Posts

New Poll Shows Trump Cut Clinton’s Lead in Half in Just One Week

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump grew up with a fellow New York City icon proclaiming that “It ain’t over ’til it’s over.”

That adage of New York Yankees great Yogi Berra is ringing true on the presidential playing field as another poll shows that a late rally by Trump is bringing him closer to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.

A Fox News poll released Wednesday showed that in one week, Trump sliced Clinton’s poll lead in half, as independent voters increasingly flock to the billionaire.

The Fox poll found Clinton leading Trump 44 percent to 41 percent, with 10 percent of the voters supporting another candidate and 4 percent undecided.

The 3 percent margin for Clinton represents a continued erosion of her lead, which was six points last week and seven points the week before.

In a head-to-head contest, Clinton leads Trump 49 percent to 44 percent. Clinton’s five-point lead is down from the seven-point lead she had a week ago.

Independents are changing the dynamics of the contest.

Trump leads Clinton among independent voters, 41 percent to 28 percent. That’s almost double the seven-point lead Trump held last week. Two weeks ago, each candidate had 35 percent of the vote from independents.

Independent voters also are a main source of support for third-party candidates. Fourteen percent support Libertarian Gary Johnson and 7 percent back Green Party candidate Jill Stein.

The poll also found that Trump’s supporters are more committed to their candidate than are Clinton backers, with 68 percent of Trump backers supporting him “strongly,” compared with 61 percent for Clinton.

“To be competitive, Trump needs to consolidate support among Republicans and carry independents,” Republican pollster Daron Shaw told Fox News. “That’s where he’s made in-roads in the last week, mostly by focusing his attention on the economy and Obamacare.”

Trump has focused his argument that voters have their only chance to defeat the “rigged” system by electing him.

“Remember folks, it’s a rigged system,” Trump said at a rally Friday. “That’s why you’ve got to get out and vote, you’ve got to watch. Because this system is totally rigged.”

“I believe we’re actually winning,” Trump said Tuesday in Florida. “It’s a rigged system.”

“The media isn’t just against me. They’re against all of you,” he later said in St Augustine. “They’re against what we represent.” (For more from the author of “New Poll Shows Trump Cut Clinton’s Lead in Half in Just One Week” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Phones Rush Limbaugh, Alleges Massive Cover-Up in Obamacare

On Tuesday, [Republican] presidential nominee Donald Trump phoned conservative talk-show host Rush Limbaugh and claimed a massive cover-up in regards to The Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

Limbaugh cited the trending statistic that the average premium has increased by 25 percent under Obamacare, but Trump asserted that the increase, in truth, is much higher.

“You know, the 25 percent [increase], Rush, is less than half of what the real number is,” Trump said. “The real number in some of these places is 80 percent to 90 percent increases. It’s catastrophic, actually.”

Trump said that he’d predicted the downfall of Obamacare from the beginning, saying it was “no good” from the start.

“And you remember, I called that from before it was approved. I said, ‘This can’t work, because it’s just… The plan is no good. The concept is no good,’ and it turned out to be much worse,” Trump said.

He later added, “They put out the phony number of 25 percent because 25 percent sounds better than 60 or 70 percent.”

Trump pointed to his own experience in small business, and he said that many in that realm are complaining that Obamacare is putting them out of business. He also pointed to Obamacare’s seeming monopoly on the insurance market, due to “over-regulation.”

“I think Obamacare has now taken over almost from regulation, which is ridiculous what’s happening with over-regulation, as the biggest single problem for opening and keeping businesses going,” Trump said.

The recent decision of Aetna and other insurance companies to pull out of Obamacare seems to support Trump’s allegations. In states like California, premiums are expected to rise significantly in 2017, and many argue that the program is a disaster on the verge of collapse.

While Democrats have painted former president George W. Bush as the culprit for many of the country’s current issues, saying that Obamacare will help alleviate problems caused by the Bush administration, Limbaugh countered that sentiment by saying Obamacare is working as designed.

“Well, the problem is, it is working. It is working, by design. The whole point of [Obamacare] was to have it fail like this so that they can then have people panic and ask the government to fix it, and the government will fix it by going single payer with the government totally running the health care system, which gives them so much power over people and their behavior and the way they live their lives, you don’t even want to think about it,” Limbaugh said.

Limbaugh’s opinion is one shared by many conservative pundits, including Daily Wire Editor-In-Chief Ben Shapiro, who said Obamacare was created with “designed obsolescence” and drew a comparison between Obamacare and Samsung’s Galaxy Note phone.

“It’s as though Samsung had designed their phones to melt down so that they could then market the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, Government Edition,” Shapiro said.

Limbaugh defended Trump, pointing out that the Republican nominee has been under siege by the Democratic party. Yet, he said, Trump is still “a winner.”

“It’s frustrating, Mr. Trump, because their fingerprints, as I say, are all over this,” Limbaugh said. “If anybody, in my estimation, is disqualified from having anything further to do with this nation’s economy or healthcare or immigration, it’s the Democrat Party.” (For more from the author of “Trump Phones Rush Limbaugh, Alleges Massive Cover-Up in Obamacare” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sadie Robertson Shares Her Thoughts on Trump in Light of Recent Scandals

Despite the release of a sexually explicit audio recording and several subsequent sexual assault allegations, one of Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s youngest female supporters recently revealed she still supports the embattled billionaire.

Reality television personality Sadie Robertson shared her take on the contentious election cycle when a reporter for The Huntsville (Ala.) Times asked if she continued to stand by the endorsement she made in August.

“That’s a good question,” the Duck Dynasty star said. “I would say yes, I would be voting for Trump.”

Robertson went on to explain that her support for the real-estate developer does not mean she supports his behavior.

“It doesn’t mean that I agree with everything he says or that he’s a moral person,” she said, “but in the end it comes down to two people.”

The 19-year-old, who was the runner-up in Season 19 of Dancing with the Stars, is not the only member of her famous family to publicly back Trump.

Her father, Willie Robertson, supported Trump during the primary. Family patriarch Phil Robertson endorsed the former reality television host after his first choice, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, suspended his campaign.

“For me and my family,” Sadie Robertson said, “we agree with what Trump wants to do with America.”

She went on to describe the unique opportunity she has as a celebrity to influence others as a responsibility she does not take lightly.

“It’s a huge honor, honestly,” she said, adding she is thankful her position allows her to share her Christian faith with a wide audience.

“When people have told me I’m a role model,” Robertson explained, “it makes me excited, because I’m going to share the good news.”

While Trump’s current controversies cost him some support among women, Robertson is hardly the only prominent female to continue openly endorsing the GOP nominee.

Patricia Smith, whose son was among the four Americans killed in the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, is one such supporter. She is expected to be one of Trump’s guests in the audience for the final presidential debate on Wednesday. (For more from the author of “Sadie Robertson Shares Her Thoughts on Trump in Light of Recent Scandals” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Myth of Donald Trump as an ‘Anti-Intellectual’

One of the criticisms frequently hurled at Donald Trump is that he’s an “anti-intellectual.” Liberals count on incautious readers to conflate the term “intellectual” (which refers to a range of professions, which leftists mostly dominate, and not because they have the better arguments) with “intelligent person.” But while there is some overlap, those terms mean quite different things. I care a good deal about this distinction, having edited the website Intellectual Conservative since 2002.

Trump shares very similar views to the other Republican candidates for president against whom he ran, on some 80 percent of issues (abortion, taxes, Obamacare, a strong defense). But he stood out from most of them on a few hot-button issues that are key to the self-conception of contemporary academics and journalists — principally, trade and immigration. On those subjects, he took a stance in support of what he and millions of others see as America’s national interest; that stance was one that’s anathema to most self-conceived “intellectuals” in 2016.

Those candidates who didn’t challenge today’s (quite recent) consensus on those two issues got much milder treatment from the media. For instance, The New York Times described Jeb Bush as “an intellectual in search of new ideas, a serial consulter of outsiders who relishes animated debate and a probing manager who eagerly burrows into the bureaucratic details.”

Now, that description wouldn’t fit Donald Trump. But Trump graduated with high grades from schools as demanding as those Jeb Bush attended. He is a very bright guy who is sloppy sometimes when speaking because he’s not a polished lifelong politician and he enjoys entertaining. It’s part of his charisma. Reasonable people can disagree over Trump’s boorish, flamboyant style. But to claim that he is an anti-intellectual is to grant the left’s self-serving definition of what intellectual life entails. It is clear that Trump has a strong grasp of the issues, although as a relatively newcomer to politics, it could take him several years to acquire the memory to spout details off the top of his head. But any policy wonk invited on a Sunday morning talk show can manage that. Is that what we want in a president?

That Trump may have plenty of supporters with middling IQs is meaningless. Democrats traditionally have higher numbers among less-skilled and less-educated voters and they are never accused of being anti-intellectual. A Pew survey from 2012 found, “On eight of 13 questions about politics, Republicans outscored Democrats by an average of 18 percentage points.” High school dropouts have traditionally favored Democrats, and this has expanded in recent years to include those with only a high school education or some college. Notably, the majority of regular contributors to my Intellectual Conservative website support Trump, as do the signers of the Scholars for Trump manifesto.

The Left’s Self-Certifying Coup in the Academy

The left has hijacked the word “intellectual” by shutting conservatives out of academia, relegating equally well-educated and thoughtful conservatives to think tanks and public policy. Secure in their institutional control over academies, the left has run rampant and allowed its own standards to plummet. Look at the dumbed-down and ideological courses offered in higher education. Besides the postmodern nonsense that has infiltrated traditional disciplines like literature and philosophy, there are now entire departments devoted to the left’s agenda, which goes unchallenged. (Find me a pro-life women’s studies professor. One.)

Leftist and far left professors now outnumber conservatives almost 12 to 1 in fields like History, Psychology, Law, Economics and Journalism. In History alone, conservatives are outnumbered 33 to 1. In contrast, in the disciplines that require mathematical competence, but aren’t typically homes of self-designated “intellectuals,” conservatives still get hired. The left/right ratio is 2.5 to 1 in engineering and 6.3 to 1 in hard sciences and math.

Plain Talk is Part of a Leader’s Job

Trump has amply demonstrated his grasp of conservative public policy. When asked during one of the presidential debates how the Constitution should be interpreted, he responded, “The justices that I’m going to appoint will be pro-life, they will have a conservative bent. They will be protecting the Second Amendment. They are great scholars in all cases ― and they’re people of tremendous respect. They will interpret the Constitution the way the Founders wanted it interpreted.” That is Justice Antonin Scalia’s view of the Constitution, put in plain words for ordinary voters.

Similarly, when asked about taxes, Trump replied, “The more government takes in taxes, the less incentive people have to work. What coal miner or assembly-line worker jumps at the offer of overtime when he knows Uncle Sam is going to take sixty percent or more of his extra pay?”

Even his statements about illegal immigration demonstrate a thorough understanding of the issue. “A nation without borders is not a nation at all,” he said. “We must have a wall. The rule of law matters.”

One of Trump’s most vocal supporters is the conservative pundit Ann Coulter. She is an extraordinarily bright, practiced constitutional lawyer and has written 12 books on politics. Penguin Random House describes one of her books: “How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must), the instant New York Times bestseller, shows why Ann Coulter has become the most recognized — and controversial — conservative intellectual in years.” Yet, like Trump, she has a speaking style that is disarming.

Trump has become a politician, and most politicians merely skim the surface of ideas, speaking in emotionally appealing talking points in order to gain support. That is their job — not filling the left’s revisionist meaning of the word intellectual. (For more from the author of “The Myth of Donald Trump as an ‘Anti-Intellectual'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why I Will Vote for Donald Trump

Before you applaud me for my integrity or condemn me for selling out, allow me to explain my decision to vote for Donald Trump on November 8.

First, I’m writing this because I have been asked incessantly for months how I would be voting, not because I think I’m someone special or that what I do should influence you.

Second, I’m not endorsing Donald Trump. In my mind, there’s a world of difference between endorsing a candidate and voting for a candidate.

Third, I respect those in the #NeverTrump camp and I share many of their concerns, including the possibility of his further vulgarizing and degrading the nation, the possibility of him deepening our ethnic and racial divides, and the possibility of him alienating our allies and unnecessarily provoking our enemies, just to name a few. Among the #NeverTrump voices I respect are columnists like David French and Ben Shapiro, bloggers like Matt Walsh, and evangelical leaders like Russell Moore and Beth Moore.

Fourth, I take strong exception to evangelicals who have fawned over Trump as if he were some kind of savior figure, supporting him as if he was Saint Donald. I also take issue with evangelical leaders who want us to minimize some of Trump’s failings, constantly saying, “Let him who is without sin cast the first one” (see John 8:7). This is not a question of condemning the man but rather a question of making a moral assessment as to his readiness to serve our nation.

Fifth, my decision to vote for Trump, barring something earth-shattering between now and November 8, is consistent with my position which has been: 1) During the primaries, I issued strong warnings against voting for Trump while we had other excellent choices. I did this in writing, on video and on the radio, but always stating that, if Trump won the nomination, I would reevaluate my position. 2) Once Trump became the Republican candidate, I wrote that I was rooting for him to take steps in the right direction and thereby win my vote. 3) I have stated repeatedly that under no circumstances would I vote for Hillary. (For two strong warnings about Hillary, see here and here.)

So, what has convinced me that I should now vote for Donald Trump?

First, I believe that he actually is serious about appointing pro-life, pro-Constitution Supreme Court justices. When he said during the last debate that, if you’re pro-life, you want to see Roe v. Wade overturned, and when he reiterated at his Gettysburg speech that he will be drawing from his list of 20 potential appointees, he helped me feel more confident that he would not suddenly flip-flop if elected.

Second, one reason I endorsed Sen. Cruz was because he took on the political establishment, both Democrat and Republican, to the point of calling it the Washington cartel. Trump is an absolute wrecking ball to the negative parts of the political system (although, unfortunately, he’s been a wrecking ball to some of the good parts of the system), so my vote for him is also a protest vote.

Third, I am voting for the Republican platform, not the Republican party, which means I’m in agreement with the platform while at the same time having very little confidence in the party as a whole.

Fourth, while I have always felt that the line, “We’re electing a president, not a pastor,” was overstated and superficial, if we rephrased it to say, “We’re electing a general to train hand-to-hand combat warriors, not a pastor,” it might have more relevance. In other words, we are not looking for Trump to be a moral reformer (even if he does appoint righteous judges), and, at this point, he certainly is anything but a moral example (although we pray he will be truly converted and become one). Rather, out of our choices for president, which are stark, we are voting for the one most likely to defeat Hillary and make some good decisions for the nation, not be the savior. And with things so messed up in America, the hand-to-hand combat analogy is closer to home.

Fifth, within the first few minutes of the last debate, the massive differences between Hillary and Trump were there for the world to see, she a pro-abortion radical and an extreme supporter of the LGBT agenda, and he unashamedly speaking out against late-term abortions and wanting to appoint justices who would defend our essential liberties. Since I have the opportunity to vote, I feel that I should vote for Trump.

Sixth, Trump continues to be drawn to conservative Christians, and not just ones who tickle his ears. One of my dear friends has spent hours with Trump and members of his family, and he has told me that in 55 years of ministry, no one has received him as openly and graciously as has Trump. Yet my friend continues to speak the truth to him in the clearest possible terms. While I am not one of those claiming that Trump is a born-again Christian (I see absolutely no evidence of this), the fact that he continues to listen to godly men and open the door to their counsel indicates that something positive could possibly be going on. It also indicates that these godly leaders might be a positive influence on him if he was elected president.

Seventh, although I’m quite aware that a president could do great harm or good to the nation, I’m far more concerned with what we as God’s people do with our own lives and witnesses, and for me, the state of the church of America is much more important than the state of the White House. In that context, I echo the words (and warning) of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: “The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and the critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”

So, in sum: 1) my hope is in God, not Donald Trump, and I do recognize that either Hillary or Trump has the potential to do great harm to America; 2) my urgent call is for us as followers of Jesus to get our own act together so we can be the salt and light of the nation; 3) I will continue to urge all believers not to vote for Hillary Clinton, whose policies will certainly do us great harm; 4) ultimately, the most effective way to defeat Hillary is to vote for Trump, while also praying that God will use him for good, not for evil.

In the end, if he gets elected and fails miserably, I will be grieved but not devastated. If he does well, I will rejoice.

Either way, though, my vote is just that: a vote. My greater role is to live a life pleasing to God with the hope of advancing a gospel-based moral and cultural revolution. (For more from the author of “Why I Will Vote for Donald Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cardinal Dolan: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Prayed Together Before Al Smith Dinner

With all of the political barbs thrown in each other’s direction lately, one would think it would take miracle for someone to convince Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton to take a quiet moment and pray together. Thursday night before the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Dinner the miraculous happened. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who suggested the prayer and sat between the two presidential nominees during the evening, recounted the “touching” moment Friday on NBC’s Today show.

“When we were going in, I said ‘Could we pray together?’ as we were waiting to be announced,” said Cardinal Dolan, “and after the little prayer, Mr. Trump turned to Secretary Clinton and said ‘You know, you are one tough and talented woman. This has been a good experience in this whole campaign as tough as it’s been.’ And she said to him, ‘And Donald, whatever happens, we need to work together afterwards.’” Cardinal Dolan said he thought that was the evening at its best.

According to Cardinal Dolan, the Al Smith Dinner is traditionally an evening of “unity and friendship and joy.” However, this time around, he said, it was like a family dinner “where you’re just hoping that everything goes well … and in general, alleluia, the evening went very well!” Cardinal Dolan was touched by the obvious attempt by both Clinton and Trump to be courteous and get along. “I was very moved by that.”

Although there was clearly some awkwardness and iciness between Clinton and Trump, Cardinal Dolan said that’s nothing new, describing the chill four years ago between Obama and Romney. Breaking some of that ice is a goal of the dinner, Cardinal Dolan explained, and “thanks be to God it worked!”

The private amity between Trump and Clinton wasn’t as present during the prepared speeches. Cardinal Dolan acknowledged that there were some tense moments and some boos from the audience. He attributes that to the break in the Al Smith Dinner tradition of self-deprecating humor.

John Kennedy and Ronald Reagan “brought the house down,” Cardinal Dolan said, because they were the butt of their own jokes. Last night, Trump and Clinton made each other the butt of their jokes. “The characteristic of the evening is self-deprecating, humble humor,”said Cardinal Dolan, but that goal is tougher to achieve nowadays, as evidenced by Thursday night’s dinner.

But for one moment they played nice, and they prayed. (For more from the author of “Why Is Every Political Party and Independents, Terrified of Clinton and the People Around Her?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

FIVE GRAPHICS: Why Trump Wins… Big

Don’t believe the propaganda from the liberal media.

IT’S A REFERENDUM ON CHANGE

161020-wtw-010

THE ENTHUSIAM LANDSLIDE

161020-wtw-020

INDEPENDENTS DISGUSTED, DEMOCRATS DEPRESSED

161020-wtw-030

MILLENIALS AMBIVALENT (OR WORSE) ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON

161020-wtw-040

SPENDING IN KEY SENATE RACES: R OVERWHELMING D

161020-wtw-050

(For more from the author of “FIVE GRAPHICS: Why Trump Wins… Big” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Final Debate: Trump, Hillary Go for Jugular

With America exactly three weeks from Election Day, GOP nominee Donald Trump challenged Hillary Clinton in a final showdown in Las Vegas, Nevada, Wednesday.

The third – and last – presidential debate of the election season took place at the University of Nevada. Fox News’ Chris Wallace moderated. Debate topics included debt and entitlements, immigration, the economy, Supreme Court, foreign hot spots and Hillary and Trump’s fitness for the presidency.

As his guests, Trump brought Project Veritas’ James O’Keefe; for Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin; President Barack Obama’s Kenyan-born half-brother, Malik; and Patricia Smith, mother of Benghazi victim Sean Smith. He also invited Leslie Millwee, a woman who accused former President Bill Clinton of sexual assault on at least three separate occasions in 1980. Hillary invited well-known billionaires Meg Whitman and Mark Cuban to the event.

The debate began with a question about Supreme Court appointments and interpretation of the Constitution. Wallace said the next president could have two or three appointments and “determine the balance of the court for the next quarter century” . . .

“I feel strongly that the Supreme Court needs to stand on the side of the American people, not on the side of the powerful corporations and wealthy,” Hillary said. She said she wants a court that will reject Citizens United. (Read more from “Final Debate: Trump, Hillary Go for Jugular” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton

First lady Michelle Obama’s past words will come back to haunt her this week with the release of a new campaign ad bought by a super PAC that is backing Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

The ad, to be aired in Orlando and Tampa, Fla., uses Obama’s quote from 2007 about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, who was facing Obama’s husband in the Democratic primary.

“If you can’t run your own house, you can’t run the White House,” Obama says.

The statement appeared to be a reference to former President Bill Clinton’s extramarital affairs, although Barack Obama denied it at the time.

Make America Number 1, the superPAC that paid for the ad, is hoping it will cause women in the key battleground state of Florida to rethink voting for Clinton.

Clinton leads Trump by 15 points among female voters in the Sunshine State — 54 percent to 39 percent — according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Monday.

Throughout the course of the election, Trump has struggled to win over many female voters. His efforts were hurt by a recent leaked tape of his lewd comments followed by sexual harassment accusations from several women.

Although Trump apologized for the remarks and denied the women’s claims, his poll numbers with female voters have dropped.

Make America Number 1 is looking to help give him a boost in this area with its ad featuring the first lady.

Michelle Obama has emerged as one of Clinton’s strongest advocates on the campaign trail, giving powerful speeches attacking Trump and how he treats women.

The White House last week gave a subtle warning to Trump not to respond in kind to Obama.

“I can’t think of a bolder way for Donald Trump to lose even more standing than he already has than by engaging the first lady of the United States,” White House spokesman Eric Schultz said.

With this new ad, though, Obama isn’t attacked at all. Instead, her words are used to attack Clinton.

Super PACs are restricted by law from directly communicating and coordinating with a campaign, but they have no limits on how much money they can raise.

The commercial initially debuted as an ad on Facebook, where Make America Number 1 spent $72,000 trying to reach and win over women voters in nine major battleground states.

Hogan Gidley, a spokesman for Make America Number 1, said the group now will spend about $400,000 to get the commercial on network television. (For more from the author of “Super PAC Set to Release Pro-Trump Ad Pitting Michelle Obama Against Hillary Clinton” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father

Ivanka Trump has been a loyal and diligent worker in her father’s effort to win the White House.

But the 34-year-old wife and mother had to pause briefly when a 2005 video showed Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump making vulgar comments about women. For more than a week, she had no reaction to the video.

Then, Monday, she released a statement in an interview with Fast Company.

“My father’s comments were clearly inappropriate and offensive, and I’m glad that he acknowledged this fact with an immediate apology to my family and the American people,” she said in a statement.

The statement mirrored words of Trump’s wife, Melania, who issued a statement the day after the video surfaced.

“The words my husband used are unacceptable and offensive to me,” Melania Trump’s statement said. “This does not represent the man that I know. He has the heart and mind of a leader.”

“I hope people will accept his apology, as I have, and focus on the important issues facing our nation and the world,” the statement concluded.

In the Fast Company interview, Ivanka Trump said that despite an onslaught of allegations claiming her father groped or was otherwise inappropriate with women, she stands by his denials that the accusers are wrong.

“The greatest comfort I have is the fact that I know my father,” she said.

”Most of the people who write about him don’t. I do. So that gives me an ability to shrug off the things that I read about him that are wrong,” she added.

Ivanka Trump is not only in the spotlight as the leading female in the Trump entourage, but she is also an entrepreneur who must market herself to America.

“She wants to be the brand of glamorous millennials,” Donald Trump critic Jennifer Rubin commented to Fast Company. “But what young woman wants to be reminded every time she puts on a pair of Ivanka shoes of her father boasting about sexual assault?”

However, for all of Ivanka Trump’s business savvy, nothing has broken the bonds of family.

“Ivanka’s brand has always been built on a really carefully balancing act,” says Rajiv Menon, a cultural analyst with the branding consultancy TruthCo. “She’s really demonstrated a sense of drive, a sense of ingenuity, and really established something strong with her apparel brand and larger public presence. But with all of that, she’s never really lost her sense of family loyalty.”

“And as the campaign has continued, she’s maintained that balancing act — but as the campaign has also mutated and turned into what we see now with the tape that was released … that balancing act becomes a lot more precarious. It becomes much more of a liability for her.”

However, the public understands that family comes first.

“Any child or parent is going to defend their parent or their child,” said leadership consultant Gregg Ward. “That’s her right.”

In fact, were she to turn on her father, it might backfire.

“She would lose points if she didn’t stand by her father,” said Larry Chiagouris, a marketing professor at Pace University. (For more from the author of “Ivanka Trump Breaks Lengthy Silence on Leaked 2005 Video of Her Father” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.