Althouse: "Attacks on Trump just make these voters like him more."

December 10, 2015

"Attacks on Trump just make these voters like him more."

David Weigel describes efforts by Frank Luntz, the Republican media consultant, to shake a group of Trump supporters by showing them some very negative advertising.

52 comments:

Bruce Hayden said...: As I pointed out elsewhere, a lot of it is that Trump can tell the MSM (most Dem operatives with bylines)to shove it up their posteriors, and they seem unable to do anything about it. They tried to go after him today with some KKK racists supporting it, but that was so desperate, that it didn't stick. It is this ability of his to be impervious to their attacks that is probably the big reason that so many are sticking with him. Plus, he is saying a lot of what many people want to hear from their politicians, but the rest of them come across as spineless for refusing to do so.; 12/10/15, 5:15 PM
eric said...: They think we are stupid. Remember, Trump supporters are mostly uneducated. See? We are dumb.

That's why "Democrat consultants" are saying they are giddy over a Trump Presidential run. Because they think the dumb hillbillies will say to themselves, "Ah shucks, now we can't vote for Trump cuz we're making dem Democrats giddy."

Yeah. Right.; 12/10/15, 5:18 PM
Anonymous said...: “You might not care if Donald Trump says he’s going to round up all the Hispanic immigrants, because you’re not one,” Moe said onscreen. “You might not care if Donald Trump wants to suppress journalists, because you’re not one. But think about this: If he keeps going, and he actually becomes president, he might just get around to you.”

Jesus, they paid someone to put this junk together? I've got some free time, Stupid Party, and I wouldn't mind a little extra cash for the holidays. I could make better attack ads against Trump than that, and I'll do it for half the price.; 12/10/15, 5:31 PM
RecChief said...: Trump supporters will violently oppose Obama's policies. Unless they are toldthe policy is attributed to Trump. Then they love it. Think about that for a minute.

Cult of personality; 12/10/15, 5:34 PM
campy said...: "That's why "Democrat consultants" are saying they are giddy over a Trump Presidential run."

I can remember when "Democrat consultants" were giddy over a Reagan Presidential run. How'd that work out for them?; 12/10/15, 5:35 PM
Michael K said...: The Democrats are making what I think is a huge mistake here.

I just hope the GOP doesn't make the same mistake.; 12/10/15, 5:38 PM
Big Mike said...: Here's the question that needed to be asked. Imagine it's Election Day and a major snowstorm has blown in. Going to the polls to vote is physically dangerous. Do you risk your life to vote for Trump over Rubio and Clinton in a 3-way race? Can anyone picture Rubio or Clinton supporters doing likewise?; 12/10/15, 5:39 PM
Big Mike said...: And let's not forget that the Post originally presented Weigel to its readers as a conservative voice while he was quietly coordinating with Ezra Klein and the rest of the Journolist gang to attack Republicans.; 12/10/15, 5:46 PM
Real American said...: Trump is playing the media like a fiddle. They can't get enough of him and keep plastering story after story about him on their front pages. And yet, they don't understand why he's still as popular as he is. These media people are fucking retarded.; 12/10/15, 5:48 PM
madAsHell said...: Doesn't Luntz pay people to say what he thinks?? I've seen interviews by Luntz where every one seems to be scopolamine zombies.

Wiegel? Hasn't he had his 15 minutes of lame?; 12/10/15, 5:51 PM
Carol said...: I saw part of that, the other day. I never saw a Luntz group so animated and vocal! Guess everyone else has been tooo boring until now.; 12/10/15, 5:51 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: I think I'm a reasonably sane person, insofar as I work, own a home, am married, have kids, coach little league, read books, and lead a fairly modest, mundane, middle class life.

A sane position regarding Donald Trump is this:

1. He has made the race interesting and refreshing, because he's not a politician, and does not play by normal rules of political etiquette.
2. He has pushed the illegal immigration issue to the forefront.
3. He is a successful businessman (Hotels, golf courses, Manhattan apartments)
4. He is a successful tv personality (The Apprentice)

Does he tend to pop off a bit too much? Yes, he does.

Is he Conservative? Probably not. Business is too messy to be Conservative. You have to make compromises with unions, building inspectors, government officials, etc, etc.

Would he be a good president? Not sure, but he'd be definitely better than Hillary.

Does my support for him send a "message" to that damn GOP establishment? Probably, not. Once in office, he will be forced to compromise like most elected officials. Not a good idea to emotionally invest in a politician. You will be let down, trust me on this.

Should I vote for Trump in the GOP primary? Probably, not. Cruz gets you the illegal immigration issue, with a Harvard scholarly flare. Rubio gets you the mushy middle, if that is required to actually win the General. Trump likely won't win the General and, now, is flirting with going 3rd Party, when he already pledged not to do so.

Trump supporting commentators -- please self-identify. You are well-intentioned, but not thinking straight.

My 2 cents.; 12/10/15, 5:57 PM
RichardJohnson said...: "Attacks on Trump just make these voters like him more."

I am reminded of a remark a yellow dog Democrat friend made to me several years ago, when Ted Cruz was running in the Senate primary. "You're not going to vote for that Teabagger Cruz, are you?" At the time, I didn't want to get into an argument, but I thought to myself that in response to that remark I would definitely vote for Ted Cruz. If Ted Cruz upsets Democrats so much, he must be doing something right.

Why do I call him a yellow dog Democrat? For starters, the back of his van, from window to the bottom, is plastered with Democrat Party bumper stickers- not just the bumper.; 12/10/15, 6:00 PM
Anonymous said...: RecChief: [Candidate X's] supporters will violently oppose [Candidate Y's] policies. Unless they are told the policy is attributed to [Candidate X]. Then they love it.

FTFY.

Hardly a newly observed phenomenon, RecChief, and certainly not peculiar to Trump supporters. Pop over to youtube and you can easily find some "hyuck hyuck look how stoopid [Bush, Clinton, Obama] supporters are" videos going back a ways, covering that exact territory.

Think about that for a minute.

Indeed.; 12/10/15, 6:41 PM
John henry said...: Bay Area Guy said

Trump likely won't win the General and, now, is flirting with going 3rd Party, when he already pledged not to do so.

He is flirting with 3rd party, really? Links? Evidence?

OTOH, I just read a report today that the repo HQ, rence Prebus et al, is working on a plan to have a brokered convention in order to get who they want as nominee. The NH GOP chair has already tried and failed to get him removed from the ballot.

Fuck the voters who look likely to give Trump the delegates to be the nominee (for now, could well change) it's all about who they want.

If I was Trump and they did that to me you better believe that I would run independent or something. You would see a campaign that would make Hiroshima on August 8 look like Central Park on a spring day. Not to necessarily to win but as a gigantic FUCK YOU!!!! to the bastards.

If Trump is treated fairly, by which I mean the same as any other repo candidate, I would be willing to bet money he will not run 3rd party and that he will support the Repo candidate.

Many, perhaps most, states have sore loser laws. If he runs as a repo and loses, these states won't let him on the ballot. He would have to run as a write-in. So even if he wanted to run 3rd party, it may just not be possible. I don't even know if he can run as a write-in in the sore loser states.

In any event, a guy with $10bn, pissed off because of unequal treatment, could sure stir up some shit.

Want to see Hilary win? Screw Trump and he'll make sure no repo wins. He might even take it to the House and Senate elections to make sure they don't win either. That would be the logical thing if he is as crazy as you seem to think he is.

John Henry; 12/10/15, 7:18 PM
Sebastian said...: "If Ted Cruz upsets Democrats so much, he must be doing something right." OK. So the Trumpian syllogism goes: 1. Trump upsets Dems. 2. Upsetting Dems is good. 3. Therefore, Trump is doing something right. [So far so good.] 4. Therefore, I should vote for Trump. Ouch.

I get it, Trumpians, I do get it. But right now the Dems and MSM are just fabricating upset to bait you. They are right to be giddy. Options: 1. Trump wins nomination, then likely loses FL, OH, VA, CO. Result: Dems win. 2a. Trump loses nomination, doesn't run 3rd party, pissed-off followers stay home. Result: Dems win. 2b. Trump loses nomination, runs 3rd party, splits anti-Dem forces. Result: Dems win.; 12/10/15, 7:26 PM
harrogate said...: Frank Luntz, btw, is a perfect illustration of the "constructed expert." That guy idoesn't have any more sense than God gave a chicken, yet there is an entire viewing audience who has come to see him as an authority on political science. The sheer achievement of it is actually quite impressive.; 12/10/15, 7:36 PM
Bob R said...: A lot of Trump's fan base are just pissed off and want to blow up everything - with the Republican party first on the list. So I think the observation is correct. The more he pisses off the right people, the more this group of followers love him. They haven't thought much beyond giving the world a big, hearty, raspberry. But they don't need to. They haven't seen much difference no matter who is in office - team blue and team red produce about the same results.

And this is why I think Trump is going to lose Iowa. You can't just show up, flip the lever, and go home. You have to sit there for hours and listen to people tell you what a moron you are. I don't think the Trumpkins are up for it. And if that happens, Trump will be a LOSER and we will see how the Trumpkins react.; 12/10/15, 7:37 PM
Carol said...: I went to a Luntz candidate seminar 8 years ago, and one of the things he said was that (state and local) candidates were usually at their best the first time out, fresh and saying whatever popped into their heads.

This isn't Trump's first go-round but he certainly has that quality Luntz seemed to appreciate back then.; 12/10/15, 7:41 PM
n.n said...: Discover your dignity. Class diversity schemes and strategies are so yesterday. Also, a competent, loyal executive would be a welcome change from Mr. Pro-choice in Chief.; 12/10/15, 7:56 PM
RecChief said...: Yeah, I knew someone would point that out Anglelyne. I've seen that, but this feels different. actually, what I'm getting at is that many of Trump's positions are close to Obama's and in some cases, Hillary's. Case in point is Hillary's and Trump's statements on closing the internet. Witnessed it firsthand at work. Trump says we need to close the internet, and several of the Union electricians nodded their heads, "Y'know, ol' Trump has a point". Next day, Hillary says basically same thing, "Jesus she's stupid". So it's not the phenomenon you seem to be describing

I don't think the easy charge of sexism is the complete explanation. I think there is an element of Trump displaying the trappings of "success" unabashedly, and I think there are a lot of people who are tired of being beaten with the PC cudgel. Trump says things they wish they could say, but are too cowed at work and within their social circle to say them.

And there is an element of a cult of personality surrounding his campaign as well. I don't think his supporters would drop him if he was found to have swindled little old ladies out of their bingo money (which he does openly in Atlantic City, btw) And they don't actually look at his policies. reminds me of '08 and '12. I'm neither a Trump supporter or a hater, but objectively I can't vote for him, for a variety of reasons.; 12/10/15, 8:24 PM
Paul said...: "Trump likely won't win the General"

Says you.

Your whole argument rests on that assumption.

Look, anything can happen. A year is a long time, but people have been erroneously forecasting Trump's upper limit if not his imminent demise since day one. I can clearly see a trajectory to a Trump landslide. That does not mean it will happen, but those who think he cannot win are mistaken in my opinion.; 12/10/15, 8:31 PM
Paul said...: "Cruz gets you the illegal immigration issue, with a Harvard scholarly flare."

I like Ted Cruz, but at this point "Harvard scholarly flare" is the last thing the pissed off electorate is looking for.; 12/10/15, 8:35 PM
pm317 said...: These supporters do not look crazy or uneducated or any of the things the media attributes to Trump supporters. They seem articulate and earnest.; 12/10/15, 8:50 PM
Hagar said...: I am not toally worried about either Trump or Hillary!, but I am very much worried about a nation where these two are the likely candidates for being the next President of the United States.; 12/10/15, 9:08 PM
Achilles said...: Trump has already broken the democrat coalition. The trump haters are not thinking consciously. Blue collar voters, a Dem staple for decades, are overwhelmingly supporting Trump. If the GOPe had half a brain they would get behind Trump and roll a landslide victory that would crash downticket.

But the key here is the GOPe is a false flag operation. They have always been a front for the COC cronies. They get their money from the same group of people as the democrats. Less money of course but the donor class has the same goals.; 12/10/15, 9:16 PM
Michael K said...: "That guy idoesn't have any more sense than God gave a chicken,"

Send me a link to your book on polling,. I assume you have written one and know much more than Luntz who has written this one, and this one, and this one, and this one, and.... You get the idea.

The internet is full of dopes with opinions. Not so many write books that sell.; 12/10/15, 9:21 PM
Hagar said...: From what I have seen so far, I do not think any of the other Republican candidates can succeed against Clinton, Inc. and the MSM, but perhaps Trump, running as a combination Republican - Third Party candidate can with his totally unorthodox ways.
I don't think I have heard him say anything he can't wiggle out of and being a "good" president might just be a personal triumph for him.
It is a gamble, but that is more than you can say for Hillary!; 12/10/15, 9:44 PM
chickelit said...: As Althouse's mother would say: "You'll only encourage him..."; 12/10/15, 9:52 PM
chickelit said...: I couldn't help but notice that the photos featured Trump supporters with their right hands in the air as if giving the Hitler salute. I didn't read the analysis...was it mentioned?; 12/10/15, 9:54 PM
chickelit said...: Here's a real question for the "experts" like Luntz: Why are are so many Republican voters so turned off by Jeb Bush and what can be done about it?; 12/10/15, 10:00 PM
traditionalguy said...: Cult of personality is an intellectual's slander name given by the other side to an opponent's great leader who won and kept the trust and loyalty of his men. They are one in ten thousand. Hannibal of Carthage, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, Wm T. Sherman, George S.Patton are some that come to mind.

Once again, why not let the man fix the disasters we are set up for and then we can fire him because he seems harsh and vulgar compared to our inimical purity.; 12/10/15, 10:05 PM
RichardJohnson said...: Sebastian:

"If Ted Cruz upsets Democrats so much, he must be doing something right." OK. So the Trumpian syllogism goes: 1. Trump upsets Dems. 2. Upsetting Dems is good. 3. Therefore, Trump is doing something right. [So far so good.] 4. Therefore, I should vote for Trump. Ouch.

I am planning to vote for Ted Cruz in the primary.; 12/10/15, 10:22 PM
Bruce Hayden said...: I will tell you right now, that the fastest way for Hillary to win the general election is if the establishment Republican leadership forces a brokered convention, and then nominate someone like JEB, when Trump looks to the rank and file to be winning. Or, really, if they can keep Trump off of enough state ballots.; 12/10/15, 10:46 PM
JackWayne said...: If it's Trump v Hillary then I will vote for Trump.; 12/10/15, 11:44 PM
eddie willers said...: Hillary's best friend and adviser is a "proud Muslim".

I don't think that's going to play well.; 12/11/15, 12:11 AM
Carnifex said...: Here's my choices. 1)Cruz 2)Trump 3)Carson. If Rubio, or any other shill for the GOPe steal the nomination, and they will have to steal it, then I'm gonna sit on my ass and watch Hillary win in a landslide. All you anti-Trump people have no clue how pissed we are at the GOPe who with both houses, manage to give the mighty Kenyan more than he asks for. The root cause of Trump is Snitch McConnell, Weepy Boehner, and their new butt buddy, Paul Ryan. I wouldn't piss on any of them if they were on fire in front of their grand children.

The GOPe sowed this whirlwind. Now they can harvest it. Eff them!; 12/11/15, 12:51 AM
Left Bank of the Charles said...: Just proves the old adage, you can fool some of the people all of the time. But the article did at the end show the roadmap for beating Trump, which is negative ads focusing on how he treats people he regards as little people in his business dealings. It's one thing when his bombast is directed at politicians and the media, it's another when it's addressed at ordinary folks.; 12/11/15, 1:48 AM
Fen said...: It is this ability of his to be impervious to their attacks that is probably the big reason that so many are sticking with him

I wouldn't say impervious. Its more that he doesn't genuflect to the PC crap and go on an apology tour, on his knees begging the likes of Melissa Harris-Perry to forgive him.

He just says "fuck you, I meant what I said, deal with it"; 12/11/15, 4:58 AM
Fen said...: "But the key here is the GOPe is a false flag operation. They have always been a front for the COC cronies. They get their money from the same group of people as the democrats. Less money of course but the donor class has the same goals."

Yup. Best analogy I read so far is that the GOP is like the Washington Generals - they are there to put on a good show and get beat up by the Globetrotters every weekend, and they don't mind so long as they get their cut of the gate fee.

Explains all the "failure theater" that Ace talks about.; 12/11/15, 5:04 AM
Phil 314 said...: The blogosphere has become the electorate.

He's OUR sonuvabitch!; 12/11/15, 7:00 AM
Moneyrunner said...: If Trump is so easy to beat, why isn't anyone doing it?

Is Trump's base defined as Conservative Republican or is it a Middle/Working class that's losing its grip on their security?

Is the argument "if Trump is the nominee, Hillary is sure to win" obvious and persuasive?

Is the media's characterization of Trump supporters as poorly educated, stupid, racist, homophobic bigots going to persuade them to drop their support?

Is the well-publicized capture of Academia by radicals who demand special rights going to factor into the election?

Who is the better campaigner, Trump or Hillary?; 12/11/15, 7:09 AM
Hagar said...: And Trump will appoint all new people - Republicans - as department and agency heads. Hillary! will inherit Obama's, and they will have another 4 years to solidify their positions.; 12/11/15, 8:04 AM
Anonymous said...: RecChief: I've seen that, but this feels different. actually, what I'm getting at is that many of Trump's positions are close to Obama's and in some cases, Hillary's. Case in point is Hillary's and Trump's statements on closing the internet. Witnessed it firsthand at work. Trump says we need to close the internet, and several of the Union electricians nodded their heads, "Y'know, ol' Trump has a point". Next day, Hillary says basically same thing, "Jesus she's stupid". So it's not the phenomenon you seem to be describing.

Yes, that's not quite the same thing, "the bait and switch" set up is different. Not sure that this really illustrates a different psychological phenomenon, though, or even a difference in degree. It's a variation on the same basic experiment. That Trump's views on a lot of things are closer to liberal views (or rather, are liberal views) isn't really pertinent to "our investigation of this specific psychological phenomenon" (to put it really pompously).

I think there is an element of Trump displaying the trappings of "success" unabashedly, and I think there are a lot of people who are tired of being beaten with the PC cudgel. Trump says things they wish they could say, but are too cowed at work and within their social circle to say them.

I think there's a subset who love his swag and his swagger (independent of his views). It's the latter - the anti-PC - that makes his supporters so enthusiastic about him. Is there a "cult of personality" among some of them? I'm sure there is (how could there not be with a popular political figure?), but I'd say it's about an order of magnitude less than Teh Crazy we saw with the Obamanauts.

Demonstrating that voters are biased and irrational in itself doesn't demonstrate a "cult of personality". Voters are always biased and irrational.

And there is an element of a cult of personality surrounding his campaign as well. I don't think his supporters would drop him if he was found to have swindled little old ladies out of their bingo money (which he does openly in Atlantic City, btw)

Now this is what I find so irrational about people who are all bebothered and confusticated about Trump supporters. That he swindles old ladies out of their bingo money in Atlantic City is (one of) the deal-killers for them. They have a set a priorities, a calculus for rating candidates - so far, so rational. That other people have a different set of priorities and deal-killer issues seems to escape them. "They'll still vote for that asshole even when they know he does things that are deal-killers for me? Bloody cultists."

I, for example, wouldn't vote for Rubio. Now, I know that some of his supporters are flaming cuckservative morons (aka die-hard members of the cult of GOPe). But for the most part I assume that people who'll vote for Rubio simply have a set of priorities and deal-killers different from my own, not that they're all retarded cultists because they'll still vote for a guy who supports things *I* can't tolerate.

And they don't actually look at his policies.

Most people don't "look into" candidates' policies. They buy the boilerplate off a candidate's website or debate statements and call it "being informed". Are Trump supporters any worse? I dunno.

...reminds me of '08 and '12. I'm neither a Trump supporter or a hater, but objectively I can't vote for him, for a variety of reasons.

You and me both. Unfortunately for me, "for a variety of reasons", all the offerings are on my deal-killer list, and Trump is far from the worst of 'em in that regard.; 12/11/15, 9:46 AM
Jaq said...: While it wasn't "thousands," there were Muslims celebrating. Some press accounts claimed they were a group of Israelis that moved from place to place celebrating accounting for all of the "Middle Eastern looking men" celebrating. The absurdity of such a claim never occurring to them.

My biggest problem with Trump is that he is a bigger exaggerator than Gore, and that is saying something.; 12/11/15, 9:47 AM
UNTRIBALIST said...: The Trump Plan? Haven’t seen this anywhere else.

My first choice: Cruz.; 12/11/15, 10:00 AM
Meade said...: "Once again, why not let the man fix the disasters we are set up for and then we can fire him because he seems harsh and vulgar compared to our inimical purity."

Of course, Obama is the biggest most recent cult of personality person. Thank god for term limits.; 12/11/15, 11:23 AM
Meade said...: Jack Wayne said...
"If it's Trump v Hillary then I will vote for Trump."

Not I. I'll vote third party.; 12/11/15, 11:26 AM
Meade said...: UNTRIBALIST said...
"The Trump Plan? Haven’t seen this anywhere else.
My first choice: Cruz."

Next November, what percentage of total voters will be Latino? I say less than 10%.; 12/11/15, 11:35 AM
Anonymous said...: Angelyne: I agree with most of your comments. I take issue with RecChief's characterization (and your countenance thereof)of Trump "swindling old ladies...".
Gambling is a pleasure for many people. People of all ages and all sexes (I forget how many there are these days)enjoy it. They are also well aware of the odds. Bingo has odds, too.
Part of Trump's business portfolio is providing service to those folk.
To characterize that as 'swindling' betrays an extant mind-set predisposed to imagining Trump as someone worthy of disdain. There may be other reasons that you find him such, certainly understandable if you are concerned with coarse language and gruff hyperbole, but viewing all he does through that prism can result in some odd refractions.
Trump is approaching this election like he is trying to close a business deal: The first thing you need to sell is the appointment. Getting an appointment to meet with your potential customer is the toughest part of the selling process. Too many salespeople, on a cold call, oversell their product and never actually get an appointment. The tactic (or 'trick' as a term of art) is to highlight the problems the customer is having, point out that your product solves those problems, cite evidence supporting your claim, deal with objections, ask for the appointment.
Trump's appointment is the nomination. He's letting the electorate know that he understands and validates their concerns. He builds confidence, trust, and rapport that way while differentiating his product from that of his competitors'. He's going through the sales process.

He also knows his audience. He's had years and years of being told by TV executives precisely who is most likely or unlikely to watch him and why, so he knows just who he can write off right off the bat and whom he can attract by altering his behavior one way or another.

And it is working so far.

Basing a decision not to vote for Trump on silly reasoning like "what if he talked that way to Putin or Merkel?", as some people do, is rationalizing. Trump is a businessman. He will do whatever the Deal requires...sweet talk or straight talk.
And there are plenty of people, after seeing Putin call our president a wimp and increased Russian adventurism, who would prefer our president be someone the rest of the world doesn't want to fuck with. I don't see Putin fearing Hillary after having contributed so much to the Clinton Foundation.
I write all this while being neither a gambler (I do gambol at times) nor a supporter of Trump as one of my first two choices.

And for those of you who will either not vote or will vote third party: What kind of conceit is that? Put both Hillary! and The Donald on opposing ends of an 'evilness scale' and see who would outweigh whom. Take into consideration how they earned their vast wealth and then ask yourself who is most incented and invested in America to want to see it healthy and vital again?.

To get my vote all one has to do is not be Hillary. Because I love this country more than I love throwing a hissy fit. And I do love throwing a good hissy fit.; 12/11/15, 12:57 PM
mikee said...: I, for one, trust the GOP establishment, who gave us Romney, McCain, Dole, and Ford, to again pick a sure winner in 2016.

And while they are at it, perhaps they could suggest to the primary candidates that every time they speak, they should begin with "Hillary delenda est!"; 12/11/15, 1:22 PM
Anonymous said...: Livermoron: Angelyne: I agree with most of your comments. I take issue with RecChief's characterization (and your countenance thereof)of Trump "swindling old ladies...".

Ha, I don't disagree with much in your comment, either. I was using "swindling old ladies" as an example of the preferences and priorities of one set of voters vs. another. (True, I have a deep personal distaste for anything "Vegas", but that's all it is, a personal distaste, and "swindling old ladies" by providing gambling venues for them doesn't constitute a slight concern for me, much less a deal-killer. Especially when there are real swindles, massive swindles, out there, worthy of a voter's wrath.)

I'm actually enjoying the Trumpian sales campaign you describe, as a thing in itself. As someone who would starve to death if I had to make a living in sales, I admire the talent, and the art. I consider myself very sales-resistant, a person who buys sparingly and only exactly what she wants, but I've always been impressed by the psychological acumen of talented salesmen having a go at my wallet, even if they don't make the sale. Especially when compared to lesser operators. (And politics today is full of cringe-inducingly maladroit lesser operators.)

And I'm absolutely not one of those people who claim they would be "embarrassed" by Trump on the international stage - as if the current lot is something to be proud of.; 12/11/15, 2:49 PM