Trump got the second highest vote in history for that caucus and he has never held office. Keep trying to spin that as a terrible loss. Plus the vote was rigged to boost Rubio and then Cruz used dirty tricks to steal votes from Carson. All in all Trump did extremely well considering the B.S. that went on, more of which will emerge soon.
Des Moines, Iowa (CNN)No one ever really doubted that Donald Trump could pull off a major counter-programing feat — even when competing with a GOP debate that was expected to draw millions of viewers.
He did it Thursday night, dazzling a crowd of hundreds of enthusiastic supporters by announcing that he had raised more than $6 million for veterans in one day — $1 million of it from his own checkbook. "We love our vets," he said.
"You know, my whole theme is make America great again and that's what we're going to do —- and we wouldn't have even been here if it weren't for our vets," Trump said.
Even Trump seemed a bit surprised that he had pulled off his stunt: "Look at all the cameras. This is like the Academy Awards," the real estate magnate said as he took the stage in an auditorium at Drake University about 20 minutes after the debate began a few miles away. "We're actually told that we have more cameras than they do by quite a bit, and you know what that's really in honor of our vets."
The rally was a restrained performance by Trump standards. He dispensed with his usual riff about his poll numbers and mostly avoided jabs at his fellow candidates (with the exception of a "low-energy" shot at Jeb Bush).
Instead he delivered a speech mostly focused on the problems veterans have faced when returning from Iraq and Afghanistan — inadequate healthcare and housing, drug abuse, mental health issues and homelessness.
"Our vets are being mistreated. Illegal immigrants are treated better in many cases than our vets and it's not going to happen any more. It's not going to happen any more."
Clearly enjoying his evening away from the debate, Trump also told the audience what could be another media sensation for his campaign: the fact that his daughter Ivanka is pregnant. "Ivanka, I said, it would be so great if you had your baby in Iowa. It would be so great — I'd definitely win!"
Huckabee and Santorum join the party
In a somewhat extraordinary move for someone who has reveled in taunting his rivals, he invited Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum — two candidates who had been relegated to an earlier undercard debate — to join him on stage to speak about veterans issues. While appearing generous, it was also politically savvy maneuver given that the two men were the respective winners of the past two Iowa caucuses, but stuck in the bottom-tier this time around.
Huckabee and Santorum are still well-liked and admired by core Republican voters here in Iowa, even if their campaigns have failed to ignite this time. And their presence on stage with Trump could go a long way toward negating the criticisms from Trump's rivals like Ted Cruz, whose allies have claimed that Trump will be punished by Iowans on Monday for skipping the debate stage.
Santorum, who narrowly defeated Mitt Romney here in 2012, tried to stand to the side of Trump's podium, noting to laughter that he didn't want to be photographed in front of a Trump sign.
"I'm supporting another candidate, but that doesn't mean we can't work together" to honor America's veterans, Santorum said.
Trump will only now speak to Murdoch. This is an open-borders issue. The whole reason Fox, The Wall Street Journal and the whole Murdoch empire wants to sink Trump and promote Rubio.
Today the editors of Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal slammed GOP frontrunner Donald Trump for his opposition to the publication’s long-standing support for open border trade and immigration policies.
The Wall Street Journal, like Murdoch,is decidedly open borders. In 1984, the WSJ editorial board wrote, “If Washington still wants to ‘do something’ about immigration, we propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders.”
Breitbart News has previously exposed how Murdoch is the co-chair of what is arguably one of the most powerful open borders immigration lobbying firms in the country, the Partnership For A New American Economy. Similarly, Murdoch has joined executives at Goldmann Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup in urging Congress to fast-track President Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, which Sen. Marco Rubio described as the “second pillar” of a President Rubio’s three-pillared foreign policy platform.
Trump will only now speak to Murdoch. This is an open-borders issue. The whole reason Fox, The Wall Street Journal and the whole Murdoch empire wants to sink Trump and promote Rubio.
Today the editors of Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal slammed GOP frontrunner Donald Trump for his opposition to the publication’s long-standing support for open border trade and immigration policies.
The Wall Street Journal, like Murdoch,is decidedly open borders. In 1984, the WSJ editorial board wrote, “If Washington still wants to ‘do something’ about immigration, we propose a five-word constitutional amendment: There shall be open borders.”
Breitbart News has previously exposed how Murdoch is the co-chair of what is arguably one of the most powerful open borders immigration lobbying firms in the country, the Partnership For A New American Economy. Similarly, Murdoch has joined executives at Goldmann Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Citigroup in urging Congress to fast-track President Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, which Sen. Marco Rubio described as the “second pillar” of a President Rubio’s three-pillared foreign policy platform.
All it means, as far as Adams is saying, is that Trump is a better negotiator than your garden variety politician, and certainly better than most news outlets. Adams has never said anything pro or con about what Trump says or stands for. Trump understands that there is only one way to lose a debate: participate. He could win the debate, but might also lose. For any of the other candidates to drop out now is just capitulation that Trump's the only one that matters but the possibility of losing the debate is still there so there is no upside to staying in at this point. Any other candidate that dropped out before Trump did would not be able to spin their exit to make it look like they were capable of winning, so they all had to stay in. And in the end the whole debacle has kept Trump in the news cycle and all other candidates paying paying paying to get any airtime at all.
If you're a fan of Trump that's great, but if you're simply a fan of policy wonks who have good ideas and skills but aren't showmen like Trump, it's bad. If Trump wins, all we'll get from here on out are people who play the game better than others. Which is basically how it is, anyway, but Trump's rewriting all the rules.
Pretty much spot on except that I would offer that Trump is playing by the rules, same as everyone else, just better.
I just read Adams now and he is right on top of this and I agree with him. Trump is playing chess while everyone else is playing checkers ...
Moving on, its about picking someone to make the final decision or have the last word on whatever, so to speak, right ? In the perfect world of the benevolent dictator school of thought, we can only hope that that person has not been compromised, bought or corrupted before they get that power. Then they face their biggest obstacle in getting anything done, the corrupt, self perpetuating, monolithic unionized federal bureaucracy and the patronage system. Full of deadwood, waste and willful malfeasance ( EPA anyone ?). It is impossible to fire anyone, we are told over and over again. Says who ? FDR said that government workers should not be unionized because it is counter productive to the job at hand and I agree.
Someone who reaches power outside of the political patronage system, is not beholden to it. If someone should be fired, then it stands a much better chance of happening. Sure it gets tied up in court, but its a beginning. All the idle government owned real estate sitting, untouched because its in someone's district, might get unloaded. yada ... But, finally, maybe it gets done, by someone who knows what they are doing.
Someone has to pick up the kicked can. I want the most qualified and unshackled person doing it and hope that they are doing it for the right and honest reasons.
Is this what it means when no one owns you ? You really do get to call your own shots ? No one can make you show up ?
Heard former UN Amb Bolden last night offer up this pure speculation ... what if ... this was a maneuver (taking advantage of this opportunity) designed to give Trump more sway in the Fall when the final debates happen ?
This is round 2 of Trump vs. Ailes and the Establishment ... , eh ?
Keeping it brief because I'm about to watch a film...
This is not about future maneuvers. There are several issues at play here.
Issue one is that debate moderators should be reasonably unbiased. Megyn Kelly is not. There is a lot of footage of her slating Trump on her own shows. What is the point of having debates if the news the next day is all about a moderator feuding with Trump?
The press release from Fox was in Trump's words childish and insulting and is the main reason he walked. Trump is THE reason the previous Fox debate had the highest ratings in US cable history. They made a fortune from it but now think they can sell him a bad deal? Nope.
Fox is owned by Rupert Murdoch who is an elite globalist that campaigns for open borders, as many of the scumbags do. This sets the agenda at Fox and explains why they will never give Trump a level playing field.
Finally as already mentioned giving Fox the finger and staging his own event makes Trump a hero in the eyes of many Democrats who despise Fox. It is Trump's cross party support that will make him president.
