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.
Why was this the Breaking Point?
I want to find a way to express the question I’m about to ask in the spirit I mean it, which is a spirit of genuine and humble puzzlement. I’m not just trying to say, “I told you so.” I’m honestly confused, and it makes me feel — of all things — lonely, as if maybe I’ve been away from home for so long that I don’t really understand my own country anymore.
What I don’t understand is why so many people seem to be genuinely surprised by the emergence of a tape of Donald Trump making vulgar remarks. As everyone here knows, I’ve misunderstood everything about this campaign from the very beginning, which necessarily means that there’s a lot about my own country that I don’t understand. At first, I just didn’t take his campaign seriously. Yes, he was getting lots of media attention, and let’s be honest, I gave him a lot of attention on Ricochet, too: Like the rest of the media, I fell for it and gave him free attention. I thought it was because his campaign was good for a laugh. It never even occurred to me at first that a significant number of Americans would really vote for him. I assumed that within a few days or weeks he’d go the way of other fleeting media sensations.
But to my astonishment, his polling numbers held up — and then he won state after state in the primaries. You all know how I felt about that. Among other things, I was stunned, absolutely floored, that so many Americans, so many people who I thought I knew and understood, thought Donald Trump should be the president. It seemed so absurd to me that I almost couldn’t bring myself to argue that he shouldn’t be: It seemed self-evident. I’ve been unable to shake the feeling throughout that this has all been a madcap practical joke that somehow got out of hand. And as this has progressed I’ve felt, increasingly, lonely — as if everyone but me is on a joke that I don’t get. And frightened, too.
But I’ve believed many of the things that people who support Trump say about why they support him. One thing that many people say, and some have said on Ricochet, is that Trump’s vulgar comments (whichever ones we’re discussing, because every day seems to bring new ones) are a feature, not a bug. I’ve seen quite a few people on Ricochet saying things like, “We’re sick to death of political correctness. We’re sick of hyper-sensitivity and being told there are things we can’t say. Trump says whatever he feels like and he never apologizes for it. We need someone like that to open the Overton Window and take a sledgehammer to Washington. A normal politician won’t be able to shake things up.” I think that’s a fair paraphrase of the sentiments of many Trump supporters, don’t you? I don’t agree with the argument, at all, but I think I understand it.
So why is that tape — which to me just sounds like Trump being Trump — the straw that broke the camel’s back? Or the one that seems to be, anyway. So many people seem honestly surprised that he said those things. Is the surprise a pose? If so, why this, why now? It’s a very offensive tape, but to me it’s not more offensive than so many of the other things he’s said, the things that at first made me think his candidacy was a joke, and later made me think I was in a nightmare from which I couldn’t wake up. This is the candidate who said, “I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters” — and I’d begun to believe he was right, that he was popular because he said outrageous and offensive things and refused ever to back down.
Why is this different? Why would it change anyone’s mind about Trump? If, like me, you see this as “just more of the same,” why do you think other people are reacting to it as if it’s different? Is it because his comments were about sex? Is that the ultimate American taboo?
I’m asking in good faith, I promise. I’m truly not trying to say, “I told you so.” I genuinely don’t understand, and not understanding makes me feel lonely and stupid and out-of-it. I was taught long ago that it’s better to admit that I don’t understand, raise my hand, and ask my question — however dumb –than to pretend everything makes sense because I don’t want to reveal how much I don’t know. So that’s my question: Why is this worse than all the other things he’s said?
Published in General
I agree about the eerie Truman Show aspect. Very much so.
Look Trump had a purpose. It was to severely damage the GOP nominee. He was madly successful and became the nominee himself, which The Powers That Be did not mind. Then he started attacking the Democrat nominee and gaining traction against her. TPTB are now destroying Trump (like they would any GOP nominee). This statement is just the method.
Most people I know do not really understand why what he said in what was supposed to be a private conversation is a big deal. It is just people talking smack. While I myself don’t talk this way I know many of both sexes that do with some regularity.
Umm, his ceiling still is sub-majority. He won the nomination with 45% of the Republican electorate, and he hasn’t cracked 50% in the RCP General election polling average.
Jury is still out on prediction 2.
I agree this makes sense, regardless of truth, if only because reality makes less sense than expected.
Claire,
This is the candidate who did stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody. She and hubby have done it over and over again. They hide behind the leftist smoke screen caring for no one but themselves. They are amoral predators. Trump with all his ridiculous nonsense comes off benign in comparison.
Regards,
Jim
There was a post I think yesterday that had the title, “If Trump is the subject, then Trump loses. If Hillary, then she loses,” or something close. Trump’s remarks are indeed disgusting. But I’ve heard from more than enough people who have had close contact with the Clintons at one time or another to know that his stupid statements cannot hold a candle to Her Annointedness’ vulgar rants. Remember one of the points of the Clinton strategy of “triangulation:” determine where you are the weakest, and attack your enemy on that very issue, no matter what the truth is.” With this thought in mind, study carefully every attack her campaign makes against Trump.
What remains is this: as bad as Trump is, and he is, Clinton is worse – far worse.
This latest “revelation” is being used by the usual suspects – squishes, globalists, open borders nuts, leftists, left-libertarians, and Muh Morality poseurs – to demean those of us who believe American sovereignty is worth defending and who are tired of the Republican so-called leadership kowtowing to the Democrats’ every whim.
How was nominating Trump a solution to your concerns and frustrations? This is a man who had Bill and Hillary attend one of his weddings, who has John Boehner as a golfing and texting buddy, and who is highly unlikely to push back against Democrats on policies because he’s usually in agreement with them. You can’t get much more establishment than that, short of being in Congress. I don’t get it.
Being boorish and crude might strike some as a sign of authenticity, but to me it just signals boorishness and crudity.
Claire,
Don’t discount that everybody commenting on Trump on TV has a financial interest in him failing:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/10/theres-nothing-better-than-a-scared-rich-candidate/497522/
If what they do has no value, as the academic research is appearing to show, and trump comes within spitting distance of McCain/Romney, how does the whole political theater justify its existence? I mean the Trump Campaign as it has been run, threatens the existence of a multi-billion dollar industry of consultants, strategists, media personalities, non profits, and entire cable news channels.
Even if you take trump out of the picture everybody who is commenting on this has a existential and financial interest in his failure.
Enter a narrative reinforcing vulgarity that strikes at the heart of an ongoing moral panic, and voila: TV freak out.
I don’t know about this. I mean, it’s certainly the prevailing narrative, but I think the fact that everyone running for President is a fan of big government is less indicative of a movement as it is a product of a Republican Party that had too many people running in the primary season.
The Libertarian candidates taking statist positions is less about the prevailing political wind in the US than it is about both of them being RINOs who are now LINOs.
Yup. This is where I’m at. When I go to church, I hear others arguing about why they are voting for HRC, or why they are voting for DT, when neither is acceptable.
I’m not getting this “just more of the same” rationale, so perhaps those who hold this view could explain. As I understand it (and based on the expletive deleted nature of what I read), Trump used a term that many women find particularly insulting. Not only that, he used it in a way that describes a criminal battery (i.e., unwanted touching of another). OK, so it’s “just words” but I’m not aware of Trump previously going there with that amount of crudity.
Bill’s sexual past pretty much makes Hillary bullet proof. What ever Hillary does the MSM will ignore it and follow Bill’s antics since sex sells and they do not want to cover the real Clinton stuff anyway. I predict that she will be considered the best President ever, despite the economic meltdown and wars on multiple fronts that will erupt on her watch. These will comfortably be blamed on her predecessor Bush and the few GOP left in congress after this farce. Even Trump will get some of the blame since our streets erupted into violence because of his rhetoric. What can not be blamed on others, well the MSM will just distract the public with stories of Bill and paint HRC up as his long suffering wife supporting her flawed man (all males are flawed) as best she can.
I am thankful that I have never put myself into a position in which I am forced to defend this stupid, ignorant, low-class, boorish man.
And now, I’m reading on Ricochet about how refusing to support such a person for president of the United States makes one a hypocrite. I beg to differ. Supporting him makes one a hypocrite in my book, when he boasts about committing indecent assault and brags about committing serial adultery. Bill Clinton is worse, sure, but is that the standard by which we measure the character of a man, namely, that some other man is worse?
If I had been telling my friends that “you have to vote for Trump to stop crooked Hillary,” I’d be ashamed by this tape. Of course, I’d have been ashamed by his remarks about judges of Mexican descent, gold star parents, prisoners of war, his mockery of the handicapped, among other offenses to decency and decorum.
This tape is not defensible. He was 59 years old, and talking like a 15 year old, on tape no less. Just as we wonder about whether hackers have extremely embarrassing info hacked from Hillary’s emails that could be used to blackmail her, what more do various entities, foreign or domestic, have on Trump that could be used to blackmail him?
This could be the understatement of the year.
From Trump’s second post-Hot Mic statement: “I’ve said some foolish things, but there’s a big difference between the words and actions of other people. Bill Clinton has actually abused women, and Hillary has bullied, attacked, shamed and intimidated his victims. We will discuss this more in the coming days. See you at the debate on Sunday.”
Trump had already been provoked by a smirking Hillary into losing his cool over a mere remark about a fat Miss U. The U.S.S. Trump was already doomed, and a slow, controlled sink would’ve taken more Republicans down with him. With the hull now holed below the waterline, Republicans are leaping into lifeboats: If the tape was was deliberately leaked by the Clinton campaign was it a risky strategy…or a stupid move? Desperate and flailing, Trump is now going to puke all over Hillary at the debate, and probably keep twitter-puking until he’s exhausted or November arrives, whichever comes first.
Maybe this was a measure of just how damaging they thought the e-mails and FBI-document releases were likely to be?
There are plenty of stories about Marco Rubio, but I don’t think they’ve ever been referenced on this Rubio Fanboy website.
And all of you are late to the party if you didn’t feel this profound sickening alienation in 2012. I don’t mean disappointed. I mean this. 2012 was a breaking point. This is all fighting in the ruins. Meanwhile, some stagger about the battlefield as if they had not been utterly routed, with exhortations to keep on doing the same things that got us defeated, occupied, conquered.
This is the POTUS election from Hell. Both major party candidates have deeply repulsive attributes. This forces one who believes this is a binary election, to “vote for the lesser of two evils”.
If we hold Trump accountable for his repulsiveness and Hillary wins because of it, we are no better than James Comey.
Distancing from Trump is a shrewd political calculation from the Republicans. The next President is going to bear the brunt of a lot of problems: higher interest rates and lower markets, problems abroad, deficits, low GDP growth, probably a US military defeat or debacle, domestic and cultural disarray. Think Jimmy Carter on steroids. To make it worse, President Obama will reside in Washington and make Al Sharpton look like mini-mouse.
Looks and sounds like a one term president either way. As long as Republicans are more assured that they can keep the Senate and the House, HRC will come to the presidency with zero mandate, hated by half the country, and not trusted by two-thirds of the country. More will come out about her to sharpen attitudes. Yes, there is the loss of the Supreme Court, but as the Chief Justice and Justice Ginsberg have shown us, it is becoming more irrelevant all of the time.
I hate to be such a cynic, but we are playing the long game here.
Do you seriously think that the Clinton e-mail crisis is about what potentially embarrassing things might open her to blackmail? Yeah, well I guess you would have to, in order to draw some sort of equivalence. “Embarrassing” is the most damaging thing you can say about Trump, and the best about Clinton. But equate these characters all you want. It’s okay. Somebody else will clean up your mess.
I expect Hillary to come out and instead of shaking hands, pull out a box of Tic Tacs and offer him one.
To paraphrase some comments on this thread defending (or at least diminishing the importance of) Trump’s taped remarks because they were 11 years ago: Why is the alleged rape and intimidation of Juanita Broaddrick relevant? It happened (if it did happen) almost 40 years ago.
“We,” Kemosabe?
How about a link or two so us fanboys can at least confront the accusers. Did any of those stories involve Rubio yakking about one of his preferred “techniques”?
Do tell.
Get them out there now, so we can avoid this same disaster in 2020.
A problem that did not seem to trouble Trump when he gave them money and invited them to his wedding. But, hey you expect Trump to really go effectively prosecute this case in a manner that independents will find convincing? This is laughable. He is the worst Republican to make this case against her.
I pointed out one aspect of Clinton’s email problems. That does not logically imply there are not other aspects to it. I know that there are, and you know that I know that there are from many other threads on which we have both commented.
I mention this aspect of her problems because it has the potential to correspond to Trump’s situation. I encourage you to stop trying to find bogus reasons to criticize commenters by imputing to them assertions they clearly did not make.
See McKay Coppins. And why would you want to “confront” them? Why not objectively evaluate?
It is worrisome that these two are our only choices at this critical time in history when so many dangerous forces are gathering. It is even more worrisome that the worst side of both are emerging and an ugly slur is a deal-breaker when the other candidate and her husband are not only involved in dangerous, unlawful activity that harms the country and our allies, while our ex-president – her husband, was a Donald Trump times 100. Behind that quick, casual smile and charm, he violated women throughout his life in public office. This is the behavior we have accepted and given a pass on.
The Clintons want to destroy Trump, and they may succeed. But this is not the end of the story. They may very well do themselves in by re-opening their own can of sins. Many world leaders have been scandalous adulterers. Several French leaders come to mind. Did it change things for the French? I’m tired of cringing too. We are not in a good place in the US on many levels – you know what they are. There is a lot more at stake than foul language.
I guess if I were to answer your question, I’d echo what others have said:
Some are jumping ship because this is a convenient opportunity to do so.
The comments he made were worse than any of the comments I’d heard him make previously. Calling someone ugly or fat is a whole lot different than saying you can get away with molesting them because you are a star. He may have said similar things in the past but I haven’t heard them, or I’ve forgotten about them.
My reasoning exactly.