Trump and the Heckler’s Veto

I need to expand on my comments about Trump and the Chicago rally cancellation.

First, I am not siding with the left-wing thugs. What they did showed they do not believe in free speech and that they are enemies of the Bill of Rights.

Second, I am not criticizing the cancellation of the event per se. That may have been the correct tactical response to the situation.

Third, my point was that the brouhaha showed one of Trump’s strategic failings. When you cut through the grandiose bullshit, you find a bully with a record of turning tail and running when the going gets too tough. America needs a strong, principles leader not a flashy con man.

48 thoughts on “Trump and the Heckler’s Veto

  1. But if you do have to go with a bully who cuts and runs in the face of adversity, I have a suggestion for Veep…

    Heck, he might even swing Wisconsin… for Hilary.

  2. Levity aside, I agree wholeheartedly on the price society is paying because an increasing fraction of society views “you disagree with me” as “you are evil” and therefore “you should not have any rights” and thus “I will not respect your rights.”

    It was pervasive on the left, now it is widespread enough that it is bipartisan in nature. As a society we have sown the wind…

    • And for the last seven years, we have had a President who has worked to increase deviseness to get votes for the Democrats. Shame on

  3. Trump got more media coverage (interviews by various networks) of his views than he would have addressed in his speech. The actions of some of the “protestors” probably knocked some voters who were on the fence onto Trump’s side. It is unlikely that anyone who saw or read about the protest changed their mind to suddenly oppose Trump.

    Note: Trump is not my first choice for President and his rhetoric is sometimes over the top, but this incident was less about how Trump said things and more about street power.

  4. I’m calling “bullshit!” First of all, what the “protesters” did was evil. Any attempts to create a moral equivalence between Trump and the “protesters” is mitigating the evil of the “protesters.” Donald Trump could have shielded himself from the protesters with a baby snatched from the crowd and it wouldn’t have mattered. The real issue is that the protesters are evil.

    Second, even if it were true that Donald Trump was a craven coward, it wasn’t in the least bit exposed in this situation. If you wish to make such an accusation against Donald Trump, a conjecture for which I have never seen any evidence whatsoever, it would be appropriate to raise such a concern in the context of him having acted in a cowardly fashion.

    Third, the whole accusation reeks of a form of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Once upon a time, when a person was dissatisfied with the direction of the government, it was considered admirable for that man to stand for office with his proposed solutions. That is what Donald Trump has done. Instead of being given such credit, Donald Trump has been treated like an interloper who deserves whatever happens to him. It has reached the point of absurdity where Hilliary Clinton is, now, merely the competition, while Donald Trump is the enemy. I even read talk of alleged “conservatives” stating their intention to endorse Hilliary Clinton should Trump be the nominee.

    • “Once upon a time, when a person was dissatisfied with the direction of the government, it was considered admirable for that man to stand for office with his proposed solutions. That is what Donald Trump has done. ”

      What is Trump’s solution to anything?

      Seriously, the man tells lies, switches positions and contradicts himself at a rate that has to be seen to be believed. So the reality is that we have no idea what his actual position is on pretty much anything, excepting that we have a reasonable idea that he’ll act in his own best interests has he has in the past. Principled, he is not.

      Other than that, he has explicitly promised to undermine the constitution and commit crimes. It’s reasonably clear for example that he wants to undermine the press’ ability to criticise people like him.

      But putting these things together, he’s just saying what people want to hear. That’s called a populist. When you put a populist philosophy together with a refusal to stick to the rules, history tells us that very bad things are about to happen.

      • What is Trump’s solution to anything?

        Donald J. Trump. Seriously, he makes NOKO’s Kim family look like wallflowers. The number of Americans ready to embrace Dear Leader is….shocking. Depressing. Heartbreaking. Frightening.

        • Why, it’s almost reminiscent of our current President and his cult of personality!

          (Not that I disagree, but don’t act like this is a new thing.)

          • Yes, and that’s the problem.

            One guy does something dubious and no one protests, the next guy considers that the minimum he’d get away with.

            For example, Obama openly telling congress and the nation that he’s going to act without them. Even though this was a grossly immoral and illegal act, few batted an eyelid because executive orders have been increasingly abused over the years, even if their number may or may not have increased.

          • Yup. It occurred to me that Trump is white trash Obama back in August.

    • “Instead of being given such credit, Donald Trump has been treated like an interloper who deserves whatever happens to him. ”

      Because he’s not doing any of that. He’s standing up and offering to pay the legal bills of those who assault protesters. He’s tossing out soundbites, not solutions.
      He’s fostering division for the sake of votes.
      It has not always been “admirable” to stand for *any* direction against government. Indeed, a few of those directions have been considered wrong.

      • Reality check, Donald Trump has proposed a number of change of direction for public policy such as ending illegal immigration, rethinking our trade policy, and prioritizing our sons not coming home in body bags.

        Reality check. Donald Trump has never stood at a podium and told the audience he would pay their legal bills if they assaulted someone. Implying that he did was simply wrong.

        Reality check. Whether, or not, you think building a border wall is a “solution” or a “sound bite” depends largely on your point of view. When I see Marco Rubio say illegal aliens “will have to pay a fine, pay back taxes, and learn English,” I have to say that he is blurting out “soundbites” inasmuch as the fine was miniscule, illegal immigrants were being granted the Earned Income and Additional Child Tax Credits retroactively, and that the government would give illegal aliens free English classes that they neither had to take nor pass.

        I have no doubt that proposing radicals changes of direction in the government is inherently “divisive.” If you are satisfied with the status quo I have to say that Donald Trump is not your man.

        Finally, you have completely misunderstood what I wrote in noting that it has generally been considered admirable that folks who were dissatisfied with the current direction of the government to stand for office with their proposed solutions. It is admirable because it is democratic. The presumption is not that such people are right, or ought to win. The presumption is that the electorate is both more active and has more choices.

        • Which Trump are you talking about? The Trump that hired illegals and used the line about jobs (working at a resort) that Americans won’t do? Trump was for the war as well as being for single payer. Trump is not an immigration hawk – he’s not a racist or fascist either. He’s mostly a con man with an insanely huge ego. I wouldn’t someone like Gov. LePage running – a consistent guy who doesn’t give a damn about political correctness. Trump says a lot of stuff, but he’s been all over the place on nearly every issue.

          I like Cruz. Rubio needs to have a shock collar to keep him away from any gangs or Schumers in the area. He’s a recovering amnestyholic, and I think it is possible to keep him on the wagon. We just need to taze him every time he starts heading toward the tequila cabinet. Kasich is uninspired and drearily moderate.

          • I thought the accusation against Donald Trump is that in the eighties he hired a subcontractor to demolish a current building and prepare the lot for a high-rise. That subcontractor hired mostly Polish immigrants, many, or most, being illegals. I am not aware of any accusation of Trump hiring an illegal. I presume that some of his companies probably have, but, I haven’t read any such accusations.

            I find it odd that Donald Trump stands accused of having “an insanely huge ego.” Politics isn’t a place to search for the truly humble. And, Donald Trump is a businessman, not a con man. Equating a real estate empire with the JTMP is just not accurate. Brett Kimberlin’s claims to being a “businessman” are specious. Donald Trump’s are not.

        • Donald Trump has never stood at a podium and told the audience he would pay their legal bills if they assaulted someone.

          Check again. “Knock the crap out of them. I promise you, I will pay the legal fees.”

          • Again, this affirms what I said. The quote is, “If you see anyone throwing tomatoes, knock the crap out of them!…”

            Throwing tomatoes is technically assault. Force is justify in response to force.

    • “Trump Derangement Syndrome” There is noting deranged about disliking Trump. He acts like a proverbial man child. He and quite of a few of his um hum “supporters” have done nothing more than reaffirm every stereotype the LWNJ’s have ever given the republican party.

      • I have no objection to those that dislike Donald Trump. I have no objection to voting for another candidate. Ted Cruz is my man. But, that aside, I have witnessed a vehemence in the attacks that is so disproportional to any underlying offense that it strikes me as deranged. [I have also witnessed attacks on the honesty and integrity of Ted Cruz that are rooted more in Ted Cruz’s honesty, sincerity, and integrity with the folks that elected him than anything else.]

  5. Trump got more free press, and cruz’s and rubio’s statement blaming him (even partially) are so anti-free speech that I wonder if they will ever be worthy of my support, and this is coming from someone that still has a Cruz for attorney general sticker on his old Honda.

    • Noting that speech has consequences is not anti-free speech. Wanting to “open up the libel laws so we can sue for lots of money” is.

    • …and this is coming from someone that still has a Cruz for attorney general sticker on his old Honda.

      BTW, how do you have a campaign sticker for an office Cruz never ran for on your old car? Did you make it yourself?

          • It’s really pretty simple.

            He started an early run at AG, but dropped out out of loyalty (and the fact he probably wouldn’t win) when Greg Abbott said he was running for re-election. I’ve been a Cruz fan since he argued successfully that we can kill our illegals who are due execution. I was able to get a sticker before they withdrew.

          • An apology that says “Pablo doesn’t know as much about Texas politics as he thought he did” would be nice.

  6. Those who support Mr. Trump believe he’ll do what he’s promised; some have an almost religious fervor in their support of him. I see nothing in his history to cause me to believe he’s honest or trustworthy. In fact, there is a lot to suggest he’s neither. Just ask many of his former business partners and wives, or the husbands he bragged about making a cuckold. He’s simply not a decent, moral person by my standards.

    If immigration is an issue important to you, then you may support Mr. Trump in part because you believe he’ll enforce the law, including building a wall. It’s established to my satisfaction that Mr. Trump is not honest and trustworthy, so I don’t take him at his word on this issue. I don’t see how anyone can when admits he told the NYT his immigration plans were “negotiable” and refuses to authorize release of the tape to prove one way or another. Just like with spoliation, an adverse inference should be drawn.

    Bottom line, imo:

    Can anyone provide a link where I can buy a Trump steak? I mean, didn’t Mr. Trump recently insist that business is still viable and active?

    No one is perfect; one mistake isn’t a big deal; but how many will it take for Mr. Trump to lose support? My only guess to explain the support of his informed, intelligent supporters (as opposed to the democrats, low-info voters, those looking for a job/political power, white supremacists, and other low-lives in his coalition), are compartmentalizing the various traits they’ve never considered supporting in the past, because they know the system is very broken and they believe he’ll at least shake it up, and maybe fix it. The flaw in that theory is the smart supporters know that Mr. Trump is of that broken system, and has used it to his own benefit, just like too many other politicians.

    Who else do we know who doubles down when caught in a blatant lie?

    • The fact that so many people are supporting Bernie on the left and Trump on the right should be a reminder of how we elected Obama in 2008. People are once again voting on campaign slogans and propaganda instead of facts, principals,and policies. That spells disaster for this country.

      You’re right . Trump supporters have become almost cult like. It’s one thing to be upset at D.C. politics, but a whole nother to try and elect people who have no idea what they’re going to do or how to do it once elected. This is not the time for “On The Job training ” for Trump if he were to be elected. His actions do not match his words either. He’s made that very clear with his “flexible” comments.

    • “Who else do we know who doubles down when caught in a blatant lie?”

      Umm, Mario Rubio, Ted Cruz, and John Kasich.

      Rubio: He ran as a Tea Party conservative in 2010 who strongly opposed amnesty. Subsequently, he wrote with Chuck Schumer the Amnesty Bill. In 2016, he claims he never intended to pass the bill he wrote. His lying on the topic of amnesty reached Orwellian levels when he accused Ted Cruz of also supporting amnesty, an accusation that rested solely on listener being “low-information” as to what actually happened during the debate. Jeff Sessions, the leader of the opposition to the Amnesty Bill corrected the record, yet, Mario Rubio has continued to double down on that lie.

      Cruz: He moved closer to Donald Trump’s position of immigration and trade and tried to spin his changes as non-changes somehow. Though he has obviously changed positions, he persists in denying that he has. Aside from Bernie Sanders, who is paragon of virtue concerning consistently–consistently wrong– Ted Cruz has been the most consistent of all the candidates, so there is less amno there. But, there is some.

      Kasich: Ran an ad in which he stated that he had “rejected Obamacare.” As governor he unilaterally imposed Obamacare [namely medicare expansion], bypassing a legislature that did in fact reject Obamacare. His entire political career has been a giant shift to the Left.

      In a business that dishonesty is endemic, and a primary in which both dishonesty and flip-flopping have been rampant, I am suppose to be shocked that one of the candidates has “lied” and “flip-flopped.”

      Now, there might be a there there to your argument, but, you simply haven’t stated what it is.

      • Jeff Sessions disagrees with your view of Cruz’s immigration stance. However, I didn’t mean to refer to politicians, or anyone, changing their positions or changing their minds about something. I referred to blatantly lying, you know, like presented Bush Brothers’ steaks as being from the defunct Trump Steaks. Gotta link where I can order Trump steaks?

        How about a link to the comment about Cruz supposedly made by Coburn that Trump kept repeating even after Coburn publicly denied ever saying any such thing?

        From what I’ve seen, Trump’s lies could be described as sociopathic.

        • Again, I pointed out examples of Mario Rubio, Ted Cruz and John Kasich “blatantly lying.” Claiming that in writing the Amnesty Bill he never intended that it pass is one of the most blatant lies I have ever heard in politics,

          As to Trump Steaks may I suggest that you read,

          It clearly states that Trump branded steaks are still being sold in some of Donald Trump’s restaurants. That is simply a fact. Some of his critics are so down right obsessed with playing “gotcha” that they don’t do basic research.

          • Again, Jeff Sessions, who endorsed a different candidate, so doesn’t have a dog in this fight, disagrees with your characterization that Cruz lied. Even if you were correct, and you’re not, at best you described someone changing their mind.

            Changing one’s mind is not the same as lying, much less blatantly lying. Presenting Bush Brothers’ steaks and claiming them as your own is blatant lying, and only one of many from the amoral bully you’re defending.

            As for claiming that some of Trump’s restaurants have steaks available is the same as one having their own steak company selling steaks to the general public through Sharper Image or other outlets, well, there’s just no arguing with that kind of ‘logic’.

          • First of all, you seem to be arguing about some strawman. First of all, I have accused Ted Cruz solely of lying about changing his mind. The “at worst,” is that Ted Cruz is a person who has changed his mind and outright denied that fact when confronted. I have once stated or implied that changing one’s mind is lying. I have stated that changing one’s mind, and blatantly claiming to have never changed one’s mind is.

            Jeff Sessions spoke of Ted Cruz’s opposition, or support, for the Amnesty Bill.

            As to Trump Steaks, it would seem intuitively obvious that the discussion ought to be about where they are still sold, and, not, where they used to be sold.

            Even if we assume there is a there there in your argument, what is left for you to argue? That Donald Trump started a Steak Business that sold steaks and hamburgers at a retailer who no longer carries the steaks, but, does still sell those steaks at his properties. If there is a “lie” therein, how exactly does it rise to the level of exhibiting sociopathology?

  7. 1) Trump was, and is, a democrat: Gov’t healthcare, gun control, eminent domain, pro-abortion, political donations to the Clintons, etc.
    2) Trump was, and is a salesman: salesmen don’t sell themselves, the sell you back to you

    As he is running on the Republican ticket (the Hillary machine is too entrenched, and the republican field was open), he is selling what he thinks we want to hear. It isn’t the truth, it’s just what he thinks we want to hear. That’s why the condemnation of David Duke wasn’t the immediate full throated in your face attack that he is known for. He isn’t a racist, but I believe he thinks we are. I think it’s the same for all those other issues he’s “evolved” on. He doesn’t believe in those issues, but he knows we do, so that’s what he sells. As for delivering, he’s on record as using the initial big ask as a negotiating tactic. There won’t be “The Wall™”, that’s the big ask to be negotiated away.

    He has one and really only one selling point: He is being an unapologetic asshole to people that have been unapologetic assholes to us for 15 years. Even W’s surrogates didn’t come right out and call his opponents unpatriotic, they “questioned” their patriotism. Obama publicly equated us with kidnappers himself. And while I *really*, *really* emotionally enjoy when Trump tosses bombs back, I must remember the truth that has been so well documented about a certain resident of Wisconsin: Assholes gotta asshole. Eventually, it’ll be our turn for him to be an asshole towards us. And he will.

    Because assholes gotta asshole.

Leave a Reply