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.
The Trump Spectrum
Inspired by this comment from @jameslileks.
- Never Trump: They truly believe he is so awful that even the chaos that would ensue after removing him from office does not outweigh the benefits of said removal. Examples: Bill Kristol.
- Anti-Trump: They too believe he is awful, but recognize that we are stuck with him. They may occasionally admit that he has done some good things, but usually only grudgingly. Examples: Mona Charen, John Podhoretz.
- Trump Skeptics: They don’t like him, they don’t trust him, but they are trying to keep an open mind. They criticize him frequently but try to keep it constructive. They probably didn’t vote for him but are trying to be gracious losers. Some of them may even concede that the good outweighs the bad but insist that the bad still needs to be addressed. Examples: Ben Shapiro, Most of NRO, I place myself here as well.
- Reluctant Trump: They don’t particularly like him, but they think we should give him the benefit of a doubt. They will generally cite Hillary Clinton as their primary (if not their only) motivation for voting for him. Examples: Andrew Klavan, Peter Robinson(?).
- Trump Defenders: They admit he’s made mistakes but either think the good outweighs the bad to such a degree as to make the mistakes not worth discussing, or they believe the forces aligned against him are so great that spending too much time on the mistakes is “piling on.” Examples: Victor Davis Hanson, Dennis Prager.
- Trump Apologists: The only thing he’s done wrong is not play by The Rules. Everything wrong with the administration is entirely the fault of his enemies. All critics are either pearl-clutching elitists and/or open borders globalists. Example: Sean Hannity.
Resolved: Groups 4-6 have a vested interest in believing that Group 1 is far larger than it really is and that Group 6 is a strawman. Groups 1-3 have a vested interest in the reverse, and I myself am far from innocent in this. As with many questions of this nature, reality is far closer to a bell curve. For both sides to accept this is the first step towards reconciliation.
Published in General
I find myself oscillating between 3 and 4.3 and getting worn out a bit.
Serviceable theory though.
I’d call myself a 4.5 on your scale. The reason I don’t believe there will be a great reconciliation is that by expressing my weariness with the virtue-signaling Nevers and disgust with the GOPe in general, I am labeled a #6, or even worse some type of Trump cultist who believes he can do no wrong.
As long as Trump is POTUS we will simply have to agree that this great divide exist on our side, try to keep it civil, and be as nice as possible in the comments section :)
I’m in the same boat, though talking to my next door neighbors pushes me towards 5 and 6. On the other hand, hearing about pearl clutching, cocktail party invitations, etc. sends me back to 2, and if I hear about Seth Rich and Pizzagate from the same people, it could knock me back to 1.
I don’t think this picture’s fuzziness will clear up until the powers that be decide to deal with some of these scandals that seem to just exist but nobody can make any of the principals testify regarding their roles. They just say no and everyone goes about their merry way. There must be an airing of who did what.
I am #5. Stop the bellyaching and give the man a chance.
I think that’s a reasonably accurate scale Umbra. I suppose I most closely align with Group 3.
This is great. It would have been supercalifragilisticexpialidocious if you’d included Ricochetians in the examples.
Also, I must have missed the blip in the night where Mona Charen admitted that Don has done some good things. But that’s entirely possible.
What you don’t think Seth liked pizza?
I almost did, but feedback from prereaders convinced me that doing so might cause more fights when I’m trying to help cut down on some of the noise.
Yeah I would say group 4 for the most part. Maybe group 3.5: Trump as the Place holder. This group doesn’t expect much. Hopes for good judicial picks, rolling back some of the Obama Ex Ords, and signing good, liberty focused legislation…..if it ever gets to him. But for the most part it’s status quo and hope he can keep the Dems out in 2020.
That’s a very valid point, and I have to admit that the sane reason for not doing it is in direct conflict with my reason for suggesting it.
I was going to reply with pretty much this. Thanks for saving me the trouble, @robertmcreynolds!
I’m pretty much the same, though I don’t really see myself on the scale. I didn’t vote for him in the primaries; in fact, I thought it was some kind of P.R. stunt at first. But when he won the nomination, I was on the Trump Train 1000%. Not because I don’t see him clearly. I can’t stand him, and have despised him since the 198os for the nouveau riche clod he is. But because at least we have the White House now, and in my view anyone who keeps carping from the sidelines is helping the Democrats. I don’t know where that puts me on the scale.
Yeah, I feel deprived of the enjoyable food fight.
FWIW, I’m a 3. Well done, UF.
I put myself at #3, but in order not to be a #1 I have to consciously suppress so many things that he has said and done as president, during the campaign, and in his earlier life. There are probably 50 things that each by itself would make it impossible for me to vote for him. I did not vote for him.
I woke up on the Wednesday after election day happy that Hillary Clinton was not going to be president. However:
Trump still has numerous faults and personality defects. It is important for conservatives to point these out and to do our best to keep him on the right path. We don’t do this by enabling the worst of his excesses, such as laughing at the notion that police should abuse suspects they are putting into their cars. Or determining that hiring a character (the kindest word that comes to mind) like Scaramucci is anything but an unmitigated disaster. Or by accepting his bizarre and inappropriate speech to the boy scouts as just Donald being Donald.
We are in danger of losing a whole lot of good people who expect dignity from their president.
7. Schadentrumpers: Anti-Democrats who enjoy watching lefty meltdowns!
I’m somewhere between 4 and 5. I happily voted for Trump, Hillary wasn’t my only reason, but I’m fully aware of his mistakes and less-desirable traits.
Nicely shaded. One doesn’t typically read that kind of nuance.
I can relate. Trump seems to be working overtime to push the majority of Americans to #1. However, I disagree with the conventional wisdom that if the Dems win the House and Senate in 2018 they’ll impeach. Why would they want to heal the GOP’s open, bleeding wound that is Trump?
I gravitate between 1, 2, & 3, but probably belong on #2. Thanks for a useful way of thinking about it.
I think your scale is reasonable, but not sure I buy this. Perhaps true of 1, 2, 5, 6. But I don’t see 3 and 4 having this view as a vested interest. FWIW, I’m generally a 4.5, which I would say is 4 +
losing sight of the fact that the swamp is really, really, really ugly and this is the first guy, with all his admitted faults, who is taking it on, with the result that the Deep State is basically in quasi-open rebellion.
@umbrafractus – excellent OP. This might be a useful scale to use when interacting with other ricochetti, (“Hey, don’t forget I’m a ‘4’, so…”)
FWIW, I’m usually a “3,” with the occasional foray into Schadentrumper territory. (@addictionisachoice – well said!)
Because they’re idiots? Why would they filibuster Gorsuch when they knew Mitchell was almost certain to nuke them. It would have been much smarter to let Gorsuch through, then use the filibuster on the next Justice.
It will be the first thing they do. Then they’ll spend the rest of Pence’s term painting him as an anti-LBGTQ bigot who hates women, and he’ll go down in flames because he’s too nice. Next will be, I don’t know, President Booker?
I’m somewhere between 2 and 3. Lefties drive me towards one end of the spectrum and many on the right drive me right back.
I don’t know that this is a separate category. Pretty much everybody from 3 up has at least a little of this in them. ;)
I would put Prager in number 6. Wasn’t it Prager who said that Trump had exceeded every conservatives “wildest dreams”?
Yeah, the categories certainly are fluid. I consider myself a strong 3, but I’ve caught myself sounding like a 4 when I have to deal with 1’s.
There’s a large amount of conflict between the people in group 3 and 4 that is hard to explain based on this taxonomy.