Trump Defended Wholeheartedly Against the Likes of Paul Rahe

 

This morning, I sent a link to my piece to various friends. One, a strong Trump supporter, responded as follows:

Paul is a hold-your-nose Trump supporter. He thinks Trump is a “swine” who has “no knowledge of foreign affairs” and is likely “unfit to be president.”

Three far more accurate and well-informed assessments of Trump can be found at American Greatness, here:

http://amgreatness.com/2016/10/13/trump-the-statesman/

http://amgreatness.com/2016/11/03/reality-show-how-obnoxious-trump-has-paved-the-way-for-truth-telling/

http://amgreatness.com/2016/11/02/the-gops-ungrateful-bastard-caucus/

Feel free to respond as you think fit. Needless to say, I do not in general share the sentiments expressed in these three posts.

Update: Here lies another piece by D. C. McAllister applying Christian apologetics to the question. What she calls “laziness” I would call a mistake.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 69 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Quinn the Eskimo Member
    Quinn the Eskimo
    @

    I put my point from the last post in somewhat more sympathetic terms:

    Trump’s core supporters do not like self-styled conservatives.  They won a plurality in the primaries and got the party to fall in line for unification purposes without even an olive branch.  They know that all they have to do is whisper “but the Supreme Court” or “but Hillary” and most conservatives will go along with absolutely anything in return.  On that basis, why should any conservative going in for Trump expect anything like respect from them?  You didn’t even try to bargain for a better position when the chance was there.   People couldn’t organize to get themselves leverage or let themselves be undercut easily.  Honestly, it’s hard to see why Trump’s core supporters are wrong to look down on conservatives.

    • #1
  2. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    I liked you letter better Paul.   Those are all interesting perspectives though and it’s important to know where that crowd is coming from.  They are not small and are not going away.

    • #2
  3. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Quinn the Eskimo:I put my point from the last post in somewhat more sympathetic terms:

    Trump’s core supporters do not like self-styled conservatives. They won a plurality in the primaries and got the party to fall in line for unification purposes without even an olive branch. They know that all they have to do is whisper “but the Supreme Court” or “but Hillary” and most conservatives will go along with absolutely anything in return. On that basis, why should any conservative going in for Trump expect anything like respect from them? You didn’t even try to bargain for a better position when the chance was there. People couldn’t organize to get themselves leverage or let themselves be undercut easily. Honestly, it’s hard to see why Trump’s core supporters are wrong to look down on conservatives.

    Well, the people who felt like their guy won in the nomination process ought to have sought the largest possible agreement.

    They will instead get the narrowest, or nearly.

    & there are not a few who are already ready to blame conservatism or the GOP or both or everyone once Mr. Trump loses.

    Being good at winning & losing is of great importance. Looking down on conservatives is unwise & unhelpful both…

    • #3
  4. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Those show again that many of Trump’s supporters advocate for their fantasy of who Trump should be rather than the reality of what Trump is. Your exposition had the benefit of conforming to reality.

    • #4
  5. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    DocJay:I liked you letter better Paul. Those are all interesting perspectives though and it’s important to know where that crowd is coming from. They are not small and are not going away.

    I’m curious Doc.  If they don’t “go away,” what exactly do you expect that they will do?  Assuming that Trump loses, I mean.  Is there some other candidate you expect them to support in 2020?  Do you expect that they will just go on a Godzilla-in-Tokyo rampage, destroying every Republican they can?  What, exactly?  I really want to know.

    • #5
  6. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    The King Prawn:Those show again that many of Trump’s supporters advocate for their fantasy of who Trump should be rather than the reality of what Trump is. Your exposition had the benefit of conforming to reality.

    Yes, I fear wishful thinking. We are all inclined to fall for it (not least myself). I also believe that this batch of Trump supporters is mildly unhinged.

    • #6
  7. Quinn the Eskimo Member
    Quinn the Eskimo
    @

    Titus Techera:Well, the people who felt like their guy won in the nomination process ought to have sought the largest possible agreement.

    They will instead get the narrowest, or nearly.

    & there are not a few who are already ready to blame conservatism or the GOP or both or everyone once Mr. Trump loses.

    Being good at winning & losing is of great importance. Looking down on conservatives is unwise & unhelpful both…

    Donald Trump played a game of chicken with the GOP and conservatives and the GOP and conservatives swerved every time and early.  If people don’t stand up for themselves, they are depending on the kindness of adversaries.

    • #7
  8. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Quinn the Eskimo:

    Titus Techera:Well, the people who felt like their guy won in the nomination process ought to have sought the largest possible agreement.

    They will instead get the narrowest, or nearly.

    & there are not a few who are already ready to blame conservatism or the GOP or both or everyone once Mr. Trump loses.

    Being good at winning & losing is of great importance. Looking down on conservatives is unwise & unhelpful both…

    Donald Trump played a game of chicken with the GOP and conservatives and the GOP and conservatives swerved every time and early. If people don’t stand up for themselves, they are depending on the kindness of adversaries.

    Hence why we should not give in and vote for Trump now.

    • #8
  9. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    Valiuth:

    Quinn the Eskimo:

    Titus Techera:Well, the people who felt like their guy won in the nomination process ought to have sought the largest possible agreement.

    They will instead get the narrowest, or nearly.

    & there are not a few who are already ready to blame conservatism or the GOP or both or everyone once Mr. Trump loses.

    Being good at winning & losing is of great importance. Looking down on conservatives is unwise & unhelpful both…

    Donald Trump played a game of chicken with the GOP and conservatives and the GOP and conservatives swerved every time and early. If people don’t stand up for themselves, they are depending on the kindness of adversaries.

    Hence why we should not give in and vote for Trump now.

    So what should we do? Vote for Hillary? Egg McMuffin?

    • #9
  10. Xennady Member
    Xennady
    @

    Quinn the Eskimo:Donald Trump played a game of chicken with the GOP and conservatives and the GOP and conservatives swerved every time and early.

    Excuse me, but this description seems very much at odds with reality. Trump has received intense and visceral hostility from the party and its establishment. There have been numerous efforts to prevent him from winning the nomination, to prevent him from remaining the nominee, and to prevent him from becoming president.

    This includes at least one occasion when the party leadership got together with a variety of media personalities and billionaires, with the expressed goal of preventing him from winning the nomination. There was an effort at the convention to oust him from the nomination. And various candidates- including McMullin, even now – have been touted by so-called conservatives with the express intent of preventing him from winning the election.

    I have to wonder just what else the party could have done to prevent him from reaching his present position.

    Would you suggest that the GOP simply cancel elections so that the proper candidate could be anointed?

    This seems likely to bring even more trouble for the party, but that’s just me.

    • #10
  11. Crow's Nest Inactive
    Crow's Nest
    @CrowsNest

    Paul A. Rahe:

    I also believe that this batch of Trump supporters is mildly unhinged.

    My suspicion is that a fair number of the AG contributors were convinced that because so much elite intellectual opinion and so much media–liberal and conservative–was so vociferously and ferociously anti-Trump (and sometimes, barely concealed, anti-Trumpvoter), that they were ready to wield over the top rhetoric to be heard amidst the noise. Therefore we have pieces over there that are written in the vivace or eroica voice.

    For at least one or two of the writers there, I think that fearsome man’s advice about needing to dilute them to see their point applies.

    This approach has its downsides, nevertheless. I am critical of several of the pieces there which I think overreach, or “understand Trump better than he understands himself”, or, worst of all, are clear about what they want torn down, but much less clear in their own minds about what they want built up in its place (or about the practical alternatives and risks in our moment). That can be a dangerous instinct, and this is particularly the case in their writing on foreign affairs.

     

    • #11
  12. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Quinn the Eskimo: Trump’s core supporters do not like self-styled conservatives.

    I’m a Trump supporter and a Cruz supporter. I sent Ted Cruz money until it became apparent he and every other primary candidate with their multi millions of dollars was going to get knocked over like rows of ten pins. I actively support all kinds of conservative candidates, many of whom have been elected.

    During the GOP primary I took Keynes implied advice. “When the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, Sir?

    It had become apparent that many millions of my fellow Americans liked Donald Trump the candidate. Americans liked him so much that none of the unprecedented incessant vicious attacks had much effect. He was alinsky proof. The people who support Trump are the salt of America. They are the Tea Party people, the workers and fighters of our United States. In Peter Theil’s speech supporting Trump he talked about the people who work with bits and pixels vs. the people who work with atoms. The American people who work with atoms support Donald Trump in large numbers.

    Trump has his weaknesses but Trump also has his strengths. He didn’t get this far without virtù. I expect that many NeverTrumpers will never reconcile with Trump. If he wins, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him get +300EV, we will all get a chance to see who displayed more foresight. The era of political correctness may be ending.

     

    • #12
  13. DocJay Inactive
    DocJay
    @DocJay

    Larry3435:

    DocJay:I liked you letter better Paul. Those are all interesting perspectives though and it’s important to know where that crowd is coming from. They are not small and are not going away.

    I’m curious Doc. If they don’t “go away,” what exactly do you expect that they will do? Assuming that Trump loses, I mean. Is there some other candidate you expect them to support in 2020? Do you expect that they will just go on a Godzilla-in-Tokyo rampage, destroying every Republican they can? What, exactly? I really want to know.

    They’ll be a voting block.  I’m unsure who they will back in 2020.     I’d view them as a force, one among many forces, who will potentially vote against progressives and maybe a force who would back a more mainstream candidate that espoused a belief or two of theirs.   I have no other grand predictions.

    • #13
  14. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Paul A. Rahe: Here lies another piece by D. C. McAllister applying Christian apologetics to the question. What she calls “laziness” I would call a mistake.

    I love Denise, but any argument that boils down to “you must violate your conscience” will always fail to persuade me and can only harden my resolve against it. It’s my conscience; no one gets to determine its contents but me.

    “Hillary is so bad, ego Trump” is simply the ends justifying the means. If there is moral laziness in all this it is that.

    If a moral stance is a line that can be crossed based on circumstances then it is no moral stance at all. Circumstances always change.

    • #14
  15. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Viator:I’m a Trump supporter and a Cruz supporter. I sent Ted Cruz money until it became apparent he and every other primary candidate with their multi millions of dollars was going to get knocked over like rows of ten pins. I actively support all kinds of conservative candidates, many of whom have been elected.

    During the GOP primary I took Keynes implied advice. “When the facts change I change my mind, what do you do, Sir?

    I like this. My path to this election has been similar. I just voted for Trump, Mike Lee, and Jason Chaffetz because my primary motivation in this election is the defense of the U. S. Constitution, for which I have taken an oath to support and defend at least three times in my lifetime. Trump is vying for the POTUS and I take his words on immigration, border control, military intervention around the world, action to defeat Islamic terrorism, a careful look at trade issues, and U.S. national sovereignty as indicative of his view on that office. Other than an effort to improve economic conditions and jobs , Trump has been less vocal about any attempt to change the very nature of our country. Clinton’s focus is on the latter and she will not hesitate to make us a mere pawn in the global collective enterprise. I voted to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

     

    • #15
  16. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    The King Prawn:

    Paul A. Rahe: Here lies another piece by D. C. McAllister applying Christian apologetics to the question. What she calls “laziness” I would call a mistake.

    I love Denise, but any argument that boils down to “you must violate your conscience” will always fail to persuade me and can only harden my resolve against it. It’s my conscience; no one gets to determine its contents but me.

    “Hillary is so bad, ego Trump” is simply the ends justifying the means. If there is moral laziness in all this it is that.

    If a moral stance is a line that can be crossed based on circumstances then it is no moral stance at all. Circumstances always change.

    You are right about moral stands. But politics rarely offers such an opportunity. Had you been FDR, would you have allied with Stalin against Hitler? Or would you have adopted a “clean-hands” policy and refused?

    Voting for Trump is not the moral equivalent of having an abortion or of embracing abortion. It is a strategic choice aimed at avoiding the worst outcome — i.e., if I am right about the likely consequences of her becoming President and of him becoming President (which is, of course, open to question).

    I would not accuse you of laziness. Confusion is the proper word. We have only two viable choices in November. It is incumbent on us to try to avoid the worse of the two alternatives. That is a moral imperative.

    • #16
  17. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Interesting that Dr. Paul Rahe brought in articles from American Greatness. American Greatness is the mirror image of Ricochet. It is full of very lively and intelligent writing exploring the positive aspects of the Trump phenomena rather than the negatives.

     

    • #17
  18. Crow's Nest Inactive
    Crow's Nest
    @CrowsNest

    Viator:Interesting that Dr. Paul Rahe brought in articles from American Greatness. American Greatness is the mirror image of Ricochet. It is full of very lively and intelligent writing exploring the positive aspects of the Trump phenomena rather than the negatives.

    I wouldn’t liken them.

    Amgreatness is more like a frontier outpost of loyal literati defending a certain understanding of Trump. Ricochet is a cordial dinner party (and sometimes raucous family gathering) with members from all of the elements of the right-center-right.

    There is a difference between the dialect of the dinner party and the strident essay of the fortress-encampment.

    • #18
  19. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    Paul A. Rahe: We have only two viable choices in November. It is incumbent on us to try to avoid the worse of the two alternatives. That is a moral imperative.

    Adding viability only removes the moral calculation from the decision and makes it solely political. If there is no moral aspect to it then there can be no moral imperative in the choice, only preference or political expediency. We become the left should we reduce our decisions to this.

    • #19
  20. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Paul A. Rahe: So what should we do? Vote for Hillary? Egg McMuffin?

    I hear that “Egg McMuffin” a lot from Trump people. A reminder:

    Soon after McMullin joined the CIA the September 11 attacks occurred, leading to an accelerated training and deployment. He spent the next decade working overseas on counterterrorism and intelligence operations as an undercover operations officer with the National Clandestine Service[8] in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. He was first deployed in 2003 and left the agency in 2010.

    I thought these were the people we were supposed to admire, not tag with a sneering sobriquet.

    • #20
  21. Xennady Member
    Xennady
    @

    James Lileks:

    Paul A. Rahe: So what should we do? Vote for Hillary? Egg McMuffin?

    I hear that “Egg McMuffin” a lot from Trump people. A reminder:

    Soon after McMullin joined the CIA the September 11 attacks occurred, leading to an accelerated training and deployment. He spent the next decade working overseas on counterterrorism and intelligence operations as an undercover operations officer with the National Clandestine Service[8] in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. He was first deployed in 2003 and left the agency in 2010.

    I thought these were the people we were supposed to admire, not tag with a sneering sobriquet.

    And one of the reasons why we send people overseas to kill our enemies is so we can retain the right to tag people with sneering sobriquets.

    Even people we generally admire, like McMullin.

    So if Eggs wants to avoid the critiques from the Trumpkins he can stop working so hard to undermine the Republican nominee, and thus make Hillary Criminal president.

     

     

    • #21
  22. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Crow's Nest: There is a difference between the dialect of the dinner party and the strident essay of the fortress-encampment.

    Fortress-encampment or the beginning of a renaissance?

    • #22
  23. Crow's Nest Inactive
    Crow's Nest
    @CrowsNest

    Viator:

    Crow’s Nest: There is a difference between the dialect of the dinner party and the strident essay of the fortress-encampment.

    Fortress-encampment or the beginning of a renaissance?

    That comment wasn’t a disparagement. It was trying to set the scene for, and account for, the difference in tone between the two places. The tone of a story (and the content of the story you tell) around a campfire is just different from a story told around a well lit dinner table.

    I also don’t think the two settings are analogous because of the quality of the discussion beyond the original writing. The original pieces have a certain charm, but there is no “member feed” equivalent there that is doing anything like what Ricochet is doing. And where there are comments on the essays, many of them are not the quality of the commentary you see here (on any side of an issue).

    • #23
  24. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    So if I supported Trump, his fans would love it if I always called him “Heel-Spur Donnie Dodger”?

    • #24
  25. Matt Upton Inactive
    Matt Upton
    @MattUpton

    James Lileks: I hear that “Egg McMuffin” a lot from Trump people.

    I thought these were the people we were supposed to admire, not tag with a sneering sobriquet.

    I voted for the guy and still like to call him Egg McMuffin, if just to paint a more concrete image in the minds of people who have never heard of him. Is it a bit irreverent? Yes. But for darned sure I won’t be like the Trump supporters who always insist of referring to the man as “Mr. Trump”.

    • #25
  26. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    The King Prawn:

    Paul A. Rahe: We have only two viable choices in November. It is incumbent on us to try to avoid the worse of the two alternatives. That is a moral imperative.

    Adding viability only removes the moral calculation from the decision and makes it solely political. If there is no moral aspect to it then there can be no moral imperative in the choice, only preference or political expediency. We become the left should we reduce our decisions to this.

    Nonsense. Political decisions are nearly always prudential, and behind them there lies a moral calculation. We asks what is right and wrong; then, we ask how best to avoid the latter and get the former. Often we have to settle with something well short of the best. You are confusing questions that are tactical and strategic with questions of fundamental principle.

    Again, think about our decision to forge an alliance with Stalin. We did it because we did not have a better alternative.

    • #26
  27. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    James Lileks:

    Paul A. Rahe: So what should we do? Vote for Hillary? Egg McMuffin?

    I hear that “Egg McMuffin” a lot from Trump people. A reminder:

    Soon after McMullin joined the CIA the September 11 attacks occurred, leading to an accelerated training and deployment. He spent the next decade working overseas on counterterrorism and intelligence operations as an undercover operations officer with the National Clandestine Service[8] in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. He was first deployed in 2003 and left the agency in 2010.

    I thought these were the people we were supposed to admire, not tag with a sneering sobriquet.

    He may be a fine man. But he is not a serious presidential contender. Debating whether to vote for him is a distraction from the choice we actually face. I would be happy to mock Gary Johnson and Jill Stein as well. Politically (and only politically), they are all a joke.

    • #27
  28. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Crow's Nest: That comment wasn’t a disparagement. It was trying to set the scene for, and account for, the difference

    I agree with you there is a difference. Since were are all in contention mode I’m quick on my digital finger.

    • #28
  29. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    James Lileks:So if I supported Trump, his fans would love it if I always called him “Heel-Spur Donnie Dodger”?

    I support him, and I call him a clown (which, alas, he is). And those who loved him used to call him The Donald. And others who liked Bill Clinton called him Charming Billy as in “Where have you been Billy Boy, Billy Boy” or they called him Slick Willie. So what?

    • #29
  30. Paul A. Rahe Member
    Paul A. Rahe
    @PaulARahe

    Matt Upton:

    James Lileks: I hear that “Egg McMuffin” a lot from Trump people.

    I thought these were the people we were supposed to admire, not tag with a sneering sobriquet.

    I voted for the guy and still like to call him Egg McMuffin, if just to paint a more concrete image in the minds of people who have never heard of him. Is it a bit irreverent? Yes. But for darned sure I won’t be like the Trump supporters who always insist of referring to the man as “Mr. Trump”.

    Damned right. This place is getting too solemn.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.