Donald Trump: The Man And The Myth

[peter_speckhard]

Virtually every conservative voice has condemned the Trump candidacy, from National Review to David Brooks to Commentary to the whole establishment. The idea that other voices aren't speaking up is an idea steeped in ignorance. The Federalist is an excellent web based source of conservative commentary. Some don't like it because it makes a habit of skewering media bias with lots of irrefutable evidence.

[James_Gale]

Mr. Gale writes:
The word out here in DC is that the Republican Senators (and House members) very much fear a Trump nomination for the reasons that you identify. 

I comment:
Then explain why they do not speak up. Where are the other Republican voices? Why do we not hear from Republicans (other than those running against him) who know that Trump will be a disaster for the party?

Some do.  Ben Sasse is a notable example.  I wish that more would.

[Donald_Kirchner]

Virtually every conservative voice has condemned the Trump candidacy, from National Review to David Brooks to Commentary to the whole establishment. The idea that other voices aren't speaking up is an idea steeped in ignorance. The Federalist is an excellent web based source of conservative commentary. Some don't like it because it makes a habit of skewering media bias with lots of irrefutable evidence.

They've got Mollie Hemingway.

http://thefederalist.com/author/mzhemingway/

And interesting perspectives...

http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/23/why-president-trump-would-be-a-bigger-disaster-than-hillary/

Vs.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/24/if-necessary-ill-vote-trump-over-clinton/

[Michael Slusser]

After reading this morning's paper, I wondered if the The Donald phenomenon might be because a lot of people

1) can't stand Hillary
2) really don't want anyone who's conservative (whatever the current definition)
3) think he's more fun to watch--in a train-wreck sort of way--than anyone else on this interminable campaign.

Peace,
Michael

[Richard Johnson]

When you honestly analyze this year's Presidential candidates you have to admit
that Donald Trump is really not the best person the Republicans have.   And the
same goes for Hillary Clinton as she is not the best Democrat available.

What fuels Trump is the anger and outrage against career politicians in Washington
D.C.   They are more interested in getting reelected that taking care of the business
of our nation.  I have always advocated term limits for U.S. Senators  who should
be limited to two terms or 12 years.  U.S. Representatives should only serve 5 terms
or 10 years.

The good candidates who would make good Presidents are sitting on the sidelines.
They hate the required fund-raising, the inevitable broken promises, the dirty tricks
on the campaign trail, the loss of family life, and the partisan bickering in D.C.

I really agree with everything you said. 

I'm definitely big on term limits for representatives.  I'd be fine with 5-6 year limits.  The senate, I'm not so sure about.  A friend articulated that the house was sort of the "community contribution" - which is what the representatives should be.  The senate, I was told, was designed for career politicians.  Without digging deeper, that makes sense to me.  But if we capped them at 2 terms I wouldn't be complaining at all.

Not a fan of term limits. We have them in California for all state offices, and IMO it has been a disaster. Legislators don't have the time to really learn their jobs; as a result, the real power shifts to the unelected bureaucrats. The Constitution did set up term limits; they're called "elections."

[scott9]

Just FYI, Craig, if I believed in the "IGNORE!" button, I would apply it to that "federalist" website. I don't go there.

Your loss.

[Pastor Ken Kimball]

After reading this morning's paper, I wondered if the The Donald phenomenon might be because a lot of people

1) can't stand Hillary
2) really don't want anyone who's conservative (whatever the current definition)
3) think he's more fun to watch--in a train-wreck sort of way--than anyone else on this interminable campaign.

Peace,
Michael

They don't seem to realize that it's the train they're on (the U.S.) that is going to wreck..  They're not just going to get to watch--they're going to be in the wreck. 

[James_Gale]

After reading this morning's paper, I wondered if the The Donald phenomenon might be because a lot of people

1) can't stand Hillary
2) really don't want anyone who's conservative (whatever the current definition)
3) think he's more fun to watch--in a train-wreck sort of way--than anyone else on this interminable campaign.

Peace,
Michael

They don't seem to realize that it's the train they're on (the U.S.) that is going to wreck..  They're not just going to get to watch--they're going to be in the wreck.

And that's true whoever wins in November.  I truly believe that Trump would lose yuge and take down the GOP Congressional majorities with him.  Of course, up till now, my beliefs about this election year have been wrong at every turn.  Trump might actually win.  Can you imagine his first day in the Oval Office?  Cluelessness + hubris =  

[James_Gale]

Just FYI, Craig, if I believed in the "IGNORE!" button, I would apply it to that "federalist" website. I don't go there.

The Federalist most assuredly has a conservative outlook.  But its work is very good.  You certainly are free to avoid all conservative media.  But if you want to read responsible, thoughtful conservative voices, you'll find them there.


The Federalist is not, say, Breitbart or Freerepublic, which you probably should avoid.

[Charles Austin]

I do not avoid all conservative media. Not at all. The things from The Federalist that have been wheeled around did not impress me. But I can learn and I can be wrong; so I (in my sweet, soft bunny rabbit persona) will make a point of reading more stuff from that site.
Happy now?

[LutherMan]

I cannot or will not vote for Cruz....

[James_Gale]

I do not avoid all conservative media. Not at all. The things from The Federalist that have been wheeled around did not impress me. But I can learn and I can be wrong; so I (in my sweet, soft bunny rabbit persona) will make a point of reading more stuff from that site.
Happy now?

It's fine with me if you do read the site.  Or don't.  I simply am sharing my opinion -- take it for what it's worth -- that The Federalist is worth reading.  It is not one of the nutty right-wing sites that most assuredly do exist.

[bookpastor/Erma Wolf]

I cannot or will not vote for Cruz....

He came in third in Nevada. Unless he starts doing a lot better, and soon, this may not be a problem for you.

[Richard Johnson]

I cannot or will not vote for Cruz....

He came in third in Nevada. Unless he starts doing a lot better, and soon, this may not be a problem for you.

From your lips to God's ears.

[mariemeyer]

After reading this morning's paper, I wondered if the The Donald phenomenon might be because a lot of people

1) can't stand Hillary
2) really don't want anyone who's conservative (whatever the current definition)
3) think he's more fun to watch--in a train-wreck sort of way--than anyone else on this interminable campaign.

Peace,
Michael

My morning was spent with LCMS church women sewing quilts for LWR.  When the conversation turned to the elections, the reason given for supporting Trump was dislike of Hillary.  Women who agreed Trump would make a horrible president, said they would vote for him above Hillary. At the same time they could give no reason for why they would not vote for Hillary Clinton.

In keeping with the decision Bill and I  made years ago not express political views when with congregational members, I did not mention the candidate I was considering.  I was, however, troubled listening to thoughts expressed by women with whom I meet weekly for bible study, prayer and quilting.

Marie