Sunday, January 31, 2016

Encyclopedia Trump and the Curious Case of the Last Straws


I was going to title this post something like "Conversations with Donald Trump Supporters," but how incredibly boring is that?

And the post was going to start out like this:

Meanwhile, at 1,700 Iowa Caucus sites February 1st, 2016...


Trump Supporter: No! No, no, not Cruz! I said Trump. Nobody's comin' up with Cruz. Who works out with Cruz? You won't even get your heart goin, not even a mouse on a wheel.

Unconvinced Voter: That... uh, good point.

Trump Supporter: Trump's the key man here. Think about it. Trump casinos. Trump wives. Trump, man, that's the number. 7 Trumpkins twirlin' on a branch, eatin' lots of sunflowers on my uncle's ranch. 


You know that old children's tale from the sea! It's like you're dreamin' about Gorgonzola cheese when it's clearly Brie time, baby. 

Step into my office!

Unconvinced Voter: Why?

Trump Supporter: 'Cause you're fuckin' fired!


You might recognize this bit as a nearly verbatim exchange between Ted and the Hitchhiker in There's Something About Mary.

Here, check it out. It might be the funniest few minutes of dialogue in any movie. Ever.



Why hasn't Adam Sandler and Ben Stiller ever appeared in a movie together?  I suspect it has something to do with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (hint: they're both jooos), but that's a blog post for another day.

By someone else.

Like a Trumpkin.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that if you are still with me, you are not a Trump supporter or you are on the fence, watching a camel being loaded with straw one piece at a time, by well restrained Arab men, who normally enjoy the pleasures of lusty camels at night, on Thursdays, all cross the Middle East... if they can't find a similar smelling man to love.

I've never seen a guiltier looking pair of Muslim men on a cheap Asian motorbike. With a goat. On Thursday--NTTIAWTT.

STRAWS AND CAMELS!


Stay with me, here.  Ignore the sexy animal.

When Donald Trump first announced his candidacy last July, I kept an open mind.  I really enjoyed the GOP establishment's squirming and hysterics.  I didn't know much about Trump politically, but had heard him speak often on Fox and Friends and he seemed like a very knowledgeable and decent guy.

I LOVED how the Establishment folks were decrying Trump in a strange panic and confusion, writing column after column, echoing the same things the Progressive media were. Man, it was like proof of how ideologically similar the GOP Establishment and the Left has become.

He quickly became a potential choice for me to support, after Cruz, Perry, Fiorina, and Rubio... and maybe ahead of Rubio and Fiorina.  Like everyone else, I didn't think he was serious, but I gave him the benefit of the doubt and defended him quite a bit early on.  Here's the proof; I was clearly evaluating him and having some fun evaluating him.


Jenna is right. I was in full joke mode while she saw specific lack of knowledge in any POTUS as a serious problem.








So What Happened to My Trump Support?


A few things.  Early on in my bemusement and appreciation for Trump's candidacy, I started seeing the Trumpkins (and I hated this term, by the way) popping up, and was mildly "targeted" after I tweeted this:




A Texas Twitter friend,  (account since suspended), was defensive and Tweeted back something like "It doesn't look anything like his hair."

I replied with:


And then Lil Miss Prepper jumps in:
















I had no idea who this chick was or what she is talking about. She's clearly having a different conversation than I.  I suppose she thought at the time any Trump alternative was a "muzzie appeaser," but who knows. She supports Cruz these days, and I have no idea what my OJ reference was to.


The Humps, The Humps, My Lovely Camel's Humps



I loved that Trump and Cruz were kind of playing nice with each other, because after Perry dropped out, I went almost all in on a Cruz-Carly ticket.

So, I cringed when it came out that Trump made the "just look at that face" Carly comment in a semi-private campaign moment.

That was a straw, I later found out, being loaded on my sexy camel's back.

Another straw was at, perhaps, the next debate, when Trump said Carson was an "OK doctor" and was "pathological."  I mean, come on, dude.  I cringed, as another straw went on a growing pile.

Trump seems to insult people a lot, but I didn't let that sway me too much. He usually insulted people I wanted him to like Jeb?! Bush.  When I heard him speak, he continued to sound gracious and I heard glimmers of the nice person he seemed to be, despite all the insults.

Then I started to realize something.  He isn't actually a very good person--or he has a pathological need to insult people, or I guess that's just how he was raised--#NewYorkValues, and all that jazz.  On Broadway.

Then Trump called Cruz a "maniac." I didn't think that was such a big deal, but count it as a straw.

As my camel got heavier, I increasingly drew comfort from Ted Cruz's poll numbers in Iowa.  I was convinced that Trump supporters--like me--would begin to wane in their desire for Trump to do well, and Cruz's master strategy was working as planned.

And then the Canadian birther issue came up.  My God, what a heavy straw that was for my poor camel to hump along with the others.  I asked myself: can Trump literally BELIEVE Cruz wasn't eligible?  I mean, I thought--only a true dumbass would not think Cruz was an eligible American citizen.

And then, boom--"Cruz is a nasty guy."  Another straw.

Another straw mounted my smoking hot camel's backside at the Jan 14th South Carolina GOP Debate, where Trump finally took the gloves off and stood on the backs of 3,000 dead Americans killed in New York on 9/11 to defend "#NewYorkValues."

Indeed.



I began to feel real internal hostility toward Donald Trump, kept in check by optimism for Cruz's chances, which were getting a little shaky as Iowa numbers began to get a little stronger for Trump, and a little weaker for Cruz.


RIP Tea Party 2008-2016



The final straw for me, when I went from someone who just quietly wished Trump would go away, to someone I would never support, was the "One Two Punch" Cruz received in Iowa on January 19th when Sarah Palin endorsed Trump along with the ethanol lobby under Iowa governor Terry Brandstad.

It was a gut punch for me as well, because it validated what I had feared for sometime now, that the Tea Party movement wasn't as ideologically pure as I thought it was--and we (Inhuman $hields and I) even sung about in defense in our debut video, "Throw Progressives Down the Well."

We were wrong.  The Tea Party wasn't some ideological Constitutional-Fundamentalist movement.  Only part of it was--mostly the part that showed up to the rallies and were peaceful, decent folks.  There was a seething anarchist element that the Progressives tended to emphasize, along with the racist elements that didn't show up in public, but lived in blogs, comments sections, and other social media.

The other crystallizing realization was that all the true conservative voices I've trusted in the past--the Krauthammers, the Kevin Williamsons, the Charles CW Cookes, the Jonah Goldbergs--were right all along for pointing out Trump's inconsistency with conservatism.  It wasn't just whining.

And I wasn't alone.  People I most ideologically align with who had reserved judgement about Trump (Mark Levin, Ace of Spades and other Morons I follow) suddenly felt as I did.

Sum Ting Wong with Trump, we discovered.  Ho Lee Fuk.

No Tea Party person can be OK with government subsidies.

No Tea Party advocate can be OK with lobbyists influencing politics on a massive scale.

If there was ANY ideological purity test for the Tea Party, it was these two issues.

Ted Cruz is the only legitimate Tea Party candidate running.

In one announcement, Sarah Palin proved she was as narcissistic and hypocritical as Barrack Obama and Donald Trump.

Frauds.

Donald Trump, the man who couldn't be bought, was indeed purchased.  He removed all doubt from my mind.  He would say and do anything to get elected.

Actions and words.

Actions and words.









 And these "Trump can't be bought" memes kept floating around after the ethanol purchase.
Yes, Finally.


The March of the Trumpkins


I am very uncomfortable with the Trump cheerleading at one of my favorite websites: Breitbart.  I joined the culture #WAAR because of Andrew.  I wish he was alive today, because I just can't believe he'd be all in the tank for Trump as is his "legacy", and I'd love to know his thoughts.

Breitbart went after The Left.  He rarely made examples of RINOs--in fact, I can't remember a single time.  He knew who the most subversive and existential enemy was.

I listen to these people call in to talk shows--the Trumpkins--and cringe at their reasons for supporting Trump.  They frequently use the word 'brilliant."  One caller used the word 6 times in about 10 seconds.  Another caller touted his building hotels and casinos as evidence of his qualifications to be President.

When Steven K. Bannon, the XM125 Brietbart News Daily host, asked him "so what specifically does Trump bring to the table that you find most qualifying for him to be Commander in Chief?"

The dude doesn't hesitate, and asserts "hotels and casinos" one more time.

A brilliant analysis, right, Steve?

It's a brilliant use of eminent domain to enrich yourself, if you ask me--another Tea Party "red line", by the way--personal property rights.




Check out this brief interplay I received on Twitter recently, after I posted a link to and a quote from the National Review "Against Trump" issue (I post what I think are the best lines at the bottom of this page): 







I see two MILFs, a future MILF, and Brent Bozell--almost the perfect orgy--but no "Pigs."



WTF is Going On, Here, Peetey?!  What's Up With All These Trumpkins?



This is where I lay some shit down.  You've probably already heard or thought of the next thought, but Trump 2016 is a rightward leaning version of Obama 2008.  It's Cult of Personality all over again--the very lesson we said we learned from the current douchbag, we didn't.





Psychologically speaking, there are a few things going on here.  I think it's clear that humans gravitate toward celebrity and authoritarian leadership.  As an evolutionary biologist, I theorize that this tendency is hardwired behavior, and most of our behavior is actually so hard wired we have no idea how robotic we actually are.

Early humans who selected powerful tribal leaders prospered and passed their genetic seeds onward.  The stakes were much higher back then to choose a pack leader, and this phenomenon goes even further back in mammalian evolutionary time, so it's buried in the most primitive parts of our mind.

Once humans have their man (or woman, ala Beyonce) selected, they ride that horse hard (hat tip to Jay-Z), often well past when they should have.  See: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Franklin Roosevelt, Emperor Palpatine (I know I'd much rather be riding Padme Amidala) etc., etc., etc.
Padme is excited to meet a real-life Sith.

It's also true when selecting a mate and things go south, but you keep hanging around.  And then the police arrest you for stalking.  And then you make new friends in prison.  And by "friends', I mean unwanted anal sex partners.  But, like Bowe Berghdal being passed around on Man Love Thursdays, you begin to enjoy it over time.

OK, that turned weird.

Where was I?

Oh, right...

Cults of personality and tribal leaders.

As a matter of fact, humans have several innate cognitive biases that reinforce this unfortunate tendency toward hero worship, including anchoring bias, group think, confirmation bias, subjective validation, and conservatism bias (inability to change one's pre-existing beliefs when presented with new, factual information)... and there are many more, but these are the big ones.

What does this look like in person, you ask?

This.



This poor child.  Her Trumpkin mother has ruined her.

Eric Hoffer would character Trumpkins as "True Believers."  Hoffer wrote a classic book in 1951 called The True Believer: Thoughts On The Nature Of Mass Movements.
You'll like Eric Hoffer

Nonconformists travel as a rule in bunches. You rarely find a nonconformist who goes it alone. And woe to him inside a nonconformist clique who does not conform with nonconformity.”  

You see this today with the insanity on college campuses and in the outrage circuses that bring down innocent people for saying things thought police have made punishable.

But on Trumpkins, he might say:

 “It is the true believer’s ability to ‘shut his eyes and stop his ears’ to facts that do not deserve to be either seen or heard which is the source of his unequaled fortitude and constancy. He cannot be frightened by danger nor disheartened by obstacle nor baffled by contradictions because he denies their existence.” 

In a recent The Hill article, Freelance writer and pubic affairs "guy" John Feehery called people like Trumpkins "misinformed voters," which are "...not uninformed. An uninformed voter acknowledges that he or she don’t know the facts and doesn’t express a strong opinion one way or another. "

He writes," The misinformed voter has the facts wrong, and when faced with contradictory evidence, doubles down on his or her own opinion," like Hoffer's True Believers. 

I suspect he would also call someone like me, who is highly informed (and amazingly brilliant, like Trump), a misinformed voter, too, because I wouldn't vote for someone he would (Feehery worked for several hardcore RINOs: the wrestling pedophile Denny Hastert, Dirty Tom DeLay, and Bob Michel), but let's give him the benefit of the doubt, because I don't actually know.  He writes and speaks as a liberal, who himself believes in print media like the New York Times as the gold standard of objectivity in media, which we know is laughable.

Feehery has a point that jives with Eric Hoffer and my own observations. I find hope in this observation, because I don't think most people are like this.

Trumpkins are True Believers who are misinformed, and that is what is going on. Further, these people, like Trump, have no internal ideological convictions.

Trump is a character assassin.  Every single person he lets get under his thin skin he assassinates via insult--even Tucker Carlson back in 2001.  Trump called and left a message on Tucker's phone, telling him, 
"It’s true you have better hair than I do. But I get more pussy than you do."


Tucker had never met or spoken to Trump, but had made a public quip about his hair that got back to Donald.

The Curious Case of the Last straws.  

Everyone has one, and these sorts of straws are getting very heavy.
For Iowan Bryan Moon, it was Trump skipping the Iowa debate, he told the Weekly Standard's Steven Hayes.
"Now I'm seeing what his true temperament is – I obviously don't know him personally – but I've seen him say and do some things that I disagree with but haven't been deal-killers," Moon says. "But the last few hours – over the last day when he decided he wasn't going to debate with the rest of the candidates – that really was the last straw."

Monday Will be a Moment a Great Clarity for Our Camel

We'll find out after Iowa not only who won, but who will and should stay.  Myself, I'm full of hope, and it's all I have right now.  

There is little we know right now.

Santorum will finally drop out, I'm pretty sure of that, and his several hundred supporters will head over to Cruz and Rubio. 

I hope Dr. Carson will likewise bow out after a poor showing; I watched the man with eager anticipation, but he has to realize his best hope to serve America in government is as HHS head.  

I hope the weather is bad and discourages Trump voters.  


I likewise hope Trump's ground game is poorly organized and isn't able to get people in a distributed fashion to all the causcus sites to stump.  


And I hope that the ones who do are mis-informed meme-mongers who can do nothing more than shout insults like a terrible Tourette's tick 
("Trump's brilliant, you fuck head!"), and repeatedly mumble about his hotel and casino qualifications.

If Trump wins Iowa, it doesn't look good for Cruz (or America, for that matter; neither Hillary nor Sanders are viable candidates, and any GOP nominee would win in a landslide in a normal election.  With Trump's tremendously yuge negatives and third party threats, enough people might stay home like they did for Romney in 2012).

If Trump is the GOP nominee I'm not going to vote for him; I'm going to vote against the Democrat nominee and keep hoping for the best--it just happens thatI have to fill in the circle beside someone's name I feel does not share my American values, but who has antithetical #NewYorkValues.  The Establishment built this Tea Party monster because they didn't listen to the Tea Party when they had the chance.  And now they may pay--along with all of us--for ignoring us.  


Interesting times, unfortunately.  


Dangerous times.

I end this epic blog post with one of my all-time favorite songs, Cult of Personality. 





Addendum: The "Against Trump" National Review Symposium Quotes


First, I thought the NR editor's op-ed was "it" at first.  And I thought, man this thing sucks and reads like a bunch of Establishment whiners.

Why didn't they have some of their best writers make a case individually in one article?!

Well, they did, as I found out.  And it's pretty good. I'm taking out the author's names because I don't want to bias the reader against it. I didn't include Glenn Beck's, though, so rejoice in that knowledge.

 "We can talk about whether he is a boor (“My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well documented, are various other parts of my body”), a creep (“If Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her”), or a louse (he tried to bully an elderly woman, Vera Coking, out of her house in Atlantic City because it stood on a spot he wanted to use as a garage). But one thing about which there can be no debate is that Trump is no conservative..."
"The case for constitutional limited government is the case against Donald Trump. To the degree we take him at his word — understanding that Trump is a negotiator whose positions are often purposefully deceptive..."
In a 60 Minutes interview with Scott Pelley, Trump aggressively supported universal health care, saying, “This is an un-Republican thing for me to say. . . . I’m going to take care of everybody. . . . The government’s going to pay for it.” He supported the prosecution of hate crimes. He favored wealth-confiscation policies. He supported abortion rights."
He doesn’t know the Constitution, history, law, political philosophy, nuclear strategy, diplomacy, defense, economics beyond real estate, or even, despite his low-level-mafioso comportment, how ordinary people live." 
"...his “[Conservative] conversion” raises serious questions. Trump wrote in his book The America We Deserve that he supported a ban on “assault weapons.” Not until last year did he apparently reverse his position. As recently as a couple of years ago, Trump favored the liberal use of eminent-domain laws." 
"Worst of all, Trump’s brawling, blustery, mean-spirited public persona serves to associate conservatives with all the negative stereotypes that liberals have for decades attached to their opponents on the right. According to conventional caricature, conservatives are selfish, greedy, materialistic, bullying, misogynistic, angry, and intolerant." ...later mentions "racist."
"Trump has made millions off a casino industry that, as social conservatives have rightly argued, not only exploits personal vice but destroys families."
"Trump is an unbalanced force. He is the politicized American id. Should his election results match his polls, he would be, unquestionably, the worst thing to happen to the American common culture in my lifetime."
"What is even more remarkable is that, after seven years of repeated disasters, both domestically and internationally, under a glib egomaniac in the White House, so many potential voters are turning to another glib egomaniac to be his successor. "

No comments:

Post a Comment