Is VDH turning a leaf? Seems unlikely. He still rails against DT but, perhaps, with some increased clarity. He is, after all, an historian with a penchant for linear, disciplined thought. As much cannot be said of Trump. Except, of course, Trump is not a loose cannon. His shots are deliberate and well aimed. He is, moreover, disciplined in his outrageous demeanor, a condition VDH and other intellectuals miss. They may well have their best friend in DT if they are disciplined enough to accept his input and reason with him as an equal.
VDH remains committed to thinking Trump is no different from Don Rickles, and that Trump supporters all subscribe to The National Enquirer.
That's a point to ponder all right. VDH has departed the realm of reason on the topic and only now, and perhaps only apparently, is trying to view the thing through unjaundiced eyes.
Point - Donald Trump is not a "buffoon" or we wouldn't be having this conversation. He is marvelously adept at turning media bias into a virtue and conversant enough with their habits and practices to stay ahead of the Goebbels juggernaut.
Point - Hillary is nearly equally inept at participating in any media event that isn't pre-scripted and whose participants pre-screened. This is 0bama's infamous dependence on his teleprompter on steroids. Were it not for her thorough corruption of party resources she would not have made it this far based only on her inability to communicate, and at some point she will have to face live, unscripted media events in the face of an experienced and articulate opponent.
Point - Trump's "bombast" is simply the forcible statement of fact, and only media figures and political wonks conditioned to consider "fact" as infinitely mutable are confused in the matter. These aren't random statements based on emotion, there are programs behind them, and they're programs the voters are beginning to find increasingly attractive.
Point - Hillary has failed to capture the "women's vote" by being unsympathetic and unattractive to women, depending instead on grievance to cement her appeal. This is true of her drive to capture minority, especially black, support as well. She can't pander unless she has something to offer more than hatred, and she doesn't.
Point - the worst possible upshot of this from the Democrat point of view is for it to settle out as an establishment versus people dichotomy with their party in the role of the establishment, and that is exactly how it is settling out. Hillary had the nerve to pose as an "outsider" for awhile, and her "war on women" campaign depended on it. I can think of few women in politics less capable of pulling that off.
Point - CrookedHillary is corrupt, wealthy as a result, unapologetic, and seemingly mystified as to why anyone would resent the fact. That can no longer be hidden or dismissed as political hostility. CrookedHillary is a crook, and it's a fact.
How the Dems come out of this mess will be an interesting thing to watch, but the odds, despite all the negatives, are still on them nominating the most unattractive candidate they have in decades and trying to sell a sow's ear full of donkey crap as a silk purse full of gold. They've managed it before, but this time they're going to be called on it.