I've drawn this parallel with Wallace before-Wallace's thing was segregation and Trump's is immigration but last night Alabama seemed to love Trump as much as it loved Wallace- a man who would cumulatively govern the staet for 30 years in 3 discontinuous periods between the early 60s to the late 80s.
I can't but note that Lawrence O'Donnell is wrong again-he always brags about the giant crowds that Bernie Sanders gets and how no one else could-he said Trump in his wildest dreams could never get Bernie like crowds. Well last night he did.
Ok,I couldn't resist taking this shot at Bernie but the Bernie maniacs drew first blood by saying that because of Hillary's' email scandal Bernie should now be considered the front-runner.
UPDATE: According to Politico only 20,000 came out to see Trump.
"It was immigration, not segregation, that brought some 20,000 southerners — far fewer than predicted — out for Donald Trump on Friday night, but the ghost of George Wallace loomed large"
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/donald-trump-2016-mobile-alabama-rally-ghost-george-wallace-121627.html#ixzz3jYr3Irrx
So there's a discrepancy-some are saying 30,000.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/politics/donald-trump-rally-mobile-alabama/index.html?eref=rss_politics
However even 20,000 is a lot. Politico seems to want to minimize it: even the subtitle says The South rises for Trump but only 20,000 of them.
How do you now that his only supporters are those that physically came ot the event?
Jeb Bush's team yesterday insisted that it's Steady as she goes-no panic over Trump.
"Being No. 2 is not necessarily a bad thing, Jeb’s allies argue: So much focus on Trump, they say, means the rest of the Republican field isn’t training their guns on him."
“It’s going to come down to Trump v. Somebody and Jeb is the somebody,” said one consultant who has worked for Bush, summing up the thinking inside his orbit.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/5-reasons-jeb-bush-not-freaking-out-donald-trump-2016-election-121612.html#ixzz3jYsYRUA8
I don't know though. To me you have to be at least somewhat concerned if you're Jeb or for that matter Rubio-even more Scott Walker with his fallen numbers in Iowa.
A lot has been made in comparing this race to 2012 where the lead changed hands from Rick Perry, to Herman Cain, to Newt Gingrich. The argument is that Trump will go the same way as these candidates went.
I'm reading a book now by John Sides called The Gamble about the 2012 election.
http://www.amazon.com/Gamble-Choice-Chance-Presidential-Election-ebook/dp/B00KAJJBRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1440262368&sr=1-1&keywords=john+sides+the+gamble
Her argues that Mitt Romney never took off like Perry, Cain, or Gingrich but that's because he was already well known form 2008. The fact that he was so often second to one of the other three suggested to the media that there was a desire for Anybody but Romney in the party but that this was mistaken.
Perry, Cain, and Gingrich all had their 'boomlets;-discovery, scrutiny, and decline but Romney already well known didn't need to have. So even if from August to December of 2011 Romney was usually in second, if you were to lean at the mean his net average poll number was the highest.
Also he had big advantages in terms of money, endorsements, party support, and his coverage by the press on net was good.
I don't now what Sides is saying now-I wish I could find out-but to me there are some clear departure from 2011 that make the idea that this time really is different at least more plausible.
Jeb has the advantage with the donors and the party insiders though it's way too early for endorsements.
Unlike 2011, he has a couple of challengers for the position of the mainstream party insider choice with Rubio and Walker-though Walker has some real worries now in Iowa.
It's just not clear that Trump's having just a 'boomlet' we've ahd the discovery and scrutiny but we're still clearly in that stage and it's arguable that he's simply pushed his way through that.
It's not clear there is a smoking gun-like Cain's history of sexual harassment complaints or Rick Perry not being able to name the government agencies he wants to shut down.
It seems that Trump is the Teflon candidate. What might doom another candidate elevates him. Indeed, this is underscored with how he uses the slur anchor babies without reprisal yet Jeb is criticized widely when he does it.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-rachel-maddow-theory-of-jeb-bushs.html
What I think has to be worrisome for Jeb as well as the other candidates is that Trump has been dominating the headlines for an extended period of time. Sides' study seems to show that the candidate who dominates the headlines will tend to dominate the polls-which will reinforce him dominating the headlines.
I don't see how you can deny at least two things at this point in the race even though it is early.
1. Trump's 'boomlet' has already surpassed that of the 2011 boomlets above. I think it's arguable he's past that phase as unlike the three from 2011 he didn't end up falling on his face.
2. Jeb is not nearly as strong a candidate as Mitt was. Mitt was a much better debater-though it's true that this is based just on Jeb's first one. But he has a lot to improve on.
3. That if Trump continues to dominate the news cycle he's going to continue to have strong numbers-unless something negative actually sticks for a change. . It may not guarantee he wins but it's going to make it much harder for anyone else to break out in the polls.
I can't but note that Lawrence O'Donnell is wrong again-he always brags about the giant crowds that Bernie Sanders gets and how no one else could-he said Trump in his wildest dreams could never get Bernie like crowds. Well last night he did.
Ok,I couldn't resist taking this shot at Bernie but the Bernie maniacs drew first blood by saying that because of Hillary's' email scandal Bernie should now be considered the front-runner.
UPDATE: According to Politico only 20,000 came out to see Trump.
"It was immigration, not segregation, that brought some 20,000 southerners — far fewer than predicted — out for Donald Trump on Friday night, but the ghost of George Wallace loomed large"
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/donald-trump-2016-mobile-alabama-rally-ghost-george-wallace-121627.html#ixzz3jYr3Irrx
So there's a discrepancy-some are saying 30,000.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/politics/donald-trump-rally-mobile-alabama/index.html?eref=rss_politics
However even 20,000 is a lot. Politico seems to want to minimize it: even the subtitle says The South rises for Trump but only 20,000 of them.
How do you now that his only supporters are those that physically came ot the event?
Jeb Bush's team yesterday insisted that it's Steady as she goes-no panic over Trump.
"Being No. 2 is not necessarily a bad thing, Jeb’s allies argue: So much focus on Trump, they say, means the rest of the Republican field isn’t training their guns on him."
“It’s going to come down to Trump v. Somebody and Jeb is the somebody,” said one consultant who has worked for Bush, summing up the thinking inside his orbit.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/08/5-reasons-jeb-bush-not-freaking-out-donald-trump-2016-election-121612.html#ixzz3jYsYRUA8
I don't know though. To me you have to be at least somewhat concerned if you're Jeb or for that matter Rubio-even more Scott Walker with his fallen numbers in Iowa.
A lot has been made in comparing this race to 2012 where the lead changed hands from Rick Perry, to Herman Cain, to Newt Gingrich. The argument is that Trump will go the same way as these candidates went.
I'm reading a book now by John Sides called The Gamble about the 2012 election.
http://www.amazon.com/Gamble-Choice-Chance-Presidential-Election-ebook/dp/B00KAJJBRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1440262368&sr=1-1&keywords=john+sides+the+gamble
Her argues that Mitt Romney never took off like Perry, Cain, or Gingrich but that's because he was already well known form 2008. The fact that he was so often second to one of the other three suggested to the media that there was a desire for Anybody but Romney in the party but that this was mistaken.
Perry, Cain, and Gingrich all had their 'boomlets;-discovery, scrutiny, and decline but Romney already well known didn't need to have. So even if from August to December of 2011 Romney was usually in second, if you were to lean at the mean his net average poll number was the highest.
Also he had big advantages in terms of money, endorsements, party support, and his coverage by the press on net was good.
I don't now what Sides is saying now-I wish I could find out-but to me there are some clear departure from 2011 that make the idea that this time really is different at least more plausible.
Jeb has the advantage with the donors and the party insiders though it's way too early for endorsements.
Unlike 2011, he has a couple of challengers for the position of the mainstream party insider choice with Rubio and Walker-though Walker has some real worries now in Iowa.
It's just not clear that Trump's having just a 'boomlet' we've ahd the discovery and scrutiny but we're still clearly in that stage and it's arguable that he's simply pushed his way through that.
It's not clear there is a smoking gun-like Cain's history of sexual harassment complaints or Rick Perry not being able to name the government agencies he wants to shut down.
It seems that Trump is the Teflon candidate. What might doom another candidate elevates him. Indeed, this is underscored with how he uses the slur anchor babies without reprisal yet Jeb is criticized widely when he does it.
http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-rachel-maddow-theory-of-jeb-bushs.html
What I think has to be worrisome for Jeb as well as the other candidates is that Trump has been dominating the headlines for an extended period of time. Sides' study seems to show that the candidate who dominates the headlines will tend to dominate the polls-which will reinforce him dominating the headlines.
I don't see how you can deny at least two things at this point in the race even though it is early.
1. Trump's 'boomlet' has already surpassed that of the 2011 boomlets above. I think it's arguable he's past that phase as unlike the three from 2011 he didn't end up falling on his face.
2. Jeb is not nearly as strong a candidate as Mitt was. Mitt was a much better debater-though it's true that this is based just on Jeb's first one. But he has a lot to improve on.
3. That if Trump continues to dominate the news cycle he's going to continue to have strong numbers-unless something negative actually sticks for a change. . It may not guarantee he wins but it's going to make it much harder for anyone else to break out in the polls.
No comments:
Post a Comment