Trump Brilliantly Plays the Media

When you think about it, how Trump plays the press time and time again is actually quite brilliant. I mean, think about it. How much press does Trump actually enjoy? Tons. And the funny part is, the media thinks the mostly negative press is seen as negative by the people who see the news coverage.

Granted. Some do. But I think the vast majority of people see through the news that's presented. In other words, you can't take the presentation all that serious.

Whatever you want to call it. MAGA humor. A Trumpism. Even a gaffe. Every time Trump has a rally or does a speech, he throws in specific things that he is fully aware the media will immediately bite at and run off with.

"I don't care about you. I just want your vote," Trump says with a smile, followed by a chuckle. He's not really saying that. He knows that will be the soundbite, though. He knows that's what will get played over and over again while a circle of pundits and commentators poke at it and try to dissect it, omit the context, and make it seem like Trump was making an off-color statement.

Most viewers see the joke, and then what's left is them scratching their heads at the media coverage. "Am I supposed to take this as serious news? That Trump actually said he didn't care about his voters? That doesn't make sense. Why would he say that?"

The thing is Trump words these things in ways that don't make sense quite on purpose. It's masterful, really. Because even out of context and cleverly clipped, the comment is so out there that no one can take it seriously.

It makes the media look like fools. And it makes viewers angry that they are being taken as fools. It also makes it obvious that the media can't be taken seriously.

That last part might be the most important part. Because that's the part that makes the viewer go off on his own to see what Trump actually said. But more importantly, what he meant. And once they do that, that's when the gig is up. 

Some people can't fathom how Trump continues to get bigger and stronger despite every effort to knock him down. The thing is, he gets more visibility because of the media's portrayals. People want to know more and then they go and listen to the full context of what was covered, or even the full speech—often times mesmerized and wildeyedlely (is that even a word?) waiting for some juicy tidbit to confirm Trump's just a crazed idiot who is power hungry.

What they find is a sensible guy saying mostly sensible things, who loves his country and sees America as a good place filled with good people who deserve strong leadership working hard for their interests.

As hard as the media is trying to make enemies for Trump, they are pointing them right into his corner to actually hear his words and his message—and of course they like the message because it's a good one. 

"I don't need your vote. I have enough already," Trump says, and once again the media pounces. "This guy's crazy. Did you hear what he said?"

Yeah. We did. We knew he was joking. We know you can't be serious when you tell us he was serious. 

Trump gains support not only through what he does. He gains it because the media almost forces people to take a closer look at the man and the campaign. And they can't clip what the viewer sees on their own, out of their own interest. They also cannot shape opinions because when the viewer gets the whole story, it will be the only basis for what they ultimately decide.

The funniest part of the joke, though, is when the media and the left take the joke seriously. It is, perhaps, the greatest punchline of all, and Trump is getting the last laugh.

Like the things I write about or the way I write about them? Follow me on my Facebook page or on X to keep up with the latest writings wherever I may write them. Want some free crypto? Check out FreeBitcoin for a fun way to get some.

© 2024 Jim Bauer

One of the REAL Reason Trump's Skipping the Debates

Normally, and under normal circumstances, I'd lambaste someone for not attending any presidential debate, regardless of the side. While I don't think debates are the end all to be all, I do think that they are important to better understand our candidates and what they are running for or on.

Hell, I watch democrat debates all the time simply because I have always felt that in order to disagree with a democrat candidate, I need to know exactly what it is I disagree with. I don't have that answer if I choose not to tune in simply because I assume I will disagree with everything they have to say.

But I side with Trump on his decision not to participate, and it is not because I also happen to be a Trump supporter.

The question is, what substance would we expect to get out of Trump's participation? What could we learn about his plan for America? What could we learn about his thoughts on Ukraine and issues facing us regarding the border? About taxes. About the economy? About inflation?

The simple answer is, we'd learn nothing at all. Because those questions would not be the types of questions anyone would be interested in asking him. It would all be about the false indictments and bogus impeachments and the make-believe January 6th insurrection.

Not a single question he'd be asked would advance his campaign or offer us a better consideration of what he wants to do or will do if he were to be reelected.

Even when it comes to Fox News debates, no one ever bothers to put a real conservative on the panel. They always opt for the lefter leaning hosts. Chris Wallace in one of the 2020 debates all but tried to throw Trump under the bus and frankly trampled all over him disgustingly.

And that's me saying that despite my very real take-away from those 2020 debates that Trump did an extremely poor job at them. But I have been critical of Trump many times in the past for various antics. But it never wavered my thoughts about his presidency, which I think is important.

I continue to be displeased with some of his antics as I think it detracts from the real issues we face and his real answers as to how we solve them, and as I have said time and time again, sometimes his own antics leave him in a spot to make those antics the focus rather than the substance of his message.

People need to hear his message.

But that goes right back to why he's dismissed himself from the debate stage. Even if he does attend the debates, his message will be moot. Because again, no one will ask him about the message. What Trump would essentially be agreeing to by attending the debates would be to accepting an invitation to a literal non-comedic roasting which would focus entirely on things that matter very little to the American people.

In an odd way you could make a comparison here to a jury trial and the right decision many lawyers often make not to put the accused on the stand. Optics. Or the possibility of bad optics which would do more harm than good in defending their case.

In other words, while the optics of Trump's not attending the debates, in the eyes of some, is bad optics in and of itself, the fact is that if he were to attend, the optics may well likely be much worse.

Part of the problem is what debates have really become. Hosts are chosen essentially by what side the particular media outlet has decided they want to support and advance. And so, the questions themselves are often geared toward driving a particular narrative rather than getting to the heart of the important questions.

Trump has also realized this from the 2020 debates specifically. Even if his performance, by my measure, was horrible, I also had to honestly step away and ask myself, was his performance driven by just Trump being Trump, or was it driven by the manner and types of questions he was being asked?

The media has been rife with so much bias anymore that one might even rightly question whether or not debates are even an important part of the question of who is best to lead. As I said before, I have found them to be helpful in order to better understand where candidates are coming from. But is that really true anymore?

The real question is, does it hurt him? I don't know the answer to that. I will say that so far it doesn't seem to have done any damage at all, and in fact, may even be helping him tremendously. The closest second in the race is Ron DeSantis and by every measure he's so far behind Trump right now that in most cases we'd have already decided he stands no chance.

So, the likelihood that Trump will indeed be the GOP nominee appears to be almost imminent. Which is perhaps another reason Trump has decided to bow out of the debates. It's already been decided and so why bother with the debates at all? Just focus on the campaign and reaching out directly to the people who are interested in his message and be able to freely offer the message he wants to deliver instead of the message the media would rather be heard.

Did you know that The Springboard has a YouTube channel? Check it out for discussions of money, investing, business and other related things. You can also follow The Springboard on his Facebook page.

Stormy And Trump Is All Publicity, And Little Else

SO, LET'S JUST BE REAL HERE, SHALL WE? STORMY DANIELS IS HOT. Not only in terms of the stories that she seems to be at the heart of lately when it comes to the latest opportunity for the left to try to damage President Donald J. Trump.

But, she really IS hot.

And despite whatever thoughts even the right may have about her, I would bet my next ten paychecks that ever since the steamy story of her affair with Donald Trump hit the news, her images and her videos have probably hit the roof in web searches.

Yes. Let's face it. We MAY be right-wingers. But we're not dead, and we have interest and curiosity in gorgeous babes just like every other red-blooded American male out there—left OR right.

Ladies, please do not take offense here.

Look, I will have to tell you, in fairness of all honesty. And believe me, I am not alone here in this. I am not in the least bit unfamiliar with porn. Yes, I am on the right. Yes, I am a conservative. And yes, I do fully comprehend that there are a good many people who think porn is downright nasty and horrible, and mind-damaging...

But those who say that, and are emphatic about that, are probably spending more hours a day indulging in porn than the ones who never say a word about it.

It's as taboo for many people in adulthood as admitting masturbating is to a teenager. No matter how many times you try to convince someone, "Oh no, I am NOT doing THAT," we all know what the truth is.

But that's not why I am here talking about this. I just wanted to lay out some reality before I get into my main point about Stormy Daniels and this supposedly sultry story about her dealings with the now President of the United States that the left is so drooling over.

I HAD HONESTLY NEVER HEARD OF STORMY DANIELS UNTIL THIS STORY SURFACED.

Which makes me think, there have probably been a good number of people, left and right, who had never heard of her either. Even if they had stumbled upon her and just didn't recognize the name, or didn't remember it.

I constantly ask the question when stories like this come around, "Why now? Why NOW is this story coming out? And why SHOULD it be coming out?"

By all accounts, regardless of how the left wants to spin this, if she did in fact have a relationship with Trump, which I think she probably did, why has she never publicly said anything about it? To what end? For what purpose?

Well, it could be that her career has been a bit sketchy lately. I mean, she's only 38, and that does not make her old by today's standards (40 is the new 20?), but in the porn industry her career could well be at least somewhat dried up. A little bit of publicity right now could do well for her and her bottom line and she knows how desperate the left is to find any dirt they can possibly find to try to destroy Trump and his presidency.

This is just what the doctor ordered.

She can gain notoriety. She can have name recognition. People will seek her out. They may even buy photos and videos that she was part of. Maybe she even gets a call from one of the big porn outfits to do something new because even if she is 38 there are enough horny men out there eager and anxious to have a closer look at what Trump got to dive into.

Pardon the pun. I am sure that last statement will meet with disgust and controversy.

At the end of the day I have to admit I am a bit remiss as to why this even is a story at all? Of course the left and the lamestream media have done their best to portray this as sort of a call to address the outrage the right had over Clinton's antics while he was president.

But, this was not happening in the White House. This was not happening in the Oval Office. This was not happening while Trump was on the phone with members of Congress. This was not happening in any official capacity whatsoever.

What was it? Sex. Plain and simple. Consensual sex between a billionaire and a porn star.

Of course, it is also a strong attempt by the left to try to discredit the president in some form or fashion and make him out to be a troll, praying on women. It is an attempt to say to the public, "See, for all your outrage for all the left has been accused of when it comes to sexual predation your guy is as guilty."

The only reason Stormy Daniels has chosen to kiss and tell is because there is something to be gained by it. Mostly probably financially. The media is interested, and even if the media does not pay her for her story...

She will sell more of her work almost invariably. And that is what this is really all about. Nothing more than that, folks. Nothing more to see here. She wants a bit of the limelight and she wants to line her pockets with it.

But it will do nothing to damage Donald Trump or his presidency.

And Stormy might be well advised when she cashes in to invest her money wisely and not spend it all in one place. Because very soon this will be old news, especially when the media realizes that no one cares...

And they are off and running on the next big thing they think will bring down the presidency of Donald J. Trump.

Trump Right, Kneeling for Anthem is Disrespectful

President Donald J. Trump is right. NFL players should stand during the national anthem. It is that simple. Aside from all of the arguments about free speech, it has been well established that free speech does not necessarily apply to your place of work. And since the players in the NFL are employees of that organization, the NFL can implement a rule saying players must stand for the national anthem—

And they would be well within their rights to enforce such a rule.

It is actually quite amazing to me the stance that the NFL leadership and owners are taking on this issue since it is all too clear that taking this stance is severely impacting their business. And let's not forget that the NFL is in fact a business. Like any business, it has customers, and those customers (the fans) have made it all too clear, and overwhelmingly so, that they do not support the kneeling of NFL players during the national anthem.

As such, fans have sold season tickets, have stopped watching televised games, have stopped purchasing NFL jersey's and other memorabilia, and even some sponsors have decided to bail fearing backlash from angry fans.

This trend will only continue so long as NFL players continue to undermine the very business that pays their salaries.

Besides the fact that the entire protest is false to begin with, what I do find refreshing is that at least finally the American people are acting like true Americans again—more and more—and not allowing the agenda of the left and the lamestream media to dictate what the interest and conscience of the American people should be.

Stand up guys or you will find yourselves as irrelevant as women's basketball.

Brokered Convention A Win For Hillary

So, we are of course still having to have the discussion, when it comes to the GOP convention in July, that there is a strong possibility of a brokered convention if Donald Trump, the clear front-runner in this presidential race, does not garner the 1,237 delegates he needs to seal the deal on the republican nomination. But why we are having this discussion at all is really the begging question, is it not?

In other circles someone commented to me that, "So you are okay if we break the rules for Trump if he doesn't get the required delegates?" I responded, and I think quite rightly, "Would we even be having this discussion if, say, Ted Cruz fell short of the 1,237 delegates before the convention?"

Of course that ended the discussion. Because the person who made that comment knows all too well that he would be okay if Ted Cruz, or anyone else for that matter, got the nomination without the required delegate count—but because we are talking about Trump here, that changes everything.

Because no matter how many times the GOP tries to give the impression it will support the front-runner, those of us who pay attention to what's between the lines know all too well if the GOP can find any way possible to deny Trump the nomination, that is exactly what they will do.

The thing that I find a little bit surprising here is that for years the republican party has been wanting desperately to find a candidate who can reach reach out and grasp hold of voters who might never even remotely consider voting for any republican candidate.

Donald Trump is doing that.

He is getting support from evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike. He is getting broad support (believe it or not) from women. He is getting broad support from (again, believe it or not) Hispanics. And while he may be falling a little bit short garnering support from blacks, there are still wide swaths of other demographics he is pulling toward the republican party that the party itself has not been able to do for a very long time.

He's even pulling in democrats.

There is another very big factor to keep in mind here and that is that Trump has also provided the republican party a huge (or should I say yuge?) increase in voter enthusiasm and voter turnout—when you look at voter turnout as a whole, enthusiasm and turnout is up 65% for republicans and down 45% for democrats.

How did Barack Obama win, partly? Voter turnout. Voter enthusiasm. Voters all but fell over themselves to get to the polls, and of course there were great efforts by PACs and other groups to load up buses and get voters to the polls to check the box for Obama.

Without a doubt Mitt Romney screwed the pooch on the campaign trail and I lay that down easily as a large contributing factor to his defeat, albeit a nominal defeat, by what was clearly a failed incumbent president. But you can also attribute low voter turnout as a large reason why Romney could not fill the gap. Many republicans were so unenthusiastic, and so not smitten with Romney as the candidate, that they just stayed home. If even a fraction of those people would have gone to the polls, it may have sent Obama packing.

I think even the GOP has to know that, in part, this is precisely why they did not win the last election.

So along comes Trump and gets the juices flowing. It may not be the guy that the republican party had hoped for to bring this along. But nobody else has been able to do it. And instead of embrace the victory this is, they only want to trounce Trump, stay the course, and disenfranchise large swathes of the very voters they have been trying to attract that Trump has attracted. Hell, he has practically laid these voters at the very doorstep of the republican convention.

Of course part of the problem the GOP and other republican and conservative voters have is that he's too brash, he's offensive, he's inexperienced, he's unrealistic, and whatever other word one can derive to relate to, "He will destroy America and bombs will fly."

Horse pockey.

The fact is that Trump is doing exactly what every single other politician has done before him—and I think we can now safely call Trump a politician. Donald Trump is telling the American people what they want to hear. It's that simple. And it is resonating and that is why the voting public is responding the way they are.

Read my lips, no new taxes. You can keep your doctor. We will attack pork barrel spending...

All of a sudden we are actually believing that everything a politician says he will do will actually be done? I mean, really. Are we really trying to say that here? We're trying to say this with a straight face?

When Donald Trump gets into the White House, if that is what happens, he will face the same realities and the same challenges as every single president always does. Not only that, but what defines an administration's accomplishments or failures is also largely dictated by what the focus of the day happens to be. Things happen, things occur in the world that cause presidents to have to shift focus, and of course there are multitudes of people that will surround any president and provide him or her with whatever current intelligence on a variety of issues happens to be...

And with reality front and center courses change.

Why would Trump be any different? I mean, don't get me wrong, he has my support in large part because he will do some things differently to my mind. But there are myriad things he won't do just because he can't, or because there will be enough smart minds surrounding him to give him some very important statistics and data and examinations into what the real and true impact may be of anything he has proposed. And like all president's do, he will change course.

Look, the bottom line for me is that if Trump gets the nomination we may lose the general election. Okay fine. Or we may not. Who really knows, right? Polls have been wrong, pundits have been wrong. It's always so easy to try and make an idea a truth when we all know it's not. But a few things are certain to lose the general and ensure Hillary winds up in the White House. To my mind, and without any doubt, one of those things is to broker the republican convention. If the GOP actually denies Trump the nomination no matter if he has the 1,237 delegates or not, there will be far more anger from the voting public than ever before that their voice is not being heard, that the establishment is rigging outcomes, and that the American people are sheep while the government and all of the power-mongers within the system don't give a flying rats ass about what the people want.

Precisely, by the way, one of the reasons that right now a guy like Trump is blowing it out of the park.

At the end of the day I think we should simply be looking at who out of the remaining three candidates have the most delegates (or two if Kasich finally comes to his senses that he has no chance of winning) and say okay. That's the nominee. Because otherwise what is all this other process about? Why did we waste our time with campaigns at all? Why did we bother to go before the American people and see what they think about who is running? Why waste time with all that if at the end of the day it doesn't matter, and no matter who the PEOPLE want it comes down who the PARTY wants?

Trump: South Carolina And Beyond

I am not sure I will classify the Trump victory in South Carolina as necessarily a commanding lead. But the fact remains that Trump's win was by a margin of 10% over the second place winner Marco Rubio, and of course one of Trump's biggest critics, Jeb Bush, is no longer in the race. We have the Nevada primary coming up this coming Tuesday, and of course the big tell, Super Tuesday, is on March 1st. Something tells me that even if Trump doesn't win in Nevada, although he is predicted to win—again by a double digit margin—I think he will do very well when all of the numbers are in on Super Tuesday. And of course the field is going to narrow after Nevada's Tuesday primary, and by the time we get to the final call after Super Tuesday I think we'll be down to three candidates.

Donald Trump, Marco Rubio, and Ted Cruz. If Kasich's numbers don't add up in Nevada I think he'll drop out. So, perhaps, will Ben Carson.

In my opinion it is still too early to necessarily predicate on the idea that The Donald is an unstoppable force. But if we are looking at just the margins over the course of the campaigns, Trump at least appears to be the presumed nominee. The thought that crosses my mind is how can Trump have his Howard Dean moment in this race? He's said some fairly nasty things, and he said some things in the CBS debate just before the South Carolina primary that not only did not resonate with me, it rubbed a lot of voters the wrong way.

Yet he still won, and it wasn't really all that close actually.

If Donald J. Trump takes home the prize on Super Tuesday I think we can safely assume the republican voters in the caucuses have chosen who they want to see run against whoever is going to be the nominee on the democratic side—who I still think will be Hillary Clinton when all is said and done, and I am fine with that.

When I talk to most of my fellow republicans and conservatives of course I am chastised every which way but Sunday when I mention that I actually am rooting for Trump. Why do I like the guy?

•  He holds nothing back and takes no prisoners.
• He is the ONLY guy I think will actually address immigration reform even if I do not think he will be successful in having Mexico pay for the wall.
• He is the ONLY guy who I think understands fundamentally that trade is good, free market capitalism is good, but that we also have a rigged system that has stacked the deck in favor of OTHER nations while leaving American workers behind.
• Therefore Donald Trump is the ONLY one who is actually going to begin the process of renegotiating trade deals and ultimately to bring back jobs to American workers who badly need better than Walmart jobs to feed their families and pursue the dying American dream.
• He is deeply concerned about the advancement of ISIS, the instability in the Middle East, and takes seriously the very real threat of terrorism in the Homeland.

On the last point, I think all of the candidates left in the race have serious concerns about terrorism as well, and aside from Bush

who I thought was extremely weak on the subject, I think all three top tier candidates—Trump, Rubio, and Cruz—would all take steps to curb the threat from Islamic Jihadists. Trump may take the strongest stance however, and with that said, I do think that while Trump has good intentions, on this issue at least, he is going to have to surround himself with the best military and foreign relations people to get his head wrapped around a strategy that will work, that will circumvent unintended consequences, and that will not cause more damage in an already sticky situation.

The one thing that does sort of twist the knife if you'll let me put it that way is that while Trump is getting all the attention on the republican side, the fact remains that where Trump has missed the mark is on substance. He's missed the how's and the why's and how come's. And I think in a general election this detail is extremely important. When Trump gets to the big stage alongside Hillary Clinton who, love her or hate her, has command of her policy, and is well spoken, Trump cannot rely on personal attacks to get the attention of the American people. He has to shred every single idea and statement that Hillary puts forth. He has to command every single issue. He needs to explain in detail why his policies would work, and why he thinks Hillary's would fail. He has to be tough on Barack Obama and his failed policies, which of course Hillary will tout as grand successes, but not just by saying the president was weak or incompetent, but by explaining in detail why he believes the president's policies were bad, how they affected the American people, and if continued how they will continue to affect the American people.

Substance, at the end of the day, is the one thing Trump has lacked throughout the campaign, and the only thing that gives me pause when deciding whether or not even I—a Trump supporter—can ultimately pull the trigger if I were to vote today. Can Donald Trump have a moment like he had with Jeb Bush in the CBS debate where he called former president Bush a liar in a debate with Clinton? I don't think so. I don't think that kind of an exchange would go over very well at all. Although, I do think he can be tough on the issue of Benghazi—but again the approach as to how you do this needs to be careful and calculated. It can't just be name calling and flame throwing. That won't work in a general election.

So all said I give Trump great props for a job well done up to this point, and frankly because of the bullet point issues I am concerned about personally, would love to see him go all the way and get these important things done like nobody else can or will. But as we draw nearer to the strong likelihood that he actually wins the nomination, he really needs to begin the process now of filling in the blanks, and giving us more than what he has given us in the past—he needs to give us the how's and why's and how come's we've been dying to hear.

Because one thing is certain. Hillary will explain her stuff, and whether it is right or wrong, if Trump can't explain his, hers just sounds more thought out and sometimes reality is not what counts. Perspective is everything, and if Trump is perceived as one who doesn't know his way around things, it will cost him the election without a doubt.

What do you think of Trump pulling out of the last Fox News debate before Iowa?

In a word? Puerile. Look, I like Trump. I think he'd make a perfectly fine president if he does exactly what he says he will do—well, aside from some of the crazier things like getting Mexico to pay for that wall which he will not be able to get done. He won't be deporting anyone either honestly. But this is the sort of thing Trump does that always irritates me, and that is his constant need to make personal attacks which I think simply overshadows his real message and aim. Want to make America great again? I want to let you do that. But that means we need to be substantive. It means we need to be able to take a few dishings out of insult and injury. We need to be thick-skinned. We need to avoid resorting to name calling.

I think what Trump was hoping to do by rallying for the vets cause and funding the Wounded Warriors Project in lieu of the debate was to detract from the real reason he is supposedly not attending the debate.

Megyn Kelly will not be removed as a moderator.

And to me if I may put it so bluntly that is simply childish. It really, really is. Look, one thing we know about Trump—and again I need to make it clear I like Trump, but I also have to be honest with myself here—is that he is a man who gets things done. But he is also someone who is used to getting what he wants. Often times Trump is likely the most powerful man sitting in any board room, or sitting at any negotiating table. He's used to having people nod and do his bidding because they want a piece of the offered prize. They want the opportunity to do business with the mogul. And in some ways that may work well in business, but when it comes to politics, and when it comes to dealing with world figures, and especially when it comes to dealing with the American people, you have to be able to accept that you cannot always win, that you will not always have people on your side on a given issue, and that that's okay. That's a part of the beauty of our system. We have enough trouble with a whiny crybaby in the White House who wants what he wants, and doesn't care if anyone agrees, and uses the mighty pen to push things through other channels against the will of the people, and frankly outside the foundations laid out by our founding fathers.

Trump's antics sometimes inadvertently pares him to what will be considered eventually as the worst president America has ever known—Barack Obama. And I don't think the American people want that anymore, that kind of leadership (and I am using the word leadership very loosely here folks). Perhaps calling Obama a dictator is too harsh, but given the opportunity I think that is exactly what Obama would be. I think it is without question. But Trump's antics in these kinds of matters at least suggests he may have the same attitude.

"Fuck them (the Congress). If they don't go ahead with my plans I'll simply go around them because they are too stupid to understand why it is so important, why it is so grand an idea..."

I can actually hear loud and clear Trump saying something exactly like that. I really can. And if I heard as much from Obama, which even if he has not said the same thing directly his actions certainly imply it more often than not, my jaw would drop. I'd be outraged and appalled. And quite honestly, terrified.

To be quite honest Obama does terrify me, and with the chance that Hillary Clinton might make her way into the White House despite all common sense and logic—I am shitting my pants at a rate far faster than my underwear supply can keep up!

All I am saying here is that enough is enough with the name calling, with the personal attacks, the all night Twitter sprees insulting one for their face, their weight, their whatever. It is simply detracting from what could quite possibly be a remarkable story about a man who conquers the world and restores the country in what could be described as an era of greatest divide since perhaps the Civil War.

Mr. Trump. We've had enough of having a fuck-up in the White House. We've had enough of having a president who has distanced nearly every single foreign leader from us. We need someone strong and strong-willed. But just like the guy with the biggest muscles in the room is not as strong as the guy with the biggest brain, bully with intelligence. Not with insult and low-brow comments. It's as ineffective as the guy with the muscles in the room simply punching someone in the face to get his point across.

Go to the debate. Stand your ground. Be a man. Show us you can do that. Show us you can stand proud even in a situation that may be uncomfortable. Show us you can be mightier than your strongest opponent. After all. Come on. This is Megyn Kelly for God's sake. How the fuck are you going to deal with Putin? Assad? ISIS? Big world issues?

If you cannot deal with Megyn Kelly maybe the naysayers and haters have a point that you may not be as suited to be president as I and others like me would like to believe. Just saying.

Tread Carefully, GOP

Time and time again I have commented that love him or hate him, Trump is leading the charge when it comes to the republican party's race to the White House. Sure, the guy is definitely not what we are used to when it comes to presidential hopefuls. He's crass, abrasive, a bit in-your-face, and I fully understand why some people may find this more than a bit troubling considering the power he might have at his fingertips.

Even I have some doubts of my own. But I am also considering his underlying message, and carefully reviewing the things he has said he wants to do, and trying to determine if there is any credibility there to answer the very important question.

Can he do these things? Of the "crazier" ideas, what is more likely to be in the realm of possibility?

We all know that presidential hopefuls, heedless of what side they are on, want to do a lot of things, and certainly promise to do a lot of things. Whether or not they can actually get anything done depends largely on the ability of presidents to get the House and Senate on their side.

One thing that can be said of Trump? Something he does very well and makes no apologies for? Ruffling feathers. And lately it seems that he's ruffling quite a few feathers in the establishment republican party. It seems to be becoming more and more clear the republican party is more than surprised by how well he's doing in all the polls, leading by miles ahead of the other hopefuls aside from Senator Ted Cruz who is his closest runner to date. It's also clear that many within the establishment GOP strongly felt that Trump would simply be a sideshow that would be fun for a little while, but then quickly fade while the party could get on with its real campaign for the White House.

That has not happened, and the Trump storm does not seem to be slowing at all. In fact, its pace is picking up.

Now New Hampshire is trying to deny that Trump even belongs on the ballot in their primary, citing lack of evidence that Trump is actually registered as a republican. To steal a line from what may well be Trump's opponent on the other side should he win the nomination, "What difference, at this point, does it make?"

Donald Trump has said all along that he will honor whoever happens to be the nominee, and has said that if it's not him, he won't run as an independent. That is unless he happens to be in the lead and is still not nominated. Then it's his choice to do what he wants, because clearly if he is the front runner and is not the nominee, something is rotten at the core of that. The republican party seems to be trying to quietly suggest Trump should not be the nominee, and that the opportunity should go to a "real" republican contender.

The GOP would be wise to not underestimate what is going on here.

I have spoken multiple times about the changing demographic and dynamics of this race on both sides. All signs seem to point that this particular presidential election may be historical in more ways than one. If one thing is certain, and I have said this before, part of Trump's popularity is in fact his distancing himself from the republican party while still running as a republican, and the fact that he is running against the government's business as usual—and that's significant when you consider that the American people are more and more becoming distrustful of their government, and their elected officials. The people are not looking for a politician this time around. At least, that's the take away from the current dynamic. That does not mean it will remain so, and no one can absolutely discount Hillary Clinton yet.

Any effort the republican party tries to make to unseat Trump could well be their very undoing. Nothing will supplant in the minds of voters more dissent for partisan politics and business as usual than denying a clear front runner a nomination. And if Trump resorts to running as an independent, he may well actually still get into the White House anyway.

The republican party needs to follow the voice of the voters. The voice of the people. And they need to be aware that regardless of what the establishment thinks of the guy out front...they also cannot deny that what puts him there is the voters—and can't we all agree that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and the body of people who ultimately help to choose our leaders, need to cognizant and appreciative of what the people want?

Trump may well fall on his own. But that's not something the republican party should be fostering prematurely, or potentially taking steps to decide his fate on their own. If Trump is going to win and become president, I don't think it is going to matter to the voters whether he is an independent or a republican. It's going to matter only whether or not he is the people's choice.

Trump's Hidden Agenda Regarding Fox News

Do not underestimate Donald Trump, and I mean this in all seriousness. Do not underestimate Donald Trump. The man has a proven track record of business prowess and business sense. He pays attention, and this is an all important thing to note. What is he trying to accomplish with his presidential run? He wants to win his way to the White House. It is that simple. It is perhaps the last big notch in his belt. And he may just do it. Sure, of course he wants to make America great again. But the real answer here is that while doing so he wants to go out of this world with a bang. Let's face it. Making it to the White House is perhaps the greatest accomplishment any man in the world can do, and if Donald Trump can do it, it seals his legacy forever.

Trump is speaking to the People. Of course he has enemies. He creates many of them of his own making. The Hispanics for example. But his latest stunt is very telling. He has now dissed Fox News. Who hates Fox News more than anyone in the world? The liberals. The democrats. I said in an earlier post that one of the things that fascinates me about Donald Trump is that he can run with a conservative message and as a republican, but yet still be as far removed from the republican party as one can be. He does not cow-toe. He disregards the establishment. He rolls with his own punches and tells it like it is. He makes no apologies for his positions. I think that the way he is conducting his campaign, the word republican may not even really be in the heart of the discussion about him. It's simply Trump. Somehow he is able to simply be one man running for the presidency, and people are paying attention to him rather than his association with the GOP.

It is absolutely brilliant really and I think you have to give him credit for that.

So, is Trump truly outraged by the coverage by Fox News of his campaign? Is he truly disregarding Fox News as a reputable news source? Or is he simply playing to the swath of voters on the other side of the fence who may otherwise not consider voting republican? What he is essentially trying to say in his campaign is that he is not one of them. He's dissed the party. He's dissed the other candidates running against him. He's dissed the leadership in all parts of the government. And now he's dissed what everyone on the left believes is a news organization that acts like an arm of the republican party and conservatives.

One thing about good business, and great businessmen is calculation. None of these men or women in business are necessarily making decisions on the fly. There is a thought process behind every thing that gets decided. The aim is the gain. The profit. And I happen to think this is exactly what Trump has in mind and is doing when it comes to his run for the White House. His decision to distance himself from Fox News is a calculated decision intended to put him further away from his association with the GOP, plant himself more firmly in the eyes of liberals and democrats as a choice, and of course walk away with the keys to People's House.

I am not going to count my chickens before they are hatched and say Trump has won the race. But I am still watching this whole thing go down with great fascination.