Thursday, April 28, 2016
It's being called an unprecedented, extraordinary alliance to stop Donald Trump from getting delegates in the contests ahead....that being the states of Indiana, New Mexico and Oregon. The idea is this that Kasich will not spend time campaigning in Indiana thereby it's believed giving Cruz a better chance at beating Trump and in return Cruz would pull out of the race in the states of New Mexico and Oregon allowing Kasich to compete solely against the Donald. Interesting. One has to wonder if their orchestrating this plan could be compared to a Titanic analogy. As the great ship was sinking out of desperation flares were set off and the pumps were working but only allowing them a small measure of time or a last ditch attempt to save the ship. I guess we'll see though how each of the two would do head to head against Trump as his sole competitor.
To illustrate the polls show this for Indiana
Remove Kasich from that contest and where exactly will the 16 % land? It'll be fascinating to watch quite risky but probably the last ditch attempt to bring Trump's numbers down. If Trump however does pull off the win Cruz and Kasich handed Donald a lot of ammunition for some convincing rhetoric ....even when they take actions together they still loose. Trump was not pleased. He made the following statement,
"Wow, just announced that Lyin' Ted and Kasich are going to collude in order to keep me from getting the Republican nomination. DESPERATION!" He also added, "Collusion is often illegal in many other industries and yet these two Washington insiders have had to resort to collusion in order to stay alive."
A fair question to Donald might be isn't this what you claimed you wanted all along......to go head to head against Cruz without the Kasich effect? Thus was Trump's request on April 4th as seen in the link below.
Why haven't Donald's opponents called him on this? Shouldn't they inquire isn't this what you said you wanted all along? Well you've got your one on one Donald! Let's see what you can do! My thoughts....with Donald's convincing win in New York and his latest 5 state sweep days later it seems likewise the Indiana contest might favor him as well. Donald seems to be on a roll and the Indiana Republicans might be tempted to join the band wagon. The actual numbers of the 5 state win by Trump could indeed confirm to the Indiana Re-pubs that Cruz would have an extremely hard time not just wining but also competing in the general.
The numbers tell it all,
The question asked by Indianans might be if Cruz has more or less bottomed out on his numbers along the east coast and that among Republicans what possible chance would he have in the general? Even with Trump's high numbers it'll be hard even for him to compete against the Democrats...how much more for Cruz? Plus when one considers Ted bottomed out as well in the state of Florida where's the practical reason of placing a vote his way? Granted many vote for the sole reason of making a statement so that their support of whatever or whoever serves to show a substantial level of backing for certain principals BUT.....if you're goal is to win the White House the chief thing many would hold is who has a better chance of winning country wide. Cruz? Perhaps that's become now a hard argument to make?
Friday, April 1, 2016
Strange, bizarre and weird.....Trump's campaign got in trouble today when asked a hypothetical question in regard to abortion. It was asked by Chris Matthews of NBC, IF abortion ever became illegal should a women be punished for still having one? The Donald spoke in the affirmative thus stepping into trouble. Why bizarre and weird? Why should a question of such a nature even be framed given the high probability at close to 100 % that such will never happen? A trap set for Trump? Looking at the question how really could anyone answer it? Wouldn't a law cease to be a law without a determent for breaking it? So what would have been a fair and sane question? How about do you believe abortion should be illegal, yes or no? Wouldn't suggesting the other promote law breaking bypassing proper legal channels to change it?
So a fair question to the Donald? In this instance I'd say NO. Interesting though it doesn't really matter. The trap was set and Trump walked into it. The said journalist knows so well that the headline won't read "Trump is asked a hypothetical question about if a law exists" but rather it'll read, "Trump say one who has an abortion should be punished". No not my mere theory for that's whats in the headlines today. Am I a great fan of Trump to be President? Not really although I do like a few of his lines such as bring back the jobs from China. In regard to the question though it would be nice to see the Dems asked the same, so Hillary do you believe legislatures should make laws without penalties for breaking them? You say NO that would make no sense? Exactly and Trump basically said the same.
Now later on this issue Trump has adjusted his position to line himself up with what various Pro-Life organizations put out....that they'd never want to see a women prosecuted for having an abortion but rather the abortion provider. Isn't the weirdness of the question still evident though? Why pose hypothetical questions which have no REAL probability of being relevant? How about it's being rather hypocritical for being so hypothetical for they know they'd never ask such an impossible question to a Hillary Rodham Clinton.