• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Donald Trump a Democratic plant?

cmikes

Muse
Joined
Dec 11, 2014
Messages
623
First off, I've skimmed some of the threads in the 2016 Politics board, particularly the Trump thread, but I haven't read all (currently) 84 pages of it, so if this is covered elsewhere, my apologies. Also, there's currently no proof of the allegation that Donald Trump is a plant from the Democratic Party to split the vote and ensure a Hillary win, so it belongs more on this board in any case.

It's no secret that until very recently, Trump was a liberal Democrat much more in line with the current progressive outlook than any conservative strain of thought. An opinion piece from Jamie Weinstein at the Daily Caller goes over just some of Trump's recent liberal positions.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/13/imagine-if-donald-trump-ran-as-a-democrat-its-not-too-hard-to-do/


His rhetoric on immigration also wouldn’t fly in a Democratic primary. But if he made the decision to position himself as a Democrat contender back in 2010, he would never have called for the deportation of all the illegal immigrants in the country. In fact, after Mitt Romney lost in 2012, Trump criticized the Republican contender’s rhetoric on immigration as “mean-spirited,” which suggests Trump’s instincts on illegal immigration may be less harsh than what we are seeing today

“The Democrats didn’t have a policy for dealing with illegal immigrants, but what they did have going for them is they weren’t mean-spirited about it,” Trump told Newsmax. “They didn’t know what the policy was, but what they were is they were kind.”


Basically, the piece makes the point that if Trump had the same positions he had in 2010, he would make a much stronger Democratic candidate than a Republican one. But we're supposed to believe that in just four years, his entire political outlook changed, more than that, that it did a complete 180 degrees flip? Yes, Reagan changed parties from Democrat to Republican also, but that was a process that took a fairly long time and the Democratic Party indisputably moved farther to the left during that time.

The most common conspiracy theory I've seen is that Trump is doing this as a strict quid pro quo with the Clintons. That, in exchange for running either as an easily beatable Republican nominee or a base splitting third party candidate, he'll be rewarded with special treatment by the second Clinton Administration. Either special tax breaks, government subsidies of some sort, deals to let him take whatever land he wants through eminent domain, or something else currently unknown.

To me, this conspiracy theory fails for a couple of reasons, but the biggest, in my opinion, is Trump's ego. My feeling is that Trump is way too much of an egotist to be playing second fiddle to anyone, particularly in a plan that requires him to deliberately lose what is, for him, a popularity contest.

I submit that a much more likely scenario takes advantage of Trump's ego, rather than works against it. It's been reported by several news outlets, including the Washington Post, that Trump had at least one conversation with Bill Clinton in the spring before he made the decision to run.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bill-clinton-called-donald-trump-ahead-of-republicans-2016-launch/2015/08/05/e2b30bb8-3ae3-11e5-b3ac-8a79bc44e5e2_story.html


Now, we of course have no idea what was actually said during that conversation, but it's easy to imagine something like this.

[Redneck accent]Don, I just want you to know that I've had a ton of people tell me how much they respect your opinion and think that if you ran it would be a great thing for this country and they would definitely support you. I think someone with your intelligence and charm could really make a difference.[/Redneck accent]

An exaggeration, of course, but no one's ever said that Bill Clinton isn't a master of telling people what they want to hear. I find this to be much more likely scenario than any kind of quid pro quo conspiracy.

Thoughts?
 
Never ascribe to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by madness.
 
Never ascribe to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by madness.

Indeed.
Seeing Mr. Trump as an almost pathological opportunist explains all past and current behaviour.

The OP makes the mistake of thinking that Donald Trump has a core set of political values and, like almost all Americans, would never adopt the exact opposite without a profoundly life-changing experience or the promise of wealth and power. Trump is not a Democrat or Republican or even a Libertarian. Trump is a Trumpist.
 
Last edited:
Motivation is often very difficult to establish. But I tend to agree with Kurt Vonnegut Jr:

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."

In the case of Trump- I really don't care who he believes himself to be: if he says and does awful things, then he is an awful man. I am certain that Stalin (to avoid bringing up Nazis) believed in his heart that he was forced to do dreadful things by circumstances, but that he was a good person who had only the best interests of the Soviet Union in mind. Well, I don't care what you are thinking, I only care what you are doing. In fact I am willing to reverse this concept: one may have the most evil and corrupt of hearts and only pretend to be a good person, but if you end up doing only good in this way as a way to hide your "true" evil nature, that's fine by me. You become the role you are playing, and if you give starving children food but inside your heart you hate them for it, so what? They are still being fed. This of course assumes that you don't at some point unmask and start doing evil. Think what you wish- but I will judge you by what you do.
 
Last edited:
To me, this conspiracy theory fails for a couple of reasons, but the biggest, in my opinion, is Trump's ego. My feeling is that Trump is way too much of an egotist to be playing second fiddle to anyone, particularly in a plan that requires him to deliberately lose what is, for him, a popularity contest.
A contest, yes. But I don't think Trump intends to win the presidency. I think he is just riding the popularity for all it's worth, and only the reason he has apparently 'changed his entire political outlook' is because that's where the audience is. He probably never expected to get this far...

After this is all over, what's the betting that Trump turns around and calls all his supporters racist morons?

OTOH, your idea that the Clintons put him up to it makes sense. Experts agree that Hillary is a despicable piece of work, and her husband is no better. The only question is: how many people did they kill to get the money to pay him?
 
You guys really don't understand politics do you?

He is running to the right to get the nomination, he'll then soften to the middle. Most liberals will be pleasantly surprised at how left he is.

Did you know he loves your progressive income tax?
He's planning on raising taxes for the wealthy.
 
I had been mentally composing a post very similar to the OP.

I think its a real possibility.

Scenario:

Bill Clinton asked Trump for his help getting his wife elected. I'll assume no "quid pro quo" per se´, but just that they'd owe Trump in some way for his help. After all, Trump has contributed to Hillary in the past.

He was tasked with going after the leading Republican candidate, as outrageously as possible. Question their faith or their looks or whatever. He's attacking Jeb Bush in a debate as I type this

And then, after demeaning the entire Republican field with his nonsense, he will eliminate himself with even more outrageous behavior. Then maybe run as a third party candidate, splitting the party and almost guaranteeing Hillary the presidency.

I imagine at this point he's wondering, "What the hell do I have to do? I've questioned John McCain's bravery. I've called Carly Fiorina ugly. I've even mocked a cripple! And these clowns still have me leading!"

Anyway, I'm usually quite far from being a conspiracy theorist. But right now, everything seems to fit the above hypothesis. It remains my best guess as to what's really going on here.
 
Last edited:
I don't know, but I found receipts on the intrawebs showing that Hillary bought coffee at a starbucks at 120 W 56th street, New York.
 
I had a Democratic plant once, a spider plant. When it died I replaced it with something much more conservative, a Ficus.


Either one would be a better POTUS than trump.
 
He's a birther. And has great admiration for Joe Arpaio.

Or, if he is a democrat plant, he got everybody's attention by sounding like a loud birther, setting the stage for the official resolution of the birther issue.
 

Back
Top Bottom