The intrepid Cornhead reports from Iowa… — 22 Comments
Only one or two comments on Neo’s theory as further expounded on by me.
Attention GOP! Trump has more baggage than Samsonite. The Clinton Machine will carve him up in the general election. The MSM wants that race: great ratings and the Clintons return to power.
I warned the world. Please wake up.
I am no chess player, but for the life of me I don’t understand why people don’t understand the consequences in a general election with a Trump nomination.
As I was explaining to my brother (who can’t understand the appeal of Trump) over xmas, the Trump phenomenon is really easy to understand. My brother also claimed that Trump is a fool, but I disagreed; he’s no more of a fool than Obama. He’s a master showman and knows the level of anger is deep. His entire strategy is to tap into that anger directly. That anger is so blinding to the Trump supporters, that of course they can’t see the consequences of their actions.
As many others have said, the rest of the GOP field better start going after that voter anger also, and with a lot more passion. but after that last debate, I doubt they are constitutionally able to do such.
Cornhead,
You did a great job in that description. You managed to capture the essential Trump. I couldn’t stop smiling as I read it.
If you work on facial expressions, I could see you cast in a film about the Trump candidacy.
physicsguy:
John Podhoretz wrote that in the age of Trump that to win the Presidency one has to be the news and make the news.
To beat Trump, I think that it is critical. And it should include big new policy ideas attacking the Left.
Here’s one I just came up with. If elected, a President Hillary would be immune from impeachment and indictment. Bill also above the law. Do you want that voters?
physicsguy:
Trump is most definitely not a fool, except in the sense I wrote about in 2011 of a “Fool.”
And a Fool is far from a fool.
Just looked up the numbers in Iowa.
Only 29% of voters are Republicans, 611K out of 2087K total.
What an appalling state, politically speaking. Especially for an early “primary.”
None of the Progressivism rubs off on those few conservatives either, huh? Nah.
Council Bluffs is a tiny part of Iowa. As Cornhead notes a significant portion of the audience was from Nebraska, probably from Omaha.
Frog,
Please note Iowa has a republican governor, the gop controls the house while dems have a slight majority in the state senate, both of our US senators and 3 out of 4 of our US representatives are republicans. Not so appalling. What is the score in your state?
parker: I didn’t make up the numbers.
The Iowa GOP? Don’t know anything about it. The notion of a caucus I find appalling, especially in Iowa winter.
I used to live in Tucson, where Iowa stood for “Idiots out walking around,” meaning the elderly snowbirds! And Tucson’s liberal!
The great John Podhoretz (and I sincerely mean great) has nailed the Trump candidacy. Trump was involved with WWE and his run for the White House is very similar to his WWE performances.
When I was about 10, I loved local TV rassling. Trump appeals to the 10 year old boy in all of us.
Go to the WWE and look at some Trump videos. In one, he is interviewed by Jesse Ventura.
We are becoming WWE nation.
Hillary goes to town on Trump’s past. Disaster for the GOP.
Frog,
I do not like the fact that our caucus is the first election event in the nation. I do like the caucus process. Its up close and personal with your neighbors, and involves discussions where the ability to persuade is important. And the question still stands, how does gop representation in Iowa 2015 stand, appalling or not, to your state?
Oh, and winter??? Iowans do not let the sleet, snow, and the sub-zero of winter; nor tornadoes or flash floods, droughts, and days of 100+ degrees with 80% humidity stop us from going about our business. Perhaps we are made of sterner stuff than you may be familiar with. 😉
parker:In Louisiana, Jindal couldn’t succeed himself. Vitter, a fine man, lost to a Democrat, Edwards, who will be a good leftist.I surmise Vitter found being a minority US Senator a waste of time in the McConnell-Reid era. A squishy GOP Rep with a liberal voting record, Boustany, seeks the Senatorship. Fine men are the new AG and the state treasurer.
We have open primaries, an abomination..
Frog,
It is, as it should be, a fight. The pendulum swings side to side. We celebrate our victories and in defeat we get back into the fight. Same as it ever was.
physicsguy:
“As many others have said, the rest of the GOP field better start going after that voter anger also, and with a lot more passion. but after that last debate, I doubt they are constitutionally able to do such.”
The GOP standard-bearers are at a significant disadvantage if they try to adjust by mimicking Trump’s approach. At the least, it demands a fine calibration under raucous conditions. See this comment under a Neo post from September, where I described the difficulty for standard-bearing Republican candidates to adapt as you suggest.
There isn’t much the GOPe candidates can do within the presidential race if they must adjust to the Trump phenomenon.
The likelier solution falls to mainstream conservatives banding together in order to win the activist game versus the Clinton-backing Left and Trump-backing alt-Right, and the ascendant Right-activist movement lifting their preferred GOP standard-bearer(s).
Y’all might think Trump is too uncultured to win the Presidency, but you’d best take note that his ratings skyrocketed when he said he’d send the Mexicans home and keep the Muslims out. No other candidate has the cojones to say that, and the silent, angry majority wouldn’t believe them at this point, anyway.
I don’t think “uncultured” has anything to do with it. He definitely is NOT uncultured. He knows the MSM will jump on anything outrageous he says and so he gets LOTS of press; he’s playing the MSM like a virtuoso. And by tapping into the deep anger, that Cornhead correctly identifies as the emotional equivalent of a 10 yr old, he is running a masterful campaign taking every advantage of the current culture.
OK. So around whom should we sane conservatives coalesce?
Of all the candidates, Carly Fiorina is my first choice for president. (My least favorite candidates are Trump, Sanders and Clinton, with Clinton’s being the worst.)
Unfortunately, Carly Fiorina does not appear to be an effective candidate in her TV appearances, notwithstanding her great performance during the first “under card” debate.
I am still stymied by the belief that only idiots and blue collar types are supporting Trump. Most of my family (cousins, aunts, uncles, etc.) are supportive of Trump. There are not idiots or blue collar types. Many of them are upper middle class with multiple degrees.
Early in the Trump campaign, most of them were saying, “he’s a successful businessman, he knows what he’s doing.” It was not about his over-the-top comments. They were looking at his successes in business and understanding that could translate to great success elsewhere. Period.
If you guys don’t get that, then you are underestimating Trump supporters.
I am still on the fence. I am waiting to see what happens after those early primaries. I have time. However, Trump is definitely on the list.
Ira:
Are you really asking that question? Do you not know the answer? In fact, there are several answers in my opinion—as long as the conservatives are sane, that is—but the most obvious one is Cruz, as I indicated long ago, and as Bookworm (among many others) indicates here.
I watched most of Trump’s South Carolina speech last night, and much to my surprise, I came to the conclusion that I could live with this guy. In fact, I could live with any one of them, except for Rand Paul, who is not only a fool, but enjoys playing one on television.
So for me, the choice will be whoever I think has the best chance of beating Hilary. I haven’t decided that yet, but it might be Trump.
Because ANY of them (even Kasich! even Bush!) would be much, much better than Hillary. I see a possibility of taking the country back after eight years of Barry O. Tack on another eight years of Hillary and I don’t think we stand a chance.
The ship of state is ponderous and slow, and very difficult to turn. I’ll happily settle for a 90º
turn instead of the 180º I would like, given that the alternative is running into the iceberg named Hillary Clinton.
K-E:
I don’t believe that “only idiots and blue collar types are supporting Trump.” However, Trump is no conservative.
neo:
Yes, I really am asking that question.
With respect to all of the remaining significant Republican candidates, I would at the very least feel wonderfully relieved if any one of them won rather than any of the currently running Democrats.
As for actually having feelings of happiness in addition to being relieved, this is the order in which my current favorites line up:
Fiorina
Cruz
Rubio
Christie
Huckabee
I bet that most readers here have at least four of those people on their lists of their top five favorites to be president (as opposed to being the Republican candidate).
I think my parenthetical comment immediately above is important. As much as I really like Fiorina (I wear a Carly for America t-shirt or bring a Carly for America mug with me to my neighborhood cafe), I currently feel she doesn’t have what it takes to win the general election. I hope I am wrong.
In any event, I think we conservatives should be supporting a single candidate sooner rather than later to prevent Trump from gathering more momentum and to reduce the risk that good candidates will do harm to each other. (Remember folks that it was during a primary that Al Gore brought up the issue that Dukakis had tolerated a Massachusettes furlough program for violent criminals even after a horrible event showed that that was a bad policy-see http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/1999/11/did_gore_hatch_horton.html.)
So, I ask who should that candidate be, taking into account conservatism and electibility? Yes, neo, you did state that Cruz is “the truly conservative alternative.” Who do the commenters here think should be our consensus candidate?
As much as I like Carly, I think our consensus candidate should be Cruz.
Cornhead — thank you for all your work in going to and reporting on all these events. On one point I must disagree with you, however. Don’t be surprised if Hillary does not go to town on Donald’s past — with her record, he’ll turn her (and Bill) into hamburger. He’s even given her fair warning. It’ll be interesting to see if she has more brains than overconfidence..
Leave a Reply
HTML tags allowed in your
comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
Only one or two comments on Neo’s theory as further expounded on by me.
Attention GOP! Trump has more baggage than Samsonite. The Clinton Machine will carve him up in the general election. The MSM wants that race: great ratings and the Clintons return to power.
I warned the world. Please wake up.
I am no chess player, but for the life of me I don’t understand why people don’t understand the consequences in a general election with a Trump nomination.
As I was explaining to my brother (who can’t understand the appeal of Trump) over xmas, the Trump phenomenon is really easy to understand. My brother also claimed that Trump is a fool, but I disagreed; he’s no more of a fool than Obama. He’s a master showman and knows the level of anger is deep. His entire strategy is to tap into that anger directly. That anger is so blinding to the Trump supporters, that of course they can’t see the consequences of their actions.
As many others have said, the rest of the GOP field better start going after that voter anger also, and with a lot more passion. but after that last debate, I doubt they are constitutionally able to do such.
Cornhead,
You did a great job in that description. You managed to capture the essential Trump. I couldn’t stop smiling as I read it.
If you work on facial expressions, I could see you cast in a film about the Trump candidacy.
physicsguy:
John Podhoretz wrote that in the age of Trump that to win the Presidency one has to be the news and make the news.
To beat Trump, I think that it is critical. And it should include big new policy ideas attacking the Left.
Here’s one I just came up with. If elected, a President Hillary would be immune from impeachment and indictment. Bill also above the law. Do you want that voters?
physicsguy:
Trump is most definitely not a fool, except in the sense I wrote about in 2011 of a “Fool.”
And a Fool is far from a fool.
Just looked up the numbers in Iowa.
Only 29% of voters are Republicans, 611K out of 2087K total.
What an appalling state, politically speaking. Especially for an early “primary.”
None of the Progressivism rubs off on those few conservatives either, huh? Nah.
Council Bluffs is a tiny part of Iowa. As Cornhead notes a significant portion of the audience was from Nebraska, probably from Omaha.
Frog,
Please note Iowa has a republican governor, the gop controls the house while dems have a slight majority in the state senate, both of our US senators and 3 out of 4 of our US representatives are republicans. Not so appalling. What is the score in your state?
parker: I didn’t make up the numbers.
The Iowa GOP? Don’t know anything about it. The notion of a caucus I find appalling, especially in Iowa winter.
I used to live in Tucson, where Iowa stood for “Idiots out walking around,” meaning the elderly snowbirds! And Tucson’s liberal!
The great John Podhoretz (and I sincerely mean great) has nailed the Trump candidacy. Trump was involved with WWE and his run for the White House is very similar to his WWE performances.
When I was about 10, I loved local TV rassling. Trump appeals to the 10 year old boy in all of us.
Go to the WWE and look at some Trump videos. In one, he is interviewed by Jesse Ventura.
We are becoming WWE nation.
Hillary goes to town on Trump’s past. Disaster for the GOP.
Frog,
I do not like the fact that our caucus is the first election event in the nation. I do like the caucus process. Its up close and personal with your neighbors, and involves discussions where the ability to persuade is important. And the question still stands, how does gop representation in Iowa 2015 stand, appalling or not, to your state?
Oh, and winter??? Iowans do not let the sleet, snow, and the sub-zero of winter; nor tornadoes or flash floods, droughts, and days of 100+ degrees with 80% humidity stop us from going about our business. Perhaps we are made of sterner stuff than you may be familiar with. 😉
parker:In Louisiana, Jindal couldn’t succeed himself. Vitter, a fine man, lost to a Democrat, Edwards, who will be a good leftist.I surmise Vitter found being a minority US Senator a waste of time in the McConnell-Reid era. A squishy GOP Rep with a liberal voting record, Boustany, seeks the Senatorship. Fine men are the new AG and the state treasurer.
We have open primaries, an abomination..
Frog,
It is, as it should be, a fight. The pendulum swings side to side. We celebrate our victories and in defeat we get back into the fight. Same as it ever was.
physicsguy:
“As many others have said, the rest of the GOP field better start going after that voter anger also, and with a lot more passion. but after that last debate, I doubt they are constitutionally able to do such.”
The GOP standard-bearers are at a significant disadvantage if they try to adjust by mimicking Trump’s approach. At the least, it demands a fine calibration under raucous conditions. See this comment under a Neo post from September, where I described the difficulty for standard-bearing Republican candidates to adapt as you suggest.
There isn’t much the GOPe candidates can do within the presidential race if they must adjust to the Trump phenomenon.
The likelier solution falls to mainstream conservatives banding together in order to win the activist game versus the Clinton-backing Left and Trump-backing alt-Right, and the ascendant Right-activist movement lifting their preferred GOP standard-bearer(s).
Y’all might think Trump is too uncultured to win the Presidency, but you’d best take note that his ratings skyrocketed when he said he’d send the Mexicans home and keep the Muslims out. No other candidate has the cojones to say that, and the silent, angry majority wouldn’t believe them at this point, anyway.
I don’t think “uncultured” has anything to do with it. He definitely is NOT uncultured. He knows the MSM will jump on anything outrageous he says and so he gets LOTS of press; he’s playing the MSM like a virtuoso. And by tapping into the deep anger, that Cornhead correctly identifies as the emotional equivalent of a 10 yr old, he is running a masterful campaign taking every advantage of the current culture.
OK. So around whom should we sane conservatives coalesce?
Of all the candidates, Carly Fiorina is my first choice for president. (My least favorite candidates are Trump, Sanders and Clinton, with Clinton’s being the worst.)
Unfortunately, Carly Fiorina does not appear to be an effective candidate in her TV appearances, notwithstanding her great performance during the first “under card” debate.
So, following the Buckley rule about supporting “the rightwardmost viable candidate”
(see http://www.nationalreview.com/article/340485/buckley-rule-according-bill-not-karl-neal-b-freeman), who should our candidate be?
I am still stymied by the belief that only idiots and blue collar types are supporting Trump. Most of my family (cousins, aunts, uncles, etc.) are supportive of Trump. There are not idiots or blue collar types. Many of them are upper middle class with multiple degrees.
Early in the Trump campaign, most of them were saying, “he’s a successful businessman, he knows what he’s doing.” It was not about his over-the-top comments. They were looking at his successes in business and understanding that could translate to great success elsewhere. Period.
If you guys don’t get that, then you are underestimating Trump supporters.
I am still on the fence. I am waiting to see what happens after those early primaries. I have time. However, Trump is definitely on the list.
Ira:
Are you really asking that question? Do you not know the answer? In fact, there are several answers in my opinion—as long as the conservatives are sane, that is—but the most obvious one is Cruz, as I indicated long ago, and as Bookworm (among many others) indicates here.
I watched most of Trump’s South Carolina speech last night, and much to my surprise, I came to the conclusion that I could live with this guy. In fact, I could live with any one of them, except for Rand Paul, who is not only a fool, but enjoys playing one on television.
So for me, the choice will be whoever I think has the best chance of beating Hilary. I haven’t decided that yet, but it might be Trump.
Because ANY of them (even Kasich! even Bush!) would be much, much better than Hillary. I see a possibility of taking the country back after eight years of Barry O. Tack on another eight years of Hillary and I don’t think we stand a chance.
The ship of state is ponderous and slow, and very difficult to turn. I’ll happily settle for a 90º
turn instead of the 180º I would like, given that the alternative is running into the iceberg named Hillary Clinton.
K-E:
I don’t believe that “only idiots and blue collar types are supporting Trump.” However, Trump is no conservative.
neo:
Yes, I really am asking that question.
With respect to all of the remaining significant Republican candidates, I would at the very least feel wonderfully relieved if any one of them won rather than any of the currently running Democrats.
As for actually having feelings of happiness in addition to being relieved, this is the order in which my current favorites line up:
Fiorina
Cruz
Rubio
Christie
Huckabee
I bet that most readers here have at least four of those people on their lists of their top five favorites to be president (as opposed to being the Republican candidate).
I think my parenthetical comment immediately above is important. As much as I really like Fiorina (I wear a Carly for America t-shirt or bring a Carly for America mug with me to my neighborhood cafe), I currently feel she doesn’t have what it takes to win the general election. I hope I am wrong.
In any event, I think we conservatives should be supporting a single candidate sooner rather than later to prevent Trump from gathering more momentum and to reduce the risk that good candidates will do harm to each other. (Remember folks that it was during a primary that Al Gore brought up the issue that Dukakis had tolerated a Massachusettes furlough program for violent criminals even after a horrible event showed that that was a bad policy-see http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/chatterbox/1999/11/did_gore_hatch_horton.html.)
So, I ask who should that candidate be, taking into account conservatism and electibility? Yes, neo, you did state that Cruz is “the truly conservative alternative.” Who do the commenters here think should be our consensus candidate?
As much as I like Carly, I think our consensus candidate should be Cruz.
Cornhead — thank you for all your work in going to and reporting on all these events. On one point I must disagree with you, however. Don’t be surprised if Hillary does not go to town on Donald’s past — with her record, he’ll turn her (and Bill) into hamburger. He’s even given her fair warning. It’ll be interesting to see if she has more brains than overconfidence..