Ho-hum, more Trump—with a bit of Rand Paul thrown in
The latest Trump story is based on Trump’s accusations towards the Cruz camp re Iowa. It’s a leaf out of the usual Trump playbook, and I have to confess I felt weary at the prospect of describing it here and then having a discussion that would be essentially similar to so many that have gone before. But fortunately, I don’t have to do it, I’ll just link to others that have traveled that way before me.
Here’s Leon H. Wolf at RedState:
As far as I can tell, Donald Trump’s grieving process works more or less completely in the reverse order from what you would expect from a rational human being. Immediately after the event, Trump was more or less in acceptance mode, saying he was proud of finishing second, he loved the people of Iowa, he was going to come back and buy a farm there.
Then he went into depression, secluding himself for an uncharacteristically long time from twitter and the media.
Working backwards, he skipped over bargaining and went straight to anger, blaming the media and their unfair treatment of him.
Then this morning, he went into denial mode, basically saying that the Iowa loss never even happened and there should be a do over…
Look at what Trump is doing here. He is complaining about a series of events that are, by any objective measure, ordinary politics, and he is treating them as evidence of “fraud” or that the results of Iowa were somehow completely illegitimate.
If you don’t know what that refers to, it was reports by some of Cruz’s staff at some point during the caucuses that Carson was dropping out of the race. But a story reporting what seemed to be an impending dropout by Carson had been on CNN, and that’s what the staff was picking up on; see this:
Cruz said on “The Mike Gallagher Show” that members of his campaign were “passing on news reports.”
“I don’t make a practice of scapegoating staff members when it’s politically convenient,” Cruz added.
The Texas senator reiterated that he has apologized to Carson for his campaign’s actions. In a Tuesday statement, Cruz said that while sharing news reports is “fair game,” he was sorry his campaign did not send out an update clarifying that Carson would remain in the race. The Cruz campaign circulated a CNN story about Carson’s plans to head to Florida following the Iowa caucus, and the campaign allegedly urged caucusgoers to vote for Cruz instead.
On Wednesday, Cruz told Gallagher that the media was reporting on Carson’s claims and the Cruz campaign’s actions in a “misleading way.”
Cruz added that “The reality hit the reality TV star in Iowa so nobody is talking about him now. So he’s trying to regain some attention on Twitter.”
I believe that in this quip Cruz is essentially correct in the psychological sense. I would go even further: one of the strongest motivations in Trump’s life has always been to be a celebrity and to thrust himself into the public eye. He thinks it’s good for the brand, and the bottom line, but it also seems to be internally driven. For whatever reason, he thrives on it; not all billionaires like the spotlight, but Trump adores it.
Trump has developed attention-getting to a fine art, which has helped him so far in his campaign. At this point—as with his boycott of the last debate, which he now admits may have cost him first place in Iowa—his carping and whining and blaming may (accent on the “may”; predicting that anything Trump does will make him lose any traction with his supporters is a high-risk move) cost him some support because, although it illustrates the fact that “he fights,” it underscores the fact that “he fights like a child.” Whether you believe Ted Cruz or not, there’s little question that such actions, even if done with malice rather than in error, would not invalidate an election and probably had no effect whatsoever on Trump’s figures. In fact, they should have made his number of votes go up, not down, if Carson supporters were indeed moving over to other candidates (no evidence that Carson’s voters did abandon him, by the way, because he did about as expected).
Let’s see, what else? Trump says this about his knowledge of the concept of the Iowa “ground game”:
Donald Trump on Wednesday morning acknowledged that his campaign may have needed a more robust operation in Iowa, noting that he only recently learned what the term “ground game” means.
“I think we could’ve used a better ground game, a term I wasn’t even familiar with. You know, when you hear ”˜ground game,’ you say, ”˜What the hell is that?’ Now I’m familiar with it,” Trump said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” when asked if his campaign needed better organization to win in Iowa.
“I think in retrospect we should’ve had a better ground game, I would’ve funded a better ground game,” he continued. “But people told me my ground game was fine. And I think by most standards it was.”
One of the big hypes about Donald Trump is that he’s sharp, a really quick learner, and “he hires the best people.” That some of this hype is spread by Trump himself is obvious. It’s also obvious from his remarks above that, in the case of Iowa and the “ground game,” he didn’t know squat, and he didn’t hire the “best people.” I’m not a politician, but even I am at least somewhat familiar with the term “ground game” and what it means, and I know that in a state like Iowa (or New Hampshire, for that matter) it’s important. One of Trump’s many many flaws is arrogance, and that’s not only annoying, it’s dangerous in a chief executive.
Oh, and Rand Paul is out of the race. That decision shows good judgment. Would that some of the other candidates—do you hear me, Jeb?—would follow suit. But I doubt that Jeb will. It makes me sad to say it, but Fiorina (one of my early favorites) needs to go, too, because her campaign failed to take off after an initial surge. Kasich needs to say bye-bye as well. Santorum and Gilmore hardly matter, in or out. Christie and Carson are still doing well enough that I can understand why they might stay, but I don’t think there’s any way either actually has a chance to win, and as time goes on they will seem more and more like spoilers.
Speaking of spoilers—in that aforementioned RedState piece, Leon Wolf opines that, if Trump’s results continue downward, he will run third-party:
Trump is prepping his followers to bolt with him for a third party run if he loses the nomination. In fact, if he loses New Hampshire and South Carolina, he may just do it pre-emptively. I suspect this is a decision he has already made. Now, I know that he will probably not be able to get on the ballot at this late date in many states, but the point will not be to win, it will be to damage the Republican nominee, which has been Trump’s goal from the beginning of this process.
I am of two minds about this. On the one hand, I actually think Trump is enough of a patriot, and his anger at his fellow-candidates enough of a pose, that he doesn’t want to damage the eventual GOP nominee that badly. That’s unless he’s always been a Hillary stalking horse, which is also possible, but not my leading theory of Trump.
Also, Trump doesn’t like to lose. Campaigning third-party in a losing cause, and spending his own money to do it (even though Trump could afford to spend many many millions, he’s a tightwad), is not really Trump’s style. He doesn’t like to lose at anything, and that dislike runs very very deep.
However, I do think that Trump has gotten hooked on the adulation. He’s always pursued celebrity, and he’s actually been a celebrity for most of his adult life, but never on this scale and in this way. Never with hordes of very vocal and demonstrative acolytes who practically worship him. It must be a very powerful feeling, and he would be loath to lose it. Running third-party would keep it going.
Of course, if Trump wins big in New Hampshire and many other states, there’s nothing to say he couldn’t get the GOP nomination. But it feels less likely than it did before Iowa, and in his gut I think Iowa surprised him. Because one of the many dangerous things about Trump is that, like Obama, he believes his own hype.
[ADDENDUM: CNN reports that Santorum is about to leave the race. I hope we can state that without being accused of fraudulent dirty tricks by Trump, if in fact it turns out to be untrue. But I assume it’s true. It doesn’t matter much, as I said above, because Santorum had so very few voters to begin with.]
The Cruz campaign pulled two dirty tricks.
As Parker reported, the Cruz campaign was telling its Caucus leaders that Carson was pulling out and his supporters should vote Cruz. Trying to blame the “mistake” on a CNN news report doesn’t wash.
The second was distributing an official looking flyer that warned voters of a voting violation.
Cruz probably picked up a couple of points using these tactics. But, as they say, all’s fair in love and elections.
PatD:
You call the Carson announcement a dirty trick, as though you know what happened. But the Cruz campaign didn’t make it up, they heard what they believed was such an announcement on CNN. If so, that wouldn’t be a dirty trick. It’s not as though there wasn’t such a CNN story; there was, and it could reasonably have been interpreted to mean that Carson was indeed quitting, or about to quit.
So you have no idea what happened, nor do I, about what they knew or didn’t know. But like Trump, you’re very quick to cry “dirty trick” as though it’s a fact.
The other issue—the mailer—is a technique that’s been used before in campaigns without much hooting and hollering about it. Most voters understand it’s not for real. But it’s not a technique I think should be used (I don’t like it and think it does run the risk of catching a very stupid and susceptible person in a trick), it pretty much is politics and certainly no basis for a claim of a fraudulent election, as Trump has done.
Trump sounds like a petulant whiner. It’s not good for him, I don’t think, even with some of his supporters. He can’t fight as dirty as he has and expect the others to fight sparking clean.
Trump’s reaction is what you would expect. His strategy is to get as much media attention as possible and drown out his competitors. It is probably premature to write him off.
My gut feel is that Rubio is the one who will surge in NH and SC, and he will pick up most of the support of the establishment candidates as they drop out.
There are no ” do overs” in elections just as there is no crying in baseball.
Maybe the most ignorant and unAmerican thing I have ever heard an adult – much less a candidate for President – ever say.
I watched a bit of Trump’s speech at a rally last night in New Hampshire, and I thought he looked very tired and like the old man that he is. Amazing that we’ve got three such oldsters involved in these grueling campaigns. What egos. Or maybe simply fear of leaving the game.
@new-neocon:
There is a pretty good twitter and email paper trail that shows what happened. Carson also called it a dirty trick and it had an impact.
Say PatD, is Trump’s campaign paying you to churn out this tripe?
“It must be a very powerful feeling, and he would be loathe to lose it.”
Lose the “e”. To paraphrase Bill Bryson, “loath” is an adjective meaning reluctant, “loathe” is a verb meaning to despise. (Bryson’s Dictionary of Troublesome Words)
Word Bully:
You’re right as usual (but not as always 🙂 ). Will fix.
PatD:
I’m sure Carson called it a dirty trick. But that doesn’t make him correct.
I’ve already clearly stated what I think, which is that we don’t know, and even if it was just as bad as stated, that has noting to do with invalidating the caucus results.
> and like the old man that he is.
I’m just about Trump’s age and I don’t wouldn’t want to try running for anything. For that matter, I thought Obama was a bit under powered in the energy department. I don’t recall where I read it, but IIRC it was apropos Churchill, that the distinquishing feature of successful politicians in the writer’s experience was exceptional amounts of energy.
Chuck:
Churchill was an “old man” during WWII by that definition (in mid-60s when it began, about 70 when it ended), but he was very energized.
By the way, Obama’s tiredness, and/or complaints of tiredness, early in his 2008 campaign (actually way back in the spring of 2007) caught my eye. It was one of the very first things I ever noticed about him, and that post was one of the very first posts I ever wrote about him.
@chuck:
I’m reading Churchill’s biography. He had boundless energy despite many serious accidents and health issues.
@Ann:
Trump is working as hard as any candidate I’ve seen. Up to three rallies a day, multiple media appearances every day, and he usually looks pretty energised. This was yesterday evening.
@neo-neocon: I did finish my first response by saying “all’s fair in love and elections”. It’s fair if your guy does it and it’s despicable if the other guy does it.
It appears that much of the support that Trump enjoys is almost Pavlovian in nature. Ring the anti-illegal bell or the “Up your PC!” bell and you get a number of supporters willing to overlook many obvious failings by The Donald.
I like and respect Dr. Carson but strongly suspect at this point that he is being used by the GOPe to divide and conquer the conservative, (and especially the evangelical), part of the base.
PatD:
Actually, no.
That may be the way you think, but it’s not the way I think.
I already wrote, in my previous comment in this thread addressed to you, referring to the mailers: “it’s not a technique I think should be used (I don’t like it and think it does run the risk of catching a very stupid and susceptible person in a trick), it pretty much is politics and certainly no basis for a claim of a fraudulent election, as Trump has done.”
So no, I wouldn’t condone the mailer thing in either candidate, but for neither candidate would I cry “fraud, invalidate the election!” My standards are the same, and I strive to keep it that way.
Perhaps you don’t really pay attention to what I actually say, before you write?
Trump didn’t know what a ground game was. Does he think Boko Haram is going to win a Grammy? Does he know that you have to spend a lot of time planning to supply an army? Did he figure out whether his golf course in Scotland had a climate not conducive to golf? Does ne think Biden will find a way to cure cancer in a year? Does he ever do any homework before he opens his mouth? And has he ever said how he is going to find all his wondeful advisors.
As to the Carson comments, Trump is probably upset that he didn’t think of these ideas.
Churchill took daily naps after lunch and was particular about his diet. He knew he had limited energy and acted accordingly. It’s tougher for Trump since the implied message is that he’s a stallion who needs no rest.
Trump’s ‘grieving process’ works irrationally in the reverse order because his narcissism (compensation for buried insecurity) demands that reality match his desires. When reality votes otherwise, denial of reality is the only option available when acceptance of reality is rejected.
All on the liberal left do this, it’s endemic to their mind-set. I believe it stems from a juvenile rejection of critical aspects of reality, the childish protest “that’s not fair!” lies at the heart of liberalism.
Trump is cunning, always looking for the angle. But arrogant people are not quick learners, their egotism prevents self-examination.
Unlike Rand, Jeb is staying in because he’s the GOPe choice. Rubio is their fallback guy.
According to Limbaugh, the campaign of Rubio is the one that pushed the Carson story first and hardest. When it went public, they deleted all their tweets but they had already been screencapped. Rubio picked up six points over the polling but Cruz only 5.
@Geoffrey Britain:
I don’t see Jeb recovering. If you spend $50 million and you can’t move the needle, you should call it a day. Rubio is now the GOPe man. That’s why he surged in Iowa.
We’ll see if Trump is a fast learner or not in NH and SC. If he loses both, he’s toast.
@Sdferr: $25/post. You should try it. You sign up here.
@neo-neocon: I was being flippant. Sorry.
I think neo-neocon’s analysis of Trump is dead on. In particular, he’s always been a narcissist, but the crowds are pretty much of a new experience. It reminds me of the story of Marilyn Monroe going to Korea to entertain the troops. Most of her work had been in studios, of course, so huge live cheering crowds were totally new to her. She said to her husband, Joe DiMaggio, “Joe, you never saw such a thing.” Pretty funny.
Outside of professional athletes, rock stars, politicians during campaigns, and an occasional general, most people, even very rich or very famous ones, never experience the cheers of thousands.
Keep in mind that for Trump-front alt-Right activists, Trump winning the general election or even the GOP nomination is not their primary objective, though that may be Trump’s primary objective. They’re building an insurgent social movement in the Left-activist style for a long march that principally targets mainstream conservatives of the Right along with a goal to take over the GOP.
What might that imply practically?
If Trump slides more, it might imply a strategic divergence where dedicated Trump campaigners tack towards more-conventional campaigning in search of broader appeal while Trump-front alt-Right activists prioritize consolidation for their social movement with identity blocs carved out from the Right under alt-Right re-frame, such as the recently asserted “nationalist” and “populist” cleavage from “conservative” that conservative pundits seem to have conceded with barely a ripple of dispute.
Another cleaving re-frame I saw in a reaction to the Iowa primary result is an assertion that “blue collar” Tea Party, whose interests were assumed by the writer to align with Trump, are betrayed by “white collar” Tea Party who support Cruz.
As long as their interests align, dedicated Trump campaigners and alt-Right activists will travel together. But watch for the point where the interests of the two groups diverge and their alliance comes to fracture.
I doubt the Trump campaign would last long as plausibly viable once the alt-Right activists have deemed it a lost cause and shift away. But be aware that the Trump campaign going away wouldn’t spell the end of the alt-Right insurgency against the Right. They’ll take their gains from the Trump phenomenon and adapt to carry forward their long march.
@y81:
The Boston and NY marathons have incredible crowd support and they cheer for every runner. Anyone with a mind to do it can experience four hours of cheering and encouragement from the thousands lining the course. You do have to run a qualifying time to make it to Boston.
I hear lots of blather from people who have never voted in a caucus and have never observed a caucus. On Monday voters gathered at 1,681 gop caucus meeting. The call I received from the campaign about Carson’s statement came after all ballots were cast, but were not yet counted. Democrats caucus in far fewer meetings that typically involve much large numbers of voters than those that appear at Republican caucus meetings.
Trump can whip this dead horse and rile up his fans, but its just more NYC values. Although no one I know received one of the ‘voter violation’ mailings, I am guessing the mailings were sent to select precincts. This was not illegal, but IMO, a bit underhanded. More like something I would expect of djt if he had one of those ground game things.
I could buy your argument, Neo, if other campaigns said the same thing about Carson. But they didn’t. Only the Cruz campaign. It looks bad. It smells dirty. Especially when you consider in some areas of Iowa Cruz won only by a few votes.
Luckily, Iowa is one state. 49 more to go. However, it leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth. Cruz might have the conservative background I like, but I don’t like this tactic (and some others) he has used.
“. . . if other campaigns said the same thing about Carson.”
What another campaign said about Carson.
Ah, but stopper your ears.
Winston also drank a bottle of champagne every night.
ParD @ 5:11,
I agree, Jeb is not going to recover, I suspect even he no longer believes that he can but until Rubio wins a state primary, the GOPe is reluctant to put all of their eggs in Rubio’s basket.
It looks like there are only 9 left now:
Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson, Fiorina, Christie, Kasich, Bush, and Gilmore.
I hope the ABC debate opens up to ALL nine.
I believe that Carly would be the best president-although she so far has not been the best campaigner. I hope she gets another nationwide opportunity to make her case before the New Hampshire primary.
Per Rush as geokster notes, the Rubio campaign picked up on Carson’s statement first and then attempted (stupidly) to erase the twitters for plausible deniability in the age of 24/7 digital memory. It looks like Rubio is on par with hrc when it comes to cybersecurity.
PatD:
I’m just about finished with the 2nd volume of the three-volume Manchester biography of Churchill.
The second volume is mostly a summary of the what was happening in the 1930s as a preamble to WWII. It’s breathtaking. And, Obama and today’s liberals with respect to Islamists (including Iran) are an eerie parallel to Chamberlain and the appeasers with respect to Nazis.
I am sure this statement will get push back, but I have had the sense before that Dr Carson is a little thin skinned–in a low key way.
Santorum is a good man, but I have no idea what he was thinking. Not just him, of course.
Remember, everyone, Donald Trump has been a crusader for truth in politics for longer than Ted Cruz has been a US citizen!
Nick, you forgot the TIC or LOL disclaimer
PatD: I do not know how you can compare Chamberlain, or anyone else in the 1930s, in any respect with what transpires today.
I presume that you are well aware of the devastation that WWI visited on the population ofEngland and the rest of Europe; so I will not dwell on it; other than to say that we have no frame of reference to apply to the psychological impact.
We judge with the benefit of hindsight, from a comfortable distance, and safe haven. Nothing in our experience qualifies us to judge.
@Eric:
The Trump supporters I know include a retired surgeon and his nurse wife, a Shakespeare scholar, a builder’s laborer active in GOP and Tea Party circles, a single mother and nurse, a lawyer, a veterinary physician and a retired grade school principal. Not exactly the great unwashed.
What drives them towards Trump?
1. Utter frustration with elected GOP politicians for their failure to stop Obama from implementing his radical agenda, despite huge victories in the last three election cycles.
2. A sense that the country they grew up in is disappearing fast, as illegals and Muslims pour in at unprecedented rates. “Adios America”, as Coulter wrote.
3. The sure knowledge that everything Big Government touches only benefits special interests.
4. Recognition that debts must eventually be repaid yet the nation’s debt has almost doubled under Obama, with nary a whimper from the GOP.
You get the drift. Supporters of other candidates have similar concerns.
A rude, arrogant, narcissistic billionaire from New York would seem to be an unlikely choice for voters with these concerns. And he was, when the campaign started. But then he railed against the illegals flooding in across the border, claimed he would build a wall, that Mexico would pay for it, and illegals would be deported. He shattered the PC prohibitions against even mentioning illegal immigration as an election issue. We know, every election cycle, GOP politicians say they will build a fence and secure the border, but they never do it. Heck, in the omnibus bill, they didn’t even fund their fence. So Trump calls the illegals murderers and rapists and drug dealers, but maybe some of them are good. All Hell breaks loose. Trump doubles down. That’s when people started to take Trump seriously. He broke down the Berlin wall of political correctness to talk about an issue that concerned ordinary Americans. Meanwhile, Cruz and Rubio were changing their positions on immigration almost daily.
Trump did it again when he called for a temporary halt to Muslim immigration. All Hell breaks loose. Trump doubles down.
When almost every manufactured good that you buy is labelled “Made in China” or Japan or Mexico, and our landscape is covered in boarded up factories, then talking about “fair trade” and making better deals sounds good. My majors were economics and mathematics, so I know the theory behind free trade and the benefits of eliminating trade barriers. But that is not how the world works. China steals American trade secrets, places huge burdens on American exporters (Boeing, you must build planes in China if you want to sell to us), and devalues its currency to its advantage.
It is rude, crude stuff but Trump has done us the courtesy of providing detail about his policies in “Crippled America” and on his web-site. That’s how I found out what he meant by a “good” immigrant.
If Trump fizzles out, we’ll be back to the tired old cycle of voting for a professional politician who will say conservative things on the stump but go progressive when elected. In that case, why bother? Let’s just stay home and give it to Hillary or Bernie. At least they won’t betray us.
We aren’t trying to take over the GOP. We just want it to live up to its principles.
What surely angers Trump the most is that he didn’t think to use Cruz’s strategy regarding the CNN Carson reports before Cruz’s camp did.
@OldFlyer: You responded to Ira’s comment to me, not me.
But he is right. I’m up to the mid 1930’s, where Churchill is warning everyone about the Nazi arms build-up, and his party leadership is still talking about disarming themselves.
@Ira – I’m reading Martin Gilbert’s biography of Churchill. Would that his like were running today, although he was hardly conservative on many issues.
PatD Says:
February 3rd, 2016 at 2:53 pm
The Cruz campaign pulled two dirty tricks.
Of course he did dirty tricks, wake up sheeple, this is just another sign of the white man keeping them down!!!
Nick at 7:50 pm, wow! If you are serious, you sound like an Obama zombie.
The 2000 “post election campaign” was the final straw in driving me out of the Democrat party, first, for trying to steal the election in Florida, and then, when that failed, trying to delegitimize the result. I am quite distressed that D Trump appears willing to do the same damage to the body politic. So, if I thought to support him, even with his faux conservatism, I’d be really put off by this bomb-throwing at the process.
PatD at 8:45 pm….
And you believe trump is the answer to the points you listed?How about some palm tree lined, sandy ocean front beaches in Iowa at just $7,000 per acre?
There is one good thing about the Trump candidacy – The destruction of PC. That is it though.
Going to buy a farm in Iowa? He bought the farm in Iowa.
For those of you not familiar with the expression, “bought the farm” is a military euphemism for getting killed. It comes from the common sentiment that when I retire I’m going to buy a farm somewhere.
@Parker:
Cruz is just another professional politician. He has billionaire Robert Mercer’s “Keep the Promise” Super PAC behind him. Mercer bought a controlling interest in Breitbart.com. The data from their polls on presidential candidates was fed to another Mercer enterprise, Cambridge Analytica, which analyzed the data and sold it to the Cruz campaign for micro-targeting donors.
Does Robert Mercer care about the issues I care about? No. Then, nor does Ted Cruz, because he answers to Mercer, not the people. Mercer is also a big contributor to “Club for Growth”, another organization with an open borders agenda. You think Cruz is going to seal the border when his biggest campaign contributor is on the other side of the issue?
I’m not making this stuff up. Far smarter people than me have done the sleuthing through public records to connect the dots.
I haven’t even touched on Heidi Cruz, but she has been a big player in DC.
The Cruz family might portray themselves as Washington outsiders who will stand up for the little guy. But that simply isn’t the case.
Check my links but do your own research. Prove me wrong about Cruz being a DC insider with strong backing from a hedge fund billionaire, and I’ll eat my words.
PatD,
I saw nothing in your comment that would make me want Trump. I find it absolutely disgusting that he is now trying to come across as the defender of Ben Carson.
Please tell me who Trump will choose for VP and cabinet positions. No one with half a brain would be willing to sit at a cabinet meeting to hear Trump tell them how rich he is. Trump has shown no knowledge of any issues. He is lazy and thinks the whole world is like NYC.
PatD Says:
Cruz is just another professional politician. He has billionaire Robert Mercer’s “Keep the Promise” Super PAC behind him. Mercer bought a controlling interest in Breitbart.com.
Then Mercer is wasting his money. Although, as evidenced by their online surveys the vast majority of Breitbart readers favored Cruz until late summer, since September or so, the Trump zombies infected that site in swarms. You can’t say anything good about Cruz there anymore without being savaged by Trump supporters.
Breitbart posters are now quite sympathetic to Trump and the site has used the increased clicks to attain new heights among internet blogs. I believe Andrew Breitbart would commend Trump for bringing keys issues to the fore, but support Cruz as the best conservative in the race.
Jeff Roe, Cruz’s campaign manager, pulled the exact same dirty trick with another candidate a few years ago.
“An e-mail sent to news media outlets and a “tweet” issued by a fake Twitter account announced that Eckersley had suspended his campaign due to personal reasons. Eckersley blames his opponent, Republican Billy Long, for sending out the hoax days before the election, “You know this is dirty politics. This is Jeff Roe style management. That’s who Billy’s retained. That’s who he writes the big checks to,”
http://www.missourinet.com/2010/10/29/eckersley-calls-e-mail-a-hoax-says-hes-still-in-the-race-audio/
http://www.riverfronttimes.com/newsblog/2016/02/02/missouris-own-jeff-roe-was-the-wind-beneath-ted-cruzs-iowa-wings
Missouri’s Own Jeff Roe Was the Wind Beneath Ted Cruz’s Iowa Wings
Sarah Palin, Karl Rove, and Bill O’reilly, three of the strangest bedfellows there ever could be, all agree that Cruz stole the Iowa Caucus with his campaign tricks.
http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=5521
If Karl Rove says your campaign is dirty then he probably knows what he’s talking about.
Oh yes, right. You’ve just wrapped Rove in the Epimenides’ paradox boxty, changing the term Cretan to Rovian. Rove says “All Rovians are liars.” So, is Rove telling the truth about that, let alone whatever else he may say? Try again.
Such a great blog this is, and your comments are wonderful. Thought I’d toss out a tip for you history lovers, of which there are many here.
I am listening to Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History podcasts and am about finished with his WW1 series “Blueprint for Armageddon”. Dan gives the human side of the conflict. It will bring tears to your eyes. You can find it on iTunes.
geokstr:
Breitbart and its posters are not “quite sympathetic” to Trump. The site has become Trump Central.
expat:
I don’t know about Trump’s cabinet positions, but maybe he’d give Palin another go-round for VP. Who knows? But if he did, I think it would just about guarantee his defeat.
Roy Lofquist:
He literally tried to buy the farm in Scotland. But the farmer, Michael Forbes, wouldn’t sell, so Trump tried to force him.
If Iowans knew that story, they probably wouldn’t have voted for Trump. But it never got publicized, and I’ll never understand why.
Michael Forbes, but the point stands.
sdferr: What nonsense are you going on about? Rove was the chief architect of Dubya’s two campaign victories. I think most people would recognize him as an expert on campaigning.
sdferr:
I keep making that mistake; don’t know why. Forbes=Holmes in my brain, apparently. Will fix.
“On campaigning”, on lying, potatoe, potahto: the paradox asks us to believe a self-professed liar (Epimenides, a Cretan, says “All Cretans are liars”). Our difficulty is as simple as: why should we? He may well be lying now, or lying again, as it were. This would not be an occasion to take him at his word.
In more concrete terms, Rove may have an agenda to promote against Cruz, so your citation of him comes already suspect as to truthfulness. It is perfectly reasonable to suspect Rove of hidden aims. Therefore, his testimony isn’t worth the breath expended to make it.
If Iowans knew that story, they probably wouldn’t have voted for Trump. But it never got publicized, and I’ll never understand why.
Lots of pig farms in Iowa, and probably state-of-the-art clean. For a pig farm, that is. So maybe an ad showing Trump saying the Scottish farmer lived like a pig would resonate differently there?
Just found this website of an Iowa company called Pork Belly Ventures, whose slogan is “Live Like a Pig”:
“A PBV team slogan that encourages Porkers to be content with their circumstances, Think Gravy, find joy in the moment, regardless of sweat and other minor discomforts, acknowledge that shift happens, and roll with it. It is not uncommon to hear virtuous Porkers praised in hushed tones: ‘Wow. The guy really knows how to Live Like a Pig’.”
Scott Adams makes a very strong case that the fellow that scammed the Iowa caucuses was Rubio.
Rubio’s camp did MORE to spread the “Carson’s dropped out” meme than ANYBODY.
Then, Hillary style, they swept their tweet trail — but too late.
Dang that Internet and it’s digital vaults.
Rubio’s camp rigged the final debate — with the avid cooperation of Fox and the GOPe.
Adams contends that the GOPe is going to surge Rubio in New Hampshire… as much to block Cruz as to block Trump.
As Cruz points out, at many levels, Rubio is a repeat of Romney.
The top issue in 2012 was 0-care. Romney was unable to create ANY daylight between his Romneycare and 0-care.
The top issue in 2016 is immigration. Rubio will not be able to create ANY daylight between himself, Trump, Hillary, Sanders, or Jeb!
For when you parse their positions and utterances — they ALL have “paths to citizenship” built in to their CORE positions.
The only outlier is Ted Cruz.
Who Rubio is smearing as being equivalent to himself.
Barry Soetoro is BOMBING our polity with anti-American ‘imports.’
For NONE of the Muslim invaders is here bound to carry the torch of freedom.
As for Barry’s inner soul, the first time he could speak without covering icons – was at a mosque.
What a surprise.