fantasy land is clouding and crowding out reality in your world.
time to break free.
Posted on 08/27/2015 8:56:11 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When pundits call Donald Trump a "know-nothing," they are not just using a historical if pejorative term to describe his immigration stance. They really mean that he appears to know nothing about public policy or governance.
On the charitable assumption that his blustery, content-free stump speech isn't an act, you'll get no argument here. But Trump does seem to know a lot more about politics than many of his detractors, including those critics who are well versed in the finer details of entitlement reform or international trade policy.
Trump's success in the polls has been particularly frustrating for wonky conservatives. How can so many people buy into the business expertise of someone who so often gives technically wrong answers to economic questions?
Worse, why do so many conservatives seem enamored with a candidate who has taken unconservative positions on issues like taxes, abortion, healthcare reform and entitlements — that is, most of the conservative domestic agenda — and in some cases hasn't even bothered to move to the right on them?
Pat Buchanan gave us a hint in his 1992 Republican National Convention speech, when he spoke of "conservatives of the heart" whose political convictions were more visceral than intellectual. "They don't read Adam Smith or Edmund Burke, but they came from the same schoolyards and playgrounds and towns as we did," he told the delegates.
Many Americans, even those engaged enough to identify as liberal or conservative much less Republican or Democrat, aren't systematic political thinkers. They vote for candidates based on who they like or trust. They cast their ballots on the basis of real and perceived self-interest. To the extent that they approach politics in a more ideological or partisan way, it is often through a nexus of loyalties and identity as much as a specific preference for how high the capital gains tax should be.
A lot of conservatism is based on an inchoate sense that something important about the America of old is being lost. Maybe it's because the government is getting too big, or social values are changing, or the demographics are different, or even a feeling that the country's foreign enemies are ascendant. But conservatives haven't always thought it was morning in America.
Mainstream Republicans have capitalized on these sentiments many times. Party leaders from George W. Bush to Sarah Palin have rallied attitudinal red staters. Trump has just taken this identity appeal to the next level.
But in terms of policy, it isn't just that some conservatives haven't read Hayek. They fundamentally disagree with him. At the grassroots level, the American right has always had strong strains of nationalism and moralism. That's not an inherently bad thing, but the modern conservative movement has generally tried to wed these tendencies to a more limited or even libertarian view of government.
Nationalism and moralism can easily be expressed through strong, activist government as well. The platforms of right-wing parties in Europe and the rest of the world are frequently anything but libertarian, even in the loose sense that Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan were.
Trump also understands that many voters across the ideological spectrum aren't looking for a detailed political platform or five-point policy plan as much they want leadership. They want their government, and the people who lead it, to fix things and get things done. They want someone who will fight for them.
All of this annoys conservative intellectuals, who patiently point out to Trump voters that they shouldn't want leadership from someone who supports single payer, or conservative activists, who with increasing impatience try to explain that the right can't be led by a Hillary Clinton/Harry Reid donor.
But certifiably mainstream conservatives, from Andrew Breitbart to Ted Cruz, have employed the fighting terminology long before Trump, with varying degrees of specificity. You knew whom they were fighting — the Left, big government, the establishment, Washington — but they didn't always have the same answer about the ultimate purpose.
Before Reagan, Richard Nixon won two terms in the White House successfully pairing populist, culturally conservative Silent Majority rhetoric with frequently quite liberal policies.
The Donald knows that for many people politics is a team sport. The fans who cheered Brett Favre in Green Bay booed him in Minnesota and vice versa. Trump is trying out for the GOP team and has the marketing experience to sell it. While his pitch may seem crude, with the thrice-married braggart invoking the "great Billy Graham" and calling the Bible his favorite book, but is it that much cruder than the fundraising appeals conservative and Tea Party groups send out daily?
In retrospect, Trump's 2013 appearance at Graham's 95th birthday celebration in North Carolina might have been the biggest tip-off that he was serious about running for president.
When Trump came on professional wrestling broadcasts and trash-talked Vince McMahon, the crowd loved it. He is simply applying the same approach to Jorge Ramos, Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton. The crowd still loves it.
Finally, as somebody whose success comes as much from his fame as his real estate fortune, Trump gets the celebrity culture. Americans are obsessed with it and reality TV has blurred the lines between entertainment and, well, reality.
The citizenry's desire to keep up with the Kardashians and its anger at the political class has proved a potent combination. Many Americans think the people running their government are jokes, self-promoting blowhards with bad, expensive haircuts engaged in pointless political theater.
Why not have a candidate who will:
A.) Pick up issues with significant political appeal that the establishment in both parties won't touch
B.) Treat the system like the joke that it is and
C.) Lampoon the bad-haired self-promoters just by existing?
Trump may be a blowhard, the reasoning goes, but at least he's our blowhard.
This act is probably less sustainable than the entitlements Trump doesn't want to reform, but for a limited time it can be just as popular with its intended audience. The know-nothing may know a thing or two after all.
Agree with your #85 posting! Good.
I agree. The Left is a mess world-wide.
We’re no exception. We and Europe are targeted because the Left has some fool reasoning that Western Civilization is evil.
I’m not sure why they think Russia, the Middle East, Africa, or Asia is better, but they must think so.
Fools.
Those people that hate Europe and the U. S. should pick the nation of their choice, and move there.
I would agree, but Trump did come of age in the takeover age. I’m all for seeing the halls of Washington awash in blood, just as our corporate offices have been for decades. As long as he brings the axe, I’m all for it.
We need to reposition our country’s negative perception and increase the above-board brand equity. The government needs to actionably increase efficiency to reduce the systemic aggressive mediocrity and give the stakeholders a better ROI with a synergistic use of organic optimization and realignment coordinated with a strategic divestment and a serious reduction of D-PAD in concert with a raft of measures to include viral multimedia campaigns that radically recontextualize the entire institution.
In other words, first we kill all the lawyers.
Totally agree. Rush was talking about it today. The evidence of the failure of socialism is everywhere. Why with all the evidence, do they accept it blindly?
There’s an agenda to destroy.
It’s that simple. They detest free societies.
Yes, because Ivy League educated lawyers have done such a good job running our government so far. I submit to you that a lot of our problems stem from lawyer presidents. Woodrow Wilson and FDR were lawyers. Clinton was an Ivy League educated lawyer and Obama was purported to be a constitutional scholar and he is an Ivy League educated lawyer also. I like Cruz a lot but your argument that we need to put another lawyer in charge just doesn’t do it for me. I like Cruz despite the fact that he is an Ivy League educated lawyer, not because he is a lawyer.
Ladies and gentlemen, attention please
Come in close so everyone can see
I got a tale to tell, a listen don’t cost a dime
And if you believe that we’re gonna get along just fine
Now I’ve been travelin’ all around
I heard trouble’s come to your town
I’ve got a little somethin’, guaranteed to ease your mind
It’s called Snake Oil y’all, it’s been around for a long, long time
Way, your crops’ll burn if it don’t rain soon
Ain’t seen a drop since the tenth of June
Well, I can open up the sky, people have no fear
If you ain’t impressed yet, just tell me what you wanna hear.
Well, you lost your farm so you moved to town
You get a job, they shut the factory down
Now you sit around all day long feelin’ sad and blue
You need Snake Oil y’all, tell you what I’m gonna do
I can heal the sick, I can mend the lame
And the blind shall see again, it’s all the same
Well, ain’t your President good to you
Knocked ‘em dead in Libya, Grenada too
Now he’s taking his show a little further down the line
Well, ‘tween me and him, people, you’re gonna get along just fine
It’s call Snake Oil y’all
Snake Oil y’all
Snake Oil y’all
Call Snake Oil y’all
It’s call Snake Oil y’all, it’s been around for a long, long time
~Steve Earle
https://youtu.be/tjH1_94K060
Kind of a back-handed swat that insinuates we be crazy fo liking da Donald but he sho is our sort of crazy...even do he don’t knows nuttin about what we needs.
TY. I stand by Trump/Cruz still. So, he’s not pristine, at times we find a few dents, nothing major. The motor still runs -purring like a kitten.
fantasy land is clouding and crowding out reality in your world.
time to break free.
So to those who have set for themselves the goal of spreading the gospel of cynicism: may your labors continue to reward you with the sour fruits they so richly deserve.
Being against Trump(being President) is not cynical it’s logical..
He quite simply is not qualified.. since he has WORKED FOR THE ENEMY.. has been the enemy, maybe still IS the enemy..
President is way to sensitive an Office for him to hold..
Without positive affirmations.. beyond “WORDs” which can be and often is mere rhetoric..
Could Be different if qualified people were not “HANDY”..
Trump is a candidate to be accepted as a conservative.. NOT as President..
Fast tracking him to be CEO of the Country is a serious MISTAKE..
Give a couple years proving he is a Conservative and I would vote for him.. unless he is a RINO..
That "something" of leadership is impossible to define---if we could define it, mostt of us would check off the boxes and buy or develop what we need. No one can predict how long that intangible holds. For Rudy Guliani it faded after a few months. We will see how long Trump keeps "it" but his history as a businessman, then as a TV star, and now as a candidate (though still not a politician) suggests he will have "it" for a long time.
I'll take your ignorantly projected cynicism as opposed to willful delusion. Those who would explain away the degree of Trump's plastic opinions show no more integrity than Xero's apologists among the leftists who showed such adulation.
Yet leftists fail to see the truth in the above.
Ditto on Trump/Cruz.
America (and our Constitution) needs a high profile fighter to stand-up to the leftwing communists that are “this” close to their goal of overthrowing America.
Trump has given voice (a BIG voice, too!) to many Conservative values...and yes, he has some liberal warts. Perhaps Cruz, as VP, can help minimize/eliminate those warts.
On the charitable assumption that his blustery, content-free stump speech isn't an act, you'll get no argument here. But Trump does seem to know a lot more about politics than many of his detractors, including those critics who are well versed in the finer details of entitlement reform or international trade policy. Trump's success in the polls has been particularly frustrating for wonky conservatives. How can so many people buy into the business expertise of someone who so often gives technically wrong answers to economic questions?The author is just another Partisan Media Shill.
Agreed!
My hope has well. The two make a team to balance out the other. Good cop/bad cop?? No offense to any cop intended!!
Donald as the mike, Cruz as the ‘wonkie’ & may I add a very down to earth guy. With Donald as a mike, he now has a chance to make a top notch candidate and have a voice which might be heard. Lord knows, everyone needs to hear the words from the man himself.
Oh, it's not opposing Trump that's cynical: it's HOW Trump is being opposed that is cynical ... by definition.
It's a well worn groove, now. "Trump is out for himself" and "if you can't see that, you're stupid." Played over, and over again. The first part is cynical, again, by definition. The second part is the "evangelical" because it's being preached constantly and will tolerate no disagreement with its conclusion.
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.