Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
Your host, PM 'Papa' Carpenter


  • ***


« William Bennett's dizzying moral compass | Main | Trump the Toddler II »

May 31, 2016


So what is Trump's policy on ....whatever? Answer: All of them. You'd almost think this is a handicap in an American election but it really isn't. The whole primary system that gives voice mostly to the committed and angry is designed to force politicians on both sides to the political equation to tack, as they say, left or right as required and basically lie their asses off. The great American political game is for people to guess who was being lied to, them or us. Humans being what they are, the temptation is always to believe that it is the other guys being fooled.

Trump strides the Republican stage because the Republicans made it all too obvious who the suckers were. It was all of them. So do they now actually give a rat's asshole what Trump's policies are? Hell no. The flip flopper paradigm that often works so well against political opponents (and the reason so much effort is made to get opposing pols on record as voting for poison pills) well that just isn't going to work with Trump. He has made a virtue of of his policy ignorance. It's his rope a dope negotiating strategy of keeping 'em guessing. And if a better way to hide one's stupidity and ignorance has ever been discovered I don't know when.

So I'm going to side absolutely with PM on this one. Donald Trump makes Woody Allen seem like a fortress of self-confidence. Contrary to popular belief Trump's skin is not orange, his flesh is. The skin is so thin as to be translucent. If this clown cannot be taken down by the simple expedient of mocking him personally on Twitter I will be shocked.

The downside is that Trump could become president in which case we will all get what we deserve. In that eventuality I offer a tip to Putin. If you want to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike against the US Mr Putin, just tweet a bunch of shit about Trump in the hours before your attack. He'll be too busy responding to do anything else.

Perhaps I'm naive, but I'm quite happy with the "rolling-thunder" Trump defining media blitzkieg being deferred and most Democrats wringing their hands for another couple of weeks as Elizabeth Warren keeps showing Twitter warriors how it's done. Another couple weeks of Republicans unifying around their nominee is exactly what we need preferably with more stories of Trump and Ryan coming to agreement on throwing entitlement beneficiaries under the bus. As a life long Democrat I have decades of emotional scars from watching the party prove their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. With the House, the Senate and most states lost to the Republicans and no cohesive vision to unify anyone but a left wing too small to move any purple state let alone any red state, I feared this election until the leading contenders or the GOP side became Trump and Cruz. Now I want the Democrats to be greedy for all the power they can get.

When the rolling thunder Trump defining blitz starts, I hope every ad and every anti-Trump speech starts with the Republican Party e.g. The Republican Party, the people bringing you voucherization of Medicare [fill in alternative odious policy of choice] have chosen this man as choice to be the next leader of the free world [insert crazy video clip A from library of top 1000 crazy Trump videos]. Or the party who brought you the birther movement [insert clip of Boehner refusing to deny birther claims] has chosen the head birther as its Presidential nominee and leader of the Party. Or Donald Trump saying out loud [insert bigot remarks video clip] what Republicans have been presenting as policy for years.

I'm obviously not a political consultant or an advertising expert, but you get the idea. If the Democrats fail to wrap the Donald in the GOP and the GOP in the Donald they are missing the opportunity of a lifetime. Remember it doesn't matter if the Donald is agreeing with the GOP line or has publicly rejected it - he's not going to look good defending movement conservatism And Republicans aren't going to look good with him running away from it.

Stu Stevens is even denser than I thought. The "race is static" and "summer blitz changed the race" thoughts are not at all contradictory. That he would think so makes me wonder if he knows what the word means. But you know, this is the guy who thought Romney had Virginia and Florida in the bag (oops!) and was poised to win in Colorado, Pennsylvania (oops!) and Ohio (which was close but Obama always had a small lead in). So we've established that he's not the sharpest tack in the drawer.

Obama was always solidly ahead but not running away with it - hence the race was static. But he was running for reelection on the basis of a good but unfinished record and amid an improving but still damaged economy. He was vulnerable and a good campaign from a good candidate might have beaten him. What the summer blitz did to "change" the race was to disqualify Romney as a "good candidate", at least in the context of 2012, which was a terrible fit for a rich stuffed shirt like Romney. It cemented Obama's advantage for the duration of the race, and made the 47% video even more of a disaster for Mittens than it would have been.

A candidate who couldn't be defined early and permanently as a heartless plutocrat might not have been vulnerable to such a blitz. I always thought Jon Huntsman would have beaten Obama if the GOP had been smart enough to nominate him. He was rich, yes, but he didn't come off as totally detached and oblivious like Romney.

The comments to this entry are closed.