clown college
Maybe it is absurd to pull hair reading some articles in the National Review, as I read their commenters talk their way into voting for Donald Trump. Like, it is one thing if their reasoning is some policies outweigh the bad but this is not what I am getting. Or maybe it is but they miss the point on “bad” when framing the issue that “I am no supporter of Trump, BUT” — failing to drop in on anything but the most superficial of oppositions to Trump.
The equivalence argument. It slides past Trump’s unconstitutional acts by linking to Biden’s great act of unconstitutionality. And what was that? Oh, it was the political game he played with student debt, at its core a policy issue you can support or oppose at your leisure, and which Biden needed to at keast feign an attempt to get at but couldn’t through congress. Advisors told him his subsequent attempt wouldn’t work, the courts rebuffed him, and that was the end of that. I stare at this reasoning blankly, muttering “You can not be serious”.
Good news, though. Even if the next Trump follows through on the vast media-now-hyperventilating-by-taking-serious-stump-speech-declarations-about-“dictator”-on-“day”-“one”-and-tgen-beyond — as we saw last time in office the Republican congress did plenty of push back on policy aims, there will be a handful of Republicans from districts that voted for Biden, and Hey! Collins and Murkowsi are in the Senate and they stomped the Stress test indeed — I mean, they kept Trump from ripping up “Obama-care”. (Again with middling policy issues). They have missed the fact we have a new Speaker. Also “he hits hard, but the defended hold” sure makes a weird argument.
I have trouble bending over backwards to meet anything here. Like, the “constitutional” issue has already been shot with the statement that is never resolved, and which until it is resolved nothing else here matters. “Obviously, all Americans should support the prosecution of the people who violently attacked police and forced their way into the Capitol.”. Trump disagrees with that statement – – he opens campaign rallied with a call in from these “patriots” in jail right now. And, like, you can argue a good defense that Trump was not an “insurrectionist” by law, but the manner of politics versus the law should put it in political terms as “close enough”.
The game continues. See where we are in three months.