Does Trump Actually Want To Be President?
Andrew Malcolm asks at McClatchyDC -- what he asked last year:
What if Trump's idea of winning is electing Hillary Clinton? And devastating the GOP in the process?
He explains:
Trump and Hillary Clinton are longtime friends and supporters of liberal causes. He's contributed generously to her campaigns and family foundation. Trump conferred with her husband just before announcing his candidacy. And with Hillary Clinton's FBI exoneration last week, we've seen the power of a Bill Clinton chat, at least with Attorney General Loretta Lynch.More significant, though, is Trump's behavior. Yes, it seems unpredictable. And that's compelling as Sunday night entertainment. He has mocked the handicapped, POWs and a woman's menstrual cycle, among other crude displays, with no apparent damage.
But Americans aren't clicking a remote control for a TV pitchman. They mark a secret ballot for the world's most powerful person. Showmanship and stage presence help, as Ronald Reagan proved. But will they choose as controller of the nation's nuclear launch codes someone whose trademark phrase is "You're fired!"?
Since locking up the requisite delegates to hijack the GOP, Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate - and help Clinton's stumbling candidacy.
His fundraising is tardy and halfhearted. He's being battered by millions of dollars' worth in unanswered negative ads like the ones that bloodied Mitt Romney beyond repair in 2012. His campaign staff turmoil dominated June news.
And he's left the GOP flailing and trying to figure out what to do -- to save face and to not lose everything.
Your diagnosis?
And another question: If you could pick replacement candidates, left and right, and/or third party candidates, who would they be?
Or, using Occam's razor: Longtime egotist goes for the biggest ego prize of all.
Since locking up the requisite delegates to hijack the GOP, Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate - and help Clinton's stumbling candidacy.
He wasn't running a terribly policy-driven candidacy before snapping up the delegates.
Andrew Malcolm is smarter than this tortured argument. I assume it's a clickbait argument, or the deadline's-due wankings of a political chatterbater. In either case, the dum-dums are eating it up in the comments:
DA! the corp media put trump in place so he would lose to clinton.this whole election makes macavilli look like a piker.
Ah, that sneaky macavilli!
Kevin at July 11, 2016 10:45 PM
But will they choose as controller of the nation's nuclear launch codes someone whose trademark phrase is "You're fired!"?
Many will. And Trump, if elected, will implement the only thing he intended to do all along, World Leaders Apprentice, in which various heads of state compete in team tasks (I've traveled into the future and...spoiler alert: in episode three, Kim Jong-un's team will sell more pizza slices from a stand in Union Square than François Hollande's team.)
JD at July 12, 2016 12:22 AM
And Trump was the guy behind the grassy knoll.
This is a comedic article born of a profession that is now largely an echo chamber of the self absorbed and almost silly (and mostly ax grinders for a specific ideology or policy).
Trump is despised by nearly the entire echo chamber -- with this echo chamber just happening to be the overwhelmingly largest spigot of information/inculcation to the masses. Every member of Trump's family likely needs an armed contingent to keep them alive. He's lost major business dealings and is now not getting his calls answered by some very important people in the world of deal making. He has been repeatedly called nearly every sinister name in the book. So, um, yea this obviously is entirely for his ego (a president have an ego?? Noooo).
But here's a shot in the dark! Trump's fundraising and campaign organization is not comparable to previous standards because he isn't like the previous standards. He's not experienced in lining up donors, polling experts and media experts fluent in media short stroking and PC type speech writing, party/campaign insiders gathered en masse to explain to Trump what he can and cannot publicly say/support, or creating a marketing mechanism for generating across the board donations.
Personally I don't care that he hasn't done enough MSM and donor/political class short stroking. I have no idea why anyone would except they want and love the status quo.
For years I have seen on this blog disdain for political correctness and what it is doing to people/society. I've seen disdain or all the hacks in the MSM and their frequent tidal waves of laughable messaging. I've seen disdain for the way American culture is lowered/denigrated in order to make a moral equivalency to aspects of other cultures that have no business being given that equivalency. I have seen disdain for pols/leaders who put snowflake feelings ahead of thinking. Disdain for gutless leadership that lacked the balls to stand up to something that is wrong.......et al. But I guess have I actually seen that disdain?
For anyone who likes those things, and many more, listed above kept solidly in place then please vote for Hillary or write in Mitt Romney or Bush or ???. The corp-pol-media cabal will be appreciative. Except for a few distinctions you'll get just what you are voting for with any one of them. You'll get someone who will slide right into the captain's chair and gleefully operate the 'the way things are' ship right on the same course.
Newsflash! the monotone but charismatic, analytical but speak his/her mind, steeped in the DC two step but will work desperately to change it, making decisions based only on what is logical/best, unaffected by the overly powerful and silly MSM but will never take them on/criticize them, will never hurt anyone's feelings but will be truthful and blunt, will enact only the Left things that are good and only the Right things that are good, will stand up to PCism, be endorsed by all the swell leaders from megacorps, pol leaders to the swells of Europe. For that candidate don't you worry one bit -- that candidate (who will have that pol machine lined up from day 1 too) will be there for you next election. Shoot! You only missed it by -->| |
Trump is an outsider and by its nature an outsider is a risk (as an outsider he is also less likely to win). A risk that the MSM (and some here) like to wildly exaggerate about....maybe?......just a little? Ya sure anyway. Will Trump push/get in place all the things he has spoken about and shouted about ad nauseum and be a 'fix everything' panacea? No. But some things I do know (where one goes about actually ignoring the MSM) is we have a candidate that in the face of a massive torrential MSM hurricane stood tall to rarely if ever say "oh I'm sorry I shouldn't have said that (insert likely truth here)". We certainly can't have someone as a leader who won't show that type of mealy mouthed PC politicking (calling doctor Romney, McCain, Jeb, Hillary).
Trump also is a candidate who is praised highly by the vast majority of people who were among his inner, secondary, third circles. He's a highly skilled businessman and a dealmaking tactician. Someone who has had the backbone to be called the worst of things yet stayed on message about American values should be held in high esteem, that American government should put American citizens as the first second and third important factor in decision making, and in the face of epic MSM blowback has maintained that immigration should be highly controlled, limited when necessary, and should be done with the benefit of its citizens in mind.
But! in a campaign for highest office Trump was crass, launched some personal attacks, he exaggerated for effect, and has used his fair share of sloganeering. Obviously the man has to be stopped! Hillary would be better or casting a vote for Yelnick McWawa is much much better for certain.....urgh..
TPW at July 12, 2016 12:44 AM
What I love is how MSM and Dems quickly accept their supported one's apology when they say something inappropriate.
Obviously the opinion stated was not really a principle. It was a poorly stated or ill-advised statement.
And NO the supported one is not saying whatever is needed to get votes. They just make ill-advised poorly stated statements every now and then.
("We will put coal miners out of jobs." unless we are speaking in coal mining country.
In which case we will ignore that long-term efforts were in place to put coal miners out of work w/o equivalent long-term efforts to give them work/training to find new jobs or relocate NOW.)
So Trump is a blast of fresh air tainted w/non-PC statements that "bull in a china shop" type personalities seem to have. Very blunt about goals and expecting to work out the details later.
Refreshing in a way.
Bob in Texas at July 12, 2016 6:46 AM
"Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate - and help Clinton's stumbling candidacy."
If I may summarize the above: There's a certain amount of elite-media condescension there, or maybe it's just the author not doing his homework. A lot of things that the media perceives as "torpedoing the campaign" actually play well with the target audience. I don't know that I trust any of the polls to decide on how Trump's campaign is doing. Across the ocean, a few weeks ago, every single one of the major polls confidently predicted that Remain would win. They all missed it.
I have to admit that a lot of things that Trump says puzzle me. But for the base, this is what it comes down to: there are two possibilities.
1. The fix is in. If that's true, then Hillary is going to win no matter what Trump does. So what Trump says doesn't matter; they'll vote for Trump as a personal protest vote, and that will be that.
2. The fix isn't in. If that's true, then what Trump represents is more important than the specific words that he says. We can argue about whether that's a good basis for governance; in a way, it's the same thing that Obama admitted to when he made his statement about being an icon that people projected their wishes upon. (And we know now that most of those wishes went unfulfilled.) But the Trump supporter is ready for absolutely anything that isn't more of the same. With Trump, there's an outside possibility of getting that. With Clinton, there's no possibility. And there is no waiting for 2020 -- this looks like the last chance. If Hillary wins, 12 million illegals become new Democrat voters, and neither the GOP nor any other opposition party will ever win another election.
Cousin Dave at July 12, 2016 8:32 AM
Did Andrew Malcolm predict that Trump would become the Republican candidate? If not, why should we listen to his predictions now?
Well, according to e.g. this article by Andrew Malcolm:
http://news.ptest.investors.com/politics-andrew-malcolm/061715-757002-donald-trump-rachel-dolezal-naacp-republican-presidential-race.htm
from this time last year, Trump is a laughable candidate who does not stand a chance. A quick Google search shows many other such articles by Andrew Malcolm. So why should I listen to him now?
It amazes me that people continue to listen over and over to people whose predictions are repeatedly wrong.
Snoopy at July 12, 2016 9:15 AM
Cousin Dave wrote:
If that's true, then what Trump represents is more important than the specific words that he says. We can argue about whether that's a good basis for governance; in a way, it's the same thing that Obama admitted to when he made his statement about being an icon that people projected their wishes upon. (And we know now that most of those wishes went unfulfilled.)
This is a really interesting point I haven't seen made elsewhere.
Kevin at July 12, 2016 9:46 AM
Replacement candidate? It doesn't really matter. The age of Liberty is over. Whomever you vote for will probably alter their views once elected in order to be reelected.
EarlWer at July 12, 2016 4:01 PM
Talk to some Trump supporters Kevin. What Trump says is largely irrelevant. No one really believe he means exactly what he says and no one believes the distortions and exaggerations the MSM try to pin on him. They see the general direction he is pulling and that is enough. Plenty of people recognize that the bureaucracy will slow him down.
Ben at July 12, 2016 5:34 PM
Talk to some Trump supporters Kevin. What Trump says is largely irrelevant. No one really believe he means exactly what he says and no one believes the distortions and exaggerations the MSM try to pin on him. They see the general direction he is pulling and that is enough. Plenty of people recognize that the bureaucracy will slow him down.
I watched his speech tonight (hadn't seen an entire Trump speech for a while) -- rambling, braggadocious, short on anything resembling nuance or specific detail. That's on him, not on the "MSM."
There's always been a subset of Americans who roll over for a Lonesome Rhodes because they see the general direction the old so-and-so is pulling -- or is pretending to pull. That's fine, but it has nothing to do with leadership.
Honestly, this is shaping up as a race between a corporatist squish and a telebrity of the moment -- like Mitt Romney vs. Cindy Sheehan or Roseanne Barr or something. And the GOP is reacting the same way the Democratic establishment would if the Dems were dumb enough to make Peace Mom their presidential candidate. Next week's convention ought to be interesting.
Kevin at July 12, 2016 8:21 PM
Look up the 'star' controversy or that Time's hit piece for MSM exaggerations, Kevin. I never claimed Trump was a calm and analytic speaker. But for as crazy and out there he gets some times the media try to drag it even further. Which is kind of hilarious. They end up in Onion country without realizing it.
As for 'nuance' or 'specific detail' those days are long gone. Look at any Obama or Hillary speech. Rambling emotional train wrecks full of pseudo-symbolism but short on any content. Anyone who has offered details in the last 20 years didn't get elected.
Ben at July 13, 2016 6:36 AM
As for 'nuance' or 'specific detail' those days are long gone. Look at any Obama or Hillary speech. Rambling emotional train wrecks full of pseudo-symbolism but short on any content.
What I saw last night was a train wreck of a speech that was sui generis — Obama, Hillary, Cruz, Kasich et al. are prone to puffery and eliding reality when it's convenient, but that's politics. Trump's speeches are closer to televangelism in my eyes.
As far as the "MSM" -- it seems to have become an all-powerful bogeyman, cited like Emmanuel Goldstein for any and every purpose by Democrats and Republicans alike. I can read people's positions without the help of MSNBC, Fox News, Drudge, the Washington Post, or whatever.
Kevin at July 13, 2016 11:11 AM
I know I don't want to be President.
On the other hand, I'd love to be ex-President
Karl Lembke at July 13, 2016 1:57 PM
Leave a comment