Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Anatomy of how a phony Trump media talking point was born

Anatomy of how a phony Trump media talking point was born

No, Trump’s Unfavorables are not the same as Reagan’s, they’re worse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRBImNItoo0

Donald Trump has a “favorability” problem. Poll after poll shows Trump doing poorly against Hillary Clinton head-to-head, perhaps reflecting Trump’s historically low levels of favorability (and high levels of unfavorability) for a leading major party candidate.

In response, a meme was created and spread far and wide earlier this month that Trump’s favorability is no worse than Ronald Reagan at a similar point in time in his challege to Jimmy Carter. The conclusion being that if Reagan could overcome that obstacle, so can Trump.

So, the theory goes, those of you Republican national convention delegates who worry about Trump being a general election disaster who could cost Republicans the presidency, House and Senate have nothing to worry about.

A post by Gallup (discussed below) explains why that is not accurate, and why Trump’s favorability is much worse than Reagan’s. But equally important is to examine how it came about that Gallup even is discussing the issue.

It turns out that it started  with a tweet by Ann Coulter, picked up by Gateway Pundit, linked by Drudge, then incorporated into Trump rally speeches. It is, in a sense, a perfect paradigm of the Republican primary so far and how pro-Trump social media has helped Trump.

The Reagan Comparison

Comparing Republican presidential candidates to President Reagan has been a clear theme of the 2016 GOP primary season.

The comparisons to President Reagan need to be made carefully and factually, however, as Trump found out when he attempted to explain away his sudden “evolution” on issues key to conservatives as mirroring those of President Reagan.  This claim inspired a searing response from Michael Reagan; among the many powerful points he made, President Reagan’s son stately clearly and plainly:  “You can’t be a Trump Republican and a Reagan Republican.”

Yet the attempts to connect President Reagan to Trump have continued, and one meme that is flying unhindered around the internet is the response to Trump critics on both the right and the left who note that Trump’s unfavorables are shockingly bad and that he loses to Hillary Clinton in almost every national head-to-head poll:  Trump, they argue, is just as unpopular as Reagan was at this stage of his 1980 campaign.

This claim apparently gained traction when Ann Coulter tweeted:

Coulter’s April 3 tweet linked a 1980 Washington Post article that includes the following:

The other poll was taken by the Los Angeles Times on March 25, the day of the New York primary. It asked Republican and Democratic voters to record favorable and unfavorable impressions of candidates.

Anderson finished in the poll with a 68 percent favorable rating. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy was second with a 60 percent favorable rating followed by President Carter with 51 percent and Ronald Reagan with 30 percent.

The Gateway Pundit picked up Coulter’s tweet and posted “DESPITE LATEST MEDIA SMEAR=> Trump’s Favorable Rating Rivals Reagan’s in 1980.”

The Gateway Pundit post was then linked by The Drudge Report as the top link in the right hand column (resulting in over 28,000 Facebook and 11,000 Twitter shares of the GP post):

https://twitter.com/DRUDGE_REPORT/status/718616940374142976

Then the talking point was incorporated into Trump rally speeches.

During a rally in Rome, N.Y. [on April 11, 2016], Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump cast himself as the inheritor of the mantle of Ronald Reagan — at least in the way Reagan came from behind to win the 1980 presidential election.

“I haven’t even started on Hillary, and my numbers are better right now than Ronald Reagan’s numbers were with Jimmy Carter,” Trump said, at about the 17:50 mark. “Ronald Reagan had a 30 (percent) favorability and he was behind Jimmy Carter by so much everybody said, ‘Oh, this is going to be a disaster.’ “

So the sequence was Coulter Tweet >> Gateway Pundit post >> Drudge link >> Trump campaign rally speech.

Gallup Says STOP!

Gallup, however, is challenging this Trump talking point in a recent report. (h/t The Weekly Standard.)

Gallup reports:

A writer with Gateway Pundit recently cited a tweet from prominent political commentator Ann Coulter, which in turn cited an April 15, 1980, Washington Post article written by Bill Peterson, which in turn cited in its final paragraph a March 25, 1980, Los Angeles Times poll showing Reagan’s favorable image at 30%. This final 30% number was used in the first two of these publications to bolster the hypothesis that Trump is merely following in Reagan’s hallowed footsteps….

In fact, the more we look at the data described in the 1980 Washington Post article, the more it appears that this author was referring to a Los Angeles Times exit poll of New York state primary voters. The New York primary was on March 25; there was a Los Angeles Times exit poll conducted then, and the article’s wording refers to Republican and Democratic voters, although the author did not label it as an exit poll per se. [emphasis in original]

We were able to locate the data from the Los Angeles Times New York exit poll from March 25 from the Roper Center archives. This shows Reagan with an overall 35% favorable rating — similar to but not the same as the 30% reported in the Washington Post article. So there remains a mystery as to the origin of the 30% number cited in the Washington Post article. But regardless, these data are from New York state voters, who constitute a substantially different group than the national population with which it is being compared — not a useful comparison.

Gallup did find actual national polls—not one exit poll from one state—that gauged President Reagan’s popularity in 1980.  Gallup also notes that they could find no polling data either in the Gallup archives or in any other polling source that show President Reagan’s favorability numbers underwater as Trump’s are.

There are, in fact, a number of traditional, national poll results from 1980 which did measure Reagan’s image. In general, these data show that Reagan enjoyed mostly positive net favorable reviews throughout 1980.

Gallup’s 10-point “scalometer” method of measuring favorability found 70% of Americans viewing Reagan positively in May and August of 1980. And while the scalometer rating tends to produce higher favorable scores than binary favorable/unfavorable scales, Reagan earned a 60% favorable rating in a January 1980 Gallup/Newsweek poll using the binary wording.

A multitude of polls by other firms whose surveys are archived in the Roper Center polling database confirms Reagan’s generally positive 1980 image.

The Los Angeles Times national polls all show that Reagan’s image was more favorable than unfavorable, including polls in the fall of 1979 and in June, September and October of 1980. There is no Los Angeles Times poll which can be located from 1980 that shows Reagan with a more unfavorable than favorable image, as is the case with Trump today.

Gallup did find one polling organization that showed less glowing favorables for President Reagan throughout 1980, but even that apparent outlier shows President Reagan’s numbers above those that Trump has today.

Only one organization’s polling — Cambridge Reports — consistently showed Reagan’s image with a somewhat less favorable tilt, including a 41% favorable/44% unfavorable rating in January 1980, a 39% favorable/44% unfavorable rating in April and a 35% favorable/49% unfavorable rating in July. But by October, Cambridge Reports gave Reagan a 51% favorable.

From this time distance, it’s not possible to determine why this one organization’s polling was so out of sync with the others conducted roughly contemporaneously. But even the Cambridge numbers for Reagan were not nearly as negative as Trump’s overall image is today, with their “worst” assessment showing a -14 net favorable, compared with Trump’s consistent net favorable ratings of -30 or worse today.

Gallup is not alone. Politifact and 538 have reached the same conclusion, comparing historical data.

At some point someone will do a thorough study of how pro-Trump social media (let’s not even get started about Fox News) has influenced this campaign. The “Reagan favorability” meme will be just a small part of that.

Related Post: Behind closed doors with GOP elites, Trump campaign guru admits to the con.

[LI Author Fuzzy Slippers contributed to and partially drafted this post.]

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

legacyrepublican | April 23, 2016 at 5:50 pm

Trump hasn’t developed a solid ground game. Trumpsters for all their bravado are voting for their sugar daddy because he has the sugar touch.

Cruz, on the other hand, knows the ground game and has earned his share of the political pie with honors.

Trump could well become a loud mouth Romney in November.

A new nickname that is appropriate D D T
Deceiving
Donny
Trump (or is it tramp)
beginning to sound a lot like dinglebarry
if his lips are moving………

An intensely unpopular man, who is subject to 24/7/365 bashing from both the left and the right, is attracting over-capacity crowds at every campaign rally and is leading the primary race. Polls are increasingly indicating he will continue to keep winning.

What does that tell you?

    malclave in reply to labrat. | April 23, 2016 at 6:26 pm

    It tells me that, despite the desires of Trump activists, people can have different opinions.

    NC Mountain Girl in reply to labrat. | April 23, 2016 at 6:27 pm

    It tells you that celebrities draw large crowds for free appearances. That doesn’t mean voters want them to be president.

    Also, most of the press has treated Donald Trump with kid gloves. They act like he is doing them a favor to even call into there shows, much less show up in person. They lob softball questions at him. They let him openly lie. They seldom call him out on his inconsistent positions and his diarrhea of the mouth.

    The fact iis that Trump, the supposed outsider, is no such thing. He may be more of a media creation than Obama 20and and his campaign is now being run by some of the most corrupt Washington political insiders around.

    Lewfarge in reply to labrat. | April 23, 2016 at 6:32 pm

    Of all Republican votes cast SO FAR, DDT only has 37.91% of the votes.
    Of the total Dem & Repub votes in the NY primary he only got 19.5% of the votes.
    WHAT DOES HE WIN ?
    The booby prize !

    genes in reply to labrat. | April 23, 2016 at 6:36 pm

    That Trump will continue whining when things don’t go his way.

    conservative tarheel in reply to labrat. | April 23, 2016 at 7:35 pm

    it tells me that Dems like either of their choices and come to donald
    trump rallies and vote for him when they can …
    in Nov they will vote for whoever has a D after their name.

    Libbylu in reply to labrat. | April 24, 2016 at 2:11 am

    It tells me he can draw 10-20,000 cultists to his events. 60% of us voted against him, higher if you take out the dems. It is a cult and will be written in history as so. He doesn’t even know basic civics and every policy he throws out has to be walked back a little or totally. CULT.

    Immolate in reply to labrat. | April 25, 2016 at 4:51 pm

    Leave Bernie Sanders alone!

This is why I continue to ignore Ann Coulter, quit reading Drudge political content, and have erased Hoft’s Gateway Pundit from my bookmark list. There is zero objectivity with those three.

My joke: To what cabinet level position did Trump promise to appoint Ann Coulter? Secretary of the Hysteria!

Duh huh!

With “truths repressed, falsehoods in every field were incessantly rubbed in print, at endless meetings, in school, in mass demonstrations, on the radio”. Robert Conquest, regarding Soviet Propaganda

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | April 23, 2016 at 6:47 pm

PredictWise – where people actually use money to bet on outcomes – has the probability that Grandma will win at 73%.

Chuck Schumer is now so confident that Trump’s negative coattails will cause Republicans to lose the Senate and make him Majority Leader that he’s saying he will get “immigration reform” done early in 2017.

Probably full amnesty for everyone and no change in border security measures.

You nominate an unelectable buffoon candidate with the highest unfavorables in history and you reap the rewards.

    Michael Muscat in reply to MaggotAtBroadAndWall. | April 23, 2016 at 7:47 pm

    By that logic, Kasich is the most “electable” candidate according to polls. That amnesty loving, common core peddling establishment stooge is going to beat Hillary Clinton? Not in a million years. But that’s what the polls are saying. Are Trump’s unfavourables not merely a manifestation of the Butterfield effect? He receives the most negative attention in the media, from both sides. Of course his negatives are going to be high. So forgive me but I do not really care what the polls or gamblers are saying.

    I just want to see Hillary get humiliated on national TV by Donald Trump. He’s got a lot of material to work with. At least he’s not afraid to attack the Clintons’ past, unlike every other republican.

      conservative tarheel in reply to Michael Muscat. | April 23, 2016 at 8:11 pm

      Hillary has plenty of material on ol Donald as well ….

        What you are saying is republicans are just too stupid to use that material.

          SDN in reply to Barry. | April 23, 2016 at 10:45 pm

          No, What he’s saying is that Republicans haven’t had NSA access for 7 years.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | April 24, 2016 at 2:16 pm

          In other words, the republicans, in control of the senate and the house, are too stupid to get access to the NSA data like their brethren, the democrats.

          Radegunda in reply to Barry. | April 24, 2016 at 3:24 pm

          It’s the Trump-supporting Republicans who are too stupid to care when anyone points to clear evidence of Trump’s deep dishonesty, cynicism, ignorance, narcissism, and nastiness — even when it comes directly from Trump’s own mouth.

          Worse, Trump fans are happy to redefine vice as virtue in order to sustain their superhero fantasy.

          Reportedly, Trump said years ago that if he ran for president he would run as a Republican because Republicans are stupid. Trump fans can be counted on to prove their gullibility even when Trump is practically taunting them for it.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | April 24, 2016 at 7:55 pm

          “It’s the Trump-supporting Republicans ”

          Uh, and you support???

          Full of it like always. Republicans are famous for being the “stupid party”. A label that fits you rather well.

          It really is simple. If there is so much dirt to report on trump, then how come the campaigns of the others haven’t thrown it out? It damn sure isn’t “integrity”. So, either there isn’t anything other than your fevered wishes, or the republicans are too damn stupid to use.

          You could make the same unsupported accusations about anyone running.

          just more bullshit from the losers. Wash, repeat, rinse.

      Libbylu in reply to Michael Muscat. | April 24, 2016 at 2:14 am

      Trump can’t debate, he knows nothing about issues. 70% disapproval rating and you think he could ever win? CULT.

      By that logic, Kasich is the most “electable” candidate

      No, by that logic, (using PredictWise, where people actually use money to bet on outcomes), Kasich has just a 3% chance of becoming the GOP nominee and is therefore the least electable candidate.

DouglasJBender | April 23, 2016 at 7:14 pm

Someone should do a poll of me regarding my view of Trump. Then, dishonest “journalists” could cite there being a poll with Trump having a 10/90 favorable/unfavorable rating.

conservative tarheel | April 23, 2016 at 7:33 pm

he WILL be Romney part II ….
say hello to president clinton …

The most interesting Mystery Meme of this election is the one about how the Wicked Witch would bury Trump in the general.

Pure comedy gold, that one.

Where are the resident Trump trolls today? I hope Donald isn’t refusing to pay overtime for weekend work.

    spartan in reply to Merlin. | April 23, 2016 at 9:40 pm

    They are acting presidential and just vetoing our posts.

    genes in reply to Merlin. | April 23, 2016 at 9:54 pm

    One crossed the line one too many times and got banned.

      I didn’t think anyone got banned here. Must’ve been a doozy.

      amwick in reply to genes. | April 23, 2016 at 10:47 pm

      Voting Female and Handy Gandy, passionate, and zealous Trump supporters both were banned. BTW, the line is actually a circle, around Prof. Jacobson. Insults, slander and filth can be hurled constantly at people who post, back and forth but he is unassailable. I can’t say as I blame him, he must put up with a lot behind the scenes. It seems an odd way to run things, but it is his business.

        genes in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 12:47 am

        VF accused him of deleting her posts or some how censoring them. She and several others routinely insult him. He let it all stay.

          amwick in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 8:12 am

          Yes, I read those comments. She thought that her comments had been blocked somehow. I know that wordpress can do some very strange things, all on its own, depending on how it is set up. I know that comments can be “held” until a moderator approves them. What I haven’t seen is that happening here at LI. I have never seen any kind of moderation at all. What I don’t like is the level of personal insults that are acceptable here. Do you know that Voting Female was referred to as Voting Vagina? Is that acceptable? And after that it was just shortened to VV? Apparently the people here at LI think that is just fine. That is their business. I don’t like it myself, and the best I can do is just try and ignore it.

        genes in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 9:42 am

        WP isn’t giving me a reply button for your last comment.
        I do a lot of commenting on another site where a number of the regulars here would be banned. some for too many over the top insults, others for spamming multiple threads with the same posts. That commenting system removes all comments from someone that gets banned.

          amwick in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 5:51 pm

          The personal insults and vulgarity have been pretty much spread around candidate supporters, I would say it has been pretty even, up until now. Trump supporters have been banned, or just left in frustration, as Eskyman said today: Looks like this has turned into a private party, with you all sitting around in a circle… so I’ll go away, wouldn’t want to upset any of you while you’re busy agreeing with each other. I wonder if this is what Professor Jacobson prefers.

          Barry in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 7:58 pm

          Perhaps some people are just too tender to handle the internets. Pathetic really. No blood, no broken bones, just some self inflicted hurt feelings cuz someone won’t listen, or disagrees, or calls you a name.

          Looks like this has turned into a private party, with you all sitting around in a circle… so I’ll go away, wouldn’t want to upset any of you while you’re busy agreeing with each other.

          There are at least 9 pro-Trumpers here on this thread alone. How many pro-Cruzers on TCTH or Gateway Pundit?

          The other day you made the claim that “Trump supporters are getting booted right and left,” and I gave evidence as to why the two who were asked to leave, were shown the door, and said “If you have any evidence of a wholesale systemic pattern of regular good-faith LI commenters ‘getting booted right and left’ by the Professor merely for supporting Trump, perhaps you should present it. This is a legal blog, after all.”

          You never replied. Instead you’re just back out here trying to perpetuate your false narrative.

          And for those curious, this is the thread which led to VotingFemale being shown the door (you have to scan the whole thing); and here is where HandyGandy (after a long pattern of gratuitous abuse and trollery) lost it.

          I for one think that the Professor is amazingly tolerant with us commenters. I was banned from Gateway Pundit merely for politely pointing out that the xray Jim was shopping around purporting to show Officer Darren Wilson’s “orbital blowout fracture” (broken eye socket) was a fake (which it was, and for which I presented evidence). He deleted my comment and banned me without notice.

          And I’ve never even tried to comment on TCTH because I know I’d be banned in two seconds flat the second I called them on their casual racism (such as calling female African Americans “sheboons” or some of the awful things they said about Dr. Carson when he pulled ahead of Trump in Iowa) or evinced any badthought about Trump.

          Face it, in this fraught and divisive election, this is still one of the most open and tolerant blogs out there.

Now, the anti-Trump forces are trying to get people to believe that Trump can not win against Hillary. But, the reality is that no one really knows what will happen in November.

Voter wise, if Trump is not the nominee, the Republican Party will likely lose most, if not all of his supporters, which is a huge number. Of course, this might not happen [there goes a flying pig]. But, if it does, this means that Cruz would have to pick up a huge number of independents, and probably some Democrats to beat Hillary. As Cruz has been running as an Uber Conservative, and many of the independents and most of the Democrats that he would need to pick-up to beat Hillary are liberals or liberal moderates, it does not seem likely that he would do too well with these people. Kasich, while having more appeal to liberals and liberal moderates, would still likely lose all or most of the Trump supporters. And, most of the Conservative Republicans as well. We have seen what happened in the case of McCain and Romney. Realistically, without the Trump supporters, the Republicans lose.

Now, if Trump is nominated, this does not mean that he will beat Hillary. Some of the anti-Trump Republican voters will not vote for him. Also, the number of independents and politically moderate Democrats which he is likely to pick-up will not be well known until far closer to the general election. But, he will be able to tap into the anti-establishment feelings across the board, due to his outsider political status. And, this anti-establishment feeling permeates both parties and most of the independents in this country. Also, There is likely to be an immense amount of Democrat vote fraud which will have to overcome [it has already started in Virginia]. So, it is really impossible to predict what will happen in November, regardless of who is running for President in the general election.

To attempt to gauge the electability of any of the Republican candidates, against Clinton, is just guessing, at this point. One contest at a time is usually the best bet.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | April 23, 2016 at 8:58 pm

    Yes. And the election will turn on how many people vote for each candidate, sort of…

    Wasn’t all that helpful.

      Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 12:29 pm

      Yes, it is always helpful when people are given all the facts, rather than cherry-picked examples which are deigned to support a given narrative.

      In the current Republican Primary campaign, we are reduced to rumor, innuendo and outright misinformation, to make a determination of which candidate we wish to support. People whine about the campaigns going negative. Well, this year, the whole campaign started out negative. The overriding theme this years was “Don’t Elect Trump”. Not, elect me, because I’ll do A, B or C; but, rather, don’t vote for Trump because he will, or won’t, do A.B or C.

      But, all this does not make any difference to a large numbers of the voters, this year. All they care about is voting AGAINST the establishment. And, these are the same people who will, or won’t, vote in November. Party bosses do not have the control over the members of the Electoral College as they do over party delegates at the convention. So, if the voters, who are needed to elect a specific party’s nominee do not vote for that nominee, the candidate AND the party lose that election.

I have no clue what Reagans favorability ratings were. What I do know, the republican party did everything it could to stop him.

And many of the gleeful “Reagan was wonderful” punditry class led the assault against Reagan.

Oh, and Fuzzy, just for you, no, I’m not comparing trump to Reagan. I’m pointing out that the hypocritical republican party has been hypocritical for a long, long time.

It is amazing how some folks compare Trump to Reagan but fail to research the record.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/04/trump_vs_conman_reagan.html

Trump liked Reagan’s slogan, which he featured on his campaign materials so much that he moved to trademark it. He forgets the part about contributing to the campaign of Reagan’s opponent, Jimmy Carter, who later expressed favor with Trump’s “malleability” and not sticking to deeply held principles. During a recent appearance at Britain’s House of Lords, Carter responded to a question of who he would pick for the GOP nomination, responding that he would pick Trump over Cruz …

Trump likes Reagan’s slogan, but not the policies which made it actually happen – “far right wing policies” like Reagan’s tax cuts, no doubt. Certainly Trump is no principled fiscal conservative as evidenced by his trashing of the 1986 Tax Reform Act as a Democratic “expert” witness before Congress.

In a demonstration of the Trump campaign’s arrogance and incompetence, it tried to tout Trump’s expertise in all things economic when Dan Scavino, Trump’s social media director, tweeted out a video of Trump testifying as an “expert” witness in 1991 before New Jersey Democrat Frank Guarini’s House Budget Committee. As Guy Benson notes at TownHall.com, the transcript obtained from Twitchy shows Trump trashing Reagan’s tax policies and comparing the Reagan economy to that of the Soviet Union ……

Trump is a clown.

    amwick in reply to Matt_SE. | April 23, 2016 at 10:56 pm

    I think Rafael is a religious wingnut, whose wife Heidi, hears the voice of G_d, just sayin’. He ran for president because G_d spoke to his wife, if you believe Rafael’s dad, an even bigger religious wingnut. Now, there are fine people who are very religious, but wingnuts are wingnuts.

      PhatElephant in reply to amwick. | April 23, 2016 at 11:34 pm

      Better a “religious wingnut” that believes he answers to a higher power than a pandering liberal like Trump who thinks that he is God and answers to no one.

      Ragspierre in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 1:07 am

      Lots of POTUS have felt they were under the hand of divine direction.

      Washington talked about it a lot, as did Lincoln. It got W a lot of trash.

      Hell, even Barracula will USE that kind of talk when it suits him, though he doesn’t believe in having any god before HIM.

        amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 8:17 am

        You are right Mr.Pierre. Deciding when a religious person falls into wingnut territory is not a clear call. I was thinking about people that have services and kinda dance around with venomous snakes, that is wingnut to me. I think Rafael comes close. It is all a matter of how you view religious zealots.

Wow… @ the professor penning his name to this juvenile hit piece. I’m losing a lot of respect. I hope there isn’t much more of this in the future.

Trump is the nominee.. it’s time to accept it. Trump isn’t the perfect candidate but he’s a lot better than Romney. And he has a shot at beating the Hildabeast in November (which Cruz will never do!)

    spartan in reply to Vince. | April 24, 2016 at 12:30 am

    Has Trump reached the 1237 threshold while we were not looking? Have 1237 delegates actually voted for Trump to be nominee while we slept?

    Last I checked, there is a lot of ball left to play. Outside of the Trump shillers, I know of no independent source that believes Trump can beat Hillary. The “juvenile hit piece” has satisfied my curiosity.

    Your curiosity will not be satisfied until the day after Trump loses to Hillary. Then, you will be either celebrating with Hillary or you blame the GOP Establishment, Cruz, Conservatives; in other words, everyone but the person you see in the mirror.

    Ragspierre in reply to Vince. | April 24, 2016 at 1:02 am

    How is this a “hit piece”?

    It’s a VERY well researched and laid out investigation of a myth from the T-rump sucking T-rump media.

    Refute what you can, moron.

      conservative tarheel in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 1:36 am

      since it does not praise Donald
      it is a hit piece.

      amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 8:45 am

      How is this a hit piece?
      LI Author Fuzzy Slippers contributed to and partially drafted this post.
      That’s enough for me.

        Ragspierre in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 9:07 am

        So, it isn’t the content of the piece, but your own hate that determines your assessment.

        Got it.

          amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 5:29 pm

          The entire post is addressing a unfavoribilty number.. comparing Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump. No, Trump’s Unfavorables are not the same as Reagan’s, they’re worse. That was the subtitle, like it was some kind of huge eye opener. If you look at the history of polling and compare telephone to internet polls, negatives are worse on internet polls, in general. Maybe someone should have addressed the actual methods, and why there may be a difference. Comparing these types of number across the years can be misleading no matter who is pointing to them and using them for or against any candidate.

        Barry in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 2:22 pm

        “That’s enough for me.”

        It shouldn’t be. The post is factual. Either show the refuting evidence or accept it. It doesn’t matter who the author is.

    MaggotAtBroadAndWall in reply to Vince. | April 24, 2016 at 10:22 am

    Pointing out that Coulter, Gateway Pundit, Drudge and Trump all promoted a falsehood isn’t a juvenile hit piece. It is exposing the truth.

    Comparing Trump to Reagan in ANY way is repugnant.

    Barry in reply to Vince. | April 24, 2016 at 2:20 pm

    “Wow… @ the professor penning his name to this juvenile hit piece”

    Nothing but the facts presented in this “hit piece”. if you can refute them, do so. I don’t think you can.

    Gremlin1974 in reply to Vince. | April 25, 2016 at 2:03 am

    Hillary will curb stomp Trump in November. Firstly because all of the areas that Trump supporters are crowing about him winning in the north east he will lose to Hillary in November, period.

    I know trump supporters don’t like it but national polls even this far out can give a clue as to what might happen in November. In the national polls Trump has gained no ground on Hillary, none, while Cruz has moved into a tie position that will most likely continue to improve.

Trump is not the nominee until one thousand two hundred and thirty seven delegates vote for him at the convention.
The hiring of an insider, lobbyist to run his campaign should tell you that he lied about who and what he is. An insider, lobbyist that has been involved with THREE losing campaigns.

    conservative tarheel in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 1:38 am

    soon to be FOUR losing campaigns …
    and Trump tells people he hires the best
    people

    Mac45 in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 12:42 pm

    Actually, RNC people are now saying that 1237 will NOT necessarily win the nomination. Now we have another story that Cruz supporters have been awarded all but one of the delegate slots in Maine. Even though the delegates were supposed to be allotted based upon percentage of the popular vote. If Trump goes into the convention with 1237 awarded delegates, and does NOT receive the nomination, it will essentially hand the election to the Democrats, as the Trump supporters will simply not bother to vote. There is still a good chance of these voters staying home, in November, if Trump comes in way ahead of all the other candidates, in the popular vote, and close to 1237 delegates and loses the nomination. The voters will understand, all too well, that their vote means little to the party leadership. It will simply reinforce their belief that the Republican Party, and its elected politicians, have no intention of listening to the rank and file members of the party. And, it is the rank and file members who elect politicians, not the party leadership or its backers.

      Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | April 24, 2016 at 1:08 pm

      You seem to literally be driven to keep literally distorting both current reality AND history with your “rank and file” bullshit. And I mean that literally.

      Perhaps you are not a ‘reader’. Here’s a visual aid…

      http://i2.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2016/04/Lincoln-Convention.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=580%2C532

      genes in reply to Mac45. | April 24, 2016 at 1:13 pm

      One person that can have no affect on the convention because he’s on the RNC rules committee that has already met and made no changes. Not the convention committee of delegates that haven’t met and might make changes.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Mac45. | April 25, 2016 at 2:07 am

      Trump is gonna be around 200 delegates short for the convention, barring some really impressive divine intervention.

      so he will have around 1000, Cruz will likely have just under 900, which will likely be supplemented by Rubio’s delegates. So Trump isn’t gonna come in “way ahead” he may come in closest, but close counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, not Presidential nominations.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Mac45. | April 25, 2016 at 6:42 pm

      Yes, so many of the delegates are cruz supporters, the bound delegates will still have to cast the vote that they are bound to on the first round. What Trump and his team are whining about is that they didn’t do enough research to realize that those delegates for the most part are only bound on the first vote. They just made the assumption that once they had a delegate the delegate was theirs for the duration. Well as usual when someone makes an assumption they have now made an ass of out of themselves and uption. Ignorance of the rules does not make those rules corrupt or unfair.

        conservative tarheel in reply to Gremlin1974. | April 25, 2016 at 8:48 pm

        Gemlin1974 said:
        Yes, so many of the delegates are cruz supporters, the bound delegates will still have to cast the vote that they are bound to on the first round. What Trump and his team are whining about is that they didn’t do enough research to realize that those delegates for the most part are only bound on the first vote. They just made the assumption that once they had a delegate the delegate was theirs for the duration. Well as usual when someone makes an assumption they have now made an ass of out of themselves and uption. Ignorance of the rules does not make those rules corrupt or unfair.

        and yet this is the same clown that wants us to believe that
        he is going to work some great deals for us on trade – right?
        and he can not be bothered to read the rules … then whines
        when someone does read the rules and wins …

“Anatomy of how a phony Cruz media talking point was born”

Reference everything at your convenience.

Rafael Cruz also has a favorability problem.
Here is the link to the Cruz charts, from that Huff post site: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/ted-cruz-favorable-rating What is going on at the end, the more recent months? oops.. It is rising fast, almost exponentially. hmmmmm

    Ragspierre in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 9:05 am

    You REALLY NEED to learn to read a chart. His polling for the last several weeks has been constant.

    The “Morning Consult” numbers have not moved within the MOE.

    Could your poor old eyes be seeing things that aren’t there, like the “poor lil’ Cruz girls”…???

      amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 9:33 am

      I looked at the Huff post collection of polls, shown by months, the same place linked in the original topic post. The whole poll thing is like the tail wagging the dog, and this is an issue across the board, especially in the information age. I also looked at John Kasich chart, which seemed really screwball. I wondered if there was a statistically significant difference between internet(social media) and telephone polling.. But, since that involves math I am going for a walk.

        genes in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 10:47 am

        Telephone polling, they call “random” phone numbers and the people respond or tell them to f off. sometimes they lie.
        Internet polling, someone finds the poll and posts a link on their favorite site that is pro or con. people then hit the poll and for real controversy, they might use multiple browsers or clear the cookies so they can respond multiple times.

          amwick in reply to genes. | April 24, 2016 at 5:39 pm

          Polling is complicated. I can see that more than ever. Looking at the Huffington post page just shows how difficult it is to compare numbers when so many different methods are used. I still wonder why they used 219 polls for Rafael, 135 for Donald and 399 for Hillary.

Prof. Jacobson/Fuzzy Slippers: At some point someone will do a thorough study of how pro-Trump social media (let’s not even get started about Fox News) has influenced this campaign. To me, this is the most important part of the post…

The favor-ability ratings shown are from the Huff post collection of polls.. Note that they used 219 different polls for Rafael Cruz and 135 polls for Donald Trump… Is it possible they omitted the results of more positive polls for Donald Trump? Is it possible they included more negative polls for Rafael? All this data flying around is a chimera of sorts. I supposed you can collect polling information like flowers, and make a bouquet look like whatever you want.
And… at least half the polls were from internet surveys. I think that is a real game changer across the board.
Follow the money, and consider the source(polls)…

    Ragspierre in reply to amwick. | April 24, 2016 at 9:34 am

    “…and consider the source…”

    Yeah. Huffing Pros. Not high up on my trusted (but still verify) conservative information sources.

      amwick in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 4:57 pm

      You know it didn’t take long to find out that there have been studies that compare telephone vs Internet polls. With very few exception negatives tend to be more negative on Internet polls. Back in the days of Ronald Reagan, the polls were done on the phone. Comparing polls now and then isn’t quite so simple. Huff post combines many, many polls both telephone and internet.

Looks like this has turned into a private party, with you all sitting around in a circle… so I’ll go away, wouldn’t want to upset any of you while you’re busy agreeing with each other.

This must be how those caucuses work! You just drive off everyone with a different point of view, how simple.

I’m still supporting Donald Trump. He’s got all the right enemies (and far too many that shouldn’t be enemies, but who believe the BS put out by the Establishment, which is sad.)

I do wish everyone here well, and hope that someday this site will return to sanity.

Goodbye.

    Mac45 in reply to Eskyman. | April 24, 2016 at 12:51 pm

    I hope that Eskyman does not mind me using him as example. If he does I apologize.

    But, this sums up exactly what I have been trying to explain. Trump supporters do not necessarily support Donald Trump, the person. They are supporting him because he is an anti-establishment candidate who is being actively, and publicly, opposed by the Establishment. This is the kind of person who is turning out in droves to attend rallies and voted for Trump. These voters were created by the policies and practices of the Republican Party. But, if the Republican Party does not embrace them, they will not be visible during the General Election. The ball is very much in the hands of the Republican leadership, at the moment. What happens in November is up to them.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Mac45. | April 24, 2016 at 4:41 pm

      You do realize that neither Trump nor Cruz are establishment candidates, right?

      So many of those that you suppose will stay home, actually won’t.

      Also, many of those voting for Trump are voting for the person who seems to be ahead and will still vote Republican.

      Much like Trumps hands your little rebellion is much smaller than it appears.

    JackRussellTerrierist in reply to Eskyman. | April 25, 2016 at 1:24 am

    Caio, baby. Come back in July so we can hear in the pain in your whine about how the orange toad got robbed! 🙂

Sorry to bring a bit of reality here but a couple things.

1. Cruz’s only possible path to the nomination us through bribery and cash payoffs to delegates plus continuing his capitulation tobthe GOPe.

2. If Cruz’s briberycand payoffs to delegates should work and Cruz gets the nomination then:

A. Name the states that Mitt Romney lost that Cruz will win and will give him majority of electoral votes.

B. How does Cruz win Florida or Ohio against Hillary when he came in 3rd in both Primaries.

At this point in time in 1980 Reagan was down in general election polls to Jimmy Carter by high double digits. The GOPe was hysterical against Reagan and was pushing Bush. Just like with Trump and another Bush in 2016.

I will never support a candidate who is such a duplicitous liar like Cruz. A person who claims to be principled but whose actions show is completely dishonest and whose only path to the nomination is literally through bribery and cash payoffs to delegates and the RNC.

    conservative tarheel in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 1:13 pm

    so because a candidate reads the rules and understands
    and uses them to his advantage. that is cheating.
    hmm when Donald uses rules i.e.: bankruptcy for example
    to walk away from a pile of debt, and uses the rules to do it.
    that is ok. that is smart, but when someone else does it
    and it doesn’t help Donald then that is cheating? got it.

      The Soviet Union had rules and regulations. Just because the rules and regulations exist doesn’t make them good or bad. That is a judgement left to the individual.

      Most republican leaning voters had no idea they were just a façade. They are now finding out. They do not like it.

      the R party is just as corrupt as the d party. At every level.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Barry. | April 24, 2016 at 4:36 pm

        Well that is just untrue. Most republican voters were more than aware of how things worked in their states, the republican voters of the states aren’t the ones doing the pissing and moaning, all of that is coming from Trump and his supporters, many of whom aren’t even residents of the states they are moaning about.

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 1:14 pm

    Lies are not “reality”. They…and YOU…are affronts to reality.

    You are an infamous liar, who has declared you’ll vote a Deemocrat ticket if your stinking, lying Collectivist fraud is not immaculated.

      The quality of Cruz the candidate is reflected by the quality of his supporters like Ragspierre. He has none.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 1:49 pm

        Actually, Cruz’s quality is reflected in his endorsements, which out-number those of Der Donald, and never require that people sell out and completely reverse their prior positions, ala Sell Out Sarah Palin.

    genes in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 1:15 pm

    bribery and threats are Trump’s methods of getting his way.

    Evan3457 in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 6:00 pm

    There is no real evidence that Cruz has “bribed” or “paid off” anyone to win delegates on the second ballot, if there is one.

    There is no real evidence he’s cheated on his wife, either.

    There is no real evidence he’s a globalist, for that matter.

      spartan in reply to Evan3457. | April 24, 2016 at 7:35 pm

      You posted:

      There is no real evidence that Cruz has “bribed” or “paid off” anyone to win delegates on the second ballot, if there is one.

      There is no real evidence he’s cheated on his wife, either.

      There is no real evidence he’s a globalist, for that matter.

      Response:

      I think Trumpmania has collided with George Costanza: “Just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.”

      Yet Phony Gary et al. persevere ……

    The Livewire in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 8:21 pm

    So let me see if I follow Gary Brit’s ‘logic’.

    If I accuse him of providing sexual favors for his internet bill, we must assume those accusations are true, unless he files a lawsuit?

    Just trying to follow his ‘logic’. It seems a lot like Harry Reid’s.

So nobody can name even a single state that Romney lost that Cruz will win, which means CRUZ CAN’T WIN AGAINST HILLARY.

In fact Cruz will NOT even win as many states as Romney.

Cruz can’t bribe and make payoffs to the members of the electoral college.

“In fact Cruz will NOT even win as many states as Romney.”

Huh…

I thought that necromancy was frowned on among “conservative Catholics”.

But so it lying. You lying liar who lies.

    So nobody can name even a single state that Romney lost that Cruz will win, which means CRUZ CAN’T WIN AGAINST HILLARY.

    In fact Cruz will NOT even win as many states as Romney.

    Cruz can’t bribe and make payoffs to the members of the electoral college.

PA – 2016 GOP Presidential Primary: Donald Trump 45% – Ted Cruz 27% – John Kasich 24% – (NBC/WSJ/Marist 04/24/2016)
Ted Cruz
Donald Trump

Source: NBC/WSJ/Marist

Method: Phone

Date: 04/18/2016 – 04/20/2016

Voters: 571 (Likely voters)

Margin of Error: 4.1 %

Full Result:

Trump 45%
Cruz 27%
Kasich 24

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 1:46 pm

    Yes, stupid. We ALL expect Der Donald to do will with fellow Collectivists in the NE.

    Duh.

    We ALSO know he’ll lose to any Deemocrat in the NE in the general.

    And that DOES NOT require a crystal ball. Just good sense.

      So nobody can name even a single state that Romney lost that Cruz will win, which means CRUZ CAN’T WIN AGAINST HILLARY.

      In fact Cruz will NOT even win as many states as Romney.

      Cruz can’t bribe and make payoffs to the members of the electoral college.

        Please stop spamming this site with the same copy and pasted messages.

        Thank you.

          You are just a pitiful person. Trying to get you and the rest of your cabal to answer a legitemate question directly related to the subject of the professors post by repeating it against the bullcrap deflections and name calling of your pets is not spamming.

          It is not possible for me to post what I really think of you. You are no different from the scum that make up the twitter and facebook censors of unapproved speech.

          No one is censoring you, Gary, just asking that you not copy and paste the same exact comment multiple times in the same or across threads. It’s a reasonable request.

          “Well, THAT’s a bunch of lies, lying liar who lies.”

          spartan in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | April 24, 2016 at 7:10 pm

          Don’t worry Fuzzy,

          Phony Gary will go from “cut and paste” to ‘cut and run’. When challenged, he never addresses the challenge.

        Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 2:38 pm

        Aww…c’mon, Gaghdad Bob Britt.

        Be HONEST. Tell us all off.

        Let your psychotic self break like VotingTamale did yesterday.

        Be BRAVE and come on out… Call the Prof. some names for supporting Cruz. You know you want to. You know you do…

          name even a single state that Romney lost that Cruz will win, which means CRUZ CAN’T WIN AGAINST HILLARY.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 3:14 pm

          I couldn’t have named states that Reagan would win this far out…or on the night of the general.

          You lying SOS.

          So you admit this far out you can’t say if Cruz can win and that means you also can’t say if Trump wins or loses.

          And this far out you agree national polls of general election matchups are meaningless because they will change and also because national polls are meaningless in a general election that is really 50 separate state by state winner take all elections.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | April 24, 2016 at 3:52 pm

          No. I “admit” none of that lying crap.

          I said what I said. You’re lying if you take anything beyond that.

          You are SUCH an idiot.

        Gremlin1974 in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 3:25 pm

        At this point to figure that out we would need Mrs. Cleo. Can you name a state the Romney lost that Trump will win? The answer is no because at this point you are just guessing.

        However, national polling has shown Trump getting curb stomped by Hillary consistently, while Cruz has improved against her to a virtual tie. So I guess now you will claim that all national polls are bias.

          spartan in reply to Gremlin1974. | April 24, 2016 at 6:57 pm

          Thank you!

          You are dealing with a poster who cherry-picks his data to prove his inartful arguments. I notice it has been 3 hours and Phony Gary has not responded to your challenge. That is likely, because the results are catastrophic:

          In Wisconsin, Cruz is within the MOE (-1.3) to Clinton while Trump is down double digits (-10 to 12).

          In PA, Cruz is via RCP average -7 to Clinton but 2 of the 6 polls have Cruz tied or within the MOE. Trump is -7.4 to Clinton and only 1 poll shows a tie.

          In OH, Cruz is via the RCP average -2.2 to Clinton, with Cruz winning 2 of the four polls taken. Meanwhile, Trump is -4 to Clinton and winning 1 of the 4 polls taken.

          In FL, Cruz is via the RCP average -5 to Clinton, winning 1 of the 6 polls taken and within the MOE in another. Meanwhile, Trump is -2.2. Trump won 3 of the 6 polls taken and within the MOE in another.

          In NY, both Clinton and Sanders handily defeat Trump and Cruz by 20+.
          And in MA, where Trump also handily won the primary; Trump is -36 to Hillary and Cruz is -33 to Hillary.

          Based on this sampling of polls, I think Cruz would be a much better candidate than Phony Gary has us believe.

          spartan in reply to Gremlin1974. | April 24, 2016 at 8:56 pm

          Meanwhile …..
          In NH, another YUUUGE Trump primary win:

          Trump is -10.2 to Hillary in the RCP average of state polls. The latest poll shows Trump at -19.
          Cruz is -5.2 and the latest poll shows Cruz at -14.

          The hits keep right on comin’ ……

        The fact that most people here won’t engage with you in dialog does no mean you’re right. It means you’re a blowhard that nobody wants to talk to.

        Evan3457 in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 5:58 pm

        Will win?
        I dunno.
        Can win? Sure: Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Wisconsin.
        That’ll be enough.

        Why do I think he can win them? One word: Hillary.

          Cruz came in 3rd in both Ohio and Florida. In Ohio Kasich who is basically a democrat beat Trump by just 3.5% points. Cruz was distant third. As a rigid pure conservative Cruz will never win either of those states. Without Florida and Ohio Cruz can never win general election.

          Finally your reasoning “because Hillary” applies to any candidate and is not a justification of why Cruz should be nominated.

          Evan3457 in reply to Evan3457. | April 24, 2016 at 7:15 pm

          He came in 3rd in both of those states because of home state candidates in both.

          He can win both, head to head, vs. Hillary.

    Ragspierre admits Cruz is just regional candidate. Cruz can’t compete outside of mormon states and mostly rural caucus states. Or without payoffs to delegates and tge GOPe.

      Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 2:09 pm

      Well, THAT’s a bunch of lies, lying liar who lies.

      Gremlin1974 in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 4:32 pm

      I would point out to you that accusations of a candidate paying off delegates is a very serious charge. Serious enough that doing so without evidence can carry serious legal consequences of its own. So unless you have some evidence of payoffs being made I would hold my tongue. I realize you are ignorant and delusional, but I have never seen you as stupid until now.

        If Cruz isn’t, hasn’t and has no intention of giving money and gifts and other forms of compebsation to delegates who promise to vote for him at convention (otherwise known as bribes and payoffs in common parlance) and he is offended by my expression then he should sue me or run to one or more government agencies and cry to them about it.

          Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 6:56 pm

          Nobody cares about you, Gaghdad Bob.

          You’re just a hiss and a by-word. A microscopic fleck of flea shit on the long scroll of history.

          spartan in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 7:07 pm

          You said:

          If Cruz isn’t, hasn’t and has no intention of giving money and gifts and other forms of compebsation to delegates who promise to vote for him at convention (otherwise known as bribes and payoffs in common parlance) and he is offended by my expression then he should sue me or run to one or more government agencies and cry to them about it.

          My response:
          What is with the lawsuit challenges? First Trump, then Roger Stone, now you? Only idiots and bullies use this tactic.
          What is wrong with your spelling?

          Gremlin1974 in reply to Gary Britt. | April 25, 2016 at 6:52 pm

          Or maybe since he was the one there, he actually talked to people, and convinced them that he was the best option and much more stable than Trump. Which Trump could have done if he had actually shown up.

Funny I know I was young at the time, but I don’t remember Reagan threatening to sue anyone for following the rules.

RI – 2016 GOP Presidential Primary: Donald Trump 38% – John Kasich 25% – Ted Cruz 14% – (Brown Univ. 04/24/2016)
John Kasich
Donald Trump

Source: Brown Univ.

Method: Phone

Date: 04/19/2016 – 04/21/2016

Voters: (Likely voters)

Margin of Error: – %

Full Result:

Trump 38%
Kasich 25%
Cruz 14%

A new Fox News poll of likely California primary voters released late Friday shows Trump leading the Republican field with 49%, leading both Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who is at a distant second with 22%, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich at 20%. A poll by CBS/YouGov has Trump as the same.

“We have a very important job to do in California,” said Tim Clark, Trump’s state director. According to the Los Angeles Times, he added “By harnessing the excitement surrounding Mr. Trump’s candidacy, it’s our intention to deliver 172 delegates for Trump to the national convention” during the June 7 California primary.

http://www.breitbart.com/california/2016/04/24/polls-look-good-for-trump-victory-in-california-and-beyond/

Donald Trump Jr.: “Cruz Has No Chance Without Bribing Delegates

TRUMP JR: Well listen, I think we’re going to do what we need to do to win, to a point, but I think we want to win without having to do that. You know, Ted Cruz has no chance of winning this without bribing the delegates. That’s his game at this point, okay, he’s mathematically eliminated, but that’s been his game from day one because he’s not an appealing candidate to the general election voter, so he’ll try to get there, he’ll do this, he’ll lose more states than Mitt Romney, because I can’t name a single state that Mitt lost that Ted can possibly win.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/04/24/donald_trump_jr_cruz_has_no_chance_wihtout_bribing_delegates.html

    Ragspierre in reply to Gary Britt. | April 24, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    Is he one of the Deemocrats who couldn’t vote for daddy?

    I ALWAYS invest super credence in those guys! Especially when they’re Stepford kids like Donald Jr. who have NOTHING to gain from kissing daddy’s ass.

conservative tarheel | April 24, 2016 at 7:55 pm

I wish we had an ignore function …

I’m not sure if I mentioned it, but Trump is a clown.

    Barry in reply to Matt_SE. | April 25, 2016 at 1:04 am

    Takes one to know one.

    Get used to it. Soon enough you will be saying President Clown.

    It is however, a real clown show here. The cruz cult clown show.

      conservative tarheel in reply to Barry. | April 25, 2016 at 4:26 am

      I did think people thought Hillary was a clown ….

      I have other names for it.
      but Trump loses to Hillary …

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend