1. Trump has more minority support than you might suppose (read here)
American minorities tend to be Christian and unemployed and they see the GOP as more family-oriented, more supportive of Christianity, and in the case of Trump probably more able to improve their job situation.
2. Trump will most likely be the GOP candidate (read here)
It's simply becoming obvious that Trump will be the GOP's entry in the 2016 presidential race.
Basically, the GOP strategy is to try to get Clinton out of the way in order to be able to run against the avowed socialist Bernie Sanders. Socialism in the US is down there with pedophilia and atheism in terms of disregard.
I think that should the GOP nominate Trump and should the Dems nominate Sanders, there's a pretty good chance Trump would win.
America isn't ready for a President who proudly declares he's a socialist.
Bernie's health care and free college education numbers are suspicious to start with, and even if they do add up, they only add up as an entire package, and no such package will make it through congress. Everybody seems to understand that except Bernie and voters under 30.
When the average American thinks about, say, Russia doing something dangerous around an American aircraft or warship, many would rather think of Trump as President than Bernie Sanders. In other words, he comes across as a wuss.
When it comes to bringing jobs back to America, many Americans (even normally Democratic voters!) will believe that Trump can do that while Bernie has no clue.
As far as perceptions of them, I agree.
Trump's an idiot/ass hat though as far as businesses....he mostly shells and declares bankruptcy, etc.
IE: If he took the money he inherited, and bought a typical SP500 mutual fund, and didn't invest in real estate and so for as he DID, he'd have more money than he has now.
IE: He squandered the inheritance compared to what he could have had.
No financial saavy...just a lot of start up money, and shady biz dealings....so he is rich, but, not because of smarts.
Bombastic, sure. Is that what we need? Another saber rattling blow hard?
Tough? Hard to say...he has confidence in himself at least. You never knw a mans true character until he's tested, and, he's never been tested.
He could rise to the occasion, or fold like a cubby quail.
He might be running now as a power trip, and if he won, sober up and take it seriously...you never know. Presidents and their legacy seem to have weight.
Obama worried about his for sure - and screwed up by working too hard to emulate great presidents of the past...instead of being himself in the present.
Trump could surprise us by not being a moron, or, meet all expectations and be one.
America is not adverse to morons, Bush II is a good example. He played even dumber than he was, it made people trust him more.
Poles of likely voters on a theoretical Trump/Sanders ballot come back with sanders having a 15 to 18 point lead. That is HUGE, and actually a bigger lead over Trump than Hillary gets with the same group.
Not sure how you came to the conclusion that Hillary was the 'most qualified'. Being married to the president does not contribute to her resumé. Bernie has 40 years in the house/senate and actually has policies rather than reflections on the latest poles.
Hillary has been a senator and also secretary of state. Those are significant qualifications, and shouldn't be ignored. (I agree with you that being ex-First-Lady is not a qualification.)
She therefore has direct foreign policy experience, which no senator has, not even one who served on the Senate Foreign Relations committee (which Sanders has not). Given that foreign policy is a HUGE part of the president's job...I'd have to say that her paper qualifications are indeed at least as good as Sanders' are.