Take that Trump! LOLThe National Review-attempting to destroy @realDonaldTrump- has a poll😂which is back firing. https://t.co/HUTMr1zPz8 pic.twitter.com/hG9JVZyJ23— Daniel Scavino Jr. (@DanScavino) January 23, 2016
Posted on 01/22/2016 6:45:06 PM PST by Hojczyk
Last night, National Review published articles from twenty conservative intellectuals “Against Trump.†This afternoon, publisher Jack Fowler sent this letter to friends of the magazine:
Dear Friend,
Today is a big day for National Review. Our editors have made a very forceful defense of conservatism, of principle, and against the politics of attitude, in our editorial, Against Trump.
We have received angry calls, and cancel Âmy subscription demands. One in particular broke my heart. Well, let’s hope time heals.
None of this was unexpected.
But: We have also received very strong expressions of support from many NR friends. People who believe ÂÂ and they are right to believe this ÂÂ that the main reason National Review exists is to do the very thing it is doing today.
Defending conservative principle. Defending it from being marginalized, or recast as emotion and bluster instead of as an expression of reason and intelligence.
On behalf of Rich Lowry and my colleagues, thank you for standing with us. Or, better, thanks for letting us stand alongside you as we embrace the Buckley mission: To stand athwart history, yelling stop.
Best,
Jack Fowler
Publisher
National Review
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
i didn’t know you had to subscribe. i havent read it in years, but when i did, all the articles i wanted were free.
Et tu Monty Python? Cleese, is that you?
Take that Trump! LOLThe National Review-attempting to destroy @realDonaldTrump- has a poll😂which is back firing. https://t.co/HUTMr1zPz8 pic.twitter.com/hG9JVZyJ23— Daniel Scavino Jr. (@DanScavino) January 23, 2016
I read the interesting issue of National Review about Trump and learned a lot about how Trump really doesn’t understand the nuts and bolts of politics. National Review is trying to decrease Trump’s popularity which is a suspicious goal.
My view: Trump understands that the nuts and bolts should be assembled by patriotic Americans rather than by phony politicians.
No, they’re brainbroken. They’re in the bag for Rubio. Same goes for Red Stain.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/430028/tea-party-movement-dead
You want some certifiable butthurtin’? Check out Steyn’s comments:
http://www.steynonline.com/7433/witless-ape-the-director-cut
(Yeah, I should make it a thread all by itself.... Except that it’s already past bedtime for the grandkids’ pack of dogs-left-at-our-house plus I’ve got a real full day tomorrow before I even get lunch. I’ll just leave new threads to those borderline insomniacs who get off on that stuff and trot my old self off to the sack. G’day.)
That was the issue that caused me to cancel my subscription! I’m from MA - and I knew exactly what this RINO Prince had done there as governor ... NR supporting Romney was the last FReeping straw for me.
The only disappointment here is Dr. Sowell. oh, well.
NR long ago became a tool of the neocons who mostly aren’t conservative: They don’t care about the social issues, they want the country flooded with cheap labor. Mostly they only care about caring on a perpetual war in the Middle East.
lol. It’s not mine; it’s been floating around online for several years. But it does describe how many of us feel about these morons!
You also have to give them permission to spam you.
Their "principled" attack on Trump was designed to get more gold into the coffers.
F 'em.
RIP
Leni
Yep, I never give information to sites that want it in order to get involved.
A poll is the lowest to ask for personal info.
When I was working with a Tea Party org, they had a guy giving out small pieces of paper for the audience to put their email addy on it so they could get updates about events.
Completely voluntary, I had no problem with that.
Email lists are money makers also.
I'll take your last small sentence as "Freep 'em" to avert any purists hitting the abuse button.
I meant "Freep 'em"
What else could I mean?
If that wouldn't shock you the prepare to be shocked.
“No. There are roughly 70% of us who do not plan to vote for Trump.”
That 70% being the 20 percent of GOP voters who are clueless dimwits ...
0.70 x 0.20 = 0.14
That’s 14% of the GOP that is too stubborn to move out of the way of an onrushing locomotive. I can live with that loss.
Have fun sitting on the sidelines - maybe we’ll throw some bread crumbs your way.
Oh, BTW - Trump is not a “politician” - that’s why his poll numbers are far above the other candidates.
The National Review went against Americans and into globalism, big time. They think globalism is conservative? They think open border; flaunting the law of the land is “conservative”?
They have a British editor now and I think they think Cameron is a conservative that they must imitate. Britain has no or very few conservatives in power. Cameron is not a conservative at all.
They have mistaken conservatism with liberal-tarianism. Conservatism respects the constitutional rule of the land not globalism and turncoat, self absorbed globalists running the country to serve themselves and foreigners which gives the need and interest of Americans, not even an afterthought. Conservatism is for the melting pot; not multiculturalism’s foreign tribal mentality. Conservative are careful to protect the Republic and could care less about foreigners.
None of it was expected?
Im canceling tomorrow, the thing has become pretty much garbage over the last few years anyway.
Run by a bunch of blue bloods and country clubbers, busy accomplishing NOTHING.
LOSERS!!!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
