Anybody got Beef with the Dispatch, Jonah Goldberg, David French etc.

[flyingpylon]

For anyone interested, it might be worth reading some articles at The Federalist and following some of their contributors on Twitter for a while. I'm sure you will find some kooky articles or opinions you vehemently disagree with, but it will be up to you to dismiss them individually or declare the entire site to be unworthy.

Here's a good piece by Michael Doran from 2018: The Anti-Trump Conservative Firing Circle Is Wildly Out Of Touch With The American Electorate

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

[joypog]

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

(edit: <snip>) Apologies for using the offensive term.

[Xan]

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

I was borrowing the term from ishrugged who utilized the phrase it a couple responses up. I never used it previously. Apologies if it offended you.

No, it appears you were the one to use it first. I Shrugged quoted you when he asked for clarification.

[joypog]

joypog, could I reiterate a question that I Shrugged asked and that you misunderstood or avoided?

Are you saying that ANYONE who supports Trump, prior to the "lesser of two evils" general election phase, is a bootlicker? Your response seemed to be that relatively few people here are in that camp. But there are some, and you didn't address your thoughts on them.

It's a question of options.

I'm assuming that GOP voters will have some options during the primaries. I don't think it's just gonna be Jeb v. Donald (in which case, I understand why anti-war conservatives would vote for Trump again). But Trump over DeSantis? Nikki Halley? etc? There should plenty of choices.

But to answer your question directly. If someone does not realize that Trump is patently unfit for office after the last 4 years, I don't take their political opinions seriously.

[joypog]

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

I was borrowing the term from ishrugged who utilized the phrase it a couple responses up. I never used it previously. Apologies if it offended you.

No, it appears you were the one to use it first. I Shrugged quoted you when he asked for clarification.

ACK!!! My apologies to ishrugged!!!

The fault is all mine. I should have doublechecked before responding.

No excuses.

Thank you for the catch.

[dockinGA]

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

I was borrowing the term from ishrugged who utilized the phrase it a couple responses up. I never used it previously. Apologies if it offended you.

No, it appears you were the one to use it first. I Shrugged quoted you when he asked for clarification.

ACK!!! My apologies to ishrugged!!!

The fault is all mine. I should have doublechecked before responding.

No excuses.

Thank you for the catch.

Joypog, I'm not exactly going to defend your use of 'bootlicking', and I think the constant name-calling by people on both sides of the aisle is something that needs to stop, pronto (although Trump is arguably ring-leader when it comes to name-calling). I will however offer a little bit more insight on why some people look at the whole Trump movement as something cult like and extremely disturbing.

A little background about me. I'm from a very conservative, church going family in the Bible belt. Grew up in church, I read my Bible daily, etc, as do many if not most members of my family. 2000 was the first presidential election I was eligible to vote in. I was told in 2000 that if Bush didn't win the world was going to end, my family was 110% behind the Iraq War, Afghanistan, Kuwait, hated the Russkies, etc. etc. In 2004, if Bush didn't win we were going to be socialist/communist. In 2008, I was told that if Mccain didn't win the country was going to be lost. You get the picture.

In the last 6 to 7 years, my family has now come to hate George W Bush, Dick Cheney, John Mccain, Mitt Romney (especially Mitt), Paul Ryan, etc. as much or more than the Democrats.

Obama ran up huge deficits, and my family (and myself) rightly complained about it. When Trump does it though.....

I have a brother-in-law who has never been politically active, but had Democratic leanings up until 6 years ago. He now wears almost exclusively Trump/QAnon branded gear, attends rallies, hangs on Trump's every word, and I'm pretty certain if there are anymore 'insurrections at the Capitol' he will be there. His stated reasons for becoming more political now: He hates Mexicans and blacks.

I remember my family's outrage at Clinton's shenanigans and affairs. These things are no longer an issue for politicians, as long as you have an R next to your name and you 'own the libs'.

I attend a church where several members threatened to leave, or did in fact leave, because a new pastor had the audacity to say 'Trump cannot save you.'

My mother has stated, point blank, that there is absolutely nothing Donald Trump can do, no facts that could come out, that would make her lose faith in him and stop supporting him. Trump, the kind of person he is, the attitudes he has, etc. would've been anathema to her until about 10 years ago. Especially since he was a Democrat until about 10 years ago. She is also adamant she is not in a cult.

My dad and brother are more in the 'well he's the nominee so we've gotta support him' camp, and also capable of more nuanced thought than some other family members and less likely to get their feelings hurt and lash out when confronted with certain facts, so I talk with them much more often about politics than I do with others. However, they only get their news from Fox, Newsmax, etc. and the snippets they hear through the grapevine from more 'conspiracist' sources like Facebook and Twitter. They dismiss much of that stuff that they hear, but the fact that they only get their news from one source does make them susceptible to some of it. In many ways, they're the most disturbing and disappointing case. I understand some of where they're coming from (I can't stand the Dems either), but they have left aside 99% of their previous 'principles' in the process of sorta kinda halfway supporting Trump. They know he's kinda bad, so they don't want to support him 100%, or at least claim that they don't, but when the rubber meets the road they will probably support him in the upcoming primary because 'he's the only one that can beat Biden', completely unable to connect the dots and realize that he's already lost to him once.

Anyway, this is just a few snippets of what I've seen change, just within my family, since the arrival of Trump. There absolutely are 'bootlickers' out there, maybe even some on this forum. I would call many of my family members 'bootlickers'. But, we need to reach a point where instinctively hating the other side is not acceptable, encouraged, and sought after behavior, or this country really will be in a world of hurt this time. For the record, Biden's recent speeches have been catastrophic in destroying his attempted narrative of 'unity'. I think there's some truth in what he's said, but it's not his place to get out there and say it in the fashion he's saying it.

[joypog]

...
Anyway, this is just a few snippets of what I've seen change, just within my family, since the arrival of Trump. There absolutely are 'bootlickers' out there, maybe even some on this forum. I would call many of my family members 'bootlickers'. But, we need to reach a point where instinctively hating the other side is not acceptable, encouraged, and sought after behavior, or this country really will be in a world of hurt this time. For the record, Biden's recent speeches have been catastrophic in destroying his attempted narrative of 'unity'. I think there's some truth in what he's said, but it's not his place to get out there and say it in the fashion he's saying it.

Thank you for the extended response. I agree with everything you wrote, including this paragraph.

Well he (Goldberg) didn't defect to the dem's...but he's been Anti-Trump and generally down on Trump's GOP bootlickers.

In my slight defense of the original offending post I was trying to reference GOP operatives. When talking about politics I reserve my ire towards political pundits and professionals who should "know better". I believe us normal folks have better things to do with our lives life than to obsess over politics and thus deserve grace whichever direction we vote.

However, I now see how my initial use of the phrase and subsequent call-backs could be read as a blanket condemnation of all voters. Since I'm the writer, that's my fault, and I totally agree that this is an awful dynamic to foster.

To be clear, I also agree with the critique of Biden. Time and place. If he wanted to go on the stump as a campaigner, that's his right to employ such a political strategy. But I hate the idea of the Office of the President being used in this fashion. Didn't like it for Trump, don't like it for Biden.

In the whataboutism game, I'm happy to pick neither.

[Kbg]

Well there you have it dockinGA...you're part of a family of RINOs. Actually, let's start a new acronym...you are part of a COIN family. Conservative only in name.

I was nodding to everything you wrote. A lot of similarity with my world actually.

My experience is that "whataboutism" runs rampant with these people (my friends, family, acquaintances as well). As soon as they are challenged on anything that is flat out not conservative or is ethically/morally wrong you get a reference to the other side and something they've done. And I agree, they spend WAY too much time with a couple of news sources that are TV based.

My very first indication that something was a changin with the R party was when Mike Huckabee went after Mitt Romney and not because he was a rich guy that ran a takeover hedge fund that destroyed businesses and jobs (which was the Ds attack line). I kinda thought we moved past religious bigotry in politics with JFK.

In any event, no matter where you are at on the political spectrum...you do have to appeal to at least 50%+ of your fellow countrymen/women.

This keeps the crazies from taking over.

[dockinGA]

Well there you have it dockinGA...you're part of a family of RINOs. Actually, let's start a new acronym...you are part of a COIN family. Conservative only in name.

I like that, COIN. Love it, actually. And the fact that you 'coined' a new acronym called COIN just makes it even better.

[glennds]

In any event, no matter where you are at on the political spectrum...you do have to appeal to at least 50%+ of your fellow countrymen/women.

This keeps the crazies from taking over.

Unless the crazy quotient of the voting populace rises above 50%+.
Or unless the crazy quotient of the voting populace is close, and the swing center can be persuaded to hold their noses on the crazy parts, but join anyway for something that attracts them (promise of jobs, tough on an adversary, better for business, drain the swamp, or the other candidate is just that bad)
Or unless the crazy quotient gets close enough and gerrymandering, state legislature voter displacement, other techniques can take it across the finish line.
In any of these situations the crazies indeed take over.

Funny thing is, the one man who was the face of latter 20th century conservatism, William F. Buckley, spelled out the risks of all three and the threat of demagoguery.
But he aimed his warnings at a liberal demagogue preying upon an uneducated voter base, what he called "any sucker who could stagger in to a voting booth". He didn't seem to consider that it could happen in the name of conservatism.
Nor did he seem to realize a day may come where the definition of conservatism would be so radically different from the one he helped define for 40 years.
WFB the RINO

[Kbg]

But he aimed his warnings at a liberal demagogue preying upon an uneducated voter base. He didn't seem to consider that it could happen in the name of conservatism.

Nor did he seem to realize a day may come where the definition of conservatism would be so radically different from the one he helped define for 40 years. WFB the RINO

Yes to all and the last two are painful for me.

I thought Biden's speech and all the background optics were poorly done, but the main message was not completely off the mark.

If one is a bit up on 19th and 20th century history, it's clear assaults on freedom come from the left and the right.

My take on things right now is the left crazies are going after local institutions whereas the right crazies are going after national institutions...but I also have hope and faith in the American people. Politicians who have fostered extremes are losing (not all of them, but enough that other politicians are getting the message and have to rein in a bit).

I think abortion is going to be very interesting to watch as an issue over the next couple of years. It's an issue, according to polling, where there is quite a bit of consensus. Like mid 60%, but consensus options are never on the table.

[glennds]

I thought Biden's speech and all the background optics were poorly done, but the main message was not completely off the mark.

Under the heading of unification, I have wondered what effect, if any, it would have had if Biden had worked in a shot or two at the more extreme elements among Democrats.
Something to the effect that polarization and extremism are threats to democracy no matter which direction they come from.

[Xan]

I thought Biden's speech and all the background optics were poorly done, but the main message was not completely off the mark.

Under the heading of unification, I have wondered what effect, if any, it would have had if Biden had worked in a shot or two at the more extreme elements among Democrats.
Something to the effect that polarization and extremism are threats to democracy no matter which direction they come from.

Or even better, some like "look, most of these folks aren't irrational; they're concerned about A, B, and C, and while I have many disagreements with them, I promise to work through these issues as honestly and openly as I can to earn their trust."

[glennds]

I thought Biden's speech and all the background optics were poorly done, but the main message was not completely off the mark.

Under the heading of unification, I have wondered what effect, if any, it would have had if Biden had worked in a shot or two at the more extreme elements among Democrats.
Something to the effect that polarization and extremism are threats to democracy no matter which direction they come from.

Or even better, some like "look, most of these folks aren't irrational; they're concerned about A, B, and C, and while I have many disagreements with them, I promise to work through these issues as honestly and openly as I can to earn their trust."

+1

[vnatale]

Anyway, this is just a few snippets of what I've seen change, just within my family, since the arrival of Trump. There absolutely are 'bootlickers' out there, maybe even some on this forum. I would call many of my family members 'bootlickers'. But, we need to reach a point where instinctively hating the other side is not acceptable, encouraged, and sought after behavior, or this country really will be in a world of hurt this time. For the record, Biden's recent speeches have been catastrophic in destroying his attempted narrative of 'unity'. I think there's some truth in what he's said, but it's not his place to get out there and say it in the fashion he's saying it.

Many thanks for all the time you put into the above. Quite enlightening.

For me it again underscores how you and I, for example. could be friends who respect a ton about each other but cannot fathom how each of us have certain political views which are opposite to each other's. I could say to you, "How can someone as smart as you believe that??!!"

[dockinGA]

Anyway, this is just a few snippets of what I've seen change, just within my family, since the arrival of Trump. There absolutely are 'bootlickers' out there, maybe even some on this forum. I would call many of my family members 'bootlickers'. But, we need to reach a point where instinctively hating the other side is not acceptable, encouraged, and sought after behavior, or this country really will be in a world of hurt this time. For the record, Biden's recent speeches have been catastrophic in destroying his attempted narrative of 'unity'. I think there's some truth in what he's said, but it's not his place to get out there and say it in the fashion he's saying it.

Many thanks for all the time you put into the above. Quite enlightening.

For me it again underscores how you and I, for example. could be friends who respect a ton about each other but cannot fathom how each of us have certain political views which are opposite to each other's. I could say to you, "How can someone as smart as you believe that??!!"

We are each entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Too often, lately especially, people just think they can have their own set of facts. I used to work with a guy, a massive conspiracy theorist, who wanted to argue with me that 2+2=4 only because the elites tell us it does. What a load of hogwash. I'm not a mathematician, or a deep thinking philosopher, but 2+2=4 sure seems to me like an irrefutable fact, and to insist that it's because the elites tell us it is, well..... Needless to say, actual intellectual debate was absolutely impossible with that guy.

[I Shrugged]

But joypog, your continued use of the term "bootlicking Trumpists" doesn't inspire much confidence in the sincerity of your requests.

I was borrowing the term from ishrugged who utilized the phrase it a couple responses up. I never used it previously. Apologies if it offended you.

No, it appears you were the one to use it first. I Shrugged quoted you when he asked for clarification.

ACK!!! My apologies to ishrugged!!!

The fault is all mine. I should have doublechecked before responding.

No excuses.

Thank you for the catch.

It's not a real big deal to me. I say bad things about neocons and the crazy portions of the left. Maybe I should tone it down. I just wanted to understand where you are coming from. Trump has YUGE! flaws but, at the same time, we are witnessing the establishment propaganda/brainwashing machine at full throttle. So it's interesting to see the venom that is being generated.

[I Shrugged]

....

A little background about me. I'm from a very conservative, church going family in the Bible belt. Grew up in church, I read my Bible daily, etc, as do many if not most members of my family. 2000 was the first presidential election I was eligible to vote in. I was told in 2000 that if Bush didn't win the world was going to end, my family was 110% behind the Iraq War, Afghanistan, Kuwait, hated the Russkies, etc. etc. In 2004, if Bush didn't win we were going to be socialist/communist. In 2008, I was told that if Mccain didn't win the country was going to be lost. You get the picture.

In the last 6 to 7 years, my family has now come to hate George W Bush, Dick Cheney, John Mccain, Mitt Romney (especially Mitt), Paul Ryan, etc. as much or more than the Democrats.

....

"He may be an SOB, but he's our SOB!"

I said a week or so ago, consider the possibility that there a strong and sizeable conservative base that kinda knows but can't elaborate that Bush et al basically sold their way of life down the GOP corporate river. Trump comes along and says all the things about the country that they have felt but never really hoped to hear from a person who has a chance to win the presidency. This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

[vnatale]

Anyway, this is just a few snippets of what I've seen change, just within my family, since the arrival of Trump. There absolutely are 'bootlickers' out there, maybe even some on this forum. I would call many of my family members 'bootlickers'. But, we need to reach a point where instinctively hating the other side is not acceptable, encouraged, and sought after behavior, or this country really will be in a world of hurt this time. For the record, Biden's recent speeches have been catastrophic in destroying his attempted narrative of 'unity'. I think there's some truth in what he's said, but it's not his place to get out there and say it in the fashion he's saying it.

Many thanks for all the time you put into the above. Quite enlightening.

For me it again underscores how you and I, for example. could be friends who respect a ton about each other but cannot fathom how each of us have certain political views which are opposite to each other's. I could say to you, "How can someone as smart as you believe that??!!"

We are each entitled to our own opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts. Too often, lately especially, people just think they can have their own set of facts. I used to work with a guy, a massive conspiracy theorist, who wanted to argue with me that 2+2=4 only because the elites tell us it does. What a load of hogwash. I'm not a mathematician, or a deep thinking philosopher, but 2+2=4 sure seems to me like an irrefutable fact, and to insist that it's because the elites tell us it is, well..... Needless to say, actual intellectual debate was absolutely impossible with that guy.

Capture.JPG (58.62 KiB) Viewed 2410 times

[vnatale]

....

A little background about me. I'm from a very conservative, church going family in the Bible belt. Grew up in church, I read my Bible daily, etc, as do many if not most members of my family. 2000 was the first presidential election I was eligible to vote in. I was told in 2000 that if Bush didn't win the world was going to end, my family was 110% behind the Iraq War, Afghanistan, Kuwait, hated the Russkies, etc. etc. In 2004, if Bush didn't win we were going to be socialist/communist. In 2008, I was told that if Mccain didn't win the country was going to be lost. You get the picture.

In the last 6 to 7 years, my family has now come to hate George W Bush, Dick Cheney, John Mccain, Mitt Romney (especially Mitt), Paul Ryan, etc. as much or more than the Democrats.

....

"He may be an SOB, but he's our SOB!"

I said a week or so ago, consider the possibility that there a strong and sizeable conservative base that kinda knows but can't elaborate that Bush et al basically sold their way of life down the GOP corporate river. Trump comes along and says all the things about the country that they have felt but never really hoped to hear from a person who has a chance to win the presidency. This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

Where the sports world and the political world share some similarities. The player on the other team may be your most hated player. But then when he gets to be on your team .... well, "He's great!".

Some of you may be old enough to remember Johnny Most the Boston Celtics radio announcer. He was the ultimate homer announcer, regularly denigrating players on other teams as part of his broadcast.

There was one particular player that he went overboard on (even by Most's own standards). Then that player became a Celtic!

We all were wondering how was Johnny Most going to handle this, what was he going to say.

He dealt with it directly and right away by saying ..."What can I say? He's [that player] reformed!"

Yet another example how in sports and politics and every other aspect of life our personal biases heavily influence our interpretation of "the facts". There are definitely facts. But they are oftentimes widely open to interpretation.

[glennds]

This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

I Shrugged - I'm just trying to better understand this logic.
(Your quote) "People who are Trump supporters have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were"..... when, and under which President/party?

[joypog]

This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

I Shrugged - I'm just trying to better understand this logic.
People who are Trump supporters have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were..... when, and under which President/party?

Hilary told me America is already great, so 2012? But then the New York Time says we've been shit since 1619.

So I think 1618 is the correct answer.

So that would be King James....makes sense since he wrote the Bible.

[dockinGA]

"He may be an SOB, but he's our SOB!"

I said a week or so ago, consider the possibility that there a strong and sizeable conservative base that kinda knows but can't elaborate that Bush et al basically sold their way of life down the GOP corporate river. Trump comes along and says all the things about the country that they have felt but never really hoped to hear from a person who has a chance to win the presidency. This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

I have some sympathies, I guess you could say, with this point of view. I have family, friends, coworkers, etc. who have espoused the same or similar viewpoints. A couple of counterpoints/questions:
1. In the beginning of the 2016 primary cycle, Trump's support was far less than 50%. He won the primary in part because the non-Trump vote was so fractured. I still can't understand how so many people went 180 degrees on their feelings of Trump, up to and including some members of the conservative commentariat, but I know that having it become obvious that Trump was going to be the nominee, and seeing members of the media jump on SS Trump drove at least some of the non-Trumpers to support him. I know several people who are still rabid Trump supporters who earlier couldn't stand him, and I just cannot understand this. I've tried, but I can't.
2. Many politicians have said the things Trump has said. Probably many politicians in Republican primaries of the past 15 years. I can't figure out how Trump was the one who harnessed this energy, other than his ability and willingness to 'hit below the belt', basically, and that appeals to certain instincts of the base. I guess that's his job as a politician, but this is downright scary to me, and has largely made the Republican party a political party with no ideas other than 'owning the libs'.
3. Trump's been in political life for 6 or so years now. He made lots of promises early on, and continues to make sometimes contradictory promises today. The wall isn't built and Mexico didn't pay for it. He played golf as much or more than Obama. HIs grandiose proclamations of sky high GDP fell flat. He failed to do anything about the debt, in fact he just made it worse. His draining of the swamp was laughable. He promised he would prosecute people for mishandling classified documents, and then has apparently taken a whole stash of top secret information to Mar-a-Lago. Now he's saying he wants the death penalty for drug dealers, when he pardoned and released folks like that from prison while president. At what point do people start to realize he's not who he says he is?

I kinda disagree with your comments about being a threat the the establishment, though. Trump is a populist, and his movement is a populist movement. Those movements never really last very long. I guess short term it's a threat, but long term, the establishment swamp creatures will be fine, in other walks of life if not politics.

[vnatale]

This is the basis for the feelings for Trump, and the newfound disdain for the old GOP people. They haven't been sold a bill of goods. They have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were and that things are going wrong now.

That's an existential threat to the establishment, and it has to destroy him. As you can plainly see.

I Shrugged - I'm just trying to better understand this logic.
People who are Trump supporters have been told that it's okay to remember how much better their lives and the direction of the country were..... when, and under which President/party?

Tonight started reading John McWhorter's book - Woke Racism. Almost all here would agree with what he writes. What I have read here written by others here have helped me better understand what he writes regarding this.

His thesis is that the anti-racist crowd are really a religion. He calls those who belong to this "religion" - The Elect.

The following sentence describes their behavior. But I find it also relates to glennds's question above. It applies to both "The Elect" and Trump's message.

"Catastrophizing the current moment is a hallmark of ideology; in 1951, Eric Hoffer's The True Believer noted that movements such as Fascism, Communism, and nineteenth-century segregationists have attracted and retained their followers by appealing to an idealized past, a fantastical future, and an indelibly polluted present."

[Kbg]

And folks here's the deal...both parties are completely lying out of both sides of their mouths economically...what you see here is average hour wages (non-management types) divided by the CPI. Even if you think CPI is crap, it's still been the same denominator for the most part.

Economically folks are doing pretty good...I was a lower middle class kid in the 60-70s and categorically people where I live have more toys, go on more vacations, eat out way more and have bigger houses comparatively.