Couldn't this just as well be 30,000 people coming to see a celebrity or attend a popular event? I wouldn't necessarily infer tons of people coming to see this or that celebrity has any direct bearing on their electability?
No, this is 30,000 people who are concerned that our country is being invaded, and view Trump as someone who will actually do something about it.
Whether you like him or not, I think that Trump's early popularity will translate into a long-term presence for him this election cycle. In 2012, Romney was the early front-runner, and then there was a rather long string of anti-Romney challengers -- including Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, Herman Cain, and Rick Santorum, among others. Each time a new "challenger" to Romney rose up, the media came up with something to pick at, and one-by-one, the challengers fell by the wayside.In Trump's case, we already know all of his scandals, and so no "media revelation" will be able to harm him.On the up-side (for Trump), he has the gift of candor -- saying what lots of people really think anyway, without disguising it in spin in any way. This is the one quality that my twenty-something kids who will vote this time seem to like the most. That seems to be the most important quality to them -- aside from any particular policies.So for those reasons alone, I don't think Trump is going to go away.
I also remember all the road signs for President Romney.Do you know who else packs events to the brim? Sanders. Yet that's more a function of campaigning in staunchly liberal, dense coastal areas rather than burgeoning national support (which begins to taper precipitously in non- lily-white states).You are inferring national electoral outcomes from local geographical and cultural accidents. Your sample is not representative. The polling data--which you refuse to acknowledge for some reason-- show Trump has some serious deficiencies and is less electable than many "RINO" candidates.
I'm a Brit, and our general election gave a surprise result consistent with the rule that people who don't look electable generally aren't electable- the man with weird eyes and an adenoidal voice, and non-centrist rhetoric and policies (left-wing, in this case) lost. How can Trump possibly win with his clown car style and his ridiculous appearance, leaving aside his offensive statements?That's leaving aside the fact, which Alan Kurschner refuses to acknowledge, that his consistent positions are not conservative, and so if you think Donald Trump will do something about your immigration levels then you're extraordinarily naive.
I'm not a brit, but I concur
Among the problems with Trump, which frankly are legion in my mind, is that he's not actually a conservative, regardless of the party appellation du jour.He's not even a RINO. He's plain spoken enough, and in that he's also self-refuting and self-contradictory.Trump isn't a satisfactory candidate for POTUS.
Trump is doing significantly worse than some other Republicans when put up against a Democratic rival in the polls. And he's doing worse at a time when he has some significant advantages. This early, when the election is still more than a year away, name recognition is a bigger factor than it will be later. And Trump has more name recognition than any other Republican candidate. Similarly, people tend to be less careful about who they support when the election is so far off. They're more willing to support somebody in order to send a message, without intending to put that person in office. Trump's newness as a candidate and the initial enthusiasm surrounding a candidacy that's so unusual won't last another fourteen months. And he's not the type of candidate who would be likely to hold up well under long-term scrutiny, with increasingly detailed questions about his policies, increasing efforts to look into his background, etc. His rivals who have held political office for years have already undergone a lot of scrutiny that Trump hasn't experienced yet. Given the unusually high rate at which Trump commits gaffes, his record of gaffes should be far longer in November of 2016, if he's the nominee, than it is now. So, the current situation is favorable to Trump in a series of ways that won't last up until election day. But even with all of those advantages, he's currently doing worse than rivals like Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush when put up against a Democrat in the polls.Alan should explain why Trump's rivals supposedly are RINOs, whereas Trump isn't. Alan could start by explaining what he'd say about somebody like Ted Cruz if Cruz were to make positive comments about single-payer healthcare or affirmative action, for example, like the comments Trump recently made. Why don't such comments make Trump a RINO? Explain how somebody like Cruz is a RINO, whereas Trump isn't. Alan should also explain how Trump would enact his policies without working with, and surely having to compromise with, supposed RINOs in Congress and elsewhere. Even popular presidents, like Ronald Reagan, haven't been able to get anything and everything they wanted. And current polling suggests that Trump won't even come close to something like Reagan's 1984 margin of victory. Besides, isn't one of the common criticisms of Republican leadership, which we often hear from Trump supporters, the notion that the leadership doesn't listen to voters, that they aren't concerned with doing what they were elected to do, etc.? So, how would Trump govern in a way that's consistent with the current anti-Republican-leadership rhetoric of his supporters?