Featured Post

Castro and the Nazis: Makes Perfect Sense

As we come up on the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis, we see newly declassified German intelligence documents reporting that Fi...

Thursday, March 3, 2016

Romney Joins the Pope in Endorsing Trump

Big mistake by the "stop Trump" forces.

Wheeling out Romney to dump on Trump was an error on par with the Pope's getting involved.

First, a disclaimer, or clarification, or the fine print. I like Romney. I think him a decent man, and one who would have been a very good president. Our country and the West would be in much better shape today if Romney had won in 2012. I had a very minor role on Romney's foreign policy team and did my best from my lowly position to get the campaign to sharpen its message on foreign affairs, especially on Benghazi--to no avail. His campaign was dominated by "the oh-so-clever-ones" who think things to death, and analyze until they paralyze. The papers we sent up to Romney were wordy "on the one hand, but on the other hand" expositions of little to no use in a campaign. They read like something written for a transition team, not a campaign team. It was impossible to get Romney's main handlers to recommend that he go after Obama and Clinton hard on Benghazi and the rest of the misadministration's foreign policy disasters. They thought that was "too politicizing" and "unbecoming." Well, what happened, happened.

I am not sure what the anti-Trump forces thought they were doing by bringing out Romney to deliver the hit. He gave a good speech, a sharp speech, one much better and more pointed than any he gave in 2012 on Obama, but to what end? Is it to provide 20 or 30 soundbites for DNC use in the general campaign? By refusing to endorse anybody, is he out to urge a deadlocked convention that would have to turn to Romney or some other "establishment" figure? Why now? If Romney felt so strongly about it, why didn't he speak up two, three, four months ago? Lots of questions.

One humble prediction: Trump's numbers will go up, as they did after the Papal intercession.

Trump's reply was, on the face of it, quite bizarre. I have just finished watching his rambling "response" in Maine to Romney. It was weird . . . except, except, perhaps, that he also sent the message that Romney is irrelevant and not worth responding to in a serious manner. Maybe Trump is a lot smarter than many think? Possible, eh? Throw that out for the Academy's consideration.

The punchline. I had been sitting uncomfortably on the fence re the GOP candidates. After listening to the Romney speech and the other "establishment" types, and hearing the anchor pundits, the pundit anchors, and all the other assorted wise ones, I have jumped off the fence. I have landed in Trump's farm. He is not perfect, far from it. I might even change my mind, but for now I support Trump.

I don't know if Trump will be terrible; I do know that what we have right now is horrible beyond words. I can't bear the thought of a Hillary presidency. I know, I know. I have seen the advice about letting the Dems have the White House, and the GOP will hold the Congress, and thus freeze Hillary in place. Don't buy it. We have seen what has happened over the past few years when the Dems did not have the Congress; we have seen the enormous damage that a progressive President can do even without Congressional approval. In addition, we have seen that the GOP members of the Washington Cartel refuse to fight Obama on what counts. So, I don't want another Democratic White House.

For now, I'll go with Donald Trump.

53 comments:

  1. (i) "I had a very minor role on Trump's foreign policy team": Romney's I suspect.

    (ii) I do wonder sometimes if Congress is so supine because the White House has access to the FBI's (and IRS's) dirt on the Congressmen. Blackmail from the White House? Why not?

    ReplyDelete
  2. On second thoughts, maybe there's no need for anyone to blackmail 'em when somebody else will just pay 'em.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not even that. It is safer and more sure to simply support in the first instance, with legal campaign funds, a candidate who already believes, insofar as he has abstract policy beliefs, in the goodness of what you want done--more immigration, say, or the Ex-Im Bank, or whatever.

      Delete
  3. He can't be worse than what we have now, nor what that gaping gash would bring. I'll go with Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, he could. But it doesn't look likely.

      Delete
  4. I will probably hold my nose and vote for Male Vainty Hairdoooo if it's him against Shrillay Shroooooo--then again, my state's so deep indigo that I might also write in Cruz or vote Libertarian or Constitution Party.

    I wholeheartedly agree that HRC is a horror, dishonest, a proven incompetent, and an enemy of the First Amendment when it's used by people she doesn't like (which means she's an enemy of the First Amendment. Period.). I quite simply will not vote for her. Even if were Shrillary Shroooooo against Angela Davis (who in any self-respecting country would be dead by 9mm cerebral hemorrhage administered after due process of law), I'd write-in.

    But Trump is a man without a conscience, whose god is his own celebrity. He's used eminent domain to devour widows' homes in order to build businesses that are among the worst robbers of the poor possible, bailed out on his creditors, used illegal immigrant labor (albeit Polish rather than Latin) and paid them only after lawsuit,defrauded people who trusted him to teach them the real estate business at his fake "university", respects neither the people who are voting for him nor even God himself, from whom he claims to have never asked forgiveness. He's a fundamentally wicked man flourishing like the biblical green bay tree.

    I'm appalled that so many of my co-religionists are supporting the scapegrace. Yes, I understand why so many of us are looking for a bodyguard, as Tucker Carlson observed. But I simply do not trust The Donald. He's cheated too many other people, and there's no doubt he'll cheat us, whom he sees as stupid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Politics of election is more about elimination than selection.
      Huck? Out.
      Kasich? Might as well be.

      If looking for someone putting their heart into serving others, there's none of that left in the race (if there ever was).

      I'm still on the fence between Hillary and Trump, because I feel like I comprehend the criminal self-absorption of Hillary. I feel like she's "progressive when it suits her advancement" much like her 'evolution' on gay marriage. She's conservative where it suits her advancement as well. She basically stands for nothing but her pride. This is the kind of politician that I've come to expect in national politics and there's kind of a complacency/acceptance about it.

      Trump is more chaotic to me, I have little confidence that Trump won't just turn around after being sworn in, say "Bucket list #2: check", and head for the hills. Hillary is 'the devil I know', but that's not compelling.
      Still on the fence.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
    2. @Reader #1482

      One thing that might get you off the fence is Hillarycare. That was Hillary unfiltered, and unaccountable to voters. It showed her essential colors. She may say or do anything in her quest for power, but in her heart of hearts she's a serious leftie.

      If the election were held tomorrow and Trump were the nominee, I'd have reluctantly and sadly cast my ballot for him, just to keep her out of the White House. But against increasing odds, I still hope this story has a happier ending.

      Delete
    3. HarryBro, I suppose that I'm more in line with you. Shrillary Shroooo is a serious Leftie; Trump at least comprehends that the USA needs to assert its commercial rights in the global market (against China's beggar thy neighbor policies), while at the same time recognizing that there's a serious problem with the whole Islamic world. That being said, I still think Trump is pretty much a mere cut or two above the con-man.

      Delete
  5. Trump may be a vulgar con man, but he's OUR vulgar con man. At least he's making the appropriate noises and who knows, maybe he'll deliver. What has the GOP "establishment" done for us lately? Romney comes off as a sour backstabber. The GOP would do better to rally around all the candidates and the eventual nominee.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is he indeed our vulgar con man?

      Well, maybe. Certainly Hillary is their vulgar con man.

      Delete
    2. That is the mindset of the unwashed masses, who will not be kindly disposed towards a brokered convention. Elected not selected or the peasants will be revolting.

      Delete
  6. Robert of OttawaMarch 3, 2016 at 5:09 PM

    Basically how I feel, Diplo. Trump has risks. The GOP establishment, the RNC and congress leaders, has no risk because they will do nothing. And this is why conservatives are sticking it to them, because they do nothing. They would send in another lamb to slaughter for Hellary to become Pres.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am reminded of W. Edwards Deeming's famous quote: 'It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.'

    So the GOP establishment's much anticipated comeback strategy is to drag from the political grave reserved for failed presidential nominees the man who could not get out, or win, sufficient votes in 2012, to stage a hit on Trump, who is winning, and in the process drawing out new GOP voters, all when the DNC's turnout is collapsing.

    Seriously, what could possibly go wrong? The stupidity is breathtaking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Robert of OttawaMarch 3, 2016 at 5:19 PM

      Yes, we knew it was coming, as advertized by the media, but what stupidity. Trump skewered Romney (a decent man, I agree) with: "I refused to back him".

      Delete
    2. Robert of OttawaMarch 3, 2016 at 5:23 PM

      Just why is the GOP trying to destroy their most popular candidate who is bringing in votes galor?

      Delete
    3. Robert, he is not the GOP candidate, yet. It's extremely bad form for the Republican power structure, i.e. State Party Chairmen, elected office-holders, to interfere in the primary and Caucus process. We have had far too much of that, for at least sixteen years.

      Delete
  8. Cruz is still within reach, so I'm all for Cruz.

    I'll get back to you if Trump gets the nomination.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That video snippet of a forced photo-op kiss of his daughter getting off the bus really bugged me. If he had stopped the production, gone back onto the bus, and had a long chat with her, I would have gained a lot of respect for him. Maybe he was just tired, but it came off very badly.

      - reader #1482

      Delete
  9. I love your columns....so much wisdom.
    When I go to post them on FB it only shows a fuzzy picture...if you could have a photo with blog article it would grab a lot more interest...imho.....keep up the great work sir

    ReplyDelete
  10. If Romney had gone after Obama this hard, we'd be preparing for Mitt's second term, and the Senate already would be considering a conservative SCOTUS nominee.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Well Mad,
    My fear with Trump is that he's another Schwarzenegger. But I don't think it really matters. The country and it's politics are going to change regardless of what happens in this election. The political landscape of this country reminds me of the 1845-1858 era. There will be change. Will there be a shoot out like in the 1860's, I don't know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Schwarzenegger comparison is quite apt. I remember voting for him in California and then being sorely disappointed. Hope this is not a repeat.

      Delete
    2. Schwarzenegger initially tried to get eight ballot propositions passed ("Governor Schwarzenegger's Reform Agenda" - 2005) and lost them all. After that, he seemed to give up and just kind of went along with the flow.

      Delete
  12. I've read some of your recent comments on Trump, and think your analysis of his success and the failure of the establishment to derail him is spot on.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think that if Trump is nominated by the GOP, he will probably beat Hillary. If Trump is elected, he will bring out the Democray-cray vote in the midterms like Obama did with the conservative vote. I also think that if Trump is elected, he will be a one term president and the Dems will win in 2020. I could very well be wrong. Maybe the Presidency will grant Trump the maturity he's failed to show thus far, but I doubt that will happen.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In an earlier thread on this topic, I voiced the opinion that Trump may very well have started his campaign as a favor to repay the Clintons, then realized he could tap into the country's frustrations for his own benefit, and demonstrated the truth of the proverb which Mr. Amselem taught that if you raise crows, they'll peck out your eyes.

    Trump, I suspect, would gladly peck out the eyes of any of his supporters if it could be advantageous to him.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dip,
    Welcome to the dark side :)
    I started out a Cruz supporter, switched to trump a couple months ago. Not perfect, not a "true" conservative, but he is unabashedly American. He'll be fine and so we'll we.

    Barry

    ReplyDelete
  16. Crazy... Romney... really?

    Dear GOP, you've lost your party, please don't end it this way. It doesn't have to be like that.

    Think Christie was promised the Scalia slot? Or attorney general?
    I know one thing... there was no one else for him to endorse, and his endorsement was rapidly losing value.

    - reader #1482

    ReplyDelete
  17. Long shot: what if the FBI brings Hellary down and the Dems realise they won't win with Sanders? Do they rig everything so they can put Bloomberg up? Biden? Can they rig everything or would their hands be tied?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. P.S. Would O pardon Hellary?

      Delete
    2. Dems would rig the Second Coming if they had to.

      Delete
    3. If you mean, could Hillary release her delegates, yes. Also, they are technically released anyway if the first vote is futile. The convention could then nominate any Democrat the convention likes.

      Of course, the Democratic National Convention is a fairly left-wing body. (Most common question after "How are you?": "Where do you teach?") They might draft a fiery young radical feminist of color like Native American Professor Senator Elizabeth Warren (who will then be one month shy of 67).

      Delete
    4. Is she prone to unexplained falls?

      Delete
    5. dearieme...if the FBI gets close enough, Hillary will "fall" again and end up with "worrisome" health concerns. Especially if she hits her head.

      Delete
    6. a6z--Elizabeth Warren is called Fauxahontas because she has not American Indian ancestry, but pretended to in order to get a minority reserved job in some NE USA university.

      Delete
  18. For the antiestablishmentarians I think Cruz the better choice. A Constitutionalist with experience in government who can work with people on all sides of the GOP even if they don't like him. Trump's electoral negatives are so high that against any Democrat but Hillary he is a loser and I expect even this Administration will follow the FBI recommendation to indict when it comes down and send in someone like Biden to sub.
    Sarah Hoyt has an excellent point in her antiTrump article from 1/24/2016 about letting Trump be the standard bearer will be fatal to not just the GOPe brand but Conservativism as a whole.
    http://accordingtohoyt.com/2016/01/24/trumped/
    Mostly based on how Eanes ran as a rightist in Potugal back in the '80's and then governed even worse than the leftists, discrediting the right there for a generation. I would rather not see that happen here, especially with a vacancy on the Supreme Court at stake.
    I expect that if Trump gets the nod he will lose to Hillary. The press is setting this up just the way they did in 2008 & 2012 where they did their best to talk up the weakest, most moderate candidate they could.
    I intend to support Cruz (already voted for him here in Texas). If he fails of nomination then I suppose that leaves whoever gets the Republican nomination. Letting a Democratic President choose the deciding vote on the Court will hurt a lot more than losing an election.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Thank you, Diplomad. At our house, we've been supporting Trump for some time. It was hard to watch him get savaged yesterday (Drudge had the great headline "Cuban Sandwich"), but that is also what will happen in the general, from the Democrats, no matter who our candidate is.

    My son makes the counterintuitive point that Trump is the best candidate because he has the best character. For all of Cruz's professed Christianity and constitutionalism, for all of Kasich's Christian rhetoric and technocrat credentials, Trump is the one who appears to love the people more and have the purer motives. I would add that he is courageous and creative thinker, qualities needed in a leader in these dire times.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is exactly true. Thank you for raising a son who is able to rationally evaluate people. Before deciding to support Mr Trump, I went back and read full interviews, speeches, news articles, etc over the past 30 years and discovered a highly principled man whose Christianity is the type that my grandfather and other faithful American men of the mid-Century exhibited: rarely discussed but solidly lived. His adult children bear out his true character - they are truly his "fruit". Only a good and decent person can achieve that kind of success and raise healthy, mature, clean-living, generous, competent children.

      Delete
  20. As far as I'm concerned Trump's assertion that he will bend the military to his will and make them kill terrorist families was a shark jumping moment; I can't support him, but I certainly can't support Clinton. It's a condundrum.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Big mistake by the 'stop Trump' forces.

    Wheeling out Romney to dump on Trump was an error on par with the Pope's getting involved."

    I ask not as a doubter but merely to understand. Why is it that this decision is attributed not to Mr. Romney himself but to "the 'stop Trump' forces" more generally? Admitting that others may have urged it, was not the decision his alone?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ultimately, of course, the decision was Romney's. I am sure he was greatly encouraged and his speech had whole chunks borrowed from some of Rubio's speeches. It was a collective error in judgement.

      Delete
    2. Because Romney was and is a puppet of the GOP Establishment.

      He was earlier approached about running again and declined. Jeb! fizzled out, Rubio self-destructed, and the GOPe felt it was out of options.

      Delete
  22. Agree with Newt's remark about people just wanting someone to "kick some tables over in DC."

    Of course, no coverage on the Governor of Maine's recent endorsement of Trump because he would only support a Constitutionally eligible candidate. (Le Page's daughters were born in Canada.)

    No Cuban-Americans or Cubanadians.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Trump is a loud mouthed braggart of the first order and if you don't see the parallels in how Schwarzenegger started (and bow pathetically he ended) I can't convince you that he is not worth your vote. He has been on every side of every policy issue and therefore is completely untrustworthy. I hope to God he is not the nominee. I have never seen a man vying for leadership of this country who is almost incapable of verbalizing a coherent thought as he. He has no discernable moral center, no principles and far too many conflate what they want him to be rather than what he is. He is a thin skinned opportunist who "exaggerates" on so many things that you have to realize honesty is not in his DNA. I despise cults of personality and the people who worship and adore him strike as members of a cult.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All true, and yet he still seems to be the least of the evils available.
      afaict, the rest of the field just sits back and says: "Whoa... we're allowed to say that???"

      - reader #1482

      Delete
  24. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  25. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  28. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  29. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete