Donald Trump wants to have control over the GOP convention in July

[bamaEER]

Donald Trump said in a new interview that he should have some control over the Republican National Convention in July because he's the GOP frontrunner and that it should have a "showbiz" quality.

"It's very important to put some showbiz into a convention, otherwise people are going to fall asleep," the GOP presidential candidate told The Washington Post in New York last week. ""We don't have the people who know how to put showbiz into a convention."

While Trump remains the frontrunner, there's no guarantee he'll reach the required 1,237 delegate threshold before the convention. CBS' latest count has Trump with 755 delegates, Cruz with 554, and Kasich has 143.

Trump called the 2012 convention in Tampa "the single most boring convention I've ever seen" and said he wants to give business leaders and other people who aren't elected officials speaking slots.

"It should be a monumentally magnificent convention and it should be brilliantly staged, but they're spending $50 million on security," he said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-wants-to-have-control-over-the-gop-convention-in-july/

 

[Mntneer]

He's right. Considering elections are based on perception and personalities, the GOP needs to put on a "show" to appeal to the average voter.

 

[WVUBRU]

He's right. Considering elections are based on perception and personalities, the GOP needs to put on a "show" to appeal to the average voter.

Are you serious?

Elections are serious. Enough said.

 

[bamaEER]

Are you serious?

Elections are serious. Enough said.

Nah, it's a great idea and he's the perfect guy to spice up the GOP convention.

 

[bamaEER]

He's right. Considering elections are based on perception and personalities, the GOP needs to put on a "show" to appeal to the average voter.

If you want the GOP to go down that road, good luck.

 

[Mntneer]

If you two think that the Presidential election is anything more than a popularity contest, where the masses pick the person with the best personality, then go ahead and keep fooling yourselves.

Sure, we'd like to have be serious business, but history proves serious doesn't win.

 

[bamaEER]

If you two think that the Presidential election is anything more than a popularity contest, where the masses pick the person with the best personality, then go ahead and keep fooling yourselves.

Sure, we'd like to have be serious business, but history proves serious doesn't win.

This is about control.

 

[WVUBRU]

If you two think that the Presidential election is anything more than a popularity contest, where the masses pick the person with the best personality, then go ahead and keep fooling yourselves.

Sure, we'd like to have be serious business, but history proves serious doesn't win.

You are more whacked out than previous thought. Of course politics is big into personality. But it is a little deeper. No wonder you support so many stupid positions.

 

[Mntneer]

This is about control.

Sure it's about control, but if the GOP doesn't put on a good show, and put a public spin on their nominee, they'll have zero chance of beating Hillary.

You are more whacked out than previous thought. Of course politics is big into personality. But it is a little deeper. No wonder you support so many stupid positions.

We'd like for it to be deeper, but at the end of the day the Presidential election comes down to personality. Not ability, not resume, not experience.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Sure it's about control, but if the GOP doesn't put on a good show, and put a public spin on their nominee, they'll have zero chance of beating Hillary.



We'd like for it to be deeper, but at the end of the day the Presidential election comes down to personality. Not ability, not resume, not experience.

As evidenced by the 2008 election.

 

[WVUBRU]

Sure it's about control, but if the GOP doesn't put on a good show, and put a public spin on their nominee, they'll have zero chance of beating Hillary.



We'd like for it to be deeper, but at the end of the day the Presidential election comes down to personality. Not ability, not resume, not experience.

Unbelievable. I thought you had a decent perspective.

 

[bornaneer]

As evidenced by the 2008 election.

Yes......and the 2012 one as well.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Yes......and the 2012 one as well.

I don't agree with 2012. He went into the first term dumb as hell, unqualified, but motivated. 2012, he was battle hardened and experienced.

 

[bornaneer]

I don't agree with 2012. He went into the first term dumb as hell, unqualified, but motivated. 2012, he was battle hardened and experienced.

Romney was bland. If he had exhibited any kind of fire, he would have won.

 

[Keyser76]

Maybe he will bring back Eastwoods chair!

 

[bamaEER]

Sure it's about control, but if the GOP doesn't put on a good show, and put a public spin on their nominee, they'll have zero chance of beating Hillary.

Trump is more worried about stopping the GOP's attempt to disarm Trump at the convention. Here he's starting a shoving match trying to posture for control.

 

[WVUBRU]

No, the last two presidential elections were not solely based on personality. Again, the intangibles such as personality and likability plays a big part in politics. Bush had a huge advantage over Gore and Kerry as well in that aspect. I think this has been true going back generations. It is smart to use any advantage for your campaign. But to think you can win solely on the intangibles is so far offbase it is sad you people have that mindset.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

Romney was bland. If he had exhibited any kind of fire, he would have won.

That's not why Romney lost. One of the primary reasons was he was exposed for being the typical Republican business person that he was, not really giving a **** about people, buying out companies, only to rake off millions off the top, then shut them down and screw people out of their retirement.

 

[bornaneer]

That's not why Romney lost. One of the primary reasons was he was exposed for being the typical Republican business person that he was, not really giving a **** about people, buying out companies, only to rake off millions off the top, then shut them down and screw people out of their retirement.

More baseless ******** that INCITES mindless idiots to rail against any Repub.

 

[countryroads89_rivals]

More baseless ******** that INCITES mindless idiots to rail against any Repub.

Baseless? HA!

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/20...business-that-shut-down-laid-off-150-workers/

 

[Keyser76]

I know, "Baseless" WTF? It's like just cause they don't need any evidence to get worked up over non issues any intelligent person would never worry about, everything then becomes suspect, like Bain capital never happened. But hey, let em run Trump and see if being non bland works out for them.

 

[ThatNehlenFeelin]

It's all about the propaganda and made for TV rallies.

 

[Mntneer]

Reagan v Carter?
Reagan v Mondale?

Reagan was so cool that it was easy to see the writing on the wall.

Bush v Dukakis?

Bush was already popular from his time as VP, then to run against the bore that was Dukakis.

Clinton v Bush?
Clinton v Dole?

They didn't call him slick for nothing. He personality oozed off of him.

Bush v Gore?
Bush v Kerry?

Maybe comes across as a dolt to some, but Bush was always the cooler of the two, and therefore very very likable.

Obama v McCain?
Obama v Romney?

Cool hip black dude running against old angry man and stuffy rich dude was easy to see from a mile away. Anyone that thought Obama was going to lose to either forgot history.

What do all have in common? The better personality as compared to their opponent.

What logical explanation is there that a sitting VP to a very popular President gets beat by an Governor that appears to have the intellect of an ant? Or a war hero with decades of public service under his belt losing to a freshman Senator that has zero private sector experience and no national public experience?

He's a quote the somewhat nails the issue (from Journeys with George):
"As a politician, Bush is much smarter than people give him credit for. Look how everyone goes weak in the knees when he comes back here -- he's got a lot of charisma, even though he's a pretty bad speaker." But still later, the twinkle's gone, replaced by the stricken look of the hunter who's been captured by the game: "I have this nagging feeling that the [Bush] 'pack' has not always done the right thing. The Gore press corps is about how they didn't like Gore, didn't trust him, and that kind of filtered through to their stories. Over here, we were writing only about the trivial stuff because he charmed the pants off us."

This year, Hillary is most certainly beatable, IF the Republicans had learned that personality matters more, because her personality is awful. What works in her favor, is Trump has allowed his personality to turn him into someone that sounds bat **** insane, and it would take a big miracle to turn that negative around prior to November. If it's Cruz... forget about November, swear in Hillary now.

 

[mule_eer]

This year, Hillary is most certainly beatable, IF the Republicans had learned that personality matters more, because her personality is awful. What works in her favor, is Trump has allowed his personality to turn him into someone that sounds bat **** insane, and it would take a big miracle to turn that negative around prior to November. If it's Cruz... forget about November, swear in Hillary now.

I think this is the key point though. You need someone with personality who is likable. That's Trump's problem. It's also Hillary's problem. Until Rubio decided to act like Trump, I think his likability was his greatest asset.

 

[WVUBRU]

I think this is the key point though. You need someone with personality who is likable. That's Trump's problem. It's also Hillary's problem. Until Rubio decided to act like Trump, I think his likability was his greatest asset.

It is correct that Hillary, Trump and Cruz unfavorability ratings are bad. Personality will not win this election

 

[mule_eer]

It is correct that Hillary, Trump and Cruz unfavorability ratings are bad. Personality will not win this election

I would say that personality could lose this election.

 

[WVUBRU]

I would say that personality could lose this election.

I agree. It works both ways. Intangibles are a factor. No doubt. That is why it is called politics.

 

[bamaEER]

I would say that personality could lose this election.

Then you throw in Kasich, who has a great personality, but keeps caucusing in with a whopping 10%.

 

[Mntneer]

I would say that personality could lose this election.

With the top 3 having such crappy personalities, it may come down to who's the worst.

It's why Kasich polls so well against Hillary while Cruz and Trump don't. Kasich has a nice demeanor, very likable, sincere.

 

[Mntneer]

Then you throw in Kasich, who has a great personality, but keeps caucusing in with a whopping 10%.

That's the party effect at play. At the party level, the primary stages, it's more about rhetoric and party loyalty than personality.

 

[WVUBRU]

With the top 3 having such crappy personalities, it may come down to who's the worst.

It's why Kasich polls so well against Hillary while Cruz and Trump don't. Kasich has a nice demeanor, very likable, sincere.

And he won't win so there must be other factors in play. Don't you think?

 

[Fingon]

Kind of funny, considering Trump's argument is completely moot this year. Barring a miraculous turn of events that leads to a sudden snowball effect, the convention is going to be contested, making it must-see TV by definition. Any semblance of pre-planned, pre-staged speaking is going to fly out the window as the party figures out how they are going to choose a nominee. There is no likely path for Trump to get to 1237. There are hypothetical possiblities, but nothing realistic. (for an excellent state-by-state analysis, see Nate Silver's delegate analysis on 538), and based on everything we are reading about the Cruz campaign's organization and ground game in getting delegates in line for the 2nd ballot, it's becoming inescapable that the convention will be contested.

 

[Mntneer]

And he won't win so there must be other factors in play. Don't you think?

No, as I said above. In the primaries, it's about ideology and party politics. Once you get to the general election, where candidates have to appeal to the middle ground voter, the independent voter, personality is key.

 

[mneilmont]

I don't agree with 2012. He went into the first term dumb as hell, unqualified, but motivated. 2012, he was battle hardened and experienced.

He was without experience going into first term. Reason for 2nd term was equally questionable. Beer Summit was not a glaring success. Obamacare will be an albatross into the near term future to see if it is salvageable. Bailouts have to be questionable. Debt to GDP ratio 9/30/2008 was 67% - 9/30/2012 was 99% and growing. Obama was on a honeymoon the entire first term and he was allowed to grow the National Debt at a rate > trillion dollars per year. And the borrow and spend continues to be on a trajectory that future generations are going to find it near impossible to satisfy repayment terms.

Hate to disagree, but these and other coincidences that were derogatory to the US will not prove to be reason to reelect Obama, IMO. What did Repub offer greater? No one knows because he failed to finish campaign.

 

[WVUBRU]

No, as I said above. In the primaries, it's about ideology and party politics. Once you get to the general election, where candidates have to appeal to the middle ground voter, the independent voter, personality is key.

Personality is important. But you have previously said it is votes are based on it and that is false. 70 percent of the country will vote with for the nominee of the party that mostly represents their beliefs. Even you have made the statement in the past about holding your nose while voting. This election will be more nose holding than ever on both sides of the aisle and independents will have an extremely hard time with a decision.

 

[mneilmont]

With the top 3 having such crappy personalities, it may come down to who's the worst.

It's why Kasich polls so well against Hillary while Cruz and Trump don't. Kasich has a nice demeanor, very likable, sincere.

He also has a tremendous track record of success wherever he has been - and people have a hard time finding that. Most know of the robust economy under Bill Clinton. Trump is a known commodity and successful. It is natural to see the glamour of Clinton and Trump when the economy has been between poor and damned piss poor over last 8-9 years and no substantial improvement going forward that middle class can see.

 

[mule_eer]

With the top 3 having such crappy personalities, it may come down to who's the worst.

It's why Kasich polls so well against Hillary while Cruz and Trump don't. Kasich has a nice demeanor, very likable, sincere.

The negative I'll say about Kasich is that I've seen him come off as either condescending or a little grumpy on a couple of occasions, the Wisconsin town hall on CNN would be one of those times. I don't think he said anything way off base then, but he started out a little gruff. I'll give Cruz credit in that same forum. He was very personable and friendly in that same event.

 

[mneilmont]

Damn, some people vote for or against because of one position - Birth control, minimum wage, etc. This board is going to support or oppose because of one trait that a person is perceived to have. I do not believe that most people on the WV board is so shallow as not to look at the total package. Will normally make a choice based on party, but that is not equivalent to a person who has won a speech contest or selected because they won the congeniality contest. Do yourself and look more deeply than what is reported in a local newspaper.

 

[bamaEER]

That's the party effect at play. At the party level, the primary stages, it's more about rhetoric and party loyalty than personality.

Call it whatever you want. I call it "GOP voters have no f-ing clue' effect. Kasich is hands down the most experienced, seasoned, polished, personable, and successful candidate in the GOP race and the voters blew it. This is on the dumbasses who really do believe in unicorns, leprechauns and 30 foot high walls on our southern border.

 

[Mntneer]

Call it whatever you want. I call it "GOP voters have no f-ing clue' effect. Kasich is hands down the most experienced, seasoned, polished, personable, and successful candidate in the GOP race and the voters blew it. This is on the dumbasses who really do believe in unicorns, leprechauns and 30 foot high walls on our southern border.

Same could be said for the Democrats as well, because if the GOP had their **** together, they'd have walked away with election in a landslide.