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."
Can’t remember,it’s been awhile,did Barack do better than Pres.Reagan?
You have a right to your feelings about candidates no matter what they are. There are some things you need to think about though.
We like Cruz. He’s a good man. He is not perfect. He’s had his set of problems too.
That being said, he’s one of two men who share most of our desires for a solid platform.
The problem with Ted is that he is a straight up Conservative that is not charismatic. I don’t say that to be mean, but look at his polling numbers compared to Trump.
I can empathize with Ted, but there is a dynamic that isn’t going to change. We have to face it.
Ted does not pull across demographic lines. Trump does.
When Ted runs in the open primaries, Democrats, Independents, and Moderate Republicans won’t be voting for him. That leaves a fraction of the Republidan party that will. Even part of the Conservative base will be voting for Trump. Ted’s slice is going to be very small.
Even if Trump weren’t in the race, why would a Democrat vote for Ted? It won’t happen. Why would a Moderate Republican vote for Ted? It won’t happen. Independents generally won’t vote for Ted.
We haven’t nominated a Conservative in 32 years. The above problem for Cruz, is part of the reason why.
We haven’t had open primaries for all that 32 years. Once we did, it made it that much harder for a guy like Cruz to get the nomination.
Cruz can not win the nomination. The deck is stacked against Conservatives.
Trump is charismatic, speaks from the heart, and appeals to people across demographic lines. He supports the Reagan doctrine. He’s not hawking Leftist programs. He’s hawking Conservatism.
Talking him down only serves one purpose. It feeds the monster in the back of the room, the GOPe.
Trump is our only chance in 2016.
If it’s not him, it will be Bush, Rubio, Christie, or another Leftist Republican.
None of them will protect this nation. It will be open borders and amnesty straight up.
No thanks.
Just noticed this thread got BUMPED off of the side bar, actually. Not sure how it got there in the first place.
Jim has led in role modeling civility in these Trump take down threads. The same for Trump’s supporters.
CW incites and runs. I’ve been amazed by the bitterness there. Very telling, and confirms impact by TRUMP, and how Trump is blowing the field out, sending many over the cliff.
Never mind the barking about who donates to FR, so they expect a free field to slander Trump and supporters too. I don’t quite get that.
If TRUMP goes, their guy sure doesn’t stand a chance, whoever he is, unless he becomes GOP of course. This is the splitter business at work.
That’s what healthy unpaid people do.
Good for you.
Amen to that. :)
It's beginning to make more sense...
A presidential candidate or any candidate can only be helped by public speaking ability. It was one of the first courses I took in college. But I have not even brought the subject up.
I also reject the "who can win" part of your analysis, because that should not matter to me in a primary. There were three situations in my past where I was led by my misunderstanding of the GOP and pragmatism where I held my nose and voted for someone who could win because that was what you did. It was called "Broken glass republican voting". I think that era is over. It was a artifact of being out of power for 30 years.
No, Trump has enough public speaking ability. If he wins the nomination he will have to use it. What he's lacking is the footnotes. The reasons why things are as they are and why he is the guy to fix it.
All I'm getting today and for the past several months is that "I will do it" and "you will like it". It's not enough, and it should not be enough for any thinking human being. I think it's a reaction to Obama, his minions, and the liberal lie. I think it's similar in nature to the last two major mistakes the country made with Carter and Obama (two timer) It's a emotional response, not a logical deliberation as it should be. It's dangerous and it's largely group think.
I'm not trying to insult anyone..I'm just asking for a pause to assess where we are today. If Trump is the nominee, then he is the nominee...I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. The general election is a year in the future. Much can happen and will.
Is that really you Mrs. Walker???
Trump is not for universal government health care. You were informed of this here.
Once again, for the learning impaired:
1. Trump has stated he will see that Obamacare is repealed
2. He has stated he wants to lower state lines so insurance companies can compete nationwide
3. He believes this will drive rates down, via competition, capitalism at work
4. He believes this will cause a proliferation of policies, proving better choices, via capitalism at work
5. He believe we will have to find a way to cover those who still do not have insurance.
6. The government always paid the bills of those who couldn't pay
7. Trump has said he wants to get together with insurance companies, business leaders, the health care industry, and come up with a plan that will provide coverage for these people at reduced rates.
8. This will save the government money, compared to what it was forking over.
Now that you've been informed again, I'm sure you'll quit lying about this false charge you've been making against Trump.
CW is off to another thread after posting this little bombing thread. Amazing troll work and ducks out to a devout thread kissing the proletariat beneath her/him.
It was funny to see the tone go from bitter here, into gush-like-honey over there, conversing like a priest.
That's the essence of your spot-on, realistic post.
It should be read and digested by all patriots on this forum who are burning to take this country back and are torn between this candidate and that.
Wish I knew how to individually ping everybody to it, lol.
Leni
Who cares?? Post whatever left-wing garbage you want.
I want a president that is an American and represents me as an American. Trump does that!
Just checked the responses to my posts of last night and I see that most people object to my saying that Trump probably wants to work out a detailed answer, with his advisers, on some issues rather than giving a firm yes or no.
I’m surprised that that was the post people objected to.
He has done position papers on several important topics so far. Every conservative loves his proposals on the care of our veterans. He is a competent person who chooses not to give a half-baked answer to a question.
As to Cooke being stupid, I so hoped for more from that book, since it originated from an idea on Free Republic. It was just nothing. A better read was the reissue of an old book called “What Is Conservatism?” which actually talked about the major differences between conservatism and libertarianism.
I’m a Cruz guy,but I fail to see how Trump is ruining the GOP primaries.
Could you enlighten me please.
Also, as a staunch conservative,did you vote for GW Bush?
Cruz might have a chance if the corruption wasn’t so widespread.
People may see him as just another career politician.
Someone on this forum(I don’t remember who)said even if he’s the best choice, he’s still got the beltway stank surrounding him, same as any other career politician from DC.
There are things I like about Cruz. I even like some things about Carson and Rand Paul.
All of the top tier have good points and bad points.
I believe Trump is the only one that can take out hillary.
I don’t believe it can be done with brilliant debating. The debates are rigged in her favor.
Crossovers like blue collar dems, blacks and Hispanics and even some evangelicals will make the difference as long as there are no third party spoilers.
Well spoken, a very good analysis.
Cruz will find a place in a Trump administration.
Hillary will dance around Trump with facts, figures and no doubt shine with her knowledge of state and world affairs.
Trump will do what we’ve seen thus far and give a good show in putting her in her place.....but he’s got lots of work to do to “debate” the issues....I don’t think he’ll go there.
Hillary with facts and figures?
That’s sarcasm right?
I was thinking the same thing... its a good assessment
We all like to hear what we want to hear
The problem with both Obama and Trump is:
Did we really hear that?
Does he really mean that?
Can he actually do that?
Obama has proved that:
people heard what they wanted to hear.
No he didn’t mean that.
Yes he has a phone and a pen and he has no problem with those pesky laws
Will Trump be the same?
I was a non believer in Obama and I am a non believer in Trump
He’s getting better all the time.
The debates are a long ways off.
I don’t believe the debates will make much difference anyway.
By then, peoples minds will already be made up.
If hillary had to stand on her own with no help at all from the media she wouldn’t have a chance.
The media will aid and abet her at every turn like they always do.
That’s tough odds for anyone.
Hillary is not brilliant by any means.
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.