Democrats think they are winning when they troll Donald Trump as an "illegitimate" president. Trump thinks his response is a win by positioning himself against a leader of black entitlement.
But it is not win-win. Vladimir Putin steps in, with a smile and a knife. Trump needs to watch out.
The Democrats are trolling Donald Trump. They love it. It is payback for birther-ism. The current hottest news was civil rights leader John Lewis saying he did not consider Trump a legitimate president. Maxine Waters said he should be impeached if Putin helped Trump win. Elizabeth Warren is says she is unwilling to say Trump is legitimate.
But Trump likes the fight, too. His sharp criticism of a black congressman gives Trump exactly the optics he likes. It shows his Republican base of white Americans that he is on their side opposing blacks angling for benefits and privileges. Trump deftly attacked Lewis for being weak, not for being effective. This way Trump gets to be against black poverty while simultaneously visibly fighting a black leader. Perfect for him.
Meanwhile Trump and his surrogates shout "sore loser" at the Democrats. Trump and his allies are shocked that someone would question the legitimacy of a president. People who winked at birther-ism a year ago are now saying Democrats are disloyal, destroying the faith in our elections to suggest there is something "off" about Trump.
This blog has noted that Trump did not win election because his policies were clearly defined. He won because he better understood the media landscape than did any of his opponents and for that matter did the media. Trump took advantage of CNN and the other news vehicles by finding their soft spot: ratings. He fed their appetite for following the spectacular and unpredictable Trump and the wild charges and countercharges that surround him. In doing so they ended up weakening their core value proposition as provider of reliable curated journalism. They peddled spectacle so when he points a finger and accuses them of doing "fake news" there is too much truth for comfort for them. It was as if Trump gave an alcoholic media what it really wanted but shouldn't have. Trump was a manipulator and message genius. He corrupted and weekend a source of potential resistance to his agenda.
 |
| This is not a gift. It is a knife. |
Meanwhile Trump has found his match. Putin comes to Trump's defense.
Putin is appealing to Trump's own addiction, his weakness in desire for popularity and praise. Trump may not even notice that Putin's praise is a knife in Trump's side. But Putin is clever, strategic, and diabolical, an expert in judo, using the opponent's strength against himself. Putin understands that Trump loves a public ally, yet is vulnerable to the nagging notion among Americans that he is too close to Putin and Russia. This is a hug that Trump would be better without. Putin is augmenting the notion of close public relationship between Trump and Putin. Trump is being handled. At some point this will be dangerous for Trump but for now they are allies, Trump's enemies being Putin's enemies.
I consider the weak spot for Trump's popularity long term to be the responsibilities of government and the suspicion he will run of being far too tight with Putin when Trump attempts to revamp current American policy with Russia and Europe. It is a serious policy adjustment for America. I consider this the main news of importance for today but meanwhile other observers are watching closely that fight between Trump and John Lewis, considering it another example of Democrats hanging on to a we-the-victim mentality. Democrats think it helps them. This blog has written that it backfires because it celebrates weakness--which no one really likes--and it creates a white backlash that is bigger than any benefit.
Advice to John Lewis—Don’t Go to White House Correspondents Dinner, Unless ....”
As UpClose emphasizes, Trump has no high ground on the “illegitimate president” uproar. His birtherism claims made him fair game. Trump was denounced as a “racist” for attacking the legitimacy of “our first black president”. Due to Democrats’ indiscriminate overuse of the term, the "racist" label no longer packs much of a punch. Still, a punch is punch, so now Trump is being denounced as a racist because he counter-punched Congressman John Lewis’ high profile attack on Trump’s legitimacy. According to the left media, Trump is not allowed to counter-attack based on Lewis’ performance in Congress as “talk” without much action.
That’s correct: We're saying a sitting U.S. Congressman calling the president elect “illegitimate”, who every two years has to raise funds from rich donors to fend off black primary challengers and/or white Republican challengers is off limits to counterattack by Trump. Trump said what several of Lewis’ challengers have said—he has not accomplished a whole lot legislatively. Indeed, Lewis’s Congressional record is not the ammo the outraged left is using to rebuff Trump. Instead, we've devised a condescending chant that 50 years ago Lewis was a colleague of Dr. King who suffered at the hands of racists-- back when the term meant something. To hear CNN, NYT and WP tell it, Lewis is a doddering old war hero, but who apparently hasn’t done much notable during his 26 years in the House.
Democrats in 2016 became the party of celebrated victimhood, characterizing ourselves as caucuses of the oppressed who can become strong only in a coalition with a Hillary or Bernie leading with a morally superior message. Whether its Hillary’s “deplorables” or Bernie’s “one percenters”, we huddle and hug behind a corporate media phalanx in a rhetorically-charged defense against rednecks and billionaires who would victimize us. And so it is when one of our own, like John Lewis, throws stones at the evil giant Twitter troll—we cry victimization. It’s an insult to Lewis. He’s not being defended as much as eulogized, as with Meryl Streep, our celebrity victims, our “national treasures” immune to counter-insult for their own insults. Yet, John Lewis is a scrappy and often abrasive establishment politician, who early on fought not just for civil rights, but to win and keep his seat safe. (See Wikipedia, “John Lewis”, https://goo.gl/UVy2AZ). Indeed, Lewis himself savaged fellow civil rights icon Julian Bond to win the seat in 1987, as the fellow activists turned “rivals, then bitter enemies as they each *** struggled to wrest a prize that shimmered with grail-like significance.” (See, “The Parable of Julian Bond & John Lewis”, Atlanta Magazine, Mar. 1, 1990, https://goo.gl/8BGaET).
Since Congressman Lewis and some of his House colleagues won’t attend the inauguration of an “illegitimate” president put in power by “racists”, “xenophobes”, “depolarables”, “Russians”, and the FBI, I doubt Lewis would attend the annual White House Correspondent’s Dinner if Trump speaks, as most presidents do. Nevertheless, my advice to Lewis is this: Don’t attend unless... you want to remain a celebrated victim of Democrats. That gala dinner is fueled by insulting humor, especially for public figures who, like Lewis, want to dismiss as “illegitimate” the President of the United States. At that dinner in 2012, Barrack Obama belittled, sliced ‘n diced, and humiliated Donald Trump for that very insult. It was pure personal vengeance and political payback. John Lewis could expect the same counter-attack from the president for the same insult.
Political office is no place for victims, and John Lewis is no victim. He’s a fighter who has waged battle against other politicians and presidents, and Democrats and their media should let him do what he does best—fight.
I consider the weak spot for Trump's popularity long term to be the responsibilities of government and the suspicion he will run of being far too tight with Putin when Trump attempts to revamp current American policy with Russia and Europe. It is a serious policy adjustment for America. I consider this the main news of importance for today but meanwhile other observers are watching closely that fight between Trump and John Lewis, considering it another example of Democrats hanging on to a we-the-victim mentality. Democrats think it helps them. This blog has written that it backfires because it celebrates weakness--which no one really likes--and it creates a white backlash that is bigger than any benefit.
Here is frequent Guest Post author Thad Guyer's take:
 |
| Guest Post: Guyer |
As UpClose emphasizes, Trump has no high ground on the “illegitimate president” uproar. His birtherism claims made him fair game. Trump was denounced as a “racist” for attacking the legitimacy of “our first black president”. Due to Democrats’ indiscriminate overuse of the term, the "racist" label no longer packs much of a punch. Still, a punch is punch, so now Trump is being denounced as a racist because he counter-punched Congressman John Lewis’ high profile attack on Trump’s legitimacy. According to the left media, Trump is not allowed to counter-attack based on Lewis’ performance in Congress as “talk” without much action.
That’s correct: We're saying a sitting U.S. Congressman calling the president elect “illegitimate”, who every two years has to raise funds from rich donors to fend off black primary challengers and/or white Republican challengers is off limits to counterattack by Trump. Trump said what several of Lewis’ challengers have said—he has not accomplished a whole lot legislatively. Indeed, Lewis’s Congressional record is not the ammo the outraged left is using to rebuff Trump. Instead, we've devised a condescending chant that 50 years ago Lewis was a colleague of Dr. King who suffered at the hands of racists-- back when the term meant something. To hear CNN, NYT and WP tell it, Lewis is a doddering old war hero, but who apparently hasn’t done much notable during his 26 years in the House.
Democrats in 2016 became the party of celebrated victimhood, characterizing ourselves as caucuses of the oppressed who can become strong only in a coalition with a Hillary or Bernie leading with a morally superior message. Whether its Hillary’s “deplorables” or Bernie’s “one percenters”, we huddle and hug behind a corporate media phalanx in a rhetorically-charged defense against rednecks and billionaires who would victimize us. And so it is when one of our own, like John Lewis, throws stones at the evil giant Twitter troll—we cry victimization. It’s an insult to Lewis. He’s not being defended as much as eulogized, as with Meryl Streep, our celebrity victims, our “national treasures” immune to counter-insult for their own insults. Yet, John Lewis is a scrappy and often abrasive establishment politician, who early on fought not just for civil rights, but to win and keep his seat safe. (See Wikipedia, “John Lewis”, https://goo.gl/UVy2AZ). Indeed, Lewis himself savaged fellow civil rights icon Julian Bond to win the seat in 1987, as the fellow activists turned “rivals, then bitter enemies as they each *** struggled to wrest a prize that shimmered with grail-like significance.” (See, “The Parable of Julian Bond & John Lewis”, Atlanta Magazine, Mar. 1, 1990, https://goo.gl/8BGaET).
Since Congressman Lewis and some of his House colleagues won’t attend the inauguration of an “illegitimate” president put in power by “racists”, “xenophobes”, “depolarables”, “Russians”, and the FBI, I doubt Lewis would attend the annual White House Correspondent’s Dinner if Trump speaks, as most presidents do. Nevertheless, my advice to Lewis is this: Don’t attend unless... you want to remain a celebrated victim of Democrats. That gala dinner is fueled by insulting humor, especially for public figures who, like Lewis, want to dismiss as “illegitimate” the President of the United States. At that dinner in 2012, Barrack Obama belittled, sliced ‘n diced, and humiliated Donald Trump for that very insult. It was pure personal vengeance and political payback. John Lewis could expect the same counter-attack from the president for the same insult.
Political office is no place for victims, and John Lewis is no victim. He’s a fighter who has waged battle against other politicians and presidents, and Democrats and their media should let him do what he does best—fight.
No comments:
Post a Comment