Advice for Would-Be Presidents

 

I’m not much of a joiner. Besides, any club that would have me as a member obviously has standards too high for me to live up to. But I am excited about my first meeting tonight with the “Monitor Twitter and Facebook Looking for Anyone Who Says Something Positive or Evenhanded About Donald Trump So We Can Bully and Harass Them on Social Media and Recreational Drugs Club.”

Okay, I made that up, but there is a loose confederation of such folks and they lie in wait ready to pounce if they even smell anything that resembles “normalizing” Mr. Trump. And, for them, normalizing means making any mention of him or members of his family or administration that does not include words such as “wacko,” “nutjob,” “racist,” “sexist,” or “megalomaniac.”

For example, I occasionally read a blog that analyzes, discusses, and critiques The New York Times’s crossword puzzles. Any mention of anything Trump in an answer or a clue causes the writer of the blog to fly into a rage over how the Times is normalizing the guy. Really? It’s a crossword puzzle! It’s The New York Times! And he’s the President of the United States! Well, maybe not his president, but certainly a president.

I’m not sure how all this anger will play out, but I’ve now come to the unhappy conclusion that it will remain with us for the balance of the Trump Era. (Excuse me, I meant Wacko Trump Era.) And in all my decades on this planet, I’ve never seen politics create such a divide among friends, families and co-workers. It’s really wearing me out. If there truly is a pendulum effect, that could mean the time will be ripe for an incredibly boring candidate. After all the Trump and Clinton Drama — and I’m afraid the latter isn’t going anywhere either — the country could very well be ready for the political version of Caspar Milquetoast. The best slogan for a future presidential candidate? How about, “Bland is Beautiful.”

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

There are 37 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. BD1 Member
    BD1
    @

    “Bland is Beautiful”

    Tom Cotton 2020.

    • #1
  2. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Bob Newhart for President!

    • #2
  3. Pugshot Inactive
    Pugshot
    @Pugshot

    In other words, time for a 21st century Calvin Coolidge!

    • #3
  4. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Pat Sajak: It’s really wearing me out. If there truly is a pendulum effect, that could mean the time will be ripe for an incredibly boring candidate. After all the Trump and Clinton Drama — and I’m afraid the latter isn’t going anywhere either — the country could very well be ready for the political version of Caspar Milquetoast. The best slogan for a future presidential candidate? How about, “Bland is Beautiful.”

    Mike Pence, take a bow.

    • #4
  5. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Pugshot (View Comment):
    In other words, time for a 21st century Calvin Coolidge!

    Of course, Coolidge got in as VP with Harding, a much more vibrant figure, at the helm.

    • #5
  6. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Pat Sajak: I’m not sure how all this anger will play out, but I’ve now come to the unhappy conclusion that it will remain with us for the balance of the Trump Era.

    I suspect longer. They did some of this with Reagan and W. and even Nixon, but it seems more virulent with Trump.

    • #6
  7. Ron Selander Member
    Ron Selander
    @RonSelander

    I’m afraid that this “anger” is not going to stop at the end of the Trump Era. The Dems seem to have gone “all in” in their worship of their god (the government). They hate those of us who refuse to bow down!

     

    !

    • #7
  8. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Ron Selander (View Comment):
    The Dems seem to have gone “all in” in their worship of their god (the government). They hate those of us who refuse to bow down!

    (It’s not just the Dems.)
    • #8
  9. She Member
    She
    @She

    BD1 (View Comment):

    “Bland is Beautiful”

    Tom Cotton 2020.

    Oh, I dunno.  Late in January of this year,  I was almost ready to sign the pledge if it meant I could  vote for Tom Cotton next time, just on the basis of this exchange (emphasis added), which dealt with Chuck Schumer’s game-playing with the timing of the vote on Mike Pompeo as the new CIA Director:

    Cotton confronted Schumer on the Senate floor over what Republicans called a broken promise on Pompeo’s vote. The minority leader told Cotton to lower his voice and join him outside to have the discussion.

    “Don’t tell me to lower my voice!” Cotton responded, according to the Standard.

    Schumer explained his position, saying the Senate had never confirmed a CIA director on Inauguration Day and that if he had been in the Senate eight years ago, he would have known that Republicans had tried to stall President Obama’s selection at the time.

    Eight years ago, I was getting my ass shot at in Afghanistan. So don’t talk to me about where I was eight years ago,” Cotton shot back.

    It’s possible that a Tom Cotton Presidency could be anything but bland.

    • #9
  10. Clavius Thatcher
    Clavius
    @Clavius

    After Trump anyone could be considered bland.

    • #10
  11. Jim Beck Inactive
    Jim Beck
    @JimBeck

    Afternoon Pat,

    As a geezer whose motto is “boredom is underrated”, I normally would send you a high five, but I am now considering it a blessing to see the true natures and true characters of many folks who have seemed or acted as if they were just reasonable average folks.  When LeBron, Steph, Chris act like modern Tommy Smiths or John Carloses it is disturbing to see what a gulf lies between the ideologies of inflicted injustice and resentment and thoughts that there may have been improvements and programs both in and out of government which were designed with compassion as their goal.  A part of our country does not like our country and does not admire its people.  It is good that we see this gulf, we do not want to live with illusions.

    • #11
  12. KentForrester Coolidge
    KentForrester
    @KentForrester

    I’ve often thought what Sajak wrote, so I could have written his post if I were smarter and more clever than I am.

     

    • #12
  13. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    I am guessing that it’s not just the president that is making everyone nuts – it’s society – and its global. The current Democratic Party, the party of my parents and the one I was a part of in my earlier life prior to Bush when I jumped ship, no longer resembles anything balanced. Politics seem much more extreme and radical, and it seems socialism and its counterparts have become the new norm everywhere – that paints a clash of civilizations to those of us who still believe in what our country was founded upon. Traditional cultures are struggling to stay afloat – you see it in Poland, Israel, Ireland, the American Midwest and South, etc. but you can feel the tidal wave of something trying to push away what has been the glue of western civilization.

    • #13
  14. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Jim Beck (View Comment):
    Afternoon Pat,

    As a geezer whose motto is “boredom is underrated”, I normally would send you a high five, but I am now considering it a blessing to see the true natures and true characters of many folks who have seemed or acted as if they were just reasonable average folks. When LeBron, Steph, Chris act like modern Tommy Smiths or John Carloses it is disturbing to see what a gulf lies between the ideologies of inflicted injustice and resentment and thoughts that there may have been improvements and programs both in and out of government which were designed with compassion as their goal. A part of our country does not like our country and does not admire its people. It is good that we see this gulf, we do not want to live with illusions.

    I’m going to piggyback a little on this comment. I completely agree that this exposure between the ideologies that prevail in our country is a good thing. I especially like the idea that it could get so intense that some people who have never really been exposed to anything but the Left will not be able to avoid getting some new information. And to have someone like Trump, who cannot possibly be normalized (a normalized Trump is an oxymoron) to hit back at what he doesn’t like exposes many of those bent on bringing down our republic. And, a little secret, much of what needs exposure is people, including prominent elected officials, thought to be part of the Right but actually acting more in the behalf of the progressive Left. I like having President Trump in the White House.

    • #14
  15. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Pat Sajak: …

    And in all my decades on this planet, I’ve never seen politics create such a divide among friends, families and co-workers. It’s really wearing me out.  …

    We are old enough to recall a time when there were conservative Democrats and progressive Republicans.

    The Democrats held a purge.  Conservatives were ejected from the Democrat Party.  They found refuge in the Republican Party, and are surprised to find that there are still a few progressive holdovers in the GOP.

    Trump is not responsible for the heightened polarity in American political life.  In fact, he is a product of it.

    • #15
  16. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Pat Sajak:  …

    If there truly is a pendulum effect, that could mean the time will be ripe for an incredibly boring candidate.  …

    I am not so concerned about the flamboyance of the President.  I am just hopeful that Americans will see the Democrat Party for the Leftist irrational violence-mongering anti-American mob that it is.  We need to keep pointing to their excesses and their hate.  Our appeal to the low-information voters is that Trump may be flawed, but those Progressives are nuts; they yammer a lot about imagined hate on our side while displaying real deep-seated hatred on their own part.

    • #16
  17. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    MJBubba (View Comment):
    I am just hopeful that Americans will see the Democrat Party for the Leftist irrational violence-mongering anti-American mob that it is. We need to keep pointing to their excesses and their hate.

    They’re doing a pretty good job pointing out their excesses and hatred themselves. They’re kind of proud of it.

    • #17
  18. Jim Beck Inactive
    Jim Beck
    @JimBeck

    Afternoon Bob,

    When the groups in the 60’s that despised our country were the Weather Underground, Panthers, Communists, and others, our society though fragmenting with the war and race, was more homogeneous than it is now.  Do you think that our increased fragmentation lessens the impact of those who hate our country now, or does our fragmentation give the groups who feel our country is corrupt a larger voice than they would have had in the 60’s?  I think the average Joe is less sympathetic to claims of injustice now, maybe out of numbness or real life counter experiences. What do you think?

    • #18
  19. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    There is no Republican in the country who is so bland that he or she will not send all Democrats and all MSM “journalists” into paroxysms of rage and hatred.  I was thinking that maybe someone who has never been known to be a Republican and who, in fact, had been a Democrat for most of his life.  But, ummm…  apparently that doesn’t work either.

    • #19
  20. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Bob Newhart for President!

    You know who this helps? Mitt Romney.

    (Somebody wake up Hugh Hewitt.)

    • #20
  21. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    MJBubba (View Comment):
    I am just hopeful that Americans will see the Democrat Party for the Leftist irrational violence-mongering anti-American mob that it is. We need to keep pointing to their excesses and their hate.

    They’re doing a pretty good job pointing out their excesses and hatred themselves. They’re kind of proud of it.

    Every Republican should be sure to challenge the Democrat opponent to repudiate other Democrats who call for violence, or who openly refused to take a position with respect to violence.  In next year’s races they should be known as the Riot Party.

    • #21
  22. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    @patsajak So you’re predicting another Romney run? Please no.

    My stock response to those who defend Antifa violence is to remember which side has more and better arms. Even Berkeley is beginning to actually enforce civil order following serial disgrace. Dawn breaks over Marblehead.

    • #22
  23. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Larry3435 (View Comment):
    There is no Republican in the country who is so bland that he or she will not send all Democrats and all MSM “journalists” into paroxysms of rage and hatred. I was thinking that maybe someone who has never been known to be a Republican and who, in fact, had been a Democrat for most of his life. But, ummm… apparently that doesn’t work either.

    They still clutch their pearls and speak in tongues over binders of women. Sapience is not their burden.

    • #23
  24. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Jim Beck (View Comment):
    Afternoon Bob,

    When the groups in the 60’s that despised our country were the Weather Underground, Panthers, Communists, and others, our society though fragmenting with the war and race, was more homogeneous than it is now. Do you think that our increased fragmentation lessens the impact of those who hate our country now, or does our fragmentation give the groups who feel our country is corrupt a larger voice than they would have had in the 60’s? I think the average Joe is less sympathetic to claims of injustice now, maybe out of numbness or real life counter experiences. What do you think?

    I’ve not thought much of this comparison. Off the top of my head, I think there was more substance to be concerned about, the war in Vietnam and the civil rights movement, with greater thought and commitment by those in the anti-status-quo movements. A big difference to me personally is that I could easily recognize and understand why those movements arose and existed, not so much with what’s out there today. Those 60’s movements, with some exceptions, were not against what America’s founding stood for but rather was an effort to bring that to all its people.

    • #24
  25. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    I’m not impressed by their non-normalization campaign. Now if they start requiring all his supporters to wear yellow stars or some such insignia, then they might qualify for the big leagues in that business.

    • #25
  26. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):I’ve not thought much of this comparison. Off the top of my head, I think there was more substance to be concerned about, the war in Vietnam and the civil rights movement, with greater thought and commitment by those in the anti-status-quo movements. A big difference to me personally is that I could easily recognize and understand why those movements arose and existed, not so much with what’s out there today. Those 60’s movements, with some exceptions, were not against what America’s founding stood for but rather was an effort to bring that to all its people.

    Agreed. As one who as a college student was also an occasional anti-war protester in those days, my view is that most of the protests were about changing a specific policy, i.e., the Vietnam War. Only a small contingent of radicals and hard lefties (Weather Underground, etc) were exploiting us naifs to move their revolutionary dreams forward. When the war and the draft ended, most of us went on to productive lives, while the radical fringe became college professors who have continued to pollute the conversation. My views certainly changed and I grew up. Others, not so much.

    • #26
  27. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):I’ve not thought much of this comparison. Off the top of my head, I think there was more substance to be concerned about, the war in Vietnam and the civil rights movement, with greater thought and commitment by those in the anti-status-quo movements. A big difference to me personally is that I could easily recognize and understand why those movements arose and existed, not so much with what’s out there today. Those 60’s movements, with some exceptions, were not against what America’s founding stood for but rather was an effort to bring that to all its people.

    Agreed. As one who as a college student was also an occasional anti-war protester in those days, my view is that most of the protests were about changing a specific policy, i.e., the Vietnam War. Only a small contingent of radicals and hard lefties (Weather Underground, etc) were exploiting us naifs to move their revolutionary dreams forward. When the war and the draft ended, most of us went on to productive lives, while the radical fringe became college professors who have continued to pollute the conversation. My views certainly changed and I grew up. Others, not so much.

    When you were protesting the Vietnam War, were you actively promoting a Communist victory?  Did you believe the lie that the ordinary South Vietnamese people really wanted the North to win?

    • #27
  28. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    MJBubba (View Comment):

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Agreed. As one who as a college student was also an occasional anti-war protester in those days, my view is that most of the protests were about changing a specific policy, i.e., the Vietnam War. Only a small contingent of radicals and hard lefties (Weather Underground, etc) were exploiting us naifs to move their revolutionary dreams forward. When the war and the draft ended, most of us went on to productive lives, while the radical fringe became college professors who have continued to pollute the conversation. My views certainly changed and I grew up. Others, not so much.

    When you were protesting the Vietnam War, were you actively promoting a Communist victory? Did you believe the lie that the ordinary South Vietnamese people really wanted the North to win?

    I’ll assume you are actually asking in good faith, perhaps not having encountered any of the millions of people who protested the Vietnam War in good faith, and you are not just taking a personal shot. So:

    No, to both questions. I thought it was a civil war on the other side of the world, in a place that, before 1964, most Americans had never heard of, and that the US should have honored the 1954 accords which had called for elections on reunification. Instead, we had clandestinely gone to war there, and on top of that, the public was deliberately lied to about what was going on. But I and others like me simply could not see that LBJ’s war had anything to do with American national interests.

    The War tore my family and many others apart. Of course, I was in the Ivy League bubble, just did not know it was such; maybe if I’d been born outside New England, I’d have had a different view.  Anyway, in 1967, I did run  into some of those radicals I alluded to and they scared the crap out of me. They were not only for the North, but for the downfall of the US government — seriously scary people.

    After the fall of Saigon and the North began their vicious purges and exterminations, I felt great sorrow and remorse for the aftermath of our involvement. But then, I was a kid. As I said, I learned, my views matured and I grew up. A visit to the Wall brought an outlet for grief for our fallen warriors, including my three high school classmates who had all died before 1968.

    Years later in grad school, I was classmates with an Army captain (and Vietnam vet) who, it turned out, had been on anti-riot duty during one of the protests I’d attended. Together, we searched for the bottom of a bottle of Scotch while engaging in our own reconciliation, each having been vehement in our former positions, he that the War was righteous, I that it was a mistake, and we each had since moved in the other’s direction.

     

    • #28
  29. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Fritz (View Comment):

    When you were protesting the Vietnam War, were you actively promoting a Communist victory? Did you believe the lie that the ordinary South Vietnamese people really wanted the North to win?

    I’ll assume you are actually asking in good faith, perhaps not having encountered any of the millions of people who protested the Vietnam War in good faith, and you are not just taking a personal shot. So:

    Yes, good faith.  I have met people who participated in anti-war protests.  I graduated high school in 1972, so I didn’t get to college until that fall.

    • #29
  30. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Fritz (View Comment):

    When you were protesting the Vietnam War, were you actively promoting a Communist victory? Did you believe the lie that the ordinary South Vietnamese people really wanted the North to win?

    I’ll assume you are actually asking in good faith, perhaps not having encountered any of the millions of people who protested the Vietnam War in good faith, and you are not just taking a personal shot. So:

    No, to both questions. I thought it was a civil war on the other side of the world, in a place that, before 1964, most Americans had never heard of, and that the US should have honored the 1954 accords which had called for elections on reunification. Instead, we had clandestinely gone to war there, and on top of that, the public was deliberately lied to about what was going on. But I and others like me simply could not see that LBJ’s war had anything to do with American national interests.

    Everyone says this.  Every time I speak with someone who participated in antiwar protests from 1967 through 1970, they all talk about how Americans were being lied to by the government.  But it was 1971 before the Pentagon Papers hit the news.

    I lived near Oak Ridge and had many friends with cold warrior fathers who worked there.  They were really distraught that so many colleges were in a pro-Communist uproar.

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