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.
The Fascinating Mr. Trump
As skipsul notes in his engrossing post below, Trump has at least this virtue: he fights. In an email that just turned up in my inbox, a friend offers yet another insight:
Trump generates news and interest because he is genuinely funny and interesting.
Trump is the mathematical average of the American voter in terms of policy, even if he has to flip flop or contradict himself. Against Iraq but USA will win. For business, against trade. Pro life but supports PP. Keep Medicare but reduce top rates. Etc.
Our guys have moved rightward in policy over the last 10 years. But we cultivated a bland, neutral group of boring dudes. Is there a genuine wit in the Senate or House?
Look at how Rubio, Cruz used Twitter. Basically a press release tool. Trump is himself. Our guys are so bland it makes the gold plated faux billionaire seem authentic!
Yes, I know I’m really working hard to find reasons for optimism these days, but isn’t this a good one? Put Trump up against Hillary and you’re putting a genuinely fascinating candidate up against a noxious bore.
Published in General
I think the circumstances that made this an opportune time for him to run are interesting. I think the sudden interest in principles among center right is interesting. Trump individually? Not terribly interesting.
Peter, I learned as a kid that fighting isn’t always a virtue…
It is certainly a temptation to turn vices into virtue, especially because there’s nothing we can do about Trump. But it’s a temptation that we should avoid.
Created by an American journalist in the 1930’s, but yes, these are interesting times.
Only if he is much stupider than he has been and submits to the pro Democrat debate format used in the past.
I am expecting a much different playing field or no debates at all.
I think we can just put Caddyshack on loop for explanation of this year’s Republican Primary.
Trump has been running as Rodney Dangerfield with National Review playing Ted Knight
Okay- much better movie and it is anti government as well.
Rich Lowry simply has too many balls in the air.
National Review got the role when Jeb! dropped out.
Trump’s the only candidate who’s consistently looked as if he’s enjoying himself.
Donald Trump is awful.
Vote for awful Trump;
Stop Corrupt Hillary.
Jeb is the dentist you get when your regular guy is on holidays. The novocaine candidacy.
I don’t do cults of personality.
Could we change now to Deathrace 2000? That’s the campaign I want to see.
Not even Arthur’s?
If this is an argument for a candidate – if Peter’s post is an argument for a candidate – all else as it is, and this is all that we can say in support of the man, then we are truly doomed.
C’mon, Bubba, it’s a long way down. Let’s just enjoy the ride. Yeeeehhhaaaaaaaa!
Wanna make fourteen dollars the hard way?
What! The man who wrote “Mr. Gorbachev tear down this wall” is supporting a real estate conman.
Is Peter alone in TPTB in the church of T?
Really, Peter, it all comes down to this… Do we want to elect Hillary and run ourselves into the ground like a bunch of European socialists or do stand with Trump and run ourselves into the ground like a bunch of frickin’ Americans!
Peter, Peter, Peter. Just come out and say your on board with Trump, because his groupies make him sound oh so fun and lively. Just ignore the actual things he says, and does. Who needs actual knowledge, honesty, or decency when we can have… Entertainment!
Bah…
Peter “tear down this wall” Robinson, rock ribbed conservative, die hard defender of the Reagan legacy and champion of civility and traditional values, a man so opposed to the coarsening of the culture he founded a community that will not countenance name calling or swearing or vulgarity … is falling in line behind Trump.
What a fraud and perfect example of everything that has become of the conservative movement and the Republican Party.
I’ll say this for Peter, all of his many friends that are invested in the survival of the GOP for their own benefit rather than the country’s have a true and loyal ally.
Right! Let’s do this the American way! High-speed thrills! Car chases! World leaders in food fights! And lots of explosions!
If you are referring to Peter Robinson in this way, I seriously object. Peter is a good and honest man. You may disagree with the direction his thoughts seem to be traveling, but that does not make him a fraud or in anyway dishonest. He is showing his thought processes as he sees things and tries to square the circle of the situation we are all in.
Also, the answer to this question is “Absolutely not.” Optimism is not always a good thing. GK Chesterton made this point, long ago. There is no value in optimism when a reason for optimism is not present. That is not a virtue.
You should think to yourself that if entertainment is your cause for optimism, then you should not be optimistic. With a candidate like Trump, there is no cause for optimism, Peter, unless you are hoping that we can send a clear message by having enough of us vote 3rd party, and that we can sober up – that conservative intellectuals will learn a lesson about how to better spread the actual message, that we will more strongly focus on education, and that we will cease to be complacent when folks who are nominally on our side patently reveal that they are not on our side for the right reasons. If you are optimistic about conservatism, then I stand behind you. If you are optimistic about the clown because at least he’s entertaining… that is something I cannot get on board with.
Agreed. Unlike Trump, Peter has a solid record that far outweighs any stockholm syndrome he may be exhibiting. It would be absurd to accuse him – or most of his friends (assuming you’re referring to conservative intellectuals) of fraud.
Maybe this is exactly the problem. Our side has been too stodgy. Was Reagan stodgy? Or did he have fun and use humor? Which has worked in the past? Which has generally worked for the other side?
I really need to do my post on the demon Hope.
Supporting Trump now is more a matter of placing concern for the future of America above concern for the future of the GOP.
The GOP Establishment guys rigged the rules to favor the candidate with the most money. They were paving the way for Jeb. But Jeb was a bad choice (as was repeatedly pointed out here at Ricochet).
And they never figured out how celebrity is a proxy for money in a situation where the chief use of the money is to purchase media time. Thus, Trump wins on the basis of his celebrity, and we are all stuck with Trump as our nominee.
However reprehensible Trump is, supporting Trump is now the only way to:
…Stop Corrupt Hillary.