Posted on 08/18/2015 7:44:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Via the Blaze, consider this an open thread for when Hannity interviews Beck about Trump later tonight at 10 p.m. on his Fox show. There are a million fascinating subplots to Trumpmania and one of them is the sometimes friendly, sometimes not so friendly rifts it’s opening up between big-name conservatives in the media. The Beck/Hannity rift is friendly: Here’s Beck’s respectful open letter to Rush, Sean, et al. last week about why they’re excited about a candidate who’s obviously not a conservative and here’s Hannity’s respectful reply. Read them now as background if you’re planning to watch their tete-a-tete later. (For a less friendly example of a disagreement over Trump, see Mark Levin’s justifiably disgusted reaction to Ann Coulter calling Trump’s immigration plan so great that she wouldn’t mind if he performed abortions in the White House himself.) Beck asks a good question here and then offers a good answer to it.
Why, he says, do conservative opinion-makers like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity give Trump a pass on his many, many ideological heresies when normally they’re bulldogs in calling out centrists like Romney for lesser offenses? Beck’s answer: Trump has a swagger that Romney doesn’t. When Trump tells you he’s going to seal the border and destroy the Beltway establishment, you believe him because he doesn’t care who disapproves of him or his objectives. He’s going to do what he sets out to do. After trying for decades and failing to make American government incrementally more conservative, some righties are ready to gamble on a guy who, if, if, if he’s true to his word, will achieve more in that vein than any president since Reagan. Essentially, after six election cycles of making low-risk bets on business-as-usual Republicans, conservatives are willing to make a high-stakes gamble on a guy who won’t be business as usual but, er, might not govern as a Republican either.
Let me give you two other takes on Trumpmania, though, to help explain the divide between Trump-lovers and Trump-haters. I think there’s some truth to what Josh Barro says about Trump appealing to a less libertarian cohort of conservatives, which may explain why Beck in particular is having such trouble grasping his appeal.
Mr. Trump’s critique of government differs greatly from that of most conservatives. The conservative argument for small government ordinarily rests on the idea that citizens necessarily know better what to do with their money and their lives than the government does, because the government lacks the local knowledge that individuals have. Under this theory, even a government run by smart people will do lots of stupid, costly things.
Mr. Trump is positing not a general, inherent failure of government but a very specific one. He nearly shouted it at last week’s debate: “Our leaders are stupid, our politicians are stupid.” This is the core idea of the Trump campaign, and it does not necessarily imply that government should be smaller. It implies that somebody smart, ideally Mr. Trump, should run the government.
If Republican voters share Mr. Trump’s diagnosis that the main problem with our government is stupid leaders, and if they believe that Mr. Trump is much smarter and wiser than the politicians who have come before him, they may be fully prepared to forgive his apostasies on Medicaid, taxes and everything else. If their real beef is not with our leaders but with big government itself, his support should fade as his policy moderation becomes clear.
Beck thinks government gallups along inexorably towards failure because that’s what collectivist institutions inevitably do. The best thing you can do with government is shrink it so that it does as little damage as possible. Some Trump fans — maybe not the sort of grassroots conservatives who read blogs like this one but surely some of his moderate supporters — think the problem with government isn’t necessarily that it’s too big but that it’s been badly run and/or run for the primary benefit of the wrong people and that a better steward could straighten things out. Again, the high-stakes bet on Trump is that he’s a guy uniquely capable, through the force of his personality and his ability to build silent-majority mandates, to do the straightening. Assuming, that is, he behaves like a Republican once in office. Beck, wisely, isn’t willing to make that bet. Hannity seems to be.
The other take on Trump’s appeal is my own, something I’ve been thinking about since he announced his immigration plan this weekend. Trump and Ted Cruz are frequently lumped in together (including by me) because they’re both overt populists and both seen as essentially right-wing phenomena even though Cruz’s base is more uniformly conservative than Trump’s is. In an important way, though, Cruz and Trump are opposites. The point of Cruz’s trademark rhetoric about “bold colors, not pale pastels” is that he’s a true believer in conservatism’s power to win over the masses if it’s presented unapologetically, in its strong form, by an able messenger like Ronald Reagan (or, of course, Ted Cruz).
Give the voters real conservatism and they’ll flock to you, whatever the pollsters or the demographics say. It’s an essentially religious belief in the power of the creed to convert infidels so long as it’s given a fair hearing.
Trump fans, on some level, have given up that belief assuming they ever had it to begin with, I think. They wish Cruz was right but they just don’t think conservatism is an electoral winner anymore, either because the character of the country has changed or because changing demographics have made it impossible. At this point, the best deal you’re going to get is a guy like Trump who’s compromised ideologically but seems to have some conservative instincts, most notably on immigration, and who seems like he really might be willing to push the country in that direction (on certain issues) if he’s given power.
In particular, by calling for all illegals to be deported and immigration to be reduced, Trump would drastically reduce the number of future voters from Mexico and the third world, most of whom would end up voting Democratic given past trends. (Coulter makes this point pretty explicitly in praising Trump’s plan.) If you’ve given up on conservatism’s power to persuade and have come to see national politics chiefly as a power struggle among different demographic groups, Trump arguably makes the most sense. He may not be a conservative but he’ll protect what’s left of the country and the people who still care about it from being preyed upon domestically and abroad, which, at this stage of American decadence, is the best you can hope for. Essentially, and very ironically, he’s the guy standing athwart history yelling “stop!” Not my candidate, but I think what I’ve described is a core part of his appeal.
Dana Loesch is the perfect woman
Her husband should kiss her butt every morning first thing and say a prayer of gratitude to our creator
She is very yummy physically
Loves being baby maker.
And her heads right
First time my oldest boy saw that Guns and Ammo cover he was like dayum!
I’d like like scoop Megyn but first I’d have to gag her
Yep
He’s a weirdo
Got some decent folks on his network
I’m not mad with democrats and GOPe’s for lying to us to get elected... I’m disgusted with them.
Disgusted.
It’s a big difference.
Don’t Trust Trump? Who or what do you trust? And if you trust anyone where has it gotten you?
Rove, Erik Erikson, Ann Coulter, Peggy Noonan, George Will, GOPe, Fox News, Boehner, McConnell, anyone in the Obama Admin, the “experts”, the process, McCain, Romney, RedState, Glenn Beck, Anyone in Hollywood ?
But Limbaugh doesn’t have a history in comedy and caricature, doesn’t pose in goofy Nazi clothes on his book covers, doesn’t believe in every random conspiracy, and didn’t name his company after the Mercury Theater. Sorry but everything about Beck says to me it’s a hoax, that he doesn’t believe a word he’s saying, it’s a joke that went wrong and now he’s just playing to the audience he’s got and cashing checks.
How can we tell that difference in someone.
Someone ‘madder than hell’ wants to see someone else who the media puts on TV call others stupid, cowardly, corrupt and a bimbo
Specific Policy may not matter to them at all.
Without Trump, amnesty was a fait accompli. With Trump, who knows?
Trump/Cruz a great team—Together they could save the Republic and transform the GOP. Boot out the RINOs and set up a truly Conservative state. There will be places for all of the people on the stage! Cruz is the real deal—as VP for Trump he can help Trump with Congress and the Senate, Trump should trust him with the day by day running of the nation. There should even be a Job for Jeb Bush—Hey someone has to clean the White House?
Of course he does. He jokes all throughout his show. He does an excellent Bill Clinton impersonation. Have you never heard any of Paul Shanklin's political parodies?
Apparently not. So here's one for you...
Trump is the Republicans Obama. A Trump presidency will be as disastrous as the Obama presidency. And, Trump is a liberal progressive. I cannot support that. I do not believe Trump will gain the nomination, we will see. I’m certain hitlery will drop out, soon.
“A staple of the Rush Limbaugh show’s cutting edge conservative political humor, Paul Shanklin continues to produce the best conservative political parodies. He’s appeared on Fox News’ Hannity & Colmes, The O’Reilly Factor, and MSNBC. Listen in, and find out why Shanklin’s the best parody artist in talk radio.”
Which other candidate running supports deportation? Point them out and I’ll support him/her.
Notice Rush brings somebody else on, he’s not the caricature. Now imagine if Dems suddenly started BELIEVING Shanklin, he suddenly found himself a big time liberal pundit. That’s what I believe happened to Beck. He spent a long time as a mediocre shock jock, including oddball caricatures. And then one day he started doing this “over the top conservative with a fondness for conspiracy” character. Only people started believing it instead of laughing at it, but his ratings started going up, his paychecks started going up, and nothing he does, even dressing up as a Nazi, gets people to realize it’s a joke. He even names his company after Mercury Radio Theater and people STILL don’t see it. And yet it’s making him rich. What’s a guy gonna do? Might as well keep playing it.
And that’s why I’ll never believe in Beck.
Facts are facts, regardless of whether you like or dislike the messenger. In any case, I would suggest you do a lot more looking into this stuff yourself. If you like, you can start with my FR home page, free of charge. :)
Facts are facts. Which is why I don’t believe him. It’s not a matter of like or dislike, it’s a matter of seeing the guy as a comedy routine that went horribly wrong.
Mr. Trump must soon find a way to convince voters that he respects and understands the U.S. Constitution. This is imperative.
I keep seeing potential voters holding back support because they don't trust him. They are afraid he will become a tyrant and bypass Congress in much the same way Obama done.
A simple statement by Mr. Trump, indicating his respect for that document which made our country great, would go a long way towards easing many minds.
I give up. I wish you luck in your long journey to understand what we’re up against vs the commie left.
I understand what we’re up against just fine without taking a guy that dresses in silly Nazi uniforms on his book covers seriously.
Beck has gone from trying to ridicule and excoriate Trump to puzzlement. It almost looks like he’s edging from denial to acceptance the final stage of grief. LOL!
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.