Arguments for DeSantis over Trump – do they matter?

The New Neo Posted on by

Commenter “Griffin” links to this Twitter page in which Steve Deace endorses DeSantis. Deace gives a host of reasons, and I agree with pretty much all of them. Here’s a small excerpt:

DeSantis has done more damage to our enemies where it matters most (policy) than any politician I’ve seen in my career, and thus earned my (our) support IMO.

Or, to put it more plainly, it is time to not just message and market the MAGA, but to actually do the MAGA. …

… I think [Trump] has real electability issues, but even more fundamental than that, I don’t believe they’re going to let you vote for him if you want to. I think he will either be in prison by this time next year, or forced to take a plea deal to stay out of it. I don’t even think anymore they’re trying to get him the nomination, because they think they can beat him. Maybe it started there, but these people can’t restrain themselves. They just want to punish Trump for daring to be our voice. …

There is only one other candidate who truly threatens the system — DeSantis. Now, I think he threatens them even more/better than Trump, …

I see no other path to stop this, since Republicans in Congress won’t defund the weaponized DOJ (which Trump himself is strangely not even asking for), than to win the next election. If Trump isn’t on the ballot, who else has an actual record of draining swamps other than DeSantis? Nobody. Heck, the same Ramaswamy currently auditioning to be Bishop of MAGA just wrote a book — last year — condemning Trump and praising Pence for goodness sakes. …

… [N]ot a single meaningful incumbent lost last year, despite the three years of Hell we’d all just been through as a people. If you missed this, and are still claiming you know what time it is, I would kindly ask you to re-check your watch.

There were two places where the Democrat Party was rightfully destroyed — Florida and Iowa. Two places with governors who didn’t surrender their people to generational damage at the hands of Fauci-Birx as Trump did. Two places where landmark #ProLife legislation was enacted. Two places where the groomers were confronted head on and kicked out. Two places with strong leaders displaying strong leadership. And the voters in each of those states, which Barack Obama had just won twice, rewarded that strong leadership by re-electing their Republican Governors by 20 point margins.

There’s more from Deace, of course, but I wager you get the point.

A personal note: I’ve had a difficult year, as most of you know. I’ve weathered the death of someone very close to me, and there are other close friends who are wrestling with illness and I’ve also had other friends die. The news out there in the wider world is often depressing for the most part, as well. So it may be that my perceptions of the upcoming election are skewed by all of that grieving.

But with that caveat, what I see is that most people on the right are going to vote for Trump in the primaries, and no other candidate will be able to gain enough traction to stop that. Logical arguments like those of Deace don’t tend to change minds, and that is particularly true where strong emotion is involved. And with Trump’s candidacy, very strong emotion is involved. That emotion involves – among other things – justified outrage at what has been done to him by his enemies.

I think for the most part Trump was a good president, and I think what he accomplished under the constant barrage of false accusations, spying, lying, lawfare, and all the rest is nothing short of phenomenal. But I think that he won by a small margin in 2016, and was unable to build substantially on that. Whether or not fraud or rigging was involved in Biden’s win, I think there’s also no question that Trump made few converts to his cause. His behavior since the election of 2020 has alienated even more people, and I believe he cannot win in 2024 for that reason.

Of course, if Trump becomes the nominee, I hope I’m wrong about that.

However, I simply don’t see that anyone else in the Republican field has a chance to win the nomination, much as I think it’s logical to support someone like DeSantis. For a host of reasons, I don’t think Trump’s support is going to sink below a plurality of Republican primary votes. And I also think that quite a few Democrats will probably cross over in the primaries to vote for Trump, because they think he will be a sure loser in the general.

Trump and the perception of guilt

The New Neo Posted on by

Commenter “Eeyore” has a question:

One thing I have never been clear on is exactly why they think Trump “guilty”, or guilty of what. I really haven’t seen anything resembling a coherent explanation. And I do not mean psychological diagnoses; I see far too many of them on the right. True, false, or whatever, they miss the point, as such approaches always do.

Is there such a thing out there?

I’ll have a go at an answer.

I think that, to most Democrats and most NeverTrumpers who once were Republicans, Trump’s guilt on myriad counts is overdetermined rather than underdetermined. But it starts with a perception, as so many things do: that Trump is a boor as well as often juvenile. I think that’s a correct perception about his personality, but it certainly doesn’t mean he’s guilty of anything in the legal sense or that he should be prosecuted for anything at all. And of course, I happen to agree with most of his policy decisions, whereas Democrats hate those positions of his, which makes them even more disposed to believe the worst.

So for them, the ground is prepared to consider Trump really really awful, and from there it’s just a short segue to believing him guilty of some or all the things of which he’s been accused. And those accusations have been made by people who are actually lawyers and law professors and prosecutors and Democrat politicians and other professors and just about every MSM reporter in the business, so if a person is already inclined to believe such things, then the Argument From Authority is available.

Most people do not delve into the details, seeking to question their own beliefs. Most people also aren’t especially knowledgeable about law or even about how our system of justice works. So they’re more than willing to believe that Trump is every bit as guilty as claimed.

And there’s a huge supply of such supposed crimes from which to choose. It is my distinct impression that many if not most Democrats have never quite abandoned the “Russian puppet” and “Russian interference on Trump’s behalf in 2016” accusations, after those things had been drummed into their heads so forcibly and for so long. So, Trump was not only illegitimately elected in 2016, but he was willing to sell us out to Russia. This latter point can combine with the classified documents case to create the belief that Trump took classified documents which could be shown to foreign powers in order to hurt us, although he hadn’t gotten around to doing so. Therefore, in their minds, the classified documents that Trump stored are far more nefarious that similar documents in the possession of other ex-officials, and need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Then we have Trump’s family. You can read accusations that they profited monetarily from his presidency, much like the current accusations about Biden. And of course there are things like E. Jean Carroll’s rape accusations, which they believe are true – as well as believing that her accusations are just the tip of a very large iceberg of Trump’s sexual crimes.

Then there’s the Georgia case, which rests on the meaning of the word “find.” When Trump told Raffensperger to “find” votes, the pernicious interpretation is that he meant to manufacture them, thus asking Georgia officials to commit voting fraud. I think it’s clear Trump believed there really were valid votes that had not been properly counted and that’s what he meant by “find,” but Trump-hating Democrats are not going to agree.

There’s more, but perhaps that’s enough to make the point that where there’s a will to think Trump guilty of crimes – and there is such a will in many people – there’s a multiplicity of ways.

However, these things are rarely listed or detailed, which I find interesting. Trump’s guilt and his awfulness are considered so very obvious that they need no restatement or proof at this point. They merely need to be alluded to, and the assumption is that every person with a thinking brain will understand what is meant and will agree.

Naomi Wolf: Happy Indictment Day

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s a truly excellent piece by Naomi Wolf, on the reaction of so many Democrats to the J6 Trump indictment. Wolf is neither a Trump supporter nor a conservative, but she has the reaction that all Americans should have no matter what their political stance. I think it’s the reaction that the vast majority of Americans would have had several decades ago. But sadly, these days that seems to make her rare among Democrats.

One of the reasons that Wolf has gotten to that point is that she’s been very against the government’s line on COVID. I agree with some of her contentions on that topic and disagree with many others, but that’s not the point. The point is that she is already quite disillusioned about federal government, so her mind is open to possible government overreach and lies. And now, with this indictment from Jack Smith, she also has relevant personal experience from 2000 that informs her point of view. She cannot un-know what she knows, and her discomfort with the contrast between the way the Democrats reacted to challenges about the results of the 2000 election (she was somewhat of an insider, having worked for Gore’s campaign) and the way they’re reacting now to Trump’s challenges to the 2020 election means that she sees the huge contradiction and the naked drive for power that it represents.

What is seen cannot be unseen, at least not by Wolf.

An excerpt from her essay:

“Happy Indictment Day!” shouted the neighbor of my host, as my host and I sat out on a balcony. The neighbor was emerging from a car, three stories below us. The building must have contained thirty apartments. The man was certain that everyone who was in earshot of his joyous shout, agreed with his sentiments.

He witnessed my silence. “Don’t you agree?” he goaded me, a near-stranger, still shouting. “Don’t you?”

Finally I responded, “I am not sure that this sets a great precedent. Every sitting President in the future will try to indict his or her political opponent.” He cut off the discussion — a reaction, from the Left, to which I am getting accustomed — and headed inside.

Earlier, at lunch, an otherwise lovely lady had celebrated the possible-near-incarceration of “that criminal.” Again, she assumed that everyone present shared her view of the events of the day.

I am experiencing considerable inner turmoil at the spectacle of President Trump’s indictment, as well as at the almost animalistic glee that this spectacle has triggered in the solid bloc of Democrats that currently surrounds me.

I am extraordinarily sad — at the thickheaded ignorance of history that those who are celebrating tonight, reveal; and at what has become of our country.

Don’t people understand — much as they may hate this fellow — that this is exactly what coup leaders in every banana republic, do? Seek to imprison their political opponents? …

Another reason for my discomfort and misery is that I have a guilty conscience, because of what I experienced two decades ago and what I know — things that not that many people have experienced or know, and things that seem to be generally forgotten. These memories bear directly on current events.

Much more at the link, and well worth reading.

Garland appoints Weiss as special counsel in the Hunter Biden case

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s the announcement.

This could – and should – have happened long ago. Why is it happening now? My first answer is that the House investigations have shed some light on the scope and meaning of Hunter’s activities and on the need for more than a tiny slap on the wrist – or rather, on the need for the appearance of more than a tiny slap on the wrist. Weiss is already somewhat compromised, so he may be just the person to appoint to give that appearance but not that reality.

Then again, perhaps they’re getting ready to replace Joe, and this is part of it.

I do not think this is the beginning of a real reckoning, however. I’m with Jim Jordan here, and I was before I even read what he said:

House Judiciary Chairman Rep Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, blasted Weiss’ appointment in a statement issued through a spokesman.

“David Weiss can’t be trusted and this is just a new way to whitewash the Biden family’s corruption. Weiss has already signed off on a sweetheart plea deal that was so awful and unfair that a federal judge rejected it. We will continue to pursue facts brought to light by brave whistleblowers as well as Weiss’s inconsistent statements to Congress.” said Jordan spokesman Russell Dye.

Another possibility is that the appointment of a special prosecutor will be the signal for the Democrats to say the House needs to stop its own investigation because it will interfere with the special counsel’s investigation (or the special counsel’s “investigation”).

And now I see this from Rep. Comer of Kentucky:

“This move by Attorney General Garland is part of the Justice Department’s efforts to attempt a Biden family coverup in light of the House Oversight Committee’s mounting evidence of President Joe Biden’s role in his family’s schemes selling ‘the brand’ for millions of dollars to foreign nationals. The Justice Department’s misconduct and politicization in the Biden criminal investigation already allowed the statute of limitations to run with respect to egregious felonies committed by Hunter Biden. Justice Department officials refused to follow evidence that could have led to Joe Biden, tipped off the Biden transition team and Hunter Biden’s lawyers about planned interviews and searches, and attempted to sneakily place Hunter Biden on the path to a sweetheart plea deal,” Comer said.

He continued: “Let’s be clear what today’s move is really about. The Biden Justice Department is trying to stonewall congressional oversight as we have presented evidence to the American people about the Biden family’s corruption. The House Oversight Committee will continue to follow the Biden family’s money trail and interview witnesses to determine whether foreign actors targeted the Bidens, President Biden is compromised and corrupt, and our national security is threatened. We will also continue to work with the House Committees on Judiciary and Ways and Means to root out misconduct at the Justice Department and hold bad actors accountable for weaponizing law enforcement powers.”

Good.

And the MSM will continue to ignore them or write stories from the “Republicans pounce!” angle.

ADDENDUM:

Andrew C. McCarthy has already weighed in:

Gillian, this is a sham. There is no special counsel investigation and there is no Biden investigation. The special counsel regulations, what makes a special counsel special is that you’re a lawyer who’s brought in from outside the United States government, not just outside the Justice Department, outside the government. This U.S. attorney is being appointed notwithstanding that he is an attorney who’s a top official in the Biden Justice Department. And Garland made clear, is going to remain a top official in the Biden Justice Department. This is the Biden Justice Department’s vehicle for maintaining control of an investigation that they are not pursuing. They’ve had the case for five years. They’ve never indicted it. They’re strategically allowing the statute of limitations to run to the point that the 2014 and 2015 conduct, which covers most of the $21 million that the congressional investigation report showed this week, that’s already time barred. And it’s time barred because David Weiss himself decided to let those charges die rather than bring an indictment. They’re not doing anything that you would do if there was an actual investigation. And he can’t be a special counsel because he’s inside the government, and the point of having a special counsel is to bring in someone from outside the government who we can trust to do a credible investigation.

Of course, just being outside the government doesn’t guarantee that, either.

ADDENDUM II:

Here’s what Ace has to say. He points out – among other things – that one of the motives to appoint Weiss may have been to protect Weiss himself from Congressional investigation into Weiss’ involvement in the sweetheart Hunter Biden plea deal and immunity offer.

If you missed how it all shook out, David Weiss hid the covert blanket immunity provisions for Hunter Biden in a separate document, as an addendum to the alternative sentencing agreement for the gun charge. He kept this out of the actual plea deal so that the judge would not see it.

His scheme was to confer blanket immunity on Hunter Biden for all crimes he committed in the past, including those never named or referenced. Immunity deals are read in favor of the defendant by judges — so Hunter, by merely showing this secret codicil could be read as conferring blanket immunity, would in fact have blanket immunity. A judge would say, “Well the prosecutor wrote this sloppily, but we construe these agreements against the prosecutor and in favor of the defendant, so congratulations, you have blanket immunity for all crimes in your entire past!”

But of course this arrangement was not done “sloppily.” David Weiss wanted to give Hunter Biden blanket immunity for all past crimes, but he knew a judge would never, ever agree to that … so he stuffed this Double-Secret Immunity provision into the alternate sentencing memorandum.

The judge asked him (or his prosecutor) if there was any precedent in all of legal history for putting the bulk of the plea deal into a document that was not the plea deal, but a side document, and Weiss (or his prosecutor) had to admit: “No.” There was no legal precedent for what Weiss was attempting to do, give a secret, backdoor Get out of Jail Free for All Past Crimes card, and give it in an alternative sentencing memo to boot.

And that’s why the plea deal fell apart: When the judge asked him directly if he was trying to give Hunter blanket immunity for all crimes he may have committed in the past, Weiss had to claim he wasn’t trying to do that, because then he’d be admitting he was committing the crime, and the disbarrable level vioation, of attempting to perpetrate a fraud on the court. …

And in that context, Merrick Garland now appoints Weiss special counsel, so that he won’t have to answer questions about his own criminal behavior.

So many possible angles here.

Tucker interviews Steven Sund, head of the Capitol Police on J6

The New Neo Posted on by

Here’s a report on the gist of the interview.

But first, a reminder of Sund’s timeline with the Capitol Police. He was appointed head in June of 2019. After January 6, 2021, he became the fall guy:

In the early morning hours of January 7, Sund issued a statement defending the department’s response. That afternoon, during a televised press conference, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called for Sund’s resignation, citing “a failure of leadership at the top” of the department and added that Sund had not contacted her since the event. (An aide to Pelosi later clarified that Pelosi and Sund had spoken on the evening of January 6, but not after that time).

That afternoon, Sund submitted a letter of resignation stating his intention to remain in the post until January 16. The following day, January 8, Sund’s command ended …

Sund later said he regretted his resignation.

So, back to the interview with Tucker Carlson. You can see clips of it at the Town Hall link. Here’s one excerpt:

“On Sunday and Monday, [military leaders] had been discussing locking down the city… because of the concern for violence. You know who issues the permits on Capitol Hill for demonstrations? I do,” Sund said. “You know, who wasn’t told? Me. Instead, on January 4th, what does Miller do? He puts out a memo restricting the National Guard from carrying the various weapons, any weapons, any civil disobedience equipment that would be utilized for the very demonstrations or violence that he sees coming. It just doesn’t make any sense.”

No it doesn’t, and hasn’t for a long time. Nor do we know who else was behind those orders, if anyone, besides Milley (whom Sund also named) and Miller. My guess is that they didn’t do it on their own, although it’s certainly possible they did.

Much more at the link.

Report from Maui

The New Neo Posted on by

I thought I’d highlight this comment from “Jim Irvine,” about the Maui fires. Some of you may not have seen it.

The fires resulted most likely, from downed power lines. Wind was 40+, gusts to 80, both in Lahaina, and in Kula.

The plantations, both Maui Pine, and HC&S, had 35000 acres under cultivation – also they functioned as firebreaks. When the plantations closed, everyone I know realized that dryland forests need to be managed. As others have said, the native grasses don’t exist. Kiawe trees continue to burn, down into the roots, and wind brings up new fires.

Yes, it’s time the state and the county (there are no city governments in Hawaii) need to find a way to replant thousands of acres with drought resistant or fire resistant plants. There exists a company, Mahi Pono, that is planting millions of citrus and other trees. Most are now 3 or 4 feet tall. they plan to plant 40000 acres. Time will tell.

There is irrigation to all of the fields. the plantations used flood irrigation until the late 70’s, early 80’s. after that drip was used, or rather drip tape.

In the last several years, we have had major brush fires, about this same time of year. Leeward sides get little rain, compared to the windward side. The last big one, several years ago, closed the two roads out of Kihei. I was lucky, and was around when Oprah opened the road to up country, so we could escape. If the fire had of continued, most of Kihei would have suffered Lahaina’s fate.

People also don’t understand that there is ONE road, to and from the west (Lahaina) side. the road that goes north, is one lane for much of the time. No guard rails, no markings, just a very small road, with sheer cliffs on one side, and lava and boulders on the other. It takes 3 hours minimum to go from Lahaina to Kahului using this ‘back side’ route. Rental companies prohibit using this route. Going thru the Kahakaloa area, you are 4 feet from people’s front doors. The distance is 25 miles, using the south road. Takes about 40 minutes.

All electric is on poles, newer ones are hurricane poles, steel and very high. Underground is almost impossible, due to the blue rock found on Maui.

To fight the fires, Maui Fire had 100 men. For three major blazes, Kula, Pulehu, and Lahaina. They were out-matched from the get go. They have helos, but those can’t fly in 60mph wind. And when they do, the small buckets make little distance. there are no California type c-130 tankers, anywhere in Hawaii. To be honest, with the wind, which had been blowing for days, like normal trades, but 3 times as strong, it was a disaster from the start.

They fought the Kula fire first, and thought the Lahaina fire was out. When it came back, it went thru Lahaina like a a hurricane. From late night to early morning, a space of a few hours, it completely destroyed Lahaina town. 100-year-old buildings, mostly wood. Spaced very very close together.

Friends i know live on LahainaLuna Rd. From the time they smelled smoke, to the time they were running for their lives, was minutes, literally. Two ran to the harbor, the heat was so intense many people died unable to run anymore. Dozens of people dove into the ocean, which became hell on earth, as the boats in the harbor ignited from the intense heat and embers. Oil coated the water. Many people didn’t make it thru that.

It is terribly terribly sad here. I have lived on Maui for 40 years. Everyone I know has an uncle or aunty, niece or cousin they know who are now homeless, and out of work as well. Unlike California, where people can relocate, it doesn’t work that way here. NO rentals, no places to live.

They will have relocated 24000 tourists out of the island by end of day today. clearing the way to help the thousands of locals who are without food, water, electric, or beds. We live on an island, and it takes time, and massive logistics, to get things here, thru the one port. Maui is a small place, and we all have friends and ohana who are suffering.

It will never be the same here. ever. It was magic when I moved here. That magic has been gone a long time now. This fire, and what will happen after, will destroy whatever is left of the Aloha that drew so many of us here, back in the day.
No one has faith in the current crop of so-called leaders. This state has been Democrat since statehood. Enough said.

The current death toll is 56 I believe. that will increase.

I hope this helps people to understand what it is like here now.

Roundup

The New Neo Posted on by

Another busy news day, so here’s another roundup.

(1) Jonathan Turley has even more to say about the Trump indictment by Jack Smith.

(2) In Ecuador, it seems they kill candidates rather than merely attempt to imprison them:

(3) The FBI killed a man in Provo, Utah, while trying to serve him with a warrant for threatening Joe Biden and other officials. It’s unclear what the exact circumstances were:

On Wednesday morning, Provo resident Craig Robertson was shot and killed by the FBI after allegedly threatening to kill President Biden. ABC4 spoke with his neighbors to get a closer look at how neighbors and friends perceived him.

Robertson was described by neighbors as an older church-going man. He was reportedly in his late 70s, and barely mobile. According to neighbors, Robertson used a hand-carved walking stick just to get out of a chair and move around.

Nevertheless, he had weapons and had threatened – online, anyway – to use them against various lawyers (Alvin Bragg, for example) as well as Biden. We’ll never know whether this was just bluster or an actual intent to harm. Neighbors describe him as a nice guy, although weird, who took care of his disabled grown son.

[A neighbor] Clark said he believes Robertson may have just let himself get carried away on social media.

“I can’t imagine that he could either physically or mentally act on any of that at all. So I think it’s just a tragedy like this, an abject tragedy that got out of hand,” Clark said.

Around 6:15 a.m., FBI agents attempted to serve an arrest and search warrant at his Provo residence when the raid led to the shooting and killing of Robertson.

Did they do the full SWAT-type approach? Did Robertson fire back at them? I wonder whether we’ll ever learn.

(4) Christopher Wray lied to Congress about the extent of the FBI’s war against “traditional” Catholics.

(5) The Biden administration is unfreezing six billion dollars in Iranian assets in exchange for five Iranian-American prisoners. Moral hazard, anyone? The money will supposedly be administered by Qatar and can only be used for “humanitarian purposes, such as medicine or food.” Why do I doubt it will work out that way?

(6) The Band’s Robbie Robertson has died. RIP. I just now learned from reading his Wiki page that Roberton’s mother was of native American (Cayuga and Mohawk) background, and his biological father (who was not his legal father) was Jewish. Interesting combination.

Maui fires

The New Neo Posted on by

The left likes to use all forest fires as opportunities to blame climate change.

But here’s the probable cause for the destructive fires in Maui:

But some experts said they suspect human development on the island is at least partly to blame for the destruction.

Wildfires have quadrupled in Hawaii in recent decades, and many scientists say the culprit is unmanaged, nonnative grasslands planted by plantations and ranchers and others unfamiliar with the island’s native ecosystems. The grass is dry and prone to fires.

“There is no doubt that fire-prone grasses have invaded drier Hawaiian ecosystems and brought larger, more intense fires,” said Peter Vitousek, a professor of earth sciences at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California.

High winds and low humidity likely contributed to the fires, but officials know little else, said Maj. Gen. Kenneth Hara, commander general of the Hawaii Army National Guard, at a briefing Wednesday.

The high winds were from a distant hurricane.

I wrote a number of posts about wildfires in California that also blamed human habitation encroaching more and more on areas of dry, unmanaged vegetation. This seems to be a constant theme for wildfires these days, as well as arson.

Oh, and by the way, in line with my post about truncated DeSantis quotes …

The New Neo Posted on by

… here’s a comment I just noticed at Instapundit:

Ron deSantis just effectively committed suicide with the Republican base (and independents as well) by endorsing the 2020 election theft.

Which of course Ron DeSantis did not do, as I wrote (with actual quotes) in this post. But the truncated-quote-lie is a very effective tool, as I also wrote, and it’s being used against DeSantis by the Trump forces – and of course by the MSM, which also uses the Trump forces to spread the word although the latter may not recognize that’s what’s happening.

Most people will not get curious enough to look up the context of any quote. Most people will jump on a quote that seems to substantiate what they already thought was the case, rather than check it out. Why do you think that NBC interviewer was so eager to keep asking an asking DeSantis to repudiate the idea that there was fraud in 2020? She was hoping to elicit something to use in a headline that the Trump forces would pick up and spread, something that would hurt DeSantis with the right. And although DeSantis was careful in his answer, the misleading sound bite was generated because – as Karl Popper said – Always remember that it is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood: there will always be some who misunderstand you.

Although actually, I very much doubt that those accusing DeSantis of rejecting the idea that any election fraud happened in 2020 actually misunderstand what he said, if they in fact read it or heard it. They are purposely misrepresenting it in order to effect a political end. So I will revise that Popper quote to read this way: Always remember that it is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be quoted in a misleading manner in order to harm you: there will always be some who use a truncated quote in order to mislead others for political gain.

Trump refuses to sign pledge to support the eventual GOP nominee

The New Neo Posted on by

As soon as I heard a while back that participation in the Republican presidential debates for 2024 would require entrants to pledge to support the eventual nominee, I was virtually certain that Trump would not be participating and that he would refuse to sign such a pledge. And so this news is no surprise:

Former President Donald Trump said he would not sign the loyalty pledge that is a requirement for participating in the upcoming first Republican presidential primary debate.

Trump has already met the other criteria, including minimum donor and polling thresholds, to participate in the debate set for Aug. 23 in Milwaukee.

But Trump, the clear front-runner for the Republican nomination, said Wednesday night that he would not sign a candidate pledge agreeing to support the eventual party nominee, no matter who it is.

“I wouldn’t sign the pledge. Why would I sign a pledge if there are people on there that I wouldn’t have?” Trump asked in an interview on Newsmax. …

The former president has repeatedly signaled he plans to skip the debates, contending that there was no point in exposing himself to a barrage of attacks from his rivals who are far behind him in the polls.

Of course he doesn’t want to debate in the first place, even if there wasn’t a pledge requirement. Why should he? He’s way ahead because the are so many completely committed Trump loyalists, or so it would appear from the polls. Why would he enter a series of debates – exercises in which he’s never been especially strong – and allow himself to be measured directly against opponents who may be more articulate in that arena? Why would he want to stand next to people who are a lot younger? No, he much prefers rallies where he can do his patented schtick unopposed, in front of adoring fans. No one ever said Trump didn’t have a well-developed ego.

In addition, he wants to keep his options open for running 3rd-party in case he manages to not get the nomination. That way he can act as a spoiler. I think he’d rather Biden were elected than one of his rivals. If that sounds like a harsh judgment on my part, so be it. I have said many times that I think Trump has changed somewhat since his bout of COVID right before the 2020 election, and since the election itself and of course J6 and then his current prosecutions. I believe his always-present narcissism and anger have grown greater, and his judgment poorer. He never was a conventional Republican, and if for some reason he fails to win the nomination in 2024 he will not hesitate to turn on the party that he will feel has so wronged him, and he will want the party to go down with his own ship and have no problem acting as spoiler.

As I’ve said so many times before when I’m predicting something upsetting, I hope I’m wrong about that. But as it is, I think that Trump loyalists will stick with Trump no matter what, and it will lead to the election of Biden or a Biden-replacement-to-be-named-later.

If this scenario ends up happening that way, I think it will be an unforced error and a tragedy.

I suppose Trump’s refusal to participate in the debates might end up backfiring on him, however. If one or several of the GOP candidates are especially impressive, Trump might lose a significant number of his supporters. I suppose that could end up mattering. But from what I see online, the vast majority of his current most loyal supporters would follow him right over that cliff and help elect Biden or Biden’s replacement.