Posted on 11/20/2015 11:30:00 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
As has been made abundantly clear by his incessant mewling and pathetically thin skin, Donald J. Trump is not in fact an unwaveringly resolute tough guy of the type you would hope to find standing next to you in the trenches, but an insecure attention seeker who cannot help but pander to his audiences' prejudices. In the past few days, Trump has been asked variously whether, if elected, he would use his power to close mosques; whether he believes that Muslims should be registered in a special government database; and whether or not it would be a good idea to suspend the Fourth Amendment for anybody who prays to Allah. In all cases he has either demurred completely or eschewed the more traditional "yes" and "no" categories in favor of some choice hedging. "That may have to be done," Trump says. "There's no doubt." "We'll look at that." "We'll consider all the options." "We're going to have to look at a lot of things very closely."
So painful has this tendency become that I have begun to hope his interviewers will get a little surreal, just to see what he says:
"Will you replace your hair with spaghetti and your fingers with soup spoons?"
"Sure. We're going to look at everything."
"As president would you consider taking suspected burglars and parachuting them naked into lava?"
"That's something we'll consider. You can't have all this crime. Terrible."
"Do you think it's fair to say that you are the egg man, that you are the egg man, that you are the Walrus?"
"We're going to examine a range of possibilities."
"GooGooGooJoob?"
"I'll be looking into that."
Perhaps the only thing that is worse than Trump's silence is what he does say.
The most common defense of Trump's perpetual acquiescence has been that he did not explicitly say "yes" to the more controversial among the questions, and that he cannot therefore be accused of endorsement. In truth, this isn't quite right; speaking to NBC last night, he did seem to suggest affirmatively that Muslims would be required to sign into his hypothetical database or face consequences. Either way, I'm struggling to see how this defense can be acceptable to his admirers. Trump, recall, is supposed to be courageous. He's supposed to be steadfast. He's supposed to be a no-holds-barred badass who will make great deals and stare down enemies and Make America Great Again. How, one wonders, does a chronic inability to say "no" fit into that mien?
If there is one quality we need in a president, it is the ability decisively to say "no" - especially, I would venture, if that president hopes to advance conservative goals. When a sane person is asked whether he would institute a tracking database for Muslims or force one religious group to carry special ID cards, he says, "Of course I wouldn't." If Trump is unable to manage even this, how would he rein in spending or limit illegal immigration? More to the point, as Trump might ask sneeringly of others, how would he deal with Vladimir Putin?
Perhaps the only thing that is worse than Trump's silence is what he does say. Even if we are generous and assume that the man does not actually believe any of the specific proposals to which he has given his tacit consent, the attitude he is exhibiting is positively Wilsonian in character. In Trump's world, America will be restored to glory when his handpicked team of experts is permitted to experiment upon the public outside of the usual constitutional limits. Nowhere in his rhetoric will you find any reference to America's pre-existing cultural and legal traditions, or to the necessary bounds that free men insist be imposed upon the state. There is no talk of "freedom"; no reflexive grounding of ideas in the Declaration and the Federalist Papers; no conceptual explanation or underlying philosophy. There is nothing, except will to power. By his own admission, Trump's are the politics of doing enthusiastically what works in the moment; of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt; of the administrative state and of bureaucratic expertise; of the Prussians and the French and the Singaporeans. Whatever he might claim before his adoring crowds, Trump is not in fact an antidote to Barack Obama. He is his parallel.
Calvin Coolidge said "no" over and over and over again because he understood that the federal government existed for a handful of specific reasons, and that any action it took outside of its carefully delineated tramlines was inherently suspect. Donald Trump's only visible constitutional opinion is that someone strong ought to make sure the trams run on time. There's a word for men like that, and it sure as heck isn't "conservative."
That’s pretty much where I am this time around. Not a big fan of Trump, but he’s still better than the rest of them other than Cruz.
“He is HS prez material. Cannot control his mouth.”
Yep, that is probably the magic key to his success.
You have got to be a Cruz supporter to come up with something that far out in left field.
Why can’t you Cruz supporters emphasize what makes Cruz your candidate, instead of directing mindless mindless venom at Trump.
We are all in the Database. All of us.
We get on no fly lists for this or that and then come off of it.
You won’t consider anyone else, and that is admirable. I want a street fighter, and that’s Trump. He has his OWN money. That right there is good enough for me, along with the fact that EVERYONE in DC, the media, and the Shadow Government/Soros want to crush him-which tells us not only what they want (destroying the US), but also who he is in fighting them.
I believe he is our last chance.
Do I admire Cruz? Yes. Do I think Cruz can win? No. Furthermore, Cruz would have to deal with the Congress, and his arguments would fall flat, simply on political grounds. Besides, Cruz isn’t a street fighter, a mensch who’ll get his hands in the mud to fight his opponents. This saddens me, too, because his cowboy boots could use some mud.
Nowhere in his rhetoric will you find any reference to America's pre-existing cultural and legal traditions, or to the necessary bounds that free men insist be imposed upon the state. There is no talk of "freedom"; no reflexive grounding of ideas in the Declaration and the Federalist Papers; no conceptual explanation or underlying philosophy. There is nothing, except will to power [i.e., his preoccupation with poll numbers]I wish the Trump supporters would put the pom-poms down for a minute and think about this.By his own admission, Trump's are the politics of doing enthusiastically what works in the moment [he's not principled but a pragmatist, i.e., Kelo]; of Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt; of the administrative state and of bureaucratic expertise; of the Prussians and the French and the Singaporeans. Whatever he might claim before his adoring crowds, Trump is not in fact an antidote to Barack Obama. He is his parallel.
It's sobering.
Trump has done some good things, including giving the other candidates a spine, but we need a principled, intelligent, courageous president with a solid track record, like Cruz.
-— Trump wants to look at these issues carefully with his advisers before giving a detailed answer, or even a firm yes or no. I think thatâs a good quality in a presidential candidate. -—
It could also mean that he s evasive or has no answer.
We all have looked at Cruz and like him. However, we think DT has a better chance of winning. His mouth made a billionaire out of him and has not gotten in the way of his success yet.
I’ll just say again.
There is a level of animosity on this board from some Cruz supporters, which is to me inappropriate.
You are a Cruz supporter, and you are also frankly, showing it at the moment.
Lay off Trump. Start promoting your guy all you want, but don’t pretend Trump is anything other than a very strong opponent to the guy you like.
It seems to me there is one fundamental difference between Cruz and Trump. That is, that Cruz seems to support globalism, whereas Trump seems to favor a return of American greatness. It is why frankly, I did not support Cruz to begin with. Trump is for American jobs.
Cruz is a good guy. I support a lot of what he is saying, but he is wrong about American jobs. He needs to be an important person - I think he would be awesome in the Supreme Court, actually.
I think Trump’s approach, however has far more support. That is why he was just shown on Drudgereport with 38.8% support now.
Cruz by the way, is at 7.1%.
“Her candidate was Walker and ever since Walkerâs been gone sheâs been rubbishing the front runners in an orgy of sour grapes/scorched earth postings....”
So she’s really Walker??
— However, we think DT has a better chance of winning. His mouth made a billionaire out of him and has not gotten in the way of his success yet. -—
OK, those are reasons. But Cooke put his finger on the bigger problem, which is that Trump is a pragmatist. A pragmatist can be good or bad, depending on what he is being pragmatic about. What are the fundamental principles for Trump s decision-making? I haven t heard that from him.
How did this tripe ever make it to National Review?
This is fourth grade level stuff—my, how R has fallen!
As for convincing you otherwise, that will never happen.
You scraped the literary bottom of the barrel to find this hit piece, which totally fits your skewed world view of things.
We get that you do not like Trump.
I just wish you would stop polluting FR with these incessantly inane posts that showcase your Trump Derangement Syndrome.
This is all part of the take out trump at any price movement. Even at the cost of losing the election to a POS Clinton.
But are his ethics different from a politician is the question ?
From a deposition under oath in 2007: The lawyer asks him, have you ever lied in public statements about your properties? Trump says he tries to be truthful, but then he adds this, “I’m no different from a politician running for office. You don’t want to say negative things.”
Then the lawyer asks him, have you ever exaggerated in statements about your properties? His response, “I think everyone does.” All billionaires lie about their wealth, he just does it more than most.
Very well stated, Jim.
So it's your position and the position of good Republicans to eliminate Medicaid and Medi-Care and everything in between???
You told a falsehood. I corrected your false assertion. You said that people who oppose trump support Bush. I pointed out that many oppose both. Opposition to trump is predicated on his lack of conservatism.
There are a number of posters here who oppose trump. Many of them say the same thing: trump is not a conservative. Yet I have not seen any that don’t also oppose Bush.
When you falsely assert that those who oppose trump support Bush, you commit slander. You thus show yourself to be projecting your hostility onto others.
Make an argument, but without lying.
Another person I thought had some brains and made sense....but is dumb as rocks.
I don’t think these pundits realize that any republican candidate must also fight the press. Trump is putting them on the defense every chance he gets.
Instead of writing about “thin skinned” Trump why not point out the cheap shot press, and while you’re at the cheap shot artists like Flacid Jeb Bush.
Exactly how does one convince a foaming at the mouth lunatic that they're wrong???? The insane person doesn't realize he (or she) is insane - they think they are doing just fine and dandy in the sense department and don't notice the dark flickers behind the eyes or the foamy bubble on the lips that sane people see in them.
Now for a short public service announcement to all on FR:
I prefer Cruz and my money goes to his campaign, hence the Cruz link. If you like someone else, donate to him/her (find your own link to do it) and if you use FR and don't donate, then please don't complain about the welfare leeches or those who have Obama Phones because, functionally, you are no different than any other FReeloader
PS - If you are one of those who cannot afford even a small donation to FR or a candidate, God Bless and happy FReeping!.....
GO CRUZ!! Keep it up Trump!!
“Iâm beginning to think that NR is hostile to Trump.”
Or. .
“Iâm beginning to think that NR/GOPe is hostile to Trump.”
POTUS Trump will use “no” often.
Trump defies traditional models and is impossible to pigeon hole. I hunger for “fundamental change” in the direct opposite direction of Obama.
Predicting specifics of this or that policy is pointless. I trust the mans fervent desire for America to be a “winner” once again. And I have confidence that Trump and I have similar ideas of what that means.
It would be better for conservatives without the delay; but, then again, we disagree.
By Springtime Cruz will probably be out...Carson and the lessors will probably be out...So why don't you guys tell us who you are REALLY advocating for...GOPe comes to mind...
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.