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
Then you’re not in the chart. You’re cool.
90% of litigation is settled out of court. That is due to the cost and risks of litigation. Litigation in the US, has little to do with wrong doing. It can be a business strategy or a means to implement political objectives. One must not assume litigation means guilt. Most people who have been sued know this first hand.
I know that, but this is a man whose stated that he doesn’t settle. So which is the lie?
Jamie –
By the way, I’m not saying he’s innocent of the charges. He’s probably not. Housing discrimination was bordering on universal in large cities in the time period and nothing I know about the Trumps (either father or son) leads me to believe they would have been noble warriors for justice, refusing to discriminate despite the wishes of their white tenants, many of whom at the time almost certainly would have objected to living with minorities.
I’m just not a fan of presuming guilt. I also don’t think newspaper articles constitute evidence. And I don’t think you can necessarily presume the good faith or care of the federal regulators in asserting claims.
I’m also not sure how much you can hold early 70s Donald responsible for practices engaged in by his father’s company that had probably been going on for decades and that he, as a young man, probably had little control over and possibly had little understanding of.
The bottom line is that this allegation is literally from a different era, both in Trump’s life and in American race relations. It really doesn’t tell you much about today’s candidate Trump, one way or the other.
There is always hope Paul. I have moved on to the nuclear weapon in the arsenal of persuasion: humor. You my friend have responded in kind. Touché.
I’m a #neverdemocrats—this year particularly because I think we need a change of ruling parties in Washington.
But I am very sympathetic to the #nevertrump voters.
Very funny graphic–it’s New Yorker cover worthy!
I disagree.
I saw the diagram and thought “This is a pretty good piece of humor. Like something from National Lampoon in the 7o’s or The Onion today” Then I read the comments. Wow. Where did the serious intent in the graphic hide? Because I still don’t see it.
Ah, but are they athletic supporters?
Those following Wiley’s recent OPs have reason to believe he’s serious about this.
Sometimes, the rational thing to do for someone with priors different from yours is to alter their perceptions in the direction opposite of how you believe they should alter them in response to feedback. I think this is one reason for so much friction between both sides here.
Yes, it was meant as humor. Thank you.
Well, people also give flak when they rightfully believe they’re being subject to an unjust classification. If you called me a whore or adulteress, for example, I might flak back at you. It’s true that at one low point in my life, I thought about whoring – I was really desperate – but I did not carry through with it (and having zero sexual experience at the time, I would have probably made a lousy whore anyhow).
It’s plausible that taking flak in conversation is not really correlated with being on target, since flak is also a natural response to someone being off target, too.
Note:
Personal attack.“Doesn’t know what he’s talking about and won’t shut up about it.”
Does that describe the OP or his candidate?No one has taken more flack in the past three or four months than NeverTrump.
Hey, I thought that up. I used it first. That’s my word. I called dibs.
Considering the NeverTrumper College Republican Alumn I interact with the most thinks Trump will commit genocide against musims and hispanics, I think “visceral” is preferred to “unhinged”.
Considering that today on this very website I read a Trump supporter advocate a war crime I think “mistaken” is preferred to “monstrous” or “evil”.
War crime being what? Waterboarding? Sign me up!
Unlike you, i can differentiate between visceral reactions and intelligence. Everyone rationalizes. Its human. Doesn’t mean I think people are stupid for doing it.
Apart from the pretty graphic this is no different in content from the rest of the abuse we’ve been taking for the past few months.
Unlike me huh? Ok.
I like the little bubble for Glen Beck, but I think you need to darken it in more. Maybe a lot more. Add some flames too. He’s creating his own personal hell I think.
Here’s my issue with this entire line of argument:
Always and ReluctantTrumpers accuse us NeverTrumpers of having a “visceral” reaction to Trump and to a certain point that is true, but you know what? So are they. It’s just as visceral to prefer a man because he “gets in people’s faces” or “fightsBANG” or “Isn’t Hillary”. So this idea that it’s solely NeverTrump that is having an emotional reaction this election cycle is laughable on it’s face.
As has happened a lot of late, this thread has descended into little more than mutual recriminations and bad faith. To again quote from the On Good Faith article:
Comments disabled for two hours.
Meh. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nevertrump+visceral
There are even several threads on Ricochet that use the word visceral before you to describe anti-Trump beliefs, eg, here and here. There are probably more, those were just the first couple I found using the limited search functionality we have here.
Wiley:
How are the experiments progressing, Dr. Pavlov?
Well, whenever anyone posts anything (positive or negative) on Trump, we all start to drool. I’d say successful then.
It appears a number of patients have accused me of malpractice (again).