Home | About | Donate

Trump's Self-Inflicted Fall


#1

Trump's Self-Inflicted Fall

Ralph Nader

Donald J. Trump is done. He will not be the Republican Party’s nominee for President. He will not receive the requisite number of 1237 delegate votes to secure a majority going into the Republican Convention in July.

Last June, I wrote a column predicting that Trump would give the GOP nightmares, but that his penchant for “leaving no impulsive opinion behind” would be his Achilles heel. Nine and a half months later, this is what is transpiring.


#2

I really think it's time to stop using Trump as a boogey-man. I honestly feel (in my gut, perhaps) that either democrat can win the general election this year. Trump is a creation of the media (who have started to turn on him or at least tire of him) and Cruz is an unlikeable maniac. Kasich might be trouble but is he really going to be the rebub nominee? In any event, Bernie will do better against all three and we won't have to suffer through a disgusting mud-fest of an election finale. Fear of Trump or the eventual repub candidate is a distraction that just plays into Clinton's hands.


#4

I think this prediction will turn out to be true. The key thing is what will happen with the rules for the Republican convention. As of now, to be nominated a candidate has to have the majority in at least 8 states. That would mean that the only two possible nominees are Trump and Cruz. If the rules are changed then other Republicans can be nominated. If that happens I think after a few rounds of balloting that they will settle on Paul Ryan since he seems to be acceptable to both the establishment and the Tea Party,


#5

I love your posts and understand your anxiety. I feel the exact same way. Conn., Del., Maryland, Penn., and R.I. are voting on the 26th. That's a ways off. I'm sure there are some earlier polls that don't look good for Bernie but momentum is key and he has that. And enthusiasm.


#6

I used to like Nader, but seems he has a chip on his shoulder since his failed attempts for the presidency, and perhaps he's a bit of jealous of Sanders doing so well. I remember hearing him speak in Regina Canada years ago and asking if anyone in the audience shopped at Wallmart, then he demeaned those that did, pointing out that he never did. Not a man of the people in my opinion.


#8

Trump could have been president - instead he chose to be an arrogant, ignorant, ego-driven failure. His MO is all carny huckster, reality-show bully and 12 year-old idiot. He may still pull-out the nomination given the level of Republicon voter's, but he will never gain the presidency.
Even the list of Trump advisers is a freakin joke - like their boss!
https://ballotpedia.org/Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign_key_staff_and_advisors,_2016

The real question is who a RepubliCon nominee will face on the Dem Party side. The business as usual, corruption, war, and banker/Wall Street 1% candidate........or Bernie Sanders, who has shown remarkable strength and commitment to the Common Good and responsible, moral leadership. Sanders integrity and essential vision, his visible truth-telling, and decades of history fighting for change are a real breath of fresh air in the cesspool of politics.........Bernie is right when he says "if we win NY we win the nomination" - so c'mon NY dig deep and support and elect the Real Deal!

Given the stupidity, bigotry and asinine behavior by Trump & Cruz RepubliCon - bagger control of Congress might even be changed. The ignorant idiot even said "its fine if South Korea and Japan build their own nuclear arsenals" - we already have two clearly psychopath nuclear powers.......(not to mention the usual suspects).....


#9

And the underlying assumption of Mr. Nader is that whoever it is that gets the GOP nomination, he will be running against Hillary. I find little to ponder in this column other than Nader's rather rueful regret on what the Trump campaign might have been.


#10

I supported Nader in 2000 and your post makes a good point about educating the youth during his 2000 campaign. Nader's 2000 campaign definitely helped Bernie's 2016 campaign.


#11

I don't know, ice. I like Ralph Nader, because of what he has to say, and for some of the things he's done, such as to usher in the making of better and safer cars than in the past.

It sounds as if Trump really did shoot himself in the foot, but, in the event that he does lose the GOP nomination, it'll be the worse for everybody, since Cruz would probably end up the GOP nominee, which would be even worse. Here's why: Cruz is way smarter, which makes him even more dangerous than Trump.


#12

I like Nader also except he helped to fail the rear engine Chev Corvair. I hope Trump gets the nomination because I think he would be easiest to beat and I think he would do the most damage to the GOP machine.


#14

Way to go, EnemyofWAr!


#15

Trump's political epitaph almost has to read thusly: An awful person who occasionally stumbled into some good ideas.

But that alone still elevates him over a lot of other players, and that should scare everyone.


#16

Great commentary Ralph! Thank you for your insight into the shifting political landscape.

I too, knew Trump was going to blow up. His shoot-from-the-hip style works good in fictitious Hollywood, but not in serious discussions of nuclear foreign policy or domestic pro-choice issues. I suspected Trump was on stage just to make the insurance-scamming Jeb Bush look moderate by comparison. I'm still worried that the Bush crime family will resurrect Jeb "Exclamation Mark" back into the race. After all, Jeb never really quit. He just "suspended" his campaign until his first cousin, Gov Scott Walker of Wisconsin, could tear Trump apart like he did the Union workers in that state. (according to ex-NSA Wayne Madsen Reports, they are cousins.)

This is the payback for Trump humiliating bush in the debates, saying "maybe she should run" after Jeb started sobbing that his mother was a good woman!

Say what you will about Donald Mouth-Dump, but one thing was for sure. His attack on the bush crime family was epic! It included exposing to the wider public the lies GWB used to force the country into the biggest quagmire since Vietnam and an insinuation about revealing just who the real culprits were behind 911 (one in the same.)

Absolutely Priceless!

Trump reminded me some of Ted Turner, "The Mouth from the South". It was just a matter of time before these kind of spoiled billionaires inserted their foot so far down their throats that no morning surgery could save them! They are so used to having the last word and being surrounded by toadies, that they just don't know when to shut up!

Trump is really a case in point why the very concept of a Billionaire, a man worshiped for manipulating others out of a fair share of the Earth's finite resources and wealth, should not even exist in our day and age. Does wealth automatically confer wisdom? Should being super-rich be the only measure of leadership?

Makes me want Nader. What a country and world this could have been if we had kept control of these Robber Barons who we now merely exist under...


#17

This goes out to the posters who:

  1. Work daily to insist on UNIFORMITY in the American public
  2. Work daily to make GENDER invisible
  3. Work daily to repeat the same lies told often

From Mr. Nader:

"He has the highest unfavorability ratings of any candidate, followed by Hillary Clinton. Of women who are expected to vote in the Republican primary, only 24 percent support him and nationally almost 3 out of 4 women oppose him—foreshadowing a certain defeat in November, given his very low standing among minority voters. Even in his victories, Trump has rarely won more than 30% of the Republican primary vote against his competitors."

Translation: It's mostly angry white MALES who identify with Trump. Too many framed the support as "Working White Families."

The terminology--working white families--is the very acme of patriarchal thinking in that it dissolves the opinions/wishes/policy preferences of the WIFE into those of her husband, the "owner."


#18

I missed that in my reading. Instead this jumped out at me: "He has the highest unfavorability ratings of any candidate, followed by Hillary Clinton." Would you please elucidate?


#19

"There are downsides to Trump’s forthcoming fall. Trump took on the corporatist trade treaties and the hollowing out of jobless communities throughout the land. He touted the need for massive public works projects. He consistently condemned Hillary’s support of the Iraq war as Senator, and her lead role in leading the way for the Libyan overthrow and the resultant spreading violent chaos in northwest and central Africa when she was Secretary of State. He stuck it to Hedge Fund billionaires with their brazen tax escapes.

It will be a while before you see a major Republican Presidential candidate stake out these positions day after day." Ralph Nader.


#20

Say what?

What mention of Clinton is there aside from pointing out how dismal her approval ratings how she supported the Iraq war?

I've double checked and there is none. Neither of those statements have anything to do with her winning the nomination one way or the other.

EDIT: ^^ How does pointing out that Trump criticizes Clinton's support of the Iraq war demonstrate an underlying assumption that Clinton will win the nomination?


#21

Yes, she is the only other candidate mentioned, enough said.


#22

No, not enough said. He isn't talking about the Democrat race at all. He mentions Clinton incidentally, both times unfavourably, one time to point out how low her approval ratings are.


#23

Yeah, this is all taking place with no context, give me a break.