Yes, I know, it's hard to believe but I have been reading Roger L. Simon for some time now, mainly via the columns of PJ Media, and he strikes me as a fairly balanced Right-wing commentator especially so given that he started his adult life as a Leftie - until the facts of life intervened!
Now I must confess that the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency fills me with horror but, alas, that's the way it is looking right now. With all his bluff 'n' bluster he looks unstoppable. Perhaps it is the unexpected nature of Simon's endorsement that has checked my prejudice against the man and forced me to try and pay more attention to Trump's real politics. According to Simon:
So if I were a member of the Establishment, whatever that is, I would quit bellyaching, embrace Donald and make him my friend. He's ready and willing. If you bother to check that ultimate news source the Daily Mail, you'd see that already he is hobnobbing with such Republican stalwarts as Rudy Giuliani, Arthur Laffer and Steve Moore. Unless I missed it, I didn't notice the article mentioning David Axelrod or James Carville.
And listen to what Trump is actually saying. He's for lower taxes and a strong defense and he's not really against free trade. He just wants a better deal. Who wouldn't and who wouldn't assume he'd get a better one than the Obama crowd? Or the Bush crowd for that matter, on just about anything.
Hmmmmn, well, maybe but there has been so much noise from the Trump camp, most of it emanating from the man himself, that it is difficult to sort out real policies from the honking and hooting cacophony. Of course, Sanders is simply Jeremy Corbyn's American alter ego, and 'Hillbilly' is so corrupt and crooked and incompetent, that it is impossible to envision either of them as the next 'leader of the free world'!
But . . .
Even so - 'The Donald'?
Really?
Well, if you say so, Mr. Simon.
ADDITIONAL: A Mr. Rob Crilly - no, me neither - in The Telegraph says much the same thing:
There's only one conversation among Republicans in Washington this week: how to stop Donald Trump.
They are wrong.
What they should be asking themselves – after his extraordinary victory on Tuesday in the Nevada caucus – is how they can learn to love him.
I don't think it looks like a Trump presidency, it looks more like a Trump candidacy. On the democratic side? Either Hillary or Sanders. I hate to say it, but as bad as those two look, either would be better than Trump. I think it is more correct to say that Hillary is a crook than it is to say that Sanders is a commie.
Trump is not against free trade? Sure sounds like he is.
Posted by: Dom | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 19:45
Let's wait and see if Trump wins some big states..Texas, Florida, Ohio or Michigan. Or the very best state: North Carolina. (Don't tell JK).
Also, Trump is a major league XXer.
Posted by: Whitewall | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 19:49
Well, Dom, although all opposition to Obama is characterized as raaaaacism, we have been breaking out in hives at his violation of our Constitution, which established us as a bourgeois republic. We liked that, very much. It is what makes us tear up when we sing the Star Spangled Banner. It is the thing that makes us different from the rest of the world. Not our virtue, (snicker) or our prowess at war, or even the cleverness of our engineering, It is our freedom. It is why so many people are trying by any means necessary to get into this country. (Yes, I know, many just come for the prosperity, now, but that prosperity arises from our system of government.)The thing that worries us is that The Donald does not understand that. If he did, we'd be OK at the prospect of a Trump presidency. The idea of another Strong-Man president, after eight years under the thumb of Obama, is really dispiriting.
Posted by: Michael Adams | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 20:36
I think America could, and has, done worse than Trump.
Posted by: Andra | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 20:44
Dom, you are right, it was careless of me to suggest that Trump is likely to be the next president, as you say, it's only the candidacy he appears likely to win - according to the commentariat, that is!
Posted by: David Duff | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 21:11
Well, Andra, how nice of you to remind us of the past seven years. We have often joked about preferring Putin for president, because, at least, he loves his own country. How lovely if we had someone who loved OUR country.
David, the Left Wing comentariat desires very much to make another Communist or near-miss the next President. So, they trash-talk, to dispirit us, and make it happen. Ever hear of Lord Haw Haw? Tokyo Rose? I think you get the idea.
Posted by: Michael Adams | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 21:47
Trump could win and a lot of people will be unhappy but some of them will grovel if he does. I hope he wins the USA need a tough bloke at this time in history.
Posted by: jimmy glesga | Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 22:16
As I see it the USA needs above all else a president who cannot be bought by corporate money and patronage, is honest and forthright, keeps his word, respects the constitution, and believes in the country and the ability and strength of the people. Trump actually fits the bill. There is no requirement whatsoever to pick someone because they are nice or polite about how it's done.
We could do with someone similar in the UK.
Posted by: woodsy42 | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 00:11
When he talks about a fairer trade deal for whom does he mean is it for the domestic producer or consumer. For the former that is not a fair deal it is just plain old protectionism. For the latter they do not not need a deal other than to deal with the standards of safety. The consumer wants to be able to buy the best from where ever it is produced free of any restrictions. We forget that free market capitalism and trade is all about satisfying consumer needs not producers.
Despite the left hawking around that only they know how to put into practice socialist ideology capitalism has been doing it for centuries. The left advocates ways that have proven not to work yet capitalists have shown us how it does work. For example redistribution of wealth it happens on a grand scale in the market place money moves from person to person and location to location. It has proven to bring people out of poverty and made us more prosperous. It has funded education, the legal system and so much more bringing about greater social justice and opening up opportunities. It has produced surpluses to do all that.
It funds welfare and such but that is where it becomes unstuck because those who are in charge of those funds have discarded the capitalist means of delivery. They have turned to a different so called progressive means and it is not delivering in the way it would if it had not been.
Those on the left are not advocating socialism we already have it they are advocating the destruction of it by destroying the means to support and propagate it.
Posted by: Antisthenes | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 09:43
+1 for woodsy42.
Posted by: Andrew Duffin | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 12:35
The first paragraph of what anti wrote hits the nail on the head. Trump is not a capitalist, or a libertarian, or even a conservative. His foreign policy would be a disaster, and his domestic economic policy would be a matter of favoritism and protectionism. All policies designed to lower a country's prosperity.
Your first impression of Trump was correct, David. Americans should dump him.
Posted by: Dom | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 16:05
Just gonna toss this little nugget in for consideration. *I think* the percentages of eligibles voting across the south at least (and according to my Kansas "acquaintances" the tuned-ins) are likely somewhat higher - not too much though.
Whitewall, how does NC look?
https://sharylattkisson.com/raw-numbers-hillarys-donalds-nevada-wins/
Posted by: JK | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 16:10
I reckon David, Typepad (fuckin' Idiot Typepad) put my comment into Spam. Have a looksee please?
Posted by: JK | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 16:12
I said Trump would win from the beginning and I will stick by that. The free world needs a tough guy at this moment in history.
Posted by: jimmy glesga | Friday, 26 February 2016 at 22:13
JK, registered Dems have always outnumbered Republicans here. But in the last 3 decades many of these Dems, though registered as such, have not marked a ballot for a Dem. Our population is growing fast..right at 10 million I think. Party breakdowns now run nearly a third Dem, a third Rep and nearly as much now registered Independent. Personally I wish about half of the population would move somewhere else. About 22% of our population is black, a growing Hispanic number, and a sizable number of butt ignorant whites--largely college students who are becoming educated beyond their intelligence.
Posted by: Whitewall | Saturday, 27 February 2016 at 12:40
Jimmy, we do not need "a tough guy", we need an intelligent guy. I'm not sure of Donald's IQ!
Posted by: David Duff | Saturday, 27 February 2016 at 15:22
His IQ is better than Salmond!
Posted by: jimmy glesga | Saturday, 27 February 2016 at 19:19
Well, Jimmy, they're both dead crafty but I'm not sure that amounts to intelligence!
Posted by: David Duff | Saturday, 27 February 2016 at 19:24
David, I think monsieur Trump could well be the next Commander in Chief and receiving intelligence. Mr Salmond has milked the cow but will never be trusted with our defense.
Posted by: jimmy glesga | Saturday, 27 February 2016 at 23:09
Eh ... Whitewall? Mebbe David?
https://wallethub.com/edu/where-are-blacks-most-least-politically-engaged/19026/
Posted by: JK | Monday, 29 February 2016 at 12:12
JK that's interesting and easily understandable if a person lives in a dark blue state on that map. I have said here and elsewhere that white Democrats have and will always find a way to keep control of black people no matter what. Democrats have been doing that for 200 years in one form or another. Thus around 92% of the black vote goes only to Democrats. The other 8% are capable of thinking for themselves, and are therefore a threat. If that 8% becomes say 15% then Democrats have real problems as they have alienated much of the white working class.
Posted by: Whitewall | Monday, 29 February 2016 at 13:45
Well Whitewall ... as sometimes happens when you've "extrapolated" ... (an' me off on another tangent looking in somewheres else - in this case 'Black Blogdom's "General Opinion" of Chris Rock's skewering Everybody' [no wonder the guy quit playing colleges] ... in his words, "Nobody on campus can take a joke anymore without getting offended" ... then - taking a single data point off a study, to supposedly "prove a point" ... *the author reckoning* My Readership ain't gonna bother with reading the Whole Thing.
[The *author* apparently not figuring 'ol JK may be lurking]
A Pew study from 2007 (Pre-Obama):
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/files/2010/10/Race-2007.pdf
"Thus around 92% of the black vote goes only to Democrats. The other 8% are capable of thinking for themselves, and are therefore a threat."
Posted by: JK | Monday, 29 February 2016 at 16:47