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.
NeverTrump Land
I have posted so much on NeverTrumps (here, here, and indirectly here, here, and here) that I feel like the examining doctor of NeverTrump Land. Despite the accusations of malpractice, I have embraced my inner physician and provide this diagnosis:
Now for those in the chattering class who prefer locution, I offer the following elucidation of the perplexing illustration above.
NeverTrump Land has two subgroups: The more influential, better funded, instigating group that I have been calling the unelected Republican establishment. They are primarily motivated to protect their own interests and are the nexus of NeverTrumps. Refer to this history of the NeverTrump movement and you will see the key people, organizations, early anti-Trump PACs, and early attack-ads are directly tied to Republican leadership. Let’s draw a ring around them.
Then there are two more concentric rings. The first ring are Republican functionaries – lower party officials, GOP consultants, associated organizations, and Republican-oriented media. Elected Republican officials are not in this list. Why? Because they are directly accountable to the voters and have largely yielded to the voter’s choice.
The next ring are all those people under the influence of the first two groups. Such as a fellow I have dialogued with who hates Trump and only seems to trust and read the National Review.
There is another smaller group who simply dislike Trump. I have gotten a lot of grief from them in comments to my posts because I previously lumped them into the GOPe camp, and I should not have. For them it’s personal and often intuitively visceral. This is a complicated group, but I see at least two sub-sub-groups. Religious and Well-Bred (forgive the term). The former have a visceral reaction and see Trump as the opposite of their religious virtues. The latter have a visceral reaction and see Trump as the opposite of their decorum and intellect.
So, let the claims of malpractice begin.
Published in Politics
Love the graphic! Especially the “Other” bubble. I’m sure many claims to “Other” are really just “Group 2” members who don’t want to admit it.
This is hilarious, and I would be completely delighted if a NTer does a corresponding diagram for us Relucto-quasi-semi-pro-Trumpers. I love how Glenn Beck is in a little world of his own.
But a warning: if you’re listening to a Mike Murphy podcast lasting more than 4 hours, see a real doctor.
I almost hate to give this post the dignity of a response, but hey, you did go to some trouble with the diagram, so what the heck.
I think you’ve probably identified some of the motivations for NeverTrumpism — even if your picture of them is blurry and colored by your desire to denigrate them.
I’ll just address the “Well Bred” one — since it’s the only one that plausibly describes me. I’m famously irreligious and immoral, and I don’t work for any republican establishment organ — so my livelihood doesn’t depend in any direct way on the election outcome.
Where I think you get us Well Bred’s wrong though is that you seem to attempt to locate the problem in our aversion to ignorance and boorishness, rather than in the ignorance and boorishness itself.
Am I wrong in thinking you think we ought to get over ourselves and learn to love having a president who doesn’t know the purpose of NATO, how its security guarantee functions as a “red line” for would be aggressors, how the gains from trade work, or what the nuclear triad is?
Or that we ought to laugh off the casual denigration of Mexicans, women, muslims — because hey, we’re Christian white males, what do we care?
If so, sorry to disappoint you. I’m too Well Bred for that and if you want my vote, you’ll need to meet me over here.
Hah! Glenn Beck got his very own bubble.
There is a quote I hear just yesterday that would be a good observation about your comment.
You are concerned about his character and think his words define his character. Agreed? Fair summation? However, I believe you are confusing Trump’s personality with character. Trump is being his obnoxious New York self, that’s his personality. It’s not a fake persona, that’s just who he is. His character is separate. Unfortunately NeverTrumps in particular often equate the two. To make the point explicit… to them his crude language means he is dumb, and an idiot; his sometimes obnoxious words means he is an evil bigoted person. He is crude and obnoxious, but he is not dumb or bigoted, one is personality, character is separate.
I have no earthly idea what you are trying to convey here. It makes no sense to me. Words and deeds add up to character. And ignorance is not a “personality” — it is a lack of knowledge.
I had a similar reaction.
While I think this effort has merit — and the “other” bubble is very funny — grouping #NeverTrumpers into people on the take and those whom Trump “viscerally” offends (even if they’re also called “principled” objectors), seems to go to great lengths to imply that opposition to Trump is felt, not thought.
Had someone posted a similar “diagnosis & cure chart” of Trump voters a year ago, I imagine it would not have gone over very well.
The analysis seems to simply reflect the impressions that stem from biases of Trump supporters (i.e., the only real reason there is a NeverTrump movement is because of some nefarious, omniscient “establishment” that simply wants to protect its power). It leaves out the actual concerns of those of us in the NeverTrump camp.
In a cycle when the Democrat party has put up the weakest, most damaged nominee in their recent history (one who, against even the most minimally competent opponent would be firmly behind), the Republican party has allowed itself (actively so) to be hijacked by a conman who is in not a single way a conservative and is completely incurious about the details of policy or governance. Possibly most tragic of all, a great many have allowed themselves to fall into the con. Further, the nomination of Trump has allowed for the affirmation of the definition of “conservatism” that is held by the “know nothing” left wing that so dominates our culture.
At a time when what the country, conservatism, and the Republican party, needed was an impressive standard-bearer (and there were multiple choices), the worst possible choice was made.
I agree completely. My little post on intuition is just as applicable to Trump supporters as NeverTrumps. We are ALL subject to being lead by intuition and making reason a slave to passion.
Hey look another self therapy session. Persuasive!!
The ongoing obsession with NeverTrump is amusing.
And both are wrong. Neither Trump or his words are serious, and that is why I can’t support him. Voting for him is choosing to put an unserious person in the most serious job in the world.
At the beginning of the primary season, I would have been OK voting for Trump. His own behavior, statements, character, temperament and lack of preparation nudged me into NeverTrump territory. I got to know him better & didn’t like what I saw.
Monday night’s exhibition did nothing but reinforce this impression. Hillary came across as obnoxious, deceitful, smug, snarky, wooden and repellent, but she didn’t look dumb or easily manipulated. Trump needed to have self-discipline and focus to turn his strong start into a complete debate performance; instead, he managed to display incoherence, distraction and ignorance for the last 60-70 minutes. Hillary baited him into defending himself, and he never stopped sounding terrible.
I don’t need someone to tell me what to think about Hillary or Trump. I can see with my own eyes & hear with my own ears. What they tell me about both: Nope.
I will use your own words as and example. You think Trump is racist because of his words (your first quote above). There is not a single example of deeds of racism of Trump, but several of the opposite.
We all must factor in that we are dealing with a 70 year old person. The way his generation used language is so different from today. In their generation a mom could say to her child “I’m going to kill you if you don’t stop” or a man could say “If I had a gun, I’d shoot him” about a frustrating co-worker. They thought nothing of such phrasings. They knew they were hyperbole without actual intent. Today, words are like reality, whatever you say it taken as your 100% actual intent. Now read the quote again:
It’s “not a fake persona, that’s just who he is“, but, “his character is separate“??? The intellectual pretzels into which Trump supporters have to twist themselves to justify their support for the disaster that is his nomination are quite amazing.
Yes, I need to get a life. That’s what my wife says too (“Get off Ricochet and go to work”).
It’s possible I now understand the point you’re trying to make but if so, I think you’re either not paying attention or intentionally obfuscating. Trump’s problems are legion. They are not limited to a stray non-PC word here or there. At nearly every opportunity, including Monday night, he’s demonstrated himself unprepared for, unserious about, and unfit for, the office he seeks. The problem isn’t just that New Yorkers tend to bluster. I know that. I’ve worked with New York lawyers my whole career. I know the type. My concerns with Trump run much deeper than that.
By the way — and if this is news I apologize but — when you are president, your words do actually matter.
It has gotten embarrassing.
With 87% of Republicans backing Trump, it appears Trump supporters are still fighting a rearguard defensive action against potential allies rather than actually focus on the enemy for a long dead army in a long forgotten but disastrous war.
Trump and his movement are actually dead but they won’t notice until about a week after the election.
This would be mildly amusing if it was May and Trump wasn’t shown as a pedestrian Leftist and egotistical simpleton ( a prerequisite) as everyone sane noted when he entered the race. His supporters decided to overlook it all thinking no one would notice but he let you down.
Good luck with all that but don’t dwell on the fact I will smirk derisively and dismiss the opinion of anyone who makes any positive mention of Trump after November. It won’t be funny then.
The man was sued for racial discrimination in housing and settled out of court.
The chart reminds me of the way Obama supporters characterize those on the right. Barack Obama is so obviously wonderful, the only possible reason anyone could oppose his policies is because they are racist. Either that, or they are just fat cats who hate the poor and don’t want to pay their fair share in taxes.
Where a doctor is needed is not to analyze the #nevertrumps. Not even to analyze the odyssey of the #Isupportsomeoneelse ==> #reluctanttrump ==> #all-intrumps. Where a doctor is really needed is to analyze the people who can’t stop giving their opinions about what motivates #nevertrumps, and whose opinions never get within the ballpark, the city, the state, or even the continent of getting anything right on that subject.
As I always say, if you think Hillary is worse, then fine; vote for Trump and go in peace. But if you can’t understand why some people are not voting for Trump, then do us all the favor of shutting up on the subject instead of illustrating your ignorance over and over and over. I’m just sick of it.
I love me an interesting info graphic. And I appreciate the effort it took to put it together. Its a well formed impression of the NeverTrumps from the perspective of the Trumps. Which means its says more about the perceiver than the perceived.
It also lacks context and perspective in favor of a particular message (the whole point of a good info graphic in sales and marketing.) Which means its largely inaccurate.
Case in point, Lumping the GOPe and the Republican Functionaries into the mix implies that the two parties are actively opposed to Trump, when in reality they are actually the enablers whose bandwagon jumping ended up legitimizing his candidacy.
Additionally, it fails to show the relative size of Never Trump sphere v. the Trump sphere, especially out there in the real world. I am pretty sure even the 80/20 rule would be too generous in favor of my cause. Even still, were it the case, Trump’s egg would be demonstrably larger than that of the Nevers. But perhaps that too would lessen your argument’s effectiveness.
Still, and to that end, I’d love to see you apply your talents further in this analysis. Any chance you will prepare a similar graphic mapping out the varying factions within your own brotherhood?
Yeah. I don’t think Trump people get to cry about how mean the evil GOPe is anymore, especially since they’ve all lined up behind him.
Sure, but even those reasoning consistently can come to different conclusions from different priors. Did you ever take a gander at “Queer Uses for Probability Theory” (Ch 5)? I keep on meaning to write my own post on it, then another part of my body breaks. Sigh.
The diagram is pretty, though I don’t buy it, either. What program did you use to design it? I don’t have the software I’m used to on my current machine, so my diagrams end up looking like this –
Jamie, what are the details of the suit? Not all the details, just a enough to know what it was really about.
Well this chart is typical leftist reasoning. Its a false dichotomy. Either you are dumb (emotionally offended) or you are evil (you are trying to retain your power against any threat) if you are a conservative and not supporting trump. The chart doesn’t allow for intellectual disagreement with trump.
But trump is a leftist and invites leftist rhetoric and argument into the Republican Party (and even conservatism) and so unfortunately it seems as though some here at Ricochet have taken up this habit of trump’s. I hope they don’t take anymore of his habits while they are at it.
True of the elected officials, still not true of (see chart).
But the narrative demands a villain and that villain must be in a position of power to “oppress” others. Do not forget your Marxist Dialectic. Virtue is defined by whether or not you are a victim and your vice by whether or not you are in power. drumpf has to be a hero to his supporters so he must be subject to their “stab in the back”, regardless of the truth of the matter.