Trump’s RNC speech
Open thread.
11:35 PM:
I fell asleep for about half of it, but I saw the rest and it was your basic laundry list. The content was a series of promises of what “we” will do. You either trust him to do these things and to know how to do them (and that it’s even possible for anyone to do them), or you don’t. Or (as is the case with me), if you vote for Trump it would be an anti-Hillary vote pure and simple.
I can’t imagine anyone’s mind being changed by this speech. Nor do I have a clue how many people watched it who weren’t already in the bag for Trump.
I will say this: he’s got a very telegenic family.
12:05 AM:
I found this in a comment at Ace of Spades: “I’ve been waiting my entire voting life for a republican to lie to voters like the dems do.”
I had a related thought while I was watching—something to the effect that if you’re willing to say anything, you can promise anything to anybody or everybody. And if you’re not worried about niceties such as the rule of law, or checks and balances—whether your name be Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, or Donald Trump—it’s just a question of who makes promises that appeal to the most people, and whether people believe them.
Repeats himself often doesnt he?
May be the worst speech I have ever been subjected to. I listened for at least a half hour, then could not take anymore.
Off topic. Conversation with my daughter, who is a health care professional, this evening. She adamantly compares Trump to Hitler; and says unequivocally that he has a personality disorder that is frightening. Said I would be a lemming if I voted for him. She is not a health care professional, but she is smart and knowledgeable. I told her that to me, Trump is problematical while HRC is not. She says there are actually three choices–Trump; Hillary; or pocket your vote if your conscience so dictates. I agree, with one caveat, There are only two choices, since Hillary is unthinkable.
What a mess we are in.
This looks like this could take all night.
Nothing thoughtful here. Just red meat. I dont mind res meat but If your going to accept the nomination for the highest office in the nation, id hoped for a bit of substance and inspiration.
Too long. Average content. Sorry to say.
Power Line 300 plus loved it.
Back to my comment. My daughter is a health care professional, but not a mental health professional. Apparently, Trump already has me drinking too much red wine; and the election is months away.
I will concede her one point for sure. It will endanger the mental health of the country to be subjected to four years of Trump’s State of the Union speeches. But, then there is Hillary.
Since my earlier post, I tried to listen some more, on the assumption that a Presidential candidate would eventually move to a higher plain, and try to appeal to the better instincts of the voters. Nope.
Lots of promises. If he can deliver on a few, I’d be happy. Full agenda. But some things should be easy like changing our stupid energy policy, Pet peeve for me.
Mission accomplished. Nobody’s going to hang around listening to the bloviators in the booths.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/20160722_Daniel_Pipes__With_Trump_as_nominee__time_to_quit_the_GOP.html
I found this in a comment at Ace of Spades: “I’ve been waiting my entire voting life for a republican to lie to voters like the dems do.”
%%%%%
But Donald is a Liberal Democrat — so he doesn’t violate the streak.
He’s STILL running against the Republican party
He’s just picked up running against the Progressive party, too.
Well, if Trump says the right things and you still don’t believe him, there’s nothing, literally, he can do to persuade you: that sounds emotional to me.
I’ve been thinking of a scene in “Dr. Zhivago” a lot lately. Komarovsky, the brutish Soviet commissar, tells Zhivago he can save Lara and their child by taking them under his protection. Zhivago detests him, and recoils at the prospect. Then Komarovsky leans in and says, “Is the price of your moral vanity so exorbitant as to demand the life of this woman and her child?”
Cut to the quick, Zhivago realizes he must yield — to save his lover and their daughter’s lives. He releases them.
I don’t have the extreme view of Donald Trump some of you have. For crying out loud, he’s a New York real estate mogul, not the Antichrist. The Leftists will be after him like the Eumenides, so his scope will be limited. Hillarious is far, far worse.
She, we won’t survive.
I found some comments at Ace, too:
[All of these came before the “lie like the Dems do” wisecrack, which is comment #76….]
Ace also posted a blistering op-ed about people continuing to savage Trump, saying:
(You know how prolix Ace is; this was but a warmup.)
I don’t like to watch political speeches. I can’t remember when I last did. I’m for Trump by now, because I “violently” oppose Hillary. I don’t need any more input at this point. I don’t care.
Sarah Palin’s Donald Trump Scrapbook (lots of pics – who’s more photogenic – Melamia or Sarah? :-))
http://opinion.ijr.com/2016/07/258115-time-visited-trump-tower-learned-donald-trump-us/
The Time I Visited Trump Tower And Learned That Donald Trump Is With Us
July 21, 2016
by Sarah Palin
My family hit the road in the motorhome for the 2011 “One Nation” Bus Tour to highlight historic sites key to America’s foundation. It was a blast watching the press attempt to keep up with us in the rearview mirror (we made buddies with some of those reporters that summer, actually, as we found out who the good guys were)!
Between stops at Philadelphia’s Constitution Hall and the Statue of Liberty, Donald & Melania Trump invited us to Trump Tower for the most memorable visit. DJT and I knew one another prior to the visit, but we’ve kept in closer touch ever since that day.
Our road trip and that personal visit solidified my support of DJT, seeing up close his gracious treatment of everyone — regardless of race, class, creed — or dress code! Mom laughed when I showed her these pics, commenting we’re all still wearing the same clothes.
Trump is all about equality and genuine care for families. As our tribe stumbled off our RV outside the iconic Trump Tower — casual and grounded after long weeks of touring — DJT welcomed us with open arms.
Dad lost his camera along the way, so we dashed across NYC streets through the gathering media storm to buy a new one to document that day’s fun spectacle; Dad still talks about the NYC sales tax shockingly plopped atop that replacement gadget. Thankfully, our good friend, photographer Shealah Craighead, captured these behind-the-scenes pics.
Tonight, you will hear from the Donald Trump I know. The GOP nominee; a man who cares about you, your family, your business, our country. He’s locked arms with us, America. Trump is with us.
====
[Just wondering. How many friends did DJT lose on 911?]
Parts of his speech resonated with the populist part of me. But the national security part of me was upset by other parts of his speech.
As I mentioned the other day, the Cruz thing would get coverage till after the convention, the the press would pick up on the NYT article about NATO.
I slept through the speeches last night, and when I got up my husband had turned on CNN International. The were talking about NATO and Trump.
Trump may know what buttons to push to get some American votes. Unfortunately, he doesn’t know what appliance he is turning on when he pushes.
I sent $100 to Johnson/weld today. You have to be able to sleep with a clear conscience My other votes will go republican with extra help to people who uphold their oaths to the constitution.
While I am not a fan of Trump, it is obvious that the problems we face in our country would be made worse by Clinton. The Democrats are not willing to do what is necessary to safeguard our sovereignty and security; most of the problems we see they created or fostered. One thing that really resonated with me in the speech was the almost doubling of our debt and little to show for it; instead the Democrats want to throw good money after bad.
I worry about Trump’s willingness to go the route that Obama has taken; bypass Congress via Executive Orders. Our republic is messy to govern, but a real leader can rally the people to do what they would rather not do for the long term betterment of our country and walk it through Congress. We shall see if he can be that type of leader.
What Beverly said in her first comment. He said all the things that I would think most conservatives would want to hear. Whether all were outright lies is another question.
Seriously, if you had read that speech, and didn’t know it was DJT’s, what would you have thought?
I’m not sure I get the concept of “red meat”. Is that responding to what the citizenry thinks is important? If so, there are two responses; What’s the problem with that?, and does calling it “red meat” discredit what the citizenry thinks is important?
Is referring to Kate Steinle “red meat”? If so, why? On what grounds? Does it make her less dead? Does it excuse the levels of government complicity in her killing? How many drunk-driving deaths, rapes, and murders byillegal-alien felons released by ICE are we supposed to have? What’s the appropriate number? Is promising to fix this “red meat”?
The same can be said of a good many other issues. IMO, the term “red meat” is applied to a politician’s response to an issue the citizens find important and that the Very Important People wish the citizens would stop noticing.
This is not to say that Trump’s approach would work, nor that he would be interested in the subject(s) once elected. It’s about how the issues in question are discredited by the Very Important People.
How many discouraged workers are we required to have to be a Compassionate Society? I recall that when things were getting better when Reagan was president, we were always being commended to worry about the discouraged workers.
Is there something wrong with vetting Muslim immigrants? How many shootings like Orlando and San Bernardino are we supposed to accept in order to be a welcoming society?
Whatever your views on the issues, the point is that Trump wouldn’t be hammering them if he weren’t certain that the citizenry is extremely concerned about them.
So, if Trump isn’t supposed to be so adamant about them, does that mean the citizens aren’t, either?
The huge issue is the Trump has no fixed convictions except what will get him adulation. Everyone talks as if he will do what he says because he pretended to do that on TV. I read a story today about a politician who said when we get to know the “Real Trump”, not the tabloid, reality TV or primary election Trump we would be happy. All that tells me is we have selected a con-man, who is not anyone. So when he doesn’t build the wall, or nominate good justices what “Trump” do we have
physicsguy:
“He said all the things that I would think most conservatives would want to hear.”
When did Russia’s favored US foreign policy become what “most conservatives would want to hear”?
The ISIS part of Trump’s speech was a glove fit with Russia’s strategy re ISIS:
https://kyleorton1991.wordpress.com/2016/06/21/russia-needs-the-islamic-state-to-save-assad/
Trump would pick up from Obama in that regard.
DirtyJobsGuy–How do you know that Trump has no fixed convictions…? I challenge myself regularly when I assume I know what is or is not motivating a person. My contempt for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton is not predicated on what I think is behind their actions, but instead, their actions. Obama refused to wear a flag pin or put his hand over his heart during the pledge, and said he wanted to “fundamentally transform this nation” during the 2008 campaign. Later he used his middle finger with regularity, and talked disparagingly about his opposition (40+% of the country). These are the reasons, along with his policy positions, of course, why I find him an unacceptable president. Hillary beginning with Travelgate, Whitewater, and on and on has proved how she handles authority and power. Despise Trump for his words, behavior or stated positions, but any statements about motivation are pure conjecture and in my opinion, not only not “the huge issue” but purposeless.
Interesting to read Beverly and others who are “all in”. They clearly heard a different speech and have watched a different personality than I have.
Then, there is the latest mantra, espoused by his children and syncophants, that he is really a nice guy, who does really nice things for the “little guy”; we just don’t know about them. Oh, come on folks. Tell the Widow who had to fight tooth and nail for years to keep her home that he wanted for a parking lot expansion what a nice guy he is. Tell it to the Scots property owners whose homesteads were eyesores from his golf development. He lost those fights, but it cost the little guys dearly to save their property. We know about those. We don’t hear from the people who were damaged by his four bankruptcies. Trump is Trump, and most of us know what he is. What we don’t know is what he will do with the power of the Presidency.
When push comes to shove, it comes around to he is the alternative to Hillary. We hear that a lot. I think we all understand that, and it may be a compelling argument; but, not a comforting one.
I see Ace quoted a lot. I am still trying to figure out the charm. I try his blog from time to time; but, not for long.
Oldflyer–You hit the nail on the head when you state it is about Trump or Hillary. My guess is that for every odious account of Trump’s behavior we can come up with an equal or worse Hillary behavior. I can think of a number of them right now. So it becomes a moot point. I’m “all-in” on Trump because I’m banking on the framework of the Constitution to deal with a possible “rogue” Trump. I know, like a I know my name, that a “rogue” Hillary will be allowed to operate with carte blanche, like her predecessor.
Sharon W:
“Despise Trump for his…stated positions”
Regarding Bush’s decision for Operation Iraqi Freedom, Trump’s position is based on blatant legal and factual error.
Even if you were inclined to overlook that Trump nakedly asserts Russian Left/alt-Right propaganda about Saddam and the why of OIF in his campaign, it’s alarming that like Obama, Trump means to apply the easily demonstrably false narrative of OIF as the keystone for his foreign affairs.
Oldflyer Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 12:18 am…
Since my earlier post, I tried to listen some more, on the assumption that a Presidential candidate would eventually move to a higher plain, and try to appeal to the better instincts of the voters. Nope.
* * *
That was Cruz last night, and you saw what thanks he got for it.
* * *
Sharon W Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 11:45 am… I’m “all-in” on Trump because I’m banking on the framework of the Constitution to deal with a possible “rogue” Trump. I know, like a I know my name, that a “rogue” Hillary will be allowed to operate with carte blanche, like her predecessor.
* * *
The media and the bureaucrats, plus most of the governing GOP and the whole Democrat Party, will fight Trump tooth and nail on the things that matter most to conservatives (they’ll gladly join him on the ones that skewer us); all of them will roll over for Clinton and nothing she does will help the country.
So, given the policy proclivities of the above forces, Trump is our best chance of the two to avoid total Marxist Meltdown.
Beverly Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 2:28 am
Well, if Trump says the right things and you still don’t believe him, there’s nothing, literally, he can do to persuade you: that sounds emotional to me.
I’ve been thinking of a scene in “Dr. Zhivago” a lot lately. Komarovsky, the brutish Soviet commissar, tells Zhivago he can save Lara and their child by taking them under his protection. Zhivago detests him, and recoils at the prospect. Then Komarovsky leans in and says, “Is the price of your moral vanity so exorbitant as to demand the life of this woman and her child?”
Cut to the quick, Zhivago realizes he must yield – to save his lover and their daughter’s lives. He releases them.
I don’t have the extreme view of Donald Trump some of you have. For crying out loud, he’s a New York real estate mogul, not the Antichrist. The Leftists will be after him like the Eumenides, so his scope will be limited. Hillarious is far, far worse.
She, we won’t survive.
* * *
A striking counter-point to Pipes’ purist lament from OM
July 22nd, 2016 at 12:45 am:
“For the Republican Party to recover its soul, Trump needs to be thumped in November. Purged of his influence, the party of Lincoln and Reagan can rebuild.”
Does he really think Trump has somehow hypnotized all of his followers, and when he is dispatched they will wake up and realize how wrong they all were? The people who wholly-support Trump are not going to go away; they will always be part of the environment around the Republican Party’s building site.
What good does a purified GOP do us if the country is destroyed?
Leave the old party if you must, make a new party if you can, but don’t pretend that four (or eight!) years of Hillary (or, frankly, any other Democrat) is going to leave any solid foundation for rebuilding any kind of effective conservative movement.
Beverly Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 2:40 am
Ace also posted a blistering op-ed about people continuing to savage Trump, saying:
Sorry, I was on Twitter. I felt it was necessary to dispel the widely-held myth, adored by #NeverTrumpers, that somehow attacking Trump relentlessly does not aid Hillary Clinton, and that they are not choosing Hillary Clinton by choosing to be NeverTrump.
All choices have consequences. By supporting Trump, I am responsible for the consequences of a Trump victory – and those consequences could indeed be dire.
…
I tried to explain to them that there is no such thing as a consequence-free choice – all choices have consequences, both on the upside and the downside – and both the upside and downside consequences must be considered by any adult, intellectually-serious person in making his choice.
* * *
That’s the most intelligent approach I have seen so far.
You cannot pick up just one end of a stick.
Yes, Trump is a bad person, in many lamentable ways.
Hillary is a bad person in all conceivable ways.
One of them will be president by the end of November, barring a heart attack or an assassination (and both are very real possibilities for either).
The time to defeat Trump was back at the beginning of the primaries and no one was willing to do what was necessary, for a myriad of reasons.
As someone once said (she’s evil, but occasionally not stupid): There are no do-overs in real life.
expat Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 4:23 am
…
Trump may know what buttons to push to get some American votes. Unfortunately, he doesn’t know what appliance he is turning on when he pushes.
* * *
That’s true of just about every politician.
“While I am not a fan of Trump, it is obvious that the problems we face in our country would be made worse by Clinton” – amr
If it were SO obvious, there wouldn’t be an issue with unity and support for trump.
The plain fact is it is not so obvious. NOBODY really knows what trump will do with power, except for trump himself, and maybe not even him – he may be that shallow.
Coupled with what we DO know about him, and what he has shown us during this campaign, that is friggin dangerous.
How can it not be?
amr – you even speak to one of the key issues that underwrites that danger – bypassing Congress – and, he gives every indication that he would blow well past Obama’s precedence.
Great, if trump doesn’t abuse it for himself, think what that will usher in WHEN (not IF) a Dem POTUS arrives!
We’ve never had a candidate like trump in our lifetimes, so people either don’t want to believe that he could really be that bad (especially next to clinton), or they discount what they don’t know, simply because they don’t know (and ignore the signs), but weight heavily what they do know about clinton, only because they are well aware of all her transgressions. That is a mistake.
It is rather irresponsible to think it is not a HUGE risk that could go the other way and make clinton look like an angel.
Just how bad must the candidate possibly be before people would be moved off of a GOP and look elsewhere?
Humanity just hasn’t learned its lesson after Wiemar.
Big Maq–It isn’t a mistake to weight heavily what we know about Clinton as compared to Trump because of the other 2 branch factor. It must be weighted more heavily because we can be virtually certain (based on the last 7 years) that she will be given carte blanche. We do not know that, and for my money can presume otherwise when it comes to Trump. Why presume otherwise? Because the Founders were brilliant and that is why they constructed our government as they did. For this very reason. However with a complicit media and populace you can see that the mechanism did not play out. Obamacare was rolled through Congress without so much as a physical possibility that it could have been fully read, let alone examined, and was passed as “not a tax”. The SC then upheld it “as a tax”. There are no words to describe this offense against the citizens that revere our Republic. Trump is not loved by the very bodies that support the Democrats. That is the difference.
And today Trump is back attacking Cruz. This is the man that is supposed to better than Hillary?
Trump puts revenge above his own best interest. How will that serve the country and the world?
Vote your conscience (and use your brain, not just the loathing of Hillary).
OM–Loathing Hillary is not the issue. Loathing the policies and positions that she has outwardly championed, along with her unconscionable execution of her public office, along with the knowledge that she is fully embraced by the media and every powerful position of influence to carry out actions that are harmful to our current circumstances and destructive to the next generation; that is where my brain says, take the only chance (again even if it’s 1%) that potential Trump foolishness would be thwarted as designed by our Founders.
Richard Aubrey:
Why would you think that “red meat” is pejorative? To me, it simply means something nourishing but somewhat bloody, that satisfies hunger. Not necessarily a bad thing—it’s an intense word, and sometimes people use it in a condescending way, but it’s not inherently negative.
See this.
“I see Ace quoted a lot. I am still trying to figure out the charm. I try his blog from time to time; but, not for long.” – Oldflyer
Ace is lamenting all the offensive comments he is getting bombarded with.
But, reading him from time to time in recent years, his language and his “voice” is rather nasty in way he demonizes his “opponents”. His tone is of abusive certainty, which is appealing to the kind of crowd that responds the way he is now complaining about.
He recently said “I didn’t join the conservative movement to become a facist” veering #NeverTrump in all but use of hashtag for a while.
Now he is essentially telling folks to back trump, in a backwards fashion, by “reminding” #Nevertrumpers that they are “morally responsible” for clinton, should she win (the premise being there are only those two choices).
So, was he wrong in the facist comment, or is he wrong now?
If trump turns out to be the facist ACE was concerned about earlier, is it a morally good thing to also have supported trump?
Like many, he never says that maybe there is an alternative, and that folks are stuck on a binary mindset, when there are other better choices.
Maybe it is because the worst case scenario with trump is acceptable?
Eric–I think that it is highly likely that should Trump be elected (which I don’t think is likely) his positions on national security issues would be adjusted after he is properly briefed with the facts. I accept that a lot of the opinions I hold, throughout my adult life, when it comes to these matters is hamstrung by the fact that I do not indeed have all the facts. When it comes to national security, I certainly hope there are some very pertinent things that are unknown. But, of course, with Hillary at the helm, that is less likely (at least where our sworn enemies are concerned.)
Trump already feels he has the Republican side sown up. He knows his avid followers would stick with him no matter what. Heck, they cheered loudly at the convention when he stated positions that Democrats and Russians hold. The rest of the Republicans he assumes are like many of you – not a fan but too scared of Hillary to vote otherwise.
So here’s my prediction – he is going to keep attacking constitutional conservatives like Cruz, and will pivot left in hopes of picking up disaffected Bernie and HRC voters. Because deep down he’s a leftist himself.
His followers will continue to cheer.
His display today, bringing up Cruz’s father and still coyly linking him to Lee Harvey Oswald . . . that’s just Trump being Trump. He isn’t able to handle opposition and becomes consumed with crushing the opposition, rather than doing what’s right for the country.
Contrary to what Ace says, it’s not my fault if HRC wins. It would be my responsibility if I VOTED for her, but I’m not going to. I’m voting for someone besides HRC or DJT. Not my responsibility if she wins or he wins. Both will be bad. I am pretty sure we’ll survive her, with a loyal, conservative opposition intact. If he wins, there will be no conservative party anymore – he’s taken that over and it’s now Trump’s party.
And he’s not a conservative.
I understand people who are too afraid of HRC to not vote for Trump. But I think you’re fooling yourselves.
Let’s take a look at some of Gary Johnson’s self-proclaimed positions. Let’s also grant for the sake of argument that he is sound on on The First, Second, Forth and Ninth and Tenth.
Let’s see what else then, Johnson thinks about the issues confronting this polity, and what we would be at least formally voting for, in voting for him.
Under “Civil Rights” he first uncontroversially announces that he is for the separation of church and state. Meaning one supposes that he is against the establishment of a state religion be that Anglicanism or Islam. Next come the following:
Ok … moving on, “On Drugs” where we catch a flavor of his views with some of these bullet items.
Immigration:
Huh; regarding that last I didn’t realize that I wanted to live in North Mexico, but heh, Gary is for freedom and that is what I want so we must want the same things which is what the Mexicans want too and therefore it’s what I want … or something.
Well, there is plenty more I have not quoted, some of it seemingly reasonable, but I have now seen enough to give me all the information I need to decide between voting for a putatively morally simpatico Johnson on the one hand, and a problematical Trump on the other. Or writing myself in on the ballot if it comes to that.
Should then, I vote for Gary Johnson because it is morally better to vote for what and who you wholeheartedly support, than for what and for whom seems strategically expedient given the circumstances?
Fortunately, I for one, will not be confronted with that supposed dilemma.
Sharon W,
Trump’s allegiance to the Russian propaganda view of the US has been the most consistent part of his campaign.
Sharon W, that is a very hopeful position you take. I might suggest that mature people, who possess good judgement, are careful about making definitive statements when they do not have “all the facts”. Most can simply say, ” I do not have enough facts at this moment to make a judgement.” If someone cannot do this with respect to questions of serious importance, it raises alarms.
We are all arguing in circles. There is a divide about Trump. There is no divide about Hillary. People can argue until blue in the face whether an abstention is in fact a vote for Hillary. I have said many times, that if that is the case; Trump needs to work hard to heal the divide about himself. He does not seem to even try; apparently believing that he does not need those votes.
There are comical aspects to the debates. For instance the notion that if Trump loses, it will be the fault of Ted Cruz and Oldflyer (if I abstain), and no blame assigned to Trump himself. I have actually read such gibberish.
DNW,
There’s some overlap, but Libertarian ≠Conservative.
Bill, when Hillary’s Supreme Court nominees trample over YOUR previously guaranteed Constitutional rights, I’m sure you will be consoled by the fact that you were not responsible for her election.
Who knows? Maybe some of your friends will be assigned to the same re-education ‘camp’ your in.
Do you think that’s extreme? No more extreme than Oldflyer’s daughter believing that Trump = Hitler.
You see Israel = Nazis signs all the time at anti-Israel rallies. Do you think that is extreme too?
The cool thing about double standards is that most of you who have them wouldn’t have any standards at all without them.
Yes well – and ignoring the synecdoche – luckily we need not listen to them constantly, but only once a year for an hour or so – and only if we choose. The spectacle of the Congress fawning over Obama as he usurped their role, left me inured to the effects of further political shocks.
Yeah. That’s really disappointing. Seriously. He suggested he would. So far as I can see, he has not. On the one hand, an effen psychotic, one the other hand puffing vainglory. And on the other? There is no other.
The cool thing about double standards is that most of you who have them wouldn’t have any standards at all without them.
Nice…
I DON’T SUPPORT HILLARY CLINTON. How many times do I have to say that?
Unfortunately, I think Trump may be insane.
It’s really unfortunate that the SC is going to become more leftist. Really unfortunate. But the Stupid Party insisted on nominating an unstable, non-conservative as it’s nominee. He’s a guy I can’t vote for. I don’t believe that this vindictive, immature man should be given an army, a nuclear arsenal, and the Executive branch. I also think his main, primary, and only standard for selecting judges will be picking the ones that will most benefit Trump and give Trump the most power.
As to my double standards – I have no idea what you’re talking about regarding re-education camps, Nazi signs, etc. What does that have to do with anything I’ve written?
Sharon,
I agree with OldFlyer.
Trump is like Obama – unmoveable. There is no evidence that Trump or Obama “listen”.
A truly self-actualized person in Maslow’s Pyramid will have learned lessons in life and understand that accountability is the opposite of being a narcissist. Being accountable is honoring your word, others, listening, having empathy and sympathy…
Well. Maybe to be President you have to be a narcissist. The Ben Carsons of the world understands Islam but didn’t seem arrogant or tough enough.
Oldflyer:
“Trump needs to work hard to heal the divide about himself. He does not seem to even try; apparently believing that he does not need those votes.”
If he doesn’t need “those votes”, then what does Trump believe he needs?
As I’ve repeated here often, the activist character of the 2015-2016 Presidential race has been apparent – as the GOP and Right should have anticipated from the activist character of the 2012 race (but have consistently failed to recognize due to their ingrained aversion to activism).
Based on Trump’s campaign so far, it’s apparent that Trump believes he needs the Left-mimicking alt-Right social activist movement that’s the creative engine of the Trump phenomenon. Trump is not the cause of the Trump phenomenon.
As Neo explained at http://neoneocon.com/2016/04/14/who-are-the-alt-right-and-what-do-they-want/:
“That’s a huge part of what this election has become. A vote for Trump is a vote for the alt-right, whether Trump knows it or not.”
Participatory politics subsume electoral politics. The activist game is the only social cultural/political game there is.
From an activist perspective, the 2016 general Presidential election is less Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump than Democrat-front Left versus Left-mimicking Trump-front alt-Right. And the “versus” characterization is misleading because the Left and alt-Right are sides of the same dis-civic coin, at times the same side.
At this crossroads, we need a viable 3rd option – for the center to go full activist – but there doesn’t appear to be a viable 3rd option forthcoming mainly due to the aversion to activism among conservatives.
Beverly Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 2:28 am
Well, if Trump says the right things and you still don’t believe him, there’s nothing, literally, he can do to persuade you: that sounds emotional to me.
You forget to consider that America was about doing things, not talking about doing things. By investing hope and change in a leader that his very words equal Change and Work, is evidence of a flaw in the human heart. The willingness to believe anything from a Savior, no matter the source or AUthority.
America was going to Hell even before you began to see what the Left really was, Beverly. It will continue to do so, even afterwards.
I don’t have the extreme view of Donald Trump some of you have. For crying out loud, he’s a New York real estate mogul, not the Antichrist. The Leftists will be after him like the Eumenides, so his scope will be limited. Hillarious is far, far worse.
So far, your fellow Trump supporters have finalized considering and declaring the character assassination of Cruz as a narcissist sociopath, evil on par with Lucifer, and will be glad he ends up in hell. Sounds like regular Southern Baptist rhetoric against anti slavery abolitionists to me. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The speech was too long and too complex. Too much of a laundry list. The delivery was a bit too bombastic for my tastes. Yet many people I respect were over the top in praise of both Ivanka (an acceptable but not inspired introduction) and DJT.
It’s true that Trump would not be able to accomplish most of the issues listed. Most require the cooperation of Congress, which might be difficult to get. What he could do, within the President’s powers, is reform the Justice Department, the Immigration Service, the Department of Homeland Security, Defense, and other executive controlled agencies to enforce and follow the existing laws. That in itself would be a great thing for this nation. We have seen how Obama ignores the law and only enforces those he agrees with. We have seen how he uses the agencies as instruments of his vision of social or environmental justice, especially in the Defense Department and the EPA But that is not unique to Obama, it is a Democrat tactic that HRC would continue to use.
I believe that, if Trump is elected, the MSM would suddenly rediscover their job as a watchdog over the government. Also, the progressives in Congress would utilize every tactic they could to stymie his agenda. As a billionaire businessman, no one, Dem or GOP, would hesitate to bring impeachment charges should he step too far out of line. That would not be true of a historical first woman President that the Dems would unite behind no matter her high crimes and misdemeanors. So, I’m not afraid of Trump being a “Hitler.Fascist” authoritarian as many seem to be.
Many are highly critical of Trump’s questioning of the usefulness of NATO. He has not been diplomatic in his words about NATO. He is not used to being a person whose every word must be measured because every world leader is listening and wondering what it means. In some ways it is refreshing to hear a leader speak his mind rather than couch his words in diplo-speak as most politicians do. Yet, diplo-speak has its uses in keeping the surface waters unruffled. IMO, NATO is still useful and still has a role to play in world security but I also think it’s high time we revisited the alliance with an eye to strengthening it and asking our partners to step up and pay their fair share. Three NATO nations (France, Belgium, the USA) have been attacked by ISIS recently, but NATO has not united to destroy ISIS as one might expect of a treaty organization that was working robustly. Trump could do nothing to unilaterally change the alliance. He would have to bring Congress and the American people along.
I can see that a Trump Presidency might bring badly needed change. I am very certain that a Hillary Presidency would provide more statism, more sluggish economic activity, more political correctness, more debt, more military weakness, less rule of law, less safety from enemies both foreign and domestic, and a Supreme Court that would make law not interpret it..
Trump is a gamble but one, at this point, I’m willing to take. That said, I’m keeping an open mind. Trump may yet do something that would reveal him as an even worse possibility then Hillary. I wish it wasn’t this way, but you have to play the cards as they are dealt.
mf:
To answer your question, Trump lost NO friends on 9/11. It was another in a long line of lies of his. I wrote a post about it, here.
Ymarsakar; Beverly:
I respond to that remark of Beverly’s here.
Tuvea Says:
July 22nd, 2016 at 1:11 pm
Bill, when Hillary’s Supreme Court nominees trample over YOUR previously guaranteed Constitutional rights, I’m sure you will be consoled by the fact that you were not responsible for her election.
Who knows? Maybe some of your friends will be assigned to the same re-education ‘camp’ your in.
Does that mean, Tuvea, you are going to pull the trigger on totalitarians in America? Because if you do nothing, and Bill has to fight by himself, there’s a term for that: collaborator. You won’t be on that Morally Superior horse for long, Tuvea, when the bullets start penetrating flesh, when the bodies pile up like cordwood. Will you be able to withstand evil then… I wonder.
Trump is not the cause of the Trump phenomenon.
Correct. Also Hussein and Clinton aren’t merely the byproducts of their own efforts. They didn’t bootstrap themselves up by their hands, to their level. Clinton had her husband and Democrat aid. Hussein had the entire Leftist alliance backing him, as their Messiah and Lightbringer (Pope + Divine King).
@DNW – really a false argument you are making. Either trump and the risk associated with him is acceptable or he is not.
If Libertarian is = Conservative, then there is nothing to argue about, right? We could seemlessly switch.
The core problem is the acceptability of trump or clinton in temperament, character (honesty, integrity), policy and motives – as much as we can guess about those for either candidate.
If he is acceptable to you, then there is no issue, and probably never has been.
If he is not acceptable, then we have to face the reality that we don’t have the luxury of trying to match our policy preferences 100%. It likely won’t even be close to 50% with trump or clinton.
Libertarian is as close as we are going to get this round, out of the world of choices available.
At least they stand for limited government – the core issue as I see it for this country – something most folks cussed at the GOP for preaching but not doing.
They also have representation in every state, enabling them to be an option that can change the binary dynamic.
Plus they have TWO experienced two-term GOP Governors on their ticket. Their records show them to be much more prudent than zealots. Both seem to not be afflicted by any of the ethical and other flaws that make trump and clinton unacceptable.
A Libertarian POTUS who is much more likely (than trump or clinton) to live within the boundaries of his powers, and abide by the Constitution, working with a GOP Congress, is the best we can shoot for at this moment. In this scenario, Congress is much more likely to be a check and balance that it is supposed to be.
Or we are kidding ourselves about the “unacceptability” of trump to begin with.
The “strategic” argument crap is what has got us into this mess. It is what both parties want us to believe. This time is different. trump is different. The GOP is different.
But, it only works for them if we blindly follow past patterns, and if we sheepishly wait for someone else to make a move to signal to us it is okay to change.
We need to choose to wake up and not play the game they are begging us to play, and look beyond the two party choice.
It is in our very hands.
Some general advice, and some specific advice about Trump:
Frist, except for entertainment, don’t listen to or watch politician’s speeches. (Exception: Unless you are studying their techniques.) Instead, read and study their speeches, later. You’ll save time, and you will have a chance to think about their arguments, and check them in various ways.
I have been doing this since the Nixon adminstration and believe that I am much better informed, because of this practice.
However, when a politician like Trump comes along, my rule changes. Like Neo, I believe that Trump is a pathological liar. When a candidate tells us that previous officials have done nothing for the people in fifty years, and that He will give us “everything”, the rational response is not to expect Santa Claus in November, or even to study the candidate’s words, but to ignore them.
But I still want to know what Trump might do, and so I worked out this set of rules.
Here’s the first: “Pay almost no attention to what he says now. (Unless it is really funny.)”
He’s trying to make a sale and, as he has said, he uses hyperbole to appeal to our fantasies. Or, to put it more bluntly, he exploits our weaknesses by lying to us.
Neo – You touch on something I’ve been wondering about: Does Trump have any friends?
I probably should add that I think both Clinton and Trump belong in prisons, not the White House, and that I plan to cast a protest vote this November.
Despite all my criticisms of Trump I might vote for him, anyway, because of the Supreme Court — were it not for the nuclear issue. I think the risk of nuclear war has increased while Obama has been president, partly because of his actions and inactions.
Because he is both ignorant and reckless, I think Trump would be even wurse on this issue than Obama has been.
Personally, it doesn’t matter to me whether people vote for Trump, Cruz, or anybody else. That’s on their conscience, and they will be held accountable to their choice, one way or another.
No, it’s this Religious Authoritarian Trump Demoncrat BS about making Cruz out to be Satan Soul and Lucifer, that anybody opposed to the Alt Right has to be destroyed the way the Left destroys anyone anti Left.
I would gladly send any such operative from ALinsky’s rules from Lucifer, to hell, irregardless of what they call themselves, white nationalists, patriots, Americans, whatever. None of it matters. You are all human, and so far as I’ve checked, still mortal. Trump is no better than any other. Clinton is the same as any other Leftist in power. There is no point trying to take them on one by one in this war.
Jim Miller: “Does Trump have any friends?”
Rudy Giuliani has been a close friend for 30 some years and raves about the man as being a great guy. Bill O’Reilly claims to be a long-time friend who likes Trump personally. O’Reilly poses as being objective in the election but you can tell that he is hoping the Donald wins. Most of Trump’s close friends are well placed New Yorkers that have known him for years. But there are many others who know him and like him. Did you watch the convention? Lots of people who are recent acquaintances spoke for him at the convention. Ben Carson, Laura Ingraham, Marcus Luttrell, Willie Robertson, Scott Baio, and many others. He seems to have convinced them of his sincerity and willingness to do the right thing for the country. How about Mike Pence? Do you think he has been hoodwinked?
It’s amazing to me that people can look at Trump and not remember how many other badly flawed men we have had as Presidents. In the modern era, there have been FDR, JFK, Nixon, LBJ (probably the biggest crook ever in the WH), and Bill Clinton. So, character is often overlooked or hidden from the voters. Meanwhile paragons of family virtue and comportment such as Carter and Obama have been awful Presidents.
J.J. Thanks.
As you describe them, those all sound more like occasional politcal allies, rather than friends.
Until recently, of course, that’s how you could describe his relationship with wedding guests Bill and Hillary== though I am sure all three would have siad they were friends.
(And in 2008 the Donald did give his friend Hillary a big plug on his radio show..)
Now that Trump has passed the primary and convention and resumed irrational attacks on Cruz I’m thinking a
“Vote For Trump WAS a vote for Hillary”
as he sure seems to be throwing the election to Hillary for those who still plan to vote for him.
J.J. Says:
Jim Miller: “Does Trump have any friends?”
“…Ben Carson…”
You mean the eminent surgeon that Trump slammed on multiple occasions as a pathological, homicidal maniac, who was at best an average doctor and believed in a sick religion? That Ben Carson?
Carson was of course guilty of the grievous mortal sin of gaining in the polls, so he deserved it, right? Carson also later admitted that Trump had promised him an unspecified “something” for eating his pride and genuflecting (it had better be something very, very good.)
The only people who will claim him as a “friend” are probably those who never had, or competed with him to get, something he wanted.
JJ:
“Three NATO nations (France, Belgium, the USA) have been attacked by ISIS recently, but NATO has not united to destroy ISIS as one might expect of a treaty organization that was working robustly.”
That’s because the model NATO solution for ISIS is the OIF Surge+Awakening. But Obama sabotaged it for his fundamental course deviation in order to end American leadership of the free world. NATO, in form and principle, has been a manifestation of American leadership of the free world.
To fix NATO, Trump would first need to backtrack from Obama’s course deviation to restore the US position to Bush, who carried forward American leadership of the free world.
The stigma applied to OIF as it represents a paradigm of US leadership is the keystone premise crippling US leadership and, by extension, NATO versus ISIS.
Re-normalizing OIF in the political discourse is necessary to re-lay the foundation for correcting course for US leadership and, by extension, NATO.
But that’s not what Trump promises to do. Instead, Trump rejects the OIF model solution out of hand by subscribing to the same false narrative of OIF promoted by Russia that’s subscribed to by Obama. Trump stigmatizes the fundamental principles of strong-horse American leadership of the free world that manifested with OIF. He overtly supports the entities using ISIS and who used AQI to similar advantage.
JJ:
“Trump could do nothing to unilaterally change the alliance. He would have to bring Congress and the American people along.”
Trump’s consistency with Russian propaganda doesn’t promise to fix US leadership and, by extension, NATO. The change that Trump promises is picking up Obama’s course deviation with Russia’s direction to worsen the problem.
Jim Miller, geokstr, and Eric; all points of interest. Which shows how differently we humans can view other humans and their motivations.
If I knew Trump on a personal basis I’m not sure I would like him. I don’t like his braggadocio, his lack of humility, and his vicious personal attacks on his opponents. Is that the real Trump or is it the WWE Trump? Trump spent time in the WWE doing programmed dust ups with Vince McMahon. He seems to have concluded from that experience that many people are attracted to such Alpha Male performances. And his success with primary voters would seem to bear that out.
One of the things that is obvious to me is that he hears the voices of those who have been left behind in this crappy economy. Yesterday Michael Medved was criticizing Trump because he has a negative view of the way people are doing in this economy. Which shows how out of touch Medved is. Medved and most successful professionals are doing okay, but the lower middle class (blue collar workers, small business people, and young people trying to get started) people are not doing well in this crappy economy. Two days ago I had a long conversation with the owner of a mobile home dealership. It was eye opening. Mobile homes are low cost housing alternatives. His business is booming. He told me he is seeing many people who have had to sell their homes because their incomes have decreased and are looking to move down to a mobile. He said that, even though it was good for his business, it made him uneasy that so many decent, hard-working people were going backwards in Obama’s stagnant economy.
You and I may not like Trump’s message in detail, but it’s resonating with people who are moving down in the economy.
Eric, I agree that Trump is totally wrong about OIF. But the MSM and Dems have made it the conventional wisdom. The only thing that would turn it around is if Iraq suddenly became a model Muslim democracy. That is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Just as an opponent to Trump with more conventional conservative credentials is not going to appear. We have to move forward, play the hand that has been dealt, and hope that Trump can deliver some of what he promises. My activism consists of writing letters to my local newspaper and to my Congress Critters, talking to my acquaintances, supporting with money the Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch. (Both organizations can do much more to advance conservative causes than individuals acting alone.) I used to hit the bricks for the TEA Party but those days are gone now. The TEA Party has been captured by the religious right. Social issues at the national level are losers for the conservative cause, but that’s not how they see it.
“Despite all my criticisms of Trump I might vote for him, anyway, because of the Supreme Court – were it not for the nuclear issue.” – Jim Miller
First, thanks for the link. Nice blog. And, nice, succinct list of rules.
Your fourth rule (determine his core philosophy – Nietzschean you have assessed – probably also some Nihilism at some level, IMHO) is the most important, and is what underlies your (and, in large part, my) hesitation to vote for him – it is the uncertainty, and the consequences and risk that come from that.
It presents a question of motivation, which can only also be guessed at by the character of his behavior, past and present.
The confluence of these all just amplify a danger signal that too many are managing to ignore.
Might have backed him long ago, if he were anywhere close to being consistent and was at least 50% conservative, and might have put up with the rest as part of the “game of politics”.
Fact is, have been silently begging for him to be so (giving evidence to refute my continuing assessment of him), and come around to his promise to “act very presidential”. Nothing but disappointment, not only with him, but with how easily all fall in line in behind.
This election boils down to the competing narratives of:
Dangerous, Risky, Disruptive, Temperamental, with the Keys to Nuclear Button
vs
Four More Years of Obama with a Criminal
Trust, Lies, Corruption, Cronyism, etc. – they tend to cancel each other out with these two.
The wildcard of timing of world events close to election day might play in trump’s favor, otherwise, most people are naturally risk averse and would rather go with the “safer” bet.
That is, unless, folks see the folly (and moral compromise), drop both trump and clinton, and look at the other options available.
“One of the things that is obvious to me is that he hears the voices of those who have been left behind in this crappy economy.” – J.J.
Completely disagree. Like what we accuse all politicians of doing, he is adept at saying what he thinks a segment of the population wants to hear.
Why should we make an exception for trump?
Were trump to be consistent in policy and not so mutable, and had a history of taking care of the “little guys”, one could make the case he is “hearing”. But, lacking in all that, it seems he is not.
A good marketer’s job is to make us believe he is “hearing”. trump is a strong marketer.
He says a lot of things, and, like a trial balloon, if he likes the response, he will continue a theme or phrase, or, otherwise, drop it.
Have not seen any evidence that his core belief is to really help those people. His history shows he is just as likely to use them for his own gain.
Yes, trump’s message is resonating with some who have been affected by the economy. So was Bernie Sander’s. It is not a reason to support either of them.
The real question is, is he the right candidate with the right solution?
Trump is a clumsy politician. Hillary has smoothed out over the years, and by now looks almost polished.
We have seen enough of Trump by now to know: voting for him will be a risk. We have seen enough of Hillary to know: we know what we’d be getting.
I plan to go with the risk.
“I plan to go with the risk.” – Jan
Please articulate what you see the risk is with trump?
The American voters are the ones that are damned. It’s not something they can recover from or fix with a politician.