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
I’ve dyed my hair orange.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html
What about those who genuinely support Gary Johnson?
Would not be surprised.
So how do you access the buried treasure that is Donald Trump’s character?
Agree with most of that. But (get ready for it) Hillary is worse. I’m just using the Buckley Rule.
“The man”. You make it sound as if he were the only Landlord sued by the DOJ for racial discrimination in the early 70’s under the 1968 Fair Housing Act or something. He wasn’t. It was a nationwide effort and has been been ongoing since those early 70’s. In fact, when the Dems held Congress, they even did significant reinforcing of that same putsch in 2008 (sans Trump).
Let’s hear from the accused on such trumped up charges, since you ascribe guilt to the “innocent until proven guilty” just because they settled out of court (often done by a businessman to cut the ‘loss’ of the high cost of the legal defense of baseless charges) …..
http://www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/07/30/1973-meet-donald-trump/?_r=0
Faith in the God Emperor of course….
Interesting affidavit linked to from that Times story. Trump very clearly denied the allegation at the time and it actually says that the compliant fails to allege any specific acts of discrimination — a claim not likely to have been put in the affidavit (which would have been written by his lawyer) if it wasn’t true.
I’m no Trump fan, but the possibility of the EEOC just throwing a net over much of the NY real estate development community in the early 70s to make a point doesn’t seem implausible to me.
A good question. Here’s what I have worked out.
I have looked at what he has done in his life (some good, some bad). I have listened carefully to his statements going back over his entire adult life. The consistent theme he speaks of and seeks is to succeed. I believe it is his principal moral value system, thus my classification of him as a pragmatist. I see Trump as neither liberal nor conservative, his is not an ideologue at all, but is a pragmatist / opportunist with an ego. He likes success and greatest and strives for it. I believe he will do what is necessary to succeed. That is not to say that he is heartless, but pragmatists can be pretty rough.
Base solely on pragmatism, Trump has adopted some common sense policies (the good side of pragmatism). There is a lot of overlap between common sense and conservatism. But the danger is that he doesn’t have a political philosophy to guide him. That is not due to a lack of intelligence. He is extremely smart. He has overcome 15 other candidates and single handed taken control of a national party in under 2 years. And is very close to becoming president. That is why you must grant him some mental framework such as pragmatism. Some people are not brain wired to seek meta-narratives or philosophies – that is Trump.
Perhaps. But now you’re changing the subject. If your OP had just been another “Hillary is Worse” post, I wouldn’t have bothered getting involved in this discussion. Frankly, while I don’t agree, I can understand why someone might think she’s the worse of these two awful choices. But that wasn’t the subject of this post. This post was purporting to diagnose the pathologies of NeverTrumpers.
Exactly. A few more links and details about this story are in comment #37.
I guess @jamielockett never passes up a chance to slam Trump and/or support Big Government intrusion into commerce.
It is, at the very least, complex. Wiley is demonstrating he listens as his analysis becomes more complex. I also think he is attempting to do this with some brevity.
I wonder how simple or complex a NeverTrumper would describe Trump supporters and how willing they would be to alter their perceptions with feedback?
“You know you’re over the target when you’re taking flak.” ~ Allen West
I’ve don’t really like Trump. So you’ll need a new analogy.
Aside from Fred, no one is genuinely excited to vote for Gary Johnson. Over and over again at the convention we were told that it is more important for the libertarian party to make in roads with voters this year than to, you know, nominate a libertarian.
A Trumpeters chart would be no more favorable. However, I do not focus on Trumpsters since they are not enabling a Hillary win. If Trump wins, I will do a 180 & chart Trump himself.
I never said he was the only one but Wiley asked for evidence of action. This is evidence of action. Ignore it if you want, but you should at least go into the voting booth with open eyes and not blinders.
The number one reason why NeverTrump people won’t vote for Trump is because for the first time in a long time, there doesn’t seem to be a noticeable difference between winning and losing.
I’m going to vote for the man and I’d clearly, and strongly, prefer him in the White House over the Orange Menace or Lady MacBeth, but there’s no denying that he generates less and less enthusiasm the more you know about him.
I repeat though — look at the choices. If the field was 3, it wouldn’t be a difficult choice. Johnson, despite his flaws, is a vast improvement on Trump or Clinton.
There’s the good faith you’re known for around here.
All I’m doing is presenting evidence do with it what you will:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-governments-racial-bias-case-against-donald-trumps-company-and-how-he-fought-it/2016/01/23/fb90163e-bfbe-11e5-bcda-62a36b394160_story.html
It’s clear that these stories aren’t nothing, otherwise Trump would have won the case outright and not “settled out of course without admission of guilt”. My attorney wife heard that in the debate and laughed out loud.
I admit it is my fault, or at least the fault of poor sods like me. The reason there is so much effort is that I just don’t have the capacity to understand. It is to the supporters credit that they haven’t given up on me, yet. They have tried shaming, mockery, threats and the occasional bluff. All to no avail. I suspect they are about spent and will cut the ropes in frustration in order to finish the ascent. Mea Culpa. They did their best.
If it is any consolation, I feel completely inadequate. As if my hands were small.
A close second is the continued harassment by AlwaysTrump and ReluctantTrumpers to board the Trump train as some sort of shared guilt complex.
One of the ways you can usually tell that a group of people has outsourced their thinking is that the entire group consistently uses the same word to describe their enemies. The more unusual the word, the more likely the word was planted in the group’s consciousness by an external source.
In this case, the word I’m thinking of “visceral”. There is a constant refrain by those attacking the NeverTrumpers that the only possible reason to be critical of him is that you have a visceral negative reaction to him. The definition of visceral is “coming from strong emotions and not from logic or reason.” The use of the word visceral is obviously intended to criticize the intelligence of people that are critical of Trump. This is complete and utter nonsense.
I don’t have a visceral negative reaction to Trump, if anything, my visceral reaction is positive. I like his brash directness. I like his “Donny from the Block” affectation. My criticism of Trump is that I think he will be an incredibly bad President because, in spite of his great brain, he doesn’t care enough to study the issues and can’t string together a sensible paragraph. More importantly, he agrees with the Democrats on the core issues that matter to me.
What baffles me is that if Trump ran as a Democrat, the vast majority of Trump on here would attacking him. The true visceral reaction is to his wearing the red jersey.
Jamie, there’s no doubt that was a weaseley, lawyerly thing to say. But it’s not accurate to say he wouldn’t have settled if he wasn’t guilty. People settle legal claims for a lot of pragmatic reasons, as I’m sure you’re lawyer wife can tell you. Litigation is expensive, and distracting and a smart business person will often dispense with it if he can do so for the right price, regardless of the merits.
Note:
Gentlemen, cease bating each other.There’s the good faith you’re known for around here.
All I’m doing is presenting evidence. Do with it what you will.
But I did make fun of Hillary (see the dark hole with the burning flames). Also a true Trumpster would never have drawn little hands with Trump saying “They’re not little.”
Fair enough, but I have read accounts of EEOC testers facing specific acts of racial discrimination at Trump properties and Trump employees marking applications with designations meant to steer minority candidates towards certain properties and away from others. Now it is entirely possible that there are no specific acts linked directly to Trump himself – but as CEO of the company he would be responsible for the actions of all of his employees. As a President once said: The buck stops here.
All well and good, except this is the man that says “I don’t settle lawsuits when I’m right”.
I am not getting into a meta-argument about whether you’ve changed the subject, but you’ve change the subject.