Althouse: "Because I was wearing a Wisconsin golf shirt and Wisconsin football hat, the Iowa Republican guy running the thing said, 'Must be a Scott Walker guy!'"

August 24, 2015

"Because I was wearing a Wisconsin golf shirt and Wisconsin football hat, the Iowa Republican guy running the thing said, 'Must be a Scott Walker guy!'"

"Caught off guard and not wanting to be impolite, I just said, 'Uh, no.' The guy looked quizzical, so in order not to blow my cover and to make the most mischief possible I blurted out, 'Trump! I’m for Trump!' He nodded knowingly."

Madison's ex-mayor Dave Cieslewicz goes to the Iowa State Fair (which he says isn't as good as the Wisconsin State Fair). Dave is, of course (need I say it?), not a Republican (but then neither is Donald Trump).

49 comments:

Big Mike said...: Dave is, of course (need I say it), not a Republican (but then neither is Donald Trump).

First sensible thing you've written about Donald Trump since you started obsessing about him in your blog.; 8/24/15, 8:31 AM
Louis said...: That is adorable.; 8/24/15, 8:32 AM
Scott said...: How do you pronounce his name -- Chisel-witch?; 8/24/15, 8:41 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Like the song says, "It's dollars to donuts that our state fair is the best state fair in our state."; 8/24/15, 8:44 AM
Laslo Spatula said...: At a County Fair in Central California there was a leather-vested carny woman who would sidle up to men and offer to suck their cock on the Ferris Wheel for fifty dollars.

She was missing most of her teeth so you know the blow-job would be good, although your balls might get gingivitis: I'm not sure how that works.

Anyway, I said a polite 'no thank you' -- my girlfriend would gladly suck my cock on the Ferris Wheel. Which she did, but she then made me pay her fifty dollars afterward.

It was worth it though, to be gently rocking in the breeze up towards the stars, the fertile landscape spread out below you and the carnival lights, and a girl who really knew how to use her tongue at an early age.

Also: my girlfriend had great teeth.

I am Laslo.; 8/24/15, 8:56 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Donald Trump is a Republican.

Morning Jolt reported on August 18 that:

He was at the Republican National Convention in 1988.

(there seems to be gap here now)

In 1999, he registered as a member of the Independence Party (probably a mistake: he probably meant to be an Independent, but there is an Independence Party in New York State. That's the year he endorsed a 14.25% "net worth tax"on individuals and trusts worth $10 million or more - a kind of inheritance tax while someone was still alive.

In 2001, he registered as a Democrat. (In New York State you have to change registration before the previous November election to vote in primaries, so if this wsas before Election Day, that would have bene to vote or run in the 2002 primaries. In 2002, George Pataki won a third term as a Republican.

In 2009, he registered as a Republican. (the Governor was a Democrat)

In 2011, Donald Trump chose No Party Affiliation (he didn't make the same mistake he made in 1999)

And most recently, in 2012, he re-registered as a Republican.
In 2011

If there is any principle, it is that Donald Trump tries to the opposite party of the incumbent Governor fo New York State.; 8/24/15, 8:58 AM
Bob Boyd said...: "in order not to blow my cover and to make the most mischief possible"

I wonder how many are doing the same thing to pollsters.; 8/24/15, 8:59 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: I go to brewpubs, and it seems to be the thing for people to wear a t-shirt with a logo on it advertising that particular brewpub, but often the t-shirt will be that of a competitor.

It causes me discomfort to imagine a fully grown man at his wardrobe selecting just the right t-shirt to put on so he can now go out and drink beer. The endorsing-a-competitor thing strikes me as simply bizarre.

Don't get me started on fully grown men playing dress-up so they can pretend that they are just like their favorite sports hero.; 8/24/15, 9:00 AM
chickelit said...: Scott said...
How do you pronounce his name -- Chisel-witch?

I believe it's pronounced "cheez-whiz."; 8/24/15, 9:02 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: tries to be the opposite party.

But there miht be a dfferent explanation. Governor is probably the office Donald Trump has most often contemplated. Independence might have been on purpose in that case, except that he could have started a whole new party anyway, and small parties like that have no real primaries, anyway, usually.; 8/24/15, 9:02 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: I do think people more easily for someone in a primary, than they would if this was a final choice and even more easily name someone in a poll.; 8/24/15, 9:03 AM
kcom said...: "not wanting to be impolite"

Well that's got to be a first for a Wisconsin Democrat.; 8/24/15, 9:05 AM
Nichevo said...: Neither are you, Ann.; 8/24/15, 9:07 AM
MadisonMan said...: That was a pretty good column. As they say in the Midwest.; 8/24/15, 9:08 AM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: Alehouse said ...
not a Republican (but then neither is Donald Trump)

Althouse has tried to link Trump to Obamacare, campaign finance reform and eminent domain and now claims that he is not a Republican at all.

Trump is at 32% in the polls, up from 24 percent a week earlier. Althouse is the kind of person who has benefitted from the export of working people's jobs and the rise of the oligarchs, and she now thinks that she gets to decide who is and isn't a Republican. Democracy doesn't work like that, or at least it shouldn't.; 8/24/15, 9:13 AM
chickelit said...: Nichevo said...
Neither are you, Ann.

True, and that's her tell.
Her Trump revulsion pushes him into a category which she is not, leaving us to wonder who is whom.; 8/24/15, 9:14 AM
chickelit said...: replace ...leaving us to wonder who is whom.

[insert] "...leaving us to wonder who is what."

Better and correct; 8/24/15, 9:17 AM
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...: The lack of a substantive response by Althouse to the rise of Trump suggests that she has no understanding whatsoever of the issues in play. Safe in her sinecure, she assumes that everyone else has guaranteed employment, health care and regular wage increases, and apparently could care less if they don't.; 8/24/15, 9:25 AM
Dude1394 said...: You would think Althouse would be happy trump isn't a republican. I don't recall her supporting one for a while.; 8/24/15, 9:26 AM
Chuck said...: A funny thing happened to me along these same lines. I was in the Hamptons, wearing my new silk blazer and an ascot from Hermes, and somebody said to me, "You look like a Hillary guy!" I said, "No I'm a Trump guy."; 8/24/15, 9:31 AM
Ann Althouse said...: I have absolutely never claimed to be a Republican.; 8/24/15, 9:42 AM
Big Mike said...: @ARM, you are thinking the way I do. I think I need another cup of coffee. (Except that based on what Althouse writes about when she posts something relating to pedagogy I think she takes her job seriously and does her work conscientiously.); 8/24/15, 9:42 AM
Big Mike said...: I have absolutely never claimed to be a Republican.

Nope. I never said you were. You have, however, sometimes claimed to be "cruelly neutral" and I don't think you quite get there.; 8/24/15, 9:44 AM
grackle said...: If I can determine on my own that I’m a minority even though I was born white Trump ought to able to claim to be a Republican.

Trump is more Republican than he is Democrat but I watch with amusement as the Trump-haters claim to be afraid of a 3rd party run by Trump even while they try their best to push him into a 3rd party run.; 8/24/15, 10:11 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "You have, however, sometimes claimed to be "cruelly neutral" and I don't think you quite get there."

I've never claimed to be "cruelly neutral." That's a re-presentation of a statement of mine that misses the point.; 8/24/15, 10:24 AM
Ann Althouse said...: In March 2008, I took "a vow of neutrality" which I hoped to maintain until October 2008. I did that because "partisanship is too tedious to read," and, not wanting to be tedious, I said my neutrality would be "cruel." I kept the vow and made it to October 8: "In which I say who won last night's debate and almost abandon my cruel neutrality pose."

I don't push "neutrality" as my political position. I am an independent and I rarely like any politician enough to put him or her above my interest in putting whatever observations I have in writing in a way that amuses me and maybe excites you.

The idea that I'm holding myself to some neutrality standard is just wrong. I'll take whatever sides I want when I want.

In the current election season, I don't like anyone who's running or threatening to run. I don't support anyone. I do dislike some more than others.; 8/24/15, 10:38 AM
Big Mike said...: @Althouse, I said "sometimes."; 8/24/15, 10:56 AM
Chuck said...: Grackle:

It's wrong of me to pick on you personally, and so with that I'd like to qualify the following questions that I'd like to put to all Trump supporters. (In truth I don't think you've held yourself out as a Trump supporter!)

What is it that you'd like, about a Trump presidency? What would you expect in a Trump presidency? Trump claims -- very forcefully -- that he is superior to other candidates because he won't be beholden to any big donors. I think that's a phony, overblown low-information-voter claim; but in any event, do you think that Trump will personally match the money needed to win a general election campaign if Democrats raise $800 million to keep the White House in Democrat hands? Will Trump spend a billion of his own cash? I'm not so sure he has a billion of his own in liquid assets.; 8/24/15, 10:56 AM
Scott said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 8/24/15, 11:39 AM
Scott said...: "In the current election season, I don't like anyone who's running or threatening to run. I don't support anyone. I do dislike some more than others."

So again when electing a President we will end up with two candidates who suck. Is the proper thing to do to vote for the candidate you dislike the least?

If both candidates suck equally, I think it's better to vote for a third party candidate. In 1972, Eugene McCarthy got almost three-quarters of a million votes, and that did make an impact.; 8/24/15, 11:40 AM
Scott said...: "Will Trump spend a billion of his own cash?"

A clever economist should be able to calculate the exact dollar value of the presidency, using published campaign expenditure figures. Maybe the Five Thirty Eight blog should take this on.; 8/24/15, 11:44 AM
mikee said...: During Nixon's administration, people like Donald Segretti did what mayor Dave did, attempting to sabotage political campaigns. Segretti called it "rat fucking" and learned it at Yale, I believe, just like Hillary!

Segretti was convicted of felonies. Just sayin', Mayor Dave. You rat fucker.; 8/24/15, 11:49 AM
Beldar said...: I wonder if it's coincidence, or inspiration, or something else that explains why so many of Trump's supporters have exactly the same reaction to anyone who disagrees with them, or says anything negative about Donald Trump, that he does?

They immediately go to ad hominem insults.

I'll say this, Prof. Althouse: At least you attract Trump-fan commenters who have a broader vocabulary than Trump himself when they sling their personal insults.

Nanny-nanny-boo-boo! The disgusting, weak, pathetic, little babies! [snort]; 8/24/15, 3:21 PM
CachorroQuente said...: "Trump is more Republican than he is Democrat but I watch with amusement as the Trump-haters claim to be afraid of a 3rd party run by Trump even while they try their best to push him into a 3rd party run."

Trump running a campaign for the general election outside the two parties seems very unlikely. It would cost him hundreds of millions to run a serious campaign and his chance of success is very small, and he knows it. Is he dumb enough to waste that kind of money on a foolish and vain pursuit?; 8/24/15, 3:42 PM
Beldar said...: Trump is neither a Republican nor a Democrat in any meaningful sense of either term. I can find direct quotes from him, from the late 1980s up through this morning, in which he is all over the board, contradicting himself, contradicting anything either major party has purported to stand for. To claim to be either, he'd need far more coherence than he's ever demonstrated within any 48-hour period of his life.

However:

We can be sure of one thing, which is that Trump is a ruthless, relentless self-promoter. That is the common thread to Donald Trump, throughout his business career (such as it is, bankruptcies and all), his reality-TV show fame, and now his political career (such as it is, which it hasn't been yet, since he's never served a single day in any public office, nor even volunteered in any meaningful way for any public purpose that wasn't bound to bring him more celebrity).

Skeptics believe he's running to benefit Hillary, because the longer he stays in the race, the more that benefits the candidates against whom Hillary would most like to run, Jeb Bush at the top of that list.

Regardless, there's no doubt that he's running to try to bring more fame and attention to himself -- win, lose, or draw. Now, I'll grant you that he's taking more risk this time than he has in any of the -- what, four, five? -- previous times he's hinted at and flirted with running. This time, to get the headlines that have gotten him his public opinion polling numbers (before a single vote has been cast at any of the only polls that matter), he's alienated his sponsors and enablers like NBC, Telemundo, NASCAR, the PGA, etc. So he's banking on the luster (if you can call it that; he thinks all publicity is good publicity) added by this race is, on a net basis, going to improve the value of the "Trump Brand" and thus his personal net worth (most of which comes from his own YUUUUGE-ly inflated valuation of that intangible and perishable asset). Most of his revenues since his last wave of bankruptcies has come from licensing his name, not from participating as an owner or even co-owner (principal) in any actual businesses.

But so far, he's getting more publicity than every other candidate combined. That's the wave he's riding, and he's not having to come out of pocket in cold hard cash -- something he's loathe to do, actually, on any of his business deals, since he almost got sucked into personal bankruptcy during his first wave of business failures.

He'll ride this wave as long as he calculates that it's good for Donald Trump, and not a minute longer.; 8/24/15, 3:52 PM
Nichevo said...: Mmm...I don't think I care if Trump has the (R) label or not. Who among the Rs lives up to it? I would be inclined to choose the man best suited for the job, i.e. with the best policy views and the means to execute them. Why don't we discuss Trump's policies, vs. the others', as if he were a serious person, instead of scribbling horns on his photo? Maybe his policies are not good and he will lose. Maybe his leadership will draw other candidates with better (whatever) to react, and adopt or improve upon his policies. They might also learn how to sell their platform, how to defend themselves or rather not defend themselves but be the ones keeping the other guy on the back foot.

I don't regard Trump as serious, at least he is not yet all-in committed, but then who is? Besides Hillary! of course. Who, Huckabee? Does Mike Huckabee really think he stands a chance? Ben Carson?

No, I think it is time to take him seriously.

Racing improves the breed.; 8/24/15, 4:44 PM
Beldar said...: @ Nichevo: I listened to Donald Trump being interviewed a few weeks ago by Hugh Hewitt on the topic of national defense. Trump repeated his standard lines -- he's the BEST, he's going to be the TOP GUY for the military, you're going to LOVE what he does, he's going to make America GREAT again.

Hewitt asked him whether he thinks we need to modernize all three legs of our nuclear deterrent triad. Trump repeated -- he's going to be GREAT. We'll LOVE what he does. We'll be THANKING HIM, saying, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE MAGNIFICENT.

He didn't have a clue in the world what any one of the three legs of our strategic nuclear defense triad is, although that's been part of American defense policy since, what, 1958? My entire life?

No, I won't take him seriously. He's a charlatan, an empty suit with a comb-over.; 8/24/15, 5:44 PM
Beldar said...: Other reporters, this past week, have quizzed him about the details of the immigration plan that Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) wrote for him.

Trump obviously didn't know any of those details. He got about half of them wrong.

This is on his #1 issue, the issue that's propelled him to the top of the polls.

But yeah, he's going to be GREAT, and you'll be GRATEFUL to him for making America great again, just like he did all those companies that bilked American investors and trade creditors out of billions of dollars in the four waves of corporate bankruptcies he's been through.; 8/24/15, 5:47 PM
Beldar said...: If only the Tsar knew. If only he'd let Rasputin fight the Kaiser!; 8/24/15, 5:47 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Anybody care to define Republican?

Why not?

I believe Mitch McConnel and John Boehner are Republicans much more than Ted Cruz, that in fact Cruz is RINO for shutting down the government (well 13% of the Federal government) and not joining McCain's grand plans for America.

They, along with Trump, are all of course Republicans unless someone dare define the term, but accomplishing that might hinder future arguments because lack of clarity, ambiguity, is interesting.; 8/24/15, 9:47 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Is Obama a White Sox fan?

If we define fan as "fanatical to the extent they can name an active player on the roster" vs. "fanatical claims without any substantiation beyond the claimant's word" we might arrive at different conclusions to the same question.; 8/24/15, 9:50 PM
Lewis Wetzel said...: Grackle wrote:
"If I can determine on my own that I’m a minority even though I was born white Trump ought to able to claim to be a Republican."
You, or Trump, can also determine on your own that you are Marie, the Queen of Romania, but that does not mean that you are Marie, the Queen of Romania.

Oh, life is a glorious cycle of song,
A medley of extemporanea;
And love is a thing that can never go wrong;
And I am Marie of Roumania.; 8/24/15, 9:54 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: "They immediately go to ad hominem insults."

What if this tool is used for its effectiveness?

You certainly seem all worked up, so these attacks about your appearance or brain function had an effect of some sort.; 8/24/15, 9:58 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: Beldar, Obama said he would recede the ocean tides, didn't give specifics beyond "Science!" and maybe Nobel Prize winner Steven Chu or something... And won.

Twice.

Can you learn a lesson from this without thinking of Trump, and then apply the lesson learned toward your critique of Trump?

Basically the electorate isn't on your level and it is silly of you to be so falsely modest because it reveals a limiting myopia.; 8/24/15, 10:03 PM
walter said...: Wow..there must be a bike lane from Madison to Iowa.; 8/24/15, 10:49 PM
Anonymous said...: I am an independent

Unless advertising is being sold on your behalf, in which case you're one of the "top conservative blogs."; 8/25/15, 8:06 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: Donald trump may actually believe, long after most other people, that he has a chance to be elected president. There will be people telling him that who want to work, or want to continue to work, for his campaign.

Even iif he thinks he doesn't, he may be buying himself a place in the history books, like Robert M. LaFollette Sr.

How many people living now would have heard of him, if he hadn't run for president on a third party ticket? How many people would remember Strom Thurmond? Maybe they would, but who could foresee he would still be a Senator at the age of 100? Henry A.Wallace is probably much better known because he ran for president in 1948 than if he had merely been the Vice president who had been replaced by Harry S Truman. Would George wallace be as remembered as well today if he hadn't run for presodent in 1968 - and got shot in 1972? How many people know the name of Ross Barnett? Eugene McCarthy is probably bets known for challenging Lyndon Johnson in a primary. That was significant and probably is better rememberd than his indepdent campaign on a third party ticket in 1976? But who would know John anderson/ Would Ross Perot be anywhere near as famous as he is today? His name will now be rememberd in 100 years. Ralph Nader didn't gain anything. Trump, although somewhat famous, does stand to gain. His fame now is more fleeting.; 8/25/15, 11:57 AM
Sammy Finkelman said...: three legs of our nuclear deterrent triad.

I guess it doesn't get mentioned in the newspapers too much these days, but a well informed person, who's been around for some time, really should know that.

The 3 legs are 3 methods of delivering nuclear bombs: By land, by air and by sea - that is:

1) ICBMs - Intercontinental Ballistic missiles. They are very accurate now. They even take the theory of relativity into account. Maybe they always did. They are the most vulnerable. They exist probably submarines were thought of later.

2) Bombers, basically B-52 - maybe Stealth now - bombers. These can be sent on their way, but also recalled. They are the only part of the triad that can be recalled once the decision has been made, they say. They exist because they were the first method of delivery. They take the longest time.

3) Submarines. These are the only ones that really matter. They cannott be destroyed in a first strike. Submarines basically cannot be detected, although this may be getting worse. They can strike even after the United States is a smoking ruin.

Only Iran, or maybe China, would ask if they then would want to.

The argument for a triad is if something goes wrong with one of them, the other two, or at least one, remain. They are three totally different problems for an enemy to solve before they could have confidence that they can use nuclear weapons and escape unscathed...although they might develop some confidence for other reasons.; 8/25/15, 12:11 PM
Sammy Finkelman said...: @Triad.

Apparently this is important because of the New Start treaty, which may get rid of a lot of one of the legs of the triad.; 8/27/15, 9:52 AM