I don’t think it’s matter of hope. Or there is no reason that they would “abandoned conservative principles”.
Or in case it’s not clear, conservative principles don’t come from leaders.
Perhaps, if you are a Cruz fan, one thinks Cruz is teaching conservative principles- which btw, is idiotic.
Or all such leaders are doing is demonstrating that they have and understand conservative principles- and hopeful respect these principles [so, as to deter them from doing something utterly stupid].
And Jonah Goldberg continues with things I disagree about:
“No, my objection to Donald Trump is . . . Donald Trump.
I think he’s a vain ignoramus and bully who mocks the disabled with a
long history of exploiting and abusing the little guy. His instincts
are nationalistic and authoritarian, not patriotic and liberty-loving.
…
You know what it means when defenders of Donald Trump refuse to
defend the actual man Donald Trump? It means he’s indefensible.
The same people who’ve mocked Barack Obama — rightly! — for years because he mispronounced corpsmen “corpse-men,” blithely whistle past the graveyard of Donald Trump’s lifeless intellect.”
So many things. Obama obviously is not a intellect- despite the claim that is what he is/was. Other than handsome and black- what else was he suppose to be?
Obama is idiot who doesn’t like America- who was going to bring hope and change – and didn’t of course [and very easy to predict that he would fail badly].
Trump is not a intellect, though one can’t say that many president have been intellects- or generally the American public do not want a president to be an intellect.
Though an intellect plus something else could acceptable to America public.
Obama was suppose to be an intellect and a good speaker- which has been disproven to be the case. He seems like he might have been a good speaker- but he bores everyone [so, not a good speaker plus an idiot].
One could say that Regan even Bush II were intellects- but they didn’t display that they were intellects. No one was selling them as intellectuals in terms of why they should be the President.
One could not say that is was selling point of why they able to win the election- unless one imagine cowboys as intellects [which I can manage to do, btw] this was not the main selling point of their resumes.
Whereas with President Wilson, it was a major part his resume.
And I will refer you to Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism regarding what disaster Wilson was for America.
One might say the list of presidents who were sold as intellects
has made them quite undesirable to vote for. And even hiding this aspect might be a good plan, if you want to be elected.
So what Trump is, is a business man. And there are a lot of business people in America.
One could divide America into business people, labor [including technical] and governmental people- who are not dependent upon the free market- those given tax dollars.
So people making money and those getting the money which has been made by business people. [Government prints money, though government does not make money.]
What the government does [and always does] is take wealth from the business people. And the government always takes too much of this wealth and this is becoming a rather large problem at the present time.
The flip side is what government does with the wealth given to it.
And presently the government is doing very little with the wealth it’s been given. And that’s not defending it’s borders is rather significant aspect of what the government is not doing.
Goldberg says that he in favor of border wall [fence], but fails to understand that it’s a politically incorrect thing to do- hence why not already finished.
In terms of politics it seems what needs to be done is build a wall before
one can politically do anything about immigration. And there needs to be something done about immigration.
Personally I favor open borders, but I realize we need a wall and something done about immigration, before one can consider such things as open borders.
I would say that generally “politically correct” is idiocy and this idiocy is major political problem facing America. The central problem of “politically correct” is it’s distraction from governing. And the purpose of “politically correct” is to distract from governing.
So I have never liked Trump. And I think liking politicians is generally a bad idea.
But I can say I have learned not to underestimate Trump. And that he has been rather amazing is actually more reason not to like him.
But it’s always been a matter of picking the political candidate one dislikes less.
If Cruz was the candidate would not like him either, but would dislike him less than Clinton or Sanders. And the main problem with Cruz is he is not winning.
One other false point is about trump is idea of not helping other republican candidate in winning in the election. I would say that if they were intellectuals they should able figure out how to win- and the actual dearth intellectuals appears to be in Congress.
Also my sympathy for republican critters in general has lowered when considering all the waste of money and time spend fighting Trump who is their leading candidate and who will likely be the republican candidate.
And I did not know my opinion in general of intellectuals could be lowered- I guess, thanks.
No one person can break a group. It’s the reaction of the group that breaks it.
Go vote for Hillary.
–ken anthony
April 23, 2016 at 4:06 PM
No one person can break a group. It’s the reaction of the group that breaks it.–
I was going to say something similar. But I didn’t.
Related:
“Hugh had a theory about what’s really driving the opposition to Trump. He doesn’t believe that rank-and-file conservatives and Republicans have abandoned conservative principles (and I hope he’s right).”
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434455/donald-trump-white-working-class-what-trumps-defenders-get-wrong
I don’t think it’s matter of hope. Or there is no reason that they would “abandoned conservative principles”.
Or in case it’s not clear, conservative principles don’t come from leaders.
Perhaps, if you are a Cruz fan, one thinks Cruz is teaching conservative principles- which btw, is idiotic.
Or all such leaders are doing is demonstrating that they have and understand conservative principles- and hopeful respect these principles [so, as to deter them from doing something utterly stupid].
And Jonah Goldberg continues with things I disagree about:
“No, my objection to Donald Trump is . . . Donald Trump.
I think he’s a vain ignoramus and bully who mocks the disabled with a
long history of exploiting and abusing the little guy. His instincts
are nationalistic and authoritarian, not patriotic and liberty-loving.
…
You know what it means when defenders of Donald Trump refuse to
defend the actual man Donald Trump? It means he’s indefensible.
The same people who’ve mocked Barack Obama — rightly! — for years because he mispronounced corpsmen “corpse-men,” blithely whistle past the graveyard of Donald Trump’s lifeless intellect.”
So many things. Obama obviously is not a intellect- despite the claim that is what he is/was. Other than handsome and black- what else was he suppose to be?
Obama is idiot who doesn’t like America- who was going to bring hope and change – and didn’t of course [and very easy to predict that he would fail badly].
Trump is not a intellect, though one can’t say that many president have been intellects- or generally the American public do not want a president to be an intellect.
Though an intellect plus something else could acceptable to America public.
Obama was suppose to be an intellect and a good speaker- which has been disproven to be the case. He seems like he might have been a good speaker- but he bores everyone [so, not a good speaker plus an idiot].
One could say that Regan even Bush II were intellects- but they didn’t display that they were intellects. No one was selling them as intellectuals in terms of why they should be the President.
One could not say that is was selling point of why they able to win the election- unless one imagine cowboys as intellects [which I can manage to do, btw] this was not the main selling point of their resumes.
Whereas with President Wilson, it was a major part his resume.
And I will refer you to Jonah Goldberg’s book Liberal Fascism regarding what disaster Wilson was for America.
One might say the list of presidents who were sold as intellects
has made them quite undesirable to vote for. And even hiding this aspect might be a good plan, if you want to be elected.
So what Trump is, is a business man. And there are a lot of business people in America.
One could divide America into business people, labor [including technical] and governmental people- who are not dependent upon the free market- those given tax dollars.
So people making money and those getting the money which has been made by business people. [Government prints money, though government does not make money.]
What the government does [and always does] is take wealth from the business people. And the government always takes too much of this wealth and this is becoming a rather large problem at the present time.
The flip side is what government does with the wealth given to it.
And presently the government is doing very little with the wealth it’s been given. And that’s not defending it’s borders is rather significant aspect of what the government is not doing.
Goldberg says that he in favor of border wall [fence], but fails to understand that it’s a politically incorrect thing to do- hence why not already finished.
In terms of politics it seems what needs to be done is build a wall before
one can politically do anything about immigration. And there needs to be something done about immigration.
Personally I favor open borders, but I realize we need a wall and something done about immigration, before one can consider such things as open borders.
I would say that generally “politically correct” is idiocy and this idiocy is major political problem facing America. The central problem of “politically correct” is it’s distraction from governing. And the purpose of “politically correct” is to distract from governing.
So I have never liked Trump. And I think liking politicians is generally a bad idea.
But I can say I have learned not to underestimate Trump. And that he has been rather amazing is actually more reason not to like him.
But it’s always been a matter of picking the political candidate one dislikes less.
If Cruz was the candidate would not like him either, but would dislike him less than Clinton or Sanders. And the main problem with Cruz is he is not winning.
One other false point is about trump is idea of not helping other republican candidate in winning in the election. I would say that if they were intellectuals they should able figure out how to win- and the actual dearth intellectuals appears to be in Congress.
Also my sympathy for republican critters in general has lowered when considering all the waste of money and time spend fighting Trump who is their leading candidate and who will likely be the republican candidate.
And I did not know my opinion in general of intellectuals could be lowered- I guess, thanks.