Erick Erickson Is Scared of Donald Trump

[erpowers]

Erick Erickson did not uninvite Donald Trump from the Red State event because of what Trump said about Megyn Kelly; he uninvited Trump because Trump did not fall flat on his face at the Republican debate. If any of the other candidates had said the same thing about Megyn Kelly, or any other woman, especially Hillary Clinton, they probably would not have been uninvited. I am pretty certain that Erickson and his friend have said far worse things about women than what Trump said about Kelly.

Erickson and others were waiting for the Republican debate hoping that Trump would completely fail. After Trump did not look completely stupid Erickson need an excuse to keep Trump from the Red State event. The Kelly insult was just a convenient happening.

Erickson's action is about disrupting the Trump campaign. He did what he did in the hope that it will slow Trump's rise with Republican voters.

[1StrongBlackMan]

1. I completely agree ...

Trump took all the air out of the room with both his Kelly comment; but, more ... just being there. The only other memorable part of the debate was the Christie/Paul dust up ... and gop polling is indicating that none of the people on the stage (other than Carly F., on the JV stage) moved the needle even a little.

Yep ... Trump has to go. But I suspect disinviting him might prove to be a mistake ... I fully expect Trump to stage a big and glitzy, counter-event to Red States. And if that happens ... and Trump Marketing can make it appear it draws ... the gop has nowhere to go (besides, maybe, a plane crash or an indictment).

[Freelancer]

2. So, Trump can insult all hispanics and damage Mexican relations, but Megyn Kelly is sacred? WTF?

Faux didn't have Baer or Wallace go after Trump the hardest -- they had Kelly act as pit bull. Gosh, I wonder why?

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

3. Erickson was bashing Trump early yesterday on TV

because Trump refused to support the eventual GOP nominee. Megan Kelly had nothing to do with the uninvite.

[procon]

4. Of course, and given the historical evidence of Republicans disparaging women,

none of them are any different than Trump and have no room for criticism. Trump's ugly blustering is just a convenient opening for the GOP leadership and the other candidates to pile on him, and if not kill off their chief rival, at least they might wound him badly enough that they have an opening to advance their own campaigns.

Erickson does not control the same Republican base voters that finds Trump's swaggering braggadocio an appealing fascination. Excluding Trump could backfire and make him even more popular if those voters perceive him as a victim of the GOP establishment who want to eliminate his 'honesty'.

Look at the last election and how the base rallied around Herman Cain after every shocking expose was aired. They did not care what their guy had done as long as he kept saying all the vile nastiness that validated their own feelings. That was the only meter they used, and Trump, the masterful showman that he is, will keep delivering that by the bucket load.

[sub.theory]

5. The entire GOP estabilishment is wetting themselves

There is something of a civil war brewing in the GOP and Trump is bringing it all to a head. The Tea Party crazies are demanding control from the corporate conservatives, and that's not going over too very well with the corporate wing. Trump will rip the GOP apart. I just have that feeling. There is massive anger and blow back at Fox New right now like I have never seen before. I've also never seen such a blatant political hit on a candidate in a debate as what I saw Fox pull on Trump. The GOP establishment is currently wetting themselves about what is going on, because I think it is more than about Trump at this point. They are scared of not just losing a chance at the White House, but control of the party itself. Thus, the obvious panic to use such tactics as Erickson and Kelly have. They want this party insurrection shut down now.

For us, this is going to be amazing to watch. I know the Law of Unforeseen Consequences, but I can't at this point see how this can possibly hurt us. I think it's going to be fun to watch, honestly.

[hatrack]

10. It's really going to be fun watching what happens to Fox . . .

I mean, when you're holding a big balloon that's just bursting-full of shit (and you're the one who was wielding the hose) and it bursts with an emphatic *splat*, you're not really left with all that much.

I mean, what are they going to do without the Tealiban? Start reporting news?

[Brainstormy]

6. You think Trump didn't look completely stupid?

I must have watched a different debate. Frankly, I've never seen Trump NOT look stupid.

[pamela]

9. Exactly.

He DID look completely stupid. The problem the GOP faces with Trump is that's not a disqualifier fot the teabaggers, it's a prerequisite.

[JHB]

7. If anyone (Trump included) had said it about Hillary...

...(or Nancy Pelosi, or Elizabeth Warren, or any non-conservative woman), he wouldn't have just not-uninvited the speaker, he'd have applauded and retweeted with high-fives.

[starroute]

8. Erickson and Kelly have their own contentious history

So it's disingenuous for him to act as if he's defending her now.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/megyn-kelly-erick-erickson-lou-dobbs_n_3367571.html

Posted: 05/31/2013

Megyn Kelly methodically tore fellow Fox News pundits Erick Erickson and Lou Dobbs to shreds on Friday for their instantly infamous comments about women in the workplace.

Both men had a near meltdown about a study which showed that more women than ever were the sole or primary breadwinners in their households. They agreed that it signalled a terrible new trend for civilization itself. Erickson even brought the animal kingdom up, saying, "When you look at biology, look at the natural world, the roles of a male and a female in society, and other animals, the male typically is the dominant role." . . .

Kelly was loaded for bear when Dobbs and Erickson joined her on her Friday show, and she let both men have it. "What makes you dominant and me submissive and who died and made you scientist-in-chief?" was her first question to Erickson. Try as he might, he failed to convince her.

When he said that many in the Pew study agreed with his discomfort about the role of women, she shot back, "Just because you have people who agree with you doesn't mean it's not offensive."