Napoleon and his Loyal Subjects

Tom Brown pointed to me by a great piece Sumner wrote on Trump yesterday. Sumner likens the rise of Trump in the GOP to Napoleon's take over of France.

"Now if we want to follow him in his victorious march to Paris, we only need consult the Monitor. To guide our readers in this historic research, we will give a curious extract. We will find the graduated march of Napoleon to Paris, with the modification that the approach produced in the opinions of the newspaper."

– The cannibal went out of his lair.
– The Corsican ogre just landed the Gulf of Juan.
– The tiger arrived at Gap.
– The monster slept in Grenoble.
– The tyrant has gone through Lyon.
– The usurper was seen at sixty leagues from the capital.
– Bonaparte is advancing with great strides, but it will never enter Paris.
– Napoleon will be under our ramparts tomorrow.
– The Emperor arrived at Fontainebleau.
– His Imperial and Royal Majesty yesterday made its entry into the Tuileries surrounded by his loyal subjects!"

http://www.themoneyillusion.com/

Speaking of which, GOP Senator Chuck Grassley introduced Trump yesterday at an Iowa rally.

"Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) introduced Donald Trump at the Republican presidential candidate's rally in Pella, Iowa on Saturday, but the Iowa senator did not endorse Trump, according to Politico."

"We have an opportunity once again to make America great again," Grassley said in his speech."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/chuck-grassley-donald-trump

There you go. Trump is now the Establishment. It's why Nate Silver has finally given up on his Trump skepticism. His theory was always based on the Establishment stopping Trump.

He had thought that Cruz might be the compromise candidate for the Establishment. Turns out, it's the opposite. Trump is the compromise candidate-of course, they still hope Rubio, or Jeb, etc. could rally but if it comes down to Trump/Cruz, they'll take Trump.

And this makes sense to me. Cruz is too much of an ideologue. With Trump you get the idea that his whole platform is like Sumner says, a joke. It's a kind of negotiating position.

For me, I've been consistent: I don't like ideologues of the Left either-a la, Bernie. 

The GOP's Vichy Regime starts now.

P.S. Sumner also says this:

"I’m 60 years old and this is by far the worst humiliation I’ve ever seen a political party experience, much worse that the 1968 Democratic convention (which I recall vividly). Seriously, will someone just kill off the GOP and put it out of its misery? Perhaps the Whigs could be brought back."

"The only thing worse than a two party system is a one party system, and that’s what we’ve now got in America."

It’s the Democrats. Period. End of story."

The difference is I've argued recently in favor of one party rule; some of the country's best periods historically have been one party rule-certainly the New Deal era.

To be sure, if Bernie were to wrest control of the primary this would make the Dem's a lot more shaky as well. You could see a splintering on that side as well.

But the Dem Establishment is much more unified-and at least a lot of Democrats do like it though not the Bernie Maniacs.