Sunday, December 13, 2015

Trump Throws Curve-Knocks Scalia's Racist Comments

Just when you think you can pigeonhole him, he throws a curve. It touches on something Greg said recently that I agree with:

"With Trump I think the racist crap will stop once he secures a nomination. This isn't really who Trump is in my opinion. Yes he's loud mouthed and bombastic but nothing in his considerable past suggests this is the real Donald, as far as I can tell."

"This man has a pretty long track record of how he has treated people and how he has operated in his businesses. You don't get to where he has acting in a way that is consistent with how he is "talking" now.

"Whether he has been put up to it or if he is just taking it upon himself to be the parody of the ignorant white American doesn't really matter. The point is that the people he is attracting CAN be taken for this type of ride."

By the way, for the record, I always liked Trump's show before he got into all this political stuff. Now I'm not necessarily representative of anyone in that I really, really like reality tv in any case-Survivor, Big Brother, whatever, I'm there

But Trump no doubt always had a lot of fans, a lot of fans of his show and I don't know that you could break down the fans in any meaningfully ideological way. 

Now when he went Birther in 2011 I was shocked and disappointed-he had often said some pretty liberal things in the past like praising Hillary Clinton, being pro choice, even calling for a wealth tax. 

So I pretty much hated him since then When he got into the race this year by calling Latinos rapists I was as appalled as many. Yet, it took only a few weeks for make me realize that this to the contrary, I wasn't going to fight the Trump campaign-until and if he made it to the general. That Trump is going to turn out to be the best thing to ever happen-to the Democratic party

I'm sure he does say a lot of stuff he knows is crazy. Tom Brown has said he wants Trump in KKK robes by the time of the Convention. But this seems to me to represent a fallacy. Trump is not just a Right wing nut on everything. What he's doing is a science as well. I think he's a lot more strategic than that. 

Now today he came out and hit Scalia from the Left-and in a legitimate way as well. 

"Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump thinks that Justice Antonin Scalia went a little too far when he suggested last week that black students may benefit from taking a slower educational route."

"Scalia said during oral arguments in an affirmative action case last week that black students may benefit from attending a "slower-track school." Scalia said that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas."

"Trump, in an interview with Jake Tapper that aired on CNN on Sunday, indicated he disagreed with Scalia's remarks."

"I thought it was very tough to the African-American community," Trump said. "I don't like what he said."

Trump, who once again claimed to have a great relationship with the black community -- and also took an opportunity to criticize President Barack Obama -- said he was "very surprised at Scalia's statements."

He has actually made a few attempts at courting blacks like when he sat down with the black ministers. Yes, he's been very critical of Black Lives Matter, but as Joy Reid herself says, this is sort of smart-there actually is a fissure within the black civil rights movement between the BLM activists and the older civil rights establishment from the 60s.

Trump is not necessarily on the Far Right on everything. His 'tough talk about ISIS' is mostly just cracking down on Muslims. But he's clearly no Neocon and makes a point of saying that W was dead wrong on Iraq-and that he was against it all along.

Many of his supporters are actually not traditional Republicans or conservatives. This is not simply a matter of the Tea Party. If you want a pure movement conservative, Ted Cruz is your man.

What's more I actually agree with these Trump voters. Listen to what they're saying:

"Trump supporters are not ordinary Republicans."

"It's hard to overstate how deeply alienated Trump supporters are from mainstream politics. They are viscerally anti-establishment. They feel the political system is broken. Since the recent terrorist attacks, they're even more anxious about the country. Several people Wednesday night said President Obama "cannot keep us safe."

"They see Trump as a strong leader who knows how to get things done. They view the Republican leadership's attacks on Trump's proposal to ban Muslims as insulting and ineffective."

"If they couldn't defend themselves against Barack Obama," said one man of the Republican-controlled Congress, "how are they going to defend themselves against Donald Trump?"

These are Trump supporters first, Republicans second. When asked whether they'd support Trump if he ran as an independent third-party candidate, even if it meant paving the way for Hillary Clinton to be president, one man said, "Maybe it's time to blow the Republican Party up."

Yes, 'maybe' it's time.


  1. Yes, Trump has been actively courting "the blacks." He'd like to win over at least ONE minority group I guess. So, you're right, he probably won't be wearing Klan robes. Still, it would be fun to see!

    And now he's called Cruz a "maniac." Is this thing going to get better? Does Cruz look like a pussy if he doesn't respond? Well I have a feeling that Trump may have decided he doesn't like Cruz pulling ahead in Iowa.

  2. Cruz is right though in what he tweeted. For him and Trump to have a cage match helps the Establishment.

    Even Morgan Warstler told me that he agrees Cruz and Trump should combine to finally get through to the Establishment.

    I'm for nothing that helps them nominate a Rubio, a Christie, a Jeb.

    To be sure, as I wrote last night the one thing that does worry me about Trump is maybe he is so singleminded about the Trump brand that he can't deal with being behind in a just a few polls and loses it.

    In truth, him coming second to Cruz in Iowa is quite possible but not the end of the world.

    But maybe Trump can't grasp that. So that's my one worry.

    1. If Trump attacks and prevails, and wins Iowa, then all the better. It may have helped him to push Carson aside.

    2. Yes, I'd prefer Trump to win Iowa. But realistically Cruz has a good shot there. I hope Trump can deal with that.

      Because if he does he then has a great shot of winning at least 3 of the next 4 primaries in NH, SC, FL, and Nevada.

  3. I don't know if I agree that Trumps supporters aren't "ordinary republicans". Ill bet all of them have voted straight GOP tickets for the last 30+ years. Thats as ordinary republican as you can get.

  4. I don't know. That's what the focus group claimed from which I was quoting. A lot of them apparently don't consider themselves to be on the Far Right.

    The consider themselves in many ways to be moderate or even liberal-within the GOP.

    Note that Trump is not a fire breather on abortion and is against cutting Social Security. He's also for single payer-or was before he started running for President.

    Whichever. The important thing for me is they are willing to leave the party for Trump that they are for Trump first and the GOP second.

    But hey whoever they are they think it may be time to blowup the GOP. I'll drink to that.

    1. I agree that Trump does not seem to be pandering to the religious right with all the abortion stuff and as far as the SS stuff, I bet these followers are just like every other GOP hypocrite, they want THEIRS protected or enhanced while everyone else gets cut or eliminated..... because we are running out of money!!

      I am hopeful that Trump does go third party. Frankly, form what I know of Trump, I could live with him as president. I think there are things he can do for progressives that Hillary might A) never try or B) try and never be able to accomplish

    2. I agree. Trump would be much preferable to a real Republican

    3. What scares me about a president Trump:

      1. If he's currently saying what he means: intending to turn the US into fortress America, and turning the immigration service into a kind of inform-on-your neighbor gestapo. Not a country I'd want to live in. Plus I think it helps radical Islam, thus weakening the fight against ISIS, etc, and having the effect of potentially increasing terrorism, especially against Americans. "Fortress America" types don't give a crap about ever leaving the US (I'd suppose), but I'd like to have that option open.

      2. If you thought W and the neo-cons were bad about warping reality and twisting the truth, you'd be right. But even though Trump was against the Iraq war (which I do give him credit for), I think he'd be an order of magnitude worse about respecting the truth. At least Cheney and the neocons felt they HAD to bamboozle the NY Times about WMDs. They snuck around lying and slandering in such a way that you could tell they thought what they were doing would be shameful if exposed to the light of day. Trump would feel no such vestigial sense of shame or compulsion. He'd just call anybody pointing reality out to him "lying scum," and that would be that. I've never seen someone with a greater sense of a right to his own facts and reality: except maybe a creationist or fundy apologist like Sye Ten Bruggencate, or Kent Hovind. I'd LOVE to see a reporter ask him about what his "investigators" turned up about Obama's birth certificate in Hawaii... you recall he promised some shocking news about that in 2012. His birther nonsense and his lies about 1000s & 1000s of cheering Muslims and his willingness to tweet racist claptrap about blacks killing whites, and his fake stats about Muslims and Mexicans (being traitors or the former, and rapist, murdering, drug dealing welfare queens for the latter) make me sick: it's scapegoating, and in that he does have a resemblance to the worst of the lynch mob leaders... or even Nazis. The fact that he couldn't give a shit about the damage that might do (people actually getting hurt from someone shooting up a Mosque say, or shooting at Mexicans) really does make me sick. I feel the same about Fiorina and her lies about PP. Trump doesn't lie about the same thing as Fiorina, but he's much more prolific and bombastic about it, and thus ultimately probably even more damaging. He would NEVER accept any tiny shred of responsibility for any damage his shameless scapegoating might cause. Hell, even Sarah Palin was capable of being shamed into eliminating the shooting and targeting of politicians references on her website after Gabby Giffords was shot. I can't imagine Trump ever feeling any sense of shame. He probably would have responded by *increasing* his use of shooting metaphors.

      3. If we were to have a president that went well beyond any in recent memory regarding ignoring the constitution, I'd guess it would be Trump. He's completely shameless and seems to not care a bit about setting any kind of good example. He enjoys breaking civilizing taboos. If he felt like running for a 3rd term, or shattering constitutional precedent, or flat out cheating (say by insisting only "patriots" (i.e. Trump supporters) be allowed to count votes from now on) and his cult of personality were still strong enough with the military and the public to pull it off, he'd just do it. Fuck the law. Fuck history and precedent. I don't think he cares one iota about any of that crap: it's all about him. That's my impression. He's a "Rubicon crosser" if ever there was one.

    4. 4. The whole "I'm a strong man... I can get it done... don't worry your little child-like heads, let Daddy take care of it" shtick that seems to impress his followers so much, thoroughly disgusts me. I guess it goes with the cult of personality, but I personally can't think of a less attractive way to market a campaign. Even if I agreed with 100% of his policy ideas, I wouldn't vote for that kind of person: the idea that we should all just turn off our brains and put our trust in a strong man is revolting to me. "Cult" really is a good description!

      5. Probably my personal thoughts about him play into my low opinion of him. I've had to deal with braggarts and people who couldn't ever be wrong about anything several times in my life, and I've grown to hate that personality type with the white hot passion of a thousand suns. I despise having to deal with such people in my personal and professional relationships, and I simply refuse to do so if there's any choice in the matter. It seems to me that Trump is maybe the best living example of that personality type in an American public figure I've ever seen, so I find him deeply revolting on a personal level.

      However, I can put all that aside if I think he's the one who maximizes the Dem's chances, and I do. More so than Cruz or any of the rest. So I say "go Trump!" By no means do I think he'd be less damaging than any other candidate. I think possibly the only more damaging candidate (should they become president) would be Ben Carson. Trump's one good characteristic is a sense of self preservation. Stalin had such a sense as well, and thus the Soviet Union was never going to be as bad as a scaled up ISIS. I think Carson might actually believe his "end-times" religious nonsense, thus making him more dangerous and divorced from reality than Trump.

    5. BTW, we had our company Christmas party last night. They always do it up good: it was at a ballroom in the Biltmore Four Seasons in Montecito this year: free booze at the bar, lots of ordoeuvres, great food, and deserts.

      But I was astonished by two of my co-workers who struck up a conversation soon after arriving... one had seen a "Muslim" at the hotel as he walked in... soon they were talking about using tables as shields and charging the shooter. They were both serious! They were unnerved by one of them having seen a Muslim looking person or couple. This is a fairly cosmopolitan small city... it's not like seeing a woman with a head scarf is that unusual! Plus we used to work with a Muslim guy... and they both knew him. Super nice guy. Nobody was unnerved by him.

      Plus we've had two "mass shooters" right here in the local area within the past 10 years (I just got my 10 year award last night actually):

      2006: Jennifer San Marco killed eight people. She was an ex postal worker. Right here in Goleta.

      2014: Just last year, Eliot Rogers killed six, right here in Isla Vista.

      Both mass shootings took place within a mile of where we all work! (and two miles of where I live).

      ... and yet I don't recall (at the time) either of these guys getting freaked out about white female postal workers or white single male college students.

      What's the difference? What gives them pause now... to openly express how uncomfortable it makes them feel to even see a Muslim on the grounds of a fancy hotel in a tourist location?

      Well, that anxiety was probably there, but I suspect that our political candidates openly discussing Muslims being a threat made that anxiety blossom into full paranoia.

      These are not stupid people either: not incapable (with a little thought) of understanding that all the people drinking and then driving home on the same roads with them is probably a LOT more worthy of being worried about than is the extremely remote possibility we'd have to arm ourselves with tables and charge an Islamic shooter.


  5. Tom I had a feeling you'd have a response to this one. The funny thing is I know what Greg means.

    I've been thinking the same thing but now that I see that he agrees with me I'm even more sure there is something to this.

    I have to agree with him on this one. But I will get into much more detail later-I'm going to write a post.

    But I have said this to you before and I mean it-I'll take Trump over a generic Republican any day of the week.

    I will write more about this though-keeping your comments under advisement-probably tomorrow morning.

    I'll say this for starters. I don't necessarily assume folks mean what they say, certainly not in politics. Trump more than most. I agree with Greg-half of what he's saying he knows is off the wall.

    This is a guy who's dealt with politicians and the heads of government the world over. He knows how things work and how they don't.

    However, I have a lot more to say about all this which I will put a post together about-probably tomorrow.

    1. Put it this way: W eventually had to admit there were no WMDs in Iraq. Sure they had a few weak theories about them having been smuggled out, etc., but eventually the lack of WMDs became a fact.

      I don't think Trump would ever admit something like that. If he'd invaded Iraq and came up empty, he'd just lie and say we found them, and "stick to his guns" about it. In other words, sticking to bull shit. I don't find that an admirable quality. People like Ann Coulter would love it, I'm sure. But that would just be more evidence to me that the Republic was essentially gone: existing in name only.

    2. ... and I know he was against the Iraq war, but if some international situation wounded his personal pride, I can't see him having any scruples about using our armed forces however he saw fit to save face for himself. As long as there was no danger of him being personally hurt, I don't think he'd give a shit about how many people died in the process. Just like Cheney... except Cheney had some hair brained blueprint he was working from (PNAC), whereas with Trump it would be all about his personal ego.

  6. I look at it from a policy standpoint. Abortion, Social Security, taxes, spending, healthcare. On most of these things Trump makes a lot more sense than a generic Republican.

    On foreign policy he's not a Neocon. He isn't really about 'boots on the ground' that's Lindsay Graham.

    On Obama's Iran deal he made some actual sense. He's running as a GOPer so he has to say it's the worst deal in history.

    But even still, unlike serious people like Jeb, Christie, Rubio, or Scott Walker, he doesn't talk about ripping up the agreement on day one.

    This tells me he is actually a lot more rational even on foreign policy-he gets it that there is a time path dependent aspect to policy.

  7. But I knew you'd have a response to this. LOL. I'm glad Greg make this comment as it's in line with where I am..

    It definitely demands at least one blog post if not more.

  8. I guess I have a little faith in our "system" in that IF trump actually won an election and he were faced with actually governing and having to make some calls that HE would have to be responsible for that he would behave quite differently than he is boasting at present. Plus, god forbid, if it was actually apparent that he was going to go rogue that someone within our MIC would snuff him. There are too many entities within our business and military community that benefit from the status quo..... in fact we have the status quo because of their influence. Presidents don't make policy they simply give speeches to support policies that certain special interests have won the right to have implemented by whatever lottery system these special interests have set up. We have the Obamacare that CIGNA and BCBS want. We have the energy policies that Texaco/Chevron/Exxon want. We have our military budgets dictated by Lockheed, GE, Boeing. Trump knows that score Im sure.

    Agree with Tom though that his ego is his biggest threat/liability. He might actually start to believe he can do whatever he wants if he got elected. I just think that he would last about one stupid decision before getting snuffed. Im sure our system has a plan for a "president gone crazy". Generally our election system weeds them out but we gotta have a plan B if the crazy actually gets there. Its been thought of Im sure.

    1. Right I agree with that-you have to remember the President is a pretty weak office. If he truly went over the line he'd be checked by Congress, the Judiciary, and worse comes to worse, the military.

      Like Greg says I think he has a pretty good idea of the structure of how things work.

      But I'd rather have him than a generic GOPer. That I can say without equivocation.

      If I had to choose between him or Christie/Rubio/Jeb, etc. I'd go with him in a hearbeat.

      Not necessarily for running the country but in his campaign I find it hilarious when the phony pundits get so overwrought because they put together some gotcha and he refuses to acknowledge it.

      Again, my main argument all along has been I want him in the general-I don't see his chances of winning there high.

      But him vs. Christie I'd choose him in a NY minute

  9. Trump would have the same limits in any 'Trumpist' agenda that Bernie would ahve in any 'socialist' agenda. You need a party and a coalition behind you.

    The Hitler analogy doesn't really work-Hilter already had a party and a gang of tough guys who considered themselves the real military.

    Trump couldn't go full Hitler even if he wanted to.