Interesting point. He'll likely either make a political calculation, or more likely shoot from the hip if buttman is the opponent. Let's face it, Trump is well known for tagging his opposition with insulting nicknames (Lyin Ted, Little Marco, Crooked Hillary, etc.). He's also anything but politically correct. His fan base will eat it up.
What we have here is a difference of historical interpretation as to Reagan's motives. That's ok. You posit that Reagan got tricked by the Democrats, I'm more inclined to think it was part of lowering labor expenses for the benefit of businesses large and small, and to bring down unions (chamber of commerce type stuff).
All of the Trump nicknames of which I am aware steer clear of racial slurs. He made some borderline sexist comments about Carly Fiorina. Most of Trumps slurs involve the character of the opponent. Attacks against Fiorina and Rubio would be the exceptions. I would be surprised if he attacks Buttigieg based on his sexual orientation. I think many on the right would be turned off by that. I don't think the base would be fired up by that type of slur.
Perhaps you forget how incredibly pumped up his fan base was over his description of the third world as **** hole countries and about Megan Kelly 'bleeding', and his characterization of Mexican immigrants as a bunch of rapists, etc ('but I'm sure there are some good people'). It would be a very very contorted stretch to not characterize such comments as racist and sexist in nature. Trump simply doesn't care about politically correct concerns at all.
(It can only go downhill from here...).
And what part of his description of ******** countries being shitholes was incorrect?
"He is smart enough to know that there are enough gays and lesbians who support him..."
I think the word you are looking for is deplorable. Don't you just hate these deplorables who are so full of hate? The world would be a lot better place if we got rid of them, right?
Peculiar that you have no retorts for the rest of my reply.
There are a whole lot of people (and I am not necessarily including Chop among them) who completely buy in to the fallacy that members of certain groups will vote in a monolithic fashion. I don't look at a black man and immediately assume he's a democrat voting social justice warrior, but a lot of people do. I don't look at a well to do white man and immediately assume he's a country club republican, but a lot of people do. I don't make similar assumptions about LGBT folks (if I even know they are LGBT) either.
Only liberals dog whistle.
And people will vote for this black, female Senator who is running for president because, well, black, female people have little opportunity in this country.
Yes, that was my sarcastic point.
