Thank You, Peggy Noonan

 

I had just wandered through a generally so-so observation about patrician and plebeian elements in our present political situation. I was not sure that I had made my points clear enough for the normal pleb to grasp fully (we are generally too preoccupied with life’s minor distractions such as rent, food, and selecting the right brand of beer).

But one can always count on their betters to provide. So Peggy Noonan was kind enough to write a Wall Street Journal piece that explains it much better than I. She, of course, is an established member of the GOP Order of Patricians and her concern was about the unwashed plebs generally known as Trump voters. Hope among her fellow elitists was that more and more of this group would abandon the notion of the former president seeking the office again in 2024, that support for him would fade and he would pass from the public’s eye. As it is turning out, that simply isn’t happening. In fact, it appears to some that their numbers might even be growing.

This is so despite the continuous dumping on the former president. Or maybe even because of it. The latest anti-Trump production is turning into a huge disappointment. It actually seems to have the opposite effect intended. Interest in the show trial sometimes called the J6 hearings has been weak and far below what was hoped for. In fact, it is probably having the opposite effect. Only the most gullible or pre-disposed believe in them and for the rest they are far too transparent. For most, they leave the distinct impression of Star Chamber episodes intended not to learn anything but to influence an election by removing a leading candidate. Plebs must be protected from their limited intellects by narrowing their choices to only acceptable options.

In any case, Trump is actually increasing in support from this sideshow. So a fresh approach in pleb management has shown its face recently. That is to agree that the plebs do have some real concerns and that maybe the down and dirty Trump demeanor helped to create attention for them. But now he has served his purpose and it is time for candidates with smoother edges to carry the banner. For the moment, they are even willing to accept some candidates who might be a little “Trumpy” themselves as long as they are not the original. For the moment, that is.

But in the end, the real call will be for “reasonable” candidates who can hopefully worm their way into those “purple” vote without really confronting the matters that will change us as a nation and having to win a thoughtful and passionate argument for Liberty. You know, the kind of candidates who made Trump possible in 2016, the kind who knows in his (or hers, or …..) heart that something can be worked out to get us by if the patricians were left to bargain among themselves.

Noonan knows enough to begin every con job with a compliment, sort of. She is impressed that every Trump voter does love America even if it is “not always been a fully thought-through love but it’s generally fully felt”. She even concedes that this is “admirable”, even if the thought process was so incomplete. So plebeian. If it got any more simple-minded, it would be on my level.

A little deeper into the piece one is able to get a clearer picture of the patrician view of those millions upon millions of the GOP base who are so regularly called on by the party elites but rarely listened to. She tries to reinforce the Dem contention that Trump was told by all reasonable and sane people that the 2020 election was fair and square but he chose to listen instead to a collection of “kooks, crooks and freaks” which was not hard to find since “Trumpworld has more than most”.

Her appeal to wayward plebs is to drop Trump or lose the shining chance to dominate in the coming elections. Everything is so very bad that just about any Republican will surely win. Any except, of course, Trump. “Only Trump” would lose.

But the truth is as soon as Trump can be eliminated, the patricians will begin to try and thin out any of the other non-conformists with plebeian tendencies. Before the discussion is over they will hope to be back to the old standard GOP patrician because they could win “in the middle”. You know, that legendary middle where gun rights can be narrowed, where new entitlements have been created, where “comprehensive” immigration reform lives, where government dollars represent educational concern, where … Oh, hell my simple mind and stubby fingers are over-loaded … You can fill in the rest.

What is so desperately needed is a clear, objective American agenda for all, with disregard for who you are speaking to. The principles of the Founding and the principles which build successful lives will reach all levels of society.

The great swath of middle America that I have spoken of very much feels the loss of our Constitution even if the patricians don’t. The party elites have yet to realize that MAGA is not a Trump thing. It is a grassroots American plebeian thing. Trump simply put a slogan behind it and then did his best to implement it.

The Peggy Noonans still talk and act as if this was about a loose-mouthed billionaire and not the saving of the republic as founded. But they do sense the shift away from them and that is what they hate, what they fight against. If Trump is at the head of the column or not is hardly the central question. The real question is the uncompromising direction of the column.

We might be in a dangerous position with our future but more and more I believe that the people who will make the long-term difference have finally realized that the damage done to us by the “warriors” on their side, it is not near the problem as the damage done by the cowards and blinded on ours. Hopefully, Noonan will save her condescension for her own kind.

By the way, if any of you fellow plebs actually want to read the Noonan column you will find it behind a paywall. Unless you have the devious computer skills to bypass “the wall”, you will have to take my word for the content of the piece. Otherwise, you can join me in some simple plebeian pleasure as I take off these smelly socks, let the air hit these more than smelly feet, pour three, possibly four fingers in a cup, and soak up the quiet of an evening that has finally begun to cool.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 375 comments.

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

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):
    She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Exactly. Talk about public policy. Socialism and populism are a problem for actual reasons

    • #181
  2. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Democrats ran a five year coup against Trump and scored a win. I want the win to be temporary to send them a lesson. I feel like the only way to do that is re-elect Trump and let him undo all Biden’s EOs and fire all his appointments. Besides, I liked the good he did.  

    • #182
  3. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Stina (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Yesterday an ABC/Ipsos poll stated that 58% of Americans felt that Trump should be charged with a crime for his role in the January 6th Attacks, while 40% disagreed. This is not that 58% of Americans would vote against Trump, this was that 58% believe that Trump should be prosecuted! And yet you suggest that Trump should be nominated when 58% of Americans can imagine Trump being incarcerated? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-americans-trump-charged-jan-riot-poll/story?id=85482369.

    Breaking this down, even 19% of Republicans want to see Trump prosecuted. Since a Republican can lose less than 10% of the Republican base and win a general election, over twice that number not only oppose Trump politically but want to see him prosecuted. (91% of Democrats would like to see Trump prosecuted, compared with 62% of Independents.)

    I don’t recall any poll where 62% of Independents wanted Romney, McCain, George W. Bush or Dole prosecuted; only Trump.

    Republicans can lose with Trump or win with DeSantis (or another Republican). Choose wisely.

    ABC viewers are not a representative crossection of American voters.

    It was a poll of all Americans, not of ABC viewers. https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/americans-think-jan-6-committee-fair-are-not-following-it

    Here’s the question:

    “As you may know, Donald Trump encouraged his supporters to march to the U.S. Capitol on January 6th, where the riot followed. Do you think Trump should be charged with a crime for his role in this incident, or do you think he should not be charged”

    LMAO.

    • #183
  4. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Red Herring (View Comment):
    Democrats ran a five year coup against Trump and scored a win.

    Totally 100% true.

    People in Gary’s camp don’t care.

    He was entitled to govern and he wasn’t allowed.

    • #184
  5. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    • #185
  6. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Why is that point continually ignored? 

    Now that I’ve typed the question a thought popped up. The GOPe regards the conditions that brought Trump to the presidency as ideal. They have worked hard with Demo-rats to bring those conditions about. To the GOPe Trump and his supporters are the problems. 

    • #186
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    We did every single thing wrong in the face of the wage deflation and job destruction from automation and globalized labor.

    Every single institution is failing from a libertarian and conservative point of view. 

    The GOPe doesn’t care.

    Say something original about public policy.

    • #187
  8. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    My guess is that Trump, when exonerated, will toss the nomination to someone else. If not exonerated the Democrats are likely to win as their vast legal and illegal voting will carry the day. Without Trump’s support, a lot of Trump supporters will stay home. What idiots here do not understand is that the Republic will be over, finished, kaput! It won’t be Biden, but it’ll be some weak candidate the top can agree on, but he’ll still win. We need Trump exonerated and then we need him to endorse one of our excellent candidates. If he still chooses to run, and he might, he needs everyone’s support. He can win. Do folks think that the Democrats and foolish Republicans are going after Trump because he can’t win? Folks if we don’t win, this is the last election our country will have that matters. I do not understand why that is not obvious. Even those who have never lived abroad should understand where we’re headed.

    How about this:

    1. Trump is not going to be exonerated. Trump’s voice started the “Big Lie.” His fingerprints are all over the Capitol riot. He isn’t going to be exonerated.
    2. The Democrats policies are wrong for America.
    3. Trump voters are too smart to stay home.
    4. There is a substantial minority of Republicans who will never support Trump.
    5. Trump is the first Republican candidate who did not win a majority of Republican voters in the 2016 primary.
    6. This will not be out last election.

    There are a whole bunch of popular Republicans who have an excellent record as being Governor without sparking a riot in their capitols. DeSantis, Kemp, Abbott, Pence, Kemp, Ducey, Little, Christie, Romney, Baker, Hogan, Sununu. Pick one of them and win.

    Or you can stick to Trump and lose.

    It really is that easy.

    Choose wisely.

    Why isn’t Kristi Noem on that list?

    Good question. Perhaps add the former South Carolina governor and Indiana’s Daniel’s.

    If Trump does run, maybe one of these two could be his running mate and DeSantis can stay in Florida.

    • #188
  9. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion here about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Mea culpa on your first point. I couldn’t lash back at Noonan for her condescending remarks but had had my fill of GR’s condescension and could reply to him  

    Agree with everything in your second point. 

    • #189
  10. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Django (View Comment):

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Why is that point continually ignored?

    Now that I’ve typed the question a thought popped up. The GOPe regards the conditions that brought Trump to the presidency as ideal. They have worked hard with Demo-rats to bring those conditions about. To the GOPe Trump and his supporters are the problems.

    Well yes, they are busy supporting that war in Ukraine and other international intrigues while remaining oblivious to the Domestic Threat posed by the Democrats and the Communists with whom they have joined forces.

    • #190
  11. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    My guess is that Trump, when exonerated, will toss the nomination to someone else. If not exonerated the Democrats are likely to win as their vast legal and illegal voting will carry the day. Without Trump’s support, a lot of Trump supporters will stay home. What idiots here do not understand is that the Republic will be over, finished, kaput! It won’t be Biden, but it’ll be some weak candidate the top can agree on, but he’ll still win. We need Trump exonerated and then we need him to endorse one of our excellent candidates. If he still chooses to run, and he might, he needs everyone’s support. He can win. Do folks think that the Democrats and foolish Republicans are going after Trump because he can’t win? Folks if we don’t win, this is the last election our country will have that matters. I do not understand why that is not obvious. Even those who have never lived abroad should understand where we’re headed.

    How about this:

    There are a whole bunch of popular Republicans who have an excellent record as being Governor without sparking a riot in their capitols. DeSantis, Kemp, Abbott, Pence, Kemp, Ducey, Little, Christie, Romney, Baker, Hogan, Sununu. Pick one of them and win.

    Or you can stick to Trump and lose.

    It really is that easy.

    Choose wisely.

    Why isn’t Kristi Noem on that list?

    Good question. Perhaps add the former South Carolina governor and Indiana’s Daniel’s.

    If Trump does run, maybe one of these two could be his running mate and DeSantis can stay in Florida.

    I said this a while back over in the PIT and I still think I’m correct. Trump has to take head on the fact that he’ll serve only one term if re-elected. He should make clear that his VP will be a co-president in the sense that he (or she) will be involved in every part of the job. Yes, Trump will make the decisions, but the VP will be at his side, sort of on-the-job training. It has to be someone the public believes could take over without missing a step. Trump has to clean up his act a bit, drop some weight, and dispel concerns about his age. If I had my way, the VP would be DeSantis and Trump would resign after two years plus a day or two and we’d have a chance at 10 years of a DeSantis presidency. 

    • #191
  12. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    In Wisconsin, Trump lost by 20,000 votes.  But Republican Senator Ron Johnson pointed out that Republican candidates for the legislature had a total of twice that number of votes statewide.  Tens of thousands of Republican voters simply refused to vote for Trump; some voted for Biden, others voted third party, others left that race blank.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. We are told that those 20,000 votes were stolen away from Trump. We go round and round in circles. For example, we get this apparent gaffe:

    During his waning White House days, then-President Donald Trump once privately acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 election, according to a former aide.

    In an apparent contradiction with his public grumblings about the 2020 election being rigged, he blurted out, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” while viewing his rival President Joe Biden on TV, former White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

    I expect Ms. Griffin will now need to be attacked. We go round and round…

     

    • #192
  13. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    In Wisconsin, Trump lost by 20,000 votes. But Republican Senator Ron Johnson pointed out that Republican candidates for the legislature had a total of twice that number of votes statewide. Tens of thousands of Republican voters simply refused to vote for Trump; some voted for Biden, others voted third party, others left that race blank.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. We are told that those 20,000 votes were stolen away from Trump. We go round and round in circles. For example, we get this apparent gaffe:

    During his waning White House days, then-President Donald Trump once privately acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 election, according to a former aide.

    In an apparent contradiction with his public grumblings about the 2020 election being rigged, he blurted out, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” while viewing his rival President Joe Biden on TV, former White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

    I expect Ms. Griffin will now need to be attacked. We go round and round…

     

    The issue is the characterization of an offhand comment, not Griffin.

    • #193
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    Speech is great.  Rioting, assaulting police officers, and using physical force is not. 

    As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    • #194
  15. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion here about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Mea culpa on your first point. I couldn’t lash back at Noonan for her condescending remarks but had had my fill of GR’s condescension and could reply to him

    Agree with everything in your second point.

    Condescension?  Nah.  We just disagree, that’s all.  

    • #195
  16. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    In Wisconsin, Trump lost by 20,000 votes. But Republican Senator Ron Johnson pointed out that Republican candidates for the legislature had a total of twice that number of votes statewide. Tens of thousands of Republican voters simply refused to vote for Trump; some voted for Biden, others voted third party, others left that race blank.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. We are told that those 20,000 votes were stolen away from Trump. We go round and round in circles. For example, we get this apparent gaffe:

    During his waning White House days, then-President Donald Trump once privately acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 election, according to a former aide.

    In an apparent contradiction with his public grumblings about the 2020 election being rigged, he blurted out, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” while viewing his rival President Joe Biden on TV, former White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

    I expect Ms. Griffin will now need to be attacked. We go round and round…

    I fully expect that the full blast of Trump World will be aimed at her.  Threats, slander, the full nine yards.  Her statement cannot be allowed to stand by Trump World, truth be damned.

    • #196
  17. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I fully expect that the full blast of Trump World will be aimed at her. Threats, slander, the full nine yards. Her statement cannot be allowed to stand by Trump World, truth be damned.

    What the hell is “Trump World”? I am so [Redacted] sick of these stupid little shorthand slanders that we’re all supposed to understand but which are essentially meaningless.

    • #197
  18. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    Speech is great. Rioting, assaulting police officers, and using physical force is not.

    As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    #s 2 &  3 are simply a pejorative phrasing of the exercise of constitutional rights.  As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    Ignoring the tens of thousands who did not riot, and claiming that Trump specifically summoned “ rioters,” is just the usual Bulwarkian BS that we’re used to.

    • #198
  19. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    In Wisconsin, Trump lost by 20,000 votes. But Republican Senator Ron Johnson pointed out that Republican candidates for the legislature had a total of twice that number of votes statewide. Tens of thousands of Republican voters simply refused to vote for Trump; some voted for Biden, others voted third party, others left that race blank.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. We are told that those 20,000 votes were stolen away from Trump. We go round and round in circles. For example, we get this apparent gaffe:

    During his waning White House days, then-President Donald Trump once privately acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 election, according to a former aide.

    In an apparent contradiction with his public grumblings about the 2020 election being rigged, he blurted out, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” while viewing his rival President Joe Biden on TV, former White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

    I expect Ms. Griffin will now need to be attacked. We go round and round…

    I fully expect that the full blast of Trump World will be aimed at her. Threats, slander, the full nine yards. Her statement cannot be allowed to stand by Trump World, truth be damned.

    I have my own opinion about the timing of when she resigned from the trump White House and her behavior since then.

    • #199
  20. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion here about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Mea culpa on your first point. I couldn’t lash back at Noonan for her condescending remarks but had had my fill of GR’s condescension and could reply to him

    Agree with everything in your second point.

    Condescension? Nah. We just disagree, that’s all.

    It’s a little more than that, Gary. You work hard to skirt factual issues that don’t comport with your false narrative of events. I asked you a question about whether the persons in charge of Capitol security were questioned publicly by the Jan6 Committee. This is important since you insist that we all should tune in to these hearings.

    • #200
  21. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    In Wisconsin, Trump lost by 20,000 votes. But Republican Senator Ron Johnson pointed out that Republican candidates for the legislature had a total of twice that number of votes statewide. Tens of thousands of Republican voters simply refused to vote for Trump; some voted for Biden, others voted third party, others left that race blank.

    Ah, but there’s the rub. We are told that those 20,000 votes were stolen away from Trump. We go round and round in circles. For example, we get this apparent gaffe:

    During his waning White House days, then-President Donald Trump once privately acknowledged his defeat in the 2020 election, according to a former aide.

    In an apparent contradiction with his public grumblings about the 2020 election being rigged, he blurted out, “Can you believe I lost to this guy?” while viewing his rival President Joe Biden on TV, former White House Director of Strategic Communications Alyssa Farah Griffin told CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday.

    I expect Ms. Griffin will now need to be attacked. We go round and round…

    I fully expect that the full blast of Trump World will be aimed at her. Threats, slander, the full nine yards. Her statement cannot be allowed to stand by Trump World, truth be damned.

    When did you start caring about truth?  Is this the dawn of a new day?

    I would add that one of the reasons that you have a number of “special friends” is that your posts/comments are often replete with distortions, untruths, exaggerations, and misleading information.  See the latest discussion of the laughable poll on Trump’s alleged criminality, for example.  Those friends are simply acting to set the record straight.

    • #201
  22. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    philo (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    The amount of material excerpted in an earlier post appearing here from the paywalled editorial is beyond any reasonable interpretation of fair use and is, in effect, stealing. … It appears that the first usage was allowed to stand on the site, so now we get a second. Sad.

    Not long ago I wondered aloud (well, in typed commentary) about how much latitude a Member could buy here (i.e. with some unknown number of empty $500 gift memberships to funnel needed cash to the host). I still wonder.

    P.S. I wish he would at least learn how to use the “paste as plain text” function when executing yet another conspicuous threadjacking.

    That “I still wonder” part really was sarcasm…now, six pages of inanity later, I think it is clear that someone certainly believes he is entitled to unlimited latitude. I’m not sure he is mistaken.

    • #202
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    Maybe Pete Buttigig running with the campaign slogan, “What, me worry?”

    I see he’s threatening the airlines this morning.

    He’s in a serious technical job and he has zero technical knowledge about his job.

    Bad reputation as mayor.

    One wonders what he’s good at.

    “Don’t say ‘gay.'”

    • #203
  24. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    Maybe Pete Buttigig running with the campaign slogan, “What, me worry?”

    I see he’s threatening the airlines this morning.

    He’s in a serious technical job and he has zero technical knowledge about his job.

    Bad reputation as mayor.

    One wonders what he’s good at.

    “Don’t say ‘gay.’”

    Isn’t that what “Pride month” is about?

     

    • #204
  25. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    Speech is great. Rioting, assaulting police officers, and using physical force is not.

    As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    You need to draw that distinction since a small minority of rally attendees were involved and the violence wasn’t spontaneous but preplanned and I bet many of them went or the violence, not the rally. We know the Dems planned their own violent actions. 

    • #205
  26. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Yesterday an ABC/Ipsos poll stated that 58% of Americans felt that Trump should be charged with a crime for his role in the January 6th Attacks, while 40% disagreed. This is not that 58% of Americans would vote against Trump, this was that 58% believe that Trump should be prosecuted! And yet you suggest that Trump should be nominated when 58% of Americans can imagine Trump being incarcerated? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/10-americans-trump-charged-jan-riot-poll/story?id=85482369.

    Breaking this down, even 19% of Republicans want to see Trump prosecuted. Since a Republican can lose less than 10% of the Republican base and win a general election, over twice that number not only oppose Trump politically but want to see him prosecuted. (91% of Democrats would like to see Trump prosecuted, compared with 62% of Independents.)

    I don’t recall any poll where 62% of Independents wanted Romney, McCain, George W. Bush or Dole prosecuted; only Trump.

    Republicans can lose with Trump or win with DeSantis (or another Republican). Choose wisely.

    Then they will lose. I won’t stab Trump in the back to win an election. He deserves better. Evidently 19% of Republicans don’t deserve better and I won’t give it to them. 

    • #206
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):

    My guess is that Trump, when exonerated, will toss the nomination to someone else. If not exonerated the Democrats are likely to win as their vast legal and illegal voting will carry the day. Without Trump’s support, a lot of Trump supporters will stay home. What idiots here do not understand is that the Republic will be over, finished, kaput! It won’t be Biden, but it’ll be some weak candidate the top can agree on, but he’ll still win. We need Trump exonerated and then we need him to endorse one of our excellent candidates. If he still chooses to run, and he might, he needs everyone’s support. He can win. Do folks think that the Democrats and foolish Republicans are going after Trump because he can’t win? Folks if we don’t win, this is the last election our country will have that matters. I do not understand why that is not obvious. Even those who have never lived abroad should understand where we’re headed.

    How about this:

    1. Trump is not going to be exonerated. Trump’s voice started the “Big Lie.” His fingerprints are all over the Capitol riot. He isn’t going to be exonerated.
    2. The Democrats policies are wrong for America.
    3. Trump voters are too smart to stay home.
    4. There is a substantial minority of Republicans who will never support Trump.
    5. Trump is the first Republican candidate who did not win a majority of Republican voters in the 2016 primary.
    6. This will not be out last election.

    There are a whole bunch of popular Republicans who have an excellent record as being Governor without sparking a riot in their capitols. DeSantis, Kemp, Abbott, Pence, Kemp, Ducey, Little, Christie, Romney, Baker, Hogan, Sununu. Pick one of them and win.

    Or you can stick to Trump and lose.

    It really is that easy.

    Choose wisely.

    All you care about is winning elections. You don’t know where to draw the line in the sand and tell others they better not cross it. The only person on your list I would want to see in the White House is DeSantis, and I have already stated my desire to keep him as Governor. I will give you the same advice, choose wisely or lose. RINO establishment has extorted my vote for the last time. By saying your ilk would let prefer a Dem win over Trump tells me we aren’t on the same team.

    There you go.

    • #207
  28. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    Speech is great. Rioting, assaulting police officers, and using physical force is not.

    As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    #s 2 & 3 are simply a pejorative phrasing of the exercise of constitutional rights. As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    Ignoring the tens of thousands who did not riot, and claiming that Trump specifically summoned “ rioters,” is just the usual Bulwarkian BS that we’re used to.

    I am far more of the Dispatch crew than the Bulwark crew.  Oh well.

    • #208
  29. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Postmodern Hoplite (View Comment):

    Here’s what I can’t figure out:

    1. Why isn’t the discussion here about the merits (or lack thereof) of Peggy Noonan’s WSJ piece, as referenced in by @ olesummers in the OP above?

    2. Isn’t there another post currently on the Member Feed for arguing with @ garyrobbins about all things Trump? Why does THIS thread have to duplicate that other one?

    Here’s what I can figure out:

    I’ve read the Noonan piece in its entirety in the hard-copy WSJ. (Yeah, I’m kinda stupid like that, but I love the feel of actual newsprint in my hands…) I believe she makes her arguments in good faith. However, she is condescending as HEL*, and seems oblivious to the fact that an awful lot of the people she is ostensibly talking to don’t trust her…and the REALLY don’t trust the J6 proceedings. She and the GOPe she speaks for haven’t yet addressed the conditions that made Trump possible. He is a symptom, not the disease.

    Mea culpa on your first point. I couldn’t lash back at Noonan for her condescending remarks but had had my fill of GR’s condescension and could reply to him

    Agree with everything in your second point.

    Condescension? Nah. We just disagree, that’s all.

    It’s a little more than that, Gary. You work hard to skirt factual issues that don’t comport with your false narrative of events. I asked you a question about whether the persons in charge of Capitol security were questioned publicly by the Jan6 Committee. This is important since you insist that we all should tune in to these hearings.

    I have no idea, I don’t serve on that Committee, however I fully expect that this issue will be investigated in the next Congress.

    • #209
  30. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Trump started the Big Lie on Election Night.

    Trump summoned the rioters to come to DC on 1/6.

    Trump assembled the rioters on 1/6.

    Trump targeted the rioters at the Capitol on 1/6.

    Trump refused to defend the Capitol for hours after it was overrun on 1/6.

    Why are you so opposed to the exercise of First Amendment rights?

    Speech is great. Rioting, assaulting police officers, and using physical force is not.

    As a lawyer, certainly you can draw that distinction.

    You need to draw that distinction since a small minority of rally attendees were involved and the violence wasn’t spontaneous but preplanned and I bet many of them went or the violence, not the rally. We know the Dems planned their own violent actions.

    And how about Trump’s dereliction of duty to protect the Capitol after it was overrun?

    • #210
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.