George F. Will: Who Will Follow Trump Off the Cliff?

[Formerly Once-Ler]

It is a shame that we did not nominate McCain again, or Romney, or Bush, or Kasich, or Boehner, or Harry Reid, or Pelosi. Then we would have a "real" conservative Republican running for President, instead of a fake conservative like Trump.

Sophistry.

McCain, Romney, Boehner, Reid, and Pelosi were not running for the GOP nomination this year.  Perry, Walker, Paul, Rubio, and Jindal were.

[Henry Noel]

Trump is accomplishing his goal.  He is fracturing an already divided GOP even further and we quite possibly will lose our majority in Congress. He has already given Hillary the keys to the oval office.

I believe that was the idea all along.

[Henry Noel]

I agree with you. It is a shame that we did not nominate McCain again, or Romney, or Bush, or Kasich, or Boehner, or Harry Reid, or Pelosi. Then we would have a "real" conservative Republican running for President, instead of a fake conservative like Trump.

Just because two times two isn't five, that doesn't make it six.

[Wingnut]

Just because two times two isn't five, that doesn't make it six.

But remember, 3 three lefties make Trump Right..

[Relic]

Relax. Breath. Drink a cup of coffee. (decaf)

Trump will not be any more "liberal" than George Bush and his father were, or that Jeb or Romney would have been. The anti-Trump people are behaving like children throwing a tantrum in the supermarket, because Mommy will not give them the toy they want.

I am always amazed by the anti-Trump crowd calling Trump a Liberal after all the absolute "flaming left wing Liberals" (who call themselves Republican) they have nominated and voted for. Why are the hand-picked "Republican left-wing Liberals" acceptable, and yet Trump is not?If Trump is a 'liberal' as they say, that should make the Republican establishment support Trump, not hate him, as they are all Democrat Liberals themselves. At the least, they support the Democrat agenda themselves, that is irrefutable.

And to make things more confusing, every candidate the anti-Trump people have always "crowned" as leader of the Republican party, has lost to the Democrat. If Trump loses the general, how is that any different from Romney or Jeb losing? Republicans are champions of losing. Why is it bad only when Trump loses, and not bad when all their candidates lose? Why not give change a chance? Why not try something different?

All of this over the top hysteria about Trump is both confusing and amusing to me. It may be exactly what the pro-Trump camp wanted all along, to shake things up. And in that case, I thank you all.

Spot on. The anti-Trump hysteria is confusing, but kind of fun to watch.

On the one hand, they say, you can't tell what Trump will do. Then, in the next sentence, they say that Trump will be worse than Hillary. 

[Relic]

I agree with you. It is a shame that we did not nominate McCain again, or Romney, or Bush, or Kasich, or Boehner, or Harry Reid, or Pelosi. Then we would have a "real" conservative Republican running for President, instead of a fake conservative like Trump.

The real 'half truths' are that the Republican Party is a conservative organization. It is not. The Republican establishment 'hates' conservatives, and furthermore, they despise their own constituents. 

Calling [the Republican Party] conservative, is like calling Bloomberg a champion for gun rights. Bloomberg called himself a Republican too.     <-- That is my point exactly. Not only did Bloomberg call himself Republican, he fit right in with them. He fit in with the monolithic single party our government has become.

The anti-Trump crowd can cry and scream all they want. Me, myself, I going to back the winner. And the winner against 17-1 odds is Trump. Say what you will about him. He said he was going to win. And he won. That is a reality fact that no one dispute.

And now, ALL THE SAME TALKING HEADS who said that he would NEVER be the nominee, are now all caterwauling that he will never be President. Based on the pundits factual record of accuracy, the wise move would be to bet on Trump.

If a weatherman predicts rain 10 times, and every time he is wrong and there is bright sunshine, it is only human to question whether or not he knows what he is talking about.

You're on your game!

On Sunday I was doing some errands. I tuned into a Sunday political talk show by a local host. He's a middle of the road kind of guy based in Cleveland. The callers that I heard, most sounded to be African American. They were all expressing their intent to vote Trump. The reasons followed two themes. #1 - Time for something different. Our political class is filled with people who went to school to be a politician, and have done nothing else. #2 - Hillary is evil.

It was entertaining for me to listen to that... from Cleveland.

[Relic]

Well, if that was Bob Frantz, he's actually more conservative than middle of the road, and that's the audience he generally tends to attract.  And yes, there are some conservative African-Americans, so I'd be leery about drawing any broad conclusions.

Not Bob Frantz, I think it was Tom Kelly on WHK. Not that it matters. It was anecdotal. I am aware that there are African American conservatives. I was just surprised by the seemingly continuous thread in the calls. I pay attention to what's around me, but I realize my observations are very micro in the macro scope of national politics.

[massadvj]

On the one hand, they say, you can't tell what Trump will do. Then, in the next sentence, they say that Trump will be worse than Hillary. 

What if you think, as I do, that Bill Clinton was a better POTUS than GWB?  If Trump will be no worse than GWB and Hillary no worse than Bill, I think I have a dilemma. 

[Relic]

What if you think, as I do, that Bill Clinton was a better POTUS than GWB?  If Trump will be no worse than GWB and Hillary no worse than Bill, I think I have a dilemma.

I agree. The answer isn't clear. I agree that Bill Clinton was better than GWB, (moral issues aside). I am not sure Trump will be better than Hillary. I think, and I hope that Trump will be better than Hillary, but I'm not sure. I think Hillary is a hard left power seeker. I think Hillary Clinton's presidency will be nothing like Bill's. For that matter, I don't think Donald Trump's presidency would be anything like GWB.

If you honestly believe Hillary is the better choice, I don't have anything to dissuade you.

The thing I cling to most is that Trump, either for the theatrics, or because he believes it, is willing to give voice to patriotism. Very few in politics today seem willing to do that. In today's America, patriotism is cast as racist and xenophobic.

[Relic]

I think that's unfair.  Just about every GOP candidate gave voice to patriotism, though what that actually meant in terms of specific issues varied between candidates.

Maybe. Maybe I don't remember it as vividly because it wasn't front and center. Certainly GWB was patriotic, misguided, but patriotic. I think McCain used it as a prop. I think Romney was reluctantly patriotic, for the reasons I said, the left views patriotism as racism and xenophobia.

And maybe Trump is just using it to play to the hayseeds? I don't know for sure. But I sure like hearing that we should consider our own interests first.

[ConstitutionRose]

Listening to Breitbart Radio on my way in this morning, I noticed many of the people who are for Trump, think that it is only Cruz supporters who are#Never Trump.
While Cruz was his closest rival, we aren't the only ones.
Trust me, it is Rubio, Paul, Bush, Kasich, Fiorina, Graham, Pataki, Jindal, Perry, etc... supporters as well.
I would venture to say, while these 4 have given Trump their support, there are Carson, Christie, Huckabee, and Santorum supporters who aren't too keen on a Trump presidency, either.
Also, 2-3 times in a 45 minute drive, I heard that the constitution was no longer relevant, and that the country is too far gone for the constitution to matter.
If his supporters believe that, what does Trump believe?

To be sure I understand. It was Trump supporters who said the Constitution no longer matters.

[driftdiver]

To be sure I understand. It was Trump supporters who said the Constitution no longer matters.

@GrouchoTex   I've heard that from many Trump supporters on numerous threads.    That our current system must be reset in order to restore the Republic because it is too far gone.   I dont think all Trump Supporters believe that but there are a significant number.   

[bolobaby]

Relax. Breath. Drink a cup of coffee. (decaf)

Trump will not be any more "liberal" than George Bush and his father were, or that Jeb or Romney would have been. The anti-Trump people are behaving like children throwing a tantrum in the supermarket, because Mommy will not give them the toy they want.

I am always amazed by the anti-Trump crowd calling Trump a Liberal after all the absolute "flaming left wing Liberals" (who call themselves Republican) they have nominated and voted for. Why are the hand-picked "Republican left-wing Liberals" acceptable, and yet Trump is not?If Trump is a 'liberal' as they say, that should make the Republican establishment support Trump, not hate him, as they are all Democrat Liberals themselves. At the least, they support the Democrat agenda themselves, that is irrefutable.

And to make things more confusing, every candidate the anti-Trump people have always "crowned" as leader of the Republican party, has lost to the Democrat. If Trump loses the general, how is that any different from Romney or Jeb losing? Republicans are champions of losing. Why is it bad only when Trump loses, and not bad when all their candidates lose? Why not give change a chance? Why not try something different?

All of this over the top hysteria about Trump is both confusing and amusing to me. It may be exactly what the pro-Trump camp wanted all along, to shake things up. And in that case, I thank you all.

See? Herein lies a Trumpette logical fallacy...

Trumpette: "You're guilty! Guilty of supporting cheap, conservative-lite candidates in the past, like McCain and Romney! You should be ashamed of those votes. ASHAMED! Look how bad those guys lost."

True Conservatives: "You're right. We're through. We will no longer support candidates who don't have proven conservative credentials. That leaves Trump out based on his history and willingness to vacillate rapidly depending on what's trending on Twitter."

Trumpette: "Whaaaaaaat? You won't support Trump? You're a crybaby! You're throwing a temper tantrum! Sore loser!"

(I especially like the "sore loser" part because most of us said "#NeverTrump" even when his candidacy was considered a long shot and a joke. Somehow, a consistent anti-Trump stance has been turned into being a "sore loser." I guess we are also a "sore loser" about the Obamacare SCOTUS ruling and gay marriage, by Trumpette "logic.")

[r9etb]

The  Trump campaign is a new or a different paradigm. It is not traditional Left-Right.

It is America First.

If, by "America first," you mean "Trump first."

[GrouchoTex]

To be sure I understand. It was Trump supporters who said the Constitution no longer matters.

Yes, it was Trump supporters, 2-3 of them this morning's drive into work alone.
This is not the first time I have heard this.
I have heard it often from Trump supporters that we are in a post-constitutional era, and that we need a "real" leader to "make America Great Again".
Scary stuff.

[GrouchoTex]

@GrouchoTex   I've heard that from many Trump supporters on numerous threads.    That our current system must be reset in order to restore the Republic because it is too far gone.   I dont think all Trump Supporters believe that but there are a significant number.

Unfortunately, the number is fairly significant, I am afraid.
Or maybe they are just the loudest, but few in numbers, which I hope is the case.

[massadvj]

If you honestly believe Hillary is the better choice, I don't have anything to dissuade you.

I don't think Hillary is a "better choice."  I would never vote for her.  My point is that an outcome in which Hillary is POTUS with a belligerent congress may not be as bad as Trump with a willing congress, especially if Trump means to add to the national debt, as he has indicated he would.

[INVAR]

The  Trump campaign is a new or a different paradigm. It is not traditional Left-Right.

No.  It's Populist Fascism. 

It is America First. It appeals across party lines, and to those that did not vote previously.

Correction: it's "America First" as Trump defines it in complete dismissal of the Constitution of which he never once mentioned.  In fact, many of his policy statements are blatantly unConstitutional - as he already asserts authority to act whereupon he would have no such authority to act.

The "establishment" conservatives

They were never Conservatives to begin with.  They were Ruling Class oligarchs - so get your nomenclature right.

But that establishment, along with their lobbyists, bond lawyers, investment bankers, etc. have fared very well during those failures.

That is what a Ruling Class oligarchy does.

Trump threatenstheir status quo, plain and simple. They are shrieking in disbelief. The say "oh dear, let us run Romney, again."

No doubt some are - but most are being reassured their Fascist gravy train will continue to run under a Trump monarchy - which is why Il Duce is getting the Establishment endorsements he is.

With the "conservative" establishment, you get four more years of talk about illegal immigration, but no action. Bush-Romney-Rove-Ryan-Kristol, etc.

Stop with the "Conservative establishment".  The 'Establishment" is NOT Conservative, and never was.  They announced they were voting for Hildabeast long ago when Trump and Cruz could not be shaken from the top by Jeb, Graham and Kasich.  The Ruling Class see themselves as the beneficiaries of the velvet Marxist/Fascist coup that Obama and the Democrats established after 2008.
[/quote]

[Relic]

I don't think Hillary is a "better choice."  I would never vote for her.  My point is that an outcome in which Hillary is POTUS with a belligerent congress may not be as bad as Trump with a willing congress, especially if Trump means to add to the national debt, as he has indicated he would.

That's where we disagree. I think Congress, regardless of which party is in the majority will be very compliant for a president Clinton. And on the flip side, I think whichever party is in the majority, Congress will fight a president Trump tooth and nail.