Posted on 08/14/2015 5:39:49 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright
Did we just see Erick Erickson’s Red State draw a red line in the sand in front of Rush Limbaugh? And if so, is it another aspect of the booming dynamic known as “the Trump effect?”
That very case can be made – as Erickson used Red State’s daily email blast lead story from Dan McLaughlin on Wednesday to fire shots across the bow of all talk radio hosts who are in any way supporting Donald Trump. And while Erickson does not have the by-line on this indictment, it is right in line with his recent dis-invitation of Trump to speak at the recent Red State gathering. (snip)
(snip) gauntlet is thrown down on all talkers with the bombastic warning that “all those in a position of leadership…. cable and talk radio hosts, pundits, columnists, bloggers – (who are) actively encouraging the Trump phenomenon, you are neither a conservative nor a Republican anymore and should not expect anyone to take you seriously again.”
There’s nothing else to add to that, other than to notice that a direct endorsement of Trump was not a requirement here – no – merely the encouragement “of the Trump phenomenon” is in and of itself damning.
And just in case anyone still missed the main point of the article, it closed with the harsh notice that “Donald Trump’s feckless campaign is a millstone…. take it off your necks, or be drowned by it.” The close was dramatically stark on purpose.
Translation: Those talk leaders who now speak well of Trump’s campaign are heading for a major embarrassment down the line….and ole Erick will be there to remind them.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
There could a rumor Erick might suffer from anal seepage because he doesn’t seem to hold his sh!t together at all.
et tu JR?
That’s your prerogative, I guess.
I just hope Mr. Loose Cannon doesn’t end up sinking the ship.
Serious question though....There is so much about Trump we don’t know. What would be your red line, if it was revealed, that would cause you to pull support?
If he pressured his girlfriends/wives to have abortions?
If he has been a serial adulterer?
If he has had homosexual relationships?
If he has donated money not just to leftist candidates but really reprehensible activist groups (pro-abort, anti 2A, pro-muslim, etc...)?
If he was intimately involved with the mob in Atlantic City?
If he had business dealings with jihadi supporters in the middle east?
Is there anything he could have potentially done in the past 30 years that would cause you to pull support or are you in no matter what because of his outspoken stance on immigration and trade?
I ask this because he has never been in a heated race before and I can guarantee if something like this exists, the Republicans are holding onto it for now until it is a two man race between Trump and Bush.
Yes, you read me in college. I was misquoted though.
I said “Trump’s chances are dead.”
It has been confused over the years due to the fact that people worship his cult of personality.
My red line is Jeb Bush.
Well Cll him and let him know who he is supposed to endorse, obviously you don't listen to him.
Mine haven't.
Stuff it. I am not now nor have I ever pushed for Trump. I have merely suggested that the GOP could learn something from what seems to have made him popular but like you they don't have a clue. If Trump crashes and burns he will have to do it to himself, personally I think smart candidates would be interested in picking up that vote. I think Cruz has laid off because he is not as stupid as some of his boosters.
Hillary will not be the candidate and I think it is foolish to try and knock her off before it is too late to field an alternative.
You want to show me where I said anything about a Rush endorsement?
" obviously you don't listen to him."
Not for the past few weeks. I'll let him work out his Trump infatuation.
That’s a classic. Mind If I borrow that?
Please do.
In other words you have no clue because your opinion is second hand.
>> Reagan was pretty close to that kind of rebel <<
Well, of course RWR appealed more directly to the “people” than he did to the establishment.
But as I remember events, he didn’t campaign as an “angry rebel” of any sort, and he didn’t go around raging against a real or imagined establishment.
In fact Reagan scarcely raged against anybody, even the commies and their fellow traveling Dhimmis. He just laid out his policies in a friendly and persuasive way, backed up by a deep intellectual understanding of the problems we were facing.
Bottom Line on Ron:
Good cheer and an attractive persona, combined with an intellectually serious conservative philosophy — a combination that’s hard to beat, IMHO.
>> So was Jimmy Carter at the time come to think of it <<
Carter as a rebel? Sorry, but I can’t quite buy the image. Call him insincere, vindictive, devious, incompetent, self-important, humorless — with all of these attributes behind the insincere smile of a sometime Sunday school teacher. But I just don’t see how “rebellion against the establishment” was an important element in his appeal to the voter.
(A rebel against Nixonism? Yeah, I’ll buy that one. And definitely he had a strong one-time-only appeal to his fellow Southerners. But I’d say those factors just ain’t the same as true anti-establishmentarianism. Not even close.)
Not exactly.
I've turned his show on occasionally since then; each time, he's been rhapsodizing about Trump, so off he goes.
Then there are Freepers who confirm that all he does is talk about Trump. I guess they're all lying, right?
And there's my husband, who normally listens to Rush at work, but who has switched to another station because he doesn't care to listen to a three-hour Valentine to a liberal Democrat.
>> Pat Paulsen <<
Running for POTUS as a rebel against the establishment? Yeah, I guess I forgot about him and the Smothers Brothers.
Anyway, the thought that comes to mind is Karl Marx’s dictum that, History repeats itself — the second time as farce.
that’s not quite true...Reagan was not all humor and charisma....he was quite often righteously angry.....against the pale pastel establishment, against the Soviets, against the American left.....quite often.
>> Reagan was not all humor and charisma....he was quite often righteously angry <<
Sure. But in a dignified and highly persuasive way, not in a demagogic or “fake populist” style. Big, big difference IMO.
That's an interesting comparison. California had their Ted Cruz in Tom McClintock, but voted for their Trump in Arnold Schwarzenegger. The biggest problem with Schwarzenegger was that he turned out to be a go-it-alone governor. He extended no coattails to other Republicans to help build a coalition or groom future Republicans in a state that desperately needed it. He wouldn't even endorse McClintock when he ran for Lt. Governor in the next election. When he got his reform amendments slapped down by the unions, he capitulated, and that was the end of the Schwarzenegger phenomenon.
A serious question about Trump's Republicanism (I won't narrow it to conservatism) is whether he will bring along the next generation that is being frozen out today by our Republican leadership, or is he going to disappoint Republicans by giving key positions to Democrats, too?
-PJ
I would bet Trump would give positions to businesspeople, Dem and Rep---but not cronies. I do think he's serious about fixing things.
Would he focus on "grooming" the next generation? Hell no. But right now, our problem is so much more desperate than that.
Think of it this way. You have a cage with a vicious lion in it. A lion tamer like Cruz or Walker goes in, but no matter how good they are or how committed they are, they don't have a whip or a gun. The lion might get on the stool for a second, but he's only sizing up his prey, then it's over.
Trump walks in with a whip and a gun. He can't be bought, can't be bribed, and doesn't care what others think (actually, Arnold did).
What you are concerned about are the younger lion tamers watching from outside the cage. That's important, but right now we need to get the lion's attention before we can train him. I'm not at all worried about who is in training, because if we con't get the lion's attention now, we're done.
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.