Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Virginia’s Primary About Who Controls the GOP Now

Is the Republican Party now the party of Trump?

Nick FreitasNick Freitas"There is no Republican Party," said former House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, at a recent policy conference in Michigan. "There's a Trump Party. The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere."

On Tuesday, Virginians will find out how accurate Boehner's statement is here. The GOP Senate primary has boiled down to a contest between Nick Freitas, a hardcore conservative and former Army Ranger, and Corey Stewart, a braggadocious blowhard so intemperate the Trump campaign fired him. (A third candidate, E.W. Jackson, also is running.)

Freitas served two tours in Iraq with one of the most elite fighting units the world has ever seen. On issue after issue, he takes a resoundingly conservative position. In early March, he infuriated Democrats when he gave a speech (since viewed more than 11 million times) objecting to their linking gun rights with Nazism and racial segregation. If Democrats really want an "open and honest debate" about guns, he said, then they should "start with a certain degree of mutual respect."

Respect is something of a Freitas theme. Last week, he tore into Stewart for his "dog-whistling of White supremacists, anti-Semites, and racists." He denounced Stewart for cozying up to figures such as Jason Kessler, organizer of the Unite the Right rally that turned into a deadly riot in Charlottesville last August. "It is well past time we defeat the hate mongers," Freitas wrote.

Stewart recently told John McCormack of The Weekly Standard, "I didn't know who [Kessler] was when I met with him. And I only met with him twice. At that point I realized, this guy is bad news." Stewart undersells himself there.

As the Charlottesville Daily Progress reported last February, Stewart stood by Kessler's side at an event, restricted "to only [Kessler's] supporters and local news reporters," in which Kessler, "whom many label a 'white nationalist,' held a news conference" about his efforts to have a black city councilman kicked out of office for offensive tweets.

Afterward, Kessler "marched to the courthouse with about 20 supporters, including Republican gubernatorial candidate Corey Stewart." That's not exactly bumping into the guy at a cocktail reception. Stewart has since said he regrets attending the event.

But he recently also had to disavow another open bigot, Paul Nehlen, whom he once called his personal hero. "That was before he went nuts and started spewing a bunch of stupid stuff," Stewart says now.

Yet when The Weekly Standard's McCormack asked the Stewart campaign about Nehlen, it would say only this: "Sadly it's unsurprising to see the establishment Republicans continue to play the race card against President Trump's most vocal supporters."

After Freitas' broadside last week, the campaign said Freitas was using the "leftist tactics of silencing conservative speech using claims of bigotry." If you can follow the bouncing ball, it appears that Stewart is (a) against bigotry, and (b) against other Republicans being against bigotry.

Freitas has taken Stewart to task before. After some Stewart supporters made fun of Freitas' name ("Sounds more like a item from Taco Bells dollar menu then a Senate candidate," said one), Freitas confronted Stewart about it during a debate: "My daughter came over to me one day and asked, 'Daddy, what is wrong with our last name?'" Stewart responded by suggesting Freitas was too thin-skinned, and later referred to him as "Cryin' Nick." Haw, haw.

Questioning other people's manhood is part of Stewart's shtick. During the recent General Assembly session, he showed up at the state Capitol with a roll of toilet paper. Republicans who supported Medicaid expansion were "flaccid" and guilty of "cowardice," he said: "These are toilet paper Republicans. Just as soft, just as weak, just as pathetic, just as flimsy. Put a little bit of pressure on them and they crumble." Was the use of "flaccid" a sexual reference? "I'm suggesting I feel sorry for their wives," Stewart said.

This is the empty bombast of the circus wrestler — the equivalent of the hollow patriotism of Donald Trump, who holds pro-America rallies but can't remember the words to "God Bless America," who "loves" the Constitution so much he wants to protect its nonexistent Article XII, who cannot abide the smallest slight against the military, but who took five draft deferments to avoid joining it.

"I was Trump before Trump was Trump," Stewart says of that walking blooper reel. Indeed. On Tuesday we will find out whether John Boehner was right — or whether there is any hope left that the Republican Party can be redeemed.

Photo Credit: Nick Frietas for U.S. Senate

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Free minds, free markets, and Paul Fucking Ryan.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    NTTIAWWT

  • damikesc||

    "There is no Republican Party," said former House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, at a recent policy conference in Michigan. "There's a Trump Party. The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere."

    Given what the Republicans did under Bush, I'd prefer Trump. "Republicans" are simply Democrats. They just want the state bigger and bigger.

    cannot abide the smallest slight against the military, but who took five draft deferments to avoid joining it.

    Ahh, Reason chicken hawking people.

  • ||

    Ahh, Reason chicken hawking people.

    Look, if patriotism to nausea-inducing levels and chicken-hawking patriots' opponents is what it takes to defeat white nationalism in this country, so be it.

  • John||

    If you are worried about white nationalism, you need to talk to Progressives and get them to understand that you cannot have a system where everyone but one group gets to play identity politics. You can, but it won't last.

  • Curly4||

    There is no republican party! What used to be the republican party is just a little right of the democrat party which is a little right of the progressive party.
    The republican party left the citizens that elected Trump. If people will open their eyes it will be easy to see that the republican party is not supporting Trump especially internationally. Most of the republican congress persons are actively trying to undermine Trump in his attempt to balance the the tariffs which are vastly in the favor of our(?) and enemies alike. The current republicans in congress are not small government as they have been in the past.
    In spite of the republicans and democrats in congress Trump's economic planes have been remarkable successful much to chagrin of especially the democrats and those on the left.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "There is no Republican Party," said former House Speaker John Boehner"

    There is a Republican Party, and it came together and threw John Boehner out on his ass.

  • John||

    http://www.thegatewaypundit.co.....sidencies/

    Trump's approval ratings are right on par with Obama and Reagan at this point in their administrations. Why do reason and the rest of the major media continue to gaslight itself and pretend that Trump is unpopular? He isn't. That doesn't mean he is going to win re-election. Time will tell on that. But the facts are what they are. Yet, the media, reason included, can't seem to face them for some reason.

  • HGW xx/7||

    When considering the insane amount of RES1STANCE!! being thrown at the administration from all directions, it's stunning his numbers are that high. Clearly, at the very least, the typical American voter can still sense bullshit and tell the media to fuck off.

  • John||

    Even if you think Trump is a bad President, there is no rational case to be made that he is any worse of a President than the last two or three or historically bad by any reasonable standard. I think most Americans hear all fo the RESISTANCE bullshit and just tune it out or wonder what the hell the big deal is.

  • HGW xx/7||

    Indeed and that's what pisses the left off so much: why can't the proles just fall in line, believe what we're telling them, and march on the White House?!? If only we had state-run media!!

    We have a completely different mindset than most of the lemmings of Europe. They're made progress in beating submissiveness into us, but we're not going quietly and hence their temper tantrums.

  • Zeb||

    there is no rational case to be made that he is any worse of a President than the last two or three or historically bad by any reasonable standard.

    No, but since when do people judge politicians by reasonable standards?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    I must not be understanding gaslight properly. I can't quite figure out how someone could gaslight themself.

  • John||

    If you told yourself a lie enough that you finally convinced yourself that it was true, wouldn't that be gaslighting yourself?

    Maybe they are trying to gaslight the public. However you look at it, I don't see how pretending Trump is unpopular helps anything.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    According to the definition I read, gaslighting is manipulating another person into thinking they're crazy.

    It appears that someone, not saying you, has taken it upon themself to give the word a new meaning. Probably in an effort to appear hip or something.

  • John||

    No, I just used the wrong word. But whatever they are doing, they should be honest and admit that Trump is not any more unpopular than Obama was at this point in his Presidency.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    That's called cognitive dissonance. At least I think that's what you're getting at.

  • Zeb||

    I must not be understanding gaslight properly.

    I know I'm not.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    I've been seeing it used in so many places I decided to look it up. The term has been around since the 40s but I suspect someone has recently tacked on a new meaning. I'd bet anything it was some smug douchebag trying to dazzle people with an old word and using it incorrectly in the process.

  • Libertymike||

    Have you ever seen the 1944 film "Gaslight?"

    The film featured Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, and a young woman making her screen debut, Angela Lansbury, who was nominated for Best Supporting Actress.

    What Charles Boyer did to Ingrid Bergman is a good film manifestation of gas-lighting.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Duh, according to the dictionary that is the origin of the term. It's not an example, it's the original.

  • Libertymike||

    Well, although you can frequently find me in various dictionaries, I knew this because of my vast reservoir of what some anti-intellectual types might deem as useless film knowledge.

    At any rate, the young Jessica Fletcher was awesome.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Ok. Not sure who you're trying to impress here.

  • ||

    I'd bet anything it was some smug douchebag trying to dazzle people with an old word and using it incorrectly in the process.

    Which is douchier, being the douchebag who used the term as a metaphor or being the douchebag who looks up the term in order to correct an obvious metaphor on its literal use?

  • Zeb||

    At the risk of being even douchier than that, how can a metaphor be used literally?

    Also, how obvious is any of it? I still have no idea what the hell it is supposed to mean.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Norm MacDonald has a whole section on this in his newest special. Go watch it if you haven't.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Which is douchier,

    Whining about being called out for using the word wrong.

  • Enjoy Every Sandwich||

    I find that their message is painfully muddled. On the one hand, they declare that Trump is hideously unpopular and the Republicans will be drowned in the "Blue Wave" in 2018 and Trump will lose in 2020 (if he isn't impeached first).

    Then, scarcely pausing to draw breath, they shriek that the Evil Drumpf and his Dark Master (Vladimir) have destroyed democracy. But if the Evil Ones have subverted Our Glorious Democracy how will the Democrats win in 2018 and 2020?

  • ||

    I find that their message is painfully muddled.

    ^This^

    Muddled, conflicted, self-defeating, and oxymoronic.

  • BYODB||

    Which is a fancy way of saying that it'll be successful to what remains of their nutjob base, and that all the blue-collar types will give the Democrat party the finger and...join the Republican party since it's becoming more like it's previous incarnations where they were actually quite liberal and progressive. Recall that Unions love tariffs and immigration and bullshit like that. Guess which party is working overtime to alienate that group?

    This appears to be beyond the chattering classes knowledge base since it involves something that happened more than one year ago.

  • HGW xx/7||

    How many times is reason going rehash the "Republicans are dead" trope? I think this is the third or fourth article I've read with basically the same premise and conclusion.

    Not that it isn't true. I'm just waiting for the article explaining how the democrats are now the Party of Lenin.

  • John||

    How is it true? The Republicans control the majority of the state legislatures, governors mansions, Congress, the White House and the judiciary. How is that dead? If it is dead, then what does the term even mean?

  • HGW xx/7||

    I should have probably phrased that better. You're correct: it's illigical to say the GOP is dead when they're in the majority across the board. Hell, reason was declaring them dead prior to Trump; yet, they seem in denial about how that went down.

    I meant more the GOP of the 90s and 00s is dead. In some ways, it's a good thing: less of a focus on pulling in the religious Right. There are some ways in which I'd argue they haven't changed for the better.

    Regardless, you're right. The party itself is clearly alive and vibrant, much to reason's chagrin.

  • John||

    That I agree with you. The old party that the Bushes stole from Reagan is dead. And that brand of big government internationalism is not coming back any time soon.

  • I can't even||

    That whole "campaign as a conservative, govern as a Democrat" run of the Bushes is dead. HW and W did it and McCain tried it. Ryan, McConnell, Hastert and company all did it in Congress.

    Trump's "campaign as a conservative and actually govern as a conservative" has surprised a lot of people but may be the lasting change he makes to the party.

  • ||

    In your defense the article and Reason are stumbling over itself on this issue. If the GOP is dying WTF do we care if Freitas wins?

    Reason has to hammer down the narrative that the GOP is on the ropes and only morons among the libertarian party would cleave right in any way, shape, or form while, simultaneously, acknowledging that Rand Paul and Mike Lee are putting their name in with Freitas. Rather than admit that the GOP is more of the libertarian party than any other party, it's easier for Reason to side with a patriot and bash white nationalists.

  • Jerryskids||

    Re: Democrats as the party of Lenin. It's right there in the name, they're democrats, the party of The People. Which is why they have the super-delegates and people like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz as insurance in case The People start getting uppity and start thinking they're too good to be told what's for their own good by their moral and intellectual superiors.

    Funny that there was some speculation the GOP going into the convention might pull some shit and deny Trump the nomination in favor of Cruz or Kasich or some compromise candidate when the Democrats have been manipulating the nomination process in just that way for years. If the GOP actually had the stomach for it, Trump's history itself would have seen his application to stand as a candidate rejected on the grounds that he's not actually a Republican. But then again, they let Kasich in and he's less of a Republican than Trump.

  • Jerryskids||

    "There is no Republican Party," said former House Speaker John Boehner, a Republican, at a recent policy conference in Michigan. "There's a Trump Party. The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere."

    Kind of telling that you have to identify which party Boehner belongs to. Boehner, as much as anybody, is responsible for Trump. If Boehner had a spine and balls half the size of his tear ducts, he might have shown some leadership and some principled defense of all those things the GOP kept paying lip service to as "conservative values". Trump didn't betray the Republican Party, he just unmasked its leadership as feckless cunts spineless shitweasels.

  • Citizen X||

    Spineless shitweasels with killer tans, let's be real.

  • Homple||

    "If Boehner had a spine and balls half the size of his tear ducts...."

    Direct hit.

  • Idle Hands||

    I so hope Corey Stewart wins. He is such an unapologetic rube it cracks me up.

  • Idle Hands||

    Kaine vs Stewart would be fun, no republican has a shot in VA so the worst we could do is have a circus of an election.

  • John||

    Kaine is a serious loon. I think he might be too far left for even NOVA. NOVA is big government Prog but it is not California.

  • Idle Hands||

    Jeb Stewart, I mean Corey, showing up in a Dukes of Hazzard replica Charger to the debate will seal the election.

  • Citizen X||

    Nah, he'll show up in a jacked up F-350 with mud all over the doors, call Kaine a fag, and then peel out.

  • vek||

    I would vote for such a politician!

  • Citizen X||

    The People's Eyebrow versus Cokehead Trump, Jr.? There is not enough liquor in the entire Old Dominion.

  • Idle Hands||

    It would be definitely be the election we deserve.

  • Citizen X||

    If "we" truly deserve it, then i need to take stock of my life. Maybe read the Bible more, i dunno.

  • Rhywun||

    If you can follow the bouncing ball

    Not even trying. I don't give a shit about who said whom was a racist Nazi anymore. If the Trump reign has taught me anything, it's to stop focusing on such tedious bullshit.

  • John||

    Whoever told Freitis that it was a good idea to campaign for the Republican nomination by calling his opponent a white nationalist needs to be fired. Republican voters are tired of this bullshit. If Freitis loses, it will be because of that.

  • EscherEnigma||

    True. Republicans/Republican voters stopped caring a while back whether or not someone was racist/white nationalist/etc./so-on, and instead caring whether or not someone called others racist/white nationalist/etc./so-on.

    In their eyes, accusing others is worse then being.

  • Zeb||

    In their eyes, accusing others is worse then being.

    I can kind of understand that reaction when so many people have been recklessly and baselessly accused of being "alt-right", "Nazi" or "white nationalist". If you want such epithets to be effective, you don't go around calling everyone you don't like those things.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    When you call someone a white racist nationalist, they're supposed to immediately go on the defense. And they're supposed to stay on defense until you stop calling them white racist nationalists (if ever).

    Republicans don't even try playing the game anymore!

  • Sevo||

    Don't know if the GOPers can ever recover from:
    1) DeVos
    2) Gorsuch
    3) Ajit Pai, end net price fixing
    4) Major reduction in the growth of regulations
    5) Dow +30%
    6) Unemployment at 3.8%
    7) The US Manufacturing Index soared to a 33 year high
    8) Got repeal of the national medical insurance mandate.
    9) Withdrawal from Paris climate agreement.
    10) Not sure about the tax reform; any "reform" that leaves me subisdizing Musk's customers is not what I hoped for. Let Musk run a company for once.
    11) In the waning days of 2017, the Trump administration pulled its support for the $13 billion Hudson Tunnel project.
    12) More than 16,000 jobs have been cut from the federal leviathan
    13) MIGHT have a deal to de-nuke NK.
    And finally:
    14) Still making lefties steppin and fetchin like their pants is on fire and their asses are catchin'

    To repeat, I did not vote for the guy; he's a blow-hard and a loose cannon, but by accident or design, he's don't better than any POTUS I can remember

  • SIV||

    ^MAGA^

  • HGW xx/7||

    I enjoy that list. I think I'll print it on leaflets and drop them over Seattle. Then I'll sit back and watch what happens.

  • Juice||

    Major reduction in the growth

    I guess that counts.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Real question. Are we still using the revised Unemployment number that Obama switched to, where we discount a larger group of people as out of the job market? Or have we switched back to the old style?

  • vek||

    That's still the fake numbers... But it's BETTER fake numbers than the last several years! The labor force participation rate is the only way to get a "real" idea of how many people are working, and it's lower than it's been since the 70s still, other than the last several years that were worse of course.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    I want to make sure I'm understanding this right...

    In Virginia, two men are trying out for the Republican team. One is a nutbag that hangs with racists and the other is a fairly moderate straight shooter. Reason publishing and article about the contest and providing some details on each contestant is an indication that they're dancing around the corpse of the dead Republican Party and laughing about it. Because Trump is a lunatic but he's the best lunatic.

  • Citizen X||

    Actually, three men are trying out for the Republican team, racist.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Ok, but he's a parenthetical man according to Bart.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    It's funny how that non-politician wants to do what all the politicians want to do.

  • Citizen X||

    Look, people don't go into politics if they're creative or even all that smart.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    He's surely not the first person to run on nothing more than 'I'm not those guys'.

  • SIV||

    A certain contingent of Reason seems deeply invested in the restoration of the Grand Old Party.
    I supported Trump in the primary because I want to destroy it. Millions of others pick3d Trump for the same reason.

  • HGW xx/7||

    I can't argue that. Regardless of who he is, this administration has made some very nice maneuvers, ones I thought would be celebrated a bit more at a libertarian publication. Any compliment paid has to be paired with "to be sure...", as if begging forgiveness from their proggg cosmo neighbors. No one wants to miss a cocktail party, I suppose.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    I'd prefer a version of the Republican Party that welcomes thoughtful, decent people like David Frum, rather than the version we have now that's been taken over by white nationalists and Putin puppets.

  • I can't even||

    David Frum - thoughtful and decent? The guy who fantasized about Trump being a wife-beater?

    There have been many thoughtful, decent Republicans - Barry Goldwater, Peter DuPont, Ron and Rand Paul, even Mitt Romney who I disagree with 80% of the time. The Democrats love them because in a general election they can demagogue and use all sorts of dirty tricks and these nice guys never retaliate - they just lose.

  • OpenBordersLiberal-tarian||

    Frum's tweets about wife-beating were an entirely rational response to the #Where'sMelania scandal.

    Drumpf is such a threat to the entire planet, the only conservatives and Republicans who deserve respect are the ones who put country over party by supporting Hillary Clinton.

  • I can't even||

    Got the TDS bad.

  • Zeb||

    It's a parody, and not even a good or clever one.

  • SIV||

    No it's great. There's a few misses now and then but "Reason-contributor Noah Berlatsky" never gets old. It's funny 'cause it's true.

  • John||

    It would be nice if reason bothered to explain what the offensive tweets that Corey wanted the black councilman kicked out of office for actually said. The fact that they don't and just leave it to the imagination is pretty piss poor journalism.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Whining about it every time the Republican Party gets picked on is pretty piss poor commenting.

  • ||

    Is the GOP getting picked on here? The reporting is so bad, I can't even tell.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    John is complaining up and down so they must be. The article to me appears to be just some information about the upcoming Virginia election. I guess if you're expecting to be told what to think about it all then it could be considered bad.

  • ||

    The article to me appears to be just some information about the upcoming Virginia election. I guess if you're expecting to be told what to think about it all then it could be considered bad.

    So, in your eyes, from the "There is no Republican Party," said former House Speaker John Boehner, lead in, to the On Tuesday we will find out whether John Boehner was right — or whether there is any hope left that the Republican Party can be redeemed. it's a strict, by the numbers, Virginia election informational piece?

    I get why a libertarian would quote Reagan's 'government is the problem' speech. Why a libertarian would quote Boehner's "There is no Republican Party" speech while talking factually about the Republican party requires some twisted logic that I could only assume naturally occurs as a result of a group of like-minded people gaslighting itself.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    group of like-minded people gaslighting itself.

    So you and John both have a problem with the meaning of gaslight. If a new definition has been added, do you know when?

    Why a libertarian would quote Boehner's "There is no Republican Party" speech while talking factually about the Republican party requires some twisted logic

    No it doesn't. Because the rest of the quote is "There's a Trump Party. The Republican Party is kind of taking a nap somewhere.". And then the article describes two candidates that kinda fit that narrative and questions whether the one who fits with the traditional Republican Party has a chance.

  • Woodchipper of the Apocalypse||

    Language evolves. Words take on new meanings all the time. I'm sorry this is so hard for you to live with, Mr. Miserable Pedant.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Language evolves. Words take on new meanings all the time. I'm sorry this is so hard for you to live with, Mr. Miserable Pedant.

    This is a retarded comment and you're a retard for posting it.

    The dictionary definitions that I've seen make his use of the word nonsense. If a new definition has been added, it would be great if you could point me to a place that includes it.

  • Woodchipper of the Apocalypse||

    The dictionary definitions that I've seen make his use of the word nonsense. If a new definition has been added, it would be great if you could point me to a place that includes it.

    Right, because as you say, new meanings for words are invented by the people who edit dictionaries, not by everyday people adapting a word to fit a new purpose.

    And I'm supposed to be the retard here?

  • Zeb||

    You're both retards. Happy now?

    Yes, meanings of words change. That doesn't mean that every new use of a term is automatically a new meaning that we all must accept. Nor does it mean that it's not a real meaning until it's in a dictionary.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    And I'm supposed to be the retard here?

    Yeah, asking where you encountered the not-in-the-dictionary definition is totally a dick move on my part. The fact that you couldn't link to a place where the word is used the way you say is also my fault, I'm sure.

    Two people used the word in an undefined way. I looked up the word then asked for clarification. No clarification was offered. Clearly I'm in the wrong here.

  • ||

    So you and John both have a problem with the meaning of gaslight. If a new definition has been added, do you know when?

    Nope. The original definition is informal and yours isn't even wrong. Nothing in your definition, like TONS of other verbs within the English language, prevents it from being done in and among members of a group to the point where a whole group can be effectively described by the verb. The existence of the word coitus doesn't prevent your understanding of the English language from being a clusterfuck.

    And then the article describes two candidates that kinda fit that narrative and questions whether the one who fits with the traditional Republican Party has a chance.

    Except that, either candidate, the GOP wins and/or isn't dead; literally, metaphorically, or otherwise. The closest we get to death in the whole affair is John Boehner's political career. In our collective... whatever... of the GOP, we may as well be lionizing Gingrich.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Nothing in your definition, like TONS of other verbs within the English language, prevents it from being done in and among members of a group to the point where a whole group can be effectively described by the verb.

    Here's the definition I found:
    gas·light
    ˈɡaslīt
    verb
    gerund or present participle: gaslighting
    manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.

    You're saying that they're manipulating themselves into believing they are crazy? And you're calling out other people for twisted logic?

    Now I'll grant that there may be another definition that hasn't made it to a dictionary. If so, could you link to somewhere you've seen it?

  • ||

    Here's the definition I found:
    gas·light
    ˈɡaslīt
    verb
    gerund or present participle: gaslighting
    manipulate (someone) by psychological means into questioning their own sanity.

    Got a date as to the origin of that definition?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    The origin is from the 1940s film Gaslight in which a guy drives his wife into believing she's crazy.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Except that, either candidate, the GOP wins and/or isn't dead; literally, metaphorically, or otherwise.

    If captain nutballs wins, the "Party of Trump" wins. If sergeant slaughter wins, the "Republican Party" wins. That is the thrust of this article. Yes, they're both Republicans so technically the Republican Party wins either way.

  • ||

    Yes, they're both Republicans so technically the Republican Party wins either way.

    The dead party, you mean?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    The dead party, you mean?

    By Boehner's definition, the dead party stays dead if captain nutballs wins and wakes up if sergeant slaughter wins. Honestly I'm amazed you can't follow this. Maybe I shouldn't be.

  • ||

    By Boehner's definition, the dead party stays dead if captain nutballs wins and wakes up if sergeant slaughter wins.

    "But if you can peel away the noise, and the tweets and all that, which is virtually impossible to do, but if you peel all this away, from a Republican standpoint, the things that he's [Trump] doing by and large are really good things," Boehner said

    Now, convince me Hinkle's sane and there isn't some manner of collective gaslighting going on by showing me the part where Boehner, on Thursday, said something about either candidate in Virginia. Because it seems like Boehner, hedging his bets should he decide to run again, led with a hyperbole that he later walked back and Hinkle took the hyperbole and ran with it.

  • Libertymike||

    "Gaslight" was a 1944 film directed by the great George Cukor.

    The film was based on Patrick Hamilton's 1938 play, "Gas Light."

    The cast featured Charles Boyer, Ingrid Bergman, and an 18 year old making her film debut, Angela Lansbury. The Murder She Wrote widow was nominated for Best Supporting Actress and for good reason - she was awesome.

    At any rate, what Charles Boyer did to Ingrid Bergman is a very good film manifestation of gaslighting.

  • ||

    Yup. And Hamilton's '29 play Rope, while still good and terrifically realized by Hitchcock and Jimmy Stewart in '48 is widely recognized drawing from Poe's A Telltale Heart. A play where the narrator effectively drives himself crazy.

    In any event, even if taken ex cathedra, 'a group gaslighting itself' doesn't violate the terms of your definition.

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    Explain how a group or even a single person can manipulate themselves into believing they're crazy. Because I'm not seeing it.

  • ||

    Explain how a group or even a single person can manipulate themselves into believing they're crazy. Because I'm not seeing it.

    Then you should really get out more.

  • ||

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Honestly, posting a broken link while discussing gaslighting and telling someone it's important, would be a pretty good meta joke.

  • Zeb||

    Does Hinkle even claim to be a libertarian?

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    And this is what the people in the media have figured out. People like John will complain no matter what they say or do, so they are just going to do whatever, damn the criticism from the John-types.

  • John||

    How is that whining about picking on Republicans? Maybe knowing what the Tweets say make Corey look even worse? I don't know. The point is that you shouldn't mention it without explaining the context. Otherwise, it just becomes an empty slur.

  • Sometimes a Great Notion||

    This is an article from the Richmond Times Dispatch so perhaps their readers are more informed on VA matters or they ran another story within the paper regarding the councilman so they didn't feel the need to rehash. In any case, Reason probably doesn't have much editorial control other then to not publish the article. I personally don't think that omission would be grounds to not publish the article if I were a Reason editor but your criticism is valid.

  • Ecoli||

    I agree. I would like to see what the black councilman said.

    In America, lives are destroyed by an intemperate tweet, and to be fair we should allow councilman, even black ones, their right to self-destruct.

  • vek||

    To answer the question, the black guy is a nut job radical anti white leftist. He said ALL KINDS of crazy shit on twitter. He said racist shit, derogatory stuff about women etc. Basically stuff that if a white Republican had said they'd be black balled for life, but it's fine for him because he's a black leftist. I forget his name, but he got fired from his real job over the tweets, but remained on the city council which is only part time in Charlottesville.

  • smalleyd||

    Has Reason officially joined the social justice warriors?

  • EscherEnigma||

    To answer the sub-title, yes, the Republican Party is now the Party of Trump, and you should not confuse it with the party of Lincoln, Goldwater, Reagan, or Bush.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Meanwhile, democrats are proudly still the party of Jackson, Johnson, Carter and Clinton. Suck that, neorepublicans!

  • damikesc||

    Does anybody miss Bush?

  • Libertymike||

    Which Bush? Barbara? Prescott? Dorothy Walker?

  • $park¥ leftist poser||

    No, they are a lousy band that makes weak music.

  • ||

    Finally something we agree on.

  • Citizen X||

    Yeah. Not sure who decided every lady in all the porns needed to look pre-pubescent.

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Bush is still around. Touring with Nickelback, last I heard.

  • BYODB||

    So Reason is just now hearing about Rockefeller Republicans, huh? Well, I guess at least their authors are consistent in their lack of historical knowledge.


    If Republicans are smart they'll go for Trump-like policies since Democrats are primed to lose a large chuck of their supporters, but that won't be good for you, me, or anyone else in the country since it means that conservatism in general is dead on arrival and only progressives remain. And make no mistake, that is the trend and it's not a good one but also there is very little anyone can do about it at this point.


    As Democrats veer further and further left, so too will Republicans.

  • Eric||

    Nationalism is progressive?*

    *Don't answer plz...I really don't want to hear your silly response redefining the left/right spectrum.

  • Zeb||

    Depends on what you are trying to progress towards, no?

  • BYODB||

    ^ This. The goal is power and nationalism can be useful to that end.

  • vek||

    A correct, decent, non violent form of nationalism isn't a bad thing. IMO if the politicians of a country DO NOT put the needs of their citizens first, then they aren't doing their job! US politicians shouldn't care more about helping out poor people from Mexico, or building up Chinese businesses, or any other damn thing than they should about people born and raised in the USA.

    So I have no problem with nationalism, provided it isn't too violent/aggressive against other nations. We can and should put our interests first, so long as we don't do it to the point of violating other nations rights.

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Freitas served two tours in Iraq with one of the most elite fighting units the world has ever seen.

    Broforce?

  • Citizen X||

    The Spartan phalanx? The 10,000 Immortals? Samurai? The Princess Pats?

  • Curt||

    My fortnite squad?

  • Curt||

    "In early March, he infuriated Democrats when he gave a speech (since viewed more than 11 million times) objecting to their linking gun rights with Nazism and racial segregation"

    Uh.. yeah. That's one way to look at it. Another way would be to say that he infuriated democrats by linking mass shootings to broken homes, abortion, wellfare, and then pointing a finger at democrats for supporting slavery, fighting women's suffrage, putting asians in camps during ww2, supporting Jim Crow, and supporting segregation. Maybe that's what's infuriating them.

    "he said, then they should "start with a certain degree of mutual respect.""

    Off to a really good start there.

  • NoVaNick||

    linking mass shootings to broken homes, abortion, wellfare,

    Actually, most school shootings have happened in very affluent, blue-leaning towns. I think the social competition there alienates a lot of kids who aren't part of the in crowd, and yes, some of them are from broken homes who don't have the resources to go on a weekend ski trip to Aspen, or summer in the Hamptons. Do all these kids decide to become shooters? No-but it doesn't help

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Does the GOP want to "recover" from Trump? There are many who would argue that Trump is accomplishing more for conservatism's stated goals than the "good" Republicans ever could.

    Also, no one gives a fuck what John Boehner thinks.

  • vek||

    Seriously. I disagree with Trump on a few things, but even if he got 100% of every single thing on his wish list it would be a VAST improvement over anything any recent Republican has done, and 1 million times better than the horror show shit the Democrats want to do.

    I'm totally fine with a Sex Pistols style "Fuck you if you don't like guns faggot! We're bootin' out all the illegals! Regulations are for pussies! And hell yeah we're cutting taxes again!" populist Republican party for several election cycles.

    For all the downsides I kind of feel a little bit hopeful for the first time in my life actually! The mainstream Republicans have been far to cowardly, pussified, and afraid to stand up for anything they claim to believe for far too many decades. Trump just flippin' all the lefties the bird is EXACTLY what needed to happen, because it's what many regular people have been feeling the whole time.

  • Harvard||

    Tell me, which set of doofuses on the Reason editorial board select articles by Shecky for inclusion? Gillespie I'm sure, is one. She profiles his hatred for Trump. But who seconds his dumb ass motion? I used to think it was to keep the commentariat nimble. Now I'm thinking most are simply liberals that know a little economics.

  • Zeb||

    Who's Shecky?

  • Harvard||

    Shecky Dullmia

  • Zeb||

    Wouldn't it just be easier to use her actual name so people know what the hell you are talking about? Or do you think that Mike M is the great wit of the 21st century?

  • Curt||

    It might've helped if this comment was under an article that had anything at all to do with Shikha Dalmia. Like, maybe one she wrote...

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I WISH Shecky Green wrote for this magazine.

  • Ecoli||

    I highly recommend Freitas' comments about Democrat's rejection of a fundamental civil liberty (2A, for those who are not acquainted with American history or its highest laws).

  • DrHubert||

    The GOP is now the PARTY of working & MIDDLE class AMERICANS

    DEMS is the PARTY of radicals and rich

  • vek||

    I would say GOP is working class, middle middle class, and business owners/very wealthy.

    The Dems are crazy leftist radicals and the upper middle class yuppie corporate types.

    There has always been a big difference between the wealthy business owner sort of person, and the college educated white collar worker who makes GOOD but not crazy money. Business owners still mostly go Republican, but insulated corporate yuppies are removed enough from reality where they buy into the leftist crap they got shoved down their throat at University.

    What this all means though is that all the sensible, decent people are basically on the side of the GOP at this point. Despite the fact that I do white collar work myself, I have always despised the smug, yuppie, liberal douche bag types.

  • JRuss||

    Because Republicans are scared to death of the Trump boorish ignorance and his more ignorant fanatics they have abandoned almost every principle they have championed for decades. But there are hundreds of thousands of disillusioned but patriotic, rational, and tolerant Republicans out there and this time they will vote with Democrat's to stop this insanity or not at all, meaning thankfully treacherous Trump can't win. Resist, vote.

  • vek||

    LOL

    That is all.

  • NoVaNick||

    *sigh* It is depressing what has happened to Virginia-used to be a successful case for, more or less, limited state government and now is about to become Virgifornia. I would vote for Freitas in the primary, but must vote in the local city council DEM primary in order to prevent it from becoming Berkeley East-wasn't sure who to vote for but the group "Blue Virginia" has at least provided me a list of who not to vote for.

    If Stewart wins the GOP primary, I will definitely be staying home in November.

  • texexpatriate||

    My family began in Virginia in the 17th Century, and spread westward from there---as many southerners did whose birthright was in that area. My family members occupy graves in Virginia's cemeteries from Lincoln's War Against the South. Through my family I always felt connected to Virginia right up to the last quarter of the 20th Century, when Virginia began to fill up and overflow with federal government workers. I don't like Virginia anymore. It is hard to think of it as a southern state today. I hope Freitas wins but I'll never waste money flying back to Virginia to fly fish again.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online