There hasn’t been a time in decades when the Left has been so concerned about a presidential election. Sure, there have been times when the election has been close, but a strong get out the vote effort, a scheme to prevent our overseas military’s vote from counting, coupled with a unparalled voter fraud network has always kept the Democrat contender in the race. With November only eight months away, is there going to be enough time to cast enough dead, illegal and mulitple votes from single voters to make up the difference in the massive number of voters Donald Trump will bring to the polls?
The Left is panicking and the paid protesters who threatened Trump supporters and rioted in Chicago are proof they’re losing their grip on the election. Donald Trump has them running scared, and that can only be a good thing, as America has never been in more trouble than we are today. Electing a candidate from the party who has intentionally divided and pitted Americans against each other for eight long years is no longer an option for anyone who loves our country.
Here’s a sample of what’s happening today in Florida:
— Lady MAGA ~Bethany (@thetimewasthen) March 14, 2016
Donald Trump’s supporters aren’t fazed by his decision to cancel an appearance at a Chicago rally over the weekend—in fact, they are more likely to vote for him to be the Republican nominee because of it.
That’s according to a new poll of likely Republican voters conducted by Monmouth University. It confirms something I’ve long suspected (and have argued in previous articles): the antics of left-wing agitators are driving ordinary people into the arms of Trump.
The poll noted that pro-Trump and anti-Trump forces clashed in Chicago last Friday, which prompted Trump to cancel the event. It then asked respondents whether this fact made them more or less likely to support Trump. Just 11 percent said they were less likely to support Trump because of this decision. Another 22 percent said they were actually more likely to back Trump, and 66 percent said their views were unchanged.
Leftist protesters who vehemently oppose Trump would do well to remember that in a free society, even contemptible speakers are permitted to be heard. As New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait wrote in a recent piece:
But the whole premise of democracy is that rules need to be applied in every case without regard to the merit of the underlying cause to which it is attached. If you defend the morality of a tactic against Trump, then you should be prepared to defend its morality against any candidate. Now imagine that right-wing protesters had set out to disrupt Barack Obama’s speeches in 2008. If you’re not okay with that scenario, you should not be okay with protesters doing it to Trump.
Indeed. But the Monmouth poll is good evidence that letting Trump speak is not merely the morally correct, philosophically consistent course of action: It’s the tactically sound one as well. When the left stops Trump from speaking, Trump wins. He gets to tell his people that the forces of far-left activism and political correctness are trying to silence him. Implicitly, he is suggesting to his followers that when he becomes president, the tides will turn: see his promise to make it easier to sue newspapers for criticizing him. Trump supporters adore this shtick. Stop giving them ammunition.