ROMNEY AND RUBIO ATTEMPT 2016 CONVENTION THEFT
The KKK/David Duke links are absurd slander. But Trump's performance on the debate stage on March 3, 2016 was not so good. Posted on 3/4/2016.
On March 3, 2016 Mitt Romney (the 2012 Republican nominee for President) launched an unprecedented attack on Donald Trump. Since Romey didn't endorse any other candidate it looked like he was trying to impose a brokered convention where he would be chosen as the nominee. As part of his attack he falsely claimed that Trump did not disavow support from David Duke. In fact, Trump had come out strongly against Duke on many occasions since 1991. Trump, who conducted his “State of the Union” interview remotely from Florida, blamed a bad earpiece for his refusal to disavow Duke and condemn his politics during his interview with Tapper. Trump said he could “hardly hear what [Tapper] was saying.” He later disavowed Duke many times, but his opponents unfairly refused to listen to him. On Figure 1 the axis term is CONVENTION THEFT. At the same absolute skip are DUKE and the current Hebrew year (5)776 which is the year of the convention. Crossing and sharing letters with CONVENTION THEFT are ESTABLISHMENT and ROMNEY, but they aren't at special case skips (+/- 1 or the absolute skip of the axis term). There are also ELSs of RUBIO and ATTEMPT. Figure 1 was found against odds of 3,333 to 1.
Figure 1 above with its probability spreadsheet below.
The current problem with Duke began in an interview of Trump by Jake Tapper on Feb. 28 on CNN’s “State of the Union.” Here’s what FactCheck.org indicates was said:
Tapper, Feb. 28: I want to ask you about the Anti-Defamation League, which this week called on you to publicly condemn unequivocally the racism of former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who recently said that voting against you at this point would be treason to your heritage. Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don’t want his vote or that of other white supremacists in this election?
Trump: Well, just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke. OK? I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don’t know.
Trump went on to say that he did not want to condemn any groups until he knew something about them. He told Tapper to “give me a list of the groups” and he would review them. But Tapper returned to Duke.
Tapper: OK. I mean, I’m just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here, but…
Trump: I don’t know any — honestly, I don’t know David Duke. I don’t believe I have ever met him. I’m pretty sure I didn’t meet him. And I just don’t know anything about him.
The FactCheck.org article entitled Trump's David Duke Amnesia goes on to document many political concerns that Trump had previously expressed about Duke. So, either he has amnesia or a momentary brain fart, or (more likely) his earpiece was not working well. Even if the earpiece was working, there is no indication that Trump ever met Duke. He may have simply failed to make the immediate connection, perhaps because he was still thinking about another issue. I don't think he is dishonest, although at times I wish he were a good bit sharper.
EXAMPLES OF ANTI-DUKE, ANTI-KKK COMMENTS BY TRUMP. On February 14, 2000 Matt Lauer interviews Trump on NBC’s “Today Show.” Trump told Lauer the Reform Party was “self-destructing.”
Lauer, Feb. 14, 2000: When you say the party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?
Trump: Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined — a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party. Buchanan’s a disaster as we’ve, you know, covered. Jesse’s a terrific guy who just left the party. And he, you know, it’s unfortunate, but he just left the party. He’s going to be doing his Independence Party from Minnesota.
Trump also put out a statement that day, according to the New York Times, that referred to Duke as “a Klansman.”
New York Times, Feb. 14, 2000: Mr. Trump painted a fairly dark picture of the Reform Party in his statement, noting the role of Mr. Buchanan, along with the roles of David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, and Lenora Fulani, the former standard-bearer of the New Alliance Party and an advocate of Marxist-Leninist politics.
“The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani,” he said in his statement. “This is not company I wish to keep.”
There is no doubt that the Republican Establishment is working as hard as it can to bring on a brokered convention where they can steal the nomination from Trump.
Figure 2 - If Romney has any delusions about gaining the nomination at the convention in 2016, they are not supported by the Torah Code Experiment. However, the excellent Figure 3 match found between ROMNEY and PRESIDENT in 2012 is not constrained by a year. It may indicate that we should not be so fast to count Romney out forever.
After it became embarassingly evident that Romney wants a brokered convention to choose him in 2016, I went back and looked at how his matrix for 2016 compared with others in my original experient. The matrix is shown above as Figure 2. Data and observations published for all candidates is shown below. For all candidates from best to worst, the Torah Codes matrices (with links to them) are ranked as follows with Democrats in blue, Republicans in red, an Independent Bloomberg in green, and Romney in yellow because he was too chicken to compete this year the right way. Romney ranked 24th out of 28 candidates, only beating Martin O'Mally (D), Rick Perry (R), George Pataki (R) and Lindsey Graham.
INTIAL TORAH CODES RANK OF ALL DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLICAN AND INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES COMBINED: |
JAMES WEBB 3,073 TO 1. (Dropped out but says he may run as an Independent) |
BOB JINDAL 873 to 1. (Dropped out) |
SCOTT WALKER 683 to 1. (Dropped out) |
LINCOLN CHAFEE 408 to 1. (Dropped out). |
JOHN KASICH 300.87 to 1. |
MICHAEL BLOOMBERG 249 to 1 |
BERNIE SANDERS 175.75 to 1 |
JEB BUSH 117.7 to 1. (dropped out) |
HILLARY CLINTON 87.98 to 1. |
MIKE HUCKABEE 83.9 to 1. Suspended campaign. |
MARCO RUBIO 79.9 to 1. |
TED CRUZ 63.8 to 1. |
RICK SANTORUM 39.2 to 1. Dropped out, endorsed Rubio. |
JOE BIDEN 38.1 to 1 (decided to not run, but may change his mind if Clinton is indicted). |
PAUL RYAN 31.08 to 1. (Not a candidate) |
DONALD TRUMP 28.47 to 1. |
BEN CARSON 12.86 TO 1. Dropped out. |
ELIZABETH WARREN 12.24 to 1. Not a candidate) |
ANDREW CUOMO 12.05 to 1. (Not a candidate) |
C. FIORINA 11.23 to 1. Dropped out. |
CHRIS CHRISTIE 10.35 to 1. Dropped out. |
RAND PAUL 8.61 to 1. (Dropped out) |
MITT ROMNEY 6 to 1. Did not run. |
MARTIN O'MALLEY 5.88 TO 1 Dropped out after Iowa caucus. |
RICK PERRY 5.3 to 1 (Dropped out) |
GEORGE PATAKI 3.93 to 1. Dropped out, endorsed Rubio. |
LINDSEY GRAHAM 1.72 TO 1 (Dropped out) |
Figure 3 - Best candidate results sought in 2012. This experiment only sought to match candidate names with the word for PRESIDENT. No year was included.
Figure 4 - TRUMP match with NOMINATE and PRESIDENT.
The original experiment found matching Donald Trump with 2016 and President occurred against odds of 28.47 to 1 (not that significant). Figure 4 above shows a match with DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT and NOMINATE that was found against odds of 1,568 to 1. However, before getting too excited, know that I did not (yet at least) search for NOMINATE in conjunction with any other candidate. So no ranking value can yet be assigned to the matrix.
Figure 4 was found against odds of 1,568 to 1.