Trump is in the lead, and the Republican Establishment, whoever they are, doesn’t want Trump to be the Republican nominee. Now people are mad at the Republican Establishment because they’re worried about Democracy: will the voice of the people be heard and respected?
What’s going on here? And who will be the Republican Establishment’s choice for the Republican nominee? We already know they hate Ted Cruz basically as much as they hate Donald Trump, and who else could possibly be their choice whom they could also rationalize as a fair and appropriate selection?
And why do they hate Donald Trump anyway? Is it because he’s making the Republican Party look bad with the things he says? They do that themselves already all the time anyway! People protesting Trump say he’s a racist, but is he really? It seems to me that Donald Trump’s worst crime in people’s eyes is that he has inartfully expressed (to say the least) the Republican view of problems America faces with regard to immigration. (Are there any violent criminals in America who have come from Latin America? Yes, there are some: a very small percentage. But are there some? Yes, there are some. We have plenty natural born violent criminals of our own right here in America too. And are there any Muslim terrorists who have slipped into the country or become radicalized here and carried out or attempted terrorist attacks here in the United States? Yes, sadly there are, but it’s just a miniscule percentage, and the government generally catches them before they’re able to carry out any attacks; and although I understand people’s apprehension about such things possibly occurring, I don’t share the fear and prejudice about it, and I see how expression of such fear and hostility can breed terrorism where it likely would not have occurred otherwise. But do we have home grown domestic terrorism here already anyway? Yes, we do. It’s nothing unusual to have a couple of bad apples in any large bunch; but contrary to the idiom, they do not spoil the whole bunch, although they can have a negative influence on a few individual apples here and there sometimes. It seems to me Trump is going with the idea of the bad apples spoiling the whole bunch. That’s not surprising, as simple ideas seem to be what he’s best at. If he were running for president of Mexico, he would be saying Americans are all racist spree-shooting murderers. He just seems like an all-or-nothing kind of a guy. He’s also blustering, bombastic and belligerent, so things he says always sound extreme.) What’s funny to me about the Republican Party disavowing Trump is that he is merely echoing talking points from Republican political pundits we’ve heard on cable news for the past 8 years. Maybe he is making them sound worse with his choice of words, but this anti-immigrant stuff and complaints about purported weakness with regard to trade deals and military intervention is exactly what the Republican Party was communicating as its platform for the entire Obama presidency. So for someone for once to come along and give voice to those issues in an unapologetic manner seems to me to be their greatest wish, especially someone who is rich, white and male, just like them.
Representatives of the Republican Party in recent years have complained bitterly about how all their presidential candidates have been “spineless”, and have not fought back against attacks from Democrats; now that they have someone who fights back and uses the same emotional reactionary tactics as the radical left, the Republicans don’t like him? That’s odd to me: that’s what they said they wanted! I guess it must be because Trump is not vehemently opposed to a woman’s right to choose and gay marriage: rights which Trump does not wish to take away from his fellow Americans. So when Democrats want to get rid of Donald Trump as the Republican nominee, it makes no sense, because what they’ll get as a replacement is Ted Cruz, and what if he wins? (<If Ted Cruz wins and has a Republican Congress, he will seek to outlaw abortion and gay marriage, and he may just get it. Then it would be the law of the land until a case against the laws finally made its way up to the Supreme Court, and if Ted Cruz gets to nominate the next Supreme Court Justice, the Court may decide in favor of the Cruz Administration: you never know what will happen, and it’s a huge risk. At least Donald Trump would never do that kind of thing, as he’s not a hard-right religious conservative Moral Majority type who seeks to run our lives for us. {Both Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton want the government to micromanage our lives, just in different ways; at least Trump won’t try to do that, I don’t think. But I cannot in good conscience vote for any of these clowns.})
It is my personal belief (although I may be wrong) that Donald Trump is simply saying what he thinks the Republican base wants to hear, and in so doing tap into the anger he knows is there and we all know gets people up and to the voting booth. My guess (although it is only a guess) is that if elected President, Donald Trump will forget all about the Mexicans and the Muslims and just do other types of things. And the political comedy shows would have great fodder for their jokes for at least four years: it will be amazing fodder; the best fodder ever.
But is the Republican Establishment really against Donald Trump? If they select another candidate at a brokered convention, not only might there be riots, but Donald Trump may run as an Independent, and if that happens, they might as well just concede the election to Hillary Clinton right now and not bother even holding one. But maybe this is about something else. Maybe the Republican Establishment knows everyone hates them (even Republicans, Republican politicians, and right-wing pundits all despise the Republican Establishment, and say so all the time), so by coming out against Trump, they know that will make everyone want to support him, even Independents. By using reverse-psychology, they can get Trump more support than ever before, and from people who might not otherwise support Trump, or even go vote normally!
Another reverse psychology phenomenon is generating more Trump supporters too, but those doing it are not aware, or are too swallowed up by their own sense of self-righteous indignation to understand why, or care that it’s happening. These people are the militant protesters who try to shut down Trump rallies, invade and provoke and throw punches, call everyone a racist, and worst of all, shut down roadways. I can understand their outrage and anger and such at people they consider to be virulent bigots, but by confronting and trying to shout down and disrupt Trump and his rallies, they are inciting the same sense of outrage and fury in these people, and worse than that, they are violating their civil rights. (Yes, right-wingers, even those you consider racist, have civil rights, and they are equal under the law whether you like it or not.) What civil rights? The right to free speech, the right to peaceful assembly, the right to participate in the political system without undue duress from others, etc. The protesters think they’re fighting the good fight, but what they’re really doing is a form of criminal harassment when they attempt to disrupt and provoke and shut down Trump rallies. And this stuff really has the reverse result from what they are expecting, I think, because Independents see this, are reminded of what the fringe left can be like, and they see it as bullying and intimidation; and then they consider voting for Trump just to do the opposite of what the protesters want. I am tempted to do that too (although I won’t), just because I am so disgusted by what I see happening; and I don’t blame the Trump supporters when protesters close down roadways: that’s their own doing. An ambulance with a dying person could get stuck and the patient could die because they didn’t reach the hospital in time; police on the way to a domestic disturbance could get stuck and an innocent woman could be killed as a result. Also, there is such a thing as road rage, and someone stuck in traffic for hours could snap and shoot the protesters, and it would be their own fault. This form of protest is completely unacceptable and destructive, and worst of all, it’s breeding many new Trump supporters.
(BTW: I am trying rationally to express the Trump phenomenon here. I know most people get very emotional, if not go ballistic, when the issue of Donald Trump’s presidential candidacy is raised, so please try to remain civil if you don’t like what I have to say here. I’m not a Trump supporter by any means, but I also think the virulent hatred of Trump is having some serious negative consequences. Can’t we, as Americans, simply respect other Americans’ right to their own opinion as to who they want to vote for, and then just vote and see who wins? I only ask, because the more people push against Trump, the stronger he seems to become, and the more he can simply point at the protesters and say nothing about what he plans to do as president. If the protesters would just step back for a little while, then Trump would have to actually answer questions and tell us what his policies would be, etc.; and once he had to do that, he would start to lose supporters all by himself, without help from anyone else. The protesters, with their in-your-face hostility, seem to forget one basic important behavioral truth: you get more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. The more you yell at or punch someone, and the more you clog up the roadways with your demands, the less people are going to want to agree with you, and the more they’re going to dislike you. It might be fun to disrupt a Trump rally or tie up traffic by closing down a road, but it is actually counterproductive, believe it or not.)
