June 24, 2017

The use of the word "pornified" in a NYT headline gets me to read a Bret Stephens column.

It's not that "pornified" isn't a word. I mean, it's not in my dictionary, The Oxford English Dictionary:
But it's in the Urban Dictionary:
And it doesn't need to be in any dictionary for you to understand it as a coinage. The word has appeared in the NYT quite often enough over the last dozen years, beginning in 2005, mostly in reference to the book "Pornified: How Pornography Is Transforming Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families."

But Ross Douthat brought the word to the op-ed page in 2010, in "Sex, Marriage and Upper Class Obligation":
American elites don’t have a strong personal interest in trying to stigmatize pornographers (instead of being amused by their antics), or in allying with anti-obscenity crusaders (instead of making fun of them). But I think there’s a pretty good case that they should do it anyway, because other people’s children, further down the ladder of education and income and prestige, might stand to gain from a less pornified society. That would be a kind of noblesse oblige, and it would be admirable and welcome.
Douthat was talking about actual pornography, but that's not what's going on in the new column by Bret Stephens (the other conservative columnist in the NYT). Here, the word is used metaphorically — and ironically titillating us in "How Twitter Pornified Politics."
This is the column in which I formally forswear Twitter for good.... Why now? Because... it occurred to me that Twitter is the political pornography of our time: revealing but distorting, exciting but dulling, debasing to its users, and, well, ejaculatory. It’s bad for the soul and, as Donald Trump proves daily, bad for the country.
Stephens says he was influenced by this New York Magazine article — "Pornhub Is the Kinsey Report of Our Time" — which has this quote" "Pornography trains us to redirect sexual desire as mimetic desire. That is, the sociological theory — and the marketers’ dream — that humans learn to want what they see."

Stephens explains:
That is what Twitter has been for our politics... If pornography is about the naked, grunting body, Twitter is about the naked, grunting brain. It’s whatever pops out. And what pops out is altogether too revealing.
That's what I like about Twitter and perhaps why my favorite thing about Donald Trump is his tweeting. I want the nakedness of the mind. Trump is great at tweeting, so to continue the metaphor, I wonder if Stephens's withdrawal from Twitter is like a guy deciding to abstain from sex because he's not up to the high-level antics he sees in pornography.

Is the analogy imperfect? When you have sex you're not (usually!) making pornography, but everyone who tweets is just writing a few words on Twitter. What the President of the United States does is, in form, exactly what any one of us can do — write a few words. The President just happens to be brilliantly effective at it. But as Stephens sees it, Twitter fits Trump's "style of crowd politics: unmediated, blunt and burst-like." It's "the reptilian medium for the reptilian brain."

If all that haughtiness and puritanism about terse speech and porn is making you want a laugh at Stephens's expense, let me show you what I encountered scrolling through the last few days of Stephens's Twitter feed:
The reptilian medium for the reptilian brain... indeed.

77 comments:

Bad Lieutenant said...

This is the Naked Lunch Presidency, where we can finally see what is on the end of the political fork. God Bless Donald Trump! I mean this with no irony at all. This is a colossal service to the nation. Opening our eyes at the end of our sleepwalk into oblivion.

Or am I wrong? Everybody was happy about the way things were going? You Democrats, H> was going to save us? You Republicans, Jeb! was going to save us?

We needed to know how deep the rot has gone. President Trump, or rather the reaction to him, is showing us with the clarity of a social X-ray.

tim maguire said...

The times' "conservative" op-ed team is part of a larger plan to undermine conservatism.

Darrell said...

The NYT scatified journalism in America. Rational people don't want that kind of thing in their homes. It stinks.

Michael K said...

Stephens, like Patrick Frey of Patterico, has gone off the deep end with Trump hatred.

I'm not sure why they react so violently. It almost seems like a class thing. As if they agreed with Hillary that we are deplorable.

I would like to get Patrick to read the new Pat Buchanan book about Nixon. He almost explains why Trump came along and has been so successful. Buchanan likes Trump which should give pause to a few of these haters.

sodal ye said...

Bad Lieutenant said...

6/24/17, 8:49 AM

Great comment

Fernandinande said...

Those conservative fNYT writers sure use a lot of words to say they don't like Trump's twitterings.

It's "the reptilian medium for the reptilian brain."

That statement is nonsense for the nonsensical brain.

rhhardin said...

Gk porne, whore. It fits with politician.

Ralph L said...

Trump is good copy and clear--why are "conservative" poundits complaining?

Everyone else in Washington tries to hide what it really believes.

Jack Wayne said...

Bret self-identifies as a snob. Ho hum.

rhhardin said...

The brothelization of the newspaper business.

Leigh said...

Maybe we should normalize the word "pornalize" ... as in "Stop pornalizing journalism." Or, "pornographizing"? As in, "I was horrified when you pornographized Trump's speech."

Nah. Neither of these versions catch your eye. Not sexy enough. Nor do they make any sense. But then, neither does "racististic" or "racistic" and I see these all the time -- like disorientated and commentated. Some people just love adding syllables, I suppose.

Drago said...

The sole reason Stephens hates Twitter is because "Trump".

If Hillary had used twitter more effectively and won the Presidency Stephens and other "lifelong republicans" would be spending all their time extolling the virtues of twitter.

It's really just that simple.

Fernandinande said...

"Americans [and probably everybody else] read headlines. And not much else."

Twitter posts are headlines without articles. For reptilian brains!

Darrell said...

If a picture paints a thousand words
what do we need the NYT for?

rehajm said...

Twitter makes Bret Stephens less important.

rehajm said...

If Hillary had used twitter more effectively and won the Presidency Stephens and other "lifelong republicans" would be spending all their time extolling the virtues of twitter.

Jack Dorsey hardiest hit. He's still comparing the current Twitter environment to Arab Spring, but he's the only one.

Fernandinande said...

I heard of a reptilian medium once before; a lizard that could communicate with the spirits of the dead.

Unfortunately the only spirits he could communicate with were dinosaurs, including fNYT scribblers who weren't even dead yet.

Just an old country lawyer said...

Of all the alternatives to pornify listed above, the only one I have ever used (or even seen before today) is fortify, but then I'm just an old country lawyer. I will have to use pornify at the first opportunity, however. I am sorry that I was not aware of the word before I finished law school in 1976; it would have found its way into an exam somehow.

Earnest Prole said...

Trump’s masterful use notwithstanding, Twitter is the leading cause of the idiotification of American politics, especially the Left, and is likely to get us all killed before too long.

Confused said...

I don't get why more of the professional commentary class don't at least understand Trump, like Althouse does. It's very bizarre.

But then, Matthew Continetti has a piece making the rounds in which he says that he finally cannot trust the media or our political class. I was shocked to read it; where has he been all this time, is it really dawning on him only now that the media is 90% spin and narrative? And he's paid to do what he does! Amazing.

roesch/voltaire said...

The good thing about tweeter speak is that one can easily catalog the lies from the Tweeter in Chief, but the bad thing is that most folks don't seem to realize these are lies because they hear only the echo of their own chosen and limited social media which offers a quick gloss on world problems. And anyway who wants to read Foreign Affairs, when you can learn that Quatar is "very bad" even though we are selling them 12 billion in US weapons. link:https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html?

Bad Lieutenant said...

1. Is Qatar doing stuff that is "very bad" or not?
2. Is Qatar more dangerous with that $12 billion or without it?
3. How's the weather in Dayton?

Ignorance is Bliss said...

That's what I like about Twitter and perhaps why my favorite thing about Donald Trump is his tweeting. I want the nakedness of the mind.

But even the (president of the United States)'s mind
Sometimes must have to stand naked

Bad Lieutenant said...

Thank you, sodal ye. I think 90% of the rage is that those people want the president to be a surpassingly excellent liar. They, really, can't handle the truth, or perhaps they think they/their set can, but no one else.

Ann Althouse said...

"Cornify" means to cuckold. ("Corns" are "horns" and the cuckold is traditionally pictured with horns.)

"Hornify," unsurprisingly, if you've read this far, means to cuckold.

"Bonify" means to make good or turn into good.

"Carnify" means to turn into flesh, and that can be a medical term, horrifyingly enough. ("The lung is carnified and reduced to a small inelastic mass.")

"Fortify"... that's the one we know.

Kevin said...

She might be trouble but he would bonify her tonight.

Kevin said...

But the most attractive thing about her in the moonlight was her well-formed Tweets.

jaed said...

"Magnify" is to make large ("magnus/magna" in Latin).

Hari said...

Annoying girlfriend/journalist is angry that her boyfriend/readership is ''cheating'' on her with pornography/Trump's Twitter account as an alternate source of sex/news.

Ann Althouse said...

" and that can be a medical term, horrifyingly enough"

Horrify is another one of the -ify words.

Also: clarify, identify, testify (turn into a testicle), justify, qualify, ratify (turn into a rat), notify, amplify, diversify....

Ann Althouse said...

I don't want to simplify you, classify you, deny, defy or crucify you...

jaed said...

But I agree with Althouse about wanting the nakedness of the mind. To me one of the best things about Trump is that we can see his off-the-cuff remarks, his immediate uncensored thoughts about this or that situation. It's refreshing to be able to see a president like that.

For decades—since maybe the late 70s, early 80s—all national politics has followed the same model: spin-doctored, focus-grouped, carefully vetted, homogenized, pasteurized. No spontaneity or honesty is permitted. No president is permitted to speak directly to the public without layers of staffers in between, massaging the "message" for conformity with this week's talking points and (more importantly) the sensibilities of the political class. And it's not just style; most of the gamut of political and personal thinking is just not allowed to be said.

Trump with his tweeting direct to the public blows that model right out of the water, and not before time either. My theory is that the aggrieved cries for Trump to "stop tweeting" or for "someone to take away his phone" are the cries of the displaced political class, angry at losing its power to control the communications of the president. (Who's supposed to "take away" his phone, as though the President of the United States were a child in daycare? Why, the political-class staffers, of course, who see elected officials as mere figureheads that they, of right, ought to control.)

Kevin said...

the other conservative columnist in the NYT

...neither of whom likes Trump. Something tells me they both voted for Hillary, yet are proud lifelong Republicans.

Like when staunch conservative Andrew Sullivan voted for John Kerry.

M Jordan said...

Cuck: noun. Person who wants so bad to be liked by the popular kids he'll give up anything he hold dear just to please them. Anything. See "Bret Stephens."

Mark O said...

To get his position out to the public, Lincoln wrote hundreds of letters, some of which became pamphlets. Trump bypasses the filter of the media by Tweeting. I'm not comparing the literacy of both, only the seemingly effective methods.

When did the media assume such a vaunted position? Perhaps he's leaving because his TL impeached him. Media credibility did not survive Twitter.

Mark O said...


I ain't lookin' to block you up
Shock or knock or lock you up
Analyze you, categorize you
Finalize you or advertise you

tcrosse said...

Pornication ?

Yancey Ward said...

Trump could write like Churchill, but the same people would still be complaining about him going over their heads to speak to the public directly.

I stand by my prediction, Twitter will ban Trump sometime before the end of this year.

Yancey Ward said...

Earnest Prole,

I think Twitter reveals rather than creates.

Balfegor said...

On the subject of "pornification" in politics, I was genuinely surprised, all the way back in 2003, to see news reporters unabashedly talking about sexing up intelligence reports. It was a more innocent time, I suppose -- nowadays our TV reporters are vulgar sorts who giggle about "tea bagging" -- but it felt to me, young as I was, as though there had been a change: the language of sex spilling over from actual sex scandals (I was a teenager in the 90s, after all) to common-or-garden news.

Chuck said...

I hope that someday we will be able to draw a straight line, from a Trump Tweet to a Trump impeachment. Based on such clear and irrefutable evidence in a federal courtroom or the floor of the Senate that even the most ardent Trump supporter won't be able to argue the point.

To me, the only thing that the Trump Twitter account reveals is the ugly, banal id of Trump and his supporters. Trump's Twitter account hasn't ever been used to advance or explain a policy, or to elevate the language. Hell; forget about elevating the language. It's Twitter, after all. Trump's Twitter account isn't just a bad form if communication, it has become an impediment to his functioning as president. It complicated the confirmation of Justice Gorsuch. It is injurious to the defense of his immigration orders. It seems to have led directly to the appointment of a Special Counsel in the Department of Justice.

Congrats, @RealDonaldTrump!

#Moronic


exiledonmainstreet said...

"For decades—since maybe the late 70s, early 80s—all national politics has followed the same model: spin-doctored, focus-grouped, carefully vetted, homogenized, pasteurized. "

It is why Sunday morning talking head shows have become so stultifying dull I no longer bother with them. Stultify, now there's another good -fy word.

Drago said...

Moronic sums up your entire post LLR.

There is not a single true or defensible assertion in it.

No amount of attacks on Trump can hide your horrendous predictions and failed "insider" political insight.

You'd be better off sticking to your attacks on the kids. It appears to be much more your speed.

Don't you have a Stolen Valor Dem to defend? You also appear to be quite good at that as well.

rcocean said...

I find people like Stephens intellectually dishonest and boring. For years he posed as some sort of "conservative" when he fact he's a globalist, Neo-Con who supports class warfare against the poor and working class. There's literly nothing "conservative" about him - except a few positions here and there. Which is why he's now writing for the NYT.

Like most Trump haters, he wants Trump to stop tweeting. Stated reason: its bad for the country and trump. Real reason: Its good for Trump and bypasses the establishment Press - which Stephens is a part of.

Chuck said...

Ann Althouse if you are serious about ending the toxic spiral of personal attacks on your comments pages, I suggest you start with "Drago."

rcocean said...

Pornified is an interesting word, but makes no sense. Who is watching "Porn"? only a small segment of society and its never been proven to be harmful.

rcocean said...

BTW, I've never understood why Chuck and Inga don't start their own websites. Then you and your friends could battle back and forth 24/7 over the dailynews. You could make some $$$ too.

Kevin said...

I hope that someday we will be able to draw a straight line, from a Trump Tweet to a Trump impeachment. Based on such clear and irrefutable evidence in a federal courtroom or the floor of the Senate that even the most ardent Trump supporter won't be able to argue the point.

Wow. What would you call someone who made the same statement about President Kasich? That in the absence of any known wrongdoing they still woke up every day hoping Kasich would do or say something incriminating enough to be removed from office?

Probably an unhinged anarchist or outraged leftist crusader. Possibly a Moby. Perhaps someone who puts their personal animus ahead of the country's welfare.

If you're genuinely a lifelong Republican I feel for you. Your anger is worse than the most ardent lefties who post here. It's going to be a long eight years. A long eight years.

William said...

I sort of agree with Bad Lietenant's introductory comment, but I think we would have muddled through with Jeb! and muddied on with Hillary. I don't look to any politician to be my savior, and history shows that the most messianic leaders are the ones most likely to lead their nation off of a cliff......I approve of most of what Trump has done and the people he has appointed. I stil have reservations about his tweeting and his personality. He's something new, and there's no past experience to guide us. Maybe it will work out, but who knows. It's a bit of an experiment.

Bad Lieutenant said...

William, it's not so much that Trump is going to save us as that Trump is going to allow us to save ourselves. The first step to avoid being drowned in a bucket of s*** is to realize that you're being drowned in a bucket of s***.

William said...

Messianic leaders are nearly always on the left. You need control of the megaphones to deliver the sermon on the mount, and Republicans will never control those. Obama was given the messiah treatment, but the multitudes thought that the bread and fishes that he delivered were a poor substitute for the pork chop on a stick they had been anticipating.....I can't think of Trump as any kind of messiah. He's the patron saint of hedonism, but, still, he does the right thing. Augustus Caesar knew more about statecraft than Jesus.

Bad Lieutenant said...

The time for muddling is over. We're out of air speed out of altitude out of ideas out of time. We need to fly the plane.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Perhaps someone who puts their personal animus ahead of the country's welfare."

That's what I think too. Chuck doesn't care about the nation. He doesn't even care about the GOP. If he did, he would consider the consequences to the party if they betrayed their base by supporting the impeachment of a GOP president.

None of that matters to Chuck - only his hatred of a man who made him look like a hapless, out-of-touch fool in November. A fool who doesn't even understand the electorate of his own state.

It's about chuck's own butt-hurt and ego.

Kevin said...

I think we would have muddled through with Jeb! and muddied on with Hillary.

Jeb! and Hillary would be fixing Obamacare by raising taxes, increasing subsidies, and tightening government control. Each would have furthered the notion that providing affordable and plentiful health care is the job of the federal government.

Neither would be perusing systemic tax reform as a means to restoring typical 3-5% GDP growth. Both would have made tweaks to immigration as a means to pushing through mass amnesty.

Opportunities for countries to correct bad courses before they go bankrupt are few, and therefore they should be seized whenever possible.

Earnest Prole said...

I think Twitter reveals rather than creates.

A fair point, and I’m willing to split the difference. I do believe Twitter greatly exacerbates the Left’s tribal/racial herd impulse, undoing decades of progress.

Darrell said...

I think that I will never see
a poem as lovely as a Trump Tweet.

Kevin said...

If he did, he would consider the consequences to the party if they betrayed their base by supporting the impeachment of a GOP president.

The old GOP is over. Trump is fashioning a new party based on taking traditional Democratic voters and moving them into his camp, while moving the Bret Stephens/David Brooks/Bill Kristol people out. His winning coalition is a group of people Democrats can't reach without abandoning their core constituencies, and the GOP of old wasn't interested in pursuing for fear of being labeled nationalist xenophobes.

I can understand the people who feel left behind. They are, for the first time, forced to choose. They could easily stand behind Jeb!, Kasich, and McCain, pretending there was a substantive difference between them and Gore, Kerry, and Hillary. The voters in 2016, both in the primaries and in the general election, just sent a message the level of difference was no longer enough.

I voted for Trump to end the Congressional stalemate supported by the one-sided media which was being used to undermine our civil rights. In short, I expected Trump to:

1. Reorganize the Republican Party.
2. Create a media meltdown which fundamentally destroyed the dishonest media's hold on "the truth".
3. Force the Democrats to undergo a similar breakup and reorganization in order to stay competitive.

It is my hope that through this reshuffling we will put off for several generations the increasing erosion of our sovereignty and the last gasps of federalism. It is my hope we'll give our own children and grandchildren a chance to make their own mistakes, rather than be forced to suffer the consequences of ours.

Should Trump be impeached with the help of the GOP, these same people will find themselves surprised that half of their party will never vote for them again and they will cease to become a viable national party. People who don't understand that simple fact are indeed living in denial of what's happening in the country.

Darrell said...

I'd rather have a million Dragos than a single Chuck.
Old Polish Proverb

Kevin said...

if we are serious about ending the toxic spiral of personal attacks on our valued comments pages, I suggest we start with acknowledging we can't just drop some screed here and be on the defensive when people take offense to it.

If we are serious, we should post things to which others can thoughtfully reply, rather than forcing them to reply to our emotion with emotion of their own.

I have no animus to anyone here, save one person who went to great lengths to earn it. I'm not sending missives to them, I'm ignoring their existence for the good of us all. And no, Chuck isn't even in that person's ballpark.

For everyone else, I'm here to have a productive discussion. If you're happy, I'd like to occasionally challenge you. If you're upset, I'd like to offer you a different, maybe more hopeful, perspective. And although I don't know any of you, I do, as fellow Americans, care about you. I spent eight years listening to the anti-Obama crowd, and I wish better for everyone than taking that to 11 under Trump.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Kevin wrote:
In short, I expected Trump to:

1. Reorganize the Republican Party.
2. Create a media meltdown which fundamentally destroyed the dishonest media's hold on "the truth".
3. Force the Democrats to undergo a similar breakup and reorganization in order to stay competitive."

Good points Kevin, which sum up my reasons for voting for Trump as well. I would add the all-important matter of Trump's judicial picks, not only for SCOTUS but also at the lower levels. He gets to appoint a lot of judges and I pray he will choose well, to stymie the Democrat pattern of winning through the courts what cannot be won through the ballot box.

richardsson said...

Some of this Trump Derangement Syndrome, among Conservatives, brings back old memories of when I was a Democrat. In 1968, it was Bobby Kennedy versus Eugene McCarthy in the California Primary. People in the McCarthy campaign feared and hated Bobby Kennedy. He was an interloper, a usurper (Kennedy jumped in the race after McCarthy had successfully challenged LBJ in New Hampshire.) Romantic relationships and friendships ended. It was ugly and ended ugly. The McCarthy people looked at Kennedy as a crass, unprincipled opportunist and McCarthy as a man of virtue and principle. Kennedy people looked on McCarthy as a loser.

That view of Kennedy is how Bret Stephens, William Kristol, and other NeverTrumpers on the right view Trump. That's why I think Scott Adams ideas of living in our own movies (and I thank Althouse for bringing that to our attention. Adams "trumped" the pollsters and the slope of the line Political Scientists.

I have a mixed view of Twitter. I really don't want to participate in it. I had a forum to talk about politics and influence people for 22 years. I think I did enough damage.

But, I think Trump's use of Twitter has been very shrewd for the most part. That his tweets enrage his enemies seems to be part of the strategy. Mueller, for example, seems to be violating every applicable rule in the Justice Department ethics book. He is presiding over a carnival of conflicts of interest. What? It can't be that he's stupid. It's that Trump has mastered the art of making the right people---Bret Stephens, William Kristol, Robert Mueller---crazy. We'll see.

Ralph L said...

Testament: Despite the common modern assertion, the sense of the word is unlikely to have anything to do with testicles (see testis). --etymonline.com
For decades, I've thought the ancients testified in court with one hand on their balls. Another grand illusion shattered by the internet.

Ralph L said...

if we are serious about ending the toxic spiral of personal attacks on our valued comments pages, I suggest we start with acknowledging we can't just drop some screed here and be on the defensive when people take offense to it.
It does get tiresome when threads end in shouting by the usual suspects, but at least it isn't like JustOneMinute, where a crazy person frequently cuts and pastes long stretches of anti-Trump to scroll through. He changes his name so killfile won't clean him out. Why bother with annoying the few commenters there?

I saw the once banned Mary crapping here last night.

n.n said...

Planned Parenthood. [class] diversity only exacerbates the liberal outlook. A conservation of principles would yield positive progress.

Drago said...

"lifelong republican" and hilariously failed MI political prognostication "expert" Chuck: "Ann Althouse if you are serious about ending the toxic spiral of personal attacks on your comments pages, I suggest you start with "Drago."

Chuck inadvertantly left off his patented ".....or else...."

Drago said...

Kevin: "In short, I expected Trump to:

1. Reorganize the Republican Party.
2. Create a media meltdown which fundamentally destroyed the dishonest media's hold on "the truth".
3. Force the Democrats to undergo a similar breakup and reorganization in order to stay competitive."

I would argue that a critical mass of republican base voters and Midwest rural voters basically reached the same "point" on the political path and Trump just happened along at the right time with an aligned skillset and persona to capitalize.

Needless to say our incompetent political class and establishment "lifelong whatever" poseurs and suckups don't much care for that.

Karen said...

Kevin: Great analysis.

James K said...

Taranto points out that Stephens, after criticizing Twitter, puts at the bottom of his column "I invite you to follow me on Twitter....

Michael K said...

Trump has mastered the art of making the right people---Bret Stephens, William Kristol, Robert Mueller---crazy. We'll see.

He has even driven some people crazy that I thought were level headed enough to survive intact.

Amazing what he can do.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Drago said...
"lifelong republican" and hilariously failed MI political prognostication "expert" Chuck: "Ann Althouse if you are serious about ending the toxic spiral of personal attacks on your comments pages, I suggest you start with "Drago."

Chuck inadvertantly left off his patented ".....or else...."

Screw that, Ivan, the boy-lover forgot about me!

Serious question. Who thinks Chuck is any good as an election lawyer? Defined as, do his candidates win?

rcocean said...

"He has even driven some people crazy that I thought were level headed enough to survive intact."

Trump has served an outstanding purpose - for me at least. He's reveled a lot of #FakeConservatives. When someone supports Hillary for POTUS and calls themselves "conservative" they've shown themselves to be a total FAKE.

And when they continue to give "aid and comfort" to Democrats and be indifferent or oppose Trump while he appoints conservative judges and suports border security/reforming obamacare/cutting taxes, etc. - that just shows me they never were conservative -despite their constant self-labeling.

Bruce Bartlett, who I thought was a "Reagan Conservative" just wrote a piece in the Poltico, where he admits he voted for Hillary and hoped she would "destroy" the Republican party. Why? Because the Trump Republican party was "too populist" - aka because it wanted border security, good trade deals, and an end to useless wars.

So what about the SCOTUS and the social issues, well, it seems that never meant shit to the #nevertrumpers -despite all their rhetoric. No, it seems their "conservatism" consists almost entirely in supporting tax cuts for the rich, low wages, globalization,"Invade the world, invite the world". If Reagan had run on that platform he wouldn't have elected dog-catcher.

rcocean said...

Bartlett is a little different than some of the other #Nevertrumpers. A lot of them like Kristol, Goldberg, Sykes, Krauthammer, Will, Erickson, were liberals who turned into conservatives primarily because of foreign policy and their support for Israel.

Kevin said...

Great points rcocean. A lot of people are being forced to reexamine and state their beliefs.

The result has not been pretty.

Michael K said...

"Bartlett is a little different than some of the other #Nevertrumpers"

I still recommend the Buchanan book on Nixon. My wife is now reading it, too.

He points out how Nixon missed so many opportunities while trying to pacify people who would hate him no matter what he did.

That now applies to almost all Republicans.

Including Paul Ryan.

Kevin said...

He points out how Nixon missed so many opportunities while trying to pacify people who would hate him no matter what he did.

Some people call that "being Presidential". Those people are not your friends.

Michael K said...

"Some people call that "being Presidential". Those people are not your friends."

I assume you mean that trying to "be presidential" when the other side hates and rejects you is futile because "Those people are not your friends."

I agree. Do what you were elected to do.

Drain the swamp.

Kevin said...

Yes, the people who are up in arms because your Tweets aren't spell-checked aren't your friends.