Coulter has become more "pro-fund" than profound, for a lot of reasons.
As no two people are ever alike, Trump and Reagan are not interchangeable, but the lashing out by the establishment in their day is very similar.
This is about the establishment being behind Trump, which is what I have been saying throughout his candidacy given the free air time he has been given. This fits the pattern of the last four elections at least, in which the conservative candidates have been starved for air time, other than Fred Thompson which was just a fan dance to dilute the conservative vote and distract attention from the likes of Duncan Hunter.
So what to do with normally rational warriors like Bozell and Sowell? It's very hard to categorize them in a changing environment like this.
Oh but you'll try, to preserve your self-delusion of immovable rectitude.
They are still allies of ours on occasion,
Speak for yourself. Trump is no conservative; he is a con artist.
Personally I prefer to skip the (R) discussion completely and to ask our luminaries whether they actually believe that doctrinaire (C) or (R) labels will win in the twelve swing states: OH, PA, MI, WI, IN, IA, NC, VA, FL, NV, NM, CO.
Against Hillary or Sanders? My dog could win those States.
Since 1986, we have had nothing but "he can win" RINOs nominated for President. You call Trump a change, but here you go again. The GOPe is lining up behind Trump. This is the best and last opportunity we have EVER seen to elect a conservative and you plan to boot the whole thing, because you believe a man who has never demonstrated adherence to conservatism over any substantive period of time, a man who has welched on his loans and cheated on his wives. He has told you in no uncertain terms, he will bring back illegal aliens as LEGAL immigrants, in other words future Democrats. That will be the end. You cannot afford this mistaken loyalty to one who has done NOTHING to earn it.
Spinning terms to the point of subjectivity is not an argument.
Is that some kind of rebuttal? RINO is certainly a relative term. Here, try disputing me, was Reagan a RINO in 1976? Surely it is a subjective term, subject to the era we are discussing. Frankly, you missed the point completely ( NRO and others calling Trump a RINO and/or CINO ). History repeats almost exactly but feel free not to notice.
Coulter has become more "pro-fund" than profound, for a lot of reasons.
Pro-fund? I don't get that, maybe that refers to ca$h or something. Ah well. Either you agree or disagree with what she said ( I do ), but we'll never know since you didn't say. Once again, Coulter: Conservative pundits keep assuring clueless viewers that Trump is not a "real Republican." ... Looking at what the party has become, I certainly hope he's not a "real Republican." Hard to disagree. No?
This is about the establishment being behind Trump ...
Actually it is not. C'mon now, do you really believe they are behind Trump? They are simply being expedient. What is happening in the past few days with Dole or whoever does not erase months, years and decades of their actions! I know that is a recent line of argument from Cruz supporters, but how anyone can really say that with a straight face is beyond me. Have fun selling that one.
Oh but you'll try, to preserve your self-delusion of immovable rectitude.
What is that, some kind of insult? Meltdown underway I see. I'll stick to my characterization of them ( Bozell, Sowell ) as blissfully ignorant shills for the entrenched UniParty status quo. That does not erase their Constitutional fidelity and great work, it just means when push comes to shove and the natives get restless and show up ( again and again ) with torches and pitchforks they will worry about their own asses first and last.
Speak for yourself. Trump is no conservative; he is a con artist.
( Using Billy Crystal's voice from The Princess Bride ) He's not a conservative just mostly conservative. I have to ask you though, since conservative is key criteria for you, exactly what office do you think this nomination is for? Is it RNC Chairman, Supreme Court Justice, House member, Senator, Governor, Pope? I have another question. Who gets to vote in this election? Those are kinda rhetorical I guess, so here is something specific ... If he is a Con Artist, exactly who is he conning? He is not acting as anybody except for himself. Apparently an authentic candidate is totally confusing to folks who are conditioned to only voting for politicians. If anybody is conning anybody it appears to be you conning yourself by projecting something onto him and then beating that strawman to death. Well, carry on then.
Against Hillary or Sanders? My dog could win those States.
I know someone has no electoral clue when I see a comment like that. There is no basis in fact to say that, and only can be explained by wishful thinking. That is indicative of no acknowledgement of past election results, or the current electoral cliff we are standing over, no idea of the enemy headstart, the ongoing demographic shift and where we will be in very few years if nothing changes.
Please help me out here ... If in these primaries where the voters are mostly (R) and (C) and Ted Cruz has only shown strength in a single state, Iowa ... what on Earth happens in a general when the doors in all states open to (D) and (L) and everyone else?