Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 46

Thread: Has Trump Found the Winning Formula?

  1. #1

    Has Trump Found the Winning Formula?


    Has Trump Found the Winning Formula?

    Telling the truth about Hillary, says Patrick J. Buchanan.

    Has Trump Found the Formula?

    By Patrick J. Buchanan

    June 24, 2016

    Stripped of its excesses, Donald Trump’s Wednesday speech contains all the ingredients of a campaign that can defeat Hillary Clinton this fall.

    Indeed, after the speech ended Clinton was suddenly defending the Clinton Foundation against the charge that it is a front for a racket for her family’s enrichment.

    The specific charges in Trump’s indictment of Clinton: She is mendacious, corrupt, incompetent and a hypocrite.

    “Hillary Clinton … is a world-class liar,” said Trump. She faked a story about being under fire at a Bosnia airport, the kind of claim for which TV anchors get fired. She has lied repeatedly about her email server.

    She lied to the families of victims of the Benghazi massacre by implying the atrocity was a spontaneous reaction to an anti-Islamic video, not the premeditated act of Islamist terror she knew it to be.

    Drop “world-class” and Trump’s case is open and shut.


    His second charge: “Hillary has perfected the politics of personal profit and theft” and “may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency.”

    Particulars?


    Bill Clinton got $750,000 for a speech from a telecom company facing State Department sanctions for providing technology to Iran. The Clintons got the cash; the telecom company got no sanctions.


    “Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while 9 investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.”


    Trump added, “She ran the State Department like her own personal hedge fund — doing favors for oppressive regimes … for cash.”


    Together, she and Bill have raked in $153 million since 2001 in speaking fees from “lobbyists, CEOs and foreign governments.”


    These figures are almost beyond belief.


    Sherman Adams had to resign as Ike’s chief of staff for accepting a vicuna coat from Bernard Goldfine, who had problems with federal regulators.


    When ex-President Reagan, after brain surgery, visited Japan to receive that nation’s highest honor, The Grand Cordon of the Supreme Order of the Chrysanthemum, and got a $2 million fee from the media company that hosted his nine-day visit, our liberal editorial pages vomited out their revulsion and disgust.


    Where are those media watchdogs today?


    Rather than condemning the Clintons’ greed, their conflicts of interest and their egregious exploitation of their offices, the media are covering for Hillary and digging for dirt on Trump.


    To substantiate his charge of incompetence, Trump notes that Clinton as Senator voted for arguably the greatest strategic blunder in U.S. history, the invasion of Iraq.


    She pushed the attack that ousted Col. Gadhafi and unleashed terrorists who took over much of Libya and murdered our ambassador.


    She played a leading role in launching the insurrection against Bashar Assad that has left hundreds of thousands dead, uprooted half of Syria and sent millions of refugees to seek asylum in Europe.


    Primary beneficiary: ISIS, with its capital in Raqqa.


    And the hypocrisy charge?


    Though Hillary and Bill Clinton profess to be the fighting champions of women’s equality and gay rights, they have banked millions in speaking fees and tens of millions in contributions to the Clinton Foundation from Islamic regimes under whose rule women are treated as chattel and homosexuals are flogged, beheaded and stoned to death.


    Why do major media let them get away with such hypocrisy?


    Because, ideologically, politically, socially, morally and culturally, the major media are with them.


    While making the case for the indictment of Hillary Clinton, Trump also outlined an agenda with appeal not only to nationalists, populists and conservatives but working-class and minority Democrats.


    If Trump is elected, an economic system “rigged” to enable big corporations to leave and take factories and jobs abroad, and bring their goods back free of charge to kill companies that stay in America, will end.


    “Globalism” will be replaced by “Americanism.”


    Trade and tax policies will be rewritten to provide incentives for companies to bring jobs and factories here. Was this not also Bernie Sanders’ message? He stood against NAFTA in the 1990s when the Clintons colluded with Bush Republicans to impose it.


    In his peroration, Trump spoke of what we Americans had done, how we had lost our way, but how we could, together, make her great again. His finale was surprisingly aspirational, hopeful, inclusive.


    In the political year just ended, several unmistakable messages have been delivered.


    First, the record turnout for Trump and remarkable turnout for Ted Cruz represented a repudiation of Beltway Republicanism.


    Second, the amazing success of 74-year-old Socialist Bernie Sanders in keeping Clinton embattled until California, showed that the Democratic young have had enough of Clintonism.


    A majority of the nation said loud and clear: We want change.


    Hillary Clinton’s vulnerability is that Americans distrust her; no one believes she represents change; and she has no agenda and no vision.


    Her campaign for president is all about her.


    As Trump noted, even her slogan is, “I’m with her.”


    Rough and raw as it was in parts, Donald Trump’s speech on Wednesday contains the elements of a campaign that can win.


    The Best of Patrick J. Buchanan


    Patrick J. Buchanan [send him mail] is co-founder and editor of The American Conservative. He is also the author of seven books, including Where the Right Went Wrong, and Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War. His latest book is Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025? See his website.


    Copyright © 2016 Creators.com



    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/06/t-hunt-tooley/stalin-fdr-best-buddies/


    Copyright © 2016 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are provided.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    People have told the truth about the Clintons for years. They are teflon, it doesn't stick. Her husband was impeached and disbarred. Now he is a "senior statesman". I read that 75% of her voters would still vote for her even if she was indicted.

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    People have told the truth about the Clintons for years. They are teflon, it doesn't stick. Her husband was impeached and disbarred. Now he is a "senior statesman". I read that 75% of her voters would still vote for her even if she was indicted.
    This, she is bulletproof and these people bringing up scandals on Clinton would only make her stronger. The more $#@! throwing I see from Trump supporters, the more it makes me want to vote for her.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    This, she is bulletproof and these people bringing up scandals on Clinton would only make her stronger. The more $#@! throwing I see from Trump supporters, the more it makes me want to vote for her.
    The fact that you would vote for her is very telling.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by silverhandorder View Post
    The fact that you would vote for her is very telling.
    Not a Clinton supporter, just hate the way she is smeared on this site by Trump people

  7. #6
    Burn the witch!

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Not a Clinton supporter, just hate the way she is smeared on this site by Trump people
    Does not change the fact that you would vote for her.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    Not a Clinton supporter, just hate the way she is smeared on this site by Trump people
    Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling…makes no difference. The degree is arbitrary. The definition’s blurred. If I’m to choose between one evil and another, I’d rather not choose at all. Geralt of Rivia



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    This, she is bulletproof and these people bringing up scandals on Clinton would only make her stronger. The more $#@! throwing I see from Trump supporters, the more it makes me want to vote for her.
    I knew if you gave these so called purists enough rope they would eventually hang themselves, congrats you are now dangling.
    Et cognoscetis veritatem et veritas liberabit vos

  12. #10
    Pfft. Pat Buchanan... Look, he's a Hitler lover. He appeals to the really staunch right wacko vote. I guess he's an anti-Semite. He doesn't like the blacks, he doesn't like the gays... It's just incredible anyone could embrace this guy...
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Pfft. Pat Buchanan... Look, he's a Hitler lover. He appeals to the really staunch right wacko vote. I guess he's an anti-Semite. He doesn't like the blacks, he doesn't like the gays... It's just incredible anyone could embrace this guy...
    Lol I like the guy. Now I know you not the person who's opinion matters.

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Pfft. Pat Buchanan... Look, he's a Hitler lover. He appeals to the really staunch right wacko vote. I guess he's an anti-Semite. He doesn't like the blacks, he doesn't like the gays... It's just incredible anyone could embrace this guy...


    Reform Bid Said to Be A No-Go For Trump
    By ADAM NAGOURNEY
    Published: February 14, 2000


    Donald J. Trump has decided to end his brief and flamboyant exploration of a run for president, concluding that the Reform Party, whose support he had sought, was so beset by internal fighting that he would have no chance of winning the White House as its nominee, his associates said last night.

    Mr. Trump will officially announce his decision in a television interview this morning, according to someone close to him. In a formal statement that is scheduled to be released today, he denounced the divisions that have beset the Reform Party in recent months, which he described as ''general fratricide.''

    Mr. Trump's decision came one day after a Reform Party faction backed by Ross Perot, which strongly opposed the prospect of Mr. Trump as the party's presidential candidate, ousted a faction aligned with Gov. Jesse Ventura of Minnesota, who was close to Mr. Trump. Mr. Ventura quit the national party on Friday, calling it ''dysfunctional.''

    Although it is risky to offer any predictions concerning the Reform Party, the latest round of maneuvering seemed all but fatal to any hope Mr. Trump had of filling the position Mr. Perot had held in the 1992 and 1996 presidential elections.

    Mr. Trump asserted in his statement that he believed he could win the party's nomination if he chose to pursue it. But, he said, ''the prospect of divisive lawsuits, continued fighting over the national convention site and general fratricide'' had convinced him that the Reform Party nominee, whoever it may be, would have no chance of victory.

    ''I have consistently stated that I would spend my time, energy and money on a campaign, not just to get a large number of votes, but to win,'' Mr. Trump said in the statement. ''There would be no other purpose, other than winning, for me to run. I have therefore decided not to seek the presidential nomination of the Reform Party.''

    Mr. Trump's imminent departure would appear to leave Patrick J. Buchanan, the conservative commentator, as the leading prospect to win the Reform Party's backing -- providing that Mr. Perot does not decide to make a third go at it.

    Mr. Trump's decision, which was described by his friend as final and unequivocal, ends what had been one of the stranger episodes of the 2000 presidential race. Before six months ago, Mr. Trump had never shown any interest in electoral politics, instead building a large reputation as a developer, casino operator and, by his own boast, skilled publicity seeker and accomplished womanizer.

    The new interim head of the Reform Party, Pat Choate, described Mr. Trump as a ''hustler'' last night, and said he had never believed that Mr. Trump had any interest beyond promoting himself and a new book that happened to be published at exactly the time he started his light schedule of campaign travel.

    ''Donald Trump came in, promoted his hotels, he promoted his book, he promoted himself at our expense, and I think he understands very fully that we've ended the possibilities for such abuse of our party,'' Mr. Choate said. ''We're taking our party back to our very principles, and exploiters such as Donald Trump will not be able to exploit us again -- and he realizes it.''

    ''We saw no evidence that he was a serious candidate at all,'' Mr. Choate said. ''All this was, was a serious hustle of the media, and I think the media should send him a massive bill on it.''

    Mr. Trump apparently anticipated such speculation -- which, in fact, is fairly common in political circles -- and in his statement went out of his way to say that this was more than a frolic. ''For those who suggest that this has just been a promotion, I want to strongly deny that,'' he said.

    He said that although his book and his businesses had probably benefited from the exposure his campaign generated, ''I did not launch my exploratory campaign for that reason.''

    Mr. Trump painted a fairly dark picture of the Reform Party in his statement, noting the role of Mr. Buchanan, along with the roles of David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and Lenora Fulani, the former standard-bearer of the New Alliance Party and an advocate of Marxist-Leninist politics.

    ''The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani,'' he said in his statement. ''This is not company I wish to keep.''

    Mr. Trump reached his final decision after meeting with advisers at his estate in West Palm Beach before flying back to New York this evening. Although Mr. Ventura said he was forming his own new Independence Party, Mr. Trump said he would not seek its nomination for president.

    At La Guardia Airport last night, Mr. Trump told reporters that he might make a decision soon about which candidate he would endorse. He lamented the loss of Mr. Ventura, calling him ''the star of the party.''

    http://www.nytimes.com/2000/02/14/us...for-trump.html
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Pfft. Pat Buchanan... Look, he's a Hitler lover. He appeals to the really staunch right wacko vote. I guess he's an anti-Semite. He doesn't like the blacks, he doesn't like the gays... It's just incredible anyone could embrace this guy...
    Do you have any non-logical fallacy opinions of Pat?

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    People have told the truth about the Clintons for years. They are teflon, it doesn't stick. Her husband was impeached and disbarred. Now he is a "senior statesman". I read that 75% of her voters would still vote for her even if she was indicted.
    Teflon folks don't get impeached and disbarred.

    http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WR...5/strange.html

  17. #15
    Pat Buchanan is pretty awful, yeah. Not surprising that he would be a Trump humper.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Antischism View Post
    Pat Buchanan is pretty awful, yeah. Not surprising that he would be a Trump humper.
    I'd say Pat is more of a HRC thumper.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    I'd say Pat is more of a HRC thumper.
    Is he? I've seen him praising the Trumpster quite often.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Antischism View Post
    Is he? I've seen him praising the Trumpster quite often.
    That how it looks to me. <shrug> I'm more anti-Clinton than anti-Trump, though I actually support neither.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Has Trump Found the Winning Formula?
    Pablum?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  23. #20
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    9,144
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    People have told the truth about the Clintons for years. They are teflon, it doesn't stick. Her husband was impeached and disbarred. Now he is a "senior statesman". I read that 75% of her voters would still vote for her even if she was indicted.
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    This, she is bulletproof and these people bringing up scandals on Clinton would only make her stronger. The more $#@! throwing I see from Trump supporters, the more it makes me want to vote for her.
    She is bulletproof with Democrat voters... not with independents. The swing voters are the ones that matter and they don't hold the blind alliance that robotic Democrat voters do.
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleaner44 View Post
    She is bulletproof with Democrat voters... not with independents. The swing voters are the ones that matter and they don't hold the blind alliance that robotic Democrat voters do.

    Where are they going to go? Trump is just as bad.

  25. #22
    Um... Already did this once, but it was so much fun last time.

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Pfft. Pat Buchanan... Look, he's a Hitler lover. He appeals to the really staunch right wacko vote. I guess he's an anti-Semite. He doesn't like the blacks, he doesn't like the gays... It's just incredible anyone could embrace this guy...
    Quote Originally Posted by silverhandorder View Post
    Lol I like the guy. Now I know you not the person who's opinion matters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronin Truth View Post
    Do you have any non-logical fallacy opinions of Pat?
    Those words were not mine. They were Donald Trump's words speaking about Pat Buchanan.

    So, Silver.... Do you STILL know who's opinion matters?!
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Um... Already did this once, but it was so much fun last time.







    Those words were not mine. They were Donald Trump's words speaking about Pat Buchanan.

    So, Silver.... Do you STILL know who's opinion matters?!
    Touche.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cowlesy View Post
    Americans in general are jedi masters of blaming every other person.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by juleswin View Post
    the more it makes me want to vote for her.



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    “I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul

  30. #26
    If you add up all the numbers in the Yes column you get 207%

    That's uuuuge.

  31. #27
    Supporting Member
    Phoenix, AZ
    Cleaner44's Avatar


    Blog Entries
    4
    Posts
    9,144
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    Where are they going to go? Trump is just as bad.
    Well considering that our elections boil down to people choosing between the "lesser of two evils" I would guess that you are correct, they would go to Trump.

    It doesn't matter how bad Trump is because people tend to vote against someone more than they vote for someone.

    Gary Johnson will be seen as a throw away vote, as will all 3rd party votes.

    The swing voters will choose between Hillary and Trump. This can't be your first time around is it?
    Citizen of Arizona
    @cleaner4d4

    I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleaner44 View Post
    Well considering that our elections boil down to people choosing between the "lesser of two evils" I would guess that you are correct, they would go to Trump.

    It doesn't matter how bad Trump is because people tend to vote against someone more than they vote for someone.

    Gary Johnson will be seen as a throw away vote, as will all 3rd party votes.

    The swing voters will choose between Hillary and Trump. This can't be your first time around is it?
    +Rep!

    In most national elections the independents choose the winners.

    BTW, I really like your signature too.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Suzanimal View Post
    Pablum?
    Maypo!

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Cleaner44 View Post
    Well considering that our elections boil down to people choosing between the "lesser of two evils" I would guess that you are correct, they would go to Trump.

    It doesn't matter how bad Trump is because people tend to vote against someone more than they vote for someone.

    Gary Johnson will be seen as a throw away vote, as will all 3rd party votes.

    The swing voters will choose between Hillary and Trump. This can't be your first time around is it?
    These are strange time we are in. Conventional logic may not apply. Never in modern times have both major party candidates had negatives this high. Something crazy might happen, Johnson has been as high as 12. If somebody like the Kochs or Theil got behind him and plastered LP ads all over TV and the internet, you never know. I mean the UK just gave the EU the boot against all odds.

    But probably American boobus will bring back the Clintons I suppose.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •