Reflections on the Trump Circus

National Review ^ | August 08, 2015 | ANDREW C. MCCARTHY

[Steelfish]

Reflections on the Trump Circus

by ANDREW C. MCCARTHY August 8, 2015

I’ve paid very little attention to the Donald Trump boomlet. I confess to enjoying Kevin and Jonah’s columns on the subject, but I’d enjoy their columns if they were writing about toothpicks. When asked about it, I’ve told people, “Ignore it and it will flame out on its own.” I’ve never met Donald Trump that I can recall. He’s a big New York personality and I’m Bronx born and bred, so of course I’m familiar with him. But I’ve never seen his TV shows, his news interviews are vapid, and I haven’t taken his presidential campaign any more seriously than I took his high-profile handwringing about running for this or that in the past. What about all this psychoanalysis of the conservative base? We’ve heard the trope: Trump’s poll numbers can’t be ignored because they are not so much about him as about the anger he is tapping into – anger at the bipartisan Beltway political establishment.

Well, as anyone who cares to read my columns knows, I am not exactly a stranger to that anger. I don’t need Donald Trump to draw my attention to it, and I don’t see him as a viable vehicle for representing it since he has a history of supporting positions and politicians responsible for a lot of that anger. Besides, at this stage, 15 months before the 2016 election, the 20 percent mark at which Trump hovers is not very impressive for someone as well known as he is (a relatively unknown Carly Fiorina, for example, has a much higher ceiling than a Trump with negatives in the 60s). So I haven’t been able to work up much interest.

[palmer]

The primaries have not begun yet. This is the lead-up. Trump is no eating into any actual Cruz votes yet, but is laying the groundwork for an antiestablishment candidate like Cruz, Trump himself, Carson, Paul, or Walker.

[palmer]

We have several decent candidates who could help us in the war against Federal power and control over everything. The rest are a step in the wrong direction (i.e. compassionate conservative or whatever). There is no need to agonize over social issue purity or perfection when federal power and control is running roughshod over all of the local institutions that could restore this country’s morality.

[MD Expat in PA]

Donald Trump tees off on the Confederate flag

Donald Trump comments on confederate flag

FWIW, the supposed quote by Trump - “Only An Idiot Opposes The Confederate Flag”- the only places I can find it are on some rather questionable websites that might be satire sites. They say that Trump said this via Twitter but I can find no such quote on his Twitter feed. If he really said that, I would be nice to have some proof but then also an explanation of why he constantly flip flops his opinions.

[nathanbedford]

Trump attacks the establishment.

No, Trump attacks people and usually by hitting below the belt. When he attacked McCain it was to attack the credibility of his war record. Trump bots rushed to his defense by twisting the context and the meaning of words. For Trump bots, Trump wiggles off the hook. Trump attacks Megan Kelly three times (literally below the belt), Trump bots rushed to his defense. For Trump bots, Trump wiggles off the hook.

The list goes on and on and every time conservatism and the Republican Party is forced to twist itself into knots to justify the gaffes of Donald Trump. Why should the party be put at risk by someone who is so intemperate in his language that time after time he raises an uproar and not for a policy issue by for a personal issue? If he is not smart enough or even psychologically healthy enough to weigh the impact of his words he is not smart enough or stable enough to be the leader of the free world.

At least Trump would ensure that our nuclear arsenal actually works as opposed to the military just saying it works.

That is your surmise. In this respect Trump is no different from any candidate possibly excepting Rand Paul. But that was not the question. In a nuclear age even Obama has left us with enough nukes to destroy the world, the question was whose finger do you want near that red button? The intemperate, irresponsible man risking the reputation of the party who was described in the first paragraph of this reply, or a measured, temperate and sober candidate like Ted Cruz?

Trump opponents turn to dime-store psychoanalysis to paint supporters as emotional idiots

That is an unfair mischaracterization of the quoted portion which says three times "rightly so." I believe the entire conservative movement feels that way, and rightly so.

As for your claim that it is Trump versus Cruz, that is complete nonsense.

I have not suggested that Trump and Cruz are antagonists at this point, I am suggesting that conservatives should regard the processes as producing either Trump or Cruz but not Trump or Bush. We have the power of choice we don't need Trump to stop Bush. We have Cruz who will do very nicely and do so as a conservative. Trump might indeed stop Bush but at what price?

[nathanbedford]

Agreed!

[odawg]

“Trump has implausibly denied what he said, and more plausibly (though not convincingly) denied that he was suggesting the anchor questioned him harshly because it was “that time of the month.”

For a lawyer with his demonstrated acuity, this is an extremely DISHONEST statement by McCarthy. There is no other way to slice it. By the way, during the debate when she leveled her accusation disguised as a question, when he interrupted her, that tone in her voice WAS malicious. She was supposed to have been an objective questioner.

[BaldJohn]

Look at the all out attack the GOPe, the MSM, Fox News, and all the Rinos are making on Trump. Do you really think they will not turn there guns on Cruz as soon as Trump falls?

I hope Trump stays in and would gladly vote for him.

[odawg]

“...whose side was Donald Trump on? Had he voted for Obama? Had he contributed to Hillary?”

Why ask that? Trump endorsed McCain and raised money for him.
Statistically, he has contributed as much, or more, to Republicans than democrats. That is the way the game is played on his level.

“In this context, what has Donald Trump actually done?”

Trump was much opposed to TPA when Cruz was for it before he was against it. Cruz supported the Obama agenda by voting, along with all but one senator, for the Iranian treaty, disguised as a “bill”. That bill directly imperils this nation’s survival. If you can justify that vote by Cruz, I will send him campaign money.

[CodeToad]

It might seem like good campaigning for Trump to pick Cruz, but rumor has it that Trump might choose a successful businessman from his own organization; someone Trump feels can win the trade deals needed.

[palmer]

Trump might indeed stop Bush but at what price?

First, Trump's goal is not to stop Bush, that would just be a nice side effect. His goal is to get nominated. Second the price of Trump would be Trump. If Trump can't do it, then Cruz can't either. It is early. What Trump is doing right now is groundwork for an anti-establishment insurgency. Cruz can't do that, he doesn't get a minute of free air time. Walker can help, Paul can help, and Cruz can help.

My prediction is that eventually Trump will flame out. You might see it as bad timing. For example he gets nominated and flames out. Or he makes it a two-way race between himself and Bush or Christie or Rubio and then flames out giving us the GOPe.

Or maybe you think he will be President and flame out with his finger on the nuclear button. That latter is pretty far fetched from his past behavior. He doesn't nuke in business, he wheels and deals. The worst case is he wheels and deals as President giving conservatives nothing, but at least we would have tried. In any case it is too early to predict any outcomes. Right now Trump is doing the right thing so let him do it.

[palmer]

Do you really think they will not turn there guns on Cruz as soon as Trump falls?

I would love to have them use up their ammo on Trump. The media is America's enemy and by attacking Trump, more people realize that they are.

[jetson]

Why is Trump popular? Because he IS the revolution.

[Carry_Okie]

It mystifies me that Trump supporters really believe the man. This is a guy who makes money in the golf course and hotel business. Guess how many groundskeepers, maids, and dishwashers he employs. Any bets on how many are illegals? So if the Donald dreams about 'sending them back' when we all know that the lawsuits will fly the moment he tries, isn't it obvious that when he mentions the 'hard-working' he means to legalize the bulk of the illegal workforce whether they have to make a round trip to Ensenada or not?

Dupes for Donald.

[nathanbedford]

I agree entirely with your assessment.

I have even posted that "so far so good" meaning that for the moment Trump is performing a great service which you have described in transforming the process out of the control of the establishment and focusing attention on the mess.

All to the good so long as we ourselves do not drink the Kool-Aid because there will come a time when Trump must be jettisoned.

[nathanbedford]

please see this reply

[nathanbedford]

Richard Nixon on his forced resignation as a result of his participation in the Watergate cover-up (referring to his political enemies, the Democrats and the media):

I gave them a sword and they stuck it in.

Just because Donald Trump is daily giving the Democrats and the media a sword does not mean that conservatism has to die by that same sword.

[Political Junkie Too]

What happens when Trump gets the Chris McDaniel treatment from the Republican establishment? We hated what McConnell and company did to support GOPe Cochran in Mississippi; will we accept it when it is directed at Trump?

Mississippi was a microcosm of the new GOP. McDaniel was as much of a threat to the establishment then as Trump is now. In 2012, many saw taking back the Senate as paramount, but some of us thought that McConnell saw having a Senate of controllable cronies as more important. The GOP changed after the defeat of Eric Cantor in the House. Democrat scorched earth tactics were now on the table for good (actually, we saw a preview of it in 2012 against Newt Gingrich in the Florida primary after Gingrich did so well in South Carolina). Republicans were willing to do anything to their own, but it still remains to be seen if they are willing to turn that fire towards Democrats. So far, I've seen no evidence of their willingness to do so.

I believe that a desperate GOPe is willing to do anything to stop Trump, and the debate antics doesn't come close to what they are now capable of accepting to preserve their power.

So what will we do when the ugliness of Mississippi returns?

-PJ

[nathanbedford]

I believe that a desperate GOPe is willing to do anything to stop Trump,

I believe that a desperate GOP e is willing to do anything to stop Cruz

[Hostage]

That’s a false rumor. A VP is there for when the President becomes incapacitated or dead. The VP therefore has to have the political connections and experience to be ready if the moment calls for a succession.

Trump has already stated he has the best managers in the world to do the trade deals competently. For example, Carl Icahn.

Trump has also said that the managers he has are ‘horrible people’, people you would not want over for dinner, people who not at all nice. But he says, they get the job done.

No way Trump’s pitbull attack dog traders are going to be cast as his VP.

Ted Cruz has the conservative base, Reagan democrats and a good share of the independents and Hispanics. That’s what Trump needs.

Trump has the low information voters; Cruz does not.

Together they are unbeatable. Individually it’s a roll of the dice.

[Political Junkie Too]

I believe that stopping Cruz won't take near the effort to stop Trump.

Cruz doesn't have the backing of strong funders. Cruz has stated that his funding comes from the grassroots. Once that runs out and the spigot is turned off, Cruz is done. The longer that Trump keeps the spotlight on him, the longer that Cruz can minimize his own spend while still getting reflective light.

Trump, on the other hand, is self-funded and can drain the resources of the GOP unless the GOPe goes nuclear and drops the bomb on Trump in one unimaginable strike that demoralizes Trump and his supporters, and avoids future losses for themselves in a long protracted state-hopping fight (notice the WWII Pacific theater analogy?).

So what do we do when the GOP does the unthinkable and goes there?

-PJ