Talk about a day that will live in infamy. Tom Brown pointed me to Sumner's take on the GOP. Its' great-he likens them to France and Napoleon.
When Napoleon landed in France, the Paris newspapers warned that the “traitor” was on the march. As he approached Paris the coverage steadily got better, day by day. (Someone find me a link) The media greeted him as a hero as he entered the capitol."
And here’s the Washington Post:
"Late Thursday night, National Review, the storied conservative magazine founded by William F. Buckley, published an issue denouncing Donald Trump."
“Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones,” the editors wrote. “Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.”
"The Republican National Committee reacted swiftly — immediately revoking the permission it had given National Review to host a Republican presidential debate next month. “Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited,” the magazine’s publisher wrote online. “The reason: Our ‘Against Trump’ editorial.”
"That soft flapping sound you hear is the Grand Old Party waving the flag of surrender to Trump. Party elites — what’s left of the now-derided “establishment” — are acquiescing to the once inconceivable: that a xenophobic and bigoted showman is now the face of the Republican Party and of American conservatism."
"In recent days, influential Republicans including Bob Dole, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, Rupert Murdoch and, as my Post colleagues reported, Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Peter King (N.Y.) have made noises about being able to stomach Trump. Republican donors are trying to insinuate themselves in the billionaire’s orbit. Trump himself said Thursday: “I have received so many phone calls from people that you would call ‘establishment,’ from people — generally speaking, conservatives, Republicans — that want to come onto our team.”
"The Wall Street Journal editorial page had long criticized Trump’s candidacy, publishing an editorial in July arguing that the conservative media who applaud Trump “are hurting the cause.” The editors opined: “If Donald Trump becomes the voice of conservatives, conservatism will implode along with him.”
"A week ago, the Journal reversed course. “Mr. Trump is a better politician than we ever imagined, and he is becoming a better candidate,” the editorialists wrote, speculating that “he might possibly be able to appeal to a larger set of voters than he has so far.”
"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."
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31443&cpage=1#comment-505777
He's right about 1968. That was a very painful year of transition for the Dems from the party of working class whites to the party of minorities, women, and college educated whites. McGovern the man was slaughtered, but the basic coalition he drew would go one to the winning coalition for Clinton and even more Obama.
As to the GOP race, I haven't had the time to speak so much about the levity that is the GOP race but things are looking pretty good as a Trump Democrat.
True, though it also reminds me of another time in France-the Vichy Regime.
It just doesn't get any better than this-if you're a partisan Democrat like me that is.
And here’s the Washington Post:
"Late Thursday night, National Review, the storied conservative magazine founded by William F. Buckley, published an issue denouncing Donald Trump."
“Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones,” the editors wrote. “Donald Trump is a menace to American conservatism who would take the work of generations and trample it underfoot in behalf of a populism as heedless and crude as the Donald himself.”
"The Republican National Committee reacted swiftly — immediately revoking the permission it had given National Review to host a Republican presidential debate next month. “Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited,” the magazine’s publisher wrote online. “The reason: Our ‘Against Trump’ editorial.”
"That soft flapping sound you hear is the Grand Old Party waving the flag of surrender to Trump. Party elites — what’s left of the now-derided “establishment” — are acquiescing to the once inconceivable: that a xenophobic and bigoted showman is now the face of the Republican Party and of American conservatism."
"In recent days, influential Republicans including Bob Dole, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, Rupert Murdoch and, as my Post colleagues reported, Rudy Giuliani and Rep. Peter King (N.Y.) have made noises about being able to stomach Trump. Republican donors are trying to insinuate themselves in the billionaire’s orbit. Trump himself said Thursday: “I have received so many phone calls from people that you would call ‘establishment,’ from people — generally speaking, conservatives, Republicans — that want to come onto our team.”
"The Wall Street Journal editorial page had long criticized Trump’s candidacy, publishing an editorial in July arguing that the conservative media who applaud Trump “are hurting the cause.” The editors opined: “If Donald Trump becomes the voice of conservatives, conservatism will implode along with him.”
"A week ago, the Journal reversed course. “Mr. Trump is a better politician than we ever imagined, and he is becoming a better candidate,” the editorialists wrote, speculating that “he might possibly be able to appeal to a larger set of voters than he has so far.”
"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."
http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=31443&cpage=1#comment-505777
He's right about 1968. That was a very painful year of transition for the Dems from the party of working class whites to the party of minorities, women, and college educated whites. McGovern the man was slaughtered, but the basic coalition he drew would go one to the winning coalition for Clinton and even more Obama.
As to the GOP race, I haven't had the time to speak so much about the levity that is the GOP race but things are looking pretty good as a Trump Democrat.
Trump looks as if he may just be able to steal Iowa. I thought Trump's ad hitting Cruz was more effective than Cruz's hitting Trump as I don't know how many in the base care so deeply about the issue of eminent domain though Cruz knows his Iowa voters well.
Even better, right now Cruz looks set to come in second behind Trump in Iowa.
Hopefully Nate Silver is right across the board. Nate has finally come around to believing Trump can win-mostly because the GOP Establishment itself has decided that Cruz is more objectionable for them than even Trump.
So now Trump is the Establishment candidate! You can't make this stuff up..
He now has Cruz winning Iowa and Trump winning NH. In Iowa, he has Hillary with a 85 percent chance. Yet everyone thinks she's the underdog their now. Which is great if you're Hillary Clinton and her team as you always want low expectations.
As for NH, he has Bernie with a 58 percent chance but this is almost totally because of that one outlier CNN poll which had him leading her by 27 points. Outside of that, he actually had her as a slight favorite. If she does win in Iowa this might jolt things as she's been declared the underdog and maybe she even could steal NH. She is down there but not by a ton.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-hampshire-democratic/
Even better, right now Cruz looks set to come in second behind Trump in Iowa.
Hopefully Nate Silver is right across the board. Nate has finally come around to believing Trump can win-mostly because the GOP Establishment itself has decided that Cruz is more objectionable for them than even Trump.
So now Trump is the Establishment candidate! You can't make this stuff up..
He now has Cruz winning Iowa and Trump winning NH. In Iowa, he has Hillary with a 85 percent chance. Yet everyone thinks she's the underdog their now. Which is great if you're Hillary Clinton and her team as you always want low expectations.
As for NH, he has Bernie with a 58 percent chance but this is almost totally because of that one outlier CNN poll which had him leading her by 27 points. Outside of that, he actually had her as a slight favorite. If she does win in Iowa this might jolt things as she's been declared the underdog and maybe she even could steal NH. She is down there but not by a ton.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/new-hampshire-democratic/
No comments:
Post a Comment