Replies

Forgive my too-angry snappy remark above.

Read some of my rather extensive posts on the Trump phenomenon. I have been writing about him for two months.

First, he is the only non-establishment candidate. Even Cruz, when pressed, reverts to "I introduced this bill or that bill . . ." But nothing ever gets DONE. There's always an excuse. Leaders find a way to lead. I love Cruz, and I love his attempted shutdown. But he got ONE GUY to follow (Lee). He hasn't even managed to put together a coalition with Paul, Ernst, Sessions, and other conservatives.

Please this isn't Cruz bashing---he is far and above the best we have. But it isn't 1996, when he would have been perfect. Times have changed. Yes, you do need a celebrity, just as in 1828 you needed someone who appealed to the "common man" (Jackson) and in 1904 you needed someone not controlled by Mark Hannah (TR).

Second, Trump has mastered the 21st century social media as an election tool. Nobody else has. SamAdams76 has done extensive work on Trump's use of Twitter, which just buries all the other GOP candidates put together, and really exceeds Hillary's. He is running an incredibly expensive campaign and has barely spent a dime (Ok, some gas for that big jet). He gets millions of constant, unrelenting, free advertising. No one else comes close.

Third, I believe we have gone way beyond ideology. This is NOT an ideological election. I think fieldmarshaldj, one of our brightest election historians, might agree with me on this. 2010 and 2014 WERE ideological elections---and it got us nothing. Mark Steyn has been on a great two-day rant about how we impose all these conservative litmus tests on candidates like Trump, but the guys who "pass" don't do a damned thing. They have one excuse after another.

This election pure and simple is about one principle, that "We the People" still get to choose our leaders, even when they aren't William F. Buckley, or Ronald Reagan, or 100% ideologically consistent ... because we can. We get to tell the elites, once a generation to piss off. We get to elect "our" guy for no other reason than he's "our guy" and we can tell the other side, "After all, we won the election" and have it MEAN something.

I'll end with this: if Trump only agrees with 5 of my 10 top issues, whatever they are, but once he gets into office THOSE FIVE are the ones he actually acts upon, then I've won 100% of my agenda and moved the ball a helluva long way down the field.

Right now, as Mark Steyn said, we're on our own one yard line squabbling over a "pathetic piece of grass."