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.
VDH and Bul****
I have a great deal of respect for Victor Davis Hanson. I’ve read and listened to him extensively, and he has always impressed me with his thoughtfulness, decency, humility, breadth of knowledge, and quiet sanity.
The Bulwark, this new anti-Trump publication staffed by Charlie Sykes, Bill Kristol, and other people whose narrow-minded smug superiority I find impossible to stomach, has placed Hanson on its list of sell-outs, dupes, and traitors to the conservative cause, and set its sights on discrediting him and others who hold his, to me, quite sensible views.
It has long been true that I would like Trump a lot less if I liked his enemies more. Folks like those at the Bulwark are much of the reason I refrain from criticizing the President more than I do. I’m not much of a joiner, but I’d rather have Hanson on my team than any number of these others.
[Update: I wrote this post not knowing that Victor Davis Hanson has a new book coming out. The Case for Trump will be released this week.]
Published in Politics
Indeed they do. Hence my remark that “Trump hasn’t been a bad president”. You’re barking up the wrong tree here.
In fact, I think Trump is better than either of his two Republican predecessors (so far at least). But I also think he is capable of much less than many of his supporters – even his lukewarm supporters – claim. That shouldn’t be too controversial.
My original point was to respond to Henry’s comment that he has a more positive opinion of Trump than he otherwise might because he’s so mad at Trump’s opponents. I think that’s an Achilles heel of many on the right, and not only when it comes to Trump. But I think that weakness is why Trump will likely get away with wavering on many of his big ticket promises and still enjoy great enthusiasm from his core voters going into 2020.
I’d say it’s barely even scratched.
Remember that when John Boehner stepped down in 2015, Kevin McCarthy was his heir apparent until the Freedom Caucus drummed up enough opposition to keep him from inheriting the position of Speaker. Fast forward to 2019, and a Republican House caucus that is supposedly more conservative than ever just elected that same Kevin McCarthy to be their leader. That doesn’t sound much like a wounded establishment to me.
Add to that the fact that Mitt Romney (!) and Martha McSally are now in the Senate while Kelli Ward is left to plan yet another primary challenge, and I’d say the establishment is doing about as well as ever.
Word up, homie.
I got redacted – my fault, I was careless. Change my earlier problematic reference to “those who scurry from the light and seek to hide in warm donor darkness.”
NO! That’s what I’ve been trying to say.
Perhaps I am being overly naive, but I really want to vote “for” someone, instead of “against” the people I dislike.
They don’t in aggregate. Medicare Part D was 9 trillion instant unfunded liability. They did it so they could finish off Iraq. Everything has been like that since Ronald Reagan. That’s when the debt to GDP angles started taking off.
You can find all kinds of interviews with Republicans like Rep Massie from Kentucky that prove what I’m saying. Try ‘Bucking the system’ on Full Measure news.
I wish it worked that way.
This thinking baffles me. Trump picked that “solid Republican team.” Trump lifted the regulatory burdens. Yet he’s doing a bad job because of something your crystal ball says he’s going to do next term?
I was strongly in the Anybody-but-Trump-but Hillary camp, and ended up on Cruz in the end. But I have to say that, over time, I’ve come to wonder if any other candidate would have moved the ball for conservatism as well as Trump has so far. He’s far from what I “want,” but he’s been a surprise to me.
I could be accused of morally preening.
Hyperbolic nonsense.
This is a very unfair reading of what Henry has been saying, IMO. I don’t see where he’s changed his views. Trump is making the right people set their hair on fire. It’s possible to enjoy that without letting it redefine your positions. I know I do.
I want that too. The problem is I don’t actually like that many people.
Don’t pretend the Trump haters actually care about conservatism. The Bulwark has made it clear that they don’t.
You can often judge a man by the enemies he gains. Both VDH and DJT have grown in my estimation based on the sub flat rock habitues who hate them.
You bubble-bursting fiend!
Sigh. Oh, so true.
@henryracette: You had me at “Bill Kristol.”
So do I. But I will always choose the lesser of the two evils with the two most electable candidates because that is preferable to the greater of two evils. As did most reluctant Trump voters.
True, that.
I’ll bite Gary. Stop morally preening!
Read Kevin Williamson’s The End is Near.
Everything moves left all of the time. O’Sullivan’s law. Google it.
This is why. None of you care.
And you can also judge a man by the friends he keeps. Just look at all the shady criminals in Trumps life who now are going to jail. And while a total stranger may choose to hate you for random reasons the people you place around you in positions of trust clearly reflect your own values and judgement.
But whatever. Trump is garbage, and some people like garbage, or at least feel an need to defend it against trash. I don’t.
I adopted my internet name a long time ago in response to progressives calling me and mine ‘Redneck’ (with the worst possible connotations, not the positive ones). Its been no real surprise at all that those ‘conservatives’ who jumped on that bandwagon over the years since then have become what they are now, I’ve been anticipating it for years. Trump is merely the lightning rod for what already was present within the Conservative ‘community’, otherwise they would restrict their moral criticisms to Trump’s personal failings, not the things that logically apply to large numbers of Republicans as well. Even for the ones who started out sincere, culture and peer pressure ‘Trump’ ideological principles, they really do think Progressives are better people than the Republican base.
Speaking of which, Erick Erickson now seems to oppose withdrawing federal funding to Universities that don’t allow free speech.
You’re confounding deficit and spending. They are not the same thing.
Excessive spending is popular.
Nope. The Fed. should be managing interest rates to target a growth target (NGDPLT). Raising rates does not “bank” growth for a rainy day. It is like driving with the brakes on in case you want to improve your fuel economy later. Paying down debt is OK though. Quantitative Tapering is OK too. But, the US economy is not that strong as the global economy is weak.
Are you suggesting that NTs are people who are indulging their self-hate?
Central planning is proven nonsense. All it does is grow government and screw savers of fiat money. It’s unworkable.
When I mean it’s dead, it’s dead at the presidential level. As @garyrobbins likes to point out, Trump won the nomination with a plurality. His ceiling, or floor depending on your vantage, may have been 37% within the party.
So, let’s play out this hypothetical: The Democrats don’t nominate the crazy in 2020 and Trump loses reelection. That 37% then abandons the GOP for good, especially if they perceive Trump was internally wounded/sabotaged by his own party. That could leave you with a Republican Party unable to crack 30M national votes for the White House. They will have achieved their purity and also permanent rump status. And all because, in their mind, they could not make a temporary strategic alliance with Trump.
As I alluded to in my first comment in this thread, men like Churchill and FDR could ally themselves with a man responsible for 43M deaths, but for people like Bill Kristol and others, Donald Trump is a step too far. And that says more about the pathetic state of American politics than Trump’s presence in the Oval Office.
@valiuth, these are fair points but not necessarily relevant. Many presidents have been “blessed” with shady associates. Certainly Clinton (both Bill and Hillary) had (and has) shady associates. The shady associations are frequently not widely known until after the election. So the real question is: Who aspires to be president isn’t garbage and how do you know for sure?