It sure worked for that Hitler guy.
Indeed it did. Quite the broken clock that man was, no?
Hopefully, Germany rediscovers the nationalism that they lost before they're completely consumed by Islam. As it is, their pathologically guilt-driven preoccupation with the 'what would Hitler do' meme is making them too over-scrupulous to defend themselves against cultural incursions (see also: Cologne, et al.).
In any event, it also worked very well for the US prior to the onset of Critical Theory and Postmodernism (not to mention KGB activity) in the mid-50s..
But will that work outside the far right voters who are pushing Trump's campaign to the lead right now? His weird popularity among the primary voters doesn't necessarily translate in the general. I know many who would rather vote Hillary over Trump, and they fucking hate Hillary. Many of those Rubio, Cruz, and Kasich crowd just may stay home this November.
I don't believe the Cruz voters will stay home. Possibly a portion of the Rubios--and an even larger portion of the Kasichs. And I'm skeptical of the idea that Hillary could flip Republican voters. She is damaged goods, and it's about to get a lot worse with Trump putting her scandals on blast for the next six months. Thus far, Trump's adversarial virtue is that he can't be ignored and, in fact, intensifies the response of his opponents who are ultimately affected by his critique whether they try to ignore him or not. Costa Mesa is the prime example of this, what with his rhetoric motivating people to march/riot on his rally with Mexican flags and posters that say, "Make America Mexico Again". LAT was compelled to gently tell them to shut up for fear of being too revealing. Like it or not, Trump's bombastic approach triggered the lefties into exposing their particular brand of extremism, which will scare away more moderate democrats as time goes on. I can easily see the Trump campaign using the Costa Mesa footage for ads that attack Big business for selling out American citizens for cheap immigrant labor. And it will work.
These days, the key to destroying a candidate's viability--or at least potential viability--has more to do with shaming his voter-base than it does with pointing out his idiocy or corruption; if you vote for Trump, you're a racist Islamophobe. But with him, the Bradley Effect sets in. This is opposed to the once fashionable candidate Hillary whose corruption is well known and is also on the verge of an indictment. By the time Trump's campaign is through, I suspect that Hillary will have developed so much ill repute, that people will be too embarrassed to vote for her. And quite frankly, it does not take much to stymie Clinton in a one-on-one. All it took was one coal miner to beat her the fuck out on television.
To digress somewhat, one of the reasons that Romney and McCain failed so hard with people who weren't diehard 'Republican at all cost' types is because they were milquetoasty, demoralizing fuckwits who didn't capitalize on their advantages (admittedly, Romney tried to do that once during the debates, but he flubbed). They had footage of Bell, Wright, and the Weathermen to use against Obama, but refused to implement any of it. Ultimately, their apparent fealty to Political Correctness proved to be a crucial aspect of their undoing. I just don't see that happening with Trump--especially since he's attracted more black and Latino voters than either of the last two GOP candidates. Compared to those two, Trump apologizes for nothing (for better or worse), thus deflecting any onus of apology placed on his camp.
