Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Useless Useful Idiots: Whither The Bulwark and The Dispatch After Trump?

 

Ever since Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign began to look like it was more than a promotional stunt for his reality show and began to take on the shape of a real run at the White House, there were voices on the Right condemning the whole idea of a Trump presidency. The Right’s most concerted effort took the form of National Review’s “Against Trump” issue, and most on the Right remain critical of the President’s failings even if they support him generally. (This is a marked difference from the last Democrat president, who received virtually no significant criticism from members of his party while in office.) But a sizable group of Republicans (excuse me, “former Republicans”) abandoned their party and became “Never Trumpers” – they were so exorcized by the idea of Donald Trump personally that they could no longer support their party. Some, like Max Boot and Jennifer Rubin, completely altered their beliefs and values because they hated Trump so much.

And from this sprang a whole new cottage industry of Republican-hating Conservatives. A niche craft that once belonged only to David Brooks and David Frum suddenly burst open with a whole field of carpetbaggers toting elephant guns: Charles Sykes, Mona Charen, Jonah Goldberg, George Will, Noah Rothman, Joe Scarborough, just to name a few. And with it has come two political websites to challenge the likes of NationalReview.com, CommentaryMagazine.com, and Ricochet.com: TheBulwark.com and TheDispatch.com.

The Bulwark clearly is staffed by people who have been marinating in the full-bore culture of the Coastal Left far too long. Even the graphics have that overprocessed, graphic design school sheen to them that looks like something off early 2000s Slate.com. As of this writing, there is a graphic of Trump with a crown that is clearly inspired by the works of 1980s neo-expressionist Jean-Michel Basquiat – an artist whose works were explicitly political in their examination of wealth, class, and colonialism. This is not something one would see in, say, The Weekly Standard, but it is something the Lefties who buy New York magazine would lap up. It instantly transmits the message, “Hey, we’re worldly Coastal Elites just like you. We go to the Whitney and the Guggenheim. We’re down with Bob Iger and Margaret Atwood and Oprah Winfrey. We’re one of you!” Honestly, it reeks of a desperation to be accepted by the cool kids.

That likely also explains why the columns go overboard in their criticism of Trump:

“The president of the United States, ladies and gentlemen, was in full Mad King mode, rambling, confused, disjointed, parading his grievances with barely a wave from afar at coherence.”

Of course, one could just go to the “trending” article, “100 Reasons Trump Is Unfit to Be President.” Written just on June 26, 2020, one would think this would have been the first article produced by the site. Finding any criticism of Democrats on TheBulwark.com is pretty much impossible: Currently, the home page of the site lionizes Alexander Vindman, an army officer who was insubordinate because his partisan beliefs ran counter to the Commander-in-Chief’s. But by in large, the majority of the articles just seem stale:

“Trump is not interested in the actual job of the presidency. He’s interested in the attention the presidency affords him.”

Really? This is a new insight? I seem to recall Never Trumpers harping on this in 2016. Why would anyone subscribe to The Bulwark if the contributors are so low on fresh material?

Just the article titles alone on The Bulwark are enough to make one’s eyes pop when one considers this site is supposed to cater to “Conservatives”:

Actually, Virtue Signaling Is Good
We could use less celebration of vice and more signaling of virtue.
Racial Injustice Remains the Great Weakness of American Democracy
If America is to lead the free world, first it must lead itself.
Crises and Competence (complete with a graphic of Ronald Reagan)
How the decades-long gutting of government—worsened by Trump’s failings—exacerbated the pandemic, the protests, and more.
America’s Underlying Injustice Won’t Just Disappear
We have all failed. Now we have to fix it.
Now is the Time to Stand with Dreamers
Evangelicals want Dreamers to be allowed to stay lawfully in the United States. The President should listen to them.
Florida’s Idiocracy
Come and witness the wisdom of The People.
(One usually has to tune into Last Week Tonight or The Daily Show to find the kind of snarling, sneering condescension and gleeful ridicule for non-elite types in which shamelessly Charles Sykes wallows in that last article.)

What’s most glaringly missing for the site? Any critique whatsoever for the behavior of any Democrat lawmaker. Andrew Cuomo’s killing thousands of people by ordering COVID patients into nursing homes? Not a peep. Gretchen Whitmer’s high-handed assaults on liberty in Michigan? Never heard of it. Anything Nancy Pelosi has done ever? Nancy who?

In short, almost the entire output of TheBulwark.com can be summed up in one line from the 1996 film Waiting for Guffman:

The Dispatch is somewhat better – in the way that being shot in the arm is better than being shot in the face. At least there is an acknowledgement that the real final boss at the end of the game is, in fact, the Democrats and not just more Bad, Nasty Republicans as The Bulwark now crew seems to believe. The problem with The Dispatch mostly seems to lie in the idea that the rules of political discourse have remained roughly the same as they were in 1985, where all politicians understood there was a balance of power and respected the fundamental layout of the system of checks and balances laid out in the Constitution. Anyone paying a lick of attention over the last decade will know that one party long ago abandoned anything like partisan comity when they rammed through ObamaCare with budget reconciliation and abandoned the filibuster in the Senate. And that party was not the Republicans. And yet Conservatives should still play by gentlemanly rules and the most prim and proper of etiquette and morality according to the thinker who most represents The Dispatch’s ethos, David French. French is the sort of man who would insist on fighting a duel with a flintlock pistol according to the rules, even when he clearly sees his opponent is carrying an AK-47. As the Democrats make loud noises about court packing and move to create an unconstitutional fifty-first state simply to consolidate a permanent hold on the Senate, French and The Dispatch gang seem less and less like standard bearers for old guard Conservatism than a gang of fusty old Don Quixotes tilting at windmills.

If TheDispatch.com folks were a Waiting for Guffman line, they would be this:

It’s difficult not to look at these sites – especially The Bulwark – and not think of the old phrase “useful idiots”: As defined by the Oxford English Dictionary, “useful idiot” is “a derogatory term for a person perceived as propagandizing for a cause without fully comprehending the cause’s goals, and who is cynically used by the cause’s leaders.” If there was ever a group of people spouting the propaganda of a group (the Democrats) whose goals they cannot fully comprehend, it must be the Never Trumpers. After all, the best recompense people like George Will and Steve Hayes could hope to get from the Left is (metaphorically) getting shot last.

So what if Trump is disposed of in this election? What do these groups do next? When Trump is gone, what is the purpose of the Never Trump brand? Are they just going to become Never Republican? There’s a name for that: Democrats. And there are plenty of those around: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, BBC, PBS, NPR, HBO, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Vox, HuffPo, BuzzFeed, The New Yorker, The Atlantic, Deutsche Welle, The Economist, etc. When there’s no longer a need for a supposed “inside” voice to undermine the Right, why would the Left continue to give these Useful Idiots succor? And why would the Right want to have anything to do with speakers who will be seen as having happily played a role in their downfall from power? Pundits like William Kristol, Mona Charen, and Charles Sykes are more likely to be viewed as treasonous Clytemnestras than tragic Cassandras.

So with that said, then, what will the Useful Idiots who have been bolstering the Democrat cause against Trump do if Joe Biden becomes president and the Democrats take control? Who will be their audience? If Trump is gone, can they sustain more than just a small echo chamber of Inside-the-Beltway types congratulating themselves on how smart they were while everything goes to hell?

For the future of their investments and careers, I suspect there are actually quite a few people working at both sites secretly praying Trump pulls out a win this November…

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 375 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Henry Racette Contributor

    Superb!

    • #1
    • July 14, 2020, at 9:36 PM PDT
    • 9 likes
  2. Hoyacon Member

    I don’t read either, so my opinion is suspect. It’s my impression, though, that The Dispatch isn’t nearly as useless as The Bulwark, and may have a longer shelf life. True?

    • #2
    • July 14, 2020, at 9:45 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  3. Gary Robbins Reagan

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    I don’t read either, so my opinion is suspect. It’s my impression, though, that The Dispatch isn’t nearly as useless as The Bulwark, and may have a longer shelf life. True?

    I suggest that you check them out. All of The Bulwark is free, and much of The Dispatch is also free. Make up your own mind. Both have several podcasts; you may find that you like one or more of them. Don’t take my word about them, read and listen for yourself.

    • #3
    • July 14, 2020, at 9:49 PM PDT
    • Like
  4. Jon1979 Lincoln

    If you look at the cross-pollination between The Bulwark and The Lincoln Project, the latter is already setting itself up to sort of be Media Matters v2.0 after the 2020 election, with their promise to do things like cancel Tucker Carlson and other conservatives on the air or in other high-profile positions, such as taking down GOP Senators in future races who are not up for election this November.

    That’s likely going to be how The Bulwark repuposes itself if Biden wins. They will become the new ankle-biting Chihuahua in harassing conservatives who don’t agree to let them run the entire GOP operation now that Trump is gone, and where their ideas are going to center around giving ground to the Dems if they want to win back support of swing voters. People who went around the bend and have now thrown a 61-month tantrum over Donald Trump are likely to keep kicking and screaming in 2021, if Trump’s gone and still nobody’s listening to them (which is exactly what David Frum did in 2009, when he told Republicans their only chance of survival in the wake of the Obama election was to lurch left, and then threw a No Labels hissy fit when the bulk of the party moved more in the Tea Party’s direction, before it was corrupted by its own set of grifters).

    • #4
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:00 PM PDT
    • 14 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  5. The Elephant in the Room Member

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    I don’t read either, so my opinion is suspect. It’s my impression, though, that The Dispatch isn’t nearly as useless as The Bulwark, and may have a longer shelf life. True?

    I finally gave up on The Dispatch’s podcast, mostly because it seems to be so dominated by David French, and his perspective is, to my mind, that high-minded, principled stance of bringing a knife to a gunfight. He still can’t quite fathom why so many evangelical Christians, for example, supported Trump: For decades, the Democrats have gotten away with anything and everything; Obama was genuinely a nasty actor towards the rights and beliefs of Christians in most respects. So many evangelicals finally realized that the only way their freedoms were likely to survive much longer against the aggression of the Left was to get their own “nasty man” to fight on their behalf.

    And this may come from French’s own brand of Christianity; perhaps he feels we’re just hastening the Second Coming, so why fight the inevitable rise of the Antichrist? But me, I’d prefer to delay the coming of New Sodom for as long as possible.

    French’s general obliviousness to the changes in how the Left now operates in its lust for total power is the flaw in the overall philosophy behind The Dispatch. I thought so when he was at NR, and I think it’s worse now without more grounded, pragmatic thinkers like Charlie Cooke to counter his absolutist moral stances.

    • #5
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:00 PM PDT
    • 21 likes
  6. Jon1979 Lincoln

    Hoyacon (View Comment):

    I don’t read either, so my opinion is suspect. It’s my impression, though, that The Dispatch isn’t nearly as useless as The Bulwark, and may have a longer shelf life. True?

    The Dispatch hasn’t decided that everything they collectively believed about conservatism prior to Donald Trump’s arrival is now invalid, because he touched some conservative ideas and gave them cooties (though David French seems to be trending more and more that way). The Bulwark’s crew can’t abide being on the same side of any issue as Trump to the point repudiating their own stated pre-2015 beliefs is no problem at all.

    • #6
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:04 PM PDT
    • 9 likes
  7. The Elephant in the Room Member

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    That’s likely going to be how The Bulwark repuposes itself if Biden wins. They will become the new ankle-biting Chihuahua in harassing conservatives who don’t agree to let them run the entire GOP operation now that Trump is gone, and where their ideas are going to center around giving ground to the Dems if they want to win back support of swing voters. People who went around the bend and have now thrown a 61-month tantrum over Donald Trump are likely to keep kicking and screaming in 2021, if Trump’s gone and still nobody’s listening to them (which is exactly what David Frum did in 2009, when he told Republicans their only chance of survival in the wake of the Obama election was to lurch left, and then threw a No Labels hissy fit when the bulk of the party moved more in the Tea Party’s direction, before it was corrupted by its own set of grifters).

    Oh, no one’s gonna listen to them. Why would a party want to let a group that basically spent half a decade dining out on their abandonment of the GOP suddenly want to put these turncoats in charge? Especially when these are not exactly new, fresh voices. The Bulwark crowd all lost their political capital with Republicans when they jumped ship. Their only real option is to go the full Max Boot – get a Planned Parenthod t-shirt, start tweeting “SCIENCE!!!” in all caps, and plan their next vacation in Caracas.

    • #7
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:12 PM PDT
    • 11 likes
  8. James Lileks Contributor

    What dismays me about the current situation is the automatic gainsaying standing in for reasoned thought. I saw a tweet from a Bulwarkian I really, really, really like as a human guy, just a great fellow, and it was dunking on Trump for being incoherent in a speech about Biden “wanting to abolish the suburbs.” The essential point was the legislation and regulation to which Trump referred, something we discussed on the last podcast, but the pith of the tweet was “he says Biden is mentally diminished, look at this.” Okay okay. I get it. But. The issue matters, no? 

    If you’re really about Conserving Conservatism and you hate the guy, maybe tweet out something like “he’s rambling here, but he’s got a point.” 

    • #8
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:13 PM PDT
    • 36 likes
  9. The Elephant in the Room Member

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    What dismays me about the current situation is the automatic gainsaying standing in for reasoned thought. I saw a tweet from a Bulwarkian I really, really, really like as a human guy, just a great fellow, and it was dunking on Trump for being incoherent in a speech about Biden “wanting to abolish the suburbs.” The essential point was the legislation and regulation to which Trump referred, something we discussed on the last podcast, but the pith of the tweet was “he says Biden is mentally diminished, look at this.” Okay okay. I get it. But. The issue matters, no?

    If you’re really about Conserving Conservatism and you hate the guy, maybe tweet out something like “he’s rambling here, but he’s got a point.”

    I think there is a sort of unhinged quality to The Bulwark that really is dismaying. For a group that so frequently decries Trump’s behavior, the writing there really is borderline inappropriate. Example: An article about Trump’s recent Rose Garden speech is entitled, “Elder Abuse at the White House,” inferring that the fact that Trump was allowed to make such a crazy, incoherent speech was an act of poor caretaking of an old man suffering from dementia.

    Imagine if Fox News has written a headline like that about Joe Biden.

    I cant help but feel like The Bulwark has become the thing they decry the most…

    • #9
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:23 PM PDT
    • 19 likes
  10. Jon1979 Lincoln

    The Elephant in the Room (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    That’s likely going to be how The Bulwark repuposes itself if Biden wins. They will become the new ankle-biting Chihuahua in harassing conservatives who don’t agree to let them run the entire GOP operation now that Trump is gone, and where their ideas are going to center around giving ground to the Dems if they want to win back support of swing voters. People who went around the bend and have now thrown a 61-month tantrum over Donald Trump are likely to keep kicking and screaming in 2021, if Trump’s gone and still nobody’s listening to them (which is exactly what David Frum did in 2009, when he told Republicans their only chance of survival in the wake of the Obama election was to lurch left, and then threw a No Labels hissy fit when the bulk of the party moved more in the Tea Party’s direction, before it was corrupted by its own set of grifters).

    Oh, no one’s gonna listen to them. Why would a party want to let a group that basically spent half a decade dining out on their abandonment of the GOP suddenly want to put these turncoats in charge? Especially when these are not exactly new, fresh voices. The Bulwark crowd all lost their political capital with Republicans when they jumped ship. Their only real option is to go the full Max Boot – get a Planned Parenthod t-shirt, start tweeting “SCIENCE!!!” in all caps, and plan their next vacation in Caracas.

    The Rick Wilson metaphorically having his underwear pulled up over his head in a super-wedgie by Stephen Colbert and his Late Show Greek Chorus Monday night was an example of what the left really thinks about The Bulwark/Lincoln Project types. They might be a tad nicer to Bill Kristol, but they still can’t forget the Bush 43 years (or with Kristol, even the Bush 41 years when he was with Quayle). They’re useful against Trump. But they still hate them.

    • #10
    • July 14, 2020, at 10:52 PM PDT
    • 16 likes
  11. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    https://amgreatness.com/2020/07/14/nevertrump-parasites-wont-give-up-on-destroying-their-host/

    A cartoon talk show produced by Stephen Colbert ambushed Wilson during what he undoubtedly thought would be a friendly interview this week. Calling out Wilson’s hypocrisy, the characters assailed Wilson for snuggling up to his former political foes and mocked the Lincoln Project for its ties to the George W. Bush Administration. “Rick, when was the exact moment you realized those pathetic little whores [how Wilson described a group of Obama supporters in a 2010 tweet] could be tapped for money?”

    The show also confronted Wilson about the Lincoln Project’s finances; nearly 90 percent of its 2020 budget so far has been spent on overhead rather than voter outreach. Wilson stammered to explain, but to no avail. The show ended by describing the Lincoln Project as “savvy grifters who ruined the country before.”

    Emphasis added. 

    Lincoln Project is about people getting rich. 

    Who funds the other sites?

     

    • #11
    • July 15, 2020, at 5:06 AM PDT
    • 10 likes
  12. Franco Member
    Franco Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Love the Waiting for Guffman references!

    Another thing I’m noticing about myself and my now-hindsight realizations, is that I’m seeing the Bush administration(s) in an increasingly negative light. I know I’m not alone. I defended him and I bought into Iraq the Model. Now that’s been exposed as those wars have outlasted their noble (?) intentions.

    It’s now all too obvious. After 20 years we still can’t leave Afghanistan. It looks like a tacit deal was made with the Obama administration. Why didn’t he leave? It was too hard. Why didn’t these people fight harder against Democrats? They were being appeased. They made deals. These are all – to a man and woman – pro massive immigration ( which is a combination of insanity and stupidity for any freedom living conservative) and pro globalism One-New-World-Order, America Last partisans. There’s not much else they care about, other than preening that Republicans are better human beings because they vote for good family men like Romney, who will virtue signal the rest of the world using taxpayer largess, with a heavy dose of finger-wagging.

    They personally lose nothing when Democrats win elections. 

    Our sherpas got us lost and the only question was- was it intentional or simply incompetence. The only way I can navigate the trail through the political jungle is by policy markers, watching which direction the birds fly through the dense cover of the media, and plotting as best I can our route. At some point even the tenderfoot white guy starts to suspect these ‘guides’ are not providing accurate information.

    It was intentional. They were never interested in the destination. They were interested in the ‘journey’ and the ongoing paycheck running us in circles.

    When I listen to the likes of Rick Wilson, who is crude and nasty – nastier than Trump ever was -moralize about Trump and the “rubes”, it’s yet another dimension in their utter hypocrisy and clear indication of what I call “moralism by proxy” ( as long as they can vote for and support a ‘moral’ candidate, they are off the hook and can operate with impunity).

    So now, exposed and cut off from funds, our sherpas have decided to sell us to the Amazonian (Bezosian?) tribe for one last paycheck. But the tribe will never accept them, even if they pierce their noses with bones and wiggle their asses in grass skirts. 

    I wholeheartedly agree that things will be better for them if Trump wins. Personally I’m more disgusted with myself than hateful towards these pathetic con-men. But that will change if they get their wish. 

    They are politically stupid ( but I suspected that for years). Assuming that 20 million Trump voters held their noses and voted for the guy, that leaves 43 million who will never, ever trust the GOP again, and any candidate these frauds endorse will go down simpering like Jeb Bush did in the primaries.

    • #12
    • July 15, 2020, at 5:10 AM PDT
    • 21 likes
  13. Stad Thatcher

    The Elephant in the Room: If there was ever a group of people spouting the propaganda of a group (the Democrats) whose goals they cannot fully comprehend, it must be the Never Trumpers.

    Amen, Brother!

    • #13
    • July 15, 2020, at 5:33 AM PDT
    • 8 likes
  14. ape2ag Member

    I’ve always wondered what the goal of the Bulwark was, and I can’t come up with anything other than short term grift. Grift is a strong word. From the inside it probably seems more like lucrative contract work. When this gig is up they’ll put themselves out for hire again.

    The Dispatch had unobjectionable goals, although I have suspected that they have a target audience and business model in mind that would make them ideologically unappealing to me. In practice they have ended up being Bulwark light much of the time.

    • #14
    • July 15, 2020, at 6:39 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  15. Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw Member

    ape2ag (View Comment):
    The Dispatch had unobjectionable goals, although I have suspected that they have a target audience and business model in mind that would make them ideologically unappealing to me. In practice they have ended up being Bulwark light much of the time.

    I think it’s partially a case of “when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail”. All they know how to do is write columns and record podcasts, so that’s what they did.

    • #15
    • July 15, 2020, at 6:51 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  16. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    ape2ag (View Comment):

    I’ve always wondered what the goal of the Bulwark was, and I can’t come up with anything other than short term grift. Grift is a strong word. From the inside it probably seems more like lucrative contract work. When this gig is up they’ll put themselves out for hire again.

    The Dispatch had unobjectionable goals, although I have suspected that they have a target audience and business model in mind that would make them ideologically unappealing to me. In practice they have ended up being Bulwark light much of the time.

    I still say the business model is as a money laundering operation for the wealthy benefactors underwriting these financial disasters.

    • #16
    • July 15, 2020, at 7:34 AM PDT
    • 4 likes
  17. Gary Robbins Reagan

    I urge my fellow Ricochetti to go to the other sites and to read and hear for yourself. All of the Bulwark is free, and about half of the Dispatch is free.

    This is not unlike Ted Cruz at the 2016 Convention asking the delegates to vote their conscience. (He was booed for saying that.)

    • #17
    • July 15, 2020, at 7:51 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  18. Franco Member
    Franco Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I urge my fellow Ricochetti to go to the other sites and to read and hear for yourself. All of the Bulwark is free, and about half of the Dispatch is free.

    This is not unlike Ted Cruz at the 2016 Convention asking the delegates to vote their conscience. (He was booed for saying that.)

    Are you still trying to convert people? Is this like a missionary quest for you? As far as I can see, you get no likes on your comments. People here are not in agreement with you very much, and if these sites are so great why are you spending so much time here? 

    If your are so certain about Trump and the GOP losing in 2020, why are you so intent on conversion? Are you trying to save our souls or something?
    It looks to me like in your religion, St. Peter admits people to heaven based on their voting records, with higher status for those who donate to the right candidates. 

     

    • #18
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:09 AM PDT
    • 13 likes
  19. Jerry Giordano (Arizona Patrio… Member

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I urge my fellow Ricochetti to go to the other sites and to read and hear for yourself. All of the Bulwark is free, and about half of the Dispatch is free.

    This is not unlike Ted Cruz at the 2016 Convention asking the delegates to vote their conscience. (He was booed for saying that.)

    But being a grown up, Ted Cruz came around. Like me, he watched what the President did, and found it to be generally conservative and worthy of support.

    There’s a good reason that Cruz was booed for his comment. A losing primary candidate is supposed to accept defeat gracefully, accept the decision of the primary voters, and back the chosen candidate for the sake of party unity.

    I did this as a voter, supporting candidates who did not appeal to me very much — Dole, McCain, and Romney.

    • #19
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:22 AM PDT
    • 16 likes
  20. Gary Robbins Reagan

    Franco (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I urge my fellow Ricochetti to go to the other sites and to read and hear for yourself. All of the Bulwark is free, and about half of the Dispatch is free.

    This is not unlike Ted Cruz at the 2016 Convention asking the delegates to vote their conscience. (He was booed for saying that.)

    Are you still trying to convert people? Is this like a missionary quest for you? As far as I can see, you get no likes on your comments. People here are not in agreement with you very much, and if these sites are so great why are you spending so much time here?

    If your are so certain about Trump and the GOP losing in 2020, why are you so intent on conversion? Are you trying to save our souls or something?
    It looks to me like in your religion, St. Peter admits people to heaven based on their voting records, with higher status for those who donate to the right candidates.

    I am merely suggesting that people think for themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.

    • #20
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:23 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  21. DrewInWisconsin, Doormat Coolidge

    The Elephant in the Room: And from this sprang a whole new cottage industry of Republican-hating Conservatives.

    They’re probably best described as “Conservative-hating Republicans.”

    • #21
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:25 AM PDT
    • 7 likes
  22. DrewInWisconsin, Doormat Coolidge

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    Lincoln Project is about people getting rich. 

    Who funds the other sites?

    Left-wing billionaires.

    • #22
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:28 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  23. DrewInWisconsin, Doormat Coolidge

    The Elephant in the Room (View Comment):
    Example: An article about Trump’s recent Rose Garden speech is entitled, “Elder Abuse at the White House,” inferring that the fact that Trump was allowed to make such a crazy, incoherent speech was an act of poor caretaking of an old man suffering from dementia.

    Oh, that’s up next in the ever-revolving cycle: “Trump has dementia.” The pattern is still holding. We’ll be back to emoluments in two weeks.

    • #23
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:30 AM PDT
    • 9 likes
  24. DrewInWisconsin, Doormat Coolidge

    Hoyacon (View Comment):
    It’s my impression, though, that The Dispatch isn’t nearly as useless as The Bulwark, and may have a longer shelf life. True?

    It looked that way at first, but David French’s shrill and unhinged nonsense has been dragging it down.

    • #24
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:34 AM PDT
    • 10 likes
  25. Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw Member

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I urge my fellow Ricochetti to go to the other sites and to read and hear for yourself. All of the Bulwark is free, and about half of the Dispatch is free.

    This is not unlike Ted Cruz at the 2016 Convention asking the delegates to vote their conscience. (He was booed for saying that.)

    Are you still trying to convert people? Is this like a missionary quest for you? As far as I can see, you get no likes on your comments. People here are not in agreement with you very much, and if these sites are so great why are you spending so much time here?

    If your are so certain about Trump and the GOP losing in 2020, why are you so intent on conversion? Are you trying to save our souls or something?
    It looks to me like in your religion, St. Peter admits people to heaven based on their voting records, with higher status for those who donate to the right candidates.

    I am merely suggesting that people think for themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.

    In the interest of furthering that cause, I’m curious. What’s your answer to the question posed in the OP? 

    • #25
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:47 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  26. DrewInWisconsin, Doormat Coolidge

    Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw (View Comment):
    In the interest of furthering that cause, I’m curious. What’s your answer to the question posed in the OP?

    Heck, I just want an answer to the question I’ve been asking for four years: “How does this ‘purified’ Republican Party hope to win back Trump voters after telling those voters they voted wrong, and after assisting in getting a Democrat elected?”

    In short, after you’ve “destroyed the village to save it,” how are you going to get people to move back in?

    • #26
    • July 15, 2020, at 9:52 AM PDT
    • 17 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  27. Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw Member

    DrewInWisconsin Doesn't C… (View Comment):

    Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw (View Comment):
    In the interest of furthering that cause, I’m curious. What’s your answer to the question posed in the OP?

    Heck, I just want an answer to the question I’ve been asking for four years: “How does this ‘purified’ Republican Party hope to win back Trump voters after telling those voters they voted wrong, and after assisting in getting Democrat elected?”

    In short, after you’ve “destroyed the village to save it,” how are you going to get people to move back in?

    Also a good question. 

    • #27
    • July 15, 2020, at 10:00 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  28. Percival Thatcher
    Percival Joined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    If Trump gets elected, they have four more years for their incoherent, spittle-flecked rage to run.

    If not, then we welcome them back in the fold to tell us how to think and explain why Rubio really was the best choice back in 2016. Maybe one of them gets the Bari Weiss gig over at the New York Times.

    • #28
    • July 15, 2020, at 10:11 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  29. Matt Balzer, Imperialist Claw Member

    Percival (View Comment):
    If not, then we welcome them back in the fold to tell us how to think and explain why Rubio really was the best choice back in 2016.

    I’d say “as long as I get to point and laugh” but who am I kidding. I’d do that anyway. 

    • #29
    • July 15, 2020, at 10:13 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  30. The Elephant in the Room Member

    DrewInWisconsin Doesn't C… (View Comment):

    The Elephant in the Room: And from this sprang a whole new cottage industry of Republican-hating Conservatives.

    They’re probably best described as “Conservative-hating Republicans.”

    If we’re really honest, they’re probably best described as “Democrats in denial.”

    • #30
    • July 15, 2020, at 10:19 AM PDT
    • 10 likes