Patterico's Pontifications

6/12/2019

Follow Up: Trump Looks to Squash Amash

Filed under: Politics — DRJ @ 9:48 am



[Headlines from DRJ]

Politico: Trump Looks to Squash Justin Amash.

Mission Accomplished?

Hot Air: Report: Michigan Poll Shows Justin Amash Trailing Primary Challenger By 16

— DRJ

106 Responses to “Follow Up: Trump Looks to Squash Amash”

  1. Go Amash.

    MasterBaker (bcae7b)

  2. If Amash loses in the primary, there’s a strong chance that that district will go Democrat. So much winning!

    Paul Montagu (a61762)

  3. The Trump supporter that called out Amash during his townhall while surrounded by leftists looks prescient.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  4. There aren’t many Republicans willing to stand up to Trump now. He is the GOP.

    DRJ (15874d)

  5. well corker, flake, Sanford, it doesn’t really work out,

    narciso (d1f714)

  6. In my view, a libertarian lawmaker is a contradiction in terms. Or, at best, (and this is where I’m choosing my similes carefully because DRJ is a lady) a teetotaler at a wine-tasting.

    But I, personally, have never given Amash even that much credit. I think he’s in it only for himself, his sponsors, and his cronies, and everything else is just a political shtick he devised, and which has worked so far to get him elected and re-elected. As far as being of any use to anybody other than himself, his sponsors, and his cronies, he’s on a par with a bicycle in a fish tank.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. There aren’t many Republicans willing to stand up to Trump now. He is the GOP.

    And this is why I think it’s a pipe dream to imagine that the GOP can be “won back” by those honorable few who have chosen to remain aboard as it circles the drain.

    Trump has co-opted everyone in a position of responsibility; to repudiate him is to admit the truth of what they themselves have become. Anyone with the temerity to speak out has been purged pour encourager les autres.

    Dave (d524ac)

  8. @6. Ahhhhhh, nk, ‘bicycle in a fish tank’ got me… your post has that wonderfully smooth sweep of the glide from a fresh blade. Refreshing.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  9. Any poll taken now is worthless. You might as well cite the latest Quinnipiac poll that shows Trump losing badly to several of the potential Democratic nominees.

    As to this poll, what is its sample size? Hot Air mentions it’s around 355. That’s a very small sample in a state that has a population of about 10 million. Not to mention that there were approximately at least four or five times that many voters giving Amash standing ovations at his recent town hall meeting. Those would be voters in his district.

    This is all much ado about nothing. But it does indicate one thing though. Trump is running scared.

    So he lashes out, as he his wont to do, calling people childish names, as if this were some sort of race for class president of some junior high somewhere. It’s not, nor is it a Reality TV show where Trump holds all the imaginary power. His manufactured image has failed him, as it has in oh so many business deals, because everything Trump is based on fraud.

    It’s a long way to the next election, and anything can happen in the, what is it, eighteen months to come.

    Amash isn’t worried at all about his support among his constituents. He’s represented them well and done what he was elected to do, which is to represent the people and more to defend the Constitution–he has explained every vote he has made in Congress on Constitutional grounds, intelligently and on solid footing. Actually, what he has done in elected office is expose the hypocrisy of the two-party system, the duopoly in which partisanship is all.

    https://reason.com/2019/06/11/justin-amash-isnt-just-rebelling-against-trump-hes-fighting-the-two-party-system/

    More power to him, I say.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  10. Trump is just trying to claim credit for something that is almost entirely Amash’s doing.

    Amash is a libertarian elected to represent a GOP area and we should not be surprised they opt for a Republican who supports the Republican president rather than a libertarian who does not.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  11. If Amash loses in the primary, there’s a strong chance that that district will go Democrat.

    Why? This is an interest assertion, if true, but why would an historic GOP area vote Democrat after choosing a different GOP candidate in the primary? It seems counter-intuitive.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  12. And this is why I think it’s a pipe dream to imagine that the GOP can be “won back” by those honorable few who have chosen to remain aboard as it circles the drain.

    This is the kind of prediction that always fails to be true. Oh, they said, the GOP will NEVER recover after nominating that Goldwater fella. 4 years later not only do they win the presidency, but they do so with the centrist Nixon. Oh, they said, the GOP will NEVER come back after that Nixon fella and all his crimes. And after one term of an incompetent Democrat, they elect Ronald Reagan.

    Same with the Democrats and LBJ, McGovern, Dukakis, etc. Major parties are FLUID. It’s why they work, and why people who want them to stay wioth their narrow wing all the time are so often disappointed and saying things like “it circles the drain.”

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  13. I mean the trade for flake seems to have worked out,

    https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/02/12/democrat-sen-kyrsten-sinema-vote-william-barr-attorney-general/2853234002/

    I know lesbian wiccan more reliable than straight laced Mormon,

    narciso (d1f714)

  14. Of the people you mention, Kevin, only Reagan remade the party in his image in a way comparable to what Trump is doing. And it stayed that way for 35 years. Reagan lifted the party – and America – up, while Trump is dragging both of them into the sewer, of course.

    Goldwater was a flash in the pan; so were Dukakis, McGovern, etc. Nixon’s Republican Party stood up for what was right in precisely the way that today’s hasn’t.

    Dave (d524ac)

  15. Actually, McGovern’s ideas have had staying power, and this year they aren’t just nibbling on the edges. Although they may never top the anti-alphabetist convention roll call.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  16. Trumpism without Trump won’t last. Reagan’s imprint worked because Reagan was wildly successful and did nearly everything he said he would do, despite an opposition House, reluctant Senate (e.g. Dole) and a hostile bureaucracy. Trump will fail at almost everything. If he gets 8 years he will fail in more things and more spectacularly. IF you oppose his policies you should be effing grateful he’s in charge, instead of someone else who might get it dine.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  17. *done.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  18. the rot hadn’t set in back in the 80s, thanks to demography and indoctrination, you couldn’t get maybe 5 members to sign on to the climate change garbage, for instance,

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. Squash amash is delicious. I love it with butter and a little bit of pepper. I can see why Trump is looking forward to it.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  20. he signed on to the contempt citation, which proves him worthy of contempt himself,

    narciso (d1f714)

  21. @14. 35 years??? Not really. It began to go off the rails when he left office, the likes of Newtie and his Blowfish surfaced and the mess has been spiraling down since insisting it was something it was not by talking to itself in an echo chamber thanks to talk radio and Faux TeeVee. The Wills and Kristols have ratted out and abandoned ship; the old droning voices muted; their platforms in retreat. So you ended up with, what– 16 weenies who were soundly roasted by Donald J. Trump. Easy pickings; ‘in case of emergency, break glass and shout Reagan’ doesn’t work anymore– falls on deaf ears and from the young, you hear crickets– which is actually the sound of them tic-a-tack-texting away on their phones.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  22. And this is why I think it’s a pipe dream to imagine that the GOP can be “won back” by those honorable few who have chosen to remain aboard as it circles the drain.

    This is the kind of prediction that always fails to be true. Oh, they said, the GOP will NEVER recover

    The GOP beating the democrats is not the same as the GOP being won back by the honorable few. Indeed, partisanship is the only reason both parties are worse and worse. Politicians have always hated eachother, but things are much different than Truman and Eisenhower, let alone Reagan and Carter.

    It’s an objective reality. Our government’s contempt for our future, and our moral responsibility to make this country secure and safe for our kids, is represented in the deficit and overall debt. We rob our kid’s futures to buy votes for our politicians, and we get more aggressive every election. Both parties do it because both parties do it. The party that is run by the honorable will be balancing the budget, saying ‘no’ to special interests (ethanol, fighter jets, PBS, Obamaphones, etc). ‘but the other side would do it’ will be the argument for spending more.

    Dustin (6d7686)

  23. in the 70s Nixon was the worse, then the 80s, Reagan was remember Neshoba, bob jones university, by the 00s, Reagan was moderate compared to W so it goes, now when new York and California determine the next election, it will be a fond memory, of when you used to be able to pray and own a fire arm,

    narciso (d1f714)

  24. I think this story only went public, after a challenger was recruited and polled well – and still Trump was waiting.

    Sammy Finkelman (9974e8)

  25. 11. Kevin M (21ca15) — 6/12/2019 @ 1:29 pm

    This is an interest assertion, if true, but why would an historic GOP area vote Democrat after choosing a different GOP candidate in the primary? It seems counter-intuitive.

    Why did a super solid GOP state send a Democrat to the Senate in 2017 after a different GOP candidate was chosen in the primary?

    Sammy Finkelman (9974e8)

  26. because people fell for Gloria allred’s fraudulent narrative,

    narciso (d1f714)

  27. Well I’ll either vote for Amash on the Libertarian ticket in 2020 or stay home.

    The Conservative Curmudgeon (27d313)

  28. @ Dave: I agree that Reagan remade the GOP. I utterly disagree that Trump is doing something comparable. No one toadied up to Ronald Reagan out of fear, but that’s exactly why most of the GOP lawmakers who’ve toadied up to Trump are doing so. When Trump is gone, when that giant vicious, nasty baby vacates the White House for whatever reason, the GOP will, I believe, emerge from the severe mental illness he represents. I likewise respectfully disagree with DRJ that Trump is the GOP now. Rick Perry was right: He’s a cancer on the Republican Party, he’s not the Party itself.

    Reagan inspired the GOP, and for those of us old enough to remember the 1980s, he still does. The two men had almost nothing in common.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  29. If Marco Rubio or John Kasich had had the wisdom and grace to bow out when their respective paths to nomination became impossible, Trump would now be back to peddling Trump Steaks and Trump University on high-numbered cable channels.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  30. I agree that Reagan remade the GOP. I utterly disagree that Trump is doing something comparable.

    Did Reagan REALLY remake the Party? I’d love to think so, but he was followed By George Bush who was just Gerald Ford II. He even had Cheney and Rumsfeld. This is followed by Dole in ’96 – who was to the Left of Bush-I, then Bush II, then McCain and Romney. Neither of whom were “Reagan Conservatives”. Nope. Looking back, the Fordites never lost.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  31. I always agree that Trump is NOT Remaking the party. But that’s not surprising. The Moderate/Ford/Chamber of Commerce faction has NEVER learned their lesson. As shown by Bush, McCain, Romney’s behavior in 2016, they would rather LOSE and give the Federal Government over to the Democrats than give up their Globalist “Invade the world, invite the world” dream.

    California a deep blue state and getting crazier and more socialist. But its 100% Globalist too. So, I haven’t heard ANY California Republicans complaining. They seem to be happy as clams at having ZERO Power. As long as big business keeps making $$$ – they’re happy.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  32. @4. Yes. He is.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  33. Slow learner:

    Trump says he would accept dirt on political rivals from foreign governments

    President Donald Trump says he would listen if a foreign government approached him with damaging information about a political rival — and wouldn’t necessarily report the contact to the FBI.

    Dave (d524ac)

  34. If Marco Rubio or John Kasich had had the wisdom and grace to bow out when their respective paths to nomination became impossible, Trump would now be back to peddling Trump Steaks and Trump University on high-numbered cable channels.

    Interesting comment. Do you REALLY think Kasich had a chance? Or are you just trying to be nice? Rubio – I can understand. Kasich, never had a chance. No matter what. In fact, I would place my bets on Rubio in 2024. He’s exactly the kind of candidate that the average Mainstream R likes.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  35. Toadies? Please; the power behind the throne was Nancy. Cross her and your frog legs were served up on a piece of Lennox china. Ask Don Regan for starts.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  36. Interesting comment. Do you REALLY think Kasich had a chance? Or are you just trying to be nice? Rubio – I can understand. Kasich, never had a chance. No matter what. In fact, I would place my bets on Rubio in 2024. He’s exactly the kind of candidate that the average Mainstream R likes.

    rcocean (1a839e) — 6/12/2019 @ 5:49 pm

    No. He’s saying they stayed in effectively blocking Cruz’s path to the nomination knowing they had zero chance to win. I though Kasich admitted at one point he was playing spoiler.

    NJRob (3b8152)

  37. rcocean, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. My point was that Kasich never had a chance, except as a way to divide the anti-Trump vote. It apparently sailed over your head like the F-35s flew over the White House today. As for California Republicans not complaining and being happy with Democratic majority rule, that’s the most preposterous thing I’ve read today — and I read the transcript of Trump’s press conference, so that’s saying a lot. I know at least one California Republican who renounced his party affiliation out of disgust with both parties; in fact, he’s paying for the bandwidth you use to comment here.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  38. Such fond memories of David Stockman splintering off the reservation… on his way to that woodshed.

    “You must come down with me –after the show– to the lumberyard– and ride piggyback on the buzzsaw.” – W.C. Fields

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  39. Paul singer was paying for Marco Rubio and probably kasich and jeb, while throwing lawn darts at Cruz and trump, through fusion gps.
    The California GOP is a dead parrot, and it’s not because they are particularly militant quite ths contrary, witness Whitman and Kashkari

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  40. Steph schmidt has been advising Howard schultz

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  41. A milquetoast like Pete Wilson got some movement going on prop 187, but even then the courts and the Clinton administration cut him off at the knees, then the latter instituted big registration among illegals and permitted voter fraud.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  42. When Trump is gone, when that giant vicious, nasty baby vacates the White House for whatever reason, the GOP will, I believe, emerge from the severe mental illness he represents.

    I would like you to be right, but I think you are wrong. There has always been a strong populist strain in the GOP electorate, a firm leaning to authoritarianism (usually under the rubric of “law and order”,and a decided nativist element as well. Those are now firmly in control, and Trump’s future absence will help it because it won’t be saddled with defending everything The Great Toupeed One says and does.

    Kishnevi (82cec7)

  43. Populism is as American as “Mom, baseball and apple pie”. De Toucqueville commented on it 180 years ago. (In the Andrew Jackson years.) It’s charlatans like Trump who make it into a dirty word.

    nk (dbc370)

  44. Reagan was a populist. But it has since then entered one of its virulent phases. Witness comment 31 on this thread as an example.

    Kishnevi (82cec7)

  45. So what’s wrong with law and order, public safety is the main purpose of this republic not the 200 other things. Through broken windows do snakes slither.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  46. It’s an objective statement us domestic and foreign policy has either retreated or metastasized since Reagan, we didnt have a 18 year foreign commitment since Woodrow Wilson

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  47. Rumsfeld and Cheney did learn somethings about striking a proper balance, that was the last panic about 15 years ago.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  48. Tom cotton doesn’t like ths criminal justice reforms, do you, that’s where hes being more lenient than Obama. In some respects

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  49. Amash was the only one in the Republican caucus to vote with the left for contempt on Barr and Ross.

    NJRob (3b8152)

  50. Do you think Republicans who vote against Trump spending money are voting “with the Left” or are they voting what they believe? In other words, is who votes the same way the only thing that matters, and what you are voting on is not important?

    DRJ (15874d)

  51. Rob, why was it bad when Holder ignored duly issued subpoena’s, but fine when Barr does the same thing?

    Dave (1bb933)

  52. DRJ,

    I think being a propaganda tool of the radical left is a bad thing. Voting against wasteful spending is a good thing.

    NJRob (3b8152)

  53. Ok, but which is it? A vote against spending or a vote that makes someone a “propaganda tool? “

    DRJ (15874d)

  54. A vote against spending is fine, an intrusive inquiry after an exhaustive independent council investigation is not.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  55. DRJ,

    reasons matter. Amash’s reasoning for his vote today was he felt it was the right thing to do? Why?

    BTW, the claim is this censure is over not answering questions regarding adding the citizenship question to the census.

    Want to play that one?

    NJRob (4d595c)

  56. I was speaking hypothetically. Was there a vote today where Amash opposed Trump?

    DRJ (15874d)

  57. Ok, sorry. I thought you meant there was a vote on funding something like my hypothetical. I guess we will never know for sure what motivates any vote but Amash’s vote on contempt seems consistent to me with his views on the Mueller investigation.

    DRJ (15874d)

  58. In other words, I see his positions as based on what he believes and not a desire to help Democrats hurt Trump.

    DRJ (15874d)

  59. DRJ,

    what does the census question have to do with the Mueller investigation?

    NJRob (4d595c)

  60. what does the census question have to do with the Mueller investigation?

    I’m sure Donald Trump thinks they’re related.

    Dave (1bb933)

  61. Amash said this about his vote today:

    The lawmaker tweeted that he opposed the resolution because it “shifts to leadership the power to authorize future enforcement lawsuits, further centralizing the House’s authority and undermining the institution.”

    Similarly, in the Mueller invextigation, Amash viewed it as an issue of the House’s authority to conduct obstruction probes. In other words, to me, he views these issues as separation/allocation of powers issues.

    DRJ (15874d)

  62. Why did a super solid GOP state send a Democrat to the Senate in 2017 after a different GOP candidate was chosen in the primary?

    Not everyone is as stupid?

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  63. President Donald Trump says he would listen if a foreign government approached him with damaging information about a political rival — and wouldn’t necessarily report the contact to the FBI.

    And when China dumps everything it’s gleaned from 10 years free run in our government and business databases, and it nails Trump to the wall, I’m sure he’ll think it all fair.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  64. I’m sure Donald Trump thinks they’re related.

    They both affect Donald Trump, so yes. Is there another criterion?

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  65. “If Marco Rubio or John Kasich had had the wisdom and grace to bow out when their respective paths to nomination became impossible, Trump would now be back to peddling Trump Steaks and Trump University on high-numbered cable channels.”

    But then how would the permanent GOP campaign consultants have made their money? How would the donors promised a Kasich-Rubio led return to Chamber of Commerce neoliberal standards be convinced to bow out and support Ted Cruz on a dime?

    In truth, ascribing “agency” to these perennial third-string presidential candidates is nothing more than a polite legal fiction. People with “wisdom” and “grace” don’t keep returning to losing contests cycle after cycle unless they’re either enormously egoistic or someone’s paying them to do so.

    Trump, naturally, did it once in 2000, then actually analyzed what worked and didn’t, and then only did it again 16 years later when he had a plan and a purpose. I guarantee you that the dynamic between the egos of the party donors and the egos of the Presidential candidates didn’t escape HIS notice, after all, he was a donor for years!

    And executed it, I might add, with foolishness that shamed those who deemed themselves wise and bluntness that shamed those who imagined themselves gracious. But you can go on demanding virtue and enterprise from the men without chests you created if it makes you feel any better.

    Antoid (8b0eb0)

  66. Antoid, I think you are blaming malice and conspiracy for what is far more easily explained by stupidity and incompetence.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  67. rcocean, you really need to work on your reading comprehension. My point was that Kasich never had a chance, except as a way to divide the anti-Trump vote. It apparently sailed over your head like the F-35s flew over the White House today.

    So, what about Rubio then? You stated if Kasich OR Rubio had gotten out, TRump would’ve been stopped. By who? Cruz? Jeb? Lindsey?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  68. Steph schmidt has been advising Howard schultz

    Well, that turned a 1% chance of winning into a .0000001% percent chance. He should have chosen Ed Rollins.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  69. Reagan was a populist. But it has since then entered one of its virulent phases. Witness comment 31 on this thread as an example.

    What is it with people, especially Liberals and labeling people “-ists” – Everyone they dislike is always some sort of “-ist”. They’re “populists” or “Nativists” or “Fascists” or “Racists” or whatever. 75% of the time you can’t even tell what the label is supposed to mean other then “I don’t like them”

    Calling Reagan a Populist is meaningless. What is that supposed to mean? Almost no one called him that in the 1980s.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  70. So, what about Rubio then? You stated if Kasich OR Rubio had gotten out, TRump would’ve been stopped. By who?

    Cruz, of course.

    Jeb! is a bogeyman that Trump’s supporters are always throwing out, which only shows they weren’t paying attention. Jeb! ended with 3 delegates and less that `1% of the vote. Cruz, who did not contest after May 3rd, won 11 primaries, had 25% of the total vote and 484 delegates.

    Rubio held out for his hail-Mary Florida primary, which Trump “won” with a plurality, Cruz and Rubio splitting the oppositon. Rubio got out then, and Cruz still could have won, but a hopeless spoiler named Kasich kept splitting the anti-Trump vote. Cruz had a chance until some time in April, he gave up May 3rd and Kasich gave up the next day. To my mind, John Kasich is the reason we have Trump.

    The combined Cruz+Rubio+Kasich vote beat Trump in all but one primary through boht “Super Tuesdays”

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  71. I take the long view people they investigated the late Bush sr for 6 years, they didnt go after jeb for contacts with castello, business associations with Padrera Corona political financing from Hernandez cartaya Martinez et al, they did investigate recarey who fled to Spain. If you’re a developer in Miami that’s what you do,

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  72. And I voted for Jeb twice, the establishment wanted him like the folks at fox wanted to make dark Phoenix they pinned for Christie they settled for Rubio and kasich.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  73. #28:

    When Trump is gone, when that giant vicious, nasty baby vacates the White House for whatever reason, the GOP will, I believe, emerge from the severe mental illness he represents.

    I would like to think that. And if Republicans are beaten decisively in 2020, there is a chance of it. Not because the current lot will actually find their lost souls, but ecause they will be taught that indulging their inner aggrieved, hateful child doesn’t build a majority.

    But I see no real constinuency, right now, for common decency in politics, or building a way that involves concessions to one another. Not in the Republicans, who are frightened of not looking frightful. Not really in the Democrats, who have embraced their inner Cotton Mather, and then wedded the poor fellow to the Marquis De Sade. It’s all, beat them with a stick, and if you see ’em look like they are moving, beat them again. We built our institutions with a populace with a very different mindset than the one we have now. We have rejected our history in ways both small and large, which puts us very out of touch with the founders.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  74. our president mr donald trump makes the sun shine and the grass grow and mr putin smile and his mouth looks just like a butthole so he deserves our adoration now and forever the end

    Dave (1bb933)

  75. But I see no real constinuency, right now, for common decency in politics, or building a way that involves concessions to one another.

    When have the Democrats ever made concessions? 9/10 this “reaching across the aisle” means Republicans helping Democrats achieve their policy goals. McCain always loved doing this. When did he ever “reach across the aisle” to implement anything CONSERVATIVE. It was always Amnesty, open borders, bad trade deals, etc. AKA whatever Ted Kennedy or Chuck Schumer wanted. Bush gave us “No Child Left Behind” with Ted. No liberal democrat ever “reaches across the aisle” to help a conservative republican get right wing legislation.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  76. The Senate democrats have REFUSED To work with Trump with anything. They don’t want to secure the border, work on infrastructure or even confirm judges. Its all delay, obstruct, oppose. But that’s somehow Trump or the R’s fault. Or so the moderates say.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  77. Had they backed Cruz from the start, they wouldn’t be in this mess, but they dont even have a quarter horse now.

    https://mobile.twitter.com/jbartash/status/1139160799040159744

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  78. Schmidt was part of a legendarily bad California race, then he recovered enough to end up pitching Arnold and John Roberts how did that work out?

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  79. #78 — The Democrats, as things stand now, look a lot like the Republicans in 2010. I mean, here they just had this historic victory premised on confrontation and, lo and behold, they are incapable of actually doing anything. (Impeach the President — Repeal Obamacare).

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  80. 78. rcocean (1a839e) — 6/13/2019 @ 6:49 am

    The Senate democrats…don’t want to secure the border

    Which is their right. Let Trump campaign against them, if he likes.

    Sammy Finkelman (9974e8)

  81. Rick Perry was right: He’s a cancer on the Republican Party, he’s not the Party itself.

    Remind me what Rick Perry is doing these days?

    Patterico (437a5f)

  82. I sent Justin Amash money this morning.

    As for the polls: if polls matter, Trump is losing to every single Dem candidate.

    If they don’t matter, they don’t matter.

    Patterico (437a5f)

  83. When Trump is gone, when that giant vicious, nasty baby vacates the White House for whatever reason, the GOP will, I believe, emerge from the severe mental illness he represents

    The rift between Trump supporters and Trump critics is likely to last the rest of my life. At least for me, there are many politicians and commentators I now deeply distrust and a handful I trust more.

    Patterico (437a5f)

  84. 85. There will always be a number of people in America who view politics as no more important than a football or basketball game. Sadly, I think this number represents a solid majority of the electorate.

    Gryph (08c844)

  85. Which is their right. Let Trump campaign against them, if he likes.

    Its their right to do anything. AND they’re covered by the First Amendment. I think I’ll just cut and paste this on every topic, since it fits.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  86. I agree the Republcian rift will NOT heal. Some pundits and R’s have made it quite clear that their support of the party is conditional. Support their candidate and they’ll support the R’s. Nominate someone they dislike – and they’re outta here. So, why should anyone else do different? Nominate Rubio or some globalist and I’m gone in 2024. I’ll vote 3rd Party. And so will most “Trumpers”.

    So the USA turns into California. And I’m sure Bill Kristol won’t be upset.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  87. SO, rcocean,

    Your argument is:

    * All those misguided wrong people won’t vote for Trump (yet he won) and

    * If you don’t nominate someone just like Trump, I won’t vote for him because *I* have the Light from Above.

    * Therefore when this leads to Socialist hegemony, it will be everyone else’s fault!

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  88. A political party hangs together no matter the nominee, or it hangs separately. It may be that our age is so fixated on Self, and our politics so intolerant of deviation from Principles, that the two-party system is no longer workable.

    The danger of that is that the FIRST stage of collapse of a two-party system is a one-party system. See 1812-1924.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  89. 1812-1824

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  90. The rift between Trump supporters and Trump critics is likely to last the rest of my life. At least for me, there are many politicians and commentators I now deeply distrust and a handful I trust more

    .
    This has been, for me, one of the most depressing aspects of the Trump era. On the plus side, it does work powerfully against “my side always good / your side always bad” complacency. But it’s hard to find many allies in the public sphere anymore. It shouldn’t be necessary to embrace or abet the loopy left in order to push against the manifest unfitness of one Donald J. Trump.

    Radegunda (da2f4c)

  91. Whenever someone says “So, what you’re saying is..” or “So, what your argument is…” almost always gets it wrong. usually because they are setting up a strawman to be knocked down.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  92. the whig party collapsed over slavery, I suppose immigration could be a catalyst, seeing the conflict between funders and the rank and file, possibly trade policy,

    but you actually need a candidate to challenge, and right now contenders are falling like the interns in the opening scene of quincy,

    narciso (d1f714)

  93. rcocean:

    I am not going to dispute your point in #78 because it’s actually true. I can think of younger, slimmer Appalled saying much the same thing in 2011 about Republicans. This is a bipartisan problem; I am pessimistic that it will get solved anytime soon.

    Democrats and Republicans did work together quite a bit in the 90s and accomplished a conservative crime bill (which has made the Left unhappy ever since) and budgets that actually yielded a surplus. So this work together thing has happened in my lifetime to produce conservative results.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  94. IRC, the democrats and R’s didn’t really “Work together” on the budget in the 90s. Its more like they had to compromise, since Dole and the Senate R’s didn’t really want to fight and Clinton only had so much power. In any case, the R’s and D’s have been working together on the Budget since 2010. The accepted “Compromise” is that everyone R and D gets to spend as much as they want to on pork, or to please their base, and to hell with the deficits and the future. So the R’s jack up Defense spending and aid to Farmers, the D’s jack up social programs. And no one touches medicare or Social security.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  95. @95 – I agree. the 90’s crime bill contained significant D support and Clinton signed it. OK, so that’s ONE

    rcocean (1a839e)

  96. #96 —

    I think it’s fair to say that the GOP has given up of even pretending to balance the budget, and that’s been so for a number of years. Can you admit that this has never been a priority for Trump?

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  97. 94, bonus points for the Quincy reference – a procedural without the gratuitous corpse-play that has been commonplace since Law and Order having Orbach thirsting for the ME.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  98. 96 —

    Can you admit that this has never been a priority for Trump?

    At least one of Trump’s biggest “intellectual” boosters has suggested that Trump is a morally superior to some other Republicans for saying he “won’t touch Social Security” – and won’t give the slightest thought to the problem of sustainability.

    Radegunda (da2f4c)

  99. Yes NCIS and bones made that gratuitous.

    Narciso (b0b7ad)

  100. The rift between Trump supporters and Trump critics is likely to last the rest of my life

    I very much doubt it. Remember how many fans W had in December 2008? At the end of Trump’s time in office, everyone will have given up on him already.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  101. the whig party collapsed over slavery

    They collapsed because they didn’t really have any answers other than “don’t rock the boat” and that they never were a cohesive party but rather a collection of factions.

    In a sense there never was a “Whig Party.” The “Whigs” were made up of a fusion between the National Republicans and Anti-Masonic Party, and its only principle being they hated Andrew Jackson and liked high tariffs and a weak Presidency. They opposed “manifest destiny” and anything that would disrupt the slavery question. On many issues besides slavery they were hopelessly divided.

    It didn’t help that their two elected Presidents (Harrison and Taylor) died in office, and their vice-Presidents (Tyler and Fillmore) were hopeless non-entities that could not even get their own faction in Congress to work with them.

    People keep bringing up the Whigs without knowing a whole hell of a lot about them or the era, whose politics generally sucked all around.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  102. Quincy reference

    It’s interesting that another Quincy (Adams) was the compromise choice (1824) of the anti-Jackson camp that would become part of the Whigs. J Q Adams was known to be exceptionally indecisive, which proved to be a hallmark of the politicians that followed Jackson (Polk being the one-term exception).

    Kevin M (21ca15)

  103. 102, is it evil of me to wish that the Central Park 5 will be sent over to where Marine 1 will be waiting?

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  104. I agree. the 90’s crime bill contained significant D support and Clinton signed it. OK, so that’s ONE

    They also changed “welfare” significantly, requiring recipients to work or be training to work. They fought over some exceptions of course (Clinton vetoed 1 or 2 bills), but in the end they got it done.

    Clinton and Gingrich ALSO ended farm supports, with a paydown period. W promptly started them again due to election pandering.

    Kevin M (21ca15)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3397 secs.