Protests backfire as anti-American images push undecided voters to Trump

[Right_in_Virginia]

The point is that Republicans who insist on nominating a know-nothing liberal can't expect conservatives to unify behind that.  They shouldn't pretend to be surprised when it doesn't happen, especially when told over and over that it wouldn't.

.../

You could have nominated a conservative, but you wanted the reality show guy.  Own it. 

@CatherineofAragon

I'll speak only for myself here.  I support Donald Trump, and I cringe that you think I could support a "know-nothing liberal".  More troubling is I can't find a place or a way  to explain to you why #NeverTrumps are wrong about this - - - because any expressed support of Trump always leads to more insults against my intelligence and my character.

I am more than willing to have real, tough debate--hoping in the end that you see more positives than negatives in Donald Trump's candidacy.

BUT, the debate needs to be without reference to cults, morons, orangutans, monkeys, cockroaches, etc. etc. etc.

Until this debate is possible with #NeverTrumps --- please --- don't tell me what I own.

Think about it.

[sinkspur]

I'm a Trump supporter, Jazz ... and I'm just curious.  I've not heard the term "alt-right cockroach" used to describe me before.  What does this mean?

Thanks.

It's a catch all phrase that a loose collection of racists think sounds better than KKK.

[Fishrrman]

Mesaclone wrote:
"Not liking that either. I'd just go with American."

No.
I've been using the term Euro-American for years now here at TheBriefingRoom (long before all the FR refugees drifted in here) and I intend to keep on using it.

You don't have to "like" the term "Euro-American" -- any more than you have to like (or use) "African-American", Asian-American, Native-American, Hispanic-American, or whathaveyou-American.

As we look at "the divide" that exists in America today, it exists not only along intellectual boundaries, but ethnic ones, as well. And, by-and-large, those Americans who find themselves on the "traditionalist, old-style values" side of that divide are.... of Euro heritage.

Mesaclone, you yourself commented on earlier posts in this thread about the changing situation in the southern border states. Twenty years ago, folks laughed and ridiculed the term "Atzlan". Who's laughing about it now?

What you (and the rest of us) are seeing -- even if you don't come right out and say it -- is the explosion of "identity politics" as those themes work their way ever-deeper into the political maelstrom. It's certainly underway in places like Arizona and New Mexico, in those segregated classrooms full of Hispanics that were mentioned above.

Of course, blacks have understood this for decades, even if to their own detriment. That's why obama won something like 96% of "the black vote". (Aside: blacks generally have a higher self-esteem than do whites, and I sense that they "identify with a winner", even a white one, and that a higher-than-usual number of them may end up voting for Trump at o'er-the-hillary's expense.)

It's also why -- in areas that are increasingly Hispanic -- that you see more and more Hispanic-named politicians coming out of them. An "Anglo" doesn't have much of a chance any more in those places, any more than a white politician has in a place like Detroit. Again, identity politics.

You may not have arrived here soon enough to read other postings I've put up (as long as two years ago) regarding what it's going to take for the Pubbies to again win the presidency.

In both 2008 and 2012, if "the white vote" in several critical states had only broken 2-4% more for the Republicans, they could have won those states and the presidency.

And this is the change in 2016 that's going to propel Donald Trump into the White House:
Euro-American disgust with the behavior of non-Euros, particularly the illegals.

That's what the original article title was about, and even the #nevertrumpers here seem to sense it.

Wouldn't it be great if we could just toss out the notion of identity politics and cling to more noble aspirations?
Wouldn't it be great if we (like the democrats) could simply just ignore reality?

[Norm Lenhart]

@Jasshead

I'm a Trump supporter, Jazz ... and I'm just curious.  I've not heard the term "alt-right cockroach" used to describe me before.  What does this mean?

Thanks.

The alt.right has a lot of positives. Antifeminist, anti SJW, Pro discussion. The problem comes in once you rip the covers off and find they are willing to trade religous freedom for homosexual special treatment, an undercurrent of antisemitic beliefs and positions and atheism. And when pointed out, they go scurrying away from the light of that truth. They are the modern Neocon. Democrat liberals here on the right under a cute name to spread the core tenets that are contrary to conservative value.

Brietbart is one outlet corrupted by them. The atheist side of the internet is filled with them. Whats needed is the Orkin man.

[Norm Lenhart]

Your proclamations that it is the "Euro-Americans" who are the ones with the "traditional, old-style values" would be laughable if it were not so racist. You must
be an avid reader of intellectual reading materials like "the trump coloring book".

There's a huge problem most people completely miss with all the 'white vote' metrics they come up with and it is in fact 100% racial. And I say this as a white guy.

The majority of white voters are so infused with liberal white guilt that basing anything on what 'white voters' can or will do is an exercise in at best, magical thinking.

We as a race, have voted majority liberal since Reagan. We elected, or tried to elect liberals to every position of power in both the RNC and DNC not because of race. Because we are a majority of the flat out most gutless, unintelligent and cowardly humans on the planet.

We do not vote on principle. We do not vote on faith. We do not vote on fact. We vote on feelings. We self loathe not because there is a reason we should. We self loathe because we are told to by anyone else including each other. We cannot be trusted, counted on or looked to anymore to do anything but capitulate.

[Silver Pines]

See how easily shifting the perspective is...and you get the same ultimate message of arrogance and condescension. The way you feel about Trump is how even more Republicans feel about Cruz...you dismiss their view and see yours as uniquely "true". That's not a reasonable way to be part of a party, because your approach...while it may make you feel superior...results in neverending defeat. That makes it just plain foolish. Your belief in principle and integrity is no more authentic or valuable than those of us who support Mr. Trump. As for votes being needed, any GOP candidate needs every vote they can muster...nobody is arguing otherwise. That said, I don't expect some to have the ability to see outside their own perspective...or to even see "big picture" as to what will ruin the nation vs just having someone you dislike in the White House.

Its unfortunate you seem locked into this belief that your views are morally superior and/or better informed than those of Trump supporters...rest assured, they are not.

Concerning the part of my post that you changed into "500 Club kook", again, you're making a false comparison not based in fact.  I have no idea what the 500 Club is, and I haven't heard a word about Cruz belonging to any such organization.  Trump, however, IS a reality show star, and he is demonstrably ignorant of how government works.  Those are facts.  It may seem like condescension or arrogance to some Trump supporters when they hear the cold, hard truth about Trump; it seems they prefer to ignore it.  I can't help that, nor am I willing to indulge the fantasy that he's something he isn't.

I've seen a good bit of the "oh, you're so morally superior" accusation from Trump supporters.  "Purity" is one of the favored means of expressing it.  But I won't be put on the defensive because I refuse to support a liberal dirtbag who has openly mocked the handicapped and who accused an elderly pastor of being an accomplice in the JFK killing.

Come to think of it, distancing oneself from Trump IS a moral decision.  Maybe deep down, you recognize that?

BTW, Mesaclone, earlier I asked you why you're after our votes now when earlier it was conventional wisdom that Trump would win without us.  We were told we weren't needed, even by Donald himself.  Has that changed?

[Norm Lenhart]

I've seen a good bit of the "oh, you're so morally superior" accusation from Trump supporters.  "Purity" is one of the favored means of expressing it.  But I won't be put on the defensive because I refuse to support a liberal dirtbag who has openly mocked the handicapped and who accused an elderly pastor of being an accomplice in the JFK killing.

Well Kat, based on the facts of Donald Trump's life and his record, it's pretty hard to not be morally superior without having a criminal regord in one's past. There's nothing moral about the man from his infedilities to his business dealings to his Romneyesque doublespeak on every subject he's thusfar opined on.

Now if his supporters want to consider him a moral anything, it places them at his own level of morality. Granny always said you are who you associate with.

[Silver Pines]

@CatherineofAragon

I'll speak only for myself here.  I support Donald Trump, and I cringe that you think I could support a "know-nothing liberal".  More troubling is I can't find a place or a way  to explain to you why #NeverTrumps are wrong about this - - - because any expressed support of Trump always leads to more insults against my intelligence and my character.

I am more than willing to have real, tough debate--hoping in the end that you see more positives than negatives in Donald Trump's candidacy.

BUT, the debate needs to be without reference to cults, morons, orangutans, monkeys, cockroaches, etc. etc. etc.

Until this debate is possible with #NeverTrumps --- please --- don't tell me what I own.

Think about it.

Right in Virginia, I'm not going to insult you or your character.  If I wanted to do that, I'd go back to where I came from.

But if you refuse to see Trump as the lifelong liberal that he is, you're simply in an alternate reality.  The man hasn't a single accomplishment for the cause of conservatism under his belt.  You expect me to buy into his con that a 70 year old man suddenly reversed all of his stances and views just in time to run for president--and all because he says so.  And despite the countless slips of the tongue made during this campaign which have revealed his core liberalism.

I'm not buying it and I never will.  I've always pegged Trump as a shyster; I just didn't know how much of one he really is until I started watching him in action.

[Silver Pines]

Well Kat, based on the facts of Donald Trump's life and his record, it's pretty hard to not be morally superior without having a criminal regord in one's past. There's nothing moral about the man from his infedilities to his business dealings to his Romneyesque doublespeak on every subject he's thusfar opined on.

Now if his supporters want to consider him a moral anything, it places them at his own level of morality. Granny always said you are who you associate with.

You're right, and I realized as much just as I was finishing my post.

[Norm Lenhart]

You're right, and I realized as much just as I was finishing my post.

I always find it precious how his supporters think they can just shovel this fraud on America and hold their noses in the air as if they are not responsible for all the idiocy he brings with him. And WE are the bad people. Not them. Us. Because they say so.

But in fact, they aren't above it. They are directly responsible for every additional Baby Planned Parenthood will kill since Donald wants them funded. They are responsible for every one of their own that goes out and calls actual Americans 'unAmerican. They are responsible for every American killed by the legalized illegals passing through his 'big beautiful door' in his big beautiful and meaningless if ever built WAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLL.

Because some of us tried to stop that. Ted Cruz tried to stop all that. And they stood PROUDLY with Donald Trump instead.

Existential Cage Theory. An idea whose time has come.

[Mesaclone]

Mesaclone wrote:
"Not liking that either. I'd just go with American."

No.
I've been using the term Euro-American for years now here at TheBriefingRoom (long before all the FR refugees drifted in here) and I intend to keep on using it.

You don't have to "like" the term "Euro-American" -- any more than you have to like (or use) "African-American", Asian-American, Native-American, Hispanic-American, or whathaveyou-American.

As we look at "the divide" that exists in America today, it exists not only along intellectual boundaries, but ethnic ones, as well. And, by-and-large, those Americans who find themselves on the "traditionalist, old-style values" side of that divide are.... of Euro heritage.

Mesaclone, you yourself commented on earlier posts in this thread about the changing situation in the southern border states. Twenty years ago, folks laughed and ridiculed the term "Atzlan". Who's laughing about it now?

What you (and the rest of us) are seeing -- even if you don't come right out and say it -- is the explosion of "identity politics" as those themes work their way ever-deeper into the political maelstrom. It's certainly underway in places like Arizona and New Mexico, in those segregated classrooms full of Hispanics that were mentioned above.

Of course, blacks have understood this for decades, even if to their own detriment. That's why obama won something like 96% of "the black vote". (Aside: blacks generally have a higher self-esteem than do whites, and I sense that they "identify with a winner", even a white one, and that a higher-than-usual number of them may end up voting for Trump at o'er-the-hillary's expense.)

It's also why -- in areas that are increasingly Hispanic -- that you see more and more Hispanic-named politicians coming out of them. An "Anglo" doesn't have much of a chance any more in those places, any more than a white politician has in a place like Detroit. Again, identity politics.

You may not have arrived here soon enough to read other postings I've put up (as long as two years ago) regarding what it's going to take for the Pubbies to again win the presidency.

In both 2008 and 2012, if "the white vote" in several critical states had only broken 2-4% more for the Republicans, they could have won those states and the presidency.

And this is the change in 2016 that's going to propel Donald Trump into the White House:
Euro-American disgust with the behavior of non-Euros, particularly the illegals.

That's what the original article title was about, and even the #nevertrumpers here seem to sense it.

Wouldn't it be great if we could just toss out the notion of identity politics and cling to more noble aspirations?
Wouldn't it be great if we (like the democrats) could simply just ignore reality?

I understand conceptually what you are saying, but I refuse to partake in this identity politics stuff. I don't accept the Mexican-American, Arab-American, African-American, etcetera, termniology because I consider the entire concept of hyphenated Americans to be wrong...morally, historically, and even spiritually. So, when I see someone use a term like Euro-American I'm going to respond in the same way I would to any other use of hyphenated-American terms. I value my heritage which is mostly German and English, but I'm not a Euro-anything...I'm simply an American. As are we all. You can't criticize racial identity politics and then attempt to practice it...I mean, I get the fight fire with fire notion...but it just doesn't override the wrongness of it all.

Yes, there is a problem with people voting in ethnic blocks...and in the Southwest we have an even broader problem of people simply not wanting to integrate into society and actually "be" American. La Raza and Mecha...the whole Aztlan movement has to be exposed and crushed before it turns into an open sedition...which it will in time. We have to fight that...I think I am fighting that by voting for Mr. Trump. But I refuse to become like the thing I hate, and the thought of my party striving for the "white" vote or the "Euro" vote sickens me. We have to break up that mentality and prove that we are seeking votes based on our intellectual point of view on issues...we have to convince the hyphenated voters that it is not in their interests and in the country's interest to vote according to superficialities like ethnicity or race.

I suppose most of what I say sounds trite and maybe even naive. I don't care. I see Mr. Trump is kind of an equal opportunity...somewhat crass...leader. Someone who ignores political correctness and values people who work for him by the effectiveness of their work and skills...I believe he could care less about a man/woman's ethnicity. That's how the nation should be...insensitive to the PC crap and caring about what people think and do rather than how they look or where they are from. A good conservative thinker is what he is based on intellect alone, ditto for a good citizen. The last thing we want to do as Americans is fall in line with the liberal race identity crap. Which is why I had an issue with the Euro-American stuff.

[RoosGirl]

We do not vote on principle. We do not vote on faith. We do not vote on fact. We vote on feelings. We self loathe not because there is a reason we should. We self loathe because we are told to by anyone else including each other. We cannot be trusted, counted on or looked to anymore to do anything but capitulate.

For some reason the emoticons don't work on my computer, probably for the best, picture a little yellow circle with its tongue sticking out at you here.  Speak for yourself, good sir!

[Norm Lenhart]

For some reason the emoticons don't work on my computer, probably for the best, picture a little yellow circle with its tongue sticking out at you here.  Speak for yourself, good sir!

Oh there are a few of us left sane, sure. But I never said ALL of us were that brain dead to begin with.

[Meshuge Mikey]

its all a part of the scripted plan that The Donny and The Georgie...SOROS worked out many moons ago!!

[markomalley]

What can't be so easily analyzed is your response to it.

Do you not expect Euro Americans to watch scenes like these, and NOT BE angry at the protesters and supportive of Trump...?

I would expect people to vote for a candidate based upon an intellectual assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of that candidate versus the other candidates for an office. I would hope that people would not vote as a reaction to some other event or series of events.

I am realistic enough to recognize that people do vote based upon emotional reactions...but I am disappointed that they would allow themselves to be pushed or pulled in a direction based on emotion rather than upon a logical analysis.

As to your comment about people being angry at the protesters AND supportive of Trump...I can't see the connection between the two, unless you believe that the individuals/groups were actually contracted to protest by Trump. Anger at the protesters could result in changing one's opinion about the significance of illegal aliens and that might, in turn, lead one to support Trump (if that person believes that Trump has the best program to deal with the problem). But that is a totally different ball of wax than directly saying one would support Trump because of the protests.

And, oh, by the way, I would hope that those protests would concern not only Americans of European ancestry, but all legal residents of the country, regardless of ethnicity.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Right in Virginia, I'm not going to insult you or your character.  If I wanted to do that, I'd go back to where I came from.

But if you refuse to see Trump as the lifelong liberal that he is, you're simply in an alternate reality.  The man hasn't a single accomplishment for the cause of conservatism under his belt.  You expect me to buy into his con that a 70 year old man suddenly reversed all of his stances and views just in time to run for president--and all because he says so.  And despite the countless slips of the tongue made during this campaign which have revealed his core liberalism.

I'm not buying it and I never will.  I've always pegged Trump as a shyster; I just didn't know how much of one he really is until I started watching him in action.

Okay.  Thanks for the reply @CatherineofAragon

[Silver Pines]

Okay.  Thanks for the reply @CatherineofAragon

You're welcome.

[Silver Pines]

Existential Cage Theory. An idea whose time has come.

 

[Jazzhead]

Look Jazz, I understand your desire there...but the primary is truly over. We could argue over why people chose Trump, but its a moot point. He is the nominee and there really is no way to undo that. If you can't support him than you can't, I'm not going to hate on you or act like you're not a good Republican. I'm sure you are doing what your conscience dictates. My conscience tells me that there is no greater danger to the nation than Mrs. Clinton, and I would literally vote for a lump of coal if it was the only thing running against her...so for me this is an easy choice. That said, I do see important and positive policy positions held by Mr. Trump that I believe will help the nation going forward. I realize his erratic history in terms of political positions, but I also know that political reality will hold him to certain positions regardless...including guys like Paul Ryan in congress who will be restraining/limiting factors.

I think we all want the same thing...conservative governance. Sadly, we may get the exact opposition when Hillary Clinton is sworn into office. Worse, as she reshapes the courts we may have no way to come back from her ideological position...it will be imposed on us, as a nation, in an irreversible fashion.

Trump's the presumptive nominee.  He's not the nominee until a majority of the delegates vote for him.   

I don't disagree that I prefer some of Trump's policy prescriptions (such as they are) to Clinton's.  You miss the point -  my opposition isn't about policy, it's about the existential danger that Trump represents,  embodied in his vindictive,  megalomaniacal temperament.   He is temperamentally unfit to be near the nuke codes.  I don't care how liberal or conservative he is.  You need to convince me that the man's not batspit crazy.   And that's a tall order, given that Trump just can't or won't change, even as he's solidified his grip on the nomination.   His attack on Cruz's father,  his attack on Susan Martinez,  these are not the actions of a well man.   This is a man with anger issues who should not be allowed within the White House fence.     

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Trump's the presumptive nominee.  He's not the nominee until a majority of the delegates vote for him.   

I don't disagree that I prefer some of Trump's policy prescriptions (such as they are) to Clinton's.  You miss the point -  my opposition isn't about policy, it's about the existential danger that Trump represents,  embodied in his vindictive,  megalomaniacal temperament.   He is temperamentally unfit to be near the nuke codes.  I don't care how liberal or conservative he is.  You need to convince me that the man's not batspit crazy.   And that's a tall order, given that Trump just can't or won't change, even as he's solidified his grip on the nomination.   His attack on Cruz's father,  his attack on Susan Martinez,  these are not the actions of a well man.   This is a man with anger issues who should not be allowed within the White House fence.   

Good post.

[sinkspur]

Trump's the presumptive nominee.  He's not the nominee until a majority of the delegates vote for him.   

I don't disagree that I prefer some of Trump's policy prescriptions (such as they are) to Clinton's.  You miss the point -  my opposition isn't about policy, it's about the existential danger that Trump represents,  embodied in his vindictive,  megalomaniacal temperament.   He is temperamentally unfit to be near the nuke codes.  I don't care how liberal or conservative he is.  You need to convince me that the man's not batspit crazy.   And that's a tall order, given that Trump just can't or won't change, even as he's solidified his grip on the nomination.   His attack on Cruz's father,  his attack on Susan Martinez,  these are not the actions of a well man.   This is a man with anger issues who should not be allowed within the White House fence.   

You have capsulized the problem with Trump.  It's not a matter of policy. It's a matter of personal temperament.  He is not a man to be trusted in the Oval Office.

[RoosGirl]

You have capsulized the problem with Trump.  It's not a matter of policy. It's a matter of personal temperament.  He is not a man to be trusted in the Oval Office.

For me it is both.  There is no policy!  No, consistent policy anyway.