Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Credo, ut Intelligam
“Tessellations,” MC Escher
I had the true pleasure of meeting a provocative and charming cadre of the Ricochetti in Manchester, New Hampshire recently at the Ricochet/National Review get together. Greetings to all my new friends! It was deeply satisfying to be with such sparkling, philosophically compatible company.
But here is a confession I have to make. When Charles Cooke, in the warmup act to the GLoP podcast, rhapsodized about how smart and noble National Review’s Donald Trump lynching issue was, there was someone in the front row who audibly (as audibly as possible) hissed.
That was me.
I have already written about my disapproval of the National Review issue (The conservative elite chooses irrelevance) and have discussed it many times with my co-host Todd Feinburg on the Harvard Lunch Club Political Podcast (for example, here).
But listening to the Goldberg, Long and Podhoretz (i.e., GLoP) podcast (Which, by the way, was completely hysterical!) I was at one point struck with a sense of déjà vu when John Podhoretz, referring to the looming end of the Trump fad and the logically ensuing conundrum the Trump supporters would soon encounter, opined as follows:
I’m wondering if, as I hope, the Trump bubble bursts, or he fizzles or whatever, how some of the people who have gone all in in this way are going to put the genie back in the bottle. Because there’s two sides to it: obviously you can support a candidate who loses and go on to support somebody else, that’s part of what happens in a winnowing process in a primary … but obviously there’s something about the temperature of the Trump supporter, that makes the idea of walking back … or getting back into the regular world [very difficult].
This is a textbook example of projection. I don’t mean that this is projection as a kind of literary metaphor. I mean that Mr. Podhoretz is deeply troubled by the prospect of Donald Trump becoming the Republican nominee. He is confronting the possibility of having to choose between Trump and Hillary Clinton. He has been over-the-top vitriolic toward Trump for months. And so he has a genie of his own to put back into a bottle.
I have enormous respect for Podhoretz and have looked to him as an inspiration and ally in all manner of battles over the past many years. So let me be clear (and eschew my normal, snarky cynicism) that I feel no rancor toward him.
As for my déjà vu regarding Podhoretz’s dilemma, here (forgive the somewhat lengthy quote) is what I said in What Will Capitulation of the GOP Establishment Look Like? back in November:
How do Karl Rove and George Will and Charles Krauthammer and Jonah Goldberg and Kevin Williamson (et tu, Kevin?) and Bret Stephens and Daniel Henninger – oh, why not just throw in the whole Wall Street Journal editorial board? – I could go on, but you get the idea. How do these and so many more venerable conservatives reach that final stage (Kubler Ross is trite, I know) of acceptance of the nomination of Donald Trump?
How does Henninger walk back the remark of saying Trump is “beyond the pale” for politicizing 9/11?
How does Goldberg escape his remark that Trump is like a “cat trained to [urinate] in a human toilet?”
During the general election, how does Will equivocate when asked about his remark that “nothing is now more virtuous than scrubbing, as soon as possible, the Trump stain from public life.”
In short, how do these pundits and many more deal with the extreme vituperation they have spewed toward Trump’s candidacy to date?
Because walk back, escape, equivocate and deal with is what they will inevitably be doing if Trump wins the nomination.
Because the alternative is Hillary Clinton. And, assuming you have no power or vested interest that is going to evaporate if Trump is elected (part of the problem, of course, is that many actually do) then it is foolish to think you really have a choice. Here are two words in case you think you do: Supreme Court.
So forget the despicable GOP money men who have illegal alien maids (we all remember Meg Whitman) or business owners who employ Dollar-Store-priced illegal alien workers. Let’s just concentrate on the honorable, intelligent and wise conservative writers who have developed a gestalt from which they cannot escape — a Quinian web where each new piece of evidence is guaranteed to support the existing conclusion because of the escalating rage that has gone into its formation. How do they escape?
First, what might tempt them to want to escape?
Consider Larry Kudlow’s anecdote about the humanity of Trump, who met him walking down 5th Ave. when Kudlow had been fired and he was despondent and Trump offered him some valuable unsolicited encouragement. Consider the integrity of Donald Trump’s children, especially the bright light of Ivanka. More than anything, go to a Trump event (as the venerable Mark Steyn did recently) and soak in the enthusiasm of the Children of Paradise. Yes, they might be vulgar. Yes, they are uneducated. And, oh yes, they are profoundly unsophisticated.
But blend yourself in, listen to their chatter and their concerns and try as hard as you can to sneer at them. Good luck. If you can then I have nothing more to say to you.
Because here’s the deal. Donald Trump is a man, much like other men. He is vain and irascible. He is spoiled and not deeply intellectual. He can be warm and charming. He can be vulgar. But Trump is not Rasputin.
Trump is campaigning on a set of policies. They are not always so consistent with the many comments he has made throughout his career. But even if they’re not, even if they are thinly developed, they are clear enough to have attracted millions of Americans to his side. They have also attracted the very gold standard of the conservative movement, Jeff Sessions to his side. If you, you distinguished conservative writer or you, you conservative housewife, have truly painted yourself into an emotional corner and interpret every new shred of evidence as proving that Trump is Mussolini, then you are in a very bad place indeed. It is not a bad place for Trump. It is a bad place for you.
Consider what Augustine said: “Credo, ut intelligam.” I believe, in order that I may understand. Perhaps you will find your way out.
Here is one other shallow piece of schmaltz that perhaps will help you:
No Drugs, No Alcohol, No Cigarettes.
Trump 2016!
Published in General
If the choice is Hillary or Trump, they are not equally horrible, Hillary is far worse.
With Hillary:
We have seen how Hillary co-otped the State Department into allowing and covering for her “home-brew” server, can anyone believe that she would not use the rest of the government in the same way?
Hillary will have allies that do not exist for Trump. Her allies include the press, and the Democratic Party which has shown itself to be disinterested in limited government or control of the executive. Trump clearly will be opposed by the press and many in the Republican party will block his attempts to acquire more executive power. The courts will also resist Trump, and will enable Clinton.
Trump is not my choice Rubio is.
Thank you, Michael. It is now easier to understand your point for view. I agree that illegal immigration is a major problem, and that securing our borders is essential. However, expulsion of millions of illegals from the country may well be impossible. I believe that many, like Cruz and Rubio, both understand the impossibility of such a venture and have far too much integrity to espouse it or even suggest that it could be accomplished. Trump, on the other hand, with little or no knowledge of the problem, and no integrity, has no problem saying that he will do it.
If that is the only reason you support him, I respectfully think you might want to look at your priorities.
I have not said that anyone’s response is completely emotional. I have said that many Trump critics reflexively interpret evidence to reinforce conclusions that they already hold. The same can be said of Trump supporters or indeed people with any strongly held belief (e.g. God or not God). Opinions may begin with evidence but eventually the interpretation of the evidence is conditioned on the opinion.
But the rhetoric against Trump expressed by much of the conservative commentariat is wildly out of proportion to opposition to a candidate. No one refers to Ted Cruz’s campaign as a “clown car.” No one talks about Rubio as a “cat who has learned to [urinate] in a toilet.”
What matters, 95% of what matters, is what the next President will actually do in office. And as I say, between Trump and Hillary there is just no choice.
For the next four years, there is probably true, but I fear a Trump presidency will destroy the GOP as proving everything the left says about Republicans as being true, causing much more harm in the longer run.
In another forum, someone said “If Trump does a great job we might have a republican president for the next 16 years.” I replied, Sure, and if he does a horrific job, we might not have another Republican President for the next 16 years. I think that is more likely, but reasonable people can differ.
why?
I think that you’re raising the white flag too soon. We don’t have to settle for Trump.
You misinterpreted my remark. I was saying that I accepted that you had indeed proven that you were not beyond the reach of argument.
Something to agree on:
“What matters, 95% of what matters, is what the next President will actually do in office. “
You have to ask why? Really? REALLY?
Everything he has said or promised in the past 10 years has had expiration date. Short list off the top of my head:
This does not even get into the vulgarity, the veiled or easy to caricature racism and sexism. And please HE JUST SAID A BJ joke on national TV about our nominee in 2012.
You have to appreciate the irony. Trump’s big selling point is that he calls it like he sees it, and doesn’t care whose feelings that hurts. His big tactic is bare-knuckled attacks on whoever it suits his purposes to attack. Trump supporters will tell you that they love him for this. “He is saying the things we are thinking.”
But if anyone says the things about Trump that most (yes, it is still most) Republicans and conservatives are thinking, well suddenly speaking your mind is not such a virtue after all. We are attacked as being all kinds of awful things – especially “Establishment,” which seems to be about the worst curse word in the Trumpian vocabulary.
I’m sick of it. I’m not part of any “Establishment.” I’m not getting paid off by any “donor class.” I’m not aligned with any “special interests.” Like most of us, I’m just a guy who found myself more in agreement with Republicans than with Democrats on most issues most of the time.
I know the Republicans have not been perfect – not my idea of perfect anyway – or anything close to it. But they have been much better than the alternative. So I have voted Republican. But if the Party nominates someone who is much worse than the alternative, I will not vote for that nominee no matter how much I loathe the alternative.
I’m reminded of the oohs and aaaahs that Daniel Patrick Moynihan received from many conservatives when he said many conservative sounding things. None of those things ever translated into conservative votes, as he always voted the Democrat party line. Based on many of the things he said, you can imagine some liberals expressing doubt about him or another politician like him, wondering if he should be reelected. But in the end, he was a safe liberal vote. All the talk was nothing more than talk. Same with Supreme Court nominees. Why would it matter if an Obama nominee truly sounded thoughtful and moderate if he ends up being a reliable liberal vote? In any high profile, symbolic case, there are really only two choices. You can’t be a little bit pregnant.
My hope is that much of the fear Trump has been causing among the Republican Pharisees will be misplaced in the same way. When faced with the reality of a Republican congress which would hopefully be in place on his coattails, Trump will come around.
I sincerely doubt it. If he had a long history of support for the Republican Party, he might come around, but he has no such history. Heck, Trump spent millions of dollars to get Hillary Clinton to come to his wedding. What conservative would allow Hillary Clinton at his wedding? I would pay her to stay away.
If Hillary wins because Trump wins the nomination and a number of us conservatives stay home due to there being no conservative option, then that is not on my conscience.
There needs to be no issue of conscience or guilt at all. The question is, looking at the next 4, 8, however many years, which future do you choose? The one that begins with Trump in 2016 or the one that begins with Hillary in 2016? Even a year ago when Trump was a reality TV personality whose claim to fame was (to me) a ridiculous fight with Rosy O’Donnell, if you had asked me: Hillary or this guy? I would not have hesitated.
But Trump will DESTROY Hillary once the race is underway. All the dirt and garbage that the other candidates would be happy to let everyone forget, in their attempt to be cordial, will be dredged up and thrown all over the place. Most people have never heard that Bill has been accused of rape. Now everyone will hear it. Etc. Etc. It may not be fair but we need a blunt weapon.
I agree that Trump will try to destroy HRC. Here’s a couple of reasons why he won’t: 1) Hillary’s bulk support is hardened and can’t be persuaded otherwise by mere attacks; 2) Trump’s credibility with the undecideds may not be high enough for scorched earth tactics to work; 3) Trump’s mere presence is going to energize unmotivated Democrats and get them to the polls; 4) Trump’s vulnerabilities will unleash an equal campaign of mass destruction from the Clinton campaign–they may even be better at it.
When the phrase “truly painted yourself into an emotional corner” is used, and the phrase “Trump derangement syndrome” is also used, that is what I’m talking about. This is simply not helpful.
“Even a year ago when Trump was a reality TV personality whose claim to fame was (to me) a ridiculous fight with Rosy O’Donnell, if you had asked me: Hillary or this guy? I would not have hesitated.”
The Trump from a year ago would be more palatable, but that was before he took a number of stances that run counter to movement conservatism and before he revealed an utter lack of regard for the constitution…not to mention a temperament that is unfit for leading our exceptional nation.
Dear Mr. Axe,
This whole article was about the nature of belief and the means by which all human beings process evidence and operate on bias. I have never claimed immunity from the phenomena I am describing. But I think that the claim that many Trump critics, as evidenced by their increasing hysteria, have to varying degrees stopped thinking rationally is completely justified.
-Mike
I don’t care much if you end up in a bad place, since we’re not acquainted, but I do care if you help enable Clinton the felon, murderess and serial liar to become our commander in chief.
Please clarify. Do you mean that unlimited, uncontrolled and low quality immigration into a country that can’t even pay it’s bills is desirable? You should help me pay my property taxes to support the sanctuary immigrants I’m educating, in Spanish.
This explanation is hollow unless you are also willing to stipulate that many Trump supporters, as evidenced by their increasing hysteria, have to varying degrees stopped thinking rationally.
Someone get CBS on the phone, I’ve got a idea that will move you and shake you!
There are about thirteen weeks between election night and inauguration. Twelve of the cabinet slots to be filled in the interim. Fade up to a street view on Fifth Ave in Manhattan. Twelve dignitaries gather at the crack of dawn. The Donald gives them the next two days task. Three teams of four are to set up a lemonade stand and earn as much in receipts as you can by the deadline. End of the week boardroom we see the losing team rat out the weakest performer. The Donald booms, “Sarah, pack your bags, you’re Secretary of Energy”…next weeks episode, teams submit a congressional budget while the battle heats up. Who goes on to eventually win State and who goes to Transportation? Be sure to tune in.
Mike:
I am a loyal HLC podcast listener and always enjoy your show – keep up the good work.
As for this post – I don’t really get your Augustine reference. He and Anselm are referencing supernatural things with their “believe so that you may understand” quote. With Trump, his boorish, rude, and bullying behavior is right there in the open, there is nothing to believe in and he is very easy to understand. Having said that, we are in agreement that if it’s Trump v Hillary, I will never vote for Hillary and will hold my nose and vote for Trump in the hope that he can be controlled by the Senate and House.
But I like what Augustine said!
You know, it only works if you start by believing something true.
My response to Trump is based on his record of bullying, denigration of anyone who disagrees with him, his corruption in trying to buy everyone, his misogyny, his lack of any credible platforms on crucial issues, his horrible character, his lies, his flip flops, and the fact that he is not conservative. I cannot understand why anyone would support him. I will not vote for such a man. I could not, nor would I vote for Hillary. We’ll get a third party person and that’s most likely where my vote will go. This is not an emotional response; it is about my own integrity.
Good heavens. If anyone has managed not to hear the allegations against Bill Clinton up to now, they will most certainly continue to be deaf to them. Besides, he isn’t running.
My “end up in a bad place” comment was a reference to the OP
As for the rest of your comment, the question is, who would be worse in the White House, “the felon, murderess and serial liar” or Donald. That the GOP would contemplate putting up someone that makes that a difficult choice is the core problem.
I am not a member of the Republican party, but I have primarily voted for them over the last 20 years. If DT is the model of the Republican party, they have lost my support permanently.
So, what are the symptoms of TDS? Disbelief that a major political party would consider nominating such a (deleted) person? Repugnance at the thought this might be the alternative to the corrupt and venal presumptive Democrat nominee? Inability to conform this choice with conscience?
I am suffering all of the above. Somehow, even reviewing the situation with cool detachment, I can’t think there is anything insane about my thought processes.
Actually, Cruz is the only one that has said he would deport illegals, including directing ICE to do so. Trump says he will deport them and bring them back, legally.