I don't understand this sentence. Do you mean that someone (Trump) liberally disdains the public? I mean, that's self-evident.
Then it follows that you're saying we're masochists. NTTAWWT
I was answering this alteration to my statement.
Trump plays the media public like a fiddle. They are such fools.
The idea that the public who support Trump, the tens of thousands that show up to his rallies, are fools being played by him shows a disdain for their intelligence. It is exactly the sort of behavior that generates so much support for him. The silent majority are sick of being taken for fools by the establishment.
Trump plays the media public like a fiddle. They are such fools.
and proud of their "homespun ways" and "common sense."
Education and rational thought have been vilified in America. We were the country that landed on the moon, developed interstate highways, developed medical breakthroughs. Now, our attention is merely on girls filmed in private fellating a boyfriend - making them multimillionaires, cultural arbiters, and role models for our children.
This is spot on and quite funny. Passion making up for eloquence.
The National Review attempt to sway voters into not voting for Donald Trump as the GOP nominee is lame. What happened to the tent the Republicans wanted to broaden after the 2012 election. Is this really a member's only club? Is this why Republicans can't win a general election? Democrats don't even do this.
I need to add one level to the BOTTOM of the persuasion stack. That level involves arguing about the definition of a word.
Persuasion Stack
Identity (best)
Analogy (okay, not great)
Reason (useless)
Definition (capitulation)
You’ll see a lot of debate on whether Trump is a true conservative or not. That is argument by definition. It is the linguistic equivalent of throwing your gun at a monster because the clip is empty.
National Review’s cover story, in which the big question comes down to whether Trump is a true conservative or not, is your tell for capitulation on the right.
The left is still in the fight, but the right just capitulated to Trump.
In the 2D world, it might seem that National Review’s organized resistance of “thought leaders” opposed to Trump is a big deal. But that incorrectly assumes “thought” was ever important. In the 3D world of persuasion, National Review’s move is nothing but throwing the gun at the monster.
Republicans kick National Review magazine out of February debate after it devotes an entire issue to savaging Donald Trump - who insists the 'dead' mag is trying to 'get a little publicity'
Donald Trump leads the polls nationally and in most states in the race for the Republican presidential nomination. There are understandable reasons for his eminence, and he has shown impressive gut-level skill as a campaigner. But he is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones.
Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy. (He and Bernie Sanders have shared more than funky outer-borough accents.) Since declaring his candidacy he has taken a more conservative line, yet there are great gaping holes in it. (...)
The free range Tea Party chickens are coming home to roost...
For months, the press and the Republican establishment alike have been expecting the Trump bubble to implode. Now that it's clear Trump isn't going anywhere, we're seeing stories about a long slog of a campaign or even a brokered convention. But there's a very real possibility that, far from those kinds of days of reckoning, Donald Trump could actually "run the table." Ironically, Trump not only could win — he could win more decisively than any non-incumbent Republican contestant for the nomination since the dawn of the modern primary system.
Capitulation of the right. 
