Disturbing news from the Trump front
It’s like a failed diet.
Each day I take a vow (although I must admit, not a solemn one) to just push away from the Trump table. Stop writing about the guy for a while. But way too many days he pulls me back in, either by his behavior, or by someone’s reaction to that behavior, or sometimes by substantive issues that have been raised in relation to him—such as, for example, who would have standing in a birther suit, or what does the GOP and the general electorate want in a candidate.
This time, though, it’s Trump’s own behavior that’s got me writing about him: he seems to have had something of a meltdown over the weekend.
Read the examples at the link. I’m not going to list them; Leon H. Wolf has done a good job. Whether you like Trump and support him or don’t support him and disagree with him or even dislike him, you should be alarmed.
This is how Trump responds to threat or criticism. It’s not just that he’s not “nice.” It’s not about niceness or meanness, it’s that he sounds like a narcissistic megalomaniac whose skin is way too thin for someone suggesting that we should elect him to a public office of great responsibility.
Most of Trump’s supporters almost certainly will not care, however, unless I read them wrong. Just as Trump cannot admit error or flaws, so they—in the glow of their admiration—see his every move as the clever tactic of a real alpha male. Now, I’m familiar with the alpha male concept, and I think that presidents should be strong and should be able to convey strength (and “male” is a metaphoric term in this case, because Margaret Thatcher was an “alpha male” if ever I saw one).
But alpha male Trump is not. Not every powerful rich guy with a beautiful young wife (or a series of them) is an alpha male, at least not in the sense I’m talking about. When I think “alpha male,” I think of the strength of the John Wayne characters in the movies, or of Ronald Reagan outside the movies, or of many of the heroes in the armed forces or other service professions (firefighter, for example). No braggadocio, no below-the-belt attacks. Integrity, and the power that comes from internal strength rather than narcissistic weakness masquerading as strength.
I don’t expect to convince anyone. But Donald Trump—for all his money, power, and real-world accomplishments, of which he definitely has many—is talking (and tweeting) like a man in deep trouble of one kind or other, whether it be trouble in the polls, or trouble within himself, or both.
I’ve described how Mark Levin has recently given Trump a warning about his tactics. Today, Rush Limbaugh has added the following:
I think Trump going after Cruz is quite normal; it’s understandable. But I think [Trump’s] making a tactical error the way he’s doing it. Whatever you want to say, Cruz is not a “nasty” guy. When you get into criticism, it better be believable. But Trump is looking at Cruz, and I’m sure is hearing about the negatives that Cruz has, and I’m not gonna sit here and pretend to you that they don’t exist…
I think Trump is free to criticize Cruz all he wants as far as I’m concerned, but going after him as a “nasty” guy and on this birther business, he’s gotta worry that it’s gonna create more negatives within his own support base rather than turn people off to Cruz. And he’s gotta consider the opportunity that it’s providing Cruz in responding.
So Trump has given Cruz the opportunity to make his point over and over again and to show that he’s not cowering in fear in the corner and running away from it. And in the midst of all this, Cruz, in responding to this, is not even mentioning Trump’s name, which is… That’s lesson number one. You don’t mention the opponent.
It seems to me that in this Trump/Cruz exchange, it’s Cruz who’s coming across as the alpha male, if anyone—and as the more stable human being, not to mention the less nasty one.
How someone responds under pressure reveals the temper of their character. Trump’s sense of self-worth is wrapped up in being perceived as a ‘winner’. Trump’s wild accusations started when Cruz started to challenge him for the lead. He’s revealing himself to be another variation of Ross Perot…
If Cruz is the debater we have seen and expect him to continue to be, he will know how to handle this.
If you don’t get emotional, you can think. If you think, you can act effectively.
Trump gets to opponents on an emotional level, ruthlessly homing in on – often justifiably – on their weaknesses insecurities.
Cruz’s birth status is a technical matter of law, when it comes down to it. Nothing to get upset about.
And as Cruz has superior intellectual credentials to virtually everyone in the field, and has stood sometimes alone against the establishment, which is one of the supposed knocks on him, he is unlikely to be intimidated by attacks that propose to marginalize him.
We’ll see how it plays out.
Add; right on the most important issues but the wrong man for the job.
Trump’s having a “meltdown”? How can they tell? Is he suddenly acting like a rational person?
Maybe there’s something good in our bizarre primary process after all.
As a Rubio supporter, I’m rather enjoying watching this battle of nasty (from the Trump camp) versus crazy (from the Cruz camp).
Ann:
Why would you be so very amused by the two front-runners tearing each other apart, unless you think it will benefit Rubio?
Rubio will have to earn his own support. I happen to think he’s a decent candidate, but I’m not the least bit amused by the prospect of someone like Trump getting the nomination, and I would think any responsible person would not be amused either.
This is neither a sporting event nor a game, although way too many people treat it that way.
By the way—I’ve not seen anything “crazy” that Cruz has done. He seems very sane to me.
Trump’s meltdown this weekend answered the question for me. I will sit out this election if he is the Republican nominee. I won’t vote for a commie (Hill or Bern) and I won’t vote for a psycho.
I think Trump likes being first in the polls and the adulation he gets on the campaign trail. But I don’t think he actually wants to be president, to do the actual job that is, and all of the life and death responsibility that goes along with it. This isn’t a TV show or winning a business deal, after all. That might be sinking in, as we see him start to unravel a bit.
Neo:
I’m hoping this spectacle of the two warring camps will encourage more folks to take a serious look at Rubio.
And I didn’t mean to say that Cruz had done anything crazy, but that the Cruz camp was tossing that charge now at Trump.
Ann:
Oh, I see.
Maybe “amused” was the wrong word, then. “Encouraged”?
CV:
We’re seeing him unravel.
I don’t think his supporters are seeing him unravel at all. They’re seeing him unload. I’m not sure, though, since I haven’t spent any time in comments sections taking a look at their reactions. But it’s my guess that most of them are liking and defending what he’s been doing.
Trump is too mercurial and erratic to be POTUS.
“Most of Trump’s supporters almost certainly will not care, however, unless I read them wrong.”
Trump’s supporters are not monolithic. I guess 20-30% hard core, with many bandwagon supporters. If he derails, he could easily lose 10% in a week.
Billboard seen today on the Skyway between Chico and Paradise California:
“TRUMP’S IDEAS FOR PRESIDENT.”
OMT that should be brought up about Trump: the British parliament had a debate today about whether he should be banned from visiting Britain because of the way he talked about not allowing Muslims to enter the country. He added that this should occur untill we get our vetting straightened out, but foreigners and the foreign press will onlly take what they want from your comments, and they sure won’t follow any clarifying tweets you make later.
Trump simply doesn’t know how to talk to the world. He doesn’t know that his outrageous statements will be used against us and leaders of our allies. He made have built golf courses abroad, but that is very different from representing our country. Sometimes you have to speak out, but an effective president should keep his threats to himself and let the diplomats exert the prssure behind closed doors. I remember during the Parsley Island conflict between Morocco and Spain, Colin Powell applied the pressure. And what dou you think Bush had to do with Pakistan?
Megalomania is personified by Andy Griffith in this classic movie by Elia Kazan, A Face In The Crowd. If Lonesome Rhodes ins’t the archetype for Donald Trump, I don’t know who is. Power mad, conniving, full of himself, without any moral sense, he’s a man who gets his self-worth through the adulation of crowds of people, huge crowds that he calls sheep. Notice the way Trump courts the famous, how he’s always throwing out names of the rich and influential as though the reflection of their achievements somehow casts glory despite his often less than stellar performances, like his bankruptcies and foreclosures. You’ll see that foreshadowed in this clip.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XaLQMs_VDLw
bho heads, the donald tails. They have different styles, but its the same narcissistic coin.
“Is he suddenly acting like a rational person?” 😉
I keep thinking about the problem that Trump creates for the convention. How do you let him speak? How do you stop him from speaking? I’d really like to see Cruz or Rubio demonstrate that they are, as Neo aptly puts it, real alphas. That’d do a lot to prove that either one deserves the nomination.
I remember a scene in Lost, where Jack has just beaten Sawyer in poekr, and won the plane’s medication. Kate tells Jack that she wishes he’d won the guns, too. Jack says, when I need the guns, I’ll get the guns. It’s a pure alpha moment. Just because I beat him one way today, don’t think I can’t beat him a completely different way tomorrow.
This has the potential to be a Sister Souljah moment for Cruz.
Ann,
Most of us have took a good long look at Rubio as a potential POTUS. Some of us have a few doubts about his conservative credentials, mainly because of his willing participation in the gang of 8. But, I do not see him as a died in the wool rino. Personally, I would gladly vote for Marco if he became the nominee. My real problem with him is he does not impress me as having enough steel in his spirit to fight the fight against the entrenched vampires in DC.
Your desire to see the donald and Cruz tear each other apart and open a path for Rubio is understanable, but IMO unrealistic. Rubio has to make voters want to support him, so far he is not connecting with enough of us to put him in the same league with the front runners.
taken not took
expat Says 5:29 pm
“the British parliament had a debate today about whether he should be banned from visiting Britain because of the way he talked about not allowing Muslims to enter the country.”
If anyone is way over their heads here I’d say it is the British Parliament who are obviously trying to interfere in American elections. The British need to clean up their own crappy country before they try to tell us how to behave.
Any political class which allows Muslim gangs to enslave over a thousand young British girls as they did in Rotherham, who knew exactly what was going on and who did nothing because the gangs were Muslims and they absolutely adore everything about Islam are absolutely and totally depraved. It is the loathsome British political class who need to learn how to talk to their moral superiors with respect. We have nothing to learn from that gang of craven dhimmis except how to loath the loathsome.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11057647/Rotherham-sex-abuse-scandal-1400-children-exploited-by-Asian-gangs-while-authorities-turned-a-blind-eye.html
Well said, Dennis. The British are practically doomed. I only hope we don’t follow them down the toilet, but it’s not looking good at the moment.
They have no damn business lecturing us about anything.
On the topic if British commentary on our elections, three words: Operation Clark County.
Amen, Dennis.
I for one am dismayed by Trump’s behavior. We could use him as an adjunct howitzer, but this?
Watch the Left make use of this to discredit EVERYTHING he’s said, including what’s valid — esp. the bit about suspending immigration of moslems until we “know what the hell is going on.” They will tie Trump’s erratic behavior to that whole concept, and sink it.
They’re yodeling in triumph in their various batcaves. Again.
Damn. It.
Agree that Trump’s display of thin skin (like Obama) is not becoming. But he has put on a clinic of alpha maleness when it’s most needed. He has controlled the entire frame of debate in this election. See more here: http://rightwise.org/2015/09/17/trump-would-not-exist-without-jeb-bush/
Advice to the Republican Hopefuls and to
Other Leaders and Members of the GOP
http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2015/12/advice-to-republican-hopefuls-and-to.html
If there is one thing that frustrates me to the uttermost degree it is the seeming unwillingness, or inability, of GOP contenders
— and I suppose that to some extent it involves the dread of being called a racist —
to go after the man in the White House and the policies that he has championed for almost eight years
…/… So Paul Ryan attacks Trump for not understanding what America stands for. Fine. By all means, do so. But, at the same time, follow up the above statement with something to this effect:
“[To the credit of all our candidates, however — and I mean ALL of them — not one of them has referred to any member of the opposition party as terrorists or the equivalent of Iran’s religious fanatics. Nor, indeed, has any of them mentioned the Democrats as the worst enemies of their career.]”
The speaker of the House might have added:
“[Furthermore, no Republican would EVER dream of nixing probes into Southern California jihadist groups or, more generally, protecting the rights of Islamists instead of protecting the American people.]”
…/… Three recent developments that should be picked upon unceasingly — especially when the candidate or any of his competitors (!) are being attacked personally …/…
(Read the whole thing (TM))
Is an Instalanche brewing?
“NEO NEO HAS A TRUMP PROBLEM (BUT SHE’S TRYING TO QUIT): Disturbing news from the Trump front.
-Posted at 4:00 am by Sarah Hoyt”
Neo says
Don’t tell that to the pickup artist wannabe’s at Roosh Vorek’s blog (www/rooshforum.com). The “Donald Trump Thread” there is running 372 pages.
Parker wonders if Rubio is not completely RINO, and thus an acceptable presidential candidate.
But “Iowa Congressman Rep. Steve King (R-IA)79%
slammed donor-class favorite Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)79%
for continuing to embrace the policies outlined in his Obama-backed 2013 Gang of Eight bill.”
Let me quote at lenght from the recent interview, because if true, it is quite damning:
http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2016/01/18/steve-king-marco-rubio-continues-embrace-gang-eight-bill-entirety/
Good perspective, but Cruz would learn a lot about dealing with people during his 4 years as Trump’s VP. After Trump pushes everyone around for 4 years, Cruz can talk our way out of any tight spots that trump got us into.
>UPDATE: Somehow I forgot the two of the most ludicrous Trump moments that occurred over the weekend. During the course of his appearance in Myrtle Beach, Trump somehow took credit for the release of the Iranian prisoners, in spite of the fact that he had never even really mentioned them before:
I picked out one random quote from the article and found it to be an out and out lie. Trump’s been talking about the prisoners not being included in the Iran deal for 3 or 4 months now and has been slamming Obama very hard for it. Either this man doesn’t know what he’s talking or is a liar. I doubt the rest of the content of his post is much better.
If you’re going to analyze people, maybe you should start with material that’s something less than a one sided political hit piece.
Oh for God’s sake. He’s a fighter and he’s fighting to win. And you know what? He will win.
I heard Donald will be on the Maury Povich show with Rosie O’Donnell this week.
Trump and Cruz are not ‘tearing each other apart’ by any standard. What would be strange/unusual/troubling would be for either to turn nice, which would impress nobody. Early days yet, but at the moment Iowa and New Hampshire should go to Cruz and Trump respectively. All Trump has to do is finish no lower than third in Iowa and even second in New Hampshire to get down to his core support in the south. And it isn’t just Trump supporters who don’t care how ‘nasty’ either is. Voters in the US and Europe are sick of a political class that puts niceties and not offending anyone before common sense and sound policy. That goes for the left/center/right. The blood hasn’t started to flow, and it may not. Cruz cannot win going negative, and he may not be able to win without going negative. Trump, as noted, can do just about anything he wants. One final point – Cruz like to wear a big, smarmy grin while he’s serving up his insults. He’s a bit too delighted by his own rhetoric and I suspect the optics are going to bite him right in the ass – as in people ignoring his arguments, even good ones, because he comes across as such a self-satisfied git. Obama has precisely the same effect on me.
I see a lot of hate for Trump in Rubio supporters. Has the Supreme Court ruled on Rubio’s eligibility yet? Maybe their anxiety is causing their hatred.
Oh please, let’s dispense with the faux concern. Trump is exactly what America needs if we’re to extract ourselves from the mess Bush and Obama have created. Trump has my vote in both the primary and general elections. And yes, Ann, I have more degrees than you, and in more useful disciplines.
It has never seemed like a good idea for one Republican to attack another. Our efforts should focus on solutions to solve Americas problems. Who can provide the best solutions? If Republicans want to attack, attack the enemy, not not each other.
I in no way defended Britian’s ridiculous treatment of the Muslims there. And I am well aware of the French practically ignoring the bannlieus and the Germans ignoring the Muslim enclaves in places like Berlin and Cologne.
The point I was trying to make is that Trump provided food for all the PC types abroad who have been denying these problems and attacking those who tried to raise these issues. I want someone leading our country who cancome up with sensible ideas and frame them in a way that others might follow them. Trump could have talked about prioritizing groups who are in greatest danger because of their religion or ethnic background. He could have talked about trying to revise our vetting and working with other countries to ensure that all are getting the info they need. He could have framed these types of things in a way that Obama was held responsible for our ineptitude. Trump could have done a lot more than just appeal to our anger, and he may have won some points wih foreigners who are also angry.
Of the top three, I desire Trump least, for many of the reasons mentioned here. In addition, I somewhat distrust Trump, for much of the same reasons I distrust Rubio: they tend towards big-government when it suits them. Cruz is most consistent and has a philosophy that more closely resembles my libertarian/ conservative leanings, so he currently is my top choice of the three. (Our state primary is one of the last in the nation, so I doubt my vote will count.)
That said–and remembering that politics is the art of the possible–I would vote for any of the three over Biden/Clinton/Sanders/whomever. I think that any of the Democrats would do more damage to the country than any of the Republicans running–and even Trump has promised to undo some of the damage of the past seven (or 15) years.
So vote for Cruz. I will. But Neo, don’t talk yourself into not voting for Trump in the general. The alternative is far worse.
I think Trump sometimes goes too far. However, he is the only one I trust to end the madness of illegal immigration, the anchor baby insanity, as well as stopping Islamist immigration. All common sense solutions to the over-riding priority of putting a stop to the changing of voter demographics, which is the long term goal of progressives in order to trash the constitution and will bankrupt the country, if we are not already there. Where are we as a country
Where are we as a country? I submit we are pretty much where the below presentation postulates. Well worth 25 min of your time.
https://vimeo.com/145285384
Henry Smith,
So, you’re using argumentum ad verecundiam, and you’re the authority?
Wilma Haas:
Or maybe not, since there is even less controversy about Rubio than about Cruz.
Nice try, but no cigar.
kidneystones:
So you don’t like Cruz because he’s a ‘self-satisfied git,” but the exceedingly self-satisfied git named Trump doesn’t bother you at all.
Interesting.
Because “self-satisfied git” is certainly one of Trump’s most salient characteristics. You just may like the sort of self-satisfied git Trump is as opposed to the sort of self-satisfied git you see Cruz as. But if Cruz is one (and I agree that he has a certain air I would instead call “smug”), Trump is certainly even more of a “self-satisfied git.”
I didn’t use the term myself—it’s yours—but, looking up the definition of “git” right now, I find this:
I submit that this definition fits Trump far far better than it fits Cruz.
As for “self-satisfied,” it doesn’t take but a few seconds to come up with a ton of quotes from Trump that exemplify the term, and constitute bragging so flagrant it’s almost comical. You would probably respond by pointing out that Trump is rich, has a beautiful wife, is successful, etc., but actually, Cruz is also a man of great accomplishment with a beautiful wife and Cruz doesn’t seem to feel the need to tell us about how wonderful he is with great regularity.
I heard on the news yesterday that the number one reason Trump supporters like him is that he is a ‘strong leader.’ So what one person perceives as ‘thin-skinned’ another perceives as strength.
I am one that does not believe he is thin-skinned. What he is doing is all tactical. How could a thin-skinned complainer/whiner achieve what he has in business? He would never have made any of the deals he’s made with a thin-skinned personality.
He attacks hard. Even when someone might perceive the attack as slight. To many that is toughness and a willingness to fight, not weakness.
What this country needs is for smart guys like Henry to tell us what to do!
I am becoming concerned as the Trump phenomenon drags on. I anxiously await some real primaries, and at least through South Carolina, to gauge whether this is real, or fantasy.
I do suspect that some pundits, such as Limbaugh and maybe Levin as examples, who have been pushing the Trump narrative out of spite, are now beginning to back off because they would hate to be associated if he actually won. Who wants to be remembered forever like the commentator who got thrills up, or was it down, his leg over Obama? Or the one who admired the crease in Obama’s trousers? Fun is fun; but only to a point.
I wonder if Trump is posting incognito under the nom de plume Henry Smith. Reacting to other’s arguments by declaring how accomplished you are has a familiar ring.
One of the reasons I hardly ever read NeoNeoCon – links to Leon Wolf and Restate.
Trump H8’ers gotta H8. I do not.
Bye.
Still think that, IF Trump’s ego would let him, he’d do best as VP to Pres. Cruz. That’s where you put emotional attack dogs, and Trump could be the best at that … and have an unflappable Cruz to hide behind if his thin skin gets hurt.
Paul A’Barge:
Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.
K-E:
I have no idea why you say a thin-skinned person can’t make deals. Trump doesn’t react by crumpling and fading away, he reacts by becoming more-competitive (and insulting to others, although I doubt he insults people he’s actively trying to make a deal with).
I wrote that he’s too thin-skinned for a public office of great responsibility. And his thin skin is only one of many, many reasons he is not a good person to fill that office, many of which I’ve described in this post and others. But I’ll add that the presidency is not the same as a businessman making business deals. In fact, I fail to see that much overlap.
neo-neo con re: gits
The difference between Trump and Cruz and their ‘gittiness’ and my own. The Mirriam-Webster definition comes closer to my use of the term: ‘a foolish or worthless person.’ Hence, my caveat ‘no matter how good his arguments may be.’ I take your point, however. I’ve no particular dog in the fight, but Cruz reminds of the smartest kid in the class who assumed his wit allowed him the freedom to insult bigger, less intellectually-capable peers with impunity. I’ve personally had enough of the ‘academically-gifted’ and place my confidence more in people who excel in the more rough and tumble world of making and losing money.
kidneystones:
I think you are reacting to Cruz’s quality that I called “smugness.” I don’t see him insulting anyone very much; in fact, he is usually quite polite. He certainly criticizes people, but insults are not his thing.
Maybe you think his obvious brilliance is an insult of sorts. I don’t feel that way. But as I said, he comes off as smug. People often feel that way about the brilliant, unless that person adopts a mantle of purposeful (and sometimes fake) humility.
I see Cruz as very tough, by the way. He stood practically alone in the Senate, and fought for his principles and for the promises he made to his constituents. He has won many SCOTUS battles for the right. Trump has made money for himself. I don’t see Cruz as untested in the real world. In the real world (and I include the Supreme Court as the real world, as is a hotly contested Senate election) he has fought and won.
I’m no longer interested in analysis of the Reps that does not at least consider Scott Adams’ stuff. I do wonder what he’ll do should the crackup never come.
Watching the Trump Ames livestream. ‘She can pick winners’ dumped Cruz fer teh Donald. The Cruz campaign reacted by throwing the kitchen sink. Gonna get interesting now. Let’s hope we don’t see too many tantrums from America’s next wanna-be pres.
I love to hear the tut-tuting of the coastals. Neo – You have made it and become a true neo-con.
All the eGoP peck-sniffs just get so precious about that ‘crass’ Trump.
He is not our gangster overlord to fight the eGoP Elitists, he is our murder weapon.
Cruz campaign brings up late-term abortion in response. So, Sarah Palin doubles down.
Cruz quickly grovels: Mr Cruz later said: “I love Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is fantastic. Regardless of what she does in 2016 I will always be a big fan.” via the Telegraph.
And that’s before Palin actually starts attacking Cruz. The speech is a rhetorical masterpiece and contains the explicit warning – stay in the Senate and House, that’s where you’re most effective. Cruz, to be fair, wears his fiercely independent Conservative purist streak with pride. Problem is it reads as ‘permanent grid-lock’ to most neutrals, even sympathetic ones. Cruz is famously hated by most of his own party’s leaders, as Cruz is quick to remind us. Is he planning on getting elected and running with a ‘doesn’t work well with others’ profile? I think not, He’s become the Alan Grayson of the Republican party. Not. Going. To. Be. Pres.
kidneystones:
You call that “groveling”? I call it gracious. There’s nothing groveling about it.
And if Cruz attacked her, you’d call it “nasty.”
And if Trump did either thing, his supporters would call either of those things “masterful, brilliant, what an alpha male would do.”
If you study this blog, you’ll see that during 2008 I defended Palin, nor have I trashed her since. But I do think that it’s really humorous and ironic that she would counsel Cruz (directly or indirectly) to “stay in the Senate and House, that’s where you’re most effective.” First of all, he’s not effective there without a Republican president and enough fellow-conservatives there to support him, which hasn’t been true so far. Secondly, of course, she left the governorship where she would have been most effective, and would have retained her own political viability for the next cycle. Since she quit, she’s drawn crowds and been a reality TV star, and lost a great deal of the support she once had. Yes, there are still many people who follow her and like her, but nothing close to the numbers there used to be. A lot of people lost respect for her when she quit the governorship. Right now, I think she sees her chance to latch onto the coattails of a media favorite and crowd favorite and become relevant again.
You seem to have a lot of personal animus towards Cruz, by the way. “Smarmy”? You remind me a bit of those people who disliked Bush because he reminded them of “spoiled frat boys” they had known.
R Daneel:
And as far as being a “true neo-con” goes—you are a newcomer here, and have no idea what I’m about or why I call myself that, but the main reason was always that I’d become a conservative, a new conservative. I wear that badge proudly, and I’ve written scads of other things about what I believe neocons stand for (the category “neocons” is on the right sidebar, with a list of links).
I am not of any wing of the Republican Party, and couldn’t care less about those wings and what each of them thinks. I think for myself.
As far as your comment “All the eGoP peck-sniffs just get so precious about that ‘crass’ Trump” goes, if you think that’s what this piece is saying, then you are a very superficial thinker and reader.
As for this: “He is not our gangster overlord to fight the eGoP Elitists, he is our murder weapon,” I say “Be careful what you wish for.” Trump may end up being the death not just of the eGoP Elitists, but the suicide of conservatism and the right, for generations. He is also a big government guy. You better just hope he doesn’t want your property for a nice real estate development, either.
“Paul A’Barge Says:
January 19th, 2016 at 12:44 pm
One of the reasons I hardly ever read NeoNeoCon — links to Leon Wolf and Restate.
Trump H8’ers gotta H8. I do not.
Bye.”
Leaving, A’Barge? That’s like watching the garbage take itself out.
Trump has survived and flourished for years in the spotlight. It is hard for me to believe that he is now losing control and saying things he doesn’t intend.
I think his attack on Cruz may be another iteration of his posture as the tough guy who will speak truths that others are too nice to say. That’s his immigration shtick.
With Cruz: his attack seems mean-spirited, but possibly true. I like Cruz much better than Trump on issues, and better than Rubio. But I have heard from lot of different places that Cruz has annoyed people in person: Senate colleagues, Princeton classmates, fellow Supreme Court clerks.
A friend compared him to Richard III of England. There are “Ricardians” who insist that he was gravely libelled by Thomas More and Shakespeare, but as my friend pointed out, everyone turned against him eventually. There had to be a reason. As there may be with Cruz.
Rich Rostrom:
Do you know that Donald Trump has actually “annoyed a lot of people in person”? I’ve read articles by them. So what?
Cruz annoys people who play the “establishment” game that so many voters on the right have said they don’t want their elected officials to play. He’s going to annoy a lot of people who do play that game. So what?
And very brilliant people also tend to “annoy” other people who are not quite as brilliant as they.
I would also like to convey that most people that find themselves without health insurance are usually students, self-employed and those that are laid-off. More than half on the uninsured are under the age of Thirty-five. They do not come to feel they are looking for health insurance since they are young plus healthy. Their particular income is typically spent on property, food, in addition to entertainment. Lots of people that do work either full or part time are not provided insurance by means of their work so they move without due to rising cost of health insurance in america. Thanks for the strategies you talk about through your blog.