stay there and find jobs?
skedaddle| 4.25.11 @ 11:03AM
You beat me to it. The constant chatter about the "need" to import skilled labor is nonsense. I've met and worked with some of the H-1B visa Indians tech workers and they're not as skilled as Americans and have huge language barriers. What they are is cheap and pliable. Build that triple-ply fence and tell companies to find the best American workers they can and train them with their company-specific skills just like they used to not that long ago.
martin j smith| 4.25.11 @ 7:31AM
My view about Trump: NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Melvin| 4.25.11 @ 7:50AM
Then who the hell has the Republicans put as their standard bearer? The cannot even decide if they want to raise the debt ceiling. They don't even have the testosterone to face the Democrats and fight them like men.
It's pretty damn good that it takes a woman to tell the Republican leadership to fight like girls.
The Republican Party Leadership or lack off has been completely neutered. They haven't the guts anymore.
Granted there are some within the Republican Party from the last election are fighting for Conservative beliefs. But they are fighting a two front war. The Socialists Democrats and the Progressive Republican Elitists.
Every time a Conservative Republican stands up, and voices the Conservative message. Many who post here stand up and declare, "Oh no, not her, Oh, not him?" Well, dammit who then, times a running out and 2012 election is practically around the corner.
Fickled Republicans and some Conservatives are still searching for the very candidate that they have been complaining about since Obama got elected.
Donald Trump may not be the perfect candidate, yes he has been divorced, yes he has declared bankruptcy. Right now I don't want a whiny nabob who is getting in touch with his man feelings, getting on media circuit telling me a bunch of Bull Squeeze. I want someone who will look out for this Country's interests. And if Trump gets elected and blows it out his backside, then at least we did something, instead of rolling over and playing dead in what the Socialist Democrats and Whiny Progressive Republican Elitists want us to do.
I'm tired of backing up people, and capitulating, and there is millions of Americans who will back me up on that.
I want a fighter, not some orange looking, whiny Progressive Republican getting in touch with his man feelings. That isn't a man, thats a coward.
Red Bubba| 4.25.11 @ 8:48AM
Allen West
Wayne | 4.25.11 @ 12:04PM
In my opinion, Trump provides the service of clearing the way for Allen West. Trump creates the debate, West wins the debate.
Occam's Tool| 4.25.11 @ 1:37PM
Yes. ALLEN WEST!!!!
Really, the man's name needs to be capitalized with asterixes. He is just so cool.
Anthony| 4.25.11 @ 2:08PM
Allen West? Really? A freshman congressman from Florida? There are a lot of conservative republican congressmen, a few senators, too, a bunch of governors out there too. Why are there so many spectator readers who love Allen West? And that other guy, the pizza guy, Cain? Gee, I can't figure it out.
PsychoDad| 4.27.11 @ 7:06PM
He has a lot more relevant experience than a community rabble-rouser with a partial Senate term under his belt.
And he seems to be an authentic conservative with the b@lls to stand up to the leftards.
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 2:53PM
Why Allen West you ask?
BECAUSE HE IS STRONG ON DEFENSE.
He's a true conservative.
You can't have one without the other.
You can't have a weak man on defense being the Commander-in-Chief!
SpiralArchitect| 4.25.11 @ 2:58PM
West is excellent. He would make a superior POTUS.
Too bad he is unelectable. : (
I would vote for him without hesitation...
Seek| 4.25.11 @ 3:04PM
If Allen West were white, he'd be just another freshman Republican to his fervid admirers. Conservatives don't need their own version of Obama; i.e., "the best black." We need our best instincts, leavened with a firm grasp of the issues.
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 3:30PM
Seek,
Now, now. Race baiting is quite unbecoming for you, dear sir.
What conservatives need is what Allen West has.
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:24PM
Seek likes Obama because he's 'clean' and speaks well. Ask VP Bite Me.
WayneFarmer| 4.25.11 @ 9:13PM
Herman Cain!!!!!!!!!!!
cyberdog| 4.25.11 @ 8:04AM
Why not Trump? Obama has proven that we will elect a closet communist and look where that got us. At least Trump is willing to fight FOR the nation and not AGAINST the nation.
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:26PM
I'd vote for Trump because he loves our country and he likes to win. I'm sick of these damned weak politicians--GWB & Obama--who have sold us down thw river.
John | 4.25.11 @ 8:07AM
Trump is my first choice because of his previous pro-American stances, especially his threat to place a 25% tariff on goods from Communist China. We are not only rebuilding this dictatorship economically but also militarily. For example, we are effectively paying for China’s upgraded and devastating ICBM arsenal pointed at American cities.
But this is the first time I read that Trump was for expanding cheap-labor H1-B visas that undercuts the hi-tech American worker. If true, this is a big mistake on his part for it is counter to his America-First message and will not sit well among the Tea Party patriots. I would expect this globalist position from RINOs Romney or Huck.
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:33AM
I would encourage you, John, to continue vetting Trump, digging up more info about him and sharing it with us out here.
Raoul Ortega| 4.25.11 @ 8:13AM
Part 2 details how a faithless elector voted for Ron Paul instead of Trump, and how with only 269 Electoral Votes, it became the newly reelected (and Tea Party dominated) House's job to select the President.
Doctor Right| 4.25.11 @ 8:24AM
IF Trump is actually serious about running this time around, and IF the Republicans nominate another milquetoast, establishment careerist as their nominee, then I'll be stumping for Team Trump (after I burn my Voter Registration Card...the one with the "R"'on it...)
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:31AM
You certainly are right about the GOP next guy in line...and career politicians. Trump need not be are only choice, however. We can put forward others.
Anthony| 4.25.11 @ 2:10PM
Yeah, it worked out well for us in 19992, let's run a third party guy and give Obama four more years.
SpiralArchitect| 4.25.11 @ 2:53PM
Bingo.
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:28PM
Weak RINO George Bush I gave us Clinton, just as his weak son gave us Obama.
I'd vote for Trump.
Louis Jenkins| 4.25.11 @ 8:27AM
The story is a fabrication. It should be agreed that now is the time to get a candidate out there in the forefront, but I am not convinced that Trump is the man. The problem is the Democrats who are milling about trying to find something that will stick to him, and they eventually will. Romney will not make it, nor will Huckabee. In a short time we will have our conservative candidate. Batten down the hatches, it is going to get stormy.
Louis Jenkins| 4.25.11 @ 8:27AM
The story is a fabrication. It should be agreed that now is the time to get a candidate out there in the forefront, but I am not convinced that Trump is the man. The problem is the Democrats who are milling about trying to find something that will stick to him, and they eventually will. Romney will not make it, nor will Huckabee. In a short time we will have our conservative candidate. Batten down the hatches, it is going to get stormy.
Groad| 4.25.11 @ 8:45AM
If Trump runs, Obama gets re-elected.
SpiralArchitect| 4.25.11 @ 2:57PM
As sure as B.O. knows exactly what he is doing
- >downgrading the American Dream ( for starters ).
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:29PM
If a RINO runs we get Obama--just like 2008.
Louis Tully| 4.25.11 @ 8:53AM
Where is the evidence that Trump has promised to do any of the things that the author says he accomplished in his fantasy?
Trump, like Obama, is a blank canvas onto which a portion of the Jaywalking electorate and punditocracy will project its hopes.
Doctor Right| 4.25.11 @ 11:25AM
Trump is a "blank canvas"?!?!?
Gee...And I thought he'd been in the news repeatedly since the Reagan Administration...
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:27AM
Yes, as a real estate salesman and reality talk show host. We all would like to know more than that.
Connor| 4.25.11 @ 11:31PM
Trump's a successful businessman who employs thousands of Americans. Why trash him? At least he's attacking Obama instead of timidly hiding under his desk.
Margie| 4.26.11 @ 2:40PM
Have you read Thoms Sowell's Trump Card article yet?
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....mas-sowell
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:25AM
You have nailed it and have asked the critical question here..excellent comment, observation, and thinking.
Anthony| 4.25.11 @ 8:59AM
This Trump thing is really getting to be way too much. It appears the media can't get enough of this supreme egotist and Trump is willing to oblige.
Enough with this guy already. He's playing the entire media for the fools that they are, including the author of this article.
Follow the money, Trump will never spend $500M of his own money to run as a 3rd party candidate and lose, wake the hell up folks.
George S| 4.25.11 @ 9:18AM
A nice story (I like stories). But before any of that can happen Trump must disclose his finances and put his holdings in a blind trust. The former may create legal problems (liberal Democrat state attorney general and Manhattan District Attorney who would love to take down a conservative president) and the latter is too distasteful to a megalomaniac.
THE BIG KAHUNA| 4.25.11 @ 9:45AM
The thought that this article might come true sends me to my car door which I slam on my hand. Its less painful than the prospect of The Donald as Commander In Chief.
russel| 4.25.11 @ 9:47AM
I'll keep trumpeting it - I don't care if Bugs Bunny runs as long as he can beat The Won . We are doomed if that nitwit gets a second term . But look , the socialist media has a massive say- so . The candidate who can handle them has a huge advantage . Once they are tamed , the moronic voter is free to vote to rekindle their American lifestyle , which by then will resemble Mexico's . And yes , it's a long way off and in politcal time , anything can happen by 11/ 2012 .
SpiralArchitect| 4.25.11 @ 3:01PM
B.O. has the Media in his pocket - always has.
B.O. has a tremendous following of the dead too.
Acorn may be the determining factor in '12 - election fraud wins elections, unfortunately.
Sorry to be such a downer, the Chump in Chief just lowers my spirits.
Dixie Pixie| 4.25.11 @ 10:34AM
One....Donald Trump has never been a member of the Republican Party at any time.
Two....He has always been a New York Liberal despite his lies to be a "Trump-Conservative".
Three...He has never supported the TEA Party movement but is the antithesis of that cause.
Four.....He does not have a base of support in the Republican Party and like Mayor Giuliani his only political supporters are limited to the New York Diaspora.
Five.....The only boosters of a Trump run for the Presidency are the New York Main Stream Media.
Six......There are two reasons the MSM is supporting Trump the first is to damage the true Republican candidates by stealing the political air for one of their own.
Seven...The MSM would rather cover Trump than the other candidates because otherwise they would have to journey to the heart of Red State America which the MSM fears and loathes.
Trump is only a cab ride away and the MSM never has to leave the comfortable bubble of Manhattan.
Eight.....Trump is a pseudo-candidacy intended to fill MSM airtime and damage the Republican Party.
Nine.....The Republican Party Leadership has to be complete and utter FOOLS to allow a Trump candidacy as it would blow the party apart.
Al Adab| 4.25.11 @ 1:19PM
Dead on point Dixie:
We too often confuse celebrity with ability. Why else would we care what Lady Gaga or the Dixie Chicks think about political issues? Maybe Oprah would back her Donald against her Obama. Do we just begin electing the "clebrity of the year" to the White House?
What worries me in the nomination process is that a few large states like Calif., NY, Ill, and a couple others could control the nominating process through their large delegations and be unable to deliver a single electoral vote in November. The GOP could find itself saddled with a candidate popular in those states (moderate to liberal) and unelectable by the nation at large. There must be a more equitable way of finding a candidate.
Dixie Pixie| 4.25.11 @ 2:04PM
Thanks Al Adab
You also nailed it.
There was a system to insure a nationally balanced slate of candidates in the old party system.
It was the McGovern Reforms that blew up the old party selection process.
The McGovern Reforms moved control of the Electoral Process from the political parties to the control of the Main Stream Media.
In the old system the party elders selected the people running in the primaries thus insuring the candidates were running in the parties interest.
That way the parties could control the candidates complicity with the parties beliefs.
The McGovern Reforms opened the primaries to anyone with Big Money and the support of the MSM.
After the reforms the primary means of selection was by, who had the best publicity in the Media.
Thus the MSM was given control of the parties selection process.
That is why the Republicans are in the ludicrous position of a Trump Presidential Run.
In the old party system, Trump would quite rightly never been selected.
PsychoDad| 4.27.11 @ 7:13PM
Well I'm sure there aint no southern goobers who would trust anything coming out of New York City; if Jesus Christ made His Second Coming down Broadway, I betcha a lot of southern baptists would be down knocking on the door of the nearest synagogue.
That said, I'd rather see Trump than Romney. And of those potential candidates I -and most of us- would prefer over Trump, I'm afraid few of them are electable.
james wilson| 4.25.11 @ 11:19AM
Right idea, wrong guy.
Peppermint Tea| 4.25.11 @ 11:28AM
Exactly. It seems to me the right guy might be Sarah Palin.
Occam's Tool| 4.25.11 @ 1:39PM
Or West, Bolton, Cain, Bachmann. I like the fact that all the best candidates are Minorities or Women here, too. Rubio may be very useful, as well.
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 11:21AM
What bothers me most about this article, and others like it in the conservative media, is the unsophistication, poor thinking, sensationalistic fascination, desperation, and the lack of sensible, adultlike seriousness about the gravity and brevity of this country's crisis at hand. This coming election cycle is not a realty show, a game, or a toy for amusement. The press is responsible for reporting about and vetting these potential candidates not playing games with them, being their sycophants, or making predictions for amusement. The public, particularly conservatives need to remain sharply focused, critical, and vigilant in demanding and finding the truth about any of them. This is your Republic and if you intend on keeping it, you better wise up, stop listening to the sweet rhetoric and sounds of campaign promises, slogans, and catchy one liners. Damn, open your eyes and think. Pay attention to facts, like when the MSM does not tear apart a candidate like they typically do but gives him lots of rope and range. Ask yourself why? Let us for once not let the ruling elite, its MSM, the so-called experts, and the talking heads determine for us who will lead this nation and who are representatives will be. Can we not learn from the lessons of the last election cycle and take control of the process like we did then? The next president needs to be picked by us, not them, and it should not be the next guy in the GOP line nor anyone who has been a part of this ruling elite. It should not be on name recognition nor how many millions they can pluck down out of their bank accounts. Are we going to play by these rules again and again and follow blindly? Or are we going to, for once, break out of the little game and make our own way?
Wayne | 4.25.11 @ 11:55AM
Perot would have had more than 19 percent of the vote if he hadn't shut down his campaign near the end. He could handle the death threats, but not the threats to his family. There is nothing like getting 2 entrenched political parties against you. You are bucking decades of special interests. A successful third party candidate would discover the actual fraud and deception that has gone in in Washington. That is a dangerous thing.
As much business savvy as Trump has, he would be completely out of his league when faced with political insiders who are little more than government financed criminal enterprises. Obama meanwhile has cut his teeth on such criminal activity as is completely at home with thugs and dons.
Solo| 4.25.11 @ 12:02PM
If Trump runs Third party, it will guarantee a second Obama term. Guarantee!
Instead of indulging ones self in this "What if Unicorns were real" exercise, we should seek "The Donald's" solemn promise that he will only run under the republican ticket.
That's assuming, of course, that one lends any real value to "The Donald's" solemn promise. I suppose we could always check with his ex-wives for an insight on that.
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 2:59PM
LOL @ that last sentence.
davelnaf| 4.25.11 @ 12:05PM
The country is ready for an ‘outsider’ presidency. People are sick and tired of the entire Political Class. And Republicans shouldn’t be smug about the Bamster’s astonishing incompetence; their positives aren’t all that much better than the dems right now.
People know we need something a lot better in the WH just to fix the mess created by its last two inhabitants and they understand instinctively that this something isn’t necessarily going to come from the two parties’ bench. Romney had his chance in the ’08 primaries to push RINO McCain aside, but his “I paid for this microphone, too” moment came and went and people no longer believe he has what it takes.
For all of you stealth lib-dems posting on this site: you are really kidding yourselves about the Bamster; he is, hands down, the worst thing that has ever happened to your party.
proreason| 4.25.11 @ 12:39PM
Thanks Mr. Wohlstetter.
Does anyone beside myself find it fascinating that all Republicans and most conservatives treat Donald Trump the same way that the marxists treat Republicans and conservatives? And yes, I'm perfectly aware that he has flip flopped (unlike apparently, every pundits favorite candidate), been liberal earlier in his life (unlike apparently, every blogger and poster alive), or held a view that is not pre-approved by the Republican or conservative Ruling Elite (unlike apparently, any person who writes a word on an online forum).
There don't appear to be more than a handful of politically informed people alive who are even a tiny bit open to viewpoints that don't align 99.9% with their own.
simon templar| 4.25.11 @ 1:32PM
The bloggers here for the most part do not expect Trump or anyone else to agree with them 99 percent of the time. I hear people expressing legitimate concerns that they do not want a candidate who wins on name recognition, has more millions of dollars to spend, one picked by the ruling elites, GOP, 0r the MSM. Many people have legitimate concerns that they do not know much about Trump besides the sound bites and slogans and celebrity status. Consistency in belief is very important and shows a deep understanding and maturity. Celebrity candidates make people nervous and for the right reasons. Let Trump run..he has a right to...but the public, particularly conservatives, must ask hard questions, not take things at face value, and vet him properly.
proreason| 4.25.11 @ 1:46PM
Yours is a rational response, and largely correct.
Most are not even close to yours in tone or information.
The consistency argument is bogus in my opinion. I was liberal as recently as the late 90's. That doesn't mean I'm liberal today.
Why shouldn't the man leverage his fame, as has every other politician from day 1? Is it a sin to gain fame in business?
The meme that he is a self-promoter is laughable. Has there EVER been someone who ran for office who wasn't a self-promoter?
Trump donated to democrats. Apparently then, any businessman from New York is eliminated from running as a Republican for all time.
I'm not a big fan of the Donald's stated policies (but I am of his back-at-you style with the make believer media). I'm just pointing out the overt hypocisy of the conservative media on this subject.
martin j smith| 4.25.11 @ 2:25PM
Could Trump be an Obama agent ? He should stay on TV and real estate that is his best bet. Keep far away from him. I would not put any faith in this guy as a President even though there were many idots who voted for another fraud--Obama that is.
Margie| 4.25.11 @ 4:53PM
I can just picture Trump feigning himself as a 007. :^)~
Tod| 4.25.11 @ 5:35PM
I can see how his positions would appeal to fiscal conservatives in the Republican party, but I don't see how his positions appeal to the Democrat party. He would probably have to adopt at least some of the liberal social positions to have a chance. As described, he would end up playing the role of Ross Perot, and Obama would win reelection with 40% of the vote. Obama would send him a thank you card too.
Speedypete| 4.25.11 @ 6:47PM
The birth certificate, SS number, passports traveled on, mothers passport tracking data, school chums writing about Barack, school papers aside. Trump is the only one that is saying what the private sector people have been saying for a long time. I too thought Perot was a quack because the liberal arts majors at the media told me so. Come to find out that he was right. But Trump isn't?
arlo price| 4.25.11 @ 8:40PM
Why does everyone assume that none of the democrat party will jump ship for an independent? Seems logical to me that since Trump has courted/donated/supported both parties, that he'd be able to draw a similar number of voters from both parties. Perhaps the author wasn't able to clarify this appropriately.
As far as not being conservative enough, that's what Patraeus is for.
Wouldn't the make-up of the cabinet be as relative to his governing style as is his 'political leanings'?
In the business world, half of the time it is 'go along to get along'; the other half of the time it's 'damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead'. What is pertinent to America at this time is a candidates vision for the peoples of the republic. I have a tendency to believe that Trump would be able to instigate the start of turning this ship around in as much as returning to the importance of personal responsibility (sorely lacking in the practice and teachings of both parties for the last 20+ years).
However, the scenario the author doesn't speak of and which has a probability of success is that in late September of 2012 3-4 major college football games simultaneously experience terrorist attacks in which thousands are killed, closely followed by additional dirty bomb and Mumbai styled attacks. Over the course of 10 days to 2 weeks a dozen attacks in a dozen different cities from coast to coast and border to border. Marshall Law is declared , elections are suspended and Big Sis knows exactly when and where you took your last dump! All for the greater good of course!!!
Let's Roll
WayneFarmer| 4.25.11 @ 9:16PM
That's MARTIAL LAW, not "Marshall" Law.
arlo price| 4.25.11 @ 10:17PM
ooooooops! a l'il slip! see NIT
bluecollarbytes| 4.25.11 @ 9:40PM
and then what happened...after he won the election? how'd it all turn out?
randyinrocklin| 4.25.11 @ 10:00PM
Palin/Bachmann all the way baby!!!!!
Dee See| 4.25.11 @ 10:24PM
IF Trump actually had a conversion, broke ranks
with the capstone 'Big Boys' ---and called out
the 'benny violent' 'chair-IT-Abel' Globalist
and EUEGNICS crazed con-job ---he might get
our respect.
Otherwise, even if he were successful
--more soft-porn and sports ---franchise slums
---and casino gulag 'culture' ---AIN'T what we
need!
Peter Verkooijen| 4.25.11 @ 10:27PM
Trump would lose. Obama would love to run against a caricature of a bloated capitalist.
Yes, we need a pro-business president, but Trump is a lousy business man. He got rich off the real estate bubble, still went bankrupt several times and now keeps his brand and empire afloat as a tv star. Trump is a symbol of all that is wrong with American business in the 21st century; too much show, too little substance.
Trump is not at all solid in his economic thinking. He wants trade barriers, was in favor of national healthcare and would probably use government as an investment tool.
Real estate is still ridiculously overvalued. Trump would do the same thing Obama is doing; try to reinflate the bubbles and put up trade barriers to prop up the northeastern elite's way of life.
The birther nonsense is hugely damaging to the GOP. Obama is an old-fashioned American communist, born in Hawaii, son of an 18-year old single white mother, a marxist student from Kansas.
Donald Trump has donated to the campaigns of Democrats Harry Reid, Anthony Weiner, Chuck Schumer, Kirsten Gillibrand, Charlie Rangel, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, Dick Durbin, etc.
Trump donated $25,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee in 2008, $20,000 in 2006.
Trump has consistently given more money to Democrats than Republicans. Republicans he supported include Arlen Specter, Mark Foley and Charlie Crist.
According to the New York Board of Elections Donald Trump hasn’t voted in a Republican primary since 1989.
http://www.newsmeat.com/billio....._Trump.php
'Donald Trump’s eminent-domain empire
... While casting himself as America’s new constitutional savior, Trump has shown reckless disregard for fundamental private property rights. ... "Unlike most developers, Donald Trump doesn’t have to negotiate with a private owner when he wants to buy a piece of property, because a governmental agency — the Casino Reinvestment Development Authority or CRDA — will get it for him at a fraction of the market value, even if the current owner refuses to sell." ...
Like most statist promises of bountiful job creation, government-engineered redevelopment math rarely adds up. Trump’s corporations have backed casino industry bailouts and wealth-redistributing “tax-increment financing” schemes — the very kind of taxpayer-subsidized interventions we’ve seen on a grand scale under the Obama administration.
Championing liberty begins at the local level. There is nothing more fundamental than the principle that a man’s home is his castle. Donald Trump’s career-long willingness to trample this right tells you everything you need to know about his bogus tea party sideshow. ...'
michellemalkin dot com
rongordo | 4.26.11 @ 8:57AM
He'd be bi-partisanly blocked from every idea and move you suggest, by a Congress suddenly adherant to the checks and balances that Obama ignores freely.
Mark| 4.26.11 @ 11:06AM
It should be obvious to anyone who has ever been to NYC and stepped foot into a Trump tower, or visited the one in Chicago, that the only way for America to win is to have Donald steering the country.
His TV show proved once and for all that the only way to make Americans proud is to tell the majority of the federal gov't, 'You're Fired!'. It worked on TV. It will work in real life.
In addition, it is quite clear that the only way to properly run a government is to run it like a business. Trump proves daily why he is presidential material for the simple fact that he's a successful businessman - and has NEVER failed at being a successful one.
George True| 4.26.11 @ 8:04PM
What Mark said.
shipley130| 4.27.11 @ 3:51PM
I like Trump because he simply said he has changed his mind about some issues, unlike moronic politicians who come up with excuses and rhetoric about their changing views on issues.
Donna| 4.28.11 @ 11:17PM
This article sounds like a Zionist wet dream. Trump will shame the establishment, but of course understand that Israel needs "special consideration." Uh Huh.
Christian Louboutin | 6.23.11 @ 6:22AM
Pundits chuckled when Donald Trump claimed presidential ambitions, calling him unserious. But events in 2011 dramatically reframed the picture, vaulting Trump from unlikely nominee to contender. If a dour Ross Perot won 19 percent in 1992, the supremely self-assured Trump might double it in far worse times
sex toys | 7.4.11 @ 1:17AM
Moyers' phony quote has one thing correct. NPR/PBS is a gift to liberalism. Why would they fight so hard against de-funding?
Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 9:49PM
is good