Trump is Doomed: Here’s How He Can Win

That is the consensus – and looking at the polls, there’s not much one could say otherwise. Keeping in mind my view that the electorate on 11/8/16 might be very different from what we expect, the bottom line is that all factors in the election indicate that Hillary will win. Probably a bit narrowly in the popular vote, but with a crushing margin in the Electoral College. Right now, there’s no indication of a collapse for down-ballot Republicans, but that could emerge if people decide not only that Trump is unacceptable, but that if we’re to return the Clinton dynasty to power, might as well go all-in and give it a Democrat Congress.

But, Trump could still win this. All he needs do is complete the un-Conservative circle he started to make in the primaries. Remember, Trump is not committed to Conservatism – he has nothing to lose by alienating Conservatives, especially as such a large number of prominent Conservatives are firmly #NeverTrump, and some are rapidly drifting towards #ImWithHer. To be sure, Trump has offered Conservatives some olive branches – he’s pledged some rather solidly Conservative judicial appointments, offered a series of tax cuts and some rather substantial regulatory reform in order to bring Conservatives on board. It hasn’t worked – and, I think, it won’t work. Because Trump is not a movement Conservative – in other words, because he hasn’t been selected, burnished and propelled along by the gate-keepers of Conservatism – Conservatives, as such, will not come over to him. So, what, then? Simple – go full on populist.

Hasn’t he already done that? Not really. He’s done the border security/fight the terrorists part of populism as well as rumbled about trade deals and such…but to go full populist he’d have to start offering some specific goodies to the people.

Earlier today on Twitter a friend posted a bit noting that Trump’s support among young Americans is lower than even Nixon’s was – and Nixon, remember, was busily fighting the Vietnam War which required a certain number of young people to be drafted and shipped off to get shot at. Rather difficult to gain the love of people in that situation. It immediately occurred to me that Trump could massively shake up that problem by simply proposing to annul student loan debt. Hillary – propelled by Bernie – has made some noises about offering some relief on student loans but if Trump were to go her one better and say that such debts will simply be cancelled, a very large number of people would immediately be grateful to him. Now, if he were a Conservative he’d couple this with a proposal to abolish the student loan program, but he’s not a Conservative…so, he just goes with annulment. And, remember, whatever Hillary says about student loans, her bit is still keeping the debt there and providing mechanisms where the indebted youngsters can become government serfs in return for debt relief…Trump would be offering to let them off; she can’t top that. And running as Mrs Responsible in the campaign, she can’t even try to top it.

Other things Trump can do:

Propose a hefty hike in SS benefits for current retirees – for a lot of years there has been no or minimal COLA hikes in SS benefits because, officially, there hasn’t been inflation. But, of course, there has been and a lot of elderly people are feeling the pinch. Offer a 10% hike in 2017, and a lot of oldsters will sit up and take notice…and it would completely kill any Democrat attempt to portray Trump as someone who is against Social Security.

Propose a big increase in the child tax credit – bump it to five thousand dollars per child. Parents who are raising children are heavily burdened financially; something like this would be an immense relief for them, and a huge incentive to vote Trump.

Propose a 20% reduction in the number of non-essential government employees. Remember them? They are the people who were furloughed when the budget shut down happened…and everyone asked, “if they are non-essential, why do we have them, at all?”. Make an issue of it. Say that it’ll help pay for the boost in SS benefits. It’s a bit of a class warfare thing – in this case, the Government Class against the Governed Class. Given the contempt most people hold government in, this is a winning issue…make Hillary defend non-essential government employees with their fat pensions.

Propose that refugee settlement and Section 8 housing be moved to the high-end neighborhoods. This is another bit of populist class warfare…and it ties into the fact that all those calling anti-refugee people racists are living in neighborhoods the refugees won’t be settled in…and they are the same people who call for more housing aid for the poor. Ok. Give it to them – where it hurts. Make them defend the current system of shoving poor people into poor neighborhoods…

You can probably come up with more along these lines. The whole idea is, as I said, to complete the Trump process – but with real teeth. As I’ve said from the beginning, Trump is no one’s answer…but Hillary is everyone’s corrupt nightmare. If we’re going to have this, then let’s have it in a way which at least gives a bit to the people and sticks it a bit to those who have been busily ruining the nation. The people are angry – such a program as this plays into it.

Now, do keep in mind that I remain Conservative – Distributist to the core. But I’m not going to get Conservatism or Distributism from Hillary or Trump. I’ve no dog in this hunt – this is just me pondering how Trump could still win this. One thing which has struck me among Conservative pundits is their inability to think these days – Trump has seemingly blinded them. They are so worked up at how un-Conservative Trump is that they have lost their ability to ponder what is happening and how out of this nettle, Trump vs Hillary, we might yet eventually pluck a flower which is Conservative government. We have to roll with it in 2016 – and hope for better days in the future.

Advertisements

38 thoughts on “Trump is Doomed: Here’s How He Can Win

  1. Amazona August 15, 2016 / 12:19 am

    I don’t even want to talk about Trump any more, think about Trump any more, even consider that Trump is the GOP candidate any more. The GOP were warned about him and they pushed him anyway, The people were warned about him but they were so caught up in the thrill of “taking Hillary down” and the gutter brawls he promised and the outrageous silly “solutions” he came up with they refused to look at the reality of Trump, as a man or as a candidate.

    This is the most depressing election cycle of my life. Even with McCain as a candidate, there was a little energy. I was happy to think of Romney as president, The GOP has sucked the life out of the election cycle this year, and made an unelectable harridan with a criminal history and a miserable record pretty much a slam dunk as our next president.

    Let’s talk about anything else. Anything. The Olympics. The new TV show “Brain Dead”. I’d even rather go back to Pirates vs Ninjas. Pokemon Go seems like the stupidest thing ever. Let’s talk about that. Let’s just stop talking about the man running the most insane, self destructive, irrational presidential campaign in history. The man who brags that he is not running against Hillary Clinton, but against the media.

    Thank you, Trumpbots and GOP.

    • Marc Lee August 16, 2016 / 11:01 am

      Amazona, Mark is right. No matter how you cut it there is no Mr. Right in this election cycle so quit being a wuss about it. What there is, is a chance with Trump that we can slow the influx of destruction which is already a reality in many nations foolishly allowing all the unvettable refugees, stop TPP from destroying what’s left of our national sovereignty, get a DOJ and DHS which actually do the job our taxes pay them to do, much of which will only entail enforcing existing laws.
      We’ve gone so far down the slippery slope we’re staring down the edge of the clifff at the bottom now and if you haven’t got a better solution to what to do until Mr. Right or acceptable shows up, (cause I don’t think whining is likely to change the situation) maybe something for that depression……
      I heard Medved interview Jill Stein yesterday, (who many of the pissed off Sander voters are considering) and she is running on exactly what Mark mentioned, forgiving student loans at a cost of about a trillion as we speak. And the Social Security cost of living increase is a no brainer. But I also think he could get some traction with something no one is talking about and that’s states rights . Well, he did pay it lip service once but nothing since. It’s the real solution to our problems anyway. Like North Carolina passing that law for voter ID and then having it challenged. Or Arizona trying to actually enforce our federal immigration laws in their state and being taken to the woodshed by an overbearing fed. That’s B.S. and the only way this changes is when states start asserting their tenth amendment rights and refusing to comply with unconstitutional laws and mandates so it doesn’t matter who’s in the oval O, sitting on the supreme court, sitting as the head of some committee at the U.N., or failing to represent them in congress. All I have to do is look at the long list of Trumps enemies to see that they are all the same people and organizations who are trying to destroy this country and anything left of our rights. Pick a side.

      • Amazona August 17, 2016 / 11:05 am

        “Pick a side.” You mean like repeating over and over again, dozens of times, that I will vote for Trump? That kind of picking a side? You mean like repeating over and over again, dozens of times, what a serious danger Hillary poses to the nation and its future? That kind of picking a side?

        Marc, sorry if pointing out the obvious—that Trump is a bad candidate—-twists your knickers. I have said I think I fear him less as a president than as a candidate. Maybe I need to explain that to you, as it seems to have gone right over your head. It means that as president he can actually work with Congress to get some things done, more important he can nominate good Supreme Court justices, and we can get bills signed after they are passed. All of these are good things. However, his personality makes him a problematic candidate. His foot-in-mouth disease and refusal to take direction from others makes him a loose cannon, and an easy target for the Left. Worse, his lack of focus means he not only doesn’t have his eye on the ball, he doesn’t seem to know what the ball is. He has spent the first weeks since his nomination going after other Republicans, has announced that he is not running against Hillary but against the media, and dismissed fears of his loss as just a way for him to have a nice long vacation. It’s pretty alarming, though not at all surprising, that he might see the entire election through a lens that is focused only on how it might affect him personally.

        Some of Mark’s pandering ideas are good ones as we do need to do what has to be done to win. SS increases are fine. The child tax credit is fine. Forgiving student loans has the same built-in downside as granting citizenship to illegal immigrants—it is a slap in the face to those who have played by the rules, making their sacrifices insignificant and even trivial, and a waste of time and money. It discards the concepts of fairness and equal treatment for all.

        There is a lot Trump could do to shake things up. The thing is, they have to be things that he is capable of addressing. He can’t handle complex ideas, such as linking the Benghazi killings to illegal State Department activity and the attempted cover-up, and the need to keep Hillary’s emails free from FOIA scrutiny due to this and also to her Pay To Play policies. But what IS in his wheelhouse is the ability to ask questions that pretty much have to be answered, because ignoring them would be dangerous, casting doubts and concerns along the way. I am speaking in particular of the massive buildup of federal armaments, weapons and ammunition, even in agencies that are administrative in nature. I don’t have the figures in front of me and don’t feel like leaving this page to look them up, but surely Trump could make many speeches starting with:

        “We all saw Hillary holding hands with Obama as he told us she is the one who is going to carry on what he has started. She is the one who is going to pick up where he leaves off. What we need to do is look at what he has started and decide if this is what we want our government to be doing in the first place. For example, why do we want the Social Security Administration buying ________ million rounds of hollow point bullets? Why does the Department of Education need ________ million rounds of ammunition? Why are these agencies stocking up on grenades, bombs, assault rifles they want to keep us from having, body armor and millions and millions of hollow point bullets? Is this the kind of thing we want her to continue?” This could be repeated over and over, with different agencies mentioned at different times. “Do we really need the Bureau of Land Management better armed than much of the military? Do we really need more armed federal employees of various agencies than we have trained Marines?” This would be a chance to start the theme of the dangers of a massive, heavily armed, Central Authority, and even tie it in to the erosion of state controls.

        I’d use that beginning—-“We all saw Hillary holding hands with Obama as he told us she is the one who is going to carry on what he has started. She is the one who is going to pick up where he leaves off. What we need to do is look at what he has started and decide if this is what we want our government to be doing in the first place. ” over and over again, linking her to Obama and then going off on his policies, one by one, constantly referring to her holding hands with him and smiling up at him as he anoints her as the one who will carry on what he has started. The vast majority of Americans believe the nation is headed in the wrong direction—we need to focus, with laser-like intensity, on the promise of Obama and Hillary that she will just be more of the same.

        He could tie in her history of illegal campaign contributions from foreign nations, going back to Charlie Trie and the Buddhist nuns in Bill’s regime and moving on to her millions and millions of dollars from nations that got special treatment from her State Department. Surely a good researcher and speech writer could put together damning stuff showing her eager and willing to sell out the country for profit. A good line would be “I MADE my money. I didn’t get rich by selling out my country.”

        Hope this isn’t too wussy for you…………..

      • Bob Eisenhower August 17, 2016 / 11:20 am

        Amazona

        How can you say “I fear him less as a president than as a candidate” in the same post you say “(his) refusal to take direction from others makes him a loose cannon,” and “he not only doesn’t have his eye on the ball, he doesn’t seem to know what the ball is,” as well as “He can’t handle complex ideas.

        The man you describe could not be trusted with a cup of unsharpened pencils, and also has the ego and anger issues you freely described in the past, and yet you think, “President? Sure, what could possibly go wrong?”

      • Amazona August 17, 2016 / 2:02 pm

        Bob, take a breath. Think it through.

        Who has control in a campaign? The candidate does, Bob, and really no one else. He can make his own rules, and he can sabotage the campaign through stupidity, egotism, whatever.

        Who has control of the presidency? The president, but only to a certain degree. He is already elected, so stupid comments and foot-in-mouth disease won’t hurt him for another three and a half years. Otherwise, if we can keep a gun to the head of Congress to rein him in, a president can’t really do all that much.

        I’m pretty sure I have laid out what I would expect/demand of Trump. Actually, I know I have. That is, to appoint good people to federal courts and the Supreme Court and to sign bills sent to him by Congress. I’m not worried about “his finger on the trigger”—it’s not that much of a unilateral power. Hell, Bill Clinton lost his copy of the nuclear codes five times during his presidency, and we made it through. As long as his desire to rule instead of govern is controlled by Congress, he won’t do much harm. And his willingness to take the bull by the horns and be a lightning rod for controversial and non-PC causes might make him an asset in some circumstances.

        “…“he not only doesn’t have his eye on the ball, he doesn’t seem to know what the ball is,” ..” clearly refers to his odd loss of focus in his CAMPAIGN, not to a concern about his actions as president. I even explained my comment: “He has spent the first weeks since his nomination going after other Republicans, has announced that he is not running against Hillary but against the media…..” I try pretty hard to differentiate between campaigning and governing, and I notice that you refuse to pay any attention to the difference.

        ““He can’t handle complex ideas.” TO EXPLAIN THEM IN A CAMPAIGN. My goodness, Bob, you seem to think that the president has to have a grip on everything and be able to explain everything in great detail. Well, Jimmah Carter sure was no genius, and was often befuddled. Obama is in over his head and just manages to cover it up, to some extent, with verbiage and a fawning Complicit Agenda Media covering for him.

        ““President? Sure, what could possibly go wrong?” There you go again, simply inventing things you then claim I think, or said, or wrote. It’s a pattern with you. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that your astounding lack of comprehension is limited to this one area, where you are so blinded by your raging antipathy toward Trump that it drowns out any rational thought. But do try to work it out.

        “I fear him LESS as a president THAN I DO AS A CANDIDATE”. “Less” is not the same as “not at all”. “Less” resides on a spectrum of “completely” to “none”. You have no idea where my concerns rest on that spectrum, so you just make stuff up.

        Remember when we talked about this? Remember what I said? “STOP THAT”

        I think it funny that you ascribe such complacence to me, regarding Trump, while you exhibit such comfort in the idea of a Clinton presidency, which offers none of the few things I think a Trump presidency could reasonably be expected to provide and vastly more dangers, long-lasting as well as immediate.

        What do YOU think a President Trump is likely to do that makes your blood run cold? Since you are in such a panic mode about the prospect, you must have some terrifying scenarios in mind. And they must be pretty awful to outweigh those of a Hillary presidency.

        Share, please.

      • Bob Eisenhower August 17, 2016 / 2:25 pm

        Share? Okiedokie.

        By your own description, a President controls “only to a certain degree.” As such, electing an erratic, egotistical, unfocused, crooked is on a par with electing Hillary or a monkey or a blender as President. Oh, but he “promises” to put a conservative on the SC. Got it.

        Also, sorry for my bad habit of putting words in your mouth but that would be you doing it, not me. I am not “blinded by your raging antipathy toward Trump.” All my posts show my antipathy is toward the GOP, and urging conservatives to move elsewhere. See? I put quotes around the words from your mouth. You simply replace the words from my mouth with your own and argue with it.

        Maybe I am naive to believe most indicators that say Trump will lose no matter the snark in your posts. Maybe I am naive to believe conservatives will take a multi-year hit no matter what and that we would be wise to use this inevitable lull to reform. Perhaps I am naive to feel your work – whatever that is, though it seems to be limited to arguing with “liberal friends” at barbecues – as effort wasted that could have been spent better.

        We’ll see.

      • Amazona August 17, 2016 / 6:51 pm

        Bob, the voices in your head are doing you no favors. “Perhaps I am naive to feel your work – whatever that is, though it seems to be limited to arguing with “liberal friends” at barbecues – as effort wasted that could have been spent better.” What an odd fantasy of yours. I don’t “argue with liberal friends at barbecues…” or anywhere else for that matter. You seem to have me confused with someone else, real or not. I haven’t even been at a “barbecue” lately, and though I did attend a family function that was held outdoors, there was no “arguing” or any kind of political discussion taking place.

        I do communicate with party officials in a couple of states. Not “liberals” and not “arguing” but discussing actual ideology and the need for serious reform within the GOP. With genuine ideas that go beyond just stomping off in a huff and throwing away a vote on someone who doesn’t stand a chance of making a difference. That is to say, trying to be productive instead of just peevish. And not at “barbecues”. Or picnics or pig roasts or parties of any kind.

        Another thing I find odd is that you are are not arguing that we, or anyone, should vote for someone other than Trump because of a belief that this other person, whoever it might be, might possibly win the presidency. You just don’t want Trump to win.

        “Monkey?” “Blender?” You might want to check your meds.

        “All my posts show my antipathy is toward the GOP,…” Ah, yes, that is true. You merely substitute the name Trump for the GOP, or references to him meaning, in code or something, the GOP. “The man you describe could not be trusted with a cup of unsharpened pencils, and also has the ego and anger issues you freely described in the past,…” is not a reference to Trump, of course, but to the party. How could I have missed that? “Man”, “party”. tomayto tomahto. When you fret about “…electing an erratic, egotistical, unfocused, crooked businessman…” you really mean an erratic, egotistical, unfocused, crooked businessman PARTY known as the GOP. Got it.

        Yet my question to you was “What do YOU think a President Trump is likely to do that makes your blood run cold? “ Crickets.

        What most people do, when evaluating the problem of who to vote for, is look at the probable or at least possible actions of each of the contenders. We talk a lot about that here. For example, it is reasonable to give, on a point system, more points to the person who has “promised” to nominate conservatives to the Supreme Court than to the woman who has not only not made such a promise but who has stated that in her opinion Barack Obama would be a wonderful SCOTUS justice. On one hand there is a possibility, on the other none whatsoever. You dismiss this. It’s not your kind of evaluation.

        But what I have learned is that there is no talking to you because you simply don’t make any sense. Your “arguments”seem centered on imaginary events (“barbecues”) and imaginary statements and imaginary ideas and so on, and you just redefine terms as you go.

      • Bob Eisenhower August 17, 2016 / 9:52 pm

        Yes. Yes, I, too, heard crickets to your question “what would Trump do that makes my blood run cold.” Probably because we had an entire discussion on the topic last week. Silly me, I thought you could remember that far. My bad.

        It isn’t what Trump will do, as no one, not even Trump, knows what he will do. What chills my blood is the audience he inspires, the mob so reminiscent of Hitler’s rise. Does any of this ring a bell?

        Wait, what’s that, voices in my head? Why yes, you are right, I do indeed hear crickets, as Accusin’ Amazona never answered the original question, how can she write about how horrible Trump is, and in combination with very much growing evidence of him losing no matter what is done, she doubles down on the GOP that has betrayed true Conservatives?

        Oh that’s right, she did answer it. Trump promises to put a conservative on the SC. Oh, and he’ll be controlled by thew Washington machine cause, you know, Presidents can’t do much anyhow.

        (crickets)

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 8:23 am

        “Probably because we had an entire discussion on the topic last week.”

        So remind me. What was that again? Just point me to the date and time, if you don’t want to copy and paste, or retype.

        ” Silly me, I thought you could remember that far. My bad.” Meow

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 5:07 pm

        Marc, here is something else you could pass along to Trump via Facebook, as he is talking about the problems of the inner city, etc. I was thinking of it and then it popped up in Bill O’Reilly’s latest article.

        “One of the more shameful incidents in President Obama’s presidency occurred when he and other Democrats ended a successful voucher program in the District of Columbia. Our own Juan Williams described it as a ‘sin against our children.’ Thousands of black parents were distressed and outraged, but no doubt most of them still went to the polling booth and voted ‘D.’

        I remember my first visit to CPAC back in 2010, and watching a speech by a black woman who was weeping as she talked about the hope this program had given children in her neighborhood, giving them the opportunity to get out of the abysmal DC ghetto schools and how it was in the process of being taken away by Obama.

        One of the whines about conservatives is that we never offer any solutions. It’s false, I know, but prevalent. Here is a chance to do a couple of things.

        “We all remember watching Hillary holding hands with President Obama not long ago when he told us she will be an extension of what he has started. I have asked you before what about the last eight years do you want continued? Here is an example of what Obama did, and the kind of thing he and Hillary have promised you will continue if she is elected. There was a program…..” and so on.

  2. Amazona August 17, 2016 / 11:18 am

    At the risk of sounding like a wuss, what you need to know is that I want to be wrong about Trump. I want nothing more than to have to come back here the day after the election and admit how wrong I was about his chances. I won’t have to admit I have been wrong about his personality, but I desperately want to be wrong about how these elements of Trump will affect his chances to be elected.

    And I am cautiously hopeful.

    http://zogbyanalytics.com/news/756-clinton-and-trump-in-statistical-tie-trump-has-closed-the-gap-among-older-millennials

    • Marc Lee August 17, 2016 / 12:43 pm

      Hell, I was only commenting on that one weak, wussy, defeatist comment. So, I figured to have my beads read…..lol….and I think you made some great talking points for Trump. I suggest you and Mark both contact him with your concerns and ideas. I have called his campaign and emailed Roger Stone on some issues. But when I wanted to bring his attention to states rights I posted on his Facebook page a map with issues (federal laws or executive orders) which the several states are in the process of or have already nullified as per the Tenth Amendment. They are pushing back which indicates they realize their powers have been usurped and are taking appropriate Constitutional recourse. Trump is paying attention and it’s going to be our job to make sure he stays on course and makes good on his word.

      • Amazona August 17, 2016 / 1:44 pm

        I just said I am tired of talking about him. If he gets his head out of his nether regions I may change my mind but the unending litany of gifts to the Dems—Ivanka posting pics of her and Putin’s girlfriend, running against the media instead of Clinton, etc. are just depressing.

      • M. Noonan August 17, 2016 / 7:52 pm

        And as your least wish is for me a command, I’ve now made two new non-Trump posts…

        :o)

      • Amazona August 17, 2016 / 8:58 pm

        And the effort is much appreciated, though there is a little Trumpcreep…….

      • M. Noonan August 18, 2016 / 1:10 am

        It’s kinda like a fungus, ain’t it?

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 10:25 am

        Marc, I don’t do social media, so feel free to post my ideas on Facebook.

  3. Amazona August 17, 2016 / 7:34 pm

    https://imprimis.hillsdale.edu/next-supreme-court-justice/3/

    After reading this, one can reflect on (1) whether or not an absolute, ironclad, immutable guarantee of nominating someone who can effectively take the place of Justice Scalia is possible. (2) who might make such a commitment with a reasonable expectation that it would happen, (3) if it is more reasonable to vote for someone who at the very least MIGHT make such a commitment and then follow through with such a nomination, or (4) assure that the presidency will go to someone who will not under any circumstances make such a nomination and who will instead tip the Court in the liberal direction explained in the article.

    I suppose it is possible to read the article and then decide it doesn’t matter who is appointed to the Court.

    • Bob Eisenhower August 17, 2016 / 11:53 pm

      It very much matters who is appointed to the Court. Unfortunately, you see a correlation in Trump appointing someone more meaningful than his sister and I do not. Also, you believe Trump has a chance of winning anyways, and I do not.

      Given Hillary will be the next President whether you pout about it or post about it or hold your breath, I recommend you stop wasting your time on the folks that got us here, the GOP. They are losers who will lose big in November.

      Get a third party candidate to the debates, by getting the polling above 15%. That’s what I’m working for. Building a new home for Conservatism.

      • M. Noonan August 18, 2016 / 1:28 am

        But Johnson is as anti-Conservative as Trump – perhaps more so (of course, Hillary is definitely more so than either of them).

        I went on a Twitter rant earlier today – here’s four of them:

        I want a Conservative gov’t so I can get trade deals with China’s ferociously inhuman government.

        I want Conservative gov’t so that the top marginal rate will be lowered on people I’ll never meet.

        I want a Conservative gov’t so we will drop just a few more bombs on ISIS than now.

        Starting to suspect that a lot of fellow Conservatives are actually Progressives who just want lower taxes and to bomb more sh**.

        Do I sound a little bitter? Well, I am. I’m just heartily sick of this.

        Trump gave a speech the other day where he pointed out that some of the biggest victims of Progressive ideology are poor and minority people. This is precisely correct. This is also something that, at best, Conservatives have only given lip service to. And after Trump reached out – in his own, bizarre, Trumpy way – all he got from Conservative “thought leaders” was more abuse. Meanwhile, the flip side of this is Obama out golfing while Louisiana is buried under flood waters. We know, of course, that Progressives only ‘care’ when they can extract some financial or political benefit out of it – highlighting the disaster in Louisiana doesn’t help with the Happy Fun Times mantra of Democrats trying to drag Hillary over the finish line, so the floods are being memory-holed as they happen…but we Conservatives are supposed to really care. We’re supposed to be the people who are informed by Faith that we must care. No one gives a hoot – left and right, the only people who get cared about are those who write the checks…

        By “no one” I mean, of course, those who propose to be our leaders – who supposedly do our deep thinking for us and come up with “solutions”. You and I care – but we’re not writing checks, so no one notices. The left will hollow out a city like Detroit and then never mention it again – we on the right will make a meme about it…but no one seems to be interested in doing the hard, dirty, Conservative work of actually helping those poor people out.

        So, in 2017, am I supposed to sign on again to a movement which is about cutting taxes and bombing people? Is that it? Is that what I get? Or do I switch over to people who want lower taxes while not wanting to bomb people so much? Where is the group which will actually protect free exercise? The group which will lay it all on the line to undo Kelo? It doesn’t exist – at least, not right now.

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 8:21 am

        Hmmm. I have not said i think Trump will win, and I have done nothing but attack the GOP, yet to Bob I think he will and I am “doubling down” on the GOP—whatever that means. Evidently being part of an internal revolt against the GOP is the same thing as supporting it, and “wasting my time on it” and doing the little that is within my power to try to keep Hillary out of the White House is pouting.

        I don’t understand. I guess I need a Bobtionary. An example of something that make no sense to me: “Unfortunately, you see a correlation in Trump appointing someone more meaningful than his sister and I do not.” ????? Correlation among/between what?

      • Bob Eisenhower August 18, 2016 / 9:45 am

        Ah. Amazona’s playing dumb as the new strategy.

        “Why, Bob, I have no recollections of last week’s discussion about Trump’s rise being akin to Hitler. Even though it was very recent, imma make you prove it to me.”

        “Gee whiz, I am soooo down on Trump I want him elected…cause, um, judges. I call that a ‘revolt from within.'” Quite revolting, imo.

        So this is what it looks like when Amazona runs out of ideas…

      • Bob Eisenhower August 18, 2016 / 9:49 am

        Mark

        Johnson’s oositions are immaterial. He will not win.

        The idea is to have a real party for Conservatives to join. By making it to the debates this year, the party may gain enough legitimacy to be a true platform.

        The further idea is that as more Conservatives join, the party will reflect few of Johnson’s views and more and more conservative ones.

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 10:20 am

        Bob, of course I remember your shrill rant about Trump being the next Hitler. But my question was not about the echoes of history. It was simple: “What do YOU think a President Trump is likely to do that makes your blood run cold?

        I apologize if I missed or forgot an outline of your specific fears of future Trump/Hitler actions—Attempt at world dominance? Another Holocaust? Bad watercolors on the walls of the Oval Office? It what way do you think Trump would ACT, in his role as president, in a way that would pose the same threats to the nation/world that Hitler posed when he reached power? Aside from his populist pandering to a certain moblike demographic, what do you think he would DO as president?

        It’s not a trick question. Sometimes a question is nothing more than a request for information.

        And in a way did answer it. You admit you have no idea what he might do. And the windmills at which you are tilting are not really Trump himself, no matter how many attacks you make on Trump himself, but on his supporters, or on the GOP. Another question you refuse to answer is why are you more comfortable with a President Clinton, whose actions are not only wholly predictable but wholly harmful to the nation, than you would be with a President Trump who at least has a shot at getting SOMETHING right.

        I admit, I am not so impressed by your posts that I make a point of remembering them. Sorry if this offends you, or is taken as proof of some defect on my part—loss of memory, running out of ideas, whatever.

        I simply see you as on the fringe of the lunatic fringe, out there alone howling at the moon, outraged that anyone dares to have a different point of view, and frantically restating what I have said and simply inventing whole stories that don’t relate to anything I have said in futile attempts to make your arguments compelling. The sad thing, at least for you, is the obvious fact that the only way you can even try to mount an argument is to first invent a foundation of things never said, motives never expressed, and ideas never thought, and then sneer ferociously at these inventions. That ought to be a clue, Bob, as to the soundness of your position. You don’t even try to make your straw men look like me.

        I think you are a lucky man, Bob. You have found a place in the world that is the perfect place for you to be, and you have absolute unshakable confidence in its very rightness, rightness for the nation and rightness for Bob. Good for you. What I don’t understand is your surliness at the fact that I have a different opinion. My opinion should not matter to you. You are secure in your belief that you are right, and that confidence does not depend on me or any of the other millions who don’t agree with you.

        Just let it go, Bob. Just let it go. This is a wonderful place of pure Bobness, in which you can fight the good fight to establish, as you say, “a home for conservatism” and you should just be happy that you have found it and it is such a good fit for you. You have your answers. I am happy for you. I don’t understand why your happiness in this place depends so much on attacking me, but then I am not Bob so I don’t know and never will know why this is such an important component, to you, of Bobville.

        However, Bob, your passion for bickering is tiresome.

      • Bob Eisenhower August 18, 2016 / 10:42 am

        Wow, for someone who cares so little about my posts you canb’t recall them, you remember great detail once pressed. Kind of like how Trump will say he paid the vet’s charities only when pressed or that he was sarcastic when pressed.

        Of course you remember that we BOTH agreed Trump was no Hitler in the sense of world domination, just in how the rough crowd has responded, but I guess your own responses in that conversation were also of so little interest as to recall.

        Funny how the most bickering mean-spirited person on this blog wants me to “let it go” and not be “shrill.”

        Actually, as I write this very sentence, the truth has become clear to me. You get unreasonably attacking when pressed, just like your buddy Trump. You deflect and rant and do whatever to change the topic to your own ideas, too. And you try to demean with things that, in your mind, make you look better than the other, such as “sic” and “what a silly thought” and “your painties are bunched up.

        Perhaps your passion about Trump is not that you despise his ideas so much as like forces repelling. You and Trump share too many similarities.

        In fact, even your screen name, Amazona, points this out. Theoretically, you too k the name of the Amazons, strong, fierce women of lore, and added an “a” but it seems more likely you simply wanted a name close to who you want to be. Ivana = Amazona. I suppose the name Amazonka was taken, as Ivanka seems more your style.

        Ok, Amazonka, we can let this argument go. You and Chachi go vote for Daddy, I won’t give you a hard time about it. You go out and continue your “work” on the “revolt from within” that is surely going to happen.

      • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 11:17 am

        “Theoretically” is in “what the voices in my head tell me…”

        I am a horsewoman. When I asked friends from South America for the word for “horsewoman” in Castellano, as “caballero” is what they say for men who ride, the answer was that a woman who rides is “una Amazona”. I no longer compete but I still have horses and I am still “una Amazona”.

        Have a nice life.

      • Bob Eisenhower August 18, 2016 / 11:56 am

        Already having a great life, Amazonka! Thanks for the good wishes!

      • Bob Eisenhower August 18, 2016 / 11:58 am

        btw, I didn’t (sic) when you wrote,”‘Theoretically’ is in…” rather than “AS in” because I am not as petty as some on this blog.

  4. casper3031 August 18, 2016 / 9:42 am

    So what do you think of Trump’s campaign changes?

    • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 10:24 am

      Why do you care?

  5. casper3031 August 18, 2016 / 3:16 pm

    I’m curious as to how you view them. Good? Bad? Indifferent?

    • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 4:47 pm

      Why do you care?

  6. casper3031 August 18, 2016 / 5:53 pm

    Why do I care? Because I am interested in your views. Because, like it or not, we are part of the same country and regardless of what happens in this election we still have to live with each other. I care because I have friends, family and former students representing every inch of the political spectrum and the more information I have the better I can understand everyone.
    I care because for all of our differences, we also have a lot in common. We both love our country. We both want it to be successful, although we disagree on what that looks like. You and I are both Bronco fans, for me since 1967. You and I have also gone through personal tragedy. You lost your husband. I lost my wife of 39 years to cancer two years ago. I know what you have gone through. So yes, I care. In spite of Our differences, I care about you and the other members of this blog. I care about what you think, because as soon as we all stop listening to each other this country is toast.

    • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 8:38 pm

      I am very sorry to hear about the passing of your wife. You are right, we do develop a kind of community here.

      Your history here has been to snipe at conservative views so it didn’t seem likely that you have a sincere interest in what any of us think.

      I have not followed the path of the Trump campaign. As you know, I am concerned about it but since I have no control over it there is no reason to make myself miserable by following its ups and downs.

      I did just see a Hillary ad and wondered why her campaign is focusing on the trivial. Some woman is upset about the way Trump allegedly treated a “Gold Star mother”. I have a hard time believing this is a crucial issue for voters. It actually seems like a dangerous direction for her campaign to go, given the total lack of respect she gave to the families of men who died on her watch in Benghazi. I would think that the entire area of respect for the families of fallen Americans is a mine field for Hillary. In general I think this campaign season is going to continue to be the most bizarre and unpredictable of any I could name.

      I’d love to be able to have a respectful and relevant conversation about matters important to the nation with a Liberal, but so far this has not been possible. Are you saying you would also like to have this kind of conversation?

    • Amazona August 18, 2016 / 10:33 pm

      “We both want it to be successful, although we disagree on what that looks like. “

      Why don’t you tell us what you think a “successful” United States would look like.

    • Cluster August 19, 2016 / 8:13 am

      Sorry to hear about your loss Cap. We all face that day, but no one can ever prepare for the profound grief. I hope time has healed the pain.

Comments are closed.