Donald Trump

The Conservative Anti-Trump Club

George Will, Glenn Beck, Karl Rove, John Podhoretz and many others aim their poison pens at the GOP frontrunner


President Trump will have the classiest presidential Twitter feed ever. ||| Twitter

In my post yesterday about the #NROrevolt Twitter rebellion by restrictionist Donald Trump fans against the pro-restrictionism National Review, I mentioned that there was a rich stream of apoplectically anti-Donald Trump commentary emanating from within the conservative media. I thought it might be useful to catalogue some of the vituperative and often entertaining arguments thus far into one place. (For a previous post on Trump's conservative-media supporters, click here.)

The following list, encompassing neoconservatives, social cons, and libertarian-leaners, includes Bret Stephens, George Will, Glenn Beck, Michael Gerson, Charles C.W. Cooke, Karl Rove, Jonah Goldberg, John Podhoretz, Kevin D. Williamson, Mona Charen, Noah Rothman, Jennifer Rubin, and Max Boot. Those with multiple entries have theirs presented in chronological order. Please leave other suggestions in the comments. Without further ado:

Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 31, "The Donald and the Demagogues." Sample:

If by now you don't find Donald Trump appalling, you're appalling. […]

When people become indifferent to the ideas of their would-be leaders, those leaders become prone to dangerous ideas. Democracies that trade policy substance for personal charisma tend not to last as democracies. They become Bolivarian republics. Donald Trump may be America's Hugo Chávez, minus the political consistency.

You go, American Spectator! ||| The American Spectator
The American Spectator

George Will, Washington Post, Aug. 13, "Donald Trump is a counterfeit Republican." Sample:

He is an affront to anyone devoted to the project William F. Buckley began six decades ago with the founding in 1955 of the National Review — making conservatism intellectually respectable and politically palatable. Buckley's legacy is being betrayed by invertebrate conservatives now saying that although Trump "goes too far," he has "tapped into something," and therefore.?.?.?.

Therefore what? This stance — if a semi-grovel can be dignified as a stance — is a recipe for deserved disaster. Remember, Henry Wallace and Strom Thurmond "tapped into" things.

Like a dog! ||| Twitter

George Will, Washington Post, Aug. 21, "Trump's immigration plan could spell doom for the GOP." Sample:

It has come to this: The GOP, formerly the party of Lincoln and ostensibly the party of liberty and limited government, is being defined by clamors for a mass roundup and deportation of millions of human beings. To will an end is to will the means for the end, so the Republican clamors are also for the requisite expansion of government's size and coercive powers. […]

Today's big government finds running Amtrak too large a challenge, and Trump's roundup would be about 94 times larger than the wartime internment of 117,000 persons of Japanese descent. But Trump wants America to think big. The big costs, in decades and dollars (hundreds of billions), of Trump's project could be reduced if, say, the targets were required to sew yellow patches on their clothing to advertise their coming expulsion. There is precedent.

George Will, Aug. 26, Washington Post, "The havoc that Trump wreaks—on his own party." Sample:

Every sulfurous belch from the molten interior of the volcanic Trump phenomenon injures the chances of a Republican presidency. After Donald Trump finishes plastering a snarling face on conservatism, any Republican nominee will face a dauntingly steep climb to reach even the paltry numbers that doomed Mitt Romney. 

Hard not to laugh sometimes. ||| CNN

Glenn Beck, Facebook, Aug. 14, untitled. Sample:

He is part of the problem when he by his own admission, buys politicians; he said he identifies his "policies more as a democrat"; he makes President Obama look truly humble; he was very pro abortion until very recently; he still says "don't defund planned parenthood"; he is pro "assault weapon ban"; he is in favor of a wealth tax that would just "take money out of people's bank accounts"; he is for boots on the ground in Iraq and 'taking the oil' from the Iraqi people; he is a progressive 'republican'; he says single payer health care works; he said he would give people more than just Obama care; the First Lady would be the first to have posed nude in lesbian porno shots; he said that he keeps all the bibles he is given in a "special place" out side the city—and he only goes to church on Christmas and Easter; he is generally not a likable guy; he has around 16% favorability with Hispanics and he has gone bankrupt 4 times.

This is an honest question. I really want to understand:

Why are big name "conservatives" supporting him? 

YUGE, in fact. ||| CNN

Michael Gerson, Washington Post, Aug. 10, "Donald Trump will inevitably flame out. Here's why." Sample:

He thinks that a Trump-branded White House might actually be possible. It is not a view held by any serious political observer. That doesn't matter. Some public figures — Harold Stassen, Eugene McCarthy — never recovered from the beatific vision, and spent the rest of their lives trying to recover it.

Trump will flame out. And since he is constitutionally incapable of accepting fault, he will blame the GOP for arson. As someone prone to conspiracy theories — on presidential birth records, vaccines and the scheming Mexican government — Trump is probably gathering string to prove a plot against him involving Megyn Kelly, the GOP establishment and the American Gynecological and Obstetrical Society. 

Michael Gerson, Washington Post, Aug. 31, "Trump declares war on America's demography." Sample:

"I don't want it to be about me," Donald Trump explained at a recent event in Nashville. In other news: War is Peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

The Trump campaign is emphatically about Trump, in a manner typical of populism from Huey Long to Hugo Chavez. The people are infallible, but they require someone who embodies their collective wisdom. The country — betrayed by elites, beset by foreigners, exploited and humiliated at every turn — needs more than policy papers. It needs a savior. 

Reconsidering your life choices is hard to do while on live television. ||| Fox News
Fox News

Charles C.W. Cooke, National Review, Aug. 10, "The Trump Virus and Its Symptoms." Sample:

A plague is sweeping the land, gathering victims of all shapes and sizes and turning them into fools. Its name — for now — is Trumpism.

The Trump virus's primary effect is twofold: First, it implants in its hosts the unshakable conviction that one of the most execrable clowns in the history of these United States is a hero who deserves to be elevated to the White House; then, having inculcated the conceit, it removes the faculties that are necessary for its removal. The results are ruinous. 

Charles C.W. Cooke, National Review, Sept. 1, "Trump Has Succeeded in Convincing Conservatives to Discard their Principles Overnight." Sample:

A handful of months ago many of those who now make up Trump's rank-and-file were ideological perfectionists who hated the GOP's leadership, believed to their souls that the country was becoming a socialist hell-hole, and insisted vehemently that they had sat out the 2012 election because Mitt Romney was such a terrible squish. Today, by dint of some dark and unholy magic, these wannabe purists have hitched their wagons to Donald Trump, the greatest shape-shifter of them all. 

BOOM. ||| Twitter

Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal, Aug. 5, "Which Donald Trump Will Debate?" Sample:

Over the years he's held many conflicting positions on many important issues.

Will the Trump who walks on stage Thursday night be the one who in 1999 told CNN's Larry King that "I'm quite liberal and getting much more liberal on health care"? The one who wrote in his 2000 book, "The America We Deserve," that the U.S. should consider a single-payer health system like Canada's government-run plan? That system "helps Canadians live longer and healthier than Americans," this Trump wrote. "We need, as a nation, to re-examine the single-payer plan, as many individual states are doing." Or will debate viewers instead get the Donald Trump who earlier this year called ObamaCare a "filthy lie" and "total catastrophe"? 

I mean, it IS fun! ||| Twitter

Jonah Goldberg, Los Angeles Times, July 7, "Trunp is a bad deal for the GOP." Sample:

This attitude helps explain why Trump is such a fan of eminent domain. The man seeking the tea party's support loves to use the government to seize private land he can't — or doesn't want to — buy fairly.

Given the fetid swamp of sanctioned corruption that passes for commerce in New York, it's no wonder he sees nothing wrong with greasing the skids by funding liberal politicians. But one might expect a person who claims to be a conservative to at least pay some rhetorical tribute to virtue while admitting his vice. Alas, it is axiomatic that the shameless are incapable of exhibiting shame. 

Jonah Goldberg, National Review, Sept. 5, "No Movement That Embraces Trump Can Call Itself Conservative." Sample:

Well, if this is the conservative movement now, I guess you're going to have to count me out. […]

[I]f it's true that politicians can disappoint, I think one has to say that the people can, too. 

And when I say "the people" I don't mean "those people." I mean my people. I mean many of you[.] […]

It is catharsis masquerading as principle, venting and resentment pretending to be some kind of higher argument. Every principle used to defend Trump is subjective, graded on a curve. Trump is like a cat trained to piss in a human toilet. It's amazing! It's remarkable! Yes, yes, it is: for a cat. But we don't judge humans by the same standard. 

John Podhoretz, Commentary, July 27, "Trump: The Case for Despairing—About America." Sample:

The issue with Trump is that his approach can only be called "the politics of unseriousness." He engages with no issue, merely offers a hostile and pithy soundbite bromide about it. He yammers. He describes how wonderful things will be when he acts against something or other without explaining how he will act, what he will do, or how it will work.

The Trump view, boiled down: They're all idiots and I'm very rich and I know how to do things and if you say Word One against me I will say something incredibly nasty about you and who cares about how the Senate works or the House works or international alliances work or how treaties work or how anything works. That stuff is for sissies and losers and disasters. I know how to do it I me me me I me me I I me. And me. And I. 

John Podhoretz, New York Post, Aug. 25, "Donald Trump's appeal—an Obama for the right." Sample:

Candidates struggle to be consistent, or to explain their changes of opinion if they find themselves making those changes. Not Trump, who was able in less than one minute earlier this week to say he supports a flat tax — in which everyone in the country pays the same rate — and wants rich people to pay at a higher rate.

At any other time in American history, such an answer would make him a laughing-stock. Not Trump. He's laughing all the way to the polling bank. for the full comic. ||| @BiffSpackle

Kevin D. Williamson, National Review, June 16, "Witless Ape Rides Escalator." Sample:

Donald Trump, being Donald Trump, announced his candidacy at Trump Tower, making a weird grand entrance via escalator — going down, of course, the symbolism of which is lost on that witless ape. But who could witness that scene — the self-made man who started with nothing but a modest portfolio of 27,000 New York City properties acquired by his millionaire slumlord father, barely out of his latest bankruptcy and possibly headed for another one as the casino/jiggle-joint bearing his name sinks into the filthy mire of the one U.S. city that makes Las Vegas look respectable, a reality-television grotesque with his plastic-surgery-disaster wife, grunting like a baboon about our country's "brand" and his own vast wealth — and not see the peerless sign of our times? 

Kevin D. Williamson, National Review, June 21, "The Art of the Con, by Donald Trump." Sample:

Trump brings out two of the Right's worst tendencies: the inability to distinguish between entertainers and political leaders, and the habit of treating politics as an exercise in emotional vindication.

Whatever Trump's appeal is to the Right's populist elements, it isn't policy. He is a tax-happy crony capitalist who is hostile to free trade but very enthusiastic about using state violence to homejack private citizens — he backed the Kelo decision "100 percent" and has tried to use eminent domain in the service of his own empire of vulgarity — and generally has about as much command of the issues as the average sophomore at a not especially good college, which is what he was (sorry, Fordham) until his family connections got him into Penn.

Kevin D. Williamson, National Review, July 28, "Fifteen Elephants and a Clown." Sample:

If you are looking for a good reason to quit the Republican party (as I did some years ago), you can start with the company you are obliged to keep in the GOP: At the moment, about one in five Republicans are rallying to the daft banner of Donald Trump, heir to a splendid real-estate fortune and reality-show grotesque, who is a longtime supporter of, among other Democratic potentates, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who remains, for the moment, the candidate against whom the Republican nominee presumably will run. […] 

He has been a very public figure for decades, with a great deal of time, money, celebrity, business connections, and other resources to put in the service of something that matters. Seventy years in, and his curriculum vitae is remarkably light on public issues for a man who would be president. One would think that a life spent in public might inspire at least a smidgen of concern about the wide world. He might have had any sort of life he chose, and Trump chose a clown's life. 

Kevin D. Williamson, National Review, Aug. 6, "Donald Trump and the American Id." Sample:

Donald J. Trump feels the need to lie a great deal about Donald J. Trump's success. Example: He has claimed, repeatedly, that his Art of the Deal is the best-selling business book of all time. It has been very successful, selling around 1 million copies since its publication in 1987. But it hasn't sold a quarter of the books that the relatively recent Good to Great and Rich Dad, Poor Dad have sold, and its sales are barely a rounding error on those of such perennials as How to Win Friends and Influence People and The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. Walter Isaacson's recent biography of Steve Jobs has sold three times as many copies as The Art of the Deal. Selling 1 million books is no mean feat, but where Trump is concerned, Trump deals exclusively in superlatives: the biggest, the best, the classiest, etc.

None of that is ever true, of course. Trump-branded shirts and ties at Macy's weren't the best, finest, classiest, most stylish shirts and ties to be had; they weren't even the best shirts you could get at Macy's. Trump-branded casinos and hotels are not the best, most luxurious, most high-end accommodations in the world — they're embarrassing, and the people sipping cocktails at the Sky Lobby bar at the Mandarin Oriental in Vegas are not secretly wishing they were at the Trump. Trump Tower is far from the nicest residential building in its neighborhood, much less in all of New York City. Trump-branded golf courses are not the greatest golf courses in the world. The Apprentice isn't the top-rated reality-television show in the history of that sorry genre.

This is what rich-kid's disease looks like when the rich kid is pushing 70.

Mona Charen, National Review, July 10, "The Trump Sideshow Plays Right into Democrats' Hands." Sample:

Just when the Republican party needs finesse and sensitivity when discussing immigration; just when it needs to focus on issues that unite all sectors of the electorate, including Hispanic and Asian voters; it gets a blowhard with all the nuance of a grenade. […]

Trump has achieved his objective — making himself the center of attention — but he has subtracted from our sum total of knowledge about the immigration issue. According to an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Immigration Policy Center, only 1.6 percent of immigrant males between the ages of 18 and 39 are incarcerated, compared with 3.3 percent of the native-born. There are terrible stories of immigrants committing crimes, and it's certainly fair to demand that criminal aliens be deported with dispatch. Sanctuary cities are a disgrace. But just as Dylann Roof doesn't represent white people, Mexican rapists don't represent anyone other than themselves either.

Mona Charen, Chicago Sun-Times, July 23, "Visions of a post-Trump GOP." Sample:

Whatever one's views about immigration, the very worst way to broach the topic is to smear all Mexican illegals as "rapists" and criminals. It's obviously false. It's not even true that illegal immigrants commit a disproportionate share of crimes. Honest anti-immigration groups like the Center for Immigration Studies agree that first-generation immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than native-borns. (And immigration rates are falling. 

Mona Charen,, Aug. 21, "Taking Our Country Back: From Whom?" Sample:

Illegal immigration is declining. Between 1990 and 2007, the number of illegal immigrants tripled. In 2000, an estimated 1.6 million illegals entered the United States. Since 2012, that number has dropped to about 400,000 (even accounting for the flood of underage migrants last year).

We've built fences along all but the most inaccessible areas along the border. Over the past decade, we've spent $10.7 billion on fences, cameras and other measures, including doubling the number of border patrol agents to 18,000. We've also spent billions on biometric identity management and other things, bringing the total expenditure for border control to $16.2 billion last year. Those truly serious about ending illegal immigration altogether must grapple with national identity cards. Another fence isn't going to do it. Forty percent of illegals are visa overstays.

Noah Rothman, Commentary, Aug. 25: "Never Fall in Love." Sample:

Donald Trump is a Republican out of convenience. Since Ronald Reagan, he has supported every president of both parties when they were popular, and he has turned on them when they fell out of public favor toward the end of their terms in office. It makes sense that Trump would eschew fealty to a party with which he is only marginally affiliated. Moreover, it isn't surprising that Trump's supporters, many of whom are voters with even less attachment to the GOP or are outright hostile toward the Republican Party, should fail to see this as a flaw in the candidate's character.

Rejecting absolute fidelity is a condition that goes both ways. Should Trump emerge the party's standard-bearer, it would signal a rejection of almost every principle for which conservatism stands. 

Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post, Aug. 9, "Donald Trump is no bully. He's a crybaby." Sample:

Trump and his supporters then spent a good deal of Friday bellyaching that Fox had been too tough on him. He crudely insulted Megyn KellyHe whined, "I think the questions to me — and that's why I'm so honored — the questions to me were much tougher than the questions to anybody else." Actually, they weren't. Trump's defenders deep in the heart of the right-wing echo chamber were incensed Trump would be asked to defend his record and egregious language. For a group that dishes it out unmercifully to every insufficiently conservative Republican and to all liberals, they sure seem squeamish when their pet candidate is on the receiving end. […]

The problem is that Trump isn't a real candidate and is not a real front-runner. He's the flavor of the month, the Don Rickles of politics, a bully and a buffoon. He brags that he made millions in Atlantic City while firing over a thousand workers and that he gave money to Hillary Clinton to get her to come to his wedding. (Why would he want her there? No other GOP contender would.) He revels in his ignorance. As such, he is getting nowhere near the White House (even by invitation). 

Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post, Aug. 30, "The anti-Trump angst grows." Sample:

These Republicans, on one hand, despair that an egocentric bully with no discernible political principles should be leading in polls. They observe that his incoherent mix of authoritarianism, protectionism and cronyism is antithetical to the modern conservative movement, and in tone is 180 degrees from Ronald Reagan. But they also note that he is building an organization and displaying "P.T. Barnum showmanship," as one veteran of GOP presidential campaigns put it. They shake their heads, unable to fully comprehend Trump's appeal, but more than that they are disturbed by the rest of the field. They do not believe Trump will be the nominee, but high hopes for a deep, quality field have not been met. In particular, they are worried that Trump's embrace of "nativism" will doom the party if mimicked by others. 

Max Boot, Commentary, Aug. 18, "Donald Trump's Remarkably Consistent Inconsistency." Sample:

That Washington Post article, damning as it is, barely scratches the surface of his confusion. This is, after all, the candidate who in March slammed Obama's handling of Ukraine, saying: "We should definitely do sanctions, and we have to show some strengths. I mean, Putin has eaten Obama's lunch, therefore our lunch, for a long period of time."

And now Trump has this to say about Ukraine: "I don't like what's happening with Ukraine. But that's really a problem that affects Europe a lot more than it affects us. And they should be leading some of this charge… Why are we leading the charge in Ukraine?"

I will be updating this post with new additions.

NEXT: Can a Nice Muslim Girl from Maryland Really Identify as Jewish?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The is running a video on their front page today about how Trump will change the GOP.

    I suspect this may signal peak Trump.

    1. First they ignored him, then they laughed at him, then they fought him, and then he lost.

      1. I would not vote for the guy but maybe the anti-establishment vibe is more than just yokels getting pissed. It’s a kooky site but…

        Another take on Trump

        My take is Trump is he not fit for office but is very different than a career politician which is what I think people are craving…a not the political class candidate.. For the “I’m not a politician”, Fiorina is the best choice – imo.

        1. My take on Trump…

        2. If that’s an example of the average Trump supporter’s intellectual capacity, I’m not impressed.

          Also who puts black text on a red background? Seriously.

          1. Karl Rove on Trump:

            “We need, as a nation, to re-examine the single-payer plan, as many individual states are doing.” Or will debate viewers instead get the Donald Trump who earlier this year called ObamaCare a “filthy lie” and “total catastrophe”?

            Tell me Karl. Will we get the Bush who says “Read my lips, no new taxes” or will we get the Bush who wants to take us into yet another war because they have “weapons of mass destruction”?

            Which lying Bush are you supporting this year Karl?

        3. I like the fact that Trump has taken on the criminal alien problem. My preference would be to shoot them at the border, and force the rest (through denying them any thing they might possibly want: Jobs, housing, medical care, schooling, police and fire protection services, access to courts, welfare) to self-deport. But his approach is probably more “centrist” than mine! 😉

        4. Trumps only saving grace is not widely supported here in Reason, due to its violation of the ideal of open borders. And that must be the reason it doesn’t get notice, except obliquely as Mona Charon (she, like this site and most of the articles I like) notes that Repubs should touch illegal immigration “obliquely.” Obama is pushing the envelope-flying people in from Honduras, welcoming thousands every year across the border and shuffling them into counties across the country, and now we are starting with a mention of 10,000 Syrian refugees.

          Mona will be faced with an open deluge, and dems holding sick and dying kids out to the repubs at public gatherings, saying “will you kill us? Please help!” Yes, of course-try nuance! With a pushy show, all that’s left is rude, tough-love “get out” a-la Trump, or mumbling agreement after trying to do a nuanced dance. My only reason for Trump support, with his many, many issues-is this. All of the others are barely picking it up, but the most savvy are trying to at least act like they will. As soon as Cruz, Walker, or Carson gets firmly behind the same Ann Coulter based program, Trump will start to crumble in comparison. But only if one of them can actually zip up his or her spine, drink a can of liquid spine, and do the job (this is a softer, gender-neutered version of the salty Navy “zip up your man suit, drink a can of man, and do your d***n job.”

      2. Blah, blah, blah. What we have here is another presidential election where a good percentage of the GOP electorate stays home and a democrat, probably Hillary, wins.

        IT’S ALL OVER FOLKS! And the socialists have won.

        1. The international socialists or the national socialists? The Dems or the GO Pee urinalysis party?

          1. To think that these commentators actually get paid for their thoughts. Who would have thought.

    2. Isn’t Peak Trump similar to Peak Derp? Can it ever truly be achieved?

      1. It’s getting Trumpier, but there is plenty of room for more Trump!

    3. I read a poll that the restrictionist xenophobe sexist nativist racist candidate would get 25% of the black vote.

      1. Though that poll may have been taken in India.


          1. DERKA DRRRRRRRRR!!!!

      2. And a share of the Hispanic vote comparable to that of Romney, if I recall correctly

        1. Corning gets high off of cognitive dissonance.

          1. Bret Stephens, George Will, Jesse Walker, Glenn Beck, Michael Gerson, Shikha Dalmia, Charles C.W. Cooke, Karl Rove, Scott Shackford. Jonah Goldberg, John Podhoretz, Kevin D. Williamson, Matt Welch, Noah Rothman, Peter Suderman, and Max Boot. are white men….

            ….or the sword tip of Storm Front.

            1. …what?

        2. “So?”

          bla bla SJW cosmoKochcuckatarainservatves something something glass houses.

          1. That may have came off as snarky but I’m honestly curious what that poll result is supposed to show? That because 25% of black people might vote for him,Trump isn’t a xenophobic restriction playing to racial anxiety? That seems to be how the statistic has been used, but that only makes sense if you think black people can’t be xenophobic restrictionists that have racial anxiety over Hispanics. Which I don’t believe for a second.

            1. There is more evidence in that statistic then the evidence given by Reason that Trump and his supporters are “restrictionist xenophobe sexist nativist racists”.

              Quit carrying the water for lying SJWs please.

              1. “restrictionist xenophobe sexist nativist racists”.


                “restrictionist xenophobe sexist nativist racists who influence and are influence by politics in India”.

                If you can’t see the apoplectic hysteria emanating like a mushroom cloud from this site over the past few weeks I can’t help you.

                1. I honestly wish Reason would do those video Budget meetings like they did in the past.

                  Watching a troop of howling monkeys throw their feces at a photo of Trump taped to a white board would make great entertainment.

                  1. I honestly wish you’d STFU because you have nothing of value to say.

    4. “The conservative anti-Trump club?” That’s hilarious. George Will HATED Ronald Reagan when he was running for president. Please give me Reason’s definition of “conservative” ha, ha, ha.

  2. The big costs, in decades and dollars (hundreds of billions), of Trump’s project could be reduced if, say, the targets were required to sew yellow patches on their clothing to advertise their coming expulsion. There is precedent.

    BOOM. Headshot.

    1. What a fresh idea: Compare somebody you don’t like to Hitler. I’ll bet this will catch on.

      1. You know who else compared someone they didn’t like to Hitler…

        1. Everybody too lazy to make a real argument?

          1. Frankly, I’m a little surprised I didn’t have to get a dictionary for Will’s entry. He’s very fond of high fallutin’ language and obscure references. It’s refreshing that he actually made a direct, understandable point.



              1. Sir, your shit is all retarded in the classic tradition of libertarian internet commenters.

                1. TIWTANF…no, wait…

            2. IOW, he usually talks like a fag and his shit’s all retarded?

          1. I’m Almanian and I approve this message

        2. Hitler?

        3. Martin Luther?

      2. You know who else had an idea they thought would catch on…

        1. L. Ron Hubbard?

      3. You fools are obviously too young to remember the time Trump plotted to overthrow the government from a table at TGIFridays.

      4. Roger that. Nobody famous wants their ideas contrasted with National Socialist ideology.

  3. “Why are we leading the charge in Ukraine?””


    1. “One, two, three
      what’re we fightin’ for?
      Hey hey I don’t give a damn.
      We’re all headed to Kazakhstan!”

  4. Finally, a Trump post worth reading rather than skipping to the comments.

    1. WHAT?


    2. I too was hugely entertained by the GOP pissing on each other rather than making everyone else piss in a cup or be fired. I want everyone to pay close attention and remember what those jackanapes said about each other when it comes time to cast a vote.

  5. I figured Rubin would be all for the Trumpolalooza

    1. I know, that one surprised me.

    2. I think she just needed a break from her weekly anti-Paul diatribe.

  6. I still have a hard time believing Trump will spend much of his own money on this, and I have an even harder time believing that anybody–including his supporters–are about to send him money.

    1. Somehow he always manages to con a few more investors. That part of his persona is actually interesting.

    2. I don’t know. Trump is going to come out in the black on this, I suspect. He may be killing his “Apprentice” brand, but I get the impression he’s tired of the show by now.

      1. I would agree with you. He could have a nightly, or weekly talk show and it would get huge (that’s right) ratings.


  7. the First Lady would be the first to have posed nude in lesbian porno shots

    Well, maybe the first one to have published photos of nude lesbian porno shots. I’m looking at you, Mamie Eisenhower.

  8. “If by now you don’t find Donald Trump appalling, you’re appalling. ”

    It’s almost like I wrote that.

    1. You’re a towel!

    2. Truly an intimidating shot at framing an argument.

  9. He’s the flavor of the month, the Don Rickles of politics

    I think that’s unfair to Mr. Rickles

    1. Yeah, Don Rickles was at least actually funny.

  10. Well the republicans deserve every bit of Trump and what he brings, this is what they get for jamming Mccain, Romney and trying to fit in Jebs portly form up their constituents assholes the last 3 cycles, sitting on their hands with a super majority in the senate and house while the president writes executive order after executive order, and the perceived caving on the best chance for gov, reform in a while with the shutdown. Trump is the bases retarded solution for the republican parties collective sins and fuck is he retarded.

    1. I have to say that while the result of Biden vs Trump election would be a sign of the apocalypse the ride down to hell would at least be a fun one.

      1. Camaros, bad hair, and trophy wives for everybody.

        1. Have you seen my wife Melania? her boobs are uuuuge and her cooch is smelted gold which is why she would make the perfect Vice President or whatever.

          1. But can she fire a shotgun into the air?

          2. She will have a merkin women will tremble to behold.

    2. This is the main reason for Trump’s popularity.

      1. Well I wouldn’t say main reason. The main reason is that the electorate is criminally stupid.

        1. well stupid is the wrong word, lets say ignorant/uninformed.

          1. I don’t blame people for not paying attention to politics- it sucks and makes you bitter and most normal people are focused on living their lives, which have nothing to do with politics. I don’t consider that ignorant or stupid.

            The problem is the goddamn politicians that are constantly pushing for more power, more of your money and less liberty FOR YOU.

            And paying attention to politics is their reason for existing.

            1. This is perfect. When my friends of family say something like “hey, you like politics…” I usually interrupt them and tell them I actually don’t at all. I’m interested in politics like I’m interested in bear hunting, which is to say only when one wanders up in my yard.

              They don’t usually get my analogy.

            2. I personally was thrilled to not even recognise any of those whining fussbudgets except Sturmbannfuehrer Will, whose screed I despised before it was even fashionable.

    3. In a certain sense, I agree. The thing is, the country, even more than the GOP elites who made these mistakes, are going to be the ones to suffer the resulting Clinton administration.

      1. It all makes sense now. Trump is a plant designed to make Hillary Clinton look like an attractive alternative.

        1. I still suspect this could be the case.

          1. In all seriousness…I’d rather vote for Hillary than Trump. Hillary is a corrupt plutocrat, but at least her craven pandering would keep her from doing anything too stupid or idealistic. Trump would be an absolute disaster.

            1. This. There’s also the GOP control of the Congress too consider. Hillary: vote for the crook!

            2. at least her craven pandering would keep her from doing anything too stupid or idealistic

              Please. This is a woman that allowed Top Secret and other classified information to be passed on a non-encrypted server that appears to have been run out of a Democrat jock-sniffer’s closet in Colorado.

              The only reason she’s survived this long politically is because of Billy’s shine and the media carrying her water for the last 20+ years.

            3. Yes, if there were no choices other than looters, that might not be so bad…

  11. I like the second Williamson article. He’s hitting Trump where it hurts.

    1. He’s not-too-subtly calling Trump’s campaign queer performance art, perfect really – the trumpen proletariat are the true “chucks elevators”

      1. Fucking iPhone.. “chucks elevators” = “cuckservatives”

        1. “chucks elevators” is the most-awesome thing in quite some time – and I think will be for quite some time

          1. “Chuck’s Elevator” only goes down, ifunowhutimean.

            1. I’m talking about oral sex.

          2. Esp. if it’s “chucks” in the sense of Chux disposable diapers.

      2. I like the phrase “trumpen proletariat”, you should use it more often.

      3. Not true!

        I specifically asked KW about this in a post on NRO and he rejected my suggestion that Trump was a performance artist. Of course, KW is becoming a performance artist too and probably doesn’t want the competition from Trump.

  12. George Will has been a RINO for years now, Glen Beck is jealous because Trump has taken his standing as the biggest clown. The others I’m not familiar with their work

    1. Um… no.

  13. Can any of theses quoted people even buy pants? Because Trump can buy pants with politicians in them. And that’s why he’s the only chance to restore Murcia to greatness with all those things that made us great in the past, like taxes and universal healthcare.

    1. Hell, Trump can even buy pantsuits with politicians in them!

      1. He really is the Nicole of candidates

  14. “This degenerate ‘Walsh‘ character is trying to take shots now. Love watching him fail!
    Not a clue. Robert Redford loves me! #LosersWhineLouder”

    1. The refined pinkie work really makes that photo sing.

      1. It’s almost like you’re channeling Foggy Nelson

  15. We have entered a bold new era of political muppetry.
    Dance, muppets!

  16. I’m trying to understand his appeal, so let me just ask the commenters here that like him. Why?

    1. they are retarded.

      1. *notes Idle Hands’ support for Trump – and reason*

        1. No mention of Idle Hand’s gender neutral/third person perspective.
          *notes Almanian is a Cis-gendered monster*

    2. IMO, a major factor is that he always appears to be enjoying himself. He’s not acting stressed, depressed, sad, tired, hangdog, etc. He’s confident, he’s always happy/excited/animated. He projects a state of mind that people want for themselves.

      What’s more, not only does he not lay out “plans” outlining how he will achieve a policy goal?he has also reached new levels of not having policy goals other than his followers’ happiness. If you see him talk about what he will do, he says things like, “I will be great on [X]. You’re going to love it.” He doesn’t tell you anything at all about what his position is?only that it is great and you will love it. It’s 100% emotional language. “I will be the best jobs president God ever created. You will be so proud.” No content other than positive emotions about him and his campaign, and negative ones about others.

      1. Nikki is right, trust me.

        Lynch is a stupid loser from loser-town, believe me.

        1. You’re going to love my plans for the future Crusty. Love them. We’re going to have china and India pay for ice cream cake for everyone. I will renegotiate the deal with Iran so they don’t get nukes and we get to build hotels there. Mexico will build a wall because I say so and it will be UGE!.

          1. Where do I send you money?

            1. Look I’m really rich, I don’t want your money, okay. Here I’ll send you a beautiful letter.

              1. +1 Here is your hope, keep the change

          2. Way too specific, my friend. What if some people in the audience don’t want ice cream or cake, and would prefer muffins?

            1. Here come my critics saying I said I would give people Ice cream and cake. When did I say that, ’cause I didn’t, I don’t know where you people get this stuff. The truth is you people know you can trust me. Look I build things it’s what I do. If you don’t believe me read the art of the deal it’s all right there.

              1. Is there a movie version of that book, because I ain’t doin no reading.

                1. Yes, but for legal reasons they had to change his name to Gordon Gecko.

            2. Ice cream for some, miniature american flags for others.

              *crowd cheers*

      2. You know, I don’t know anything about Donald Trump, but when I’m elected, I’ll know way more than you’ll ever know, Nicole. Trust me.

        Almanian for President – 2016
        Probably Won’t Make it Any Worse

        And I’m definitely not Donald Trump.

      3. Like Bush, who said he wanted to be the education president.

      4. What do you have against great things that you are going to love?

        1. Nothing! No one could object to that!

      5. You’re gonna like the way I govern. I guarantee it.

    3. Because….fuck you, that’s why?

    4. My impression is that it’s their attempt at sticking it to THEM. Trump has done a very good job of presenting to low-education conservatives the dichotomy of US and THEM. If your not on Donald Trump’s side, you’re either one of THEM or you’re just a loser.

      It’s really weird. I’ve conversed with people on conservative websites who support the guy. They really divide the GOP into the GOP Establishment and Donald Trump supporters. I’ve tried explaining to them that there are guys running who aren’t part of the GOP establishment who actually are conservative, and its like talking to a brick wall. They’ll either report you (hiding your comment) or they’ll come up with some spiel about how the actual conservatives don’t have a chance. And then they’ll treat any criticism you have of Trump like it’s coming from the GOP establishment.

      He’s done a very good job of tapping into people’s understandable resentment and channeling it for his own purposes.

      1. TURMP is cashing in on half-literate yokel resentment. He’s a genius.

        1. To some extent, yes. The strange thing is that, in some ways, their frustration mirrors what I think a lot of GOP libertarians feel. An out-of-touch GOP establishment that is a lot more interested in accruing their own political power and privilege provides an unfortunately ripe target for both intelligent and stupid criticisms.

          1. But that’s what all even slightly large organiz’ns tend to get like, esp. political ones. To the extent it happened to the GOP, it was complete over a century ago.

            I don’t think it can be helped. Get enough people together for a big enough effort, a small # of them pretty much have to become professionals at it. Division of labor. The organiz’n’s far too big to accurately reflect any member’s desires, so what is leadership to do but continue to secure their own leadership?

            1. Well, yeah. But, eventually, people grow dissatisfied with that leadership unless it reforms itself.

          2. That’s why it’s a waste of time to engage the unwashed masses. We should focus on talking over their heads to the elites.

            1. That works great all the way up until the guillotine blades start falling.

              1. That’s why we have so many guns.

                1. The proles you hate own them too.

                  1. That’s fine. As libertarians we have no intention of forcing the proles to do anything in particular. If each side has enough firepower to dissuade the other, that’s great.

                    1. If each side has enough firepower to dissuade the other, that’s great.

                      Please. People who talk like this would melt in less than 15 minutes if shit ever actually got real.

                      Talking over the proles heads, as Cytodoofus proposes, is a guarantee for revolution. It’s like certain libertarians never took a history course.

      2. He’s done a very good job of tapping into people’s understandable resentment and channeling it for his own purposes.

        You know who else tapped into people’s understandable resentment and channeled it for his own purposes?

        1. Does it have to do with the saying, “The devil find things for Idle Hands to do”?

      3. Trump has done a very good job of presenting to low-education conservatives the dichotomy of US and THEM.

        Nothing “low-education” about conservatives realizing that, if conservatives are “US”, then the Republican Party leadership is definitely “THEM”.

        1. No, but Trump supporters scream ‘low education’ for a thousand other reasons.

    5. Resentment for GOP leadership+ he tells people they don’t like to fuck off+ (100 years of cult of personality x celebrity status)

      1. But this is what I don’t get. People don’t like the GOP leadership but if you actually try to distill some of Trump’s potential policies, they are closer to the Democrats than the GOP leadership. Healthcare is a great example. If people are fed up with the GOP for not standing up for conservative values, how is Trump a better alternative?

        1. Because he latched on to the one issue that a lot of his supporters feel the most insecure about. For a lot of Trump supporters, immigration probably does pose a real threat, that of getting underbid by immigrant labor. Add to that probably a good amount of concern about a changing culture and you get an issue a demagogue like Trump can latch onto.

          1. Yup. Trump supporters are all the losers from globalization. Out of work factory workers and low-skill laborers who have seen their jobs move to Mexico and China. They’re pining for the days of “Motor City” Detroit and steel mills in Pennsylvania. When Trump says “Make America Great Again”, they think about Cadillacs and interstate highways and heavy industry. Trump is a guy who builds buildings, that’s what he means to them – construction projects, infrastructure, blue-collar jobs.

          2. Yup. Trump supporters are all the losers from globalization. Out of work factory workers and low-skill laborers who have seen their jobs move to Mexico and China. They’re pining for the days of “Motor City” Detroit and steel mills in Pennsylvania. When Trump says “Make America Great Again”, they think about Cadillacs and interstate highways and heavy industry. Trump is a guy who builds buildings, that’s what he means to them – construction projects, infrastructure, blue-collar jobs.

          3. ^^ This!

            I have a family member who is a father of three trying to make it as a General Contractor. He hates that Illegal immigrants come in and underbid him on all his jobs, and that it is really truly fucking up his life.

            It is not easy to rationally explain to such a person that they are arguing for a subsidy, that they could shift the work they do to make it more value add (and therefore earn a higher payment) or anything like that. He is staring at a dwindling bank account and is getting pretty close to crisis mode. He’ll take the first asshat (Trump) promising to get him back to the glory days of the Housing Bubble.

    6. What IH said. As annoying as Trump is, his supporters are even worse. Please don’t engage them. I’d rather see Tony, PB, Am Soc, and JackAss show up and spray santorum all over the thread than read the idiotic mouth breathing of a bunch of retarded Trump supporters. Hopefully they’re all too busy stuffing their faces with cake to respond.

    7. “so let me just ask the commenters here that like him. Why?”

      No one here likes him.

      Though there is an unhealthy obsession over him by many of those who claim to hate him.

      1. I’m entertained by him. I think he is pissing off a lot of the right people. I don’t think that he would even make a worse President than some of the other candidates.

        But like him? No. I hate him less than some of his competitors.

      2. I actually would have pegged you as someone that at least is sympathetic to his policies, even if you don’t like him. Along with a few others. Maybe I’ve been misinterpreting people.

      3. I wouldn’t vote for the guy either. He’s a blowhard, he’s old as shit, and he doesn’t understand how government works other than for crony purposes.

        His only value to me is that he appears to have a good chance to blow the Republican Party to shit, and given that NRO is basically a mouthpiece of the Republican establishment at this point, it’s not hard to see why Trump’s squatting in Goldberg’s and Williamson’s heads rent-free.

  17. Matt: Thank you for not using the word ‘huge’. I’m really, really starting to hate its little guts.

  18. OWWWWW

    WE want the Trump!

    Give up the Trump! Ohhhhhh

    WE need the Trump!

    Gotta have that Trump! Ohhhhhh

    WE got the Trump!

    He just got a bump! Ohhhhhhh

    WE need the Trump!

    We gotta have that Trump!


    1. We got a ‘UUUUUUUUUUGE type of thing
      goin’ down gettin’ down.
      There’s a whole lotta retard goin’ round.

      We got a ‘UUUUUUUUUUGE type of thing
      goin’ down gettin’ down.
      There’s a whole lotta retard goin’ round.Ohhhhhhhhhh


  19. When did the National Review become conservative?

    It has written that Trotsky was just misunderstood.…..n-schwartz

  20. Do we have any genuine Trumpalos here?

  21. Ok, Trump isn’t a conservative or a libertarian. We get it.

    So… tell me what conservatives and libertarians have ever done for me, such that I should actually give a shit? I suspect I’m not the only one who’s had quite enough shit from conservatives and libertarians. Go Trump!


        1. We’d better laugh at these idiots, otherwise we’d have to cry.



    2. I want my cut! Gimme my cut of the loot!
      I don’t want to faggot mexican rapists stealin my job!

      1. I wouldn’t worry – the only thing more minuscule than the chance of any faggot mexican rapists stealin my job is *your* chance of stealing my job. 😉

    3. …what conservatives and libertarians have ever done for me, such that I should actually give a shit?

      And let me guess, Donald Trump personally delivers you an ice cream cake every other Wednesday.

      This is a libertarian site. People here tend to think libertarian policies are the best for the country. Most of us think that Donald Trump’s arguments and policies are just plain silly for much the same reason. If you can explain to us – substantively, not using wishful or magical thinking – why we’re wrong and Mr. Trump is right, I’ll certainly entertain the idea. Otherwise, if you’ve “had quite enough shit from conservatives and libertarians”, you might want to consider visiting a site that isn’t devoted to libertarian thought and ideas.

      1. What’s he done for me? For a start, he’s already demolished the libertarians without even trying, which seriously needed to happen. Maybe you can make a comeback in about 30 years, if you can reconstitute your movement as something more substantial than free market SJWs.

        Hey, I thought you guys were all about creative destruction. Consider yourselves creatively destroyed!

        1. So basically, you’re mad that libertarians aren’t racist and sexist enough for you.
          That’s a new one.

          FWIW, I’m glad people like you don’t call themselves libertarians.

          1. …Something something COSMOZ!!11!!!!! …mumble mumble COCKTAIL PARTIEZ!11!!!!!1!!!! /NB

        2. 3/10 creative but ultimately unsatisfying

          1. I liked the “free market SJWs”. Kind of a riff on “left libertarian”.

            Mind you, I’ve seen more rainbow-farting unicorns than I have either free market SJWs or left libertarians.

            1. Unless by SJWs, he means those that stick up for civil liberties, gay marriage, drug legalization, etc.

              1. That sounds awfully close to just being a liberal. It’s one thing to be principled and sympathetic, but “sticking up for” or “fighting for a cause” sound like typical Democrat candidate platform issues.

        3. So, your big prize is that he’s attacked people you don’t like. And that’s an achievement to you? What a sad, sad little man you are. You know, even if Trump does get elected, you’re still just going to be the bagger at the local Shop-N-Save. And whether it’s Mexicans or automation, you’re still going to have to take a pay cut sooner or later.

          1. So, your big prize is that he’s attacked people you don’t like.

            Don’t underestimate the effectiveness of that approach. Trump understands TEAM dynamics.

            He’s mastered and turned it against the current beneficiaries, the GOP establishment. That he’s more establishmentary on most thing than the people he’s aiming to replace is irrelevant to him.

        4. “For a start, he’s already demolished the libertarians without even trying, which seriously needed to happen. Maybe you can make a comeback in about 30 years, if you can reconstitute your movement as something more substantial than free market SJWs”

          How exactly has he demolished libertarians? What were libertarians doing that required their “demolition?”

          Also……free market SJW, seriously?

          1. He’s mad that we like free markets and we’re against racism.
            Why can’t we hate free markets AND black people, at the same time, huh?

          2. How exactly has he demolished libertarians? What were libertarians doing that required their “demolition?”

            That’s how.

            1. So he’s demolished libertarians by being more popular than a candidate that libertarians were divided on to begin with do to his social conservatism and support for interventionism? A better question is: When did Rand Paul become the entirety of libertarianism? And if you truly believe that libertarianism rises and falls on the shoulders of one flawed politician you no nothing about the ideology to begin with.

      2. And let me guess, Donald Trump personally delivers you an ice cream cake every other Wednesday.

        ICE KREAM CAKE IZ FER FAGGITS!!!!1!!! REEL CAKE OR GTFO, FAG!!!11!!!!! /Napoleon Bonaparte

        Remember, they all want cake, not ice cream cake. That’s too confusing a concept for Trump supporting retards to get their heads around.


  22. Trump is the candidate for the “Right Wing” FEELZ voter.



  24. I predict Trump is going to “grow”, as far-ahead front runners tend to. By 3 months from now, he’ll no longer e much associated as a candidate w the characteristics he’s associated w now.

  25. Donald Trump trump de trump. Trump de trumpity trumpy trump. Until one day, the trumpa trumpa trumpatrump. Trump de trump. Da teedily dumb. From the creators of Der, and Tum Ta Tittaly Tum Ta Too, Donald Trump is Da Trump Dee Trump Da Teetley Trumpee Trumpee Dumb. Rated PG-13.

    1. Once upon a time and a very good time it was there was a moocow coming
      down along the road and this moocow that was coming down along the road
      met a nicens little boy named baby tuckoo…

      His father told him that story: his father looked at him through a
      glass: he had a hairy face.

      He was baby tuckoo. The moocow came down the road where Betty Byrne
      lived: she sold lemon platt.

      O, the wild rose blossoms
      On the little green place.

      He sang that song. That was his song.

      O, the green wothe botheth.

      When you wet the bed first it is warm then it gets cold. His mother put
      on the oilsheet. That had the queer smell.

      His mother had a nicer smell than his father. She played on the piano
      the sailor’s hornpipe for him to dance. He danced:

      Tralala lala,
      Tralala tralaladdy,
      Tralala lala,
      Tralala lala.

  26. As a former conservative and a lapsed Republican, Trump’s success in the early stages of the 2016 primary run have taught me one thing. I left the GOP 25 years ago after GHWB made it clear that it is a hopeless organization to advance libertarianism.

    I still thought that, on the whole, conservatives were somewhat less ignorant and significantly more principled than progressives and “liberals”. This was true of my own conservative acquaintances and the writings of conservative intellectuals, but Trump’s success has completely disabused me of notion that observation could be extended to conservatives in general. On average they seem just as clueless as progressives — just as ignorant and just as unprincipled.

    1. But Trump’s support doesn’t come particularly from “conservatives”. Look at the polls. He does better with “liberals” & moderates than w “conservatives”. Don’t forget that there’s no ideologic test to be a Republican.

      1. Yeah, working-class whites who hate immigration and trade because they are threatened by foreign labor. They’re totally happy with big government handing out money for big instrastructure projects, or protecting domestic industries via tarriffs. The “Buy American”, “America First” , they-took-r-jobs crowd.

        1. I think it was John who said Trump is our Berlusconi (I’m pretty sure it was John, since whoever it was spelled the name wrong). It is proving more accurate all the time. Trump is who “the people” want. That he doesn’t really have anything substantive to say about philosophy of government is just a reflection of modern attitudes. Nobody cares about right or wrong any more; from Clinton to Bush to Obama to Trump, the entire thing is a farce. If you’re going to have a clown, you might as well have a good one.

  27. By “conservative”, you mean “Republican Party hacks”, right? Most of these writers are conservative in name only; they’re generally predictable ciphers for the Team Red establishment, who are shitting in their pants over a reality TV host who send Teflon coated.

    They clearly don’t understand the voters who are currently supporting Trump. These are the people the Party scared into voting for them in 2010 by claiming Obamacare was a threat to Medicare; they clearly don’t have a problem with “socialism”, just benefits going to people who aren’t them. Trump during the debate made it clear single payer was an idea that should be looked into and his popularity went up. Smearing him as a Democrat or socialist won’t really work because he’s saying the “right” things about issues they actually care about

    1. they clearly don’t have a problem with “socialism”, just benefits going to people who aren’t them

      This is true. Trump voters are xenophobic racists who like government handouts, but only when they go to white people. AMERCA FRST, JEBS FER REAL MERCANS!!!

      1. Calling them “xenophobic racists” is pointless and not very accurate besides. They’re tribalists but their tribe is not defined by such characteristics. Attempting to distill it down to concrete races or ethnicities ignores confounding variables. Sure, there’s “us” and “them”, but that is mostly if not entirely based upon where people are standing and not who they are. Failing to understand this is just paving the way for Trump’s continued success.

        1. I think the more appropriate label would be nativists.

  28. Not many people that comment on Reason actually like Trump. He is just the dumbed down version of voting for “Deez Nutz!”. BTW, Deez Nutz! is a serious candidate.

    1. “Not many people that comment on Reason actually like Trump.”

      Has there ever actually been a single person who has said they “support” him, as opposed to simply griping that “his ideas aren’t mockworthy by default”? (although The Donald might certainly be as a person)

      (see: Corning, who reviles at the notion that Trump might be accused of being a teensy bit xenophobic/the R word)

      1. Deporting all 11 million illegal immigrants, and getting Mexico to pay for building a border fence are ideas that are mockworthy in themselves.

        1. “Deporting all … illegal immigrants” is not necessarily worthy of mockery. It happened in the 1950s under Eisenhower; see Operation Wetback. The real questions are about how it would play out it in a drastically different legal climate and what the effects would be in a drastically different economy. In the 1950s, there was no minimum wage, no federal welfare, and the regulatory state was still nascent and somewhat benign. The courts were loathe to interfere in government actions outside of citizens’ Constitutional rights and the legislation concerning civil rights in general was much more circumspect.

          1. Also, the border patrol was tiny and flat by comparison to its modern form. The CBP of today might be fundamentally incapable of operating effectively.

          2. Yes deporting over ten million people for no good reason is necessarily worthy of mockery.

            1. no good reason

              question begging

  29. Word up to libertarians:

    Given the damage that Trump is doing to the Republican brand, when the gale-force farts coming out of Trumps ass subside, the factions left standing are going to be the people that *didn’t* jump on the Trump bandwagon. Think about that.

    1. Regardless, president is only 1 office. There are loads of offices being contested next year, & some this year as well. The Trump bandwagon isn’t going to affect Republicans who want to be involved in all of those campaigns.

      Think about past presidents & nominees for that office. Did they have a noticeable effect on your city council, your state legislature, your Congressional reps, or the other executive positions in your polity?

      1. The Trump bandwagon isn’t going to affect Republicans who want to be involved in all of those campaigns.

        Really? What about all the people who are so repulsed by Trump and his clown-car that they won’t even consider voting Republican anymore, even for dog-catcher?

      2. The Trump bandwagon isn’t going to affect Republicans who want to be involved in all of those campaigns.

        Really? What about all the people who are so repulsed by Trump and his clown-car that they won’t even consider voting Republican anymore, even for dog-catcher?

        1. if people like that existed, they’d’ve stopped voting long ago.

      3. Once you become president, you move the party in your direction. GWB did it when he made NCLB and Medicare Drug Bennies central planks to the “Small Government” platform.

        The problem is that running for office is expensive. And if you want to get money, you need to be cozy with senators/congressmen. And those guys need to be cozy with the President. Obama has been flying all over the country doing fundraising dinners for Dem senators that support his policies, and any GOP politician will support Trump too if he helps bring in donations.

        1. I notice a distinct tendency of presidents to not be able to have much effect moving their respective parties, even in Congress, even VP, let alone in state & local office.

          1. Even their own successor from the same party tends not to be much like them.

    2. What do you mean by ‘left standing’? Do you mean still standing with non-Trump candidates? Carson is not Trump but he echoes many of his asinine talking points.

  30. Ironically, a NRO article hits the reason for Trump’s support right on the head.…..clear-deal

    “Surrender . . . Then Play-Fight ” is Republican leadership’s shameful approach to “governing.”

    The conservative base of the party is literally out their minds with frustration. They have funded and supported huge Republican victories over the past 15 years. W took office with control of both both Houses of Congress – and betrayed them. After that eventual collapse, they again put Republicans in control of Congress – and they have done absolutely fucking nothing, They have no balls at all. Paul and Cruz get lumped in with the party eunuchs even though they have tried.

    Right now the base just wants the guy who will mock, insult, and offend the party leaders. Might not want him in 6 months but right now Trump is making all the right enemies.

    1. I think this is a huge part of Trumps success.

      Much like the cops crying about their newly hostile communities, the Repubs have nobody to blame but themselves for their current travails.

    2. I loath Trump. But I also loath Boehner and McConnell and anybody named Bush. They promised a smaller government and a humble foreign policy, and then gave us Medicare Part D, NCLB, and a nation schemes from Libya to Pakistan. They turned out to be as bad as Democrats, or even worse in the individual rights category. The GOP establishment is getting what it deserves for its betrayal of any concept of limited government. It wouldn’t bother me at all if the GOP went the way of the Whig Party.

      1. It wouldn’t bother me at all if the GOP went the way of the Whig Party.

        Good, then vote for Trump.

      2. They’re well on their way and I, for one, can’t fucking wait to see them completely destroyed. As one falls so, too, must the other. It would be the end of the two-party system and the emergence of more political parties or, Jupiter forgive us, completely independent candidates with *no* party affiliation.

        Woodchippers at the ready, my fellow shitlords!

      3. They’re well on their way and I, for one, can’t fucking wait to see them completely destroyed. As one falls so, too, must the other. It would be the end of the two-party system and the emergence of more political parties or, Jupiter forgive us, completely independent candidates with *no* party affiliation.

        Woodchippers at the ready, my fellow shitlords!

        1. Not sure I see why a failing GOP will mean a failing Democrat Party.

          More likely, if you see the GOP splinter, a good portion will go over to the Democrats, since the Dems need only 3 or 4% of the population to ensure their dominance. Why would they break apart at that point?

        2. “They’re well on their way”

          Really? Sure? They control more state governments now than ever. At the state level, the GOP has passed meaningful reform and moved away from anti-immigration horse shit.

          1. The question is which part of the party drives the long-term policy. Is there historical precedent we can look at?

    3. I think they learned a lot from NJ. The Republicans swept out a very unpopular Democratic legislature & governor, rolled back a little bit, but lost popularity & were swept out themselves when they tried to go farther. The status quo or something very close to it is always pretty popular; there’s a reason it’s the status quo.

  31. Every single comment here is way off the mark. Trump is currently ahead in the polls because he’s a TV star.

    If Jim Parsons from Big Bang Theory was running, you’d have your first openly gay GOP candidate. (I don’t know Jim Parsons’ politics, just that he has an extremely high ‘Q’ score.)

  32. Every single comment here is way off the mark. Trump is currently ahead in the polls because he’s a TV star.

    If Jim Parsons from Big Bang Theory was running, you’d have your first openly gay GOP candidate. (I don’t know Jim Parsons’ politics, just that he has an extremely high ‘Q’ score.)

  33. So, a bunch of scumbags write how much they don’t like a certain particular scumbag, in order to try to get assorted mindless zombies to instead vote for some other scumbag[s]?

    What’s not to like here? 🙂

    regards, onebornfree

  34. Between this and the Kim Davis story, it’s like you’re in a race to see how far up a millennial’s ass you can crawl.


  35. Today was the first time my unassailable political instincts told me that Trump will relatively soon start getting annoying even to his current supporters. How far can you really carry an absolutely-no-details shtick? The Iran deal is one of the worst deals ever made because our leaders are stupid. The end.

    Or maybe I’m letting the pundit mindset get to me. Maybe his latching onto the prisoners as his main critique will start a whole new fake thing with his idiot supporters.

    I wish I lived in a country where fake bullshit wasn’t always half of the political conversation.

    1. ” How far can you really carry an absolutely-no-details shtick? ”

      If “Hope and Change” is any indication, all the way to the White House.

  36. Who gives a fuck what a bunch of socialist neocon that waffles think about an even more agape asshole?

    1. ZOMG, *twat* waffles. Goddam autocorrect. Thanks, Obama.

  37. One bright side to a Trump presidency: Separation of Powers

    Instead of the house and/or senate being at the beck and call of the chief executive (Obama, Pelosi, & Reid) we’ll have a president that neither party will be inclined to support. Who would want to work with that twit?

  38. I was wondering when Reason would finally dispense with the hourly anti-Trump stories and just post them by the minute. They jumped that shark.

    GOP Strategy

    1: Bring out the long knives and backstab anyone who actually has any voter support such as Ron Paul, Donald Trump, etc.

    2. Inflate preordained candidate

    3. Lose election

    4. Blame base for not voting for a shined up turd

    Reason fits right in.

    1. Yes, Reason was such a fan of Romney.

  39. so Matt…are you a Trump fan!!

    REAL REASONS to run from the Donald…………..

    Why Didn’t Trump Include His Grand ‘Touchback’ Amnesty Scheme In His Immigration Manifesto?
    Answer: Because he knew that revealing this scheme (that he’s been talking about on interview after interview since April 14, 2015) would cause a Conservative revolt and very likely cost him the GOP nomination, so he simply left it out.
    As a result, there is no “touchback” Amnesty mentioned nor is there a mention of his wanting to deport all 40 to 60 million illegals in the U.S. in his manifesto.
    However, Conservatives and others paying attention will not let Trump off the hook re: his Amnesty. We want “the truth”! We want to know “how” he’s going to get “touchback” thru both houses of Congress and we want to know how many illegals-once-removed he will try to bring back..

  40. BTW…Trump is opening the door for this too….

    The Hijrah Into Europe is hitting a breaking point – Hijrah, or jihad by emigration – This is also Europe’s death knell.

    , is, according to Islamic tradition, the migration or journey of Muhammad and his followers from Mecca to Yathrib, later renamed by him to Medina, in the year 622 CE. It was after the hijrah that Muhammad for the first time became not just a preacher of religious ideas, but a political and military leader. That was what occasioned his new “revelations” exhorting his followers to commit violence against unbelievers. Significantly, the Islamic calendar counts the hijrah, not Muhammad’s birth or the occasion of his first “revelation,” as the beginning of Islam, implying that Islam is not fully itself without a political and military component.

  41. To emigrate in the cause of Allah ? that is, to move to a new land in order to bring Islam there, is considered in Islam to be a highly meritorious act. “And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance,” says the Qur’an. “And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah. And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful.” (4:100) The exalted status of such emigrants led a British jihad group that won notoriety (and a shutdown by the government) a few years ago for celebrating 9/11 to call itself Al-Muhajiroun: The Emigrants.
    And so it goes. If you don’t accept the brave new world that is sure to bring more jihad and more Sharia to Europe, you’re a Nazi and a racist. Meanwhile, no one is bothering even to ask, much less answer, one central question: why is it incumbent upon Europe have to absorb all these refugees? Why not Saudi Arabia or the other Muslim countries that are oil-rich and have plenty of space? The answer is unspoken because non-Muslim authorities refuse to believe it and Muslims don’t want it stated or known: these refugees have to go to Europe because this is a hijrah.
    This is also Europe’s death knell.…..rt-spencer

  42. everything in American politics is so retarded now. he’s the retard we deserve.

  43. Fuck Michael Gerson. That is all.

  44. those who support trump because they wish politics as usual would die a quick death are justifiably angry. the media, etc. don’t get that anger, even now. but if the outside world doesn’t understand why they’re rallying around trump because they don’t see what they’re so upset about, it can equally be said that anger has led some to be so desperate that the legit criticism of their false idol can’t possibly pierce their desire for anything different.

  45. I love it that the neocons are swallowing their tongues.

  46. I love it that the neocons are swallowing their tongues.

  47. The one thing Trump is teaching other politicians is that people will respond to someone who is forceful and at least acts like a leader. People are numb to political speak where the words ultimately mean nothing, conservatives vote for more government, liberals vote for erosion of civil liberties.
    I think this is where Rand Paul collapsed. He started as a principle libertarian and then morphed into a regular politician. He could have ridden the courage of his convictions to wider popularity.

  48. Jews do not like hand holding solidarity songs, rarely are they seen in a circle singing Kumbaya. The Jewess feels most comfortable in a crowded department store sale where her identity is unknown. A white empire is distasteful to the Jew because he is identifiable as an outsider. A good mixture makes the Jew more at ease.

  49. Where are the conservatives in this group?

    These folks are neocons and pseudo-conservatives who want us to support Jeb.

    Because he’s electable, of course.

  50. This is my comment.

    and please check the home page and view the video.

    I hope that you find it funny, and enjoy experiencing it as much as I did creating it

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.