On attacking any Republican candidate
Commenter “Yancey Ward” has made the following claim on the Carroll trial thread, the gist of which I’ve seen for many years on this and other blogs:
And those who think the GOP can avoid these sorts of problems by dumping Trump and nominating someone else in 2024 are delusional. If it ever appears that DeSantis is going to be the nominee, he will be indicted somewhere for something, or have women spring forth from the woodwork to accuse him of rape, too.
There’s no question that any GOP nominee will be attacked. Not only that, there’s a lengthy history of sexual allegations against such candidates: Cain, Moore, and Kavanaugh, just to mention a few. And attacks are hardly limited to the sexual: remember Romney and the dog on the roof, the binders of women, and allegations of high school teasing.
However, the quote also introduces a strawman. Who thinks the GOP can avoid these sorts of problems by nominating someone else? I certainly am not aware of anyone on the right who thinks that such things can be avoided. We’ve witnessed such charges too many times.
However – and this is the basic point – for some candidates, such charges are more believable to the general public than for other candidates. The left is going to believe the charges – or pretend to believe them – no matter what. But the left was never going to vote for any Republican anyway. The charges are aimed at conincing voters in the vast middle to turn away from that candidate. And too many of those voters have already turned away from Trump for a host of reasons, including false allegations mounted against him. Some of those reasons, however, are his own fault, and mostly personality-driven. And the charges are extremely numerous and have had years to accumulate and marinate.
Would similar charges, or other charges, stick against other candidates? Perhaps. We can be sure they will be made, however. A nominee should be chosen with many things in mind, and among them are the baggage that person already carries plus the baggage we imagine will be loaded onto them by their opponents. Baggage is a given. How resistant to it a candidate will be is another question. Trump is already piled high with baggage, however.
Yes. This. If Kavanaugh had the same history as Trump, he would not have survived.
And when Trump loses in 2024, which he will, the same will be true for ’28 so I guess we have to run him out again if he’s still living and then ’32..
The vote fraud of 2020 and 2022 will be bigger in 2024. My state of PA no matter what the economy or other circumstances will be thrown to mail voting and the Democrat/Marxist.
In many ways I thing DeSantis would be a better candidate as saying 2024 is going to be a loss since no vote fraud has been cleared up. And Dominion being as pure as the wind driven snow can’t be questioned counting your state’s votes without oversight.
Better DeSantis sits this one out though who knows if 4 years more of Marxists there will be a country left.
Skip; Occasional Commenter:
I am 100% against any potentially good candidate sitting this one out. Time is of the essence.
Trump is already piled high with baggage
Now is the time for Sam Brinton to come to the aid of the country (sorry– couldn’t resist!)
It doesn’t matter at this point. Biden, or whoever the Ds put up, will win.
the more the merrier, now larry hogan and chris christie (ever seen them in the same room) don’t really qualify for much, and niki haley keeps finding new ways to alienate her audience,
the candidate that should have done better in the tory selection,
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/29/ron-desantis-interview-kemi-badenoch-war-on-wokery/
Much of the problem with candidates is the focus on the candidates themselves. It’s the cult of personality. Can Michelle Obama win? Can Oprah win? Can Tucker win? I want someone who values what I value and will advance the causes I want advanced.
Who can do that best? Who is suited for the job? I want someone who is capable of getting things done. Michelle Obama, Oprah, and Tucker haven’t demonstrated the ability. Of the three, probably Oprah is the most qualified for office, having built up an enormous enterprise herself, but should she be President? Heaven forbid!
One of the biggest reservations I had for Trump in ’16 was his lack of government experience. Yes, he was successful in business and possessed the leadership skills to run a giant organization, but his lack of experience in working within the confines of government and the the humungous bureaucracy of the federal government was obvious and hurt him.
Pence was the anti-Trump and was vilified for it. He had no women coming forward to accuse him of assault because he hedged against that. Because of his policy not to dine with a woman alone and not to drink unless his wife was present, he had an unblemished record, and the left mocked him and called him a misogynist for it.
So, will the left vilify any and all GOP nominees? Yes. Should those attacks affect the outcome of the election? No, but they will. People will be swayed by personality flaws and traits that they dislike rather than considering what the candidates stand for and their qualifications for office.
and yet pence served as a repository for swamp staff (walters who was deep in the russia fraud) toye (who fronted the lockdown sham) so on paper he sounded ok, but in practice,
oprah is full of the vaporous platitudes that have made this country vulnerable, I think it began with donahue, the obamas don’t get me started,
windbag (6:19 pm) said:
“It’s the cult of personality. Can Michelle Obama win? Can Oprah win? Can Tucker win? I want someone who values what I value and will advance the causes I want advanced.”
Ummm, *before* those causes get advanced, the candidate’s gotta win. And to the extent that the electorate focuses on personality, we gotta deal with personality(ies).
Trump needs helpers who have his back… like Brandon does: https://freebeacon.com/biden-administration/the-tiny-tight-lipped-circle-of-aides-guiding-biden-2024-has-a-lot-of-conflicts/
I share the view that the next President has already been chosen and I think the next pResident will be Gavin Newsom.
As Biden’s mental frailty is far too risky to count upon and Harris is so far out of her depth that it’s embarrassing.
Many believe that the 2024 election will determine the future of the country. I think that Turning Point happened in 2020, when the Republican Party refused to go scorched earth over a blatantly fraudulent election. No consequence = no incentive to ‘fix’ what worked so well before.
Not a day goes by that I don’t read 10 or comments from conservatives that claims exactly that, Neo. The claim is always- don’t nominate Trump, and the GOP won’t have such attacks on the candidate occurring.
Kavanaugh is the model for what the Democrats will do from now on, and he only survived, Bauxite, because the GOP Senate held every member but one on the confirmation vote. Had Kavanaugh faced a general election to the SCOTUS, he wouldn’t have survived. Mark my words- DeSantis, if he is nominee, is going to be indicted somewhere for something- likely something sexual since it is the Dems go-to-play these days. They won’t do it immediately, but will wait until about June of next year, then the NYTimes or WaPo will begin publishing accounts of women who claim to have been assaulted by DeSantis- one of those women will conveniently be located in NYC, and a grand jury will convened. The Democrats are playing to win, Republicans play tiddlywinks.
And, remember, there were a lot of Republicans in the Senate and House who suggested that Kavanaugh withdraw from the nomination because they were afraid of the upcoming election in 2018. A good number of them didn’t want to fight for him. In the end, Trump stood behind his nominee, and the Senate Republicans found a tiny bit of backbone after Kavanaugh’s spirited defense of himself.
Yancey Ward:
I would wager I spend more time reading blogs and blog comments than you do. And I have NEVER seen a comment claiming that such attacks would not happen. However, I read plenty of comments saying they won’t necessarily stick, and would be less effective, with other candidates.
I find it very interesting that you claim to see comment after comment saying categorically a claim that I never see. I’m not calling you a liar, but I wonder (a) where you’re reading comments – at National Review, or at some article at the Bulwark? Because other than Trump-hating sites like that, I simply don’t see such comments (and I don’t go to those particular sites); and (b) whether you’re interpreting comments that only say the accusations wouldn’t stick that well as being comments that say the accusations won’t be happening at all.
Yancey Ward:
As I said, I happen to agree that any candidate will be attacked viciously. The question is what effect it will have. With Trump, it is not only more inclined to stick, but way too many people already detest him with a passion.
With other candidates I think that the accusations could be about more than sex. But maybe not even about sex at all, if the left can think of something that fits that candidate better. With DeSantis, I think it will be something other than sex, although sex isn’t ruled out either. I think it will more likely have to do with gay rights (the “Don’t Say Gay” charge) and also abortion (“he’s right out of ‘The Handmaid’s Tale'”).
Powerline has an excellent discussion of the problem for the Republicans in any election in the future.
Note that the big money pretty much all comes from outside Minnesota, mostly from coastal leftists. There is no analogous support for Republicans in Minnesota:
On the Republican side of the aisle, the cupboard is much barer. Only 7 of the Forbes 400 gave to Minnesota state Republican candidates or causes in the past three years, giving a total of $70,000. Of the $70,000, a total of $49,000 was donated by Bill Austin [who also donated $14,000 to the Democrats].
That $70,000 is just over one percent of what the super-rich gave to the Democrats. And the $21,000 given by the super-rich who do not also support Democrats was 1/295 of what the super-rich donated to Democrats.
The Republicans have become the party of small donors and middle class voters. This goes way beyond Minnesota and is a national issue. For whatever reason (largely abortion) the rich support the political left. The economics seem to not be important to them, probably because they think they are immune.
Trump is to Republicans what Hillary is (or was) to the Dems: what I’ve seen called a “broken glass candidate.” Meaning a candidate that the opposing party’s voters will crawl over broken glass to vote against. A candidate who is that much a hated villain to the opposition.
On the plus side for Trump, how much more poo can the leftist monkeys find to throw at him?
Mike K.: “For whatever reason (largely abortion) the rich support the political left.”
Yep. The GOP needs to navigate to a position that eliminates the boogey man of a national ban on abortion. I’m not sure how they do it. I know what I would do, but I’m probably wrong.
Inflation is THE issue and will continue to be. It’s the 800 pound gorilla and the Republicans need to keep the monetary pain it’s causing for citizens as well as their plan for dealing with it in front of the voters as much as possible.
The Democrats don’t lose sleep over the quality of their candidates or their policies. They spend their time and money organizing the “get out the votes” and “count the votes” efforts in the swing sates and districts. We should do the same.
We know our candidate will be trashed and smeared in every way possible. There is no candidate that can avoid that. I agree with Neo that the Donald has a huge burden of baggage. However, if he can win the nomination, I will support him and vote for him.
There’s an interesting movement afoot that might help the GOP candidate. Joe Lieberman and some other moderate senior statesmen are trying to organize a viable third party candidacy. I don’t know who they have in mind -John Kasich, Larry Hogan, Chris Sununu, or??? – but it is afoot.
A moderate candidate with more appeal then Biden (and most every candidate has more appeal) would obviously get a lot of votes from the Democrats, independents, and RINOs. It could be reminiscent of Ross Perot. It could also help a true populist candidate like DeSantis or Trump.
The next eighteen months are going to be important, and may be surprising.
Any Republican considering running for a national office would be foolish to set foot in New York state where they could come under the jurisdiction of the Kangaroo New York legal system.
Yancey Ward – I think you’re conflating cause and effect. The Republican Senate caucus held together on Kavanaugh because a critical mass of the caucus, including most notably Susan Collins, believed that Kavanaugh was innocent. Or at least they weren’t afraid to go out on a limb on that position mere months before many of them faced the voters.
Hold everything else constant and make Kavanaugh was a thrice-married, known adulteror who was on tape saying anything similar to what Trump said in the Access Holywood affair, and I guarantee that the Republican Senate caucus would not have held together.
This pro-Trump argument on this matter is a lot like arguing against wearing a seatbelt on the grounds that you’re going to crash anyway.
that wing wants another romney, which won’t get us anywhere, or to be charitable another ford,
we saw how savage the weaponization was against palin, it didn’t help that (redacted) mccain went in on it, with the jones memo, we have the receipts,
when they take a dive, they go all in,
DeSantis = “another Romney?” Really?
I’d argue the turning point was 2008. When all that nonsense happened in the Coleman/Franken election. If the Republicans had been smart they would have seen that and actually had some strategy for the next time. Either be ready for when it happened or make sure it couldn’t happen again. But they didn’t so that only encouraged the dems to step up their game since it’s not as though the pubs were going to do anything. (That’s not even counting the fact that Franken was a coke head who has anger control issues including assaulting at least one person at a political rally and of course likes to sexual harass people. The media wasn’t going do anything to bring any of that up and apparently neither were the pubs.)
the fact that Romney’s cousin was reelected shows the Reps have learned nothing
Yancey Ward – I think you’re conflating cause and effect.
==
This is a nonsensical statement.
I have my doubts about Trump, mostly about his obsession with what happened in 2020. I agree it was a stolen election but Dominion machines may have been a minor part of it. What the Democrats have and Republicans don’t, is a large number of black election “workers” who have no problem with hauling boxes of fraudulent votes into counting centers to be included in the tally. The Trump campaign, run by the usual GOP flacks hired by Kushner, made no preparations for the fraud. Trump’s greatest weakness as president was the lack of a team he could depend on. He seemed to believe those people he appointed were patriots when most of them were the usual DC grifters.
Art Deco – Do you care to elaborate, or is this just another drive-by?
no the sununu hutchinson wing, not really a wing, its more like a wear fin,
well the gope did learn, they used their tactics to target miller voters against murkowski, there was collaboration from the local media, which is a mcclatchy affiliate, then who can forget the orca tracking equipment,
they stole in fulton maricopa wayne dane and other blue bergs, with the cooperation of kemp and ducey, and the gope in michigan and wisconsin,
Let me say first that I am still deciding whom to support in the Republican primary. My state is late in the primary process, so in essence my vote probably matters little. But here are my two comments:
1) Trump carries baggage because the Deep State worked to put it there in order to disqualify him from consideration by moderates, the undecided, and establishment types. If one chooses to withhold support for Trump only because of baggage, then that voter really is little more than a manipulatable pawn of the Establishment. The polls do seem to indicate that there is a segment that would never vote for Trump, but I wonder how accurate that polling is.
2) The primaries are a long way off. DeSantis may yet prove to be an excellent candidate. Or he may fizzle out a la Scott Walker. From what I have seen, DeSantis has not been very inspiring on the national stage. He does very well in Florida where he has a huge base of support and a compliant legislature. How will he do with a divided government?
I would wager I spend more time reading blogs and blog comments than you do. And I have NEVER seen a comment claiming that such attacks would not happen. However, I read plenty of comments saying they won’t necessarily stick, and would be less effective, with other candidates.
==
I think Yancey has in mind a woman who is very active at Althouse and makes use of the handle ‘I have misplaced my pants’.
All the comments above indicate or imply that the Democratic Party is totally immoral, devious, and malicious.
So what to do, huh?
near beer
https://twitchy.com/justmindy-313239/2023/04/30/biden-speechwriter-fired-for-breakfast-tacos-speech-tries-coming-for-christina-pushaw-and-oof/
Meanwhile…(echoing Yancey Ward):
‘ “A full-blown Color Revolution-style attack on the US Supreme Court as an institution is now in its early stages”;
‘A color revolution edging into a hot war on the conservative Justices.’—
https://legalinsurrection.com/2023/04/a-full-blown-color-revolution-style-attack-on-the-us-supreme-court-as-an-institution-is-now-in-its-early-stages/
it does look that way,
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2023/04/30/joyce-carol-oates-claiming-she-never-witnessed-anyone-pledging-allegiance-to-the-flag-backfires/
Here he comes ladies and gentlemen–the next president of the US. From an agricultural state with oil, coal, and gas issues. Strong environmental background. Never been handled by one of the “dirty girls” (politically speaking). Deep voice, sounds straight as an arrow–comes out of middle America as opposed to either coast. Here is his website: https://www.tester.senate.gov/newsroom
scroll down to the piece about Amtrak and standing against Biden’s nominees. You’ll get a good look at what you will be seeing a lot of in the future.
One thing you don’t hear much in politics is “At least he’s not as bad as … .” Democrats may think that DeSantis isn’t as bad as Trump, but if DeSantis is the nominee, you won’t hear them say it. DeSantis will become the Devil and all resources will be marshalled to defeat him.
You do hear it said of politicians who are no longer a threat, that at least Bush (senior, if not junior) or McCain or Romney isn’t as bad as Trump. They’ll get great eulogies and encomia, but only because they aren’t active threats to Democrat rule.
How is it with the Republicans? If Newsom is the nominee, will you hear “at least he’s better than Biden”? Probably not, because what Biden lets happen through incompetence and bumbling, Newsom would more actively make happen.
The present political climate in this country is as close to a cold war as you could get without gunfire. The contrast of Biden saying “All America’s children are our children” with his ignoring the daughter of his son is illustrative of the moral case. The twin attacks on Trump in New York by Bragg, the Soros DA, and the woman who suddenly remembered being raped by Trump in Bergdorf Goodman 30 years ago illustrate the lawfare side of the assault. An illustration of our ability for self defense is seen with the imprisonment of the Arizona rancher who shot an illegal alien on his land near his home. He sits in prison with no bail allowed while his wife sits home alone in the ranch house.
it does look that way,
https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2023/04/30/joyce-carol-oates-claiming-she-never-witnessed-anyone-pledging-allegiance-to-the-flag-backfires/
==
As we speak, New York requires that the pledge be said in its public schools, with opt outs available. It may be honored in the breach now. I remember it was a talk radio controversy in greater Rochester ca. 1974 when a local teacher was sanctioned for refusing to say it. Oates parents lived their whole lives either in Niagara County, NY or in the northern tier townships in Erie County, NY. She’d have been in school between 1943 and 1957. The segments of those counties in which she lived were exurban, small town, and rural at the time and it was a Republican area.
An article about the third-party movement. It’s called No Labels. The have apparently raised $70 million.
Mostly an anti-Trump movement, but they may actually help his cause if they actually field a ticket.
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/joe-lieberman-no-labels-president/2023/04/03/id/1114842/
Art Deco:
Yancey Ward wrote that not a day goes by that he doesn’t read 10 comments of that sort. So, unless the misplaced pants person writes the same thing 10 times a day, every day, he can’t possibly be talking about her and her alone.
Perhaps someone somewhere does make such comments. But I repeat: I read a ton of blogs and comments, and I have never seen one. Therefore I conclude they are quite uncommon. And I have also never seen one on this blog.
I have seen a number of comments on various blogs and threads that either directly or indirectly argue that Trump is a problem for the entire GOP because of his “baggage”. And I have seen comments which foolishly argue that some other candidate would not be hammered like Trump. The Powerline guys seem to suffer these delusions to some extent or another. Paul Mirengoff articulated this delusion constantly.
Critically important — 1) Kavanaugh only survived because Trump had the strength of character to stand firm with him. And Kavanaugh had ZERO baggage.
2) The GOP will never have a candidate or nominee with less baggage than Clarence Thomas or Kavanaugh. The claims against each were complete fabrications.
3) At some point, the GOP has to fight back or die. Instead of focusing on trying to find flawless resumes, we should focus on finding, promoting and cheering for those who will fight fearlessly. The only path forward is to hammer the Democrats for their lies, their slanders, their criminality and their embrace of Big Brother brutality. A fighting spirit has to be a part of every resume and some might argue that the only important metric for a nomination is who is most willing and most effective in the fight.
The underlying sense of the “baggage” discussion is that some seem to hope to find a way to avoid the street fight because it feels dirty, unclassy, ungentlemanly. They are cowards.
Fight or die. There are no rules. And there is no moral claim for those who choose to die without engaging.
The essential quality of every GOP nominee should be a commitment to demand election integrity.
The most used GOP talking point should be that the USA has the worst election integrity of any developed country in the world. There should not be a voter anywhere who hasn’t heard it dozens of times by election day.
Too many poeople now vote on ideology and personality rather than on things such as economics, crime, taxes etc. That is why the Republicasn did so poorly last November. Trump’s noxious personality is a heavy burden on them. Voters in blue cities even if they consider crimne to be the number 1 issue for them will still vote for Progressives for Mayor and District Attorney who are soft on crime and big on taxes (see Chicago).
stan – Thomas survived because 11 Democrats voted for his nomination and none filibustered. While it is true that Trump stood behind Kavanaugh, and credit to him for that, Kavanaugh survived beause squishy, GOPe Republicans like Susan Collins voted for his nomination.
Even given the world of difference the political climate of 1991 and that of the present, I dare say that Thomas would not have won 11 Democrats’ votes if he had anything other than a squeaky clean reputation. (Remember that in 1991, something like 60% of the public believed that Anita Hill was lying. That would not have been the case if Thomas had a history of boorishness towards women.) Same with Kavanaugh – if Kavanaugh had even a fraction of Trump’s baggage, he would have lost Susan Collins and probably more. No Susan Collins, no Justice Kavanaugh.
I really don’t understand how you think that the comparison to Kavanaugh and Thomas helps the pro-Trump position. In Kavanaugh and Thomas, you have two Republicans without significant baggage who survived attacks from the left. In Trump, you have a candidate with significant baggage who has underperformed in 3 out of 4 of the national elections for which he has been at the head of the party.
That’s not exactly a ringing endorsement for the “baggage doesn’t matter” position.
(Also, while Trump does get credit for sticking with Kavanaugh, you have to give the same credit to the squishiest GOPe president of them all for sticking with Thomas. It’s easy to stick with a candidate or nominee when they have a sterling reputation. Even GHW Bush did it.)
leahy and biden and kennedy were in the forefront of the attack on thomas chris buckley (before he lost his ever loving mind) satirized biden as dexter mitchell, a man so craven in his campaign of personal destruction, his crew were called the night soil brigade, so desperate for the accoutrements of the office, he would join a telenovela about a president,
The left already has an established Trump narrative that is well socked in. Not so much for DeSantis, they would have to expend some effort buffing it up. But they are good at that.
Art Deco:
Yancey Ward wrote that not a day goes by that he doesn’t read 10 comments of that sort. So, unless the misplaced pants person writes the same thing 10 times a day, every day, he can’t possibly be talking about her and her alone.
I think I can count ten such comments right here on this blog. Powerline is a big source. I quit Ricochet because of the TDS there, mostly from the administrators. I’m sure it’s worse now.
I grant that Trump has baggage. The Democrats ignored it in 2016 because they were sure he’d lose. Now, I think they are worried. In 2020 they had Biden who was not an obvious senile fool. Imagine the fraud to drag him over the finish line this time.
It doesn’t matter what the electorate wants, or thinks is significant, or who the candidates are, or what media narratives they are likely to find plausible about which candidate.
All that matters is, can Democrats get more ballots counted than Republicans?
All this other stuff is sideshow. In all the states that matter in the Electoral College, the Dems control which party will have its ballots preferentially counted.
The ballots the Dems harvest that push them over the top are not from engaged voters who follow issues and candidates and news media. There is no upper limit on how many ballots they can harvest, because the Dems control the process in the states that matter.
For example they can very strictly reject R ballots and wave through D ballots. Or send teams through apartment complexes and nursing homes to harvest only D ballots and mysteriously not collect the R ballots.
Frederick, I’ve seen several comments here like yours at 1:44 p.m. Generally, they seem to say that we’re doomed and no effort to improve our election performance will be any good. Do you want us all to just roll over and accept loss and upcoming humiliations and mistreatment? Is there anything you suggest can be done?
Mike K:
By all means, be my guest and point out those ten comments that say “If we nominate someone other than Trump, the Democrats and the MSM won’t attack that person and won’t try to manufacture fake charges against them.”
Because that is what was claimed is in those comments by Yancey Ward. But I have never seen them. Every comment I’ve ever seen here has been of the variety “they would come up with similar accusations or other accusations but they wouldn’t be as likely to stick as they would with Trump.”
stan:
I say the same to you as I wrote to Mike K above: show me those comments that say other candidates won’t be attacked. All I’ve ever seen is comments saying those other candidates will be more resistant to the attacks they will sustain, because of their records or their character or their temperament or some such.
Nor have I seen people saying a candidate shouldn’t fight. The argument is, instead, over HOW to fight and what is the smartest and most effective way to fight.
@Kate:Do you want us all to just roll over and accept loss and upcoming humiliations and mistreatment?
Obviously not. By all means Vote as Hard you want. It won’t help. I’m just the messenger, I’m not saying this the right way for things to be.
There are things you can focus on that will help, but focusing on the national news and the national narratives and the 2024 Presidential election is low-effort and will have no effect.
Is there anything you suggest can be done?
The same things I say over and over and over and over every time someone thinks they’re scoring a point by asking me that.
Move to a red state if you can and if you worry about what will happen to you as a result. Help consolidate power in the red states. Clean up their elections and laws, purge the leftists from those states’ government positions. When laws stand in the way of those efforts, change those laws. This will only happen in red states at first but it has to be done for these reasons:
The big cities in red states vote blue and can tip statewide elections.
Refugees from blue states are going to move to red states and tip them blue if these things are not done.
Government bureaucracies are overwhelmingly blue and sabotage all these efforts.
Over time, the balance in the Electoral College MAY shift and then Presidential elections can be competitive again. Over time, red states MAY send Congressmen and Senators who care about changing things and not playing in the Swamp. Over time, if red states are strong, things can turn around, because the blue states should get more and more dysfunctional and maybe less populous.
By all means, be my guest and point out those ten comments that say “If we nominate someone other than Trump, the Democrats and the MSM won’t attack that person and won’t try to manufacture fake charges against them.”
I submit that you are changing the terms. I understood it to mean that Trump has so much baggage that he can’t win and we should support someone else.
I actually like this guy, if I could pronounce his name.
Point is, even if you don’t have ANY baggage (or nothing too fancy or expensive), they’ll create it for you, throw it at you and shriek that it’s all yours.
(Kind of like a reverse Sam—the man—Brinton….)
MIke K:
No, it’s you who changed the terms. My argument has been with Yancey Ward, who states this:
My answer was that no one actually thinks other GOP candidates won’t be attacked, probably even in similar fashion. So the problem of vicious (and perhaps mendacious) attacks cannot be avoided, and I haven’t seen people claim that it could be. The argument I’ve seen made by the anti-Trump forces is that other candidates would be better able to resist and be more effective at fighting, because they don’t have quite the same personality or history as Trump.
The argument I’ve seen made by the anti-Trump forces is that other candidates would be better able to resist and be more effective at fighting, because they don’t have quite the same personality or history as Trump.
I think this argument is fallacious, even if elections weren’t fortified. Only a tiny minority of people bother to follow national politics outside of Presidential election years. Trump is a known quantity to the general public, since he lived in the public eye for decades before he ever ran for President. The media can say what they want about Trump, and they do, but every man and woman in America already has an opinion about him.*
This is not true for anyone else who we’ve heard of as possibly running. The general public is never going to hear anything about any of those people, including DeSantis, that isn’t filtered through the Dem-controlled media. They started smearing DeSantis long ago.
*It’s Trump’s weakness as much as his strength. When he ran against Hillary Clinton, both candidates were people, famous for decades, about whom virtually everyone had an opinion. I’m convinced Trump was the only Republican who could have beaten Hillary Clinton, because the media would have defined that Republican in the way they did John McCain and Mitt Romney. And I’m convinced Hillary Clinton was the only Democrat Trump could have beaten, before he’d had a term as President by which people can judge him.
I’m indifferent to whether he’s the Republican nominee for President, just as I’m indifferent to who the D is: government, media, and big corporations working together are seeing to it that ballots are counted until the Dem will win. However, it is foolish to pretend there’s no downside or risk in throwing over Trump. But there’s no safe choices either…
It’s bad enough that the Democrats will smear any alternative Republican candidate, and they will, but I really object to Trump’s using left-wing talking points to smear an effective and energetic Republican governor.
Thanks, Frederick, and I’m already doing what you recommend in a “purple” state.