Home | About | Donate

Attacking Trump for the Few Sensible Things He Says is Bad Strategy


Attacking Trump for the Few Sensible Things He Says is Bad Strategy

Mark Weisbrot

Donald Trump is a buffoon, a narcissist and misogynist who has offended large segments of the American population with racist comments. He has so little impulse control that he erupted with a pathetic defense of the size of his penis in the middle of a presidential debate, and retweeted an unflattering picture of former rival Sen. Ted Cruz's (R-Texas) wife next to his own wife.


Good article, I agree. Trump is all over the place on issues usually, but some of his ideas a down right liberal. If he wins, and he might, could we expect an end or renegotiation of the TPP? Could he really reign in the out of control neocon war hawks and stop policing the world? We know he would stop this insane march to ring Russia with war toys. These are some of the things he has said that actually make sense to me. So when the Dems try the ole Trump is so bad, vote for me, I wonder. Yes, it's a bad idea to demonize him when he's right.
What we know for sure is Clinton will move forward on alienating Russia and will double down on the things Trump claims he will end. It's common knowledge that Obomer has held her back on some of her aggressive ideas, like a no fly zone over Syria, but she will rush to accomplish those things if she's crowned.
It is fear of Clinton that drives me to the Green party, not Trump.
There are corruptible crooks and incorruptible crooks. The corruptible ones, like Trump, can often be better than the incorruptible one's like Clinton, that are so set in their own mind about their direction that nothing can change them.
Cruz is incorruptible as well, but again, Trump is not.
I'm not advocating for Trump it's just that sometimes he makes more sense than Killary. She, after all, is the devil we know and she is unchangeable.


Just asking, could it be that some of these "sane" ideas are actually absurd? Evidence mounts on direct Russian involvement in US election cycle , yet it is too aggressive to consider them adversaries?


Excellent. Thank you, Mark. I've been looking for something like this all day. Obviously, Dems don't "get it". They are playing right into Trump's hands, and there are many of us who will vote for Jill. The DNC has been taking every strategy to alienate Sanders voters. We will not be standing up for Hillary as she struggles against Trump's agenda.


What evidence, Airedale, that Putin prefers the candidate less apt to declare war on him?

This is thin. On the other hand, we know that Clinton has interfered with the US election cycle by interrupting democratic process within the Democratic Party.

Moreover, even were Putin trying to take a hand in the US election cycle, it would be mild compared to what the US has already done in with coups and destabilizations and extreme nuclear buildup on his border.

Putin's no angel nor even a particularly nice guy. But if he is working to avoid Clinton, that's working to avoid kickstarting a nuclear war. I think I can support him that far.


It is nice to see this acknowledgement.

By ignoring or rejecting the Sanders camp and stealing the nomination by fraud, the Democratic Party has moved to the right of even the Republicans in all but questions of race and gender. It behoves people who are commenting to draw distinctions that cross party lines, and I am glad to see Weisbrot begin to do this.


How about this crazy idea , what if it is an authoritarian dictator Putin who is making all these nuclear aggressive moves.


This liberal is voting Trump.

The only antiwar candidate with a chance of winning, period. I voted for Dr Stein last time, but the neocons now are just too close to the nuclear triggers.


All this Putin bashing and stirring up more fear sounds to me like very primitive propaganda. I don't even believe in the "Russian" hacking theory. Never do they deliver any proof, just accusations and assumptions.


Excellent. High time someone pointed this out. If anything stands in the way of my voting for Trump, its his SCOTUS appointments. The rest I can live with.


The Dimcritter Party continues to rely heavily on bashing Trump to make Clinton look good. That strategy might work with a GOP candidate who has never turned bad PR into energy. The Dimcritters appear to be relying on the sudden end of Trump's serial ability to make bad PR work for him. If the Dimcritters are lucky Trump's fortunes will change.

The safer strategy for beating Trump would be to run a Dimcritter candidate that swing voters want to vote FOR. That strategy would reduce the Party's corporate money fix and addicts rarely voluntarily shake addiction prior to hitting rock bottom.


Thanks, Mr. Weisbrot,
I'm amused at the obligatory insults with which Lefties preface any non-scathing commentary on Trump. Thanks for the useful cross-party distinctions. I offer another. Trump may use racist rhetoric, but Hitlery promotes racist wars that have killed millions of dark-skinned people in the middle east. Voters should realize this. Not to put too fine a point on it: people prefer being insulted to being blasted, shot, or incinerated. If racism is a concern, Trump is the better choice. I, too am becoming less embarrassed to prefer Trump over Hitlery.


The Dems at the Convention are so delirious right now trying to show unity that they will agree to anything warmongering Hillary says and does.


There are a lot of indications of Russian government involvement in this , unfortunately like with any hacking it is not a 100% proof. So anyone who is sympathetic to Putin will still have doubts and call it "bashing" , by the ones who doubt words of an authoritarian dictator will find it credible.

"But some of the most compelling evidence linking the DNC breach to Russia was found at the beginning of July by Thomas Rid, a professor at King’s College in London, who discovered an identical command-and-control address hardcoded into the DNC malware that was also found on malware used to hack the German Parliament in 2015. According to German security officials, the malware originated from Russian military intelligence. An identical SSL certificate was also found in both breaches.

The evidence mounts from there. Traces of metadata in the document dump reveal various indications that they were translated into Cyrillic. Furthermore, while Guccifer 2.0 claimed to be from Romania, he was unable to chat with Motherboard journalists in coherent Romanian. Besides which, this sort of hacking wouldn’t exactly be outside of Russian norms."



The US government interferes with the elections in other countries as a policy. The US government spies on everyone around the planet and hacks into the computer systems globally. You know the NSA has every email the DNC ever sent and probably all the ones Clinton ever sent or received on her private server, which was not secure.

Who cares who hacked into the DNC emails, or who revealed what they said? (They were hacked several times, so they didn't have much security on the system, in any case.)

The more important thing is what the emails themselves said and proved. And what they said was NOT that the Russians were trying to manipulate the US election; the emails said and proved that the DNC was trying to manipulate the US election.


In this articles 4th paragraph lies an opening for Trump to trump Hillary and the democrats. You write taxpayer dollars are restricted from benefiting the general population by using them to police the world.
BUT, taxpayer dollars do not exist in government spending. All monetary sovereign nations spend only new created money into the economy. So there is plenty of spending room to cover all the bases, and not have to rob Peter to pay Paul.
All Trump has to do is say the US can afford full pensions, Medicare for all and free education, K-16. The government can always buy any debt as long as there are resources available and for sale. Trump can say it and it will come across as outlandish, but it IS the TRUTH! He can say it and repeat it and will get more votes. There are people out there who know this truth about macroeconomics and will support him. It will be an Ace for him!.


Thank you, Dede. I've been disturbed by the tendency to suffocate Trump just like they did with Sanders. Today I saw that Google searches refuse to include Trump if you search for "presidential candidate." I don't care how bat-shit crazy the guy is, that's wrong. And while I'm pessimistic that encouraging Trump's more reasonable ideas would lead to more of the same, at least enough to morph him, it's what we do in a democratic process.

One correction to Weisbrot: "eighth grade mentality"? I've taught eighth graders and they're much smarter than that. More like a fourth grade mentality, as another journalist has said.


Beware of the Boogeyman - but the boogeyman turned out to be just a harmless scare tactic.
Whereas the Neocons and Gaddafi's revenge - now that's really scary


“He (Trump) asserted that he wants Europeans to pay for their own defense.” Defense, ….. or bullying or bringing the world to the brink?

Who is more likely to want a hotter new cold war? Hillary or Donald? Is this the point Mark is making?


Wow, I didn't know they were doing that. Though there were a few websites during the race that were progressive but when you tried to get on their site you were redirected to a vote for Hillary page.
This all smacks of the type of total domination I expect under a Clinton administration. She is so very powerful her reach is horrifying.
I too am worried about Trump and his craziness but if he would stop the TPP and close bases as he has promised it would be an improvement. The thing is Democrats get away with way more than the Republicans. (Like Obama's TPP) If Republicans get too crazy the whole country will rise up, if Clinton does it, you can expect capitulation from most of the liberals.