President Donald Trump

[Bernie Brewer]

As someone who identifies as middle right, what do you think it means that trump won the GOP nomination?

I think the GOP sold the sole of the party to this guy for a chance to retake the White House. And, I think the Party leaders thought they could control him, eventually, and that when Trump fell in line, or more likely when he got bored of “ruling”, they could make hay on the party’s platform on Health care, immigration, regulatory reform, court appointments, etc. and other key issues. But, he is not and never was a Republican and they cannot and never will control him. He’s a usurper. The GOP leaders must now regret that the primary process was so crowded that the cream never rose to the top. At he end you had three unlikely candidates in Trump, along with Cruz and Kasich, niether of whom could gain traction. Couple this with the mainstream media fascination in covering Trump as the novelty item he was, niether MSM or the GOP took him as a serious candidate, until it was too late. MSM allowed him to suck up all the oxygen during the debates and on the campaign trail to the detriment of all of the candidates. The GOP never slapped him down when he made outrages comments or showed his despicable real self. Key Republicans tried to cast him out, such as Romney, McCain, the Bushes, Rubio and Cruz, but those efforts came far too late and/ or far too little. Truth be told, as you and Red pointed out, he resonated with the disenfranchised, many of whom were not Republicans, but chose to vote that way because of Trump.

To me, him beating HRC represents a failing on the left that needs to be addressed. I imagine you think think his rise as a Republican represents a failing on the right. Both parties seem fractured and in need of repair. What do you think trump's presidency will mean for the GOP lon term? Will they morph into a party that fits trump more, or will they develop a response/different path away from him?

Just as you said, I agree that both parties are pretty broken. This is particularly true of the GOP. I think it was Ronald Reagan who once said about his changing from Democrat to Republican, “I didn’t leave the party, the party left me.“ I think many of us former Republicans are feeling this way right about now. I am. I think the Republican Party has morphed into the party of Trump already, much to the dismay of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and the old guard. I wonder if this will create some legitimate movement towards the formation of a real centrist third-party. This party could bring together disenfranchised Democrats and Republicans who see things more moderately. Obviously, a splintered GOP or a legit third would not be comparable in size to a unified Democratic or GOP Party, and there would be a heavy cost to pay in national elections, at least for a while. But they would be forced to work together and maybe coalition governments would be better for everyone.

Also, who does a middle-right fellow like yourself turn to for sensible, moderate conservative news and opinion?

I read the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post. For work I have access to digital subscriptions for the first two, and I have just signed up personally for a digital subscription to the Post. All three are excellent papers. Obviously the Wall Street Journal is a right-leaning business focused paper, and being a Banker this is where I find myself most days. The Times and the Post are anything but right leaning but I don’t find them to be outlandishly left either. They are both pretty fair IMO. I believe they both cover stories and do investigative reporting exceptionally well, at least until the writers express their personal opinions, which happens in the WSJ as well.

Sadly, for TV, I’m kind of struggling with that lately. Historically, I’ve been a CNN watcher. But I find their coverage of Trump exasperating, not because Trump is exasperating (which he is), but because it appears to me that they feel so guilty about their role in the Trump election that they have to go to such extremes in their criticism of him. I have never watched Fox news and I have no interest in doing so. I’ve always been fascinated by the number of the liberals that seemingly watch Fox news. It’s sort of like the mental version of self abuse or cutting but to each their own. I had occasionally watched MSNBC, but they've spun themselves into being the Fox News of the liberals and I have lost interest.

The vast majority of right-wing opinion media, especially radio, seems radically right and biased to me, like Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck, Savage, Jones. These are the biggest names in conservative talk, but none seem to speak to and for moderate conservatives.

Never listened to Rush or any of the right mouth pieces. I hate being told what I should think or feel. However, I’m a Milwaukee guy, and although I live in Chicago, I’m still close enough to get Milwaukee AM radio stations. There was a guy from Milwaukee has become kind of a national celebrity recently by the name of Charlie Sykes who I enjoyed listening to as he was a moderate Republican. You’ve probably seen him on any of the MSN news-shows, as he was one of the first “talkers” to go along with the “Never Trump“ movement.

[Bernie Brewer]

This, bernie. This is why you have to answer the question...because you transition from asking reasonable questions about the dossier to suddenly implying that it should be made part of a federal criminal investigation, while failing to suggest that there was any actual criminal activity involved.

I didn’t imply, as much as you inferred. I’ll admit that my post was a bit clunky. My transition from asking specific questions about the dossier to the final statement was inelegantly structured. My final comment was meant to be more of a general comment about the greater Russia/Mueller investigation not necessarily about how the dossier fits into it. But I will be interested in seeing if this Dossier somehow falls into Mueller’s scope.

[Redbirds Fan]

I agree with above that the list was good but it does need some modifications.

For one, I think the "Hillary" bullet point is likely one of the larger factors. And it extents far past "haters" into a group that didn't particularly like either option we were given this election cycle.

Ken, please keep in mind that my list wasn't really supposed to be about people who voted for Trump. That type of analysis would be extremely complex and would include a lot of different groups of people not included in what I wrote. But you are right, the people who voted for Trump would included many, many people who did not like Hillary and who were generally unhappy for many reasons with the choices which were unavailable. That doesn't mean they are necessarily a part of the "Trump base" right now, meaning that 38% which keeps showing up in the polls. A lot of them fall into that population who do not currently approve of Trump's performance, but who voted for him in the election, which may be 15 million or so. I think a lot of these people did so in good faith and lengthy reflection, not upon some knee-jerk reaction. I don't agree with them, but I respect those who thought carefully about it and made a conscious choice based upon personal beliefs.

So, the last of the list (campaign promises) shouldn't have been on there. It originally was in a separate paragraph to support another point entirely, but I was in a hurry to get the post finished up and made a mistake editing. #10 isn't really a group which makes up the base, since I don't think a lot of those people currently make up the base. I think a lot of those people may still be supporters to an extent, but certainly not part of that fervent 38% who will support him no matter what he does. These are the people who, if video is released tomorrow of him literally in bed with Putin, will declare 'fake news'.

[Redbirds Fan]

I think the GOP sold the sole of the party to this guy for a chance to retake the White House. And, I think the Party leaders thought they could control him, eventually, and that when Trump fell in line, or more likely when he got bored of “ruling”, they could make hay on the party’s platform on Health care, immigration, regulatory reform, court appointments, etc. and other key issues. But, he is not and never was a Republican and they cannot and never will control him. He’s a usurper. The GOP leaders must now regret that the primary process was so crowded that the cream never rose to the top. At he end you had three unlikely candidates in Trump, along with Cruz and Kasich, niether of whom could gain traction. Couple this with the mainstream media fascination in covering Trump as the novelty item he was, niether MSM or the GOP took him as a serious candidate, until it was too late. MSM allowed him to suck up all the oxygen during the debates and on the campaign trail to the detriment of all of the candidates. The GOP never slapped him down when he made outrages comments or showed his despicable real self. Key Republicans tried to cast him out, such as Romney, McCain, the Bushes, Rubio and Cruz, but those efforts came far too late and/ or far too little. Truth be told, as you and Red pointed out, he resonated with the disenfranchised, many of whom were not Republicans, but chose to vote that way because of Trump.



Just as you said, I agree that both parties are pretty broken. This is particularly true of the GOP. I think it was Ronald Reagan who once said about his changing from Democrat to Republican, “I didn’t leave the party, the party left me.“ I think many of us former Republicans are feeling this way right about now. I am. I think the Republican Party has morphed into the party of Trump already, much to the dismay of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and the old guard. I wonder if this will create some legitimate movement towards the formation of a real centrist third-party. This party could bring together disenfranchised Democrats and Republicans who see things more moderately. Obviously, a splintered GOP or a legit third would not be comparable in size to a unified Democratic or GOP Party, and there would be a heavy cost to pay in national elections, at least for a while. But they would be forced to work together and maybe coalition governments would be better for everyone.



I read the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post. For work I have access to digital subscriptions for the first two, and I have just signed up personally for a digital subscription to the Post. All three are excellent papers. Obviously the Wall Street Journal is a right-leaning business focused paper, and being a Banker this is where I find myself most days. The Times and the Post are anything but right leaning but I don’t find them to be outlandishly left either. They are both pretty fair IMO. I believe they both cover stories and do investigative reporting exceptionally well, at least until the writers express their personal opinions, which happens in the WSJ as well.

Sadly, for TV, I’m kind of struggling with that lately. Historically, I’ve been a CNN watcher. But I find their coverage of Trump exasperating, not because Trump is exasperating (which he is), but because it appears to me that they feel so guilty about their role in the Trump election that they have to go to such extremes in their criticism of him. I have never watched Fox news and I have no interest in doing so. I’ve always been fascinated by the number of the liberals that seemingly watch Fox news. It’s sort of like the mental version of self abuse or cutting but to each their own. I had occasionally watched MSNBC, but they've spun themselves into being the Fox News of the liberals and I have lost interest.



Never listened to Rush or any of the right mouth pieces. I hate being told what I should think or feel. However, I’m a Milwaukee guy, and although I live in Chicago, I’m still close enough to get Milwaukee AM radio stations. There was a guy from Milwaukee has become kind of a national celebrity recently by the name of Charlie Sykes who I enjoyed listening to as he was a moderate Republican. You’ve probably seen him on any of the MSN news-shows, as he was one of the first “talkers” to go along with the “Never Trump“ movement.

This is an excellent post. Thanks for laying out so much. I have some observations.

1. Charlie Sykes is an interesting guy, one of the few moderate Republicans on television. He articulates his views extremely well and is very persuasive.
2. For the record, Mitt Romney came out strong against Trump eight months before the election, calling him a phony and a con man. Nobody paid much attention to Mitt except for the MSM.
3. Paul Ryan and Mitch? They do occasionally express dismay, but watch what they do, not what they say.
4. A lot of liberals tune into Fox. We want to see what the other side is saying first hand. (I get tired of having my conservative friends tell me what Ann Coulter tells them that I believe.)

Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

[Bernie Brewer]

Weak sauce, Bernie. Nobody claims that Tony Podesta isn't subject to the same legal scrutiny applied to others. But to suggest that John is somehow guilty of something because his brother is a scumbag...that's an attitude which flies in the face of the so-called Christian belief system.

You’re really going to call me out on this? I never said John = Tony, therefore he’s a scumbag, too! While I’ll admit that I was drawing a dotted line for people to follow, this has been done often by others on this board when making disparaging comments about people in the right. If we’re going to call a foul, then call it every time, Ref.

And, just my opinion, it is pretty easy for someone to drop in and suggest that both sides were guilty of despicable rhetoric, conduct and tone during the campaign. But that is like saying Hell and Arizona are both hot. It's a false equivalency. What we now know is that one side acted not only in a despicable manner, but in an illegal manner. Nobody on 'your' side can now say there is "no evidence" of collusion.

I “drop in” occasionally because don’t have time to post everyday. I’m glad you and others do because I enjoy reading the Sport Bar and political threads almost everyday. Sometimes, however, I feel compelled to post when the echos start bouncing off the walls. So if you’d rather this Board be the echo chamber that it’s becoming where only the liberal voices express opinions, spin conspiracy therorys, cast aspersions, unchecked, let me know. I’ll stay out of the posting game. I’m merely trying to provide a different voice, because there are so many that sound the same here, at least to me. Where are the Chances and other right leaners these days? They stopped fighting the uphill fight. I may not be the most elegant of posters but at least I’m trying to provide an alternative view. That’s one of the reasons HRC lost the election, as many people feel politicians can’t hear their voices anymore. Liberals really don’t want to hear why The disenfranchised voted for Trump. It seems liberals only want to mark them as stupid under educated and a list of 10 other things. That’s one of the reasons why I answered Soul Mashers questions. In reading his post it truly sounds like he wants to know how others think. And I know you genuinely do as well. So, Until you tell me otherwise, I’ll trust that is not what you really mean and I’ll assume I’m taking your comments too personally and incorrectly.

As for “on ‘your’ side” comment, which side am I on? Certainly not the Trump side. And, while charges have been filed has anyone been found guilty of anything illegal? One guy plead guilty to lying to FBI and this far that isn’t a campaign issue, or is it? And, No one’s hands are clean of bad behavior from the past election.

Edited to add: we don’t need to agree, in fact it’s probably better if we don’t, as that creates discussion. But, damnit, I just read your post above and now I need to delete this whole post!!!

[Sour Masher]

Thanks for the responses Bernie. It is interesting to me that we share a lot of the same news sources, that many of those sources are "old school"--print journalism (well, screen journalism now, but stuff you read), and that neither of us like being told how to think or feel.

I will admit that while I do feel that way, back when I had a longer commute than I do now, I was in that self-abuse category you describe--I used to listen to those radical right-wing radio hosts on occasion. I always wondered how much of their disturbingly large audience consisted of left-wingers who couldn't help but listen to the hyperbole, nut-baggery, and urgent shouting that happens on those programs. If I'm being honest, I guess I took some pleasure in being outraged by their stances and rhetoric, and maybe I felt superior to those listeners who actually believed what they were hearing. I've outgrown that now, though--haven't listened to the crazies on radio or watched more than a minute or two of Fox in a good long while. These days, more than a few seconds of listening to Tucker Carson or Sean Hannity makes me want to hurl.

But back to the point about relying on respected "print" journalism, I wonder how much of the current craziness is due to an over-reliance by many on being spoon-fed their ideas by what amounts to shock-jocks who rely on hyperbole and outrage for their ratings. I wonder how much of it is due to social media using algorithms to anticipate your likes and opinions and feeding you more of the same, creating an echo chamber. I wonder how much of it is stuff like the Russian bots and other manipulative agents using social media to feed into and infect people with more misinformation, more divisiveness, more fear, more hate.

There is a sci-fi book by Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age. In it, he describes a society in which most people have their media completely customized by their likes, preferences, and by commercial forces. But the elites--the ones that run the show--they all got the same news, presented in the same way, in a digital newspaper. The book was published in 1995, so Stephenson was ahead of his time with these ideas. While I appreciate the customization of the digital age, part of me longs for a shared sense of facts and information that comes from everyone getting similar, well-vetted information on subjects. How can you develop real solutions to real problems, if those involved can't even agree on objective facts and reality. In an age when anything that does not fit entrenched belief systems and pre-conceived notions is labeled "fake," I don't know how we move forward towards synthesis, reconciliation, and progress as a society.

[hacko]

I think the GOP sold the sole of the party to this guy for a chance to retake the White House. And, I think the Party leaders thought they could control him, eventually, and that when Trump fell in line, or more likely when he got bored of “ruling”, they could make hay on the party’s platform on Health care, immigration, regulatory reform, court appointments, etc. and other key issues. But, he is not and never was a Republican and they cannot and never will control him. He’s a usurper. The GOP leaders must now regret that the primary process was so crowded that the cream never rose to the top. At he end you had three unlikely candidates in Trump, along with Cruz and Kasich, niether of whom could gain traction. Couple this with the mainstream media fascination in covering Trump as the novelty item he was, niether MSM or the GOP took him as a serious candidate, until it was too late. MSM allowed him to suck up all the oxygen during the debates and on the campaign trail to the detriment of all of the candidates. The GOP never slapped him down when he made outrages comments or showed his despicable real self. Key Republicans tried to cast him out, such as Romney, McCain, the Bushes, Rubio and Cruz, but those efforts came far too late and/ or far too little. Truth be told, as you and Red pointed out, he resonated with the disenfranchised, many of whom were not Republicans, but chose to vote that way because of Trump.



Just as you said, I agree that both parties are pretty broken. This is particularly true of the GOP. I think it was Ronald Reagan who once said about his changing from Democrat to Republican, “I didn’t leave the party, the party left me.“ I think many of us former Republicans are feeling this way right about now. I am. I think the Republican Party has morphed into the party of Trump already, much to the dismay of Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and the old guard. I wonder if this will create some legitimate movement towards the formation of a real centrist third-party. This party could bring together disenfranchised Democrats and Republicans who see things more moderately. Obviously, a splintered GOP or a legit third would not be comparable in size to a unified Democratic or GOP Party, and there would be a heavy cost to pay in national elections, at least for a while. But they would be forced to work together and maybe coalition governments would be better for everyone.



I read the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post. For work I have access to digital subscriptions for the first two, and I have just signed up personally for a digital subscription to the Post. All three are excellent papers. Obviously the Wall Street Journal is a right-leaning business focused paper, and being a Banker this is where I find myself most days. The Times and the Post are anything but right leaning but I don’t find them to be outlandishly left either. They are both pretty fair IMO. I believe they both cover stories and do investigative reporting exceptionally well, at least until the writers express their personal opinions, which happens in the WSJ as well.

Sadly, for TV, I’m kind of struggling with that lately. Historically, I’ve been a CNN watcher. But I find their coverage of Trump exasperating, not because Trump is exasperating (which he is), but because it appears to me that they feel so guilty about their role in the Trump election that they have to go to such extremes in their criticism of him. I have never watched Fox news and I have no interest in doing so. I’ve always been fascinated by the number of the liberals that seemingly watch Fox news. It’s sort of like the mental version of self abuse or cutting but to each their own. I had occasionally watched MSNBC, but they've spun themselves into being the Fox News of the liberals and I have lost interest.



Never listened to Rush or any of the right mouth pieces. I hate being told what I should think or feel. However, I’m a Milwaukee guy, and although I live in Chicago, I’m still close enough to get Milwaukee AM radio stations. There was a guy from Milwaukee has become kind of a national celebrity recently by the name of Charlie Sykes who I enjoyed listening to as he was a moderate Republican. You’ve probably seen him on any of the MSN news-shows, as he was one of the first “talkers” to go along with the “Never Trump“ movement.

I also would like to add this is a good post - and expresses a lot of my thoughts and feelings.

I do like chuck Todd on Msnbc.

I'm an Independent - left -central. Voted for Reagan - Bush 1 - Bush 2 (first time) Clinton (2nd time)Obama twice. This election voted for Kasich in Primary - Hillary in General - (just to Keep Trump out)

I would join a new centrist base Party ( Probably)

I know lots of People who voted for Trump in General Election that I would not say are Trumpers (his base) They didn't vote for him but for change period. Most if not all Regret it now but as they say- Dems can take a lot of the blame for putting Hillary up as their candidate.

[Bernie Brewer]

I do like chuck Todd on Msnbc.

I know lots of People who voted for Trump in General Election that I would not say are Trumpers (his base) They didn't vote for him but for change period. Most if not all Regret it now but as they say- Dems can take a lot of the blame for putting Hillary up as their candidate.

I like Chuck Todd as well. And, he’s a diehard Packers fan, so, what’s not to like!

I agree with the last paragraph in its entirety.

[Redbirds Fan]

You’re really going to call me out on this? I never said John = Tony, therefore he’s a scumbag, too! While I’ll admit that I was drawing a dotted line for people to follow, this has been done often by others on this board when making disparaging comments about people in the right. If we’re going to call a foul, then call it every time, Ref.



I “drop in” occasionally because don’t have time to post everyday. I’m glad you and others do because I enjoy reading the Sport Bar and political threads almost everyday. Sometimes, however, I feel compelled to post when the echos start bouncing off the walls. So if you’d rather this Board be the echo chamber that it’s becoming where only the liberal voices express opinions, spin conspiracy therorys, cast aspersions, unchecked, let me know. I’ll stay out of the posting game. I’m merely trying to provide a different voice, because there are so many that sound the same here, at least to me. Where are the Chances and other right leaners these days? They stopped fighting the uphill fight. I may not be the most elegant of posters but at least I’m trying to provide an alternative view. That’s one of the reasons HRC lost the election, as many people feel politicians can’t hear their voices anymore. Liberals really don’t want to hear why The disenfranchised voted for Trump. It seems liberals only want to mark them as stupid under educated and a list of 10 other things. That’s one of the reasons why I answered Soul Mashers questions. In reading his post it truly sounds like he wants to know how others think. And I know you genuinely do as well. So, Until you tell me otherwise, I’ll trust that is not what you really mean and I’ll assume I’m taking your comments too personally and incorrectly.

As for “on ‘your’ side” comment, which side am I on? Certainly not the Trump side. And, while charges have been filed has anyone been found guilty of anything illegal? One guy plead guilty to lying to FBI and this far that isn’t a campaign issue, or is it? And, No one’s hands are clean of bad behavior from the past election.

Edited to add: we don’t need to agree, in fact it’s probably better if we don’t, as that creates discussion. But, damnit, I just read your post above and now I need to delete this whole post!!!

Don't delete, good post.

No problem with dropping in, just thought it was sort of a drive-by posting of a false equivalency claim, which I disagreed with for the reasons stated.

I'm curious as to the conspiracy theories you think liberals are touting, especially if those liberals are on the board here. Care to elaborate?

My post wasn't about why people voted for Trump (as you obviously picked up on), but why 38% remain in the base. And it is not my opinion, but a clearly established fact that a majority of whites with high school degrees or less living in poverty conditions continue to strongly support Trump, even though his policies so far have done little or nothing to benefit them.

I'm glad you are posting. Good to hear from everyone. Clearly, though, you are not speaking on behalf of 'Team Trump', but more from general conservatism, which is unfortunately a very small minority these days. (I still believe our best hope for progress is a coalition built from the center left and the center right, but there just doesn't seem to be as much center left as there used to be and almost no center right, at least not amont elected officials in Washington. Anytime someone in Congress tries to be center right, they are castigated and primaried.)

So, you can take my posts to be heretical or ridiculous, but please don't take them as intended to be personally offensive. Should I ever intend to offend you, I will send you a PM.

[Redbirds Fan]

Trump just cannot keep from shooting himself in the foot when it comes to hurting his own causes, despite what his attorneys have surely told him a thousand times, namely "do not talk about pending legal cases". He compromised the Bergdahl case to the point the Judge considered dismissing it instead of sentencing the defendant by commenting that Bergdahl was a traitor who should be executed. You can't say that about a military case when you are the Commander-in-Chief.

Similarly, in the wake of the NYC terrorist attack, Trump says he wants a military tribunal to handle the case. He says he wants quick justice and a harsh punishment. That's like in the Western movies where the sheriff would tell the outlaw he would have a fair trial and a first-class hanging. It gives the defendant a great argument to have a civilian court try his case. Personally, I think that is where the case should be tried, but my point is that if the Administration wants a military trial they should be smart enough not to make comments that hurt their chances of getting one.

But, he's got a very good brain and has the best words. And he went to an Ivy League school, where he was a nice student. So I guess we should just believe him.

[cardboardbox]

So if you’d rather this Board be the echo chamber that it’s becoming

its been this way for around a decade at least. Back in Bush 2's first term there were a good number of conservatives here but they gradually made their exit during his second term. Its very rare to find a forum that is evenly split, its usually 80/20 split or worse in either direction and I think thats because partisans love echo chambers.

[Ken]

Ken, please keep in mind that my list wasn't really supposed to be about people who voted for Trump.

Ahhh, makes sense

These are the people who, if video is released tomorrow of him literally in bed with Putin, will declare 'fake news'.

Indeed. At some point there's no rationalizing the level of stupidity that people can attain. Discussions over the methods that took them there may be a futile exercise.

[Ken]

its been this way for around a decade at least. Back in Bush 2's first term there were a good number of conservatives here but they gradually made their exit during his second term. Its very rare to find a forum that is evenly split, its usually 80/20 split or worse in either direction and I think thats because partisans love echo chambers.

I would agree with the one exception being that this discounts the moderate viewpoint. I personally find myself drawn to discussions that include both sides, since both have their valid points that are interesting.

[Hi.I'm.Mandy]

Indeed. At some point there's no rationalizing the level of stupidity that people can attain. Discussions over the methods that took them there may be a futile exercise.

We can't just have one big basket of deplorables...it is important that we sort them into 10 or more pints/quarts of different flavored deplorables.

[Bernie Brewer]

its been this way for around a decade at least. Back in Bush 2's first term there were a good number of conservatives here but they gradually made their exit during his second term. Its very rare to find a forum that is evenly split, its usually 80/20 split or worse in either direction and I think thats because partisans love echo chambers.

I remember. I’ve been around for a while now. Long time lurker, first time caller!

If I recall correctly there a few more harsher voices in the far liberal side, a few louder voices on the (what was then considered) the extreme right. A few crazy nut jobs and a few reasoned voices in the moderate or conciliatory center. Oh, for the good old days. Back then I didn’t dare wade out of the kiddie pool and into deep end because the conversations were fairly intellectual and I didn’t feel equipped as I didn’t participate high school debate. Those were often strong and informative discussions (an on occassion very passionate, too!) that helped me come change my mind on several issues. A few of those folks still participate.