May 10, 2011
— Ace I think we all knew this without knowing this. No one talked about Trump last week. A lot of his momentum was just momentum, if you know what I mean.
Momentum arrested, and then reversed.
Donald Trump has had one of the quickest rises and falls in the history of Presidential politics. Last month we found him leading the Republican field with 26%. In the space of just four weeks he's dropped all the way down to 8%, putting him in a tie for fifth place with Ron Paul.
Why? Well, the obvious:
Trump really made hay out of the 'birther' issue and as the resonance of that has declined, so has his standing. In February we found that 51% of Republican primary voters thought Barack Obama was not born in the United States. Now with the release of his birth certificate only 34% of GOP partisans fall into that camp, and Trump's only in fifth place with that now smaller group of the electorate at 9%.
Another poll says the number of birthers was cut in half.
And, as Allah notes, a lot of birthers weren't, and aren't, really birthers. "Birthers" may talk about the birth certificate for a lot of reasons:
1. They really believe the conspiracy theory.
2. They do not really believe the conspiracy theory, but also are not very trusting of Obama and the media, and take a "Prove it" stance.
3. They became sort of surprised (as many were) that there seems to be no clear mechanism for enforcing the Constitution's requirement of "natural born citizen," and for reasons I call "hygienic," wished to make sure this particular part of the Constitution was not ignored as dead-letter and some clear mechanism of enforcement was either created, or an informal method (public pressure) was brought to bear.
4. They generally are sick of Obama getting a pass on everything in life and decided to draw the line here, for whatever reason.
5. They generally want him to produce background information and finally get the vetting Joe the Plumper did, and figured, let's start from birth.
6. They figure any tool to dig up negative information on Obama is a useful catspaw which should be encouraged, not restrained, by conservatives.
Where the mix is now, I don't know. I don't know if the remaining believers are now mostly true believers, or still a mix of people who think there is some kind of hygienic reason or partisan-catspaw reason to push this.
I suspect it's still more the latter kind, the not-really-believers-in-the-theory but believers-in-its-usefulness types. I think they're wrong about that -- I don't think it's useful any longer, and in fact is where the establishment previously thought it was: damaging to those who push it.
It's not so much that he's damaged by the implosion of this issue, so much as he was only elevated by it, and now that it's more or less gone, so too his elevation.
Of course he is also damaged. If you build a house on shaky ground, it's going to collapse, and you'll look like a foolish builder.
Candidates still can learn a lot from Trump: The party is eager to embrace a tough-talking candidate who treats Obama as what he is, and what he always has been: A professional politician, remarkable only for his ambition and narcissism.
I do not believe that any old attack will work. Some attacks are easier to sell, some are harder; some will resonate, and some will mostly just damage the candidate offering them. But the stronger attacks can and should be made.
Question: Did Trump's profanity-laced speech hurt him too? I know a lot of people thought it would. I actually didn't think it would hurt him much, given the crowd's positive reaction, and given, too, the base's strong desire to hear Obama treated dismissively. (Yes, I know I'm confusing two things, because Trump's f-bombs were about pressuring the Saudis and Chinese.) So I thought he'd be given a pass, even by those who normally reject profanity.
Not a full pass. More like Chris Rock's joke about O.J. killing his wife: "I'm not saying he should have done it. I'm not saying any man should kill his wife. I'm just saying -- I understand."
But I could be wrong. Hell, look, based on my track record: I probably am wrong.
Posted by: Ace at
10:41 AM
| Comments (86)
Post contains 747 words, total size 5 kb.
Posted by: Dr Spank at May 10, 2011 10:45 AM (1fB+3)
Posted by: Goober at May 10, 2011 10:46 AM (Q5+Og)
Posted by: JackStraw at May 10, 2011 10:48 AM (TMB3S)
Posted by: Goober
*Ahem*. That would be 'second' smartest man alive.
Posted by: VP choo-choo Biden at May 10, 2011 10:48 AM (Gzv/o)
Nyeah, I wish Trump hadn't shot his wad on the birth certificate. I wish he'd started out making noise about the Transparent Genius's school records.
Posted by: arhooley at May 10, 2011 10:49 AM (80Ah7)
That's ok then, because Obama has selected the Republican he wants to run against in 2012. Drum roll, please........ it's Mitch Daniels! Yea! Mitch is even more a beta male than McCain was! Bonus!
Posted by: Marie at May 10, 2011 10:49 AM (H50jQ)
Posted by: Tough US Immigration Policies at May 10, 2011 10:49 AM (x/4B/)
Posted by: pedantic at May 10, 2011 10:49 AM (qSveF)
Posted by: rdbrewer at May 10, 2011 10:50 AM (95cYb)
... pegged this one right.
I have that thought a lot.
Self-affirmation is important part of any relationship.
Posted by: Michelle Obama's Landing Strip at May 10, 2011 10:50 AM (KNsCP)
I hope the prez doesn't release his transcripts because, right now, most Americans don't believe he's qualified to hold his current job or most others. Releasing his grades, if they're good, only hurts that belief.
Posted by: Dr Spank at May 10, 2011 10:50 AM (1fB+3)
A lot will happen in the next 18 months.
Trump's whole thing lasted, what, 4 or 5 weeks?
We're not even talking about Charlie Sheen, anymore. Trump is just the beginning of many GOP "rise and falls" between now and November 2012.
Posted by: Soothsayer at May 10, 2011 10:50 AM (uFokq)
This is pretty much why I want Christie to run. No one would do this better than he would. Plus the comparison between the out of control spending while lying about it and the straight talking guy who actually is getting spending under control in a straight forward way would be great.
Oh well, there's always...Tim Pawlenty.
Posted by: DrewM. at May 10, 2011 10:51 AM (2f1Rs)
Posted by: El Kilo at May 10, 2011 10:51 AM (le5qc)
So he has done a service to the cause by throwing his hair into the ring.
Posted by: Nighthawk at May 10, 2011 10:51 AM (OtQXp)
Posted by: MWR at May 10, 2011 10:52 AM (4df7R)
But Juan Williams and Kirsten Powers say Ron Paul is in the lead!
Posted by: Vic at May 10, 2011 10:52 AM (M9Ie6)
I would put the drop at 50/50 between showing the BC and the profanity.
Posted by: Rocks at May 10, 2011 10:52 AM (Q1lie)
Posted by: El Kilo
Gesundheit.
Posted by: VP choo-choo Biden at May 10, 2011 10:53 AM (Gzv/o)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 10, 2011 10:54 AM (SY2Kh)
I asked Obama the tough questions.
"Was it hard to keep the mission a secret?"
"Did you tell Michelle?"
"Were you nervous?"
"Can I massage your ball bag, for you?"
Posted by: I'm Steve Croft at May 10, 2011 10:55 AM (uFokq)
I think Trump was also hurt among the grassroots when the Democratic connections started falling out of the closet.
I will admit, I was partially turned off by the F-bombs and the sheer lunacy of his arguments. It was...Obamaesque.
We here have derided Obama from the begining for his lack of tact and his essentially demeaning the office of the presidency (a solemn and respected position) with doing things like commercials for George Lopez, and handing out ipods to foreign royalty. Trump's antics would have further exacesbated this condition.
Second, Obama believed a version of the Underpants Gnomes guide to the presidency: that by merely being Obama, decades old problems would cease to be in the face of his awesome. Trump too indulged in this fantasy in his speech, and I and many others like me were probably turned off to the sheer naiviety of assuming that telling the Chinese to back the fuck off or whatever would somehow work, or something.
Posted by: JollyRoger at May 10, 2011 10:55 AM (NCw5u)
But I could be wrong. Hell, look, based on my track record: I probably am wrong.
If profanity-laced attacks on Obastard are wrong, I don't wanna be right.
Posted by: Reactionary at May 10, 2011 10:55 AM (xUM1Q)
Posted by: MWR
Problem is, anyone who hangs out here isn't in a position to know. This is the opposite of the Park Central broad who was shocked when Nixon won, saying "I don't know of anyone who voted for him". If we're here, then Trumps's speech rolled off and went on by.
Posted by: Blue Hen at May 10, 2011 10:56 AM (Gzv/o)
Posted by: El Kilo at May 10, 2011 02:51 PM (le5qc)
Yo le doy mi lealtad a la bandera de los Estados Unidos de America. Y a la republica que representa, una nacion, bajo Dios, indivisible, con libertad y justicia para todos.
(Just throwing out some of the spanish I remember from high school. I find it highly ironic that the thing I remember best is the Pledge of Allegiance.)
Posted by: MWR at May 10, 2011 10:56 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Damiano at May 10, 2011 10:58 AM (3nrx7)
Oh, and #7:
Suspected there had to be -something- other than the actual crucial bits "Mother, Father, Location" that he didn't want out.
That is: Religion, name change, race, -something-. (Not saying I'd think they're that big a deal, but Pres. Thinskin would probably take a lot more than 16 hours to decide if he wanted to release "Religion: Jewish" or something.)
And #8:
Let's get this one the freak over with so we can move on. Staked, beheaded, burnt, ashes immersed in Holy Water then consecrated and eaten by piglets.
Posted by: Al at May 10, 2011 10:58 AM (MzQOZ)
Just spit-balling here:
How about Gov. Brewer throwing her hat in the ring?
She's been flaky on some really important shit lately, which is a shame because she did some great work with immigration and Constitutional Carry.
But the real killer is that she's got a voice like a career Las Vegas cocktail waitress.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 10, 2011 10:59 AM (7YzRS)
Posted by: That thing on Trump's head at May 10, 2011 10:59 AM (RD7QR)
Posted by: robtr at May 10, 2011 11:00 AM (MtwBb)
Posted by: John McCain (Maverick - Maverick Land) at May 10, 2011 02:59 PM (OWjjx)
Hah!
Question. If southern Arizona were to become it's own state, would that mean Northern Arizona could foist John McCain on them and elect someone who isn't a squishy squish?
Posted by: MWR at May 10, 2011 11:01 AM (4df7R)
I'm glad Trump will probably be gone, but I'm not sure we are out of the woods yet with him. I don't know if he was a positive on net, but I think that he showed the Republicans want a strong, vocal candidate.
Posted by: Paper at May 10, 2011 11:01 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: robtr at May 10, 2011 03:00 PM (MtwBb)
And don't forget he was barefoot. He gave his boots to a starving, homeless Pakistani urchin he saw sitting in front of the compound. What a great American he is. So brave. So selfless. So gutsy.
Posted by: MWR at May 10, 2011 11:04 AM (4df7R)
Did Trump's profanity-laced speech hurt him too?
Fuck no.
First, almost no one saw it. Second, it's Trump. People who object to "fuck" object to him, as an embodiment of vulgarity (the other kind), no matter what he's doing, whether he says "fuck" or not.
"OMG he said f*** I'm all [vapors and/or rage]" is a personality type no "outsider" politician can appeal to. It's why the Huckabites hate Palin.
Posted by: oblig. at May 10, 2011 11:04 AM (xvZW9)
Posted by: Damiano at May 10, 2011 11:04 AM (3nrx7)
I still can't help but be bewildered that a significant number of people considered Donald Trump a legitimate choice as Republican nominee.
No matter which candidate wins the primary, he'll "go after" Obama- a race against an incumbent is a referendum on the current President. They all know that once the general election campaign begins, criticizing Obama is going to be central to their campaign.
They won't be able to go as negative as the Republican base would like- make it too personal or virulent and it'll backfire. Negative attacks work, but only to a point- the public only has so much tolerance for them.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 10, 2011 11:04 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Paper at May 10, 2011 11:05 AM (VoSja)
Posted by: Paper at May 10, 2011 11:06 AM (VoSja)
I suppose he may yet follow through on his threat of a third party run, but hopefully he's been diminished for that also.
Posted by: Dave R. at May 10, 2011 11:06 AM (UZeV0)
Posted by: Paper at May 10, 2011 03:05 PM (VoSja)
Name recognition.
Posted by: DrewM. at May 10, 2011 11:08 AM (2f1Rs)
Anyone but am Mitch Daniels, please.
Sorry, I trained seal or pet rock could destroy Prez'nit Gusty in a foreign policy debate.*
Daniels is self admittedly not up to the job. Move along, nothing to see here.
It was a dumb thing to say, or at least a dumb way to word it.
He should've said that as governor he's focused on serving his state, but looks forward to debating Obama's foreign policy if he decides to run.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at May 10, 2011 11:09 AM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Damiano at May 10, 2011 11:10 AM (3nrx7)
Posted by: Damiano at May 10, 2011 11:11 AM (3nrx7)
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at May 10, 2011 11:12 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: BruceTheRobert at May 10, 2011 11:13 AM (re6ik)
Former GodfatherÂ’s Pizza CEO and radio talk show host Herman Cain was a surprise victor in a straw poll of GOP presidential candidates held at State RepublicansÂ’ 29th Annual Spring Gala on Friday.
Cain took 54 votes of 357 votes cast. He edged out former Massachusetts Gov. Willard “Mitt” Romney (52) and Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels (51). Daniels has yet to decide whether he will run.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who has said he will not run, took 39 votes. Ex-Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty had 28, Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin 22, ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich 14, and ex-Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee also 14.
Trailing were Rudy Giuliani with 12 votes, Donald Trump and Rep. Ron Paul with 10, Rep. Michele Bachman at 9 votes, Jeb Bush and Sarah Palin at 8 votes apiece, ex-Sen. Rick Santorum with 7 vote
http://tinyurl.com/44zgqd9
Posted by: Tami at May 10, 2011 11:13 AM (VuLos)
Posted by: ann althouse's unrepentant obama-voting finger at May 10, 2011 11:14 AM (Y1DZt)
Lets just say that OJ's acquittal had very little to do with what OJ did and more with me!
Posted by: Zombie Johnny Cochran at May 10, 2011 03:12 PM (OWjjx)
Actually it had more to do with me
Posted by: Jury nullification by racist black LA jurors at May 10, 2011 11:14 AM (M9Ie6)
That's why I think its a major mistake not to release the bin Laden photos, and to dump his body immediately. Not to persuade the true believers, but to persuade the squishes who are going to listen to somebody "just asking questions" about the "coverup".
Posted by: Dave R. at May 10, 2011 11:14 AM (UZeV0)
Posted by: Zombie Laura Branigan at May 10, 2011 11:15 AM (oDMwn)
Posted by: joeindc44 at May 10, 2011 11:19 AM (QxSug)
Posted by: George Orwell at May 10, 2011 11:26 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: polynikes at May 10, 2011 11:27 AM (RuYVo)
Posted by: Goober at May 10, 2011 11:28 AM (Q5+Og)
Greg Gutfeld seems to agree with you. Can't find a more complete clip right now, but McCotter himself didn't seem to want to do it when Greg asked him right after this clip. Granted it's Red Eye so I'm not sure how serious anybody is being.
Posted by: Guy of Gisbourne at May 10, 2011 11:33 AM (kNi8z)
Oh, and #7:
Suspected there had to be -something- other than the actual crucial bits "Mother, Father, Location" that he didn't want out.
That is: Religion, name change, race, -something-. (Not saying I'd think they're that big a deal, but Pres. Thinskin would probably take a lot more than 16 hours to decide if he wanted to release "Religion: Jewish" or something.)
And #8:
Let's get this one the freak over with so we can move on. Staked, beheaded, burnt, ashes immersed in Holy Water then consecrated and eaten by piglets.
Put me down for 2,3,4,5,6, and,8. I'd say #7 is redundant with #6, plus I knew that they don't put religion on birth certificates (or on much of anything else). I'm just concerned that the lack of any damning information could inhibit the next stage of #5. What we learned from the BC thing is that Obama is willing to put a lot of people - including his allies - to a lot of trouble and expense simply for the sake of his narcissism ("How dare anybody question me?"). Hell, didn't he sit back and allow some poor guy go to jail somehow, rather than spend five seconds signing a letter? This strikes me as being downright dangerous for a person in his position. How much destruction is he willing to cause for the sake of his fragile ego? Ironically, however, what the public may have come away with is "See, those birther guys were just a bunch of conspiracy kooks."
Posted by: Optimizer at May 10, 2011 11:43 AM (F56VB)
You think this means ANYTHING? ... You think I don't understand, what have you done for me lately?
I've been bankrupt so many times... This means NOTHING...
Now, about those Columbia and Harvard transcripts?
Posted by: The Donald at May 10, 2011 11:47 AM (Xv7f/)
We shouldn't forget Republicans wanting to introduce bills allowing foreign-born folks, specifically Arnold Shwantzenkegger, to be eligible to run for President, either.
So much for a bunch of jerks yearning for that shining knight to come save them. A good lesson there for the folks falling for the Daniels and Christie show.
Yes, the f-bombs hurt Trump. If you sound like a dimwit, you fall fast. Ask Doctor "Yearghhhhhh!" about that one if you don't believe me. Gratuitous f-bombs are purely amateurish. Even newbie standup comedians find out fast that the f-bomb is a tool, and if it's used wrong, it backfires.
Posted by: K~Bob at May 10, 2011 11:49 AM (9b6FB)
Posted by: dread pirate roberta at May 10, 2011 11:56 AM (+BLsW)
Posted by: Optimizer at May 10, 2011 12:05 PM (F56VB)
Posted by: laceyunderalls at May 10, 2011 03:02 PM (pLTLS)
Not me.
You mean the Thad McCotter (R-UAW)?
Voted in favor of forced unionism, i.e., union card check?
http://www.nrtwc.org/card-check-roll-call/
Voted in favor of continuing union-friendly project labor agreements?
Voted to over ride President Bush's veto of the 2008 Farm Bill, which, until Obama's Porkulus was the largest spending bill in US history?
Voted in favor of creating Obama Motors and its UAW bailout?
Mitch Daniels looks like Rand Paul compared to McCotter.
Posted by: RINObama at May 10, 2011 12:08 PM (Xv7f/)
Chris Rock? I thought for sure I heard Sam Kinison do this routine.
Posted by: Rod Rescueman at May 10, 2011 12:09 PM (HwE/1)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at May 10, 2011 12:15 PM (/gY+v)
Getting in a pissing contest with Trump is like wrassling with a pig. You get muddy, Trump enjoys it.
Or, in snooty liberal highbrow terms, Trump is like Antaeus, who, when flung to the ground, rose up rejuvenated.
Either way, Trump will be back, louder and brasher than ever. I give it about a month before he is in the spotlight again, enjoying the attention.
Posted by: Sweet Lou at May 10, 2011 12:21 PM (irk3g)
Posted by: Frank Marshall Davis' Genetic Sewage at May 10, 2011 01:05 PM (wOaLi)
Next question -- the REAL question, lost in the fray -- and the one Obama was probably trying to dodge with the birth certificate red herring from the get go:
Is a Natural Born Citizen the same thing as a Citizen at Birth???
The second is defined in the US Federal Code, the first is not.
Bueller? Anyone? Anyone?
Donald Trump, have you the balls to take this one up?
Posted by: starboardhelm at May 10, 2011 01:17 PM (ctMcG)
Just spit-balling here:
How about Gov. Brewer throwing her hat in the ring?
She's been flaky on some really important shit lately, which is a shame because she did some great work with immigration and Constitutional Carry.
But the real killer is that she's got a voice like a career Las Vegas cocktail waitress.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at May 10, 2011 02:59 PM (7YzRS)
Fuck, no. She's my governor and I don't want her here, much less as President of the USA.
Oh yeah, the immigration thing worked out real well, huh? She went and made nice-nice with good old buddy Barack in Washington. We're now spinning our wheels in court and going nowhere - and she's said nothing since her big "meeting."
Posted by: soulpile is... expendable at May 10, 2011 01:28 PM (Mk/IQ)
Meanwhile, y'all, Bobby Jindal has produced his birth certificate. Pointless, as who would vote for this guy?
The above statement is sarcastic as I would vote for Bobby Jindal in a red hot minute; or as cajuns say, I have some freesons (goosebumps), pad nah, (partner)thinking about Jindal, in 2012 debating dat coo-yan (foolish) peeshwank (little person, aka JEF)...and may a gris gris (curse) be put on all Dimmicrats.
If Jindal runs, baby, laissez les bons temps rouler. He may be just who I have been praying for.
By the way, I can't take much more of The Won.
Posted by: ChristyBlinky at May 10, 2011 03:08 PM (FnRYN)
Posted by: not the droid you seek at May 10, 2011 03:27 PM (6MNtp)
So it doesn't hurt to have some gadfly fluttering around and drawing unforced errors -- so long as nobody actually considers them to be serious candidates.
Posted by: cthulhu at May 10, 2011 05:38 PM (kaalw)
Posted by: km at May 19, 2011 08:01 PM (zzXIh)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2593 seconds, 214 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: Blue Hen at May 10, 2011 10:45 AM (326rv)