[Trumpinator]

Last night I was banned from the National Review website, apparently because some Cruz supporters called me a "troll." My crime was to suggest - and not in a "har-de-har-har" way - that Cruz's dismal showing on Tuesday virtually ended his campaign. I am not a Trump supporter, and tended to prefer Cruz.

But some people are so hyper-sensitive, so emotionally unstable, that they can't tolerate any negative comment at all about their candidates. The fact that NR let's these people police their website is appalling.

---------

I suggest you were not banned for being a troll an d upsetting any one's feelings - you were banned for telling the truth and the National Review is looking to weed out anyone who seems "defeatist" even of their guys are losing. The National Interest came out against Trump on behalf of the Republican establishment and is doing work against Trump including preventing people from mentioning reality or banning people for deviating against their message.

[Steve_Seattle]

"I suggest you were not banned for being a troll an d upsetting any one's feelings - you were banned for telling the truth and the National Review is looking to weed out anyone who seems "defeatist" even of their guys are losing. The National Interest came out against Trump on behalf of the Republican establishment and is doing work against Trump including preventing people from mentioning reality or banning people for deviating against their message."

You may be right, but lately a lot of people are having rather innocuous comments deleted from NR. I haven't tracked whether most of these situations involve the presidential campaign, but probably a high percentage do.

[Steve_Seattle]

" . . . you were banned for telling the truth and the National Review is looking to weed out anyone who seems "defeatist" even of their guys are losing."

The comments directed at me did have a "defeatist" theme, as if it's somehow my moral obligation to keep up hopes until the very top of the mainsail goes under.