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. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    After the break he got a little more specific. It sounds like he was explaining his constitutional opinion about how things get resolved to the point where Pence is supposed to certify it. I bet he didn’t say anything different than what he says on the radio all of the time.

    Most likely he didn’t, but just imagine what Liz Cheney and others could edit it into!

    He said he had hired a couple of lawyers who specialize in slander, defamation of character, whatever fancy terms lawyers use. They advised him, he said, to “keep his powder dry“. Levin has made these sorts of comments before, but I don’t think anything ever came of them.

    • #241
  2. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    After the break he got a little more specific. It sounds like he was explaining his constitutional opinion about how things get resolved to the point where Pence is supposed to certify it. I bet he didn’t say anything different than what he says on the radio all of the time.

    Most likely he didn’t, but just imagine what Liz Cheney and others could edit it into!

    He said he had hired a couple of lawyers who specialize in slander, defamation of character, whatever fancy terms lawyers use. They advised him, he said, to “keep his powder dry“. Levin has made these sorts of comments before, but I don’t think anything ever came of them.

    They may have some kind of immunity no matter how far they go.

    • #242
  3. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Threadjacked by comment #5 (and all downhill from there) by the guy that frequently insists on apologies from commenters for their soiling of front page comment sections. And it’s gone on for nine pages now. All very aggressive and unhinged more than usual. It’s almost like he thinks he owns the place now…

    I recommend that everyone bookmark this post because there is a lot of good material in here for future use. (HINT: I can almost guarantee it will be the subject of a deep dive…maybe sometime after the midterms. Keep it handy.)

    • #243
  4. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    philo (View Comment):

    Threadjacked by comment #5 (and all downhill from there) by the guy that frequently insists on apologies from commenters for their soiling of front page comment sections. And it’s gone on for nine pages now. All very aggressive and unhinged more than usual. It’s almost like he thinks he owns the place now…

    I recommend that everyone bookmark this post because there is a lot of good material in here for future use. (HINT: I can almost guarantee it will be the subject of a deep dive…maybe sometime after the midterms. Keep it handy.)

    He sort of reminds me of a gnat on a warm summer evening. Harmless but irritating. You think you’ve managed to crush it between your palms, but 30 seconds later you realize you missed and it’s buzzing around your ear again. 

    • #244
  5. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Threadjacked by comment #5 (and all downhill from there) by the guy that frequently insists on apologies from commenters for their soiling of front page comment sections. And it’s gone on for nine pages now. All very aggressive and unhinged more than usual. It’s almost like he thinks he owns the place now…

    I recommend that everyone bookmark this post because there is a lot of good material in here for future use. (HINT: I can almost guarantee it will be the subject of a deep dive…maybe sometime after the midterms. Keep it handy.)

    He sort of reminds me of a gnat on a warm summer evening. Harmless but irritating. You think you’ve managed to crush it between your palms, but 30 seconds later you realize you missed and it’s buzzing around your ear again.

    Harmless?  Gnats don’t vote for Joe Biden.

    • #245
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    philo (View Comment):

    Threadjacked by comment #5 (and all downhill from there) by the guy that frequently insists on apologies from commenters for their soiling of front page comment sections. And it’s gone on for nine pages now. All very aggressive and unhinged more than usual. It’s almost like he thinks he owns the place now…

    I recommend that everyone bookmark this post because there is a lot of good material in here for future use. (HINT: I can almost guarantee it will be the subject of a deep dive…maybe sometime after the midterms. Keep it handy.)

    Oh my.

    • #246
  7. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    philo (View Comment):

    Threadjacked by comment #5 (and all downhill from there) by the guy that frequently insists on apologies from commenters for their soiling of front page comment sections. And it’s gone on for nine pages now. All very aggressive and unhinged more than usual. It’s almost like he thinks he owns the place now…

    I recommend that everyone bookmark this post because there is a lot of good material in here for future use. (HINT: I can almost guarantee it will be the subject of a deep dive…maybe sometime after the midterms. Keep it handy.)

    Oh my.

    I suppose that’s easier than actually responding to other comments that call your judgments into question.  

    • #247
  8. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    After the break he got a little more specific. It sounds like he was explaining his constitutional opinion about how things get resolved to the point where Pence is supposed to certify it. I bet he didn’t say anything different than what he says on the radio all of the time.

    He seemed particularly irritated at the reporter, but also said he believed that the committee had leaked it to the reporter. He mentioned some ruling years ago regarding libel, maybe Sullivan vs NYTimes? Sounded like he doesn’t have much to work with at this time. 

    • #248
  9. DaveSchmidt Coolidge
    DaveSchmidt
    @DaveSchmidt

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    I wonder if Pelosi didn’t want federal troops because the House leadership wasn’t sure of their loyalty. 

    • #249
  10. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    DaveSchmidt (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    I wonder if Pelosi didn’t want federal troops because the House leadership wasn’t sure of their loyalty.

    I could be wrong, but I think she is just a bitter, nasty piece of work who wouldn’t accept anything from Trump. 

    • #250
  11. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything. 

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded. 

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    • #251
  12. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Stina (View Comment):

    cannot possibly be the only one who has read and heard reported that based on intelligence reports Trump had received he offered troops to protect the Capitol two days prior to the actual demonstrations, offered to both Pelosi and whoever that it is that is mayor of DC. Both declined according to the reports I’ve read.

    You are not. Gary’s contention seems to be that Pelosi changed her mind 24 hours later and Trump pussy-footed around with the request and failed to deliver on time.

    A lot of bollocks that.

    But even if true and it takes more than 24 hours to honor such a request, Pence following it through would have been right on time. I don’t see how he can use this as evidence that Trump staged an insurrection. I have nothing nice to say about Gary’s intelligence.

    Exactly, these are civilian soldiers who aren’t on alert to deploy. Governors would have to release them. Congress pissed off several governors after Jan 6 and they recalled their troops because of how they were being treated. 

    • #252
  13. Red Herring Coolidge
    Red Herring
    @EHerring

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    • #253
  14. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    McCarthy, along with The Turtle, is one of those we need to send to the back bench. Trump owes you nothing other than a middle-finger salute. 

    • #254
  15. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    • #255
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    Only the Left can do stuff like that.

    • #256
  17. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    Only the Left can do stuff like that.

    Unless the Left says, Oh, but you should have!

    • #257
  18. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    Only the Left can do stuff like that.

    Unless the Left says, Oh, but you should have!

    And of course, if he had, that would have been terrible.

    • #258
  19. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    Only the Left can do stuff like that.

    Unless the Left says, Oh, but you should have!

    Seriously. For his entire presidency I heard DJT was a facist; those on the left never screamed louder than when he didn’t take the opportunity to act like one.

    • #259
  20. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    Red Herring (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    Do what?

    Why, to explain why he didn’t violate the Constitution and the established legal procedures for using US soldiers on American soil, I guess.

    Only the Left can do stuff like that.

    Unless the Left says, Oh, but you should have!

    Seriously. For his entire presidency I heard he was a facist; those on the left never screamed louder than when he didn’t take the opportunity to act like one.

    And now Joe isn’t one, while BEING one.

    • #260
  21. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    The Republican explanations of why the security was bad make sense to me.

    The Democrat explanations make no sense to me.

    Trump wanted National Guard there and he did everything he was supposed to to make that happen.

    And yet, once the Capitol was overrun it took some 187 minutes for Trump to do anything.

    It is almost as if Trump was hoping that the rioters would have succeeded.

    When Kevin McCarthy called Trump, Trump told McCarthy, well it looks as if the rioters care more about the election than you.

    Trump has some [ex]plaining to do …

    This is literally the only point the other side has. And he never wanted it to come to this. This is all about him not using Twitter fast enough.

    • #261
  22. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    I, for one am looking forward to the hearings today.  I will be wearing my “TEAM CHENEY” t-shirt with the symbol of Wyoming’s bucking horse and rider on it.

    • #262
  23. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    More aggressive trolling. Meet the new boss…

    • #263
  24. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I, for one am looking forward to the hearings today. I will be wearing my “TEAM CHENEY” t-shirt with the symbol of Wyoming’s bucking horse and rider on it.

    She won’t go out with you, bro.

    • #264
  25. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    The reporter used the term “mastermind” as if Levin thought it up and was taking all kinds of initiative.

    I think he was just offering his opinion on the constitution and trying to keep what they were doing constructive and logical. The Democrats, for two decades haven’t give a damn about behaving that way. 

    • #265
  26. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    The reporter used the term “mastermind” as if Levin thought it up and was taking all kinds of initiative.

    I think he was just offering his opinion on the constitution and trying to keep what they were doing constructive and logical. The Democrats, for two decades haven’t give a damn about behaving that way.

    Was there ever anything more than an effort to have state officials re-examine the voting data and the certification process to assure legal validity of what had been certified?

    • #266
  27. Stina Member
    Stina
    @CM

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Mark Levin is currently on a rant about these “lying bastards”. Evidently someone on the committee has leaked something about one of his private emails. More to come, assuming I can follow it.

    The reporter used some dramatic language to describe it, like he was attempting something beyond legal angles. It was emails with John Eastman.

    The reporter used the term “mastermind” as if Levin thought it up and was taking all kinds of initiative.

    I think he was just offering his opinion on the constitution and trying to keep what they were doing constructive and logical. The Democrats, for two decades haven’t give a damn about behaving that way.

    Was there ever anything more than an effort to have state officials re-examine the voting data and the certification process to assure legal validity of what had been certified?

    It seemed to me people were just doing what was expected without much thought. The media declares the winner, the electors do the ritualistic vote, the legislature signs it, the VP counts it. Prim, proper, more ritual than process.

    I thought the push to re-evaluate was to get the VP and legislatures to not just phone it in. There’s reason for these steps and there’s more to it than empty ceremony. The media doesn’t determine who wins. The electoral college protects the vote from fraud. The legislature isn’t just a write off. There are places to stop and halt if something is funky about the vote.

    Otherwise, this country could so easily be hijacked given how insecure our voting process is.

    • #267
  28. DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Unapologetic Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Stina (View Comment):

    Otherwise, this country could so easily be hijacked given how insecure our voting process is.

    Already has been hijacked.

    • #268
  29. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

    • #269
  30. AMD Texas Coolidge
    AMD Texas
    @DarinJohnson

    E. Kent Golding (View Comment):

    I like Peggy Noonan. She has a great way with words, and sometimes has great ideas and other times truly awful ideas. I enjoy her prose, much like I enjoy Kevin Williamson and Jonah Goldburg. Kevin and Jonah are behind pay walls that I am unwilling to pay to breach.

    I trust my own judgement to consider their ideas, and reject the bad ones and use the good ones. I neither need to accept all their ideas as brilliant or reject all their ideas as evil, idiocy or treason.

    Trump was a great president. However, he mishandled the messaging of Covid, trusted ( or at least didn’t fire ) healthcare advisors who successfully undermined him, and bungled his re-election. I truly believe there was a tremendous amount of fraud and corruption in the election, but I also know he inspired enough hate that he may have lost the election even without the fraud. I voted for him.

    I think he should pass on 2024, and if he does run I think the Republicans should pass on him. I am not convinced that he can win the general in 2024, and if he does win, he is still too old and too focused on revenge for 2020. There are a handful of young Republican contenders that would be better candidates than 2024 Trump and better presidents than 2024-2028 Trump.

     

    This

    • #270
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.