National Review just handed Donald Trump the Election

National Review's publication of the collective anti-Donald Trump missives from 22 self-appointed conservative potentates has caused quite a stir in Republican circles.

The nationwide responses range from, "Wait, I thought National Review went out of business years ago," to "Ed Meese? Seriously?"

The Gang of 22 have officially become parodies of themselves. One would have to reach back to the days of Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew to lift an adequate quote to describe them.

"Nattering nabobs of negativism," "vicars of vacillation," "pusillanimous pussyfooters," "the decadent few," "ideological eunuchs," "the effete corps of impudent snobs," or "the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history" - take your pick, because they all apply about equally well to each and every one of them.

So clueless is the Gang of 22 they can't even see how they've stumbled right into the narrative Trump's been communicating so successfully for months. Just like the elected officials from both parties, the Gang of 22 has been GREAT at complaining about stuff, year, after year, after year.

Many of the Gang of 22 have been hanging around and chattering for decades, and some are active cogs in the Conservative Entertainment Complex, deriving their income by pandering to conservative anger while offering no real solutions.

Donald Trump represents a threat to these ineffectual poohbahs in the same way he represents a threat to do-nothing public officials.

Jealousy is also seriously at work here. Trump is inspiring and exciting a broad spectrum of the country like no member of the Gang of 22 ever has, or ever will.

In just seven months of campaigning, Trump already has more Americans listening to a Republican message than the entire Gang of 22 could muster over decades. Trump understands that before you can advance the ball, you have to convince people to take time from their busy lives to listen. No one on the GOP side since Ronald Reagan has accomplished that like Trump.

No one else has come close, and certainly no one from that "effete corps of impudent snobs" to which the National Review thinks we should defer.

The Gang of 22 had their chance. They've done a lot of bitching over the years, and it paid well for some.

But Americans care about results. They can plainly see that all of the empty talk from the Gang of 22 got us eight years of Barack Obama, and a loss in pretty much every conservative battle there was to lose.

At the same time when Americans look at Donald Trump's life they get a lot of assurance that here is finally a man who shares their focus on actually getting results. And Trump returns the respect by recognizing regular hard-working Americans are a lot smarter than any of the "ideological eunuchs" in all of their pontificating glory.

The "pusillanimous pussyfooters" love to nitpick Trump's words, but what voters are looking for this year is competence and accomplishment. Donald Trump has an actual record of delivering both in spades.

The Gang of 22 is right to be terrified. A President who could get things done would expose them as the irrelevant creatures they truly are.

...I can say that what NR has done is deplorable.

I have yet to take a look at any of the essays, but I doubt that any of it would be more deplorable than the bald faced lies and intentional distortions coming from the Trump camp. I know of several individuals who have switched allegiance from Trump to Cruz in part because of the dishonesty of Trump's attacks on Cruz.

On McCarthy - I always thought that too but he threw cold water all over the standing cases instead of leading the rush forcing the House to use Jon Turley. When presented a chance to actually do SOMETHING McCarthy taunted those who tried rather than lead. Frig all of them.

NR came out with an editorial 2 years ago backing Paul Ryan’s pension cuts to military veterans.......even combat, 100% disabled veterans who were missing limbs. I wrote them and told them what I thought of their position. They have lost perspective.

But back to Trump. He is an unabashed capitalist who will make America great again. On social issues he will be disappointing or nonexistent.

This is likely to be true. So if any of us think that Trump is the better pick, we better also steel ourselves to "help" push him and the country farther than he might naturally want to go on these issues.

I don't see Trump support here as a denial of conservatism. I see it more as calling in a bombardment before the infantry assault. It doesn't win the war, it just sows chaos in the opposition and softens them up for the ground game.

Okay, so, on 1-22 there were 179 topics with Trump (or Donald) in the title, out of 672 posted (this excludes any which were deleted by the mods), about 27% of topics posted -- IOW, this is the "living rent-free in your head :

WOW you really put a list together!!

In regards to the list of 22, did they forget it is we the people that vote, it is not the decision of the 22. I’m very disappointed in some, but its expected of some of the talking idiots. I have lost ALL respect for redstate / erickson, he reminds me of Al Sharpton.

“And Trump strongly supported Romney. We should deport both of them.”

Of course he did.
So did I, and many here.

Remember what our alternative was!

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.