Timex
4462
Well respected conservatives are really starting to come out hard against trump. Finally.
Robert Costas, plugged in reporter for WaPo, on GOP establishment warming to Trump.
As far as that National Review “manifesto against Trump”, comparing Obama to Hitler is a good start! Staggering logic here:
No national leader ever aroused more fervent emotions than Adolf Hitler did in the 1930s. Watch some old newsreels of German crowds delirious with joy at the sight of him. The only things at all comparable in more recent times were the ecstatic crowds that greeted Barack Obama when he burst upon the political scene in 2008. Elections, however, have far more lasting and far more serious–or even grim–consequences than emotional venting. The actual track record of crowd pleasers, whether Juan Perón in Argentina, Obama in America, or Hitler in Germany, is very sobering, if not painfully depressing.
Oh and the killer nail-in-the coffin that will assuredly sink Trump:
Trump’s liberal positions aren’t in the distant past–he has openly promoted them on the campaign trail.
ShivaX
4464
Remember how Obama overthrew the government and became a dictator!?
Oh wait, I’m sure that’s going to happen soon though! Maybe next Tuesday!
Stay classy, National Review.
I think the tide is turning for Jeb! He got his mommy to put out a video saying he’d be a good president.
Well remember that the GOP party apparatchiks have a very valid reason for not opposing Trump directly: if they piss him off too badly, he’ll run as an Independent.
So it’s one thing for the National Review to come out and criticize him directly, but I don’t think you’ll see any major figures in the GOP bad-mouthing him the way that the IN Governor did for Cruz. They pretty much HAVE to let him go through the primary process and lose “naturally”.
Honestly, how many of Trump’s supporters even read…The National Review?
Trump’s tweets:
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 40s41 seconds ago
National Review is a failing publication that has lost it’s way. It’s circulation is way down w its influence being at an all time low. Sad!
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago
Very few people read the National Review because it only knows how to criticize, but not how to lead.
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago
The late, great, William F. Buckley would be ashamed of what had happened to his prize, the dying National Review!
Plus, The National Review is off the ticket for moderating the next debate.
National Review was asked by the RNC to partner in the GOP debates. We agreed. Our initial partner was NBC, with whom we were to help moderate the pre–Super Tuesday debate, originally to be held on February 26 in Houston, then suspended by the RNC in retribution over the antics of CNBC moderators in its now infamous debate last month. A new main host was picked this week — CNN. National Review was to partner, along with Salem Radio and Telemundo, the debate rescheduled for February 25. Tonight, a top official with the RNC called me to say that National Review was being disinvited. The reason: Our “Against Trump“ editorial and symposium. We expected this was coming. Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald.
Timex
4471
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump 1m1 minute ago
The late, great, William F. Buckley would be ashamed of what had happened to his prize, the dying National Review!
Donald Trump goes against everything that Buckley stood for.
They should be sorry. It’s the National Review and people like Glenn Beck and John Podhoretz and Erick Erickson that created the conditions conducive to the political rise of Trump.
The National Review has strayed quite a bit too.
Miramon
4475
The National Review was always a smug, snide, vicious little rag. But while Buckley was around they had some veneer of dignity, anyway. Now they make the Huffington Post look good, which is a pretty sad state of affairs.
Timex
4476
This is true, but it’s still one of the more respectable right wing political sources. It has a perhaps more… hysterical? tone than it previously did, but at times it’s still well written. Of course, I don’t really read it much, so maybe I’ve only happened to see the well written articles.
Their attack on Trump, in some ways, is misguided from my personal perspective… not because attacking trump is wrong (attacking trump is effectively the duty at this point of every American), but because some of their arguments are not reflective of my positions. For instance, they correctly point out that Trump’s immigration “plan” is nonsensical and would involve an impossible increase in the size and power of the federal government, but they also point out how some of his policy positions are TOO pro immigration, like effectively advocating for amnesty. For me, personally, I generally favor amnesty if done in a reasonable and orderly manner… The National Review piece faults trump for his policy because it’s not only nonsensical, but in addition to having what are effectively fascist elements, it ALSO has elements which are not really reflective of traditionally conservative immigration policies. So they fault him for his facism, and his inconsistency… but also for being too pro-immigration. The last part of their argument isn’t my cup of tea.
But still, the National Review deserves praise for finally getting the guts together to just all Trump out on his bullshit. They should have done it sooner.
Hopefully, the conservative movement, even the crazy wing of it, will abandon trump entirely and Trump will be left with just his little group of sad old white racist dickheads, who are not really an important voting block, since most of them don’t even bother voting. Lots of old white guys vote… some of the highest turnout of any group. But THESE aren’t the old white guys you’re looking for.
LMN8R
4477
Is Trump the Free Market correction to the disastrous policies, governing, and rhetoric of the Republican Party?
Their argument is Trump is too liberal, am I understanding this correctly? Lol. Those guys…
Timex
4479
Not really “too liberal” as much as simply not being representative of conservative values.
Things like Trump’s absurd isolationist nonsense, like placing massive tariffs on goods… or his fascist bullshit about wanting to round up 11 million people, or just crapping on the constitution and saying freedom of speech doesn’t matter… that stuff goes against actual conservatism.
That’s the thing, Trump isn’t conservative at all. He’s just a mishmash of terrible ideas, designed to foment hatred and anger in disillusioned people. There’s no coherent ideology at all in anything he says.
And when you hear him speak, this is painfully obvious. There aren’t even real ideas presented. It’s just a bunch of catchphrases and buzzwords.
Quaro
4480
Trump’s twitter is just wow. You’d think the leading presidential nominee would have someone vetting things he retweets. Just four hours ago he retweeted a @WhiteGenocideTM twitter account which is exactly as racist as it appears. Like links to ‘find the truth about adolph hitler’ in it’s bio.
Timex
4481
Trump is one of those old folks who has been introduced to a technological medium, but doesn’t quite understand the nuances of its use from a social perspective. Or maybe he does, and just doesn’t care.
