Trump Is Not a Bogeyman

 

shutterstock_163234616On Tuesday, Mona Charen wrote here:

This week, while we were still burying our dead from San Bernardino, every Republican – rather than explaining why President Obama’s refusal to fight the war on terror has led to this moment – was instead having to condemn Donald Trump’s mindless proposal to keep every single Muslim out of the United States until further notice. Again, he’s the perfect bogeyman.

But this is only true because the other Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about, say, President Obama. Imagine if, instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well, Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the president said about [insert latest outrage here]? Talk about unacceptable! In fact, I think that … “

Trump is not a bogeyman. He’s a great big, fluffy pile of excuses for the GOP to fall on when they fail. It’s a symptom of the same disease that has the GOP demanding that they be elected to supermajorities everywhere for twenty years before they can be expected to produce results. Many of us aren’t buying their plans that will never be achieved, nor their inevitable excuses.

Republican candidates don’t want to talk about Trump? Fine. Don’t talk about Trump. The only reason these guys “have to” talk about Trump is they are either unwilling or unable to re-direct the conversation. If reporters have no respect for our other candidates, it’s because they don’t deserve it. Trump is a symptom, not a cause. It would be nice to see folks like Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham echoing Josh Earnest less, and act more of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzq57mux-_o

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 81 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Yes, indeed. They should be doing more of that. If they want to be in the big seat, they ought to show that they can at least roll a reporter since they will be expected to deal with Putin.

    • #1
  2. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    “I’m doing good for the Muslims,” Trump told Don Lemon in an interview for “CNN Tonight.” “Many Muslim friends of mine are in agreement with me. They say, ‘Donald, you brought something up to the fore that is so brilliant and so fantastic.'”

    Brilliant I say….

    • #2
  3. Pencilvania Inactive
    Pencilvania
    @Pencilvania

    Ball Diamond Ball: this is only true because the weak-kneed Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about (say) Obama

    Absolutely true.  I thought our guys knew enough by now to practice the Newt Maneuver on reporters?  Mona’s complaint and many others like it make me very disappointed to see Trump Derangement Syndrome on our own side.

    • #3
  4. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Mirroring the problem.

    Fundamentally, Republicans have absorbed the mantra that they are bigots, homophobes, and Islamophobes. They have, in effect, agreed that they must police their ranks and make sure to distance themselves from the wicked and bigoted elements within their party or else they will be assumed to believe the same.

    Meanwhile, we are lectured to refrain from doing similar things. All Republicans are bigots, but all Muslims must be taken on an individual basis. Prominent Muslims worldwide refuse to denounce these heinous acts saying generally, This is not Islam, Islam is a religion of peace and these killers don’t represent Islam. Why do I have to answer for every lone-wolf attacker who doesn’t share my version of Islam?

    The Republican Party has blown it bigtime. They have allowed the debate, once again, to be about how they are *not* something bad.

    In other words, they allow themselves to be charged with crimes they didn’t commit by honoring the debate. The more they are forced, or feel forced, to defend themselves, the more it looks to most ordinary people there must be something to the charge.

    Meanwhile, it reinforces the perceptions that Republicans are just as unable as Democrats to do anything definitive about this problem of terror in our midst.

    The proposal, while not practical, is worthy of discussion. It’s not bigotry but self-interest. We don’t need any more immigrants from anywhere right now.

    • #4
  5. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    I think Cruz is the only one who got it right:

    When a reporter specifically asked Cruz–a Harvard-trained lawyer and former solicitor general of Texas–about the constitutionality of Trump’s proposal, Cruz declined to express an opinion. “I am focused on my policies and the solutions that I am proposing to the real problems of this country,” Cruz replied.

    Not exactly the ‘Obama is worse’ statement you ask for, but far better than the rest seem to have said.

    • #5
  6. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    PHenry:I think Cruz is the only one who got it right:

    When a reporter specifically asked Cruz–a Harvard-trained lawyer and former solicitor general of Texas–about the constitutionality of Trump’s proposal, Cruz declined to express an opinion. “I am focused on my policies and the solutions that I am proposing to the real problems of this country,” Cruz replied.

    Not exactly the ‘Obama is worse’ statement you ask for, but far better than the rest seem to have said.

    Heh.  Yup.

    • #6
  7. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Our politicians are hard targets. Obama can mock us for being afraid of “widows” ( while he makes our military place women in combat roles) yet every woman and child is screened for weapons at his appearances.
    These killers seek out those of us who are unprotected by police cordons or bodyguards. It is we who must live among them, not the elites. We are the soft easy targets they seek and find, and we are supposed to be welcoming to the refugees in which the enemy has told us they will infiltrate.

    We are continually forced to abide by laws that are designed to save a tiny minority, or would promote our health and longevity. “If it saves ONE person, it’s worth it” logic.

    If banning any subgroup from our country will prevent just one mass shooting, isn’t it worth it?

    • #7
  8. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    The GOP may be kept out of the White House until it raises up a new generation of politicians that is unafraid of the enemy – the media.

    • #8
  9. Vance Richards Inactive
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Ball Diamond Ball: But this is only true because the weak-kneed Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about (say) Obama. Imagine if instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the President said about X? Talk about unacceptable! I feel that … “

    Exactly. A strong leader should take control of the conversation. Letting a lowly reporter set your agenda is not leadership.

    • #9
  10. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    Holy Cow.  FP in 9.

    • #10
  11. raycon and lindacon Inactive
    raycon and lindacon
    @rayconandlindacon

    Mona and company are scared to death of a Donald presidency.  He has made a few harebrained proposals in among his no-b.s. statements on immigration and war-on-terror.  It’s as though his merely articulating our concerns is tantamount to accomplishing his goals.

    Isn’t it enough that if he wins the White House he can count on the Democrats and the entire GOPe to oppose his every move.  We are safe, Mona.  Unless the GOPe remains the same as they have for the last 30 years.

    • #11
  12. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Franco: If banning any subgroup from our country will prevent just one mass shooting, isn’t it worth it?

    Yes. And the subgroup at issue is doing several times the damage the Left tries to attribute to other causes.

    • #12
  13. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge
    Fake John/Jane Galt
    @FakeJohnJaneGalt

    It seems that Obama and friends feel the number one threat facing this country is climate change.   The GOP seems to feel that the number one threat facing this country is Donald Trump.  I seem to think they both are wrong.

    • #13
  14. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Ball Diamond Ball: Trump is not a bogeyman. He’s a great big, fluffy pile of excuses for the GOP to fall on when they fail.

    I’d say he’s likely both; Trump is — as Mona said — doing lasting damage to the Right by confirming a number of the worst stereotypes about us. That said, a better GOP would also have figured out how to better deal with him and the media who love to badger us with Trump.

    Ball Diamond Ball: It would be nice to seefolks like Jeb Bush and Lindsey Graham echoing Josh Earnest less, and act more of this…

    Trump handled that extremely well; it was him at his best. If did more of that and less of making fun of people with arthrogryposis and the other nonsense, we’d all be better for that.

    • #14
  15. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Ball Diamond Ball:But this is only true because the other Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about, say, President Obama. Imagine if, instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well, Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the president said about [insert latest outrage here]? Talk about unacceptable! In fact, I think that … “

    . . .

    Republican candidates don’t want to talk about Trump? Fine. Don’t talk about Trump. The only reason these guys “have to” talk about Trump is they are either unwilling or unable to re-direct the conversation.

    Put on your “journalist” hat and think like a leftist. This is how it will get reported:

    When asked about Trump’s crazy plan to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., Senator Ted Cruz stopped short of harshly criticizing Trump, and appeared to change the subject. “I disagree with Mr. Trump, but let’s take a close look at where the President’s policies have brought us.”

    Refusal to talk about Trump is, in the fevered heads of the left, proof that a candidate secretly agrees with Trump.

    I know this because I read four or five pieces yesterday that took precisely that approach.

    • #15
  16. Ball Diamond Ball Member
    Ball Diamond Ball
    @BallDiamondBall

    DrewInWisconsin:

    Ball Diamond Ball:But this is only true because the other Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about, say, President Obama. Imagine if, instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well, Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the president said about [insert latest outrage here]? Talk about unacceptable! In fact, I think that … “

    . . .

    Republican candidates don’t want to talk about Trump? Fine. Don’t talk about Trump. The only reason these guys “have to” talk about Trump is they are either unwilling or unable to re-direct the conversation.

    Put on your “journalist” hat and think like a leftist. This is how it will get reported:

    When asked about Trump’s crazy plan to ban Muslims from entering the U.S., Senator Ted Cruz stopped short of harshly criticizing Trump, and appeared to change the subject. “I disagree with Mr. Trump, but let’s take a close look at where the President’s policies have brought us.”

    Refusal to talk about Trump is, in the fevered heads of the left, proof that a candidate secretly agrees with Trump.

    I know this because I read four or five pieces yesterday that took precisely that approach.

    I think I take your meaning, but all that means is you’ve pushed them back to another defensive wall.  Then they have to misrepresent the facts, which can be countered.  Cowardice is indefensible.

    • #16
  17. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Ball Diamond Ball: But this is only true because the other Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about, say, President Obama. Imagine if, instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well, Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the president said about [insert latest outrage here]? Talk about unacceptable! In fact, I think that … “

    Totally agree with this BDB, great observation.

    • #17
  18. Eustace C. Scrubb Member
    Eustace C. Scrubb
    @EustaceCScrubb

    But wouldn’t it be awesome if someone uncovered Hillary e-mails that showed she and the Donald were in cahoots? (Probably wouldn’t really bother Hillary OR Donald supporters… but still…)

    [Editors’ Note: While the CoC prohibits “99% of conspiracy theories,” the particular context of this comment and set-up of “wouldn’t it be awesome if” indicates that the conspiracy is hypothesized rather than maintained; as such, we do not believe it counts as a conspiracy theory or a CoC violation]

    • #18
  19. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Here’s Politico with the alarming headline:

    Some big GOP players say Trump has a point

    Established party figures are stopping short of condemning Trump’s proposal to halt all Muslims from entering the U.S.

    See how cleverly that was done? And the subhead says they “stop short” of condemning it. Very clever. The message that’s communicated is that the GOP is secretly agreeing with Trump.

    Say something and you’re just doing PR for Trump. Say nothing and you “stop short” of condemning.

    The article itself reveals how false the headline is. One GOP figure after another is quoted, none of them supporting Trump’s ban. The only person they could find who agreed with Trump was Ann Coulter. Mentioned at the very end of the piece.

    But the headline already does the damage.

    • #19
  20. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    My answer would be:  “I think Trump was wrong, but we should consider putting a moratorium on granting visas to people coming directly or indirectly from countries on the state sponsor of terrorism list.”

    This not only distances the candidate from Trump’s looniness, but also presents a serious proposal for consideration, and would probably please Trump supporters who want to see some action taken.  The message is, “I can take Trump’s impractical ideas and turn them into something that works.”

    • #20
  21. Fricosis Guy Listener
    Fricosis Guy
    @FricosisGuy

    If nothing else, Trump is winnowing the wheat from the chaff in the GOP field. If you can’t handle Trump, then how will you handle the Clinton machine?

    • #21
  22. Concretevol Thatcher
    Concretevol
    @Concretevol

    Maybe it’s just me but this isn’t in the top 10 of “crazy things Trump said”.  I think that may explain part of why the other R’s are having a hard time arguing against it.  In their position I would point out that even though I may disagree with the general idea of a total ban that most Americans are much closer to that opinion than say, Obama’s plan to bring in Syrian immigrants come hell or high water.  I would compare it to the immigration issue as a whole.  Give Trump credit for getting the issue out there (that part would be hard for me lol) and then explain there are effective things that can be done short of an over simplistic total ban.  Stress that keeping Americans safe should take priority over a non-citizen’s resettlement needs.

    • #22
  23. Fricosis Guy Listener
    Fricosis Guy
    @FricosisGuy

    Concretevol:

    Ball Diamond Ball: But this is only true because the other Republicans can’t roll a reporter from talking about Trump to talking about, say, President Obama. Imagine if, instead of being led by the nose, some of these candidates had said “Well, Trump says a lot of things, but have you heard what the president said about [insert latest outrage here]? Talk about unacceptable! In fact, I think that … “

    Totally agree with this BDB, great observation.

    The top contenders did this well in the last debate. Time and again they turned their fire on Obama and Hillary.

    It would’ve been unanimous, save for Kasich and Jeb.

    • #23
  24. Man With the Axe Inactive
    Man With the Axe
    @ManWiththeAxe

    Certain people are imposing a standard on the non-Trump Republican candidates that is impossible to meet, while at the same time imposing no standard whatsoever on Trump.

    The non-Trump candidates are supposed to find a way to react to Trump’s bloviations without responding and also avoid being tarnished by those statements. That’s not how the world works. Regular people, and not just the media, hold it against you when you don’t disavow such statements.

    Example:  “Mr. Obama, do you agree with the black lives matter activists who were chanting for the deaths of policemen?” “Let me tell you my opinion about gun control.”

    “Aha!” would say every Trump supporter on Ricochet. “He agrees with the chanting anti-police crowd.”

    Meanwhile, Trump says every kind of offensive thing that riles up all those people who refuse to think his ideas through to see that they are nonsensical.

    • #24
  25. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Eustace C. Scrubb:But wouldn’t it be awesome if someone uncovered Hillary e-mails that showed she and the Donald were in cahoots? (Probably wouldn’t really bother Hillary OR Donald supporters… but still…)

    Wouldn’t it be awesome if someone uncovered a plan that had Jeb Bush and his family colluding with Hillary to bestow upon her the Liberty Medal ?

    I thought conspiracy theories were banned from Ricochet? Yes? No?

    Not only are your speculations politically stupid*, you like so many other Republicans, completely misdiagnose the Trump problem.

    * [Editors’ Note: If you believe someone has violated the the CoC, flag the comment so moderators and editors can follow-up; do not respond with comments that warrant follow-up themselves.]

    • #25
  26. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    Larry3435:My answer would be: “I think Trump was wrong, but we should consider putting a moratorium on granting visas to people coming directly or indirectly from countries on the state sponsor of terrorism list.”

    This not only distances the candidate from Trump’s looniness, but also presents a serious proposal for consideration, and would probably please Trump supporters who want to see some action taken. The message is, “I can take Trump’s impractical ideas and turn them into something that works.”

    Yeah I like this. Trump could actually help Republicans. Point to Trump as to excessive and Obama as doing nothing and then provide a reasonable mature middle ground policy. This type of thing is in basically every Obama policy speech, it could work for Republicans as well.

    • #26
  27. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    DrewInWisconsin: See how cleverly that was done? And the subhead says they “stop short” of condemning it. Very clever. The message that’s communicated is that the GOP is secretly agreeing with Trump.

    yet on newsmax, this story is running, 64 percent of GOP voters support ban….

    Almost two-thirds of likely 2016 Republican primary voters favor Donald Trump’s call to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the U.S., while more than a third say it makes them more likely to vote for him.

    Those are some of the findings from a Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies PulsePoll, an online survey conducted Tuesday, that shows support at 37 percent among all likely general-election voters for the controversial proposal put forward by the Republican front-runner.

    The GOP voter  has fallen for the Trump gambit.   How does the stink get removed?

    • #27
  28. Herbert Member
    Herbert
    @Herbert

    Jager: Yeah I like this. Trump could actually help Republicans. Point to Trump as to excessive and Obama as doing nothing and then provide a reasonable mature middle ground policy. This type of thing is in basically every Obama policy speech, it could work for Republicans as well

    I like it.   If it is not to late…

    • #28
  29. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Franco:

    Eustace C. Scrubb:But wouldn’t it be awesome if someone uncovered Hillary e-mails that showed she and the Donald were in cahoots? (Probably wouldn’t really bother Hillary OR Donald supporters… but still…)

    Wouldn’t it be awesome if someone uncovered a plan that had Jeb Bush and his family colluding with Hillary to bestow upon her the Liberty Medal ?

    I thought conspiracy theories were banned from Ricochet? Yes? No?

    The “Trump is secretly working for Hillary” idea seems to have gained new life this week. I’m not sure it’s only the tinfoil-hat crowd anymore.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/donald-trump-donations-democrats-hillary-clinton-119071

    • #29
  30. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Herbert: The GOP voter  has fallen for the Trump gambit.   How does the stink get removed?

    You talkin’ ’bout the stinkin’ GOPe?

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.