A Summary of " Is Donald Trump Self-Destructing?

"
by Lisa Braat COV2C - 0885560
The Article Is Donald Trump Self-Destructing? by John Cassidy appears on 31
march 2016, the article asserts that Donald Trumps behavior have raised more
doubts about his temperament, judgement and command of policy issues and
analyses if it is self-destructing. The arguments made by Cassidy are summarized
below.
The first example the author states; Trump did not punish a campaign manager
who manhandled a female reporter, Michelle Fields and lied about it. Even though
Lewandowski looks guilty according to the author, Donald Trump is not firing him
or criticizing him like most candidates would do in this kind of situation. He
denied the evidence of the video and defended Lewandowskis actions. The
reaction of Trump was bad for his reputation. The author states that Trump looks
deluded, sexist, and cowardly but it also provides his political enemies with
ammunition to use against him. The topic got spoken a lot of in social media in a
negative way.
According to Cassidy the incident with Michelle Fields was not the only incident
that made Trump get into trouble with female voters. Last week a poll showed
forty-seven percent of Republican women would not vote for Trump. On top of
that Trump told a reporter that women who seek abortions should get some sort
of punishment. These words got used against him by his political opponents,
Cruz, Kasich and Hilary Clinton who made negative comments about it.
Cassidy states abortion is not the only issue where Trump does not have answers
for detailed questions. This also applies for his foreign policy and his trade policy,
etc. A former political adviser to Trump also said that he was concerned about
Trumps policy substance and ability. The cracks in his candidacy are becoming
visible according to Cassidy.
The question is how large a segment of the Republican electorates do support
Trump? Most analysts say about a third. To get a majority in delegates he needs
Republicans who not fully agree with his policy, to vote for him. He managed to
do this in some states but in others he did not. Wisconsin, where Trump has fortytwo delegates at stake seems to be a struggle. Cassidy says even if Trump loses
Wisconsin it does not imply that Trump will not get a majority. After Tuesday the
race moves to Northeastern Corridor, Trump hopes to get some big wins here.
According to Cassidy Trumps position is still strong and he remains the solid
favorite, even when the cracks are showing. Cassidy explains that Trumps
supporters like his nativism, his attacks on the media, and they like that he is not
a professional politician. A website that combines data from polls and betting
markets, made an estimation of sixty-six percent that Trump will be getting the
nomination.
The Never Trump movement wants to narrow the Republican field, unite antiTrump forces and keep pressuring Trump to see if he self-destructs. The author

concludes that it would be an exaggeration to say that this has already

happened, but his enemies have reasons to be encouraged.

A Summary of "Let them not come."

by Lisa Braat COV2C - 0885560
The Article Let them not come by print edition appears on 2 April 2016. The
article asserts that Hostility to large-scale European Union migration could decide
the referendum and it also discusses the effects of migration for Britain.
Polls show immigration is voters main concern, according to the author this
shows the issue was going to play strongly in the Brexit debate. Although
Camerons government has promised to bring down migration it increased. Much
of this is caused by a rise of EU immigrants.
There seems to be a consistency between hostility to immigration and support for
Brexit. According to the author the Leave campaigners ignore the economic
impact of migration but also discuss unrelated strings of the matter while doing
this.
According to Brexiteers migration bothers taxpayers, drives up welfare spending,
strains public services and intensifies the housing crisis. Some say that migration
steals jobs and reduces wages. Those who favour some immigration want an
Australian-style points system that would let cherry-pick Britain the best and
brightest.
The author gives answers to most of these claims. He states studies show that EU
migrants are net fiscal contributors. Migration adds pressure on housing but the
real problem is restrictions. Britains employment rate is at a new high, so there
is little sign of migrants taking natives jobs. As for the cherry-picking system he
shows a research that proves Britain does this a lot already.
The author concludes rich countries need migration to blossom, never to
maintain their public services. A growing population can create problems, but a
shrinking one is worse. The easiest way to reduce immigration to Britain is, to
wreck its economy, and leaving the EU is a quick way to do that. Brexiteers could
carelessly get what they wantbut the country would suffer for it.