web analytics
August 25, 2016 / 21 Av, 5776

Posts Tagged ‘election’

Donald Trump: ‘Our Greatest Ally in the Region [is] Israel’

Friday, July 22nd, 2016

GOP candidate Donald J. Trump accepted his party’s nomination for president Thursday night at the fourth and final night of the 2016 Republican National Convention in Cleveland, Ohio.

Introduced to the packed arena of 50,000 delegates, the political novice opened with a small smile, and a question. “Who would have believed when we started this on June 16 that the Republican Party would receive almost 14 million votes — the most in the history of the party? The Republican has party received 60 percent more votes than it received eight years ago,” he said. By comparison, the Democratic Party received “20 percent fewer votes than it received four years ago … not so good. Not so good,” he shook his head.

“Together we will lead our party back to the White House and we will lead our country back to safety and peace… But we will also be a country of law and order,” he said. “Beginning on January 20, safety will be restored,” he said.

But it was in the foreign policy section of his speech, that Trump focused on the issue of world terror, and in particular, the situation in the Middle East. He noted it had become “worse than it has ever been before.”

“After four years of Hillary Clinton, what do we have? ISIS has spread across the region, and the entire world,” Trump declared. “Libya is in ruins and our Ambassador and his staff were left helpless to die at the hands of savage killers. Egypt was turned over to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, forcing the military to retake control. Iraq is in chaos. Iran is on the path to nuclear weapons. Syria is engulfed in a civil war and a refugee crisis, and now threatens the West.

“This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: death, destruction, terrorism, and weakness. But Hillary Clinton’s legacy does not have to be America’s legacy,” Trump said.

“A change in leadership is required to produce a change in outcomes,” he noted.

“Once again, France is the victim of brutal Islamic terrorism. Men, women and children viciously mowed down. Lives ruined. Families ripped apart. A nation in mourning.

“The damage and devastation that can be inflicted by Islamic radicals has been proven over and over — at the World Trade Center, at an office party in San Bernardino, at the Boston Marathon, at a military recruiting center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. And many many other locations.

“To protect us from terrorism, we need to focus on three things,” Trump said.

“We must have the best — absolutely the best — gathering of intelligence anywhere in the world. The best.

“We must abandon the failed policy of nation-building and regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, in Libya, in Egypt and in Syria.

“Instead, we must work with all of our allies who share our goal of destroying ISIS and stamping out Islamic terrorism and doing it now, doing it quickly.

“This includes working with our greatest ally in the region, the State of Israel.

“Recently, I have said NATO is obsolete because it did not properly cover terror, and also that many of the member countries were not paying their fair share. As usual, the United States has been picking up the costs,” he said.

“Shortly thereafter, it was announced that NATO will be setting up a new program in order to combat terrorism.

“A true step in the right direction,” he commented.

Hana Levi Julian

Trump, Clinton, Terrorism, and the Election

Sunday, July 17th, 2016

{Originally posted to the author’s website, Emes Ve-Emunah}

Well, it’s beginning to happen. It seems that my unwelcome (even by me) prediction that Donald Trump will be the next President of the United States is not as remote as many people believe.

Conventional wisdom has long ago ‘left the building.’ The idea that a self-centered, erratic, megalomaniac like Trump would have even the remotest chance of being nominated by a major political party for President of the United States is now the reality of our time.

His comments on a whole host of issues are so repugnant that at any other time in history he would have been laughed out of contention in very short order. The media and just about every political pundit has been relentless. He has been ridiculed extensively by comedians on late night TV. He has been condemned by prominent politicians in his own party. He managed to alienate past Presidents and Presidential candidates of his own political party. Many of whom will be boycotting the Republican National Convention. And even those that have reluctantly endorsed him have vehemently disagreed and even condemned many of his statements and proposed policies. Including Mike Pence, the man he has ostensibly chosen as his running mate.

I do not recall anything like this even remotely happening in my lifetime. And yet the latest poll shows Donald Trump in a dead heat with Hillary Clinton in the general election with 40% of the electorate saying they will vote for Trump and 40% saying they will vote for Clinton. With Trump leading among independents!

When I made this prediction I said then that it didn’t seem to matter what Trump said or did. Republican voters voted for him anyway… as if he never said or did anything wrong. This is the mood of the country, or at least a majority of it.

The counter to that was along the lines that it is only unenlightened Neanderthal Republicans that voted for Trump. The general election will include a much smarter electorate that will overcome that voting element.

Well, that is not what is happening. Trump started out well below Clinton in initial polls just after his nomination was assured. But now that Clinton has been proven to be a careless and sloppy liar she is deemed less trustworthy the Trump. Which I believe is the reason for Trump’s recent bump in the polls.

Now many people will say that this bump is temporary. Perhaps. But I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. Sure, Trump will continue to be his unpredictable boorish self. But as I have been saying, that doesn’t seem to matter in this strange political year. What does matter is the impact of radical Islam on the world. And what happened yesterday helps Trump. He does not speak softly and carry a big stick. He roars! His ideas may not be realistic. But this is what a lot of people want to hear right now. They want to hear tougher talk about terrorism – and its Islamic source. A lot tougher than what has been coming out of the administration and the Democratic candidate.

Yesterday in what seems to have become a weekly affair, over 80 people were killed in Nice, France while they were celebrating Bastille Day (France’s equivalent of our Independence Day). Mohmaed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, a  Muslim citizen of France drove a huge truck at high speed into a crowd watching fireworks at a beach. The truck mowed people down in its path. He then exited the truck and started firing a gun at people until he was shot and killed by the police.

Islamic terrorists have managed to murder masses of innocent people in Nice, Paris, Belgium, San Bernardino, Pakistan, Orlando, and Netanya. All in a relatively short span of time.

The response of the administration and Mrs. Clinton is to ignore the ideology and combat the terrorists. As though terrorism is the problem and killing terrorists is the goal. But terrorism is not the problem. It is the means of a radical religious ideology that wants to take over the world by any means necessary. You don’t fight an ideology by killing their adherents that commit these attacks. You have to devise a way to fight the ideology. And the first order of doing business is to identify the source of that ideology. You have to identify the enemy, not only the means they use.

Clearly Islam is what motivates them, even as it is being called a perversion of Islam by many Islamic clerics. It is not a perversion. It is a version. An ancient version that is militant in pursuit of its goals. And more than a few Muslims believe in it. It has been resurrected in our time by radical Muslim clerics. These are religious ideologues that are willing to die for what they believe is a  ‘Kiddush HaShem’ screaming Alahu Achbar! They are not perverted lone wolves but a theological movement where terror is a legitimate tool in seeking a world Islamic Caliphate. Which is the ideology of ISIS, Al Qaida, and every other Islamic Jihadist group.

This is why people like hearing things like banning all Muslims. Even-though most Muslims are not terrorists and in many cases themselves victims of Islamic terror. And even though it is racist and unconstitutional to ban people because of their religion… the American electorate sees Muslim religious fanatics perpetrating violence all over the world inspired by an ideology being promoted worldwide via the web. And they like hearing what Trump is saying – even if they will not publicly say so.

Among the collateral damage from terrorist attacks like this is the boost in Trump’s poll numbers. There is little doubt in my mind that Trump is seen as tougher on terror than Clinton, whose policies are more or less the same as Obama’s. Which is not surprising since she was his Secretary of State.

People want change. The more terrorist attacks we have like this in the world… the more impotence the world seems to  have. This then makes Trump – with all of his flaws – very attractive. What about all that erratic shoot from the hip behavior? What about his diarrhea of the brain? I don’t think the majority of the electorate cares about that anymore. They simply want change and Trump is unquestionably change. An unprecedented one.

Which is why the selection of a Vice Presidential running mate is so important. Because in Trump’s case, he knows deep down that he has no clue about how to govern. He is going to rely more on his VP than George W. Bush did on his VP, Dick Cheney. Which makes his choice of Governor Mike Pence an important one. As a religious Evangelical Christian Pence will solidify the support from the social conservative base of the Republican Party. He also was known as a consensus builder when he was a member of the House of Representatives. He was well liked among his peers and has an even keeled temperament, which is something that Trump doesn’t know the meaning of.

My prediction is that in the next poll, Trump will take the lead. Especially if he can shut up for five minutes! Which he needs to do. He’s already established his bonafides as an attack dog who does not care where the chips may fall. Now it’s time to win over the more level headed voter that is turned off by such disgusting rhetoric. Maybe the soft spoken Pence can accomplish that.

Clinton on the other hand does not have all of Bernie Sanders supporters on board yet. All the enthusiasm he generated during the primaries has dissipated. I’m not sure all the support Bernie got will now accrue to Clinton. She may get most of it. But she needs all of it – and the enthusiasm that goes along with it. I don’t think she will get it. And her negatives are higher than Trump’s!

As far as I am concerned, I will still hold my nose and vote for Hillary. I prefer a continuation of the status quo – as bad as it is – over the uncertainty and possible chaos that will ensue from a Trump Presidency. Either way, God help us all.

Harry Maryles

MK Ahmed Tibi: “I Would Vote for Bernie Sanders in the US Election”

Thursday, June 23rd, 2016

On IDF radio this morning, Member of Knesset Ahmed Tibi announced that he would vote for Bernie Sanders — if he could vote in the US presidential election.

Tibi said, “All Palestinians and most Arabs would vote for Sanders…the candidate’s political views are more important than their ethnicity.”

Now that’s a ringing endorsement if I ever heard one.

Jameel@Muqata

Hillary Clinton Makes History as First Major Party Woman Nominee, But Bernie Sanders Refuses to Quit Race

Wednesday, June 8th, 2016

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday night, making American history as the first woman to lead the ticket of a major political party in a national race.

Clinton’s rival, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, is however nowhere near to capitulating, even though he finally lost the California primary after what was, admittedly a very tough fight.

Speaking to supporters in Santa Monica towards the end of the evening while still waiting for final primary results Sanders said in a cracked voice from the podium: “The struggle continues. Next Tuesday we continue the fight in the last primary in Washington DC!” (He is under pressure from the Democratic Party leadership to ‘let go, already,’ so they can pull together the delegates for the fight against Donald Trump.)

In response to his fiery passion, the packed house roared, shaking and waving blue-and-white signs that read, “A Future to Believe In.”

“We are going …we are going …we are going to fight hard …,” Sanders went on, his weakening voice making it clear that his campaign has already been anything but easy.

“We are going to fight hard to win the primary in Washington DC…” he said stubbornly, his voice hoarse from shouting, “and then we take our fight for social, economic, racial and environmental justice to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania!

But even Sanders knows the fight is almost over. His campaign managers and strategists have been discussing this issue for weeks. And he didn’t survive the U.S. Senate with a halo of white locks by ignoring reality, either. He told his supporters he had called Clinton to congratulate her on her victories. Although he won the primaries in Montana and North Dakota, the California loss made it clear that time is running out.

“I am … I am pretty good in arithmetic and I know that the fight in front of us is a very, very steep fight,” he added, “but we will continue to fight for every vote and every delegate we can get,” he told supporters. Sanders is scheduled to return home to Burlington, Vermont on Wednesday before he heads to Washington DC on Thursday.

Both he and Hillary Clinton received calls from President Barack Obama, with congratulations to the two of them on their campaigns.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, was rarin’ to go as she addressed her backers in Brooklyn, New York.

She clearly had much preparation ranging from a raft of speech writers, handlers, beauticians, hair and fashion stylists, makeup artists, media coach and PR advisers.

All had coalesced for this moment.

“Thanks to you, we’ve reached a milestone,” Clinton began in warm, measured tones.

(Applause)

“The first time … the first time in our nation’s history that a woman will be a major party’s nominee,” she said, nodding her head, eyes shining with just a slight glimmer of tears, hair carefully, conservatively coifed for the occasion.

Presidentially. Wisely, she wore understated makeup – for once, even her lipstick wasn’t loud.

“Tonight’s … (here she hesitated to give the audience more time to applaud longer – and they obliged, of course) tonight’s victory is not about one person. It belongs to generations of women and men who struggled and sacrificed and made this moment possible.

“In our country (ed.- an unstated reference to the fact that in many other countries there have already been female heads of state; for Jews in the audience it undoubtedly called up the image of Israel’s late Prime Minister Golda Meir) it started right here in New York, in a place called Seneca Falls, in 1824 when a small but determined group of women and men came together with the idea that women deserve equal rights and they set it forth in something called the Declaration of Sentiments – and it was the first time in human history that that kind of declaration occurred.

“So we all owe so much to those who came before. And tonight belongs to all of you,” she smiled.

Then she raised her voice, calling for unity within the party – and yes, from Bernie Sanders too, aiming straight for the jugular.

“I want to congratulate Senator Sanders for the extraordinary campaign that he ran,” she said.

Her next compliment was a direct shot designed to remind voters that he is probably too old to have really been considered a serious contender for a presidential run. It was also a quick slap at his largest support base, discrediting the youth of America with an emphasis on their lack of experience. But with all of that, she tried to heal the breach as well.

Hana Levi Julian

Sanders’ Bigoted Appointees Endanger Clinton’s Election

Tuesday, June 7th, 2016

For many years now, support for Israel has been a rare point of bipartisan consensus in an increasingly polarized political climate. Bernie Sanders apparently seems determined to undermine that consensus.

Sanders has demonstrated a consistent bias against the nation state of the Jewish people and surrounded himself with foreign-policy “experts” who often describe Israel as an apartheid state, and have repeatedly accused the IDF of committing war crimes. Sanders has clearly absorbed some of this rhetoric, as demonstrated in a series of interviews last month, in which he grossly overstated the number of Palestinian civilian deaths in Operation Protective Edge, and accused Israel of using disproportionate force in response to Hamas’ rocket attacks.

Following these statements, primary voters in New York and across the Northeast decisively rejected Sanders’ candidacy, and effectively ensured that Hillary Clinton will be the next Democratic presidential nominee. But Sanders’ efforts to end the Democratic Party’s support for Israel may well endanger Clinton’s prospects in the general election. Rather than modify or moderate his positions on Israel, Sanders now seems intent on remolding the Democratic Party to reflect the views of his most radical anti-Israel (and anti-American) supporters. Sanders apparently wants to use his newfound political clout to revise the language of the Democratic Party platform as regards the only true democracy in the Middle East.

Sanders claims that he wants Democrats to embrace a more “balanced approach” to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but his appointment of James Zogby and Cornel West to the Democratic Platform Committee suggests anything but. Indeed, both Zogby and West are notorious for espousing policy positions that are extremely critical of Israel, and for using rhetoric that sometimes borders on antisemitic.

Zogby, for example, has frequently used provocative and even bigoted language when commentating on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He has compared the plight of the Palestinian people to that of the Jews during the Holocaust. He has described Gaza as “the world’s largest concentration camp” and repeatedly accused the Israeli government of perpetrating crimes against humanity. Comparing Israel’s self-defense actions to the Nazi genocide against the Jews is a not-so-subtle form of Holocaust denial: if all Nazi Germany did was defend itself against Jewish aggression, then there were no gas chambers, no rounding up of Jews from the most far flung corners of Europe and transporting them to Auschwitz, and no genocide. Moreover, Zogby has endorsed the Boycott Divestment Sanctions movement, which calls for the boycott only of Israeli goods and institutions, until Israel allows for the so-called “right of return,” which would turn Israel into yet another Arab-Muslim majority state. In effect, Zogby is supportive of a group whose stated objective is to undo over 30 years of negotiations, and end the existence of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.

Zogby, however, seems like a moderate in comparison to West, whose frequent diatribes against Israel at times speaks to a propensity for borderline antisemitic stereotypes. According to West, for example, the Iraq War was caused by “the close relationship between American imperial elites and Israeli political officials.” He has repeatedly accused Israel of killing Palestinian babies—an allegation that echoes historic attacks on Jews for “blood libel”—and frequently claims that Israel is deliberately seeking to annihilate the Palestinian people.

Like many hard left anti-Israel bigots, West also has disdain for America and its current president, who he has accused of being a war criminal for supporting Israel’s military interventions in Gaza, and for escalating the use of drones in operations against ISIL and Al-Qaeda. He has also called President Obama as “the first niggerized president of the United States,” a remark which was widely condemned by Republicans and Democrats alike. West justified his criticisms of President Obama by explaining that the President “feels most comfortable with upper middle-class white and Jewish men who consider themselves very smart, very savvy, and very effective in getting what they want,” thereby invoking another antisemitic stereotype, that of the savvy Jewish businessman. West has a long history of accusing Jews of being racist. He claimed that “large numbers of Jews tried to secure a foothold in America by falling in step with the widespread perpetuation of anti-black stereotypes and garnering of white-skin privilege benefits to non=black Americans.” Yet it is West who is doing the stereotyping: when West angrily left Harvard for Princeton in 2002 because of a feud with Harvard’s then-President Larry Summers, he said that Summers had “messed with the wrong Negro” and called Harvard’s Jewish president, “the Ariel Sharon of higher education.” West also called Black Lives Matter a “marvelous new militancy…with courage, vision” and believes that the shooting of Michael Brown was a manifestation of “American terrorism.” West also does not shy away from associating himself with 9/11 conspiracy theorists, going even himself so far as to suggest that one cannot be certain whether Muslims were behind the attacks.

Sanders’ decision to elevate radicals like West and Zogby into positions of power within the Democratic Party speaks to either a stunning lack of judgment or an underlying hostility towards the nation-state of the Jewish people. Either way, it must be resisted by the much-maligned Democratic Party establishment come the Convention in July. Clinton has already made significant concessions to the so-called progressive wing of the party represented by Sanders. On issues like free trade, the minimum wage, and regulations of the financial industry, she has moved towards Sanders in meaningful ways. As far as Israel is concerned, however, Clinton must stand her ground and oppose the fringe positions of the far-left. If she does not, she may well suffer among centrist voters in several swing states.

Sanders seems determined to turn Israel into a partisan issue by appointing surrogates like Zogby and West to rewrite the Democratic Party platform. It is up to centrist Democrats, who still represent a majority of the party, to resist this attempt, and to ensure that support for Israel remains a point of bipartisan consensus. Weakening this historic consensus would be bad for Israel, for America, for peace — and for the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party.

Alan M. Dershowitz

Supporting Trump Should Be A No-Brainer For Jews

Thursday, April 14th, 2016

In 1980, New York City decided to renovate Central Park’s ice skating rink. The cost of the two-year project was estimated at $9 million. Six years and $13 million later, the renovations were nowhere near complete. Enter Donald Trump. He asked then-Mayor Ed Koch if he could take over the job. Six months later the rink was ready.

Trump is a man who gets things done. He is a man who strives for excellence. He is a man who before 9/11 wanted to build the tallest building in the world. Ivanka Trump recalls that her father used to tell her as a child, “You’re going to be thinking anyway. Might as well think big.” In short, Trump is a man who values greatness and seeks the same for his country.

Trump’s critics pounce on his every mistake over a business career of 50 years. But they’re ignoring the larger picture: Trump is a multi-billionaire with flourishing enterprises all over the world. To conclude that Trump is a terrible businessman because not all his endeavors succeed is like concluding that Benjamin Cardozo was a terrible lawyer because he occasionally lost a case. Both inferences are sheer lunacy.

Trump’s critics also like to attack him for being unhinged. But think for a moment: Can anyone succeed in Manhattan’s real estate market – with all its regulations and zoning laws – by being unhinged? By embracing an attitude of “my way or the highway”?

In fact, those who know Trump best testify that he is a “reflective, gentlemanly, decent” man (in the words of longtime friend Rudy Giuliani). When Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi was asked why she supports Trump for president, she said, “I see a different Donald Trump, I think, than a lot of people see. I see the way he interacts with his kids…. He’s a great dad. His employees adore him. I think they would jump off a cliff for him, and I think that’s speaks a lot about a person.”

Indeed, it does. As do Trump’s numerous quiet acts of kindness over the decades. Just two weeks ago, for example, a former Miss Wisconsin tearfully recounted the moment she received a handwritten note from Trump as she lay in a hospital bed fighting for her life. “He is the kindest man I have ever met,” she told FOX News. “I think he has a heart of gold.”

What about Ted Cruz’s reputation? In a word, it’s terrible. He helped win the White House for George W. Bush in 2001, but virtually everyone on the campaign team – including Bush – “couldn’t stand him,” a prominent Bush aide recalls. “People wouldn’t go to a meeting if they knew he would be there,” he said.

Cruz’s freshman roommate at Princeton University remembers him as “a nightmare of a human being.” Another Princeton acquaintance remembers him as an “arrogant jerk.” Yet another remembers Cruz speaking to her in such a “vicious” supercilious fashion that she literally broke down in tears.

Cruz’s reputation in Congress isn’t much better: “Everybody who knows him in the Senate hates him. And I think hate is not an exaggeration,” political pundit Charles Krauthammer recently said.

Is character everything? No. But when so many colleagues and acquaintances find you – not your ideas – detestable, something is wrong.

How do the candidates rate on policy? Cruz isn’t bad, but Trump approaches problems with a certain clarity and straightforwardness that Cruz simply doesn’t possess. Thus, while Cruz hems and haws about water-boarding terrorists, Trump approvingly repeats the story of General “Black Jack” Pershing allegedly executing 49 Muslim terrorists in the Philippines with bullets dipped in pig’s blood. He also dares suggest that allowing hundreds of thousands of Muslims into this country at a time of worldwide jihad may – just may – not be wise.

This straightforward thinking – unmarred by the obfuscations of politically correctness – will likely benefit Israel too. For the question isn’t whether this or that candidate likes Israel. The real question is: What will the next president say when Saudi Arabia threatens to desolve its friendship with the U.S. if it doesn’t pressure Israel into making concessions? For that is precisely the threat made to George W. Bush, as Elliott Abrams recounts in his book Tested by Zion. As a result, Bush – who was about as instinctively pro-Israel as they come – supported a Palestinian state, condemned Israel’s anti-terror campaign in the West Bank, and pushed for negotiations with the Palestinians. Why should we believe Cruz will act any differently?

Trump, however, might. As a non-politician, he harbors no instinctive reaction to cave to Saudi Arabia. Indeed, he has publicly attacked the oil-rich country. It’s true that two months ago Trump talked of acting neutral while negotiating a Middle East peace deal – a deal Netanyahu has publicly begged for, incidentally – but since then he has stated several times that a peace deal is impossible unless the Palestinians stop teaching their children to kill Jews.

And Trump doesn’t play games. He isn’t a politician. He is a businessman who has made a career out of reading people. If he perceives that the Palestinians are inveterate liars – which they are when it comes to making peace with Israel – he will walk. Will Cruz?

Judaism teaches us not to put faith in any human being. God runs the world, not man. But when I look at Cruz and Trump, I see a politician on one side (have you ever heard Cruz utter a natural-sounding sentence?) and, a smart, clear-thinking, politically-incorrect patriot with an enormously successful business career on the other side. To me, the choice is a no-brainer.

Elliot Resnick

Trump Ranks No. 2 GOP Candidate in Nationwide Poll

Wednesday, July 1st, 2015

Donald Trump now is in the number two spot, shared with Ben Carson, in Iowa and Michigan after a survey that already placed him in the second spot in New Hampshire, according to a CNN poll.

The social mood in the United States, as well as most of the world, demands a change, not just from President Barack Obama but from the “establishment” politicians who are viewed by rank and file voters, rightly or wrongly, lackeys for corporate boardrooms and Wall Street.

There are too many people who want “anyone but Trump” for him to be president, but he just keeps on trucking.

The primary elections won’t be held until early next year, but Trump is enjoying solid support from a growing minority. Working against him is the strong dislike of the maverick billionaire by almost half of those polled.

A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday gives Trump 10% support in Iowa, eight points behind Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and tied with Dr. Ben Carson, another candidate with no political experience. They have left behind better-known names and experienced politicians, some of them like Ted Cruz and Mike Huckabee who are perfect for the conservative state of Iowa. Right behind Carson and Trump are Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, followed by Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio.

Before Trump announced his candidacy, he won only 4% support, according to a poll carried out for Des Moines Register/Bloomberg.

In Michigan, Trump is tied with Carson and also with Bush, with Walker in first place.

Dean Debnam of Public Policy Polling, said in a statement:

Donald Trump’s in the top tier of the Republican field for a second consecutive week in our polling, Time will tell how long the Trump Bump lasts, but it’s at least two weeks at this point.

There are at least 16 Republicans running for the nomination for president, and that makes Trump all the more distinguishable from the others.

The JewishPress.com two weeks ago drew a parallel here between Trump and former Alabama Gov. George Wallace. Like Wallace, Trump does not care what anyone thinks about him or his opinions. He says what he thinks, and you can take it or leave it. Like Wallace, Trump is a magnet for people who resent ObamaCare, resent a dismal American foreign policy, especially in the Middle East, and are fed up with politicians whose popularity is based on how many promises can be made, fulfilled or not.

For them, this is what they want to hear about the biggest domestic issue today:

It’s people—our fine American people, living their own lives, buying their own homes, educating their children, running their own farms, working the way they like to work, and not having the bureaucrats and intellectual morons trying to manage everything for them. It’s a matter of trusting the people to make their own decisions.

It sounds like Trump, but it was out of the mouth of Wallace in the 1968 campaign, when his third-party candidacy attracted 10 million voters and 45 electoral votes.

If Trump loses his bid for the GOP nomination, as expected, and if he decides to run as a third-party candidate, he could cause wreak havoc for both the Republican and Democratic parties.

The pollsters and politicians sneered and mocked Wallace, but his third-party candidacy threatened to throw the election to the House of Representatives, which is what happens if no candidate wins a majority of electoral votes.

For the time being, the media are having a field day covering Trump, as seen in this CNN video here.

Tzvi Ben-Gedalyahu

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/trump-ranks-no-2-in-nationwide-poll/2015/07/01/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: