April 12th, 2016

Trump the fabulous wheeler-dealer, hirer of the best and smartest people who know how to work the system, whines “It’s unfair!” when he fails to successfully wheel and deal and work the system

Ace points out the contradiction of it all. Read the whole thing, plus the links to pieces such as this one:

If anything, in fact, the delegate-wrangling process should be a godsend for Trump. It moves the race out of the ballot box, where he’s vulnerable to a surge of #NeverTrump votes as the primaries near their conclusion, to the backroom, where he can work his fatcat dealmaking magic. In practice, Cruz is beating the pants off of him, something that should never happen per the mystique that surrounds Trump of being a master negotiator. Noah Rothman claimed this morning that the fact that two of Trump’s kids failed to register in New York as Republicans in time to vote in this year’s primary is a microcosm of Trump’s disorganization generally, which is fair enough. But I’d add to that that him getting consistently beaten by Cruz at the delegate level is a microcosm of how Trump’s image as wheeler-dealer extraordinaire is oversold. An ingenious salesman should not be at this sort of chronic disadvantage against a guy who’s not very personally likable, whose methods are loathed by the establishmentarians who “rigged” the system, and who’s operating at a financial handicap compared to Trump. But he is. How come?

The question is rhetorical, and the answer is obvious: Trump is not the ingenious guy he presents himself as being, nor does he hire the best people. Or maybe he is all that in the field of real estate development, but that’s because he actually has skills there that don’t transfer easily to a lot of other processes, although they transfer to some. And he’s an infantile entitled complainer, too, which I’ve noticed a lot of his fans seem to have no problem justifying and excusing.

By the way, I would think this whether I liked Trump or not. How do I know? Simple. It has to do with my reaction to Bush/Gore 2000. At that time I was, of course, a Democrat, and I voted for Gore. During the long and nerve-wracking legal process of watching the courts decide who had won the photo finish election, I very much wanted to it be Gore, naturally. But when Bush won in the courts, unlike a lot of Democrats I never cried “Foul!” or thought he had stolen the election. I remember being very very disappointed in Gore and his advisors and aides, and thinking that if they couldn’t mount that fight and win—if Gore had been outfoxed and outmaneuvered by the Bush team—then he probably didn’t have the requisite toughness and knowledge of the system to have deserved the presidency and made an effective president.

President Obama started a new presidential tradition of whining and complaining, blaming and accusing. Prior to Obama, such behavior in a president was considered both unmanly and unpresidential. But at least Obama didn’t run on touting his macho alpha male characteristics, except for the occasional remark. Trump does.

[NOTE: See also this, as well as this:

Trump is not being cheated. Everyone is playing by the same rules, which were available to every campaign well in advance. Trump simply is not as good at converting knowledge into success – notwithstanding the centrality of this talent to his candidacy. Perhaps this is because he is singularly good at generating free publicity (and consequently minimizing the publicity available to his rivals). Maybe he underestimated the importance of building a competent, experienced campaign organization. But he can hardly acknowledge this because it is a colossal error of judgment – and his purportedly peerless judgment is the selling point of his campaign…

Trump is constitutionally incapable of admitting errors – a flaw exacerbated by a campaign premised on a personality rather than a program. So his now familiar, repulsive reaction is to smear his opposition as cheaters, liars and even law-breakers … while Roger Stone, one of Trump’s brass-knuckles specialists, threatens to extort delegates. The stubborn fact, however, is that Trump has a management problem – namely … Trump. He grossly miscalculated the task at hand, he is scrambling to find suitable staff way too late in the game, and in a vain effort to divert attention from his own failings he is slandering others. This is the kind of candidate he has been, and the damage someone of his judgment and temperament could do if he were president is blatant.

Please read the whole thing.]

[ADDENDUM: Please see also this and this.]

[ADDENDUM II: Rather than turn this blog into an all-Trump all-the-time festival, I’m going to just post another link to an article on a topic that truly does deserve a post of its own, the fact that the hundred million dollars of Trump’s supposed charitable donations mostly amount to free golf rounds and hotel rooms at his resorts.]

18 Responses to “Trump the fabulous wheeler-dealer, hirer of the best and smartest people who know how to work the system, whines “It’s unfair!” when he fails to successfully wheel and deal and work the system”

  1. liz Says:

    One thing that irritates me is that everyone assumes that the “GOPe” people are very long time members and are corrupt sobs.

    But, based on the grassroots activism that rose up in 2010 – 2014, perhaps a lot of people decided to change from the ground up? There were a lot of “tea party people” who were ridiculed in 2010 and then stopped by a lot of people in 2012 (IRS). Perhaps the people decided that change has to come through the party.

    I’ve said it before in this forum – elect the good people at the city level, get them to go to the state level, then to Congress. I wonder how many of the delegates that are being elected/selected are old timers or fresh new faces?

  2. Matt_SE Says:

    @liz,

    That’s exactly what a lot of them did. That’s what I did. I see these people at local GOP meetings and although there are some explicit establishment types dedicated to holding office only, there are at least as many citizens who are taking their party back.

    One of the most irritating aspects to Trumpkins and the alt-right is their tendency to jump in front of the parade and act like they were always leading it. They criticize others for being insufficiently dedicated when for years they themselves were nowhere to be found.

    @ neo

    Your link to the Ace story is gone. Maybe he removed the article?

  3. neo-neocon Says:

    Matt_SE:

    Thanks—I fixed the Ace link.

  4. expat Says:

    Matt_SE,
    Judging by some of the comments made by avid (or should I say rabid), not only were they no where to be found previously, they don’t seem to have even read news reports. As Eric’s fantastic research has shown, Trump’s remarks on Bush and Iraq should have turned off any knowledgeable person.

  5. parker Says:

    Matt_SE,

    I think the so called alt-right are for the most part not conservative. I see them as ‘progressive’ saboteurs.

  6. Eric Says:

    parker:
    “I think the so called alt-right are for the most part not conservative.”

    Yep. Their othering conservatives as “cuckservative” is a pretty good indicator they’re not conservative.

    Alt-Right activists have targeted conservatives for displacement modeled on the Left activist displacement of liberals.

  7. parker Says:

    Eric,

    Since you agree with my assessment, perhaps you might tell us who you think who/what are the alt-right. Meanwhile, its my turn to prepare dinner. On tonight’s menu is eggplant roasted with a miso glaze, homemade bread toasted in the broiler with a brie topping, and a salad of dandelion greens dizzled with olive oil and balsamic vinegar. (Not bad for a farm boy.)

  8. Eric Says:

    expat:
    “As Eric’s fantastic research has shown, Trump’s remarks on Bush and Iraq should have turned off any knowledgeable person.”

    Thanks.

    It’s a stark example of the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist of the activist game, where narrative is elective truth and the actual truth is just a narrative that must be competed for like any other in the arena.

    Not to dull your praise or self-deprecate, but the primary sources of the mission are easily accessed on-line and readily understandable for any smart HS graduate. The Gulf War ceasefire enforcement versus “Iraq’s intransigence” (Clinton) had been headline-news current event for over a decade leading up to OIF, the defining US-led international enforcement of the post-Cold War. In Saddam’s “final opportunity to comply” (UNSCR 1441), Iraq was evidentially in material breach across the board of the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441), including and especially the (WMD) disarmament, terrorism, and humanitarian ceasefire mandates.

    On the law and the facts, President Bush’s decision for Operation Iraqi Freedom was correct.

    In other words, the grounds for the Iraq intervention are straightforward and the why of OIF shouldn’t have been misunderstood in the 1st place. Yet the prevailing conception of OIF, including for many ostensible OIF supporters, is a demonstrably false narrative.

    It goes to show, if the why of OIF can be mischaracterized in the public discourse, then in the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist, any issue is up for grabs.

    The amoral competition of the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist is exemplified by factions like the Democrat-front Left and the Trump-front alt-Right, not to mention foreign competitors like Russia, that propagate and refresh the demonstrably false narrative of OIF as a cornerstone linchpin premise of their anti-GOP (and/or anti-American) strategy.

    The competition’s success in doing so highlights the competitive weakness of Republicans that they’ve chosen to (pathetically and guiltily) skirt the Iraq controversy despite the strategic importance of the prevailing false narrative of OIF for their competition and that Republicans could attack it armed with a straightforward set of law, policy, and facts to set the record straight.

    The better strategy for the GOP in the Narrative contest for the zeitgeist would be to vigorously re-litigate the Iraq issue in order to re-lay the foundation of the public discourse, and with the cornerstone linchpin premise switched, relentlessly move on that basis to discredit any competition, at home or abroad, that has utilized the demonstrably false narrative of OIF.

  9. Eric Says:

    parker,

    You should ask Ymarsakar, who has answered that question in comments here.

    What catches my attention about the alt-Right is their consistency with Russian propaganda about the American role in the world.

  10. parker Says:

    Eric,

    Thank you for your confirmation. Nice quarter moon in a clear sky over flyover country.

  11. blert Says:

    Eric Says:
    April 12th, 2016 at 9:53 pm

    parker,

    You should ask Ymarsakar, who has answered that question in comments here.

    What catches my attention about the alt-Right is their consistency with Russian propaganda about the American role in the world.

    &&&

    I sense the SVR — and Active Measures — no doubt.

    BTW, the very term “cuckservatives” refers to the stated opinion that ‘National Review Republicans’ et. al. are not ‘race realists’ and that they are selling the White race’s birthright down the toilet.

    You might note that that theme is congruent with Putin’s personal ‘race realist’ point of view.

    So both Heartiste and Putin want Whites to stop destroying Paternal Society — and denigrate homosexuals — and fat ugly, unwomanly sluts.

    Like Alex Jones and Zero Hedge, these give off every appearance of being SVR ( nee KGB ) Active Measures web fronts.

    One might note that Alex Jones espouses paranoia.

    Zero Hedge espouses nihilism in the financial markets — and in societal themes, more generally.

    Not one of these sites permits// advocates an anti-Putin stance.

    Zero Hedge never critiques the economies or grand politics of Iran, Russia or Red China.

  12. Matt_SE Says:

    I don’t see the alt-right as a movement that was purposefully spawned, although I agree that occasionally (and depending on the site) that “active measures” agents deploy agitprop to keep the churn up. I think it was a bunch of people originally inclined to the political right who were socially liberal (at least in a few ways).
    They fell into cynicism from both fronts, as on the one hand their fiscal conservatism was betrayed by the Republicans, and on the other hand their progressive social outlook was inherently self-contradictory and just collapsed in on itself like it always does.

    They are cynics. I’ve said it a dozen times.
    They often are sneering atheists, and are aggressive with their disdain. They think everyone in politics is corrupt. They don’t talk about building anything because they have no hope. They only talk about destroying and punishing their enemies. They are prone to paranoia and conspiracy theories when simpler explanations would suffice. They often use this paranoia to justify their actions, which are as amoral and degenerate as those of the progressive left.

    I would guess they have very little reason to live, and no cause they would die for.

  13. KLSmith Says:

    Regarding Trump’s charitable donations: he reportedly gave away very little of the money to the veterans groups he said he was going to help. You remember, that time he didn’t debate in Iowa. So he could raise money and keep most of for himself.

  14. blert Says:

    Matt_SE

    But that’s how Active Measures ALWAYS worked.

    The KGB // nee SVR look for nihilist surfers and amplify their waves.

    Active Measures has always been about signal amplification in the body politic.

    Its primary themes at all times:

    Paranoia — domestically
    Nihilism — domestically
    Exposing corruption of orthodox politicians
    Critical theory — attacking orthodoxy at a primal level
    Anti-paranoia WRT Russia
    Anti-nihilism WRT Russia
    Racial division — domestically
    Slavic virtues — WRT Russia — as in White Russians

    When you see this agtiprop set trumpeted from any propaganda monastery — figure it to be riven with Russian Active Measures media troopers of the First Directorate.

  15. Dennis Says:

    KLSmith Says at 1:17 am
    “Regarding Trump’s charitable donations: he reportedly gave away very little of the money to the veterans groups he said he was going to help.”

    I’ve heard that claim before and believe it is probably true but I haven’t fond a link to a reliable source on the issue.

  16. neo-neocon Says:

    Dennis:

    Here are some links and quotes about the money Trump raised for the veterans, and where it is now—

    This:

    A veterans advocacy group [22Kill] that received $200,000 from presidential candidate Donald Trump’s January fundraiser said the move was a huge boost for their organization, even if the money brought with it a rash of confusion and criticism….

    Trump’s campaign still has not fully accounted for the $6 million officials claim was raised at the Iowa event, organized as a protest to Fox News’ choice of moderators for a debate scheduled the same evening.

    Only a few of the 22 organizations originally listed as beneficiaries of the event have publicly reported receiving donations, and several others have expressed concerns that money being offered has been tied to campaign appearances and events.

    Trump campaign officials have offered no response to repeated inquiries by Military Times about future distribution of the money.

    This:

    More than two months after Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump held a fundraiser for veterans, the beneficiaries of the funds have only been given “a fraction of the promised money,” according to an investigation by The Wall Street Journal.

    Trump skipped a Republican debate on Fox News prior to the Iowa caucus after claiming moderator Megyn Kelly was “biased” against him. Trump opted to hold the fundraiser instead, and claimed to have raised $6 million for veterans’ charities.

    The Wall Street Journal surveyed the 22 veterans’ groups originally listed by the Trump campaign as beneficiaries. According to the publication’s calculations, 19 of the groups have received only $2.4 million of the reported $6 million raised – less than half of the funds from what the campaign called a “special event.”

  17. Dennis Says:

    Thanks for the information Neo.

  18. Big Maq Says:

    The only thing to add (not mentioned specifically), is that Trump at some point bragged how he is a “master” at reading contracts and finding “holes” to exploit, and that is how he would deal with the “poorly negotiated” treaties the US has signed with foreign countries.

    His recent complaints about how the rules are “rigged”, and incurring a loss due to not recognizing those rules and planning accordingly, seems incompatible with the above assertion he made.

    Just piling on, since there are so many implications from / inherent in Trump’s complaints, that they are really what “losers” would do (as Trump would undoubtedly call them, if the shoe was on the other foot).

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>






Monthly Archives



Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge