George Will vs. Trump
 

Never been a big fan of George Will (except for his love of baseball), but I have to give him credit for a good line. Trump tweeted about Will leaving the GOP, and Will responded:

WALLACE: Now, not surprisingly, Donald Trump has tweeted his reaction to this news. Let's put it up on the screen. He says you are "overrated" and that you lost your way a long time ago. Would you like to respond?

WILL: He has an advantage on me because he can say everything he knows about any subject in 140 characters and I can't.

I read George Will mostly for his use of language, though the underlying message is usually bogus. In this case, however, he's right.

Odd I never really liked his syntax or style...always seemed too convoluted for me.

The thing is that George Will is a perfect example of what a large portion of the Republican electorate are sick of.

I'm not necessarily a fan of his syntax or style, as it reeks of presumptuousness and arrogance. Despite that, his pieces are well-written and often thought-provoking. I think he's trying to take over Bill Safire's mantle as the recognized leader in the use of the English language in conservative political discourse and opinion-writing (another writer whose writing I admired and consistently read, even if I disagreed with much of what he wrote).

Yeh, Trump voters are sick of people smarter than them (and that represents pretty much everybody but them).

Here is how Trump derives his support. :)

http://www.thedailycall.org/wp-conte...01/Scan-23.jpg

Clueless response.

Trump and Sanders were products of the same anti-establishment mood that most of the electorate now finds itself in. And if the Brexit vote is any indication, that anti-establishment mood is going world-wide.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...e85877257.html

Sure Mike. That's why Clinton won the Democratic primary by 4 million votes and almost 400 delegates. She's also leading Herr Trumpenstein by double digits in the latest polls.

To anyone without a partisan agenda, the writing is on the wall. The GOP is undergoing a massive transformation at this point while the Donkeys are rapidly coalescing to defeat this bigot and con artist in November.

What comes after the next GOP post mortem is unclear but I suspect that the Tea Nutz will be cast out into the outer darkness as the first order of business.

Good riddance.

I agree with this.

The Clinton people don't seem to get that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDGVa6ZwXiQ

The Bernie Bros and Hillarybots will form an uneasy coalition to defeat Trump but after that all bets are off. The Democratic party is just as fractured now as the Republicans were after the Tea Party arrived on the scene. Both major parties are in for a period of massive restructuring and the corporate Neo-liberal Third Way Democrats are finished.

Poor old Bob is just like all the pundits who have been saying Trump can't do this and can't do that, and the UK won't leave the EU etc. Clueless.

Good, I've never been a big fan of the 3rd Way but it did get Bill in office back in '92 and to some extent Obama in '08.

I hope the millennials actually show up to vote in '16 and stay engaged through '18, '20 and further into the future so we Dems can ungerrymander the House.

I hope you older heads keep after the kids after this election. They need to understand that revolutions come from the bottom up. Get them on city councils, school boards, water district boards and state government. That's where real power is manifested.

It's their future and they have to grab it. You and me are just old fuckin' hippies with one foot in the grave. :cool:

Yeah, I'm still shy of 60, eunuch and I ain't goin' anywhere anytime soon.
Not while there are conservatives and libertarians like you left to piss off. :D

I prefer "Junkless" or "Smoothie".

Ironic, isn't it? When Bob Dole said that he wanted to be "the bridge to the past" during the 1996 election, Bill Clinton made hay with the response: "'We do not need to build a bridge to the past, we need to build a bridge to the future!''

20 years later, Hillary Clinton is absolutely the "bridge to the past."

You and Bob are preoccupied with peckers. Whatever blows your dress up.

Never think that you are going to piss me off about anything.

Anybody who makes 30,000 posts on a forum that a dozen people look at on it's best day is a statement in itself.

Awwww, thanks for noticing 'No Junk'. You're kinda sweet yourself for a chainsaw totin' white boy from North Cackalacky. :rolleyes:

I'm cute too.

Glad you think so, ZJ.

Yet still too progressive for you. That should tell you something.;) She may want to turn back the clock to the '90's, but you're "Make America Great Again" candidate wants to turn it back to the '50's.

Sort of. The 50's without strongly progressive taxation or strong unions.

Yeh, kind of a hybrid era, the '50's with the labor policy of the 1890's. The good old days.

Pre- civil rights, figures.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

The Neo Gilded Age kinda suits T'Rumpf.

It's a good thing a woman is going to kick his fat ass all the way back to Mar el Lago in Palm Beach.

Well, since you are so absorbed with my private parts I just didn't want to mess up your dream.

Sorry bro. Old, white, married & straight but not narrowminded guy here. You'll need to get your kicks elsewhere. :rolleyes:

I know how you feel, I'm sort of that way about women's breasts.

Don't you have a chainsaw to rebuild or something? :confused:

Back on topic to the OP I don't read op ed pieces anymore. I figure I can decide things on my own. I occasionally read the LA Times editorials. Marcel Proust, in his 3500 page book In Search Of Lost Time said that fiction was more truthful (or real) than non-fiction because all authors of non-fiction ultimately slant what they write to an ulterior motive that cannot be ever proven to be completely true. Of course op-ed pieces are the zenith of ulterior motive.

Not really. She's cut from much the same political cloth as you are. However, her bridge's destination is to the "pay to play", "everything's for sale as long as I get a cut" 1990‘s style politics of Bill Clinton. 1992 - 2000 was the true decade of greed, at least inside the beltway.

Perhaps, but there seems little doubt that Trump's motives, beyond ego gratification, is to build his brand.

Pretty much the same thing.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

You mean there's a politician out there somewhere that isn't "all about me"? I'd like to meet that one.

I believe there are a few, but neither of these candidates are. Elizabeth Warren, for example, is likely not, whether or not you agree with her policies.