Pages

Friday, June 3, 2016

Donald Trump's GOP Supporters in Name Only

Yesterday Paul Ryan finally endorsed Trump-though he refused to quite use that word-just as Hillary was about to give her strong anti Trump speech. Coincidence?

You wonder what Trump has done since Ryan expressed his misgivings to turn him around. Is it attacking the judge in his fraud case as a Mexican? Is the fact that he's the plaintiff in an ongoing fraud case where 40,000 Americans say that presumed Republican nominee says lied to them and scammed them?

Is it the revelation that he lied about making donations and raising money to veterans organizations?

Is it Trump's vow to only consider white male Vice Presidential candidates as anything else would be pandering?

What put Ryan over the top? Many pointed out that Ryan sort of sounded like he was going to the gallows in making this endorsement.

And he sort of was. I mean this officially makes it Donald Trump's Republican party now. There's no way to claim otherwise anymore.

No matter what plans Ryan has for the future of the GOP and for himself, he and everyone in his party will be forever tainted by two words: Donald Trump.

Master Troller, Harry Reid is at it again. He declares that Mitch McConnell and Donald Trump are 'all cuddled up together.'

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/reid-nevada-interview-223808

McConnell for his part worries that Trump may do to the Hispanic vote what Goldwater did to the black vote: lose it for the GOP for good.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/mcconnell-worries-trump-could-be-the-gop-s-next-goldwater

Perhaps this is why, as Greg Sargent observes, Republicans are so muted in their defense of Trump today after Hillary's blistering attack.

"Hillary Clinton unleashed a brutal attack on Donald Trump in her speech yesterday, hitting him as temperamentally unfit for the presidency, hammering his threat to ban Muslims and attacks on Mexican immigrants, and lacerating him as a divisive and unstable figure who should never have access to the “nuclear codes.” She blasted his ideas as frighteningly “incoherent.” In short, without quite saying so, she portrayed him as a dangerous lunatic."

"But here’s the question: How many Republicans responded on Trump’s behalf? Given that Clinton has now telegraphed that she will continue casting him in these terms, how forcefully will Republicans push back?"

"Chuck Todd raised that question this morning:

"Does Trump have a SINO problem? Too many "Supporters in Name Only" who won't defend him when he needs it the most? Yesterday was notable."

"It’s a good question. But it’s worth adding an additional point: Even as Clinton’s attacks on Trump were receiving widespread media attention and being digested by the political classes, Republicans were actually in defensive mode about the very criticisms of Trump that Clinton launched."

"For instance, the New York Times reports this morning that legal experts worry that a Trump presidency represents a genuine authoritarian threat and could precipitate a real constitutional crisis. In the article, Senator John McCain gamely defended Trump, saying he did not think that a Trump presidency endangers the nation. McCain added: “We have a Congress. We have the Supreme Court. We’re not Romania.”

"Meanwhile, in a radio interview earlier this week, McConnell said he did not fear Trump would trample the rule of law. “He’ll have a White House counsel,” McConnell said. “There will be others who point out there’s certain things you can do and you can’t do.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/06/03/clinton-just-blasted-trump-as-a-dangerous-lunatic-do-republicans-disagree/

What others? Roger Stone? Corey Lewandowski? The Trump lawyer who says a woman can't be raped by her own husband?

Are these the kinds of folks that stand between us and some gargantuan overreach from Trump over some pique or other?

Is Stone going to talk him into not trying to shutdown the Washington Post or fire a missile into Europe?

Overall, is this the argument to make us feel more confident in allowing Trump access to the nuclear codes and all the other aspects of the awesome power of the US Presidency?

McCain is more or less saying that, yeah, Trump has the heart of a Romanian dictator, but not to worry, we're nation of laws and, constitutional limits and separation of powers will restrain him.
It's like when Michael Hayden of the CIA said that if Trump gives certain orders the CIA will disobey his order.

Maybe. But wouldn't you rather not test this? Wouldn't the prudent thing to do be to put someone in who doesn't have the heart of a Romanian dictator to begin with?

"That doesn’t exactly seem heavy on conviction. And regardless, in a separate interview with CNN, McConnell actually conceded that Trump’s divisive rhetoric could harm the GOP in a lasting fashion among Latinos, just as Barry Goldwater’s 1964 candidacy harmed the GOP with African Americans. There was also this:

Asked if he would draft legislation on Trump’s behalf over a temporary ban of Muslims from entering the U.S., a signature Trump proposal, McConnell said: “I’d say no.”

"In other words, broadly speaking, Republicans are either mounting weak pushback against the charges Clinton is now amplifying, or not defending Trump’s positions at all."

"Even Paul Ryan’s declaration yesterday that he would vote for Trump had a faint-hearted feeling to it. At first his staff wouldn’t even confirm that his vote for Trump constituted an endorsement. Overall, Ryan exhibited all the enthusiasm of someone getting marched off to the gallows with a sack over his head."

The best course for Republicans in the next 5 months is to put a bag over their heads. For Ryan's reputation it just may be a trip to the gallows. 
Better a bad over your head than lots of footage of you defending the indefensible. 
It's as some GOP operatives have advised. If you're running for Congress as a Republican, run as if you're running for sheriff. 

No comments:

Post a Comment