Home | About | Donate

Donald Trump and the GOP’s New ‘Pitchfork’ Rebellion


#1

Donald Trump and the GOP’s New ‘Pitchfork’ Rebellion

James Carden

In spring 2003, the journalist and former George W. Bush speechwriter David Frum published a controversial essay in the pages of the conservative house organ, National Review. In the frenzied run-up to the Iraq War, Frum, branded a number of antiwar conservatives like Patrick Buchanan, the columnist Robert Novak and the libertarian journalist Justin Raimondo as “unpatriotic conservatives.”


#2

Watched a variety of interviews with Trump supporters in SC and noticed that they were mostly voting on their anger and frustration with the corrupted political establishment, rather than for any positive comprehensive policies that actually address the issues of America. Can't political action be guided by more than this?
Maybe this is how the revolution begins.


#3

"So while it seems likely that in the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s convincing win in Nevada that Sanders is more or less finished."

It was only a win by 5 or 6 points and only three states have voted. I think one should at least wait till the Super Tuesday results are in before making such predictions. People were close to declaring Clinton was finished after the New Hampshire primary. Sanders appears to have the financing to keep going until June. This thing could be in doubt for some time to come.


#4

I thought Mr. Carden presented an elegant case (I like his writing style)... until this:

"So while it seems likely that in the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s convincing win in Nevada that Sanders is more or less finished, the Democratic Party’s pursuit of neoliberal trade policies may soon give rise to a populist movement from within the ranks."

Frum may serve as one of the strategists for Right Wing Conservatives, but how is the above paragraph not using similar tactics?

Present the Sanders' campaign as finished. Dismiss the tremendous showing that Mr. Sanders' has seen at virtually every primary/public appearance and then dissolve all that into some futuristic "picture" of what a "populist movement from within the ranks" would look like.

Such a statement renders the EXISTING populist movement (a rising tide supporting Sanders' run) either irrelevant or theoretically non-existent.


#5

...Otherwise, you wouldn't have a job, right?


#6

I think that the broad range of people who consider themselves to be some-kind of Republican have become more fed up with their party sooner than those of us on the left have become fed up with the Democratic one, and appear to be willing to burn the entire thing down by nominating Trump.


#7

And how the German middle-class loved Hitler . Same old same old.


#8

Carden sez: "So while it seems likely that in the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s convincing win in Nevada that Sanders is more or less finished ..."

Aye, in 30 days she turned a 25-point lead into a five-point victory. I'm convinced!

The Bern is dead! Long live "responsible" Liz!


#9

Hitler never won an election. He became Chancellor when the German industrialists (the Koch brothers of that day) convinced President Hindenburg to appoint Hitler Chancellor (the head of government). They were deathly afraid of a Marxist revolution and Hitler was a rabid anti-Communist. They convinced President Hindenburg that they could control Hitler. Once Hitler was in power he convinced enough conservatives in the Reichstag to join with the Nazis (a minority party) and pass an Enabling Act giving Hitler absolute power. The Weimar Republic became a fascist dictatorship by a vote of democratically-elected members of the Reichstag. It was a case of the German industrialists not heeding that old warning: "Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it."

If Americans actually vote Trump into power, then we are more stupid than Germans were in 1932 because they did not vote Hitler into power.


#10

The Nevada caucus, held on Saturday in a state whose biggest employer by far is gaming/hospitality (serving weekenders from California) is hardly a make or break event for Sanders and is in no way a convincing win for Clinton. How many of those hospitality workers can afford to take off work on their biggest tip day of the week to caucus ?

While the Democrats serially whine about GOP voter suppression, Democrats having so many caucuses rather than primaries, and scheduling the caucuses to limit turnout and prejudice outsiders, are just as bad as the GOP.


#11

Very funny.


#12

I don't get why some states have caucuses. I am glad my state doesn't. Not only is it inconvenient for voters and sometimes there is no secret ballot so other people can see who you vote for but there often seems to be a lot a confusion. Apparently that is the case with the Nevada Republican caucus.


#13

The media tried and failed to make "the populist movement supporting Sanders' run irrelevant AND non-existent". Guess they are going to keep trying.


#14

Near as I can tell state party leaders decide to have caucuses if they think it will impede outsiders. Caucuses are more than inconvenient, they are a form of voter suppression when you consider 1) that they last only an hour or so, 2) if you have kids and need a babysitter, either you can't caucus, or the babysitter can't caucus, 3) there are no ballots in my state, you just line up in groups, 4) I have seen intimidation of attendees supporting outsiders, 5) just as corporations profit from confusion, caucuses keep things confusing so the Party can better control the results.

The stories about drawing cards to determine precinct winners are entirely true.

Caucuses should be abolished.


#15

Enough Germans voted for Hitler's Nazis in a legitimate election to get the Nazis into a very strong, legitimate, political position in 1932. A far cry from 1923 when he was jailed for 9 months for being part of an attempted pusch in Munich. Trump just needs the moustache and the armband.


#16

I'm sorry but are you paying attention to what's happening in the Democratic party? First, Bernie Sanders is not, more or less finished. At this point they are more or less even. Second, there already is a populist uprising, nay a revolution brewing in the party as we speak. If you think that will fade away if Clinton is elected, think again. The revolution is coming either way and Clinton and the neo-con/neo-liberal policies will be at the center as they are in the Sanders campaign. You can talk about the Republicans angst but they are not any more fed up or angry then the Democrats who feel betrayed because Obama promised change and gave us more of the same. The pitchforks are out and the whole country is angry about the 1% and the lousy foreign policies and lack of justice across this country. Your article leaves a lot of facts to be desired.


#17

Can you believe he just glazed over the elephant in the room, the Sanders revolution, and assumed Clinton the winner. Maybe she paid him to write this into his piece. What a joke.


#18

The Clintons and all empowered Establishment figures definitely have the connections to make or break writers' and others' careers. I am convinced that something like a Black List exists today.