Said Rush Limbaugh on his show yesterday, talking about reports that Trump was booed at the South Carolina Tea Party Coalition Convention when he attacked Ted Cruz for a failure to report a large loan from Goldman Sachs to the FEC.
So NBC doesn't really understand the people Trump and Cruz are competing to win, and Rush — who, of course, believes he understands these people very well — says that the way Trump is going after Cruz is "unsettling and unnerving to people." Trump is calling Cruz a "nasty guy," a guy "nobody likes."
Whenever a Republican or conservative attacks a fellow Republican or conservative using the same language or the same approach that Democrats and liberals would, that's a huge red flag.That is, a red flag that Trump isn't really a conservative. Now, Rush himself has spent some time with Cruz:
The criticism I hear most often about Cruz is that he doesn't seem natural, seems like he's just constantly... What's the word? Earnest all the time. He just never seems relaxed, doesn't seem casual, ever. And it unnerves people.So Cruz's unnaturalness "unnerves people," according to Rush, who just got done saying that Trump calling Cruz nasty is "unnerving to people." Rush tries to explain Cruz. He's "just so smart" and he's "proud of it."
He's just decided he's gonna be who he is. I just think it unnerves people, like it unnerves people whenever you encounter somebody that's so damn sure of themselves.There's "unnerve" two more times. I think it's another way to say people don't like Cruz, which is what Trump said.
But smart people have the tendency sometimes to come off as calculating, and certainly not casual or relaxed. And it has... It just unnerves some people, and it makes them go from feeling unnerved and bothered to maybe, "I don't like it. I just don't like it."Whoa! 2 more "unnerve"s. It reminds me of the way Trump came up with "nasty" and then kept repeating it. And, in fact, it's at this point that Rush gets back to Trump's word, "nasty":
So it's like, as I said earlier, the "nasty" guy that Trump is saying. I don't think -- and I'm wild guessing here. I don't think he really believes that. I don't think he thinks Cruz is a nasty guy. It's just the way Trump campaigns. It's the way Trump deals. I mean, look at what he did to the guy that runs Macy's. It's entirely in character and it isn't personal....Trump uses plain, strong language — stronger than what Rush is using, at least in this context. Well, I think part of this is that Rush doesn't want to show his hand. He's being the observer, looking at various sides of things as he cogitates in real time for 3 hours a day. He's not picking yet, and he wants to have a decent foundation for supporting whoever the GOP nominee turns out to be. And he doesn't like seeing them hurting each other.
By the way, what did Trump do to "the guy that runs Macy's"? After Macy's dropped his line, Trump called for a boycott of the store. He used plain, strong language like: "Macy's stores suck and they are bad for U.S.A.”
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
Macy's stock got blasted after sales disappointed. Layoffs. That's what happened. Trump had nothing to do with it. Drop in sales was weather and growth in online sales.
I'm a conservative, and Donald Trump is not conservative. I LOVE how he goes after the establishment because he is not a politician....but he wanted single payer healthcare for one...and there are other reasons he wouldn't be my first pick...but if it were him against the Socialist, or the old lady liar..I will vote for Trump
Yeah, Trump is probably not a bedrock conservative. Too much evidence exists to prove otherwise. I suppose Trump could have had a road-to-Damascus moment b/w the 1990s and now, though Trump has never mentioned such an event. He probably sensed that his belief in America's core values, residing in flyover country, would have a better sell. As he's moved further into his campaign he's come to realize that his initial sensing was dead-on.
Let me get this straight. Mr Nasty , like Limbaugh himself, makes a career off the Lost Cause guys who deep down need to get their glory from losing everytime to bad guy.
Trump's NYC values are a terrible winning way that assembles a coalition from tolerance of others. And there are JEWS in that coalition too.
Why the great brain washed don't want the winning that comes from NYC Values is astonishing. But they want what they want like an addicted S&M fetishist does.They want their bitter lost cause to rally around winning arguments in their own minds cheering Mr Nasty who says it so well.
It sounds to me that Macy's boycotted Trump before he did anything to them.
There is a rule that you should "Never strike a prince unless you kill him." A guy back a few hundred years said that and it is still true.
Macy's was "Virtue Signaling" and they got caught at it. Tough.
I am still of two minds about Trump but I'm not seeing a good alternative yet. Cruz is one but he seems to have less cross-over appeal. I have said since the beginning that I would like Cruz on the Supreme Court better.
Let's see what the voters do.
Trump is like a Karass Negotiation Class that's run wild.
I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton. If I'm going to vote for a corrupt politician, I at least want the politician to be competent at being corrupt. She gets caught every time, and the only thing that saves her behind is the uni-party's unwillingness to arrest her. I'm not voting for Bernie Sanders. My husband and I paid off our school loans, and we paid our kids' way through college. We aren't interested in funding someone's degree in interpretative basket weaving. Our doctor retired rather than deal with ObamaCare. Heaven only knows how many more we'd lose under a single payer system that funds care at the Medicare levels. Where are the new drugs coming from when the pharmaceutical companies have their prices fixed? Even unicorn farts stink. So if the Republicans give me the Donald as my choice, at least he knows what it means to meet a payroll and to have a deadline staring you in the face. If he gets to nominate a Supreme Court judge or two, competence is likely to be more important to him than ideology because I'm not sure he has thought about ideology all that much, and I'm OK with that.
"Heaven only knows how many more we'd lose under a single payer system that funds care at the Medicare levels."
40% of young British doctors are emigrating and another 40% are on strike.
"To those of us who are conservative..."
funny guy.
Cruz rejects ethanol subsidies. Trump supports them.
Cruz making reasoned case to push against an entrenched policy. Trump selling self, says what people want to hear in simple repetitive language.
Trump makes show about being the outsider who will shake up the system. Cruz seems to actually be willing to shake the system itself.
Cruz seems to have principles that drive his responses.
Trump is corny.
Michael K
UK NHS to cut young docs' pay by 40%.
40%!
This is coming to America unless Obamacare is repealed. Under Obamacare only the cronies won.
Politico has an interesting article about what ties Trump supporters together.
Taking it with a grain of salt, but it's an interesting suggestion and study.
There are a lot of Americans who are not conservative. Why elect a European, African, Asian, etc. to do an American's job?
Whenever a Republican or conservative attacks a fellow Republican or conservative using the same language or the same approach that Democrats and liberals would, that's a huge red flag.
This is funny, since the Republicans seem to spend most of their time attacking and distancing themselves from whomever of their "fellows" the progs have targeted as Wrong Thinkers, rather than putting their energies into attacking Dems.
I don't listen to Limbaugh, but I had the impression that he was astute enough to realize that this whole "not a real conservative" thing ain't playing, for reasons that should be apparent to anyone who hasn't been living in the Conservative, Inc. bubble for the last twenty years.
Guess not.
This represents the absolute stupidity of the Republican establishment. Trump has cross over appeal like Reagan to pull more people in to the tent, and a critical time when the Dems have been saying the party will eventually whittle down to white men only.
Trump attracts more women, African Americans, and white blue collar Reagan Democrats, but noooooo, we don't want to pull any of those voters away from Hillary!
The more the political elite kick and scream about Trump, the more his current supporters will dig in. After yesterday's Trump bashing parade in the British House of Commons, and those pukey smug European liberals bashing Trump, while ignoring the fact that they have destroyed their own country, I'm more on board than ever.
Does anybody really give a shit if a Muslim member of the House of Commons is freaking out about Trump? That's a good thing. The last thing we want to happen to America, is what we see currently happening in Europe.
Well said, Gusty.
Rush is hard to predict--sometimes he comes across as pro-outsider, championing anyone who is detested by the "fancy people" because for so long he was an outsider himself and feels snubbed by those people. But then he also lines up with the "establishment" types when they court him (like Bush Sr.) and he liked Romney in '08 (though apparently less so in '12). And then of course there's personal benefit for him if the Dems win because he'll have a lot more to rail against (it's harder to take effective shots at people you often agree with). Rush's high points were during the Clinton and Obama administrations--there was a time during Bush Jr's term that I heard so little about Rush that I figured he'd retired.
I get the feeling he'd back Trump or Cruz and is just waiting to see which one wins. If someone like Rubio or Christie wins, I figure Rush will reluctantly go to bat for them, but his heart wouldn't be in it. And if Hillary becomes president, his silver lining is his ratings going up.
Paddy O: Politico has an interesting article about what ties Trump supporters together.
Taking it with a grain of salt, but it's an interesting suggestion and study.
Interesting, I guess, if you're the sort of person who takes the shoddy partisan social "science" that constitutes "authoritarianism" studies seriously.
Come on, Paddy. You're smarter than that.
Paddy O: Politico has an interesting article about what ties Trump supporters together. Taking it with a grain of salt, but it's an interesting suggestion and study.
"Trump’s electoral strength—and his staying power—have been buoyed, above all, by Americans with authoritarian inclinations."
What a bunch of crap. Its just another lame attempt to liken Trump supporters to Nazis. Really sad that you fell for this.
Trump is ascending for the same reason Sanders is: anti-establishment. Anyone who attempts to whitewash that is working for the Establishment Party (E) and should be held suspect. People don't care about whether Trump is a conservative because they know from experience that the GOP will talk a good game and then sell out the base once they are elected. Like Ryan did on the last spending bill.
"Trump is the symptom, poor GOP leadership is the disease" - Glen Reynolds.
I'm not voting for anyone other than Cruz and Trump. If they aren't on the ballot, I will vote for the marxist Dems just so that everything crashes sooner. The GOP is a scam - a fake party designed solely to provide fake opposition to the Dems while both parties rape us up the ass.
if you're the sort of person who takes the shoddy partisan social "science"... seriously
Like with anything, it's not really a binary but a mixture of interesting data and interpretation. Studying people is enormously complex, but something is leading people to support him that doesn't fit conventional boundaries.
Trump is clearly an authoritarian. He makes ample use of and enthusiastically supports eminent domain for private developers. His recent fame is due to being the boss who fires people when they don't perform. He's going to unilaterally run the immigrants out and give Russia the what for. People want the strong Trump to speak truth to power and put people into shape like a powerful CEO would do, cleaning house and maximizing power. He insults and dismisses others, he caricatures and offers simplistic slogans to rouse the people. Of course Trump is an authoritarian. So, is this what people really want? A good amount of people are always drawn to that kind of person.
Something explains his appeal across boundaries, and sharp division in otherwise shared circles. The idea that it is authoritarianism rings true as it describes why I find him so revolting--as it matches how I feel about other authoritarian movements/leaders.
It's a thesis, and one supported by their study. There may be other suggestions but it's the best one I've heard that matches the curious support he has. I get why people like his positions, but the package he brings is more Schwarzeneggary and Obama-like than Reaganesque.
Maybe the issue is more that authoritarian sounds like the sort of thing people don't want to be. But authoritarian is what authoritarian wants. And people sure seem to get excited about Trump the authoritarian.
"Really sad that you fell for this."
Really sad that you don't get the underlying issues it's pointing to.
Trump is anti-establishment because he is not the establishment. Obama was anti-establishment until he became the establishment. Trump uses and fights for the establishment when it is useful for his power and wealth.
Both are authoritarian in the rest of their lives. Trump made his fortune by using the establishment in whatever ways he can to leverage his power. Fighting the establishment is his way to power because he does not want to kowtow to others.
Why is that hard to understand?
Didn't there used to be a thing where people voted for the tallest candidate. Maybe that's morphed. People no longer vote for the tallest, or best looking, or most charming candidate, but rather the most entertaining candidate. Trump is the candidate who holds your attention. On a crowded stage he's the one you look at. He doesn't even have to say anything. You look for his reaction to what others are saying.......I would definitely vote for Trump over Hillary or Bernie, but, if he wins, we're in for a bumpy ride. Well, maybe it will be more like a roller coaster than the forty miles of bad road with Obama.
Look, let's start with the understanding that Tromp is NOT a conservative. I don't think it's necessary to pick a word to describe what he is -- there may not be a word; he may be sui generis -- but it is important to get over this notion that anything Tromp says represents the conservative position, or appeals to conservatives and appalls everyone else. One of the big problems the anti-Tromp folks have had is that they call him names, rather than refute his arguments or come up with better solutions.
You'd think Trump would know the name of "the guy who runs Macy's," the guy who bought, then dumped his multi-million dollar haberdashery line. The guy who puts on NYC's Thanksgiving Day parade and July 4 fireworks. The guy who put Trump in his TV commercials.
Pretending he doesn't is as small and petty as calling Charles Krauthammer "Krauth-hammer."
Same subject, different takeaway.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/why-rush-limbaugh-is-cheating-on-conservatism-with-donald-trump/424083/
@Gusty Winds: Absolutely!
The value of Trump's "crossover" appeal is vastly overstated by Rush and others. Appealing to a different group of voters is one thing, but the net positive perception across all voters (percent of voters with a positive view minus percent with a negative one) is far more important. In this measure, Trump is in real general election danger.
Read Nate Silver's latest analysis: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-really-unpopular-with-general-election-voters/
Among Republicans, Cruz is seen more positively than Trump (net positive of 51% for Cruz versus 27% for Trump). You may say, well that's fine because those Republicans who don't like Trump will come around in a general election, and anyway they are offset by "crossover" voters among independents and Democrats who support Trump. However, among independents, Cruz is more popular than Trump (really, less unpopular -3% for Cruz versus -27% for Trump). Fine, you say, squishy independents may like Cruz better, but what about Reagan and blue collar Democrats? Well, Cruz has a net -37% favorability among all Democrats, which is pretty bad giving him the second highest negative rating among all Republican candidates. The only candidate who does worse with Democrats is Donald Trump himself, coming in at a whopping -70%.
Trump saying Cruz has "unnerved" voters who see him as "nasty" is engaged in projection.
At this point in the campaign, Trump has articulated three issues as I see it. Close the border and deport; stick it to Wall St. traders; and make America great again.
How he's going to do that is vague and certainly appears authoritarian. But isn't that just a way to avoid the details? And don't all politicians make campaign promises that can't possibly be kept? Trump is just closing the circle with a little bombastic rhetoric.
Of course he's not a conservative. Giuliani, a New York Conservative, couldn't gain traction as a conservative but Trump is.
Different times, of course, but Trump has struck a nerve with immigration. I don't think it's the most pressing problem facing the country in the short term, but if a country can't or won't enforce it's borders, is it even a country?
Ever since the Reagan amnesty agreement, when we were promised strict enforcement, the promises have been empty.
I've worked in an around the agriculture industry that relies on migrant labor. And in '87-89 when INS would arrive with vans to deport the illegals (which would show up at the same place with new forged documents) our border enforcement policy has failed.
We need migrant labor. But our open border policy has produced, along with the needed labor, crime (mostly drug related). People are beginning to recognize, after 30 years, that we are reaching critical mass with our immigration policy.
If you take that away from Trump's issues, you have a candidate that would be seated at the second tier debate table.
While not as bad as European countries our birth rate is too low in this country. We need immigrants to even make a show of supporting our failing entitlement programs. That's reality. I've heard proposals to peg immigration to economic growth, which seems reasonable.
One of the solutions to the problem is unpalatable to conservatives (and probably many liberals). A national ID card and police to enforce it. That's about as authoritarian as you can get, but it's probably the only way to realistically control immigration, whether it be illegal border crossing or legal visitors overstaying their visa.
The fact that Trump's support hasn't faltered yet speaks to how important illegal immigration resonates with voters-- and not just Republicans. I do think this crosses ideology.
I don't like Trump calling my candidate nasty. I preferred it when Trump and Cruz were friendly with each other. It put me off. Made me not like Trump as much.
Hopefully they can make amends.
I like Trump.
My theory on Cruz's demeanor. It's his face. Without expression he appears to be smirking, smart-ass. When he is smirking, which is often, he looks even more obnoxious.
This is why those posters that show him shirtless and tattooed "Blacklisted and Loving it" works so well. He looks like Robert Mitchum in "Cape Fear". Actually Robert Mitchum has the same face-at-rest natural smirk, but on him it works.
That guy Koskinen, head of IRS - same thing.
Yes I need to stop here.
Michael K said...I have said since the beginning that I would like Cruz on the Supreme Court better.
Hear!! Hear!! I am with you 100% on this!!
I'm for Cruz but I can vote for Trump. Is Trump a conservative? No. If elected will he rollback the leviathan state? No. Will he increase it? No. Will he raise my taxes? No. Will he push for policies that further dampen growth? No. Will he be a pushover in foreign policy? No.
While I believe that Cruz would try to rollback the leviathan state and aggressively push for growth policies and be strong and assertive in foreign affairs when it suits the national interest Trump won't worsen the situation we have now and a pro-growth policy will dampen a lot of our problems. Like I said, I can vote for Trump and so can most conservatives especially when the choice this year will be so stark between the parties.
If Trump does get the nomination it will be very interesting and important who he chooses to be his running mate. At Trumps age I don't think he will be running for a second term. It's not like he needs the job that bad for his post-presidency income.
"Macy's stores suck and they are bad for U.S.A.”
That, sadly, is the depth of Trumps critiques of things. Note how quickly he resorts to the demagogic attack. Not bad business decision and why. No, bad FOR AMERICA.
Trump is not a conservative. Which one of the candidates is?
Cruz? I love the Cuban-Canadian-American who is the only person capable of saving the Constitution from leftist shenanigans.
Carson? A most honorable and brilliant man. Too quiet and honorable for the presidency.
Rubio? That is the real wolf in sheep's skin, liberal in conservative garb. Elected by Tea Party conservatives to the Senate. Sold his base out once he got to Washington, now is too afraid to run for re-election.
Jeb? Don't even get there. He disowned his brother's principles and legacy. A Republican establishment stooge.
Christie? Dear Leader's ass kisser, wouldn't even support the Republican nominee in 2012.
So why does it matter whether Trump is a conservative? What is the alternative?
Cruz.
Trump is clearly an authoritarian. So, is this what people really want? … it describes why I find him so revolting … people sure seem to get excited about Trump the authoritarian.
What an indictment of Trump, right? Hey, let’s all support a candidate that has no authority. Surely we could find a nice candidate somewhere, the weaker the better.
There hasn't been a conservative president since Coolidge. There hasn't been a conservative presidential candidate since Goldwater.
Trump is as conservative as Romney and McCain. W was a big government conservative, which is an oxymoron. George HW Bush was a pragmatist. He raised taxes to close the deficits and had effective diplomacy while using the military sparingly compared to Clinton, W, and Obama.
Reagan was conservative in tone but not really in action. Amnesty and deficits and raising Social Security taxes to ensure FDR's vision remained intact for another generation. These were all practical decisions but not conservative.
Coolidge cut federal spending. He was an antidote to Wilson's progressivism and foreign adventurism. He signed an immigration bill that barred Arabs, Asians, and most Africans from immigrating and restricted immigration from Europeans to 2% annually of the number of each ethnicity based on the 1890 census so as to maintain the American population balance as it existed in the late 19th Century.
So Trump's approach to immigration is more conservative, like Coolidge and not like Reagan/Obama. Trump doesn't care about deficits or entitlement reform, much like most Republicans.
His non-intervention approach to foreign relations is like Coolidge's and makes sense given the last 20 years.
I don't know what makes Cruz a conservative. He's not running on reforming entitlements since he doesn't want to scare seniors. He doesn't like deficits but has no proposal how to eliminate them. His foreign policy seems pretty no interventionist so that's more conservative than W/Obama/Hillary/Rubio/McCain/Romney. He's also more liberal on immigration than Trump but not as liberal as Reagan/W/Obama/McCain/Hillary.
So Cruz conservatism, other than rhetorically, doesn't seem much different than Trump's. Cruz is a lawyer and senator so he likes to talk. Trump is a real estate developer and celebrity so he likes to build things and likes publicity/attention. Each of them, like every politician, has a big ego and is running because they are narcisstic since being president is the ultimate celebrity in the world
The value of Trump's "crossover" appeal is vastly overstated by Rush and others. Appealing to a different group of voters is one thing, but the net positive perception across all voters (percent of voters with a positive view minus percent with a negative one) is far more important. In this measure, Trump is in real general election danger.
Trump probably isn't beloved by others.
He just has to be more popular than the ALTERNATIVE. Same response I give to friends who ask "How could you have voted for Strom Thurmond? Or Lindsey Graham? Or Nikki Haley? Or...". Sometimes, the alternative is just that bad.
Who LIKES Hillary? I mean genuinely likes her. Even her supporters know she's sleazy as hell.
And Bernie? Dude just looks mean all of the time and he is a bit of an imbecile.
Trump probably isn't beloved by others.
He just has to be more popular than the ALTERNATIVE. Same response I give to friends who ask "How could you have voted for Strom Thurmond? Or Lindsey Graham? Or Nikki Haley? Or...". Sometimes, the alternative is just that bad.
Fair point, but keep reading Silver's piece. He covers the head-to-head match ups. Cruz (and Rubio) routinely out-poll Hillary (statistical tie, basically). Bernie and Hillary both beat Trump soundly.
Trump isn't a wolf in sheep's clothing
He's a wolf.
Paddy O: Like with anything, it's not really a binary but a mixture of interesting data and interpretation.
No, it's ideologically-driven crap, and this particular theme goes way back. Examine the questions that determine whether a respondent is "authoritarian" and think a little harder. There's lots of interesting stuff that could be done with that data; this isn't it.
Trump is clearly an authoritarian.
For some contrived, muddle-headed, and basically useless definition of "authoritarian", sure. Apparently to you, any authority figure who exercises authority is an "authoritarian".
He makes ample use of and enthusiastically supports eminent domain for private developers.
Lot of "authoritarian" abuse of eminent domain and the like going around. (See "Section 8 and developers" and get back to us.) It's ugly and abusive, but why you think this behavior or its tolerance is peculiar to Trump and his supporters, I do not know.
His recent fame is due to being the boss who fires people when they don't perform.
It's "authoritarian" that bosses fire people who don't perform? See "basically useless definition", above.
He's going to unilaterally run the immigrants out...
That's the way politicians talk, Paddy. On the other side they are going to unilaterally "bring everybody out of the shadows" and "fix our broken immigration system" blah blah blah. No elected official has the authority to unilaterally do any of the things they all bloviate about. It's painfully obvious that this only offends you when someone is promising to do stuff that you don't like.
...and give Russia the what for.
I'm pretty sure it's the neo-con tools in the line-up who are all hot about giving Russian (or Assad, or whoever happens to be their Hitler of the Week) "what for", not Trump. (Trump, surprisingly, sounds relatively sane compared to most of those tools.)
People want the strong Trump to speak truth to power and put people into shape like a powerful CEO would do, cleaning house and maximizing power.
Promising to "clean house"? Maximinzing power at the expense of checks and balances? Obviously, Trump is manifesting heretofore unseen tendencies in American political life, and appealing to an ugly streak in voters that nobody else has ever tapped, or is attempting to tap now.
He insults and dismisses others, he caricatures and offers simplistic slogans to rouse the people.
Look at it this way, Paddy. Trump supporters probably find it a refreshing break not being, for once, the people insulted and dismissed by the pols (of both parties). Guess you missed all that. And I guess I've been too busy having my intelligence insulted by everybody's simplistic slogans to get all that offended by Trump's in particular.
"Trump is clearly an authoritarian. He makes ample use of and enthusiastically supports eminent domain for private developers."
And Hillary and Bernie are not ? Bernie wants to arrest climate "deniers."
Hillary has top secret documents on a home server that is wide open to foreign hackers.
Eminent domain is small beer compared to $41 trillion for Bernie's healthcare money pit.
Hillary is like the guy whose wife's credit card was stolen. A friend asked him if he had reported it. No, he said because the thief stole less than she spent.
What I have been seeing lately is that Trump is a nationalist, and nationalism is no longer a bad word, especially when we are seeing Europe self destruct in the name of multiculturalism. People think he will put America's interests first, which is refreshing. He also seems to enjoy the fight, which is appealing.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा