It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That's all true, but in the end, I think Trump played it perfectly. He set the thing up so that he'd get what he wanted either way. Either Cruz endorsed him and he got the most elusive endorsement from the 16 GOP challengers, or Cruz refused to do so and he got to position himself as the victim to Cruz's antics. The added bonus for him was that Cruz took it a step further and made a complete fool out of himself in the process.
In the end, this debacle was a win for the GOP, both short term and long term. In the short term, it helped unify the Trump and Cruz factions, at least those in the convention hall, a bit more behind Trump than they had been before. Long term, it has the potential to severely damage Cruz's political future. The donors are reportedly furious with him, so it's possible he could seek a primary challenger when he's up for re-election in 2 years. Also, if Cruz's brand is irrevocably damaged, and Trump loses, then they're both potentially out of the political picture, which could pave the way for more moderate and sane voices in the party to gain a foothold.
Are you kidding? I think this narrative is damaging. You tend to forget one important thing here: There's 'Trumpism' and there are the core conservative ideals of the GOP. Those are clashing heavily right now. And even if 'Trumpism' now is like 65% part of the GOP, the less populist voices and 'true' Conservatives (Trump is NOT a Conservative!) within the party still make out 35% of the GOP.
Even if it backfires on Cruz' entire career, it still makes Trump look unprofessional; a guy who doesn't even know to unify the GOP. This destroys every bit of unity that normally a convention wants to bring about. People start asking questions now: If Trump let's this mess in Cleveland happen, then what will happen if he's controlling the buttons in the Oval Office?
You can blame it on the Cruz, but again Trump has caused this madness himself in a way. The above quote from Politico mentions it very well. If you say this all helps the GOP, then you are seriously deluded.
It helps the GOP in terms of getting them to closer to a place where Trump and Cruz no longer are leaders in the party. The party cannot be strong with either of them leading it.
You know........I think you should actually mention Donald Trump Jr. now. Because his speech was actually damn nice! THAT'S how Trump Sr. himself should have positioned himself.
I think we're still overestimating the importance of conventions here. Generally, since 2008, the DNC is taking place within two weeks of the RNC, so any big bounce should not be expected. Not in the short-term polls.
But the image of this 2016 RNC is already starting to stick like glue at Trumps character.
Also, ask yourself why such an 'unconventional' campaign still isn't resulting in a more solid lead for Trump in the polls. I know it's too damn early to draw conclusions from the polls, but if you can't lead Clinton now by +3% to +5%, then you need to be self-critical and asking yourself if you're making some mistakes.
In some ways Trump's campaign reminds me a lot of Wallace's campaign from 1968:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1968
Also George Wallace's supporters were so unified behind Trump. But obviously he could never win. Because from a demographical point of view there simply weren't enough Wallace supporters. That's the trouble Trump is facing too. I think he simply doesn't bring in enough independents and moderates.
Re: Cruz last night: It made for political and tv theatre, but it's a side show for me. We know there's party disunity. Ultimately I believe we saw one ambitious person destroy his political career on national tv, but he also affirmed his conservative principles. It was his choice.
I have no idea how Trump coordinated his 757 to fly right into the frame as Cruz was bragging about his achievements in the campaign yesterday afternoon in Cleveland, but it was again, interesting tv.
Perhaps we, 'Trumpians', supporters of Kasich and Cruz now that there has always been a lack of unity yes. But that's not what should be the only conclusion here. Even if I were a loyal Trump-supporter, I would feel agitated about all this. You simply don't want this to happen.
Lastly, one should always make assumptions if your key goal is to improve. For that you need a healthy bit of self-criticism. Not just a glaring ignorance of pundits, advicers, pollsters & experts. He should use them carefully in his own advantage. Because frankly as a president you are in need of experts.
Sadly, Trump isn't able at doing that....not yet. So the big question should be: Will Trump be able to do that once he is president?
I find it a pretty good speech, especially from the point of view of being a nuanced, articulate Conservative. 'Trumpism' isn't the typical Conservatism. It's nothing more than an inconsistent populist, screamy, TV-friendly version of it.
Like I mentioned in my comparison with other conventions on page #62, Cruz speech reminded me a lot in tone, build-up and style of that of Ted Kennedy's speech from the DNC 1980 convention.
So I think it's pretty unfair to blast Cruz, when all what should have been happening was a more controlled audience, especially from the New York delegation. Was Kennedy booed back in 1980? No. So why should Cruz be booed? Ask yourself that. And in the end it's still a GOP-convention, in which IMO also different voices should and must be heard. Luckily the DNC knows better how to deal with that.
If you're so much in favor of an uncontrolled campaign....and especially freedom...then don't mock that same freedom.
It's awful just thinking about the possibility.
Just leave it to the voters to take a field of nearly 20 and come up with the two worst possible candidates.
And you can see why Trump will lose in the actions of many of his supporters. They don't want discussions on issues, they just howl at the moon. And you know who you are.
Met Ivanka Trump a few times when she was developing Trump Tower in Chicago and she is the best of his kids. Articulate, detail-oriented and real sharp.
Thanks for your response, Earmuffs. I know you;ll love this one from Bill Maher.
On the other hand it might give space travel a boost....
Just think if Clinton had to suffer a revolt like this. If Sanders revolted against Clinton in a similar way. I'm curious how you would have responded then.
Anyway, in the end, I think Trump himself facilitated this 'corny, contrived speech'. It's so damn funny how everyone (most of us) in here frees 'the Donald' from every bit of blame, when this actually happened. I call that shameful:
As I said in my opening post of the day, Cruz's speech yesterday is a sideshow to me. I don't think the Trump campaign is too worried about it either. It made for good tv, and gave us a little more insight into Cruz the man, that's about it.
But a dream within a dream?
I wish it could be as simple to say that Clinton will run away with this election, but as @CommanderRoss says, the old standards of politics have gone out the window in this cycle. Trump, on a comparatively shoestring budget and powered by a campaign run by his children, is neck and neck with the big money machine of the Clintons. If it were someone other than Trump, that would probably be a comforting thing to think about, but given who it is, it's concerning since there appears to be no conventional playbook that Clinton can draw from to put this thing away as quickly as she should be able to based on the repugnant nature of her competition.
This is true. But I wouldn't say it's because of Trump; I think the investigation into Hillary's email server is going to drag on and be a contentious issue.
Given that in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida, the race is tight, it tells us that something's up, especially since Hilary has outspent Trump by a wide margin so far. And she has nothing to show for that. Nothing.
However, this convention is a debacle. And Trump's recent statements about not protecting NATO allies from Russia is troubling. The debates will likely show Hillary as the better candidate, and so I would still; put my money on her. (But not a lot.)
Did people actually think Cruz would support Trump after all he did to him? Come on, now. If this was back in the 1800s where men in politics made actual bold moves against each other instead of exchanging hollow words, we'd be following Teddy and Don out to a field to watch them duel to the death with single-shot pistols. Now that's a big deal!
He smiled slightly and said "Here's what I think. No comment."
:-??
Probably his biggest issue was that the whole thing upstaged Mike Pence, who took the stage to accept the VP nomination not long after that. I would imagine that a lot of the outcry in the room came from those that were upset that Cruz wasn't trying to bring the party together with his speech but also because the story has overshadowed what most in the media and Republican circles are saying was a pretty well received speech by Pence. In short, it was supposed to be Pence's night, not Cruz's. Aside from the New York delegation and those intimately involved in the Trump campaign, I'd imagine that a lot of the anger directed at Cruz last night was due to his overshadowing of the party's VP nominee.
I just happened to get a kick out of it because, after the reaction to Cruz, if his career ends up taking a huge hit and Trump ends up losing in November, the GOP will be rid of its two biggest cancers in a matter of four months.