Trump and Supporters Insult Our Intelligence

I am not #NeverTrump, but I'm getting close... thanks to Donald Trump and his supporters.

The fact is, Trump often makes profoundly stupid and manifestly false statements. These are the kind of statements that always offend the intellect of anyone who thinks analytically and is interested in the actual truth, regardless of who is saying them. If you are not offended by such, then by definition you simply have jettisoned any concern for truth and intelligence. That Trump runs afoul of both concepts is beyond debate.

Written words are the least emotional medium possible, so let’s remove the feeling of the mob rally or the sycophantic television interview and dispense with a few Trump pronouncements in the cold harsh reality of the written word. 

No doubt some of Trump’s supporters will quickly retort that Trump is a billionaire, so there's no way he could possibly say anything stupid about any topic. Or that it's impossible that Trump would lie. Yet Trump can, and does, routinely lie. In the words of Victor David Hanson, for Trump "truth is simply a narrative whose veracity is established by the degree of power and persuasion behind it." 

Let me translate:  Trump repeats nonsense loudly and often. Moreover, he daily adds insults to anyone who opposes him, which is an odd strategy for someone wanting to "unite the party." He's doing everything now to make that impossible for anyone to do anytime soon. His apparent cliching of the nomination simply lends more urgancy to the matter.

But I digress. To the cold hard words, in perfect context, starting this week in Indiana.

“His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald’s being -- you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. What is this, right prior to his being shot, and nobody even brings it up? They don’t even talk about that. That was reported, and nobody talks about it. I mean, what was he doing -- what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting? It’s horrible.”

What is this, coming from a man who wants to be the most powerful in the world? Does Trump consider the National Enquirer to be the gazette of truth? Was Ted Cruz’s father at Area 51 too? It's not even clear that Trump has any idea whose death he's even rambling about. Serious people would be bothered by a candidate who is capable of saying this. 

How about the Mike Tyson endorsement: "So Cruz is now saying, 'Oh, he (Mike Tyson) was a rapist. This guy is a real liar, that's why we call him Lyin' Ted Cruz. I mean, the greatest liar that ever lived except he gets caught every time." 

Trump may have no responsibility over embarrassing endorsers. But Tyson was in fact convicted of rape and served hard time for it.  

On the Mike Pence endorsement of Cruz: 

"(Pence) gave me more of an endorsement than he gave Cruz. He started off with 'Donald Trump and what a great job he's done.' I mean look, his donors and special interests obviously made him give an endorsement."

You see, because Pence was deferential and respectful of Trump, he was really endorsing Trump. You might say Pence was trying to "unite the party". 

Apparently, in these sad days AD (after Donald), only full-throated insults and childish taunts can be trusted. Pence -- who has conservative credibility going back decades and not merely 20 minutes -- is only saying nice things about Lyin’ Ted because of his donors. This is ridiculous on its face and rivals Trump’s comments in Iowa about anyone who opposes ethanol being "in the pocket of big oil." Both comments are a window into the shallow soul of Trump and the shallow minds of anyone who accepts either premise. 

Speaking of shallow, here is Trump with fellow New York liberal Chris Cuomo:

“The bosses are trying to run it. It’s a rigged party. The bosses want to pick whoever they want to pick. The voters wouldn’t stand for it."

This was a continuation of Trump's talking points over the last six weeks. Everything without exception is “rigged”. This contention, geared to the mentally uncurious and emotionally supercharged, simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but of course this only affects those who are capable of scrutiny. 

For one thing, Trump has benefitted from the perpetual rigging of the system for whoever the frontrunner is. Trump's percentage of the delegates remains much higher than his percentage of the raw vote, making this whole argument moot and nuking his "voters" argument. He won 100% of South Carolina's delegates while winning less than one in three voters. So Donnie, what is it the voters won't stand for? (In truth, we can assume we've heard the last of this after Indiana.) 

Moreover, the system is exactly what's it's been for a long time. You would think someone who always picks a great team and surrounds himself with the best people might have read the rules.  

But the most offensive concept is that of “party bosses”.

John Boehner, Trump’s tweeting and golfing buddy, is a “party boss”. Mitch McConnell, whom Trump supported in his most recent primary against a conservative outsider is the consummate “party boss”. Lobbyist and Trump convention manager Paul Manafort is an insider party boss. Trump buddy Chuck Schumer is a party boss, albeit from the other party Trump often belongs to. Ditto Hillary Clinton. It's Donald's rolodex (smart phone contacts) that are filled with party bosses. 

The same party bosses who loathe Ted Cruz. 

Farmers and teachers and tea party activists from rural Wyoming or Colorado who go to a caucus and become delegates are not party bosses. Even local elected officials are not party bosses. No, the real party bosses are quite often Donald's buddies and beneficiaries. He has to know this, but he has been counting on one thing: that his supporters are not smart enough to figure it out. 

Which is the story of his campaign. Words mean things, according to a long-time famous radio host. Trump's words belie the idea that he's a wise choice for nominee. The buyers' remorse that is coming will not be owned by those of us who sounded the warning bells. 

Edmund Wright is a contributor to American Thinker, Breitbart, Newsmax TV and Talk Radio Network. He's been writing against the establishment since 1992 and has written an elections bestselling book. 

I am not #NeverTrump, but I'm getting close... thanks to Donald Trump and his supporters.

The fact is, Trump often makes profoundly stupid and manifestly false statements. These are the kind of statements that always offend the intellect of anyone who thinks analytically and is interested in the actual truth, regardless of who is saying them. If you are not offended by such, then by definition you simply have jettisoned any concern for truth and intelligence. That Trump runs afoul of both concepts is beyond debate.

Written words are the least emotional medium possible, so let’s remove the feeling of the mob rally or the sycophantic television interview and dispense with a few Trump pronouncements in the cold harsh reality of the written word. 

No doubt some of Trump’s supporters will quickly retort that Trump is a billionaire, so there's no way he could possibly say anything stupid about any topic. Or that it's impossible that Trump would lie. Yet Trump can, and does, routinely lie. In the words of Victor David Hanson, for Trump "truth is simply a narrative whose veracity is established by the degree of power and persuasion behind it." 

Let me translate:  Trump repeats nonsense loudly and often. Moreover, he daily adds insults to anyone who opposes him, which is an odd strategy for someone wanting to "unite the party." He's doing everything now to make that impossible for anyone to do anytime soon. His apparent cliching of the nomination simply lends more urgancy to the matter.

But I digress. To the cold hard words, in perfect context, starting this week in Indiana.

“His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald’s being -- you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. What is this, right prior to his being shot, and nobody even brings it up? They don’t even talk about that. That was reported, and nobody talks about it. I mean, what was he doing -- what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting? It’s horrible.”

What is this, coming from a man who wants to be the most powerful in the world? Does Trump consider the National Enquirer to be the gazette of truth? Was Ted Cruz’s father at Area 51 too? It's not even clear that Trump has any idea whose death he's even rambling about. Serious people would be bothered by a candidate who is capable of saying this. 

How about the Mike Tyson endorsement: "So Cruz is now saying, 'Oh, he (Mike Tyson) was a rapist. This guy is a real liar, that's why we call him Lyin' Ted Cruz. I mean, the greatest liar that ever lived except he gets caught every time." 

Trump may have no responsibility over embarrassing endorsers. But Tyson was in fact convicted of rape and served hard time for it.  

On the Mike Pence endorsement of Cruz: 

"(Pence) gave me more of an endorsement than he gave Cruz. He started off with 'Donald Trump and what a great job he's done.' I mean look, his donors and special interests obviously made him give an endorsement."

You see, because Pence was deferential and respectful of Trump, he was really endorsing Trump. You might say Pence was trying to "unite the party". 

Apparently, in these sad days AD (after Donald), only full-throated insults and childish taunts can be trusted. Pence -- who has conservative credibility going back decades and not merely 20 minutes -- is only saying nice things about Lyin’ Ted because of his donors. This is ridiculous on its face and rivals Trump’s comments in Iowa about anyone who opposes ethanol being "in the pocket of big oil." Both comments are a window into the shallow soul of Trump and the shallow minds of anyone who accepts either premise. 

Speaking of shallow, here is Trump with fellow New York liberal Chris Cuomo:

“The bosses are trying to run it. It’s a rigged party. The bosses want to pick whoever they want to pick. The voters wouldn’t stand for it."

This was a continuation of Trump's talking points over the last six weeks. Everything without exception is “rigged”. This contention, geared to the mentally uncurious and emotionally supercharged, simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny, but of course this only affects those who are capable of scrutiny. 

For one thing, Trump has benefitted from the perpetual rigging of the system for whoever the frontrunner is. Trump's percentage of the delegates remains much higher than his percentage of the raw vote, making this whole argument moot and nuking his "voters" argument. He won 100% of South Carolina's delegates while winning less than one in three voters. So Donnie, what is it the voters won't stand for? (In truth, we can assume we've heard the last of this after Indiana.) 

Moreover, the system is exactly what's it's been for a long time. You would think someone who always picks a great team and surrounds himself with the best people might have read the rules.  

But the most offensive concept is that of “party bosses”.

John Boehner, Trump’s tweeting and golfing buddy, is a “party boss”. Mitch McConnell, whom Trump supported in his most recent primary against a conservative outsider is the consummate “party boss”. Lobbyist and Trump convention manager Paul Manafort is an insider party boss. Trump buddy Chuck Schumer is a party boss, albeit from the other party Trump often belongs to. Ditto Hillary Clinton. It's Donald's rolodex (smart phone contacts) that are filled with party bosses. 

The same party bosses who loathe Ted Cruz. 

Farmers and teachers and tea party activists from rural Wyoming or Colorado who go to a caucus and become delegates are not party bosses. Even local elected officials are not party bosses. No, the real party bosses are quite often Donald's buddies and beneficiaries. He has to know this, but he has been counting on one thing: that his supporters are not smart enough to figure it out. 

Which is the story of his campaign. Words mean things, according to a long-time famous radio host. Trump's words belie the idea that he's a wise choice for nominee. The buyers' remorse that is coming will not be owned by those of us who sounded the warning bells. 

Edmund Wright is a contributor to American Thinker, Breitbart, Newsmax TV and Talk Radio Network. He's been writing against the establishment since 1992 and has written an elections bestselling book.