Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
I would like to hear your definition of “cult of personality”. Personally, I think it’s overused and misapplied. In a sense, every politician has followers who like his personality- if he has one – and then there are followers who like the other type precisely because he has no personality. Mike Pence?
My loose definition is people voting for charisma over substance. It also carries an implication that the followers are being duped and are somewhat naive or stupid.
I have seen little evidence that Trump has much of a cult following due to his personality. It’s actually the opposite. Most people don’t like his personality. (I’m actually coming around, myself). Trump candidacy had all the indications of a movement as Bernie Sanders’ was.
Obama didn’t have much of a personality, his was a cult of racial identification and white liberals having him as their clean well-spoken pet black guy a la Joe Biden.
Clinton was well-liked by the ladies, if that counts. He was supposed to be personally very charming- which is the hallmark of that type of narcissist.
Moderator Note:
Please return to the matter of the post. Thanks.Deliberate obtuseness ought to be graded as a backhand ad hominem attack too.[Redacted]
Some of you might be interested in this post from Patterico regarding Henry Kerner, the McCain staffer mentioned in the Judicial Watch piece. It provides a different take on what he was doing.
I read that today as well. Given what was revealed in the Patterico piece and subsequent retraction by Gateway Pundit I think I can safely call this entire controversy: FAKE NEWS!!!
It’s certainly not fake as the documents exist. As I said earlier in the comments, it had to be either malice or stupidity. Patterico (unwillingly) comes down on the side of stupidity. If Mr. Kerner went into it thinking anyone in the Obama Administration was interested in equal treatment of conservative and liberal groups then he’s hopeless. Of course, he’s working through intermediaries and not addressing the issue himself so we still only have the documentation and his boss’s past hostilities.
Fake News.
Isn’t putting things in all caps supposed to be moderated? Particularly, when that is the sole reply. We have gone from Obtuse Olympics to Outrage Olympics.
You could save time by flagging yourself.