Rotting in Hell

Trump5by Brad Nelson11/6/16
May all you NeverTrumpers rot in hell. You are Globalist Authoritarian pigs.  •  Says a poster at the bottom of a David French article at NRO this morning.

I don’t hold similar views toward Trump supporters because I’m not a lunatic. Politics is not my religion either. My emotions this post-election morning are joy at the coming removal of Obama and the delousing of our National politics of the Clintons. This is combined with a bemused sense of Trump. He and his supporters make me smile in a way one would smile at an enthusiastic young child who has just eaten his fill of ice cream and hotdogs and thinks the roller coaster sure looks like it would be fun to ride.

May Trump govern with some restraint and wisdom. But we are more likely to watch a succession of bulls entering the various China shops and toppling display cases. But if we actually get a strict constructionist Supreme Court nomination (and confirmation), wonderful. I will applaud. I will state that all those “Rot in hell” magnanimous Trumpsters were right. And who in their right mind wouldn’t want them to be right about that?

But this same “rot in hell” faction will also have to own what inevitably will be a coming mess. May Trump at least find a few acorns of useful action as he carpet bombs us with his oafish personality and ego.


Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author  Author Archive  Email • (612 views)

Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to Rotting in Hell

  1. Rosalys says:

    No, no, no. Bad Mr. Poster-at-NRO. Not good to wish anyone in hell! Not even Hillary. They need prayer. But then again, I am a Christian (a born again, no less – the [gasp] worst kind!) and I believe in this stuff.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I thought it was a magnanimous article by Mr. French spoiled, to some extent, by an idiot Trumpster. I wish Trump well (because I wish our country well). Only a small-minded and pathetic person could wish otherwise. But that does not require me to overlook the reality of Trump and many of his supporters. There is a lot that still stinks.

  2. Gibblet says:

    When President-Elect Trump came out to give his victory speech last night, I think I saw genuine humility on his face.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      It was a good speech. And, frankly, he was a lot kinder to Hillary than anyone had a right to be. I would have congratulated her on a tough campaign but to congratulate her on her years of public service was a bit much. It’s rubbing out the results of those “years of service” that he ran on.

      Still, he read a good speech that someone else no doubt wrote for him. And it was a good speech. And, understandably so, Trump was dog-tired and was simply fulfilling a necessary task. I don’t read too much into any one speech. He did his job.

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    According to Jonah Goldberg, Hillary gave a good concession speech this morning.

    “Liberalism and big government were told to take a hike” — Rush Limbaugh.

    Really, Rush? I don’t think a single voter voted for Trump because they thought he would reduce the footprint of government. I think they voted for him for a variety of reason: Couldn’t stand Hillary, illegal immigration, economics, etc. But Trump all throughout the campaign did his best impression of an American Mussolini in terms of his “fix it all” strong-man approach.

    And maybe that’s what we need, or is the best we can hope for at the moment, someone taking the existing powers and using constructively instead of destructively. But Limbaugh continues to mold himself into a thoughtless demagogue.

  4. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I don’t think many, if any, hard conclusions can come from this election other than, despite being a deeply flawed candidate, the country rejected Hillary Clinton. That’s not to say that Trump didn’t work very hard and, near the end, act more presidential. He did. And it was absolutely necessary that he present himself as a not-crazy-man in order for people to be able to hold their noses and vote against Hillary.

    But we can hope certain things happened or certain trends will be long-lasting. We can hope this repudiation of the media (by a media star) will have some lasting effect on the aging Brokawian dinosaurs of the liberal media. But I’m not holding my breath.

    But if we are to take a positive message from Trump’s win (and not see in it simply anti-Hillaryism), we might gain hope that Trump has, in some way, put a stake in the heart of political correctness. More importantly, he may have exposed (for a while) the soft underbelly of feminism. It may be the case that Republicans need not run so scared from the Vagina Voters. They actually need not be held hostage to every issue being framed as a “war on women” by Democrats.

    Granted, that’s not likely a lesson to be learned. But I do appreciate one aspect of Trump most of all: He is not a girly-man. No, some of his loose “locker room” rhetoric is vulgar (especially when done in public in front of open microphones) and is not praise-worthy. But he has shown that you can win without emasculating yourself.

    My older brother called me this morning and mentioned some emasculated media “man” he saw on TV going on and on about “What am I going to tell my daughters now with Trump is president?” This is the most pathetic kind of emasculated girly-manism and I’m sick of it. It’s okay to tell your daughters that they can murder their unborn babies but god forbid some politician say “pussy” in public.

    I hope most of all that Trump helps to man-up the entire Republican Party. If he does that, his candidacy and his win will have done lasting service.

  5. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    The below is a translation of a popular Austrian blog which a friend sent me.

    Trump is President

    And that is beautiful. One who only consumed European media will perhaps be surprised. I am not surprised. The People were angry, frustrated and were sick of the constant censorship/control by their “betters”.

    They therefore presented their bill and it was quite heavy.
    It appears to be that finally once again freedom has been won. So-called political correctness has suffered a crashing loss. One can again say what one thinks without the self-chosen “over-teacher” (of female gender) wagging her finger, which she has covered with her own filth, at one.

    And the most beautiful thing: the faces of the opinion makers, of those who would teach us, those who are upset. I will be able to look at those for a few days and every time I look at them it will give me untold pleasure. Now, they should have finally grasped the nonsense, the lies which they have served us for months.

    But they won’t grasp/understand, they are too dumb to do so. And we will soon have an election for President. After this election, I will see the faces of those dummies who have continuously preached to us who we absolutely must elect.

    This is just one more indication of the worldwide reaction to the Globalists and their machinations. Brexit and now Trump’s election has these people dirtying their breeches.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I’m not convinced that Trump’s win represents a stroke against political correctness or a comeuppance to the ruling class by “the masses.”

      It could be argued (I will argue until evidence shows otherwise) that “the masses” have had a pique of distemper — the same masses who live in a country with a standard of freedom and material wealth unimagined by the greatest rulers even of merely a century ago.

      We have punted the ball to one authoritarian to cure us of the other authoritarians and then think it will just all work out. Well, the fact is that our society has a deep philosophical and moral structure to it. Aiming the massive and mostly unconstitutional wrecking ball of Big Government toward another target might be emotionally satisfying, and even useful. But who is talking about taking some weight off of that ball?

  6. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    I consider politics to be important. Heck, some politics (Communism and socialism, for instance) can be a threat to your very life and freedom.

    But other than as an instrument (a necessary evil) in regards to forming and regulating society, politics ought not to be our religion and certainly nothing to shed a tear over.

    But, goodness gracious, you see the cheap and shallow individuals of the media who have invested far more into their politics than is healthy. Had Hillary won, I would have been disappointed. But life goes on.

    One of the kool-aid media moments that stood out for me last night was when this pathetic “man” (and are there anything but girly-men in the mainstream media?) lamented the 3% (or so) votes that Gary Johnson picked up in Florida (or somewhere). He said, in essence, “If only Johnson would not have been in the race, those votes would have gone to Hillary.” That’s not an exact paraphrase.

    Now, arguably, some of those votes might have. But common sense should tell you that at least half, if not quite more, would have gone to Trump — despite the obvious harmony between many aspects of liberalism and libertarianism.

    Certainly some post-elections breakdowns will tell us who those Johnson voters were. (I was not amongst them despite my earlier threat to do so in the fact of this clown, Trump.) But it seems they were a non-factor. I don’t recall anyone saying, as apparently happened to Bush because of Ross Perot, that Gary Johnson tilted this state or that to either Hillary or Trump.

    What seemed to matter from statistics that I read is that there were truly significant numbers of blacks and hispanics who stayed home.

  7. David says:

    “He and his supporters make me smile in a way one would smile at an enthusiastic young child who has just eaten his fill of ice cream and hotdogs and thinks the roller coaster sure looks like it would be fun to ride.”

    What a wonderfully descriptive image.

    Again you have me laughing Brad.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Thanks, David. And if you like that, you’ll love this quip by Mona Charen in what is a frank, but I think accurate, analysis of the challenges at hand with the president-elect:

      The election results feel like a gorgeous, gleaming new BMW in the driveway. But instead of a bow on the roof, there’s a vial of nitroglycerin.

  8. NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

    As the first to comment on French’s article “May God bless President Trump” (on Disqus at Quiket since I refuse to use Facebook) last night, I wrote this:

    “Now that you’ve admitted being wrong about Trump’s prospects, David, perhaps you could also admit to being wrong about the man himself, suffering from TDS as you did. And no – you cannot now claim to be “NeverHillary” and NeverTrump at the same time, since one of them was always going to win!”

    The problem is that if French was trying to sound a conciliatory note, he failed miserably. The only sin he would admit to is underestimating Trump’s electability, and at the same time he pretended to be “NeverHillary” which was logically impossible since he was not only NeverTrump, he was actively trying to cause Trump to lose the election.

    I think we can all agree that the “Rot in Hell” guy was a bit extreme. Nonetheless, some recriminations would appear to be in order for those supposed Republicans who, by withholding their support at a critical moment, put us at serious risk of a President Hillary which in turn would have meant that fundamental liberties would be in immediate danger. Now a minority of these people could truthfully claim they acted out of conscience although most acted out of a desire to exact vengeance on Trump’s primary supporters. And far worse were those like French who did more than refuse to support Trump; they waged an active war to sabotage his campaign in the general election (not in the primaries, which was an entirely different matter). This is truly unforgivable since their efforts, had they been successful, would have resulted in Hillary winning the Presidency, although we should consider the possibility of an “insanity plea” as Trump Derangement Syndrome obviously left French and others unable to think clearly.

    As to what this election represents, I think it’s very clear that this was anything but a mindless fit of rage; it was quite justified anger directed at an arrogant, faithless political class and an explicit repudiation of the policies of Barry Obama. Notice that Republicans held both the House and Senate. So much for the “My Gawd, that buffoon Trump is going to drag down the entire party!” sort of alarmism we heard over and over again from the NT crowd. I don’t believe Trump is any sort of incipient Mussolini and I know as well as I know my own name that he was not perceived by the electorate as an authoritarian. He was seen, rightly or wrongly, as someone who could clean out the Augean Stables that Washington has become.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      I see no reason for anyone to admit they were wrong about Trump. Trump likely won the race because his handlers got him to act against his instincts.

      And, Jesus, Nik, if you can’t find a conciliatory note in French’s article, I think you’ve gotten wound up way too tightly by this whole Trump thing. The man is, at best, a loose cannon. I think his best prospects for a successful presidency (as defined by needed reform) is to put good men in positions of power and let them do their job while he joyrides in Air Force One and gives prepared speeches.

      I think French did a gracious thing. But it is asking far too much of anyone who has witnessed the entirety of Trump during this campaign to ignore some of the bizarre stuff he’s said.

      Whether Trump drags the party up, down, or sideways remains to be seen. He is the president-elect. We can hope he repeals Obamacare and replaces it with something better; he “drills baby drills;” he has a coherent and sane foreign policy; he fixes the illegal immigration mess to the extent it can be fixed; he lowers taxes and unnecessary regulations; he reverses many of Obama’s destructive Executive Orders; he brings integrity back to the Justice Department, including jailing whomever necessary; and more.

      I don’t expect him to heal the planet and lower the sea level. But I do expect him to act presidential, to have an attention span longer than that of a three-year-old, to be magnanimous about the little stuff instead of being such a petty and vindictive man. There is nothing in the conservative creed that says we have to pretend that the naked emperor is fully clothed.

      And it is highly arguably that only when Trump began to respond to conservative criticism did he become the kind of anti-Hillary candidate that people could feel safe (enough) to vote for. For goodness sake, they had to take the man’s Twitter account away from him. But by giving him good speeches to read with a coherent message, they helped fashion Trump into something quite presidential. But the man who bragged about grabbing pussy when and where he liked was not likely going to win anything.

      So I don’t ask French or anyone else to deny what they know. Holding Trump’s feet to the fire is the only way his presidency won’t be a disaster. Drinking Trump kool-aid won’t do it.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        It has been suggested that Trump seemed to develop a sudden self-discipline on October 22, and that’s perhaps what won him the election by enabling many doubtful GOPers to come back.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          I don’t know the exact timing and you sound more informed than me on the date. But I do think his self-discipline (as well as his tireless efforts and his good speeches/themes) along with the fatal dose of Clinton Fatigue brought on by the FBI re-lighting the email scandal, worked magic for him.

          It was exactly the same for Ronald Reagan against Jimmy Carter. People were tired of Carter and wanted to dump him. But they weren’t sure about this mere “actor,” Ronald Reagan, who was regularly denigrated as a “cowboy” and dangerous rube who confused movies with reality. But the debates with Carter, in particular, gave people all the confidence they needed that Reagan was a stable and thoughtful man. The rest is history.

          This is precisely what many people needed to know about Trump. I don’t think he’d be president-elect today unless the David Frenches and Jonah Goldbergs of the world weren’t busting his chops about acting less like a petulant child and more like he was running for the highest office in the world.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      some recriminations would appear to be in order for those supposed Republicans who, by withholding their support at a critical moment, put us at serious risk of a President Hillary which in turn would have meant that fundamental liberties would be in immediate danger.

      No one put Trump’s potential victory at greater risk that Trump himself. It took strong arming by those in his campaign to get him to stop being a thin-skinned adolescent and put away his Twitter account for the last two weeks of the campaign. Even my wife, who always supported Trump, was somewhat dismayed at his behavior and clearly noted how his behavior improved over the last two weeks of the campaign. I am convinced this helped his appeal a lot. What is the message there?

      Had the man acted just a little bit less juvenile and vulgar during the months of August and Sept; had he not been such an asshole with his comments about Cruz, he would have had the thing wrapped up long ago.

      I guarantee you many conservatives did not vote for him, because of this. You may find this appalling, but he must accept responsibility for these actions.

      I believe Mark Levin said just over 80% of those who identify as conservative voted for Trump. Do you think maybe it would have been 90% if he had been a little more controlled? He wouldn’t have had to change his positions on anything, just be a mature adult, not a jerk. Fyi, it looks like Trump received about 1.2 million less votes than Romney. And it is thought by many that Romney lost something like 4 million votes to conservative no-shows. Would it have been a good thing to capture some of these votes?

      Again, I find it amazing that those who demand purity from voters don’t demand a little more discipline from the candidate. And I say this a someone who was not a Never-Trumper, but one who tries to analyze the way campaigns are run.

      As I said, I am happy Hillary lost, and hope Trump does a couple of the things he promised. But I am not going to pretend the man has not often put his damn ego before the mission.

      As to punishing others, don’t be a sore winner. I believe the Bush machine has been badly damaged by Trump’s victory. I think this is a good thing. I feel sure the Clinton machine is fatally damaged. This is a better thing. Don’t aim the pistol at your head just to shoot the bad guy sitting next to you.

      If you wish to punish someone, go after Leftists.

      • NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

        KFZ – I personally am far less eager to punish anyone than were a goodly portion of the NeverTrump-ers, whose chief purpose was to wreak vengeance upon those who voted for Trump in the Republican primaries. On the other hand, I think there has been insufficient understanding in some quarters that (to repeat) once Trump had won the nomination further public criticism of him was only giving aid and comfort to the Leftist enemies you mention. Such is the nature of political warfare and the radicalism of today’s Democratic Party.

        Too many people refused to face reality after Trump had won. They dreamed of a putsch at the Republican Convention to replace Trump with someone else (exactly who no one seemed able to say). They refused to see that while it was fine to heap justified criticism on Trump in order to help some other Republican win the nomination, it was not fine to continue to heap (mostly unjustified or irrelevant) criticism on him after he had been nominated in order to help Hillary Clinton defeat him in the general election. (For example as when David French and other hysterics, whom I referred to as “Vestal Virgins,” inflated Trump’s adolescent (and evidently consensual) groping to “sexual assault”). Then there were the contemptible Ewan McMullin, whose only purpose was to deny Trump a majority in the Electoral College and by doing so achieve nothing except possibly victory for Hillary Clinton, and his supporters.

        These people owe the rest of us who continued to fight the Democratic Left an apology. We may not get it, and we’re certainly not going to waste any time trying to “punish” them, but neither will we waste many tears if they choose to be left behind as the rest of us move ahead and do whatever we can to help President Trump (has a nice sound to it, I must say) turn this nation around.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          Nik,

          I no longer read NRO except on the fairly rare occasion when it is linked to here.

          I pretty much stopped listening to Williamson over a year ago. He made a lot of nutty comments which I found very strange. I no longer recall the exact details, but he clearly had lost touch with and held in contempt, much of America.

          I think French was altogether different and not bitter as Williamson appears to be.

          I believe Williamson is a spent force and is irrelevant. I think French may still be able to contribute something of worth.

          I had never heard of McMullin and think he is something of an anal orifice. I suspect the real reason he ran was simply self aggrandizement.

          I couldn’t agree more with you as regards helping Trump turn this country around. Keeping the pressure on him to keep his promises would be a good way to start.

          As I have said before, if he appointed a couple of constitutionalists to the Supreme Court and got the problem of immigration under control by building the wall, going after illegals in the country and cut back the flood of immigrants into the country, I would be happy. Anything else would really be icing on the cake.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Well, he’d better do something to assuage the working class concerns that elected him, or there will soon be hell to pay. Controlling the border, reducing the excessive burden of regulation, and corporate tax cuts might be enough to do that.

            • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

              While cutting taxes might actually help them in the medium to long term, I doubt that corporate tax cuts are of much interest to the working class voters who supported him. I don’t think they would mind the rich “paying their fair share.”

              I believe his message on immigration was more important to them. If he actually follows through on this, he will get a twofer. 1) it will be very popular and he will be seen as fulfilling his promise, 2) it will push up wages in the country, especially at the lower end. That will also likely push up inflation somewhat, but I think people will accept that.

              The easiest and quickest move Trump can make is to revoke the dozens of Executive Orders signed by the Obamanation which are having a horrible effect on our country. This action would cut back insane regulations imposed by the EPA, revoke the legal status of a couple of million illegals who are here, and throw out international “treaties” which have never been ratified by Congress.

              By picking this low-hanging fruit he could be seen to be very active, thus make himself very popular. Many of the other promises he made will be much more difficult to carry out.

              • NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

                All very good suggestions – I hope someone on the Trump team either reads them or comes up with them on his own.

  9. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Yuval Levin gives a wise and even-handed analysis to the entire situation in A New Political Reality. It is this mornin’g required reading.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      Has he been reading ST?

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Indeed. We often get there first even if with far less fanfare. But I appreciate his mostly objective and even-handed approach. His words about the role (and marginalization, to some extent) of conservatives was interesting, perhaps vital, to read. In his view, conservatives share space with a whole lot of factions (not really news, but it needs to be stated). However, he views conservatism as the brain that needs to lead where this whole Republican body needs to go. I agree.

        • Steve Lancaster says:

          I think the big tent is Republican. I may not agree with every policy decision but the trend over the last six years is clear as VDH says;

          From Victor Davis Hanson, Why Trump Won: It [Democrat party] is now a municipal party. It has no real power over the federal government or state houses. Its once feared cudgel of race/class/gender invective has become a false wolf call heard one too many times. The Sanders-Warren branch of the party, along with the now discredited Clinton strays, will hover over the party’s carcass. Meanwhile, President Obama will likely ride off into the sunset to a lucrative globe-trotting ex-presidency. His executive orders will systematically be dismantled by Donald Trump, leaving as his legacy a polarizing electoral formula that had a shelf life of just two terms.

          • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

            It has no real power over the federal government or state houses. Its once feared cudgel of race/class/gender invective has become a false wolf call heard one too many times.

            With all due respect to VDH, I think this is wishful thinking. Whenever a Republican wins the presidency we hear, “The Left is finally on the run and has been discredited.” In reality, they’ve simply lost an election while the main means of indoctrination into their worldview (the media, government schools, and the entertainment complex) continues to not only lay the groundwork for the next victory but the next Republican “victory” tends to be built upon the leftward ratchet, hence Trump — a very marginal “Republican,” at best.

  10. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    A significant percentage of Trump supporters do not at all seem content that their guy won. Read this comment to a completely reasonable view by Kevin Williamson of the very possible political dynamics that will exist (and the pitfalls to avoid) regarding having a Republican House, Senate, and presidency.

    What a pitiful loser Kevin Williamson is–just enough of a somebody to realize the he is a nobody. Hey Kevin, here comes the Clue Train: YOU DON’T MATTER. You and the rest of the preening, navel-gazing, narcissistic fossils at NR did your absolute best to elect Hilary Clinton. Trump won in spite of your sneering and condescension, in spite of your pandering to the mainstream media, and in spite of the kind of hatred and venom you never focused on Barack Obama as he gleefully destroyed as much of America as he could. YOU DON’T MATTER.

    Remember, I was not a fan of the unhinged anarchists masquerading as “Occupy Wall Street.” What is it that people are so angry about or why is it that they have read far more into Donald Trump as a hero than any reasonable person should expect?

    This is one reason to be afraid of any kind of candidate who appeals to “the masses” and is a populist. You tend to energize this kind of intolerant zealousness. Your candidate has just won and it seems now we are supposed to view Donald Trump as Jesus Christ, a man who is flawless — so much so that anything other than fawning praise of him is an outrage.

    Who are these loons?

  11. NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

    Frankly, I think the commentator has a better grasp of reality than Williamson, who was another TDS sufferer harping on one irrelevancy after another in his quest to stop Trump at any cost. (Remember his “witless ape” reference, or his dragging in Trump’s corporate bankruptcies, and expecting people to care for some reason?) Williamson is wrong in citing some supposed “illiberal tendency” that “is driven by resentment, fear, and bad economics”. The “resentment” he’s referring to is directed at the political class, which intended (and still intends) to become our rulers instead of our servants, and is entirely justified; the “fear” is a perfectly rational response to a very doubtful-looking future; and the “bad economics” are the views held by anyone who isn’t a “free trade” absolutist (with the “free trade” being of course highly managed trade engineered to benefit a few).

    As for the commentator, he was merely pointing out that Williamson and NR generally are very close to irrelevancy (if they haven’t already crossed that line) now that Trump has won and the old order changeth, I hope forever. All those at NR who continued to run anti-Trump articles after Trump had won the nomination have something to answer for, because all they were doing (if anything) is helping Hillary and the Democratic Left. Williamson and French were two of the worst offenders, and they shouldn’t expect anyone to forgive them too soon, especially as they seem to have no intention of apologizing.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Well, whatever help they gave Hillary obviously wasn’t enough. They probably did cost him a few GOP votes, but I doubt enough to make much of a difference. Most of his GOP vote losses were his own fault — and likewise, the major gains in working-class voters (which won him Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and most likely Michigan) were to his credit. I doubt anyone else in the party could have done that anywhere near as well.

      • NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

        Agreed. Trump certainly did many things wrong, and if all the NR people had done was to point that out in a constructive way, I would have no beef with them. But though they didn’t help Hillary enough, their efforts were in that direction, and for that they need to accept some responsibility. So far, they don’t seem to want to do that.

        And as much as I wanted Cruz, I have to wonder if he would have done as well. Surely the patrician Jeb!, the turncoat Rubio, and that idiot Kasich would not have.

        • Timothy Lane says:

          I doubt anyone else would have won Pennsylvania or Michigan, though New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado might have been within reach instead. But Trump seems to have held his own with minority voters, actually doing a bit better than Romney. (This may be a result mainly of the fall-off in Hillary voters among them.)

  12. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Trump’s fawning supporters were a means to an end. As the days unfold, we shall find out what ends. I happen to agree with Jonah Goldberg that when you lead the unicorn out into the cold heart of reality, the airy, utopian promises will begin to resemble a donkey.

    And I agree that this dynamic that Goldberg describes is most likely:

    But whichever tribe of Trump Nation we’re talking about, my guess is that their glee is likely to have an inverse relationship with Trump’s approval ratings in early 2017 and beyond. Trump’s bottomless yearning for praise and popularity (and, possibly once he’s president, good press in the mainstream media) will likely triumph in any contest with ideological rigor. We can already see that in his entirely laudable cooperation and praise for Obama yesterday.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Putting Mike Pence in charge of the transition team is a good start, though. Pence is a good conservative, though he showed last year a gelid backbone.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        We’re pretty much in a “wait and see” situation with either crow to eat (and pleasantly so) or a never-ending stream of “I told you so’s.” Time will tell. But it’s worth noting that even the most vigorous conservative Republican (or Democrat, for that matter) has tended to be inexorably sucked into the media-establishment-power vortex of D.C. and spit out the other end a member of the status quo who throws out a few red-meat rhetorical scraps from time to time to sooth the masses.

        • Al Hoove says:

          You’re entirely correct. They tend to bang on about the second amendment and Roe v. Wade, while allowing the general rot to continue if not actively accelerate it. By way of example, note that all the cost-overrun military programs Trump is fulminating against have been aided and abetted in their profligacy by Republicans who control the Senate and Congressional Armed Forces Committees. Great conservative talkers, even better liberal spenders that have seriously harmed the military capability of the US.

  13. Al Hoove says:

    Since the NRO poster likes to speak in metaphors, the bull in the china shop would be, metaphorically speaking, the voters chasing out the current management of said metaphorical china shop, who saw fit to display in said cases artifacts such as “Piss Christ” and “Dung Madonna.”

    New Management, new worthy artistic displays. Out with the corrupted and corrupting, in with the uplifted and uplifting.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      So one hopes. But it was during the administration of Bush 41 that the NEA funded “Piss Christ”. (I thought some GOP candidates that year should have run against that sort of thing.)

      • Anniel says:

        I would so love the “uplifted” and “uplifting.” Art, privately funded, of real beauty and value. Thank you Al Hoove, for articulating our great need.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *