They hate him. They really, really hate him.

[cali]

It is impossible to overstate how much the republican establishment loathes their own creation. They may despise him for differing reasons, but boy, do they hate him.

I offer this:

Susan Collins wrote a scathing op-ed saying why she won't vote for him in the WaPo today.

Paul Ryan is headlining a Never Trump event put on by RedState on Friday, August 12.

the Economic director of the Cato institute just smashed Trump's Detroit speech into smithereens in a CNN op-ed.

People like Negraponte joined with 49 others writing a missive detailing what a dangerous CoC he'd be.


And the hits will just keep coming faster and harder.

[mdbl]

1. I don't understand why they are so upset

He's just a product of the last 30 years of republican BS.

[cali]

2. Because he presents as a boorish buffoon spewing hate

They prefer it be done with more delicacy.

[mdbl]

3. you mean like the Repugs in congress?

Joe " YOU LIE " and the like? This is crap they love.

[cali]

8. You are referring to a SC House member.

And that is the exception, not the rule. Nor was he running for President.

[mdbl]

54. No, Joe Wilson was in the Congress

I guess you're referring to my "you lie" comment.

[cali]

55. Right. The U.S. House. That's what I said.

[rbrnmw]

12. Exactly cali

[TeamPooka]

40. They prefer dog whistles over bullhorns. Racism and oppression with nuance. :)

[DetlefK]

4. But Republicans don't believe their own BS.

They don't believe that Obama is authoritarian or that he's a Muslim/Kenyan or that the ACA is bad or that Obama is to blame for Iraq or that fossil fuels are bad for the environment or...

They are merely saying these things because they:
- hype up the republican voters
- get them some sweet donor-cash

[mdbl]

5. and they get a candidate like Trump

that's what they get for the BS they have been propagating since Ronnie Raygun took office. It started with shi$$y right wihg radio and ballooned into this. Do you think this will teach them a lesson? Fat chance. It's too ingrained in their party.

[TeamPooka]

41. Funny thing about a Golem but it always turns on its creator. nt

[BlancheSplanchnik]

43. Doesn't matter whether or not the *believe* it .

Their actions are as if they believed it.
Vows to block everything Obama does, make him a one term president, etc.

They're not just merely saying these things. They ACT on it ( how many hearings on Bengazi? 50-something? Gov't shutdowns, block jobs bills, health care reforms. Sabotage of all kinds at the state levels.)

So, I'd say, yeah, a lot of them do believe it. Well, and of course the sweet donor $$$$$, that'll make a true believer out of an idiot with no ethics compass.

[Beartracks]

56. But Republican VOTERS do...

... and these sheeple picked Trump* as their perfect guy.





* That's Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, for the Googlebots.

===========================

[uponit7771]

6. +1, he's just the unpolished version of what they've been saying for years

[get the red out]

27. Yep

He doesn't know how to operate the dog whistles, so he just vomits it out.

[Fast Walker 52]

9. he's spoiling their brand!

they had a well-balanced blend of racism, cynicism, fascism and exploitation going, that was covered with enough patriotism to make it tasty to older whites, and now he's torn up the recipe.

[workinclasszero]

52. They wanted a better actor for the part

Like Rayguns or Pappy Bush.

Wouldn't be a dimes worth of difference in policy between Trump and someone like that but he would act like he cared as he F'ed the living shit out of the American public.

[Berlin Expat]

7. Not just that; there's this

as well: https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/762738782269476864/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

A potential Trump presidency is actually a greater risk - by twice as much - as Brexit, and just slightly ahead of an overall Eurozone breakup and ahead of the risk of ongoing jihadist terrorism destabilizing the global economy.

[Cary]

10. They are a mess.

This is what happens when a party embraces radicals, driven by emotion rather than sober reality. Emotion is unpredictable and uncontainable.

We are blessed to be able to win without leftist radicals.

[cali]

20. I'm a leftist radical, I guess.

You are winning with us.

And it has nothing to do with the supernatural, as your use of the word "blessed", would indicate. Or do you believe that "God" actually takes sides in political elections



And have a good day.

[Cary]

21. Maybe you are.

I am not the judge. But you seem to have embraced the sober reality.

I was never against Sanders. He isn't my idea of a radical.

[Cary]

25. And cali, the "sober reality" I refer to is that "conservatives" are evil

"Conservatism" is the enemy. That isn't "fear mongering." That isn't any kind of attempt at brain washing, or whatever other nonsense Jill Stein is spewing.

Fortunately the radical leftists are few and far between. That is why I say we are blessed.

[cali]

26. I'm an "evil" skeptic.

I don't believe all conservatives are enemies.

I really dislike the word evil.

I don't believe in evil.

Or more accurately, I believe the word evil is one of the most dangerous words and concepts in any language. I haven’t used it in years. What we don’t believe is the negative space that defines our world view as much as what we do believe.

Absolute evil. True evil. blah fucking blah evil, evil evil.

Evil Bad, Must Destroy.

Both the word and the concept(s) attached to the word have been the excuse for a thousand wars and countless horrific acts. Describing someone or some institution as evil, doesn’t tell me shit about the person or the institution. Nothing, except that the utterer thinks said person or institution is bad BEYOND DESCRIPTION.

Our ideas about what constitutes “evil”, vary wildly. Historically, the concept of “evil” is freighted with the supernatural- a concept (or not) that I don’t think belongs in the political lexicon. No wonder politicians ride it hard. Hey, want support for your war or your brutal policing practices, or whatever? Depict the forces you’re fighting (and trying to enlist others to fight) as EVIL. You don’t have to explain shit.



I’ve had this conversation with a fair number of people over the years. What about Hitler, people ask me? Nope. Still doesn’t tell me much. Caligula, Attila the Hun, and modern iterations like Hitler and Stalin, are people who did horrific things. Unremarkable except for the scale of the horror and terror they unleashed.

People aren’t monsters. They are all too human. In part, by using the word evil or deeming someone a monster, we distance ourselves from the horror that they are human- that we are human.

What bothers you more? The torture and death of one child or the death by push of a button in the California desert that kills 47 members of a wedding party in Afghanistan? My answer would be that I’m more viscerally horrified by the former but far more troubled and scared by the latter, because of its banality. It’s the cruelty masked by “good” intentions that is so pernicious, that persuades regular people to support the most awful actions. The banality of evil, as Hannah Arendt described it.

<snip>

Evil skeptics give three main reasons to abandon the concept of evil: (1) the concept of evil involves unwarranted metaphysical commitments to dark spirits, the supernatural, or the devil; (2) the concept of evil is useless because it lacks explanatory power; and (3) the concept of evil can be harmful or dangerous when used in moral, political, and legal contexts, and so, it should not be used in those contexts, if at all.

<snip>

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/concept-evil/

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2014/oct/21/-sp-the-truth-about-evil-john-gray


http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/the_spectator/2011/09/does_evil_exist_neuroscientists_say_no_.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028073106

[Cary]

28. Note that I use quotes

Conservatism is careful, prudent, traditional, rational, .... Conservatism is just to the right of center on a legitimate political spectrum as liberalism is just to the left. On the far right you have absolute monarchy. On the far left you have anarchism.

Contemporary "conservatives" are not careful. They are reckless and emotional. They are not based in tradition, except the nostalgia that they make up. They are not rational. There is nothing rational about "supply-side economics." I have studied this in depth and it's total b.s. made up by non-economists not as economic theory but rather as a device to acquire power. There is nothing prudent about them. I could go on, but simply look at their nominee. They are haters. That's the only thing you can really say that they have, hate.

Now I ask you, what is to the right of conservatives? It isn't "conservatives." I'm being nice. It's fascism, plain and simple and I defy you to distinguish between fascism and "conservatism." Fascism, if you boil it down, is a pure power grab. Now not all fascism is National Socialism. I will grant you that, but we're now into an actual lesser of two evils discussion and the lesser of two actual evils is still evil.

You don't like the word evil. That's fine but I defy you, once again, to prove that it isn't appropriate in this instance. It's critical to identify true evil when we see it. "Conservatism" is there.

[cali]

29. we are talking past each other. I reject the word/concept of evil.

And you don't. My position is not remarkable- if less common (much less) than yours. It's pretty well discussed in contemporary philosophy, where it's a hot topic.

What I think we can agree on, is that contemporary right wingers which constitute the vast majority of the Republican Party, create, promote and when able implement policies that are cruel, dangerous and harmful .

[Cary]

30. That was my point

"contemporary right wingers which constitute the vast majority of the Republican Party, create, promote and when able implement policies that are cruel, dangerous and harmful." We agree on that, yes. And we agree on more. Like I said, it's more process than policy. Perhaps I see the urgency of defeating them more than you do? Actually, I doubt that.

No offense but I'm not going to stop using the word "evil" because it offends your sensibilities. I think the urgency is appropriate and why quibble?

I note that you didn't take me up on my challenge, which was to distinguish "conservatives" from fascists. Nor were you able to explain why certain self identified leftists would go after other leftists instead of "conservatives." You intermingled with those leftists and had to remove yourself.

"Sober realities" and all of that. I don't need to fight with people with whom I agree, in substance. We need to defeat Trump. Not just defeat, overwhelm this toxic ideology. Then perhaps we can afford to quibble over definitions? We might even make room for conservatives to regain sway in their party.

[cali]

32. I would never ask you to do that. I think it's a very interesting debate (the concept of evil)

I'm not fighting with you. I'm discussing ideas.

[Cary]

33. Sorry if it seemed like I was referring to you

I was speaking generally about "radical leftists." You said that maybe you are one, I didn't.

Yes we are discussing ideas. But "radical leftists" have picked fights with me. I have lost friends simply because I don't hate Hillary Clinton.

[ismnotwasm]

34. I would posit that rather than the word "evil" being the "most dangerous word or concept"

(As I disagree--it's a very useful word that, rather being a new "hot topic", has debated by college sophomores in Philosophy for decades, and people who find the word useless for whatever reason for millennium.)

That the word "radical" conveys, depending on ones point of view, either ineffective temper tantrums or diffuse violence driven movements of the "tear it all down and force it down throats" variety. Once something is radicalized, it can quickly lose true effectiveness, although conversely once a strong radical idea enters mainstream conscienceness, say, women voting--it can change the world.
I think the western and modern use of the word "radical" can carry with it a certain look at me chic, which also lessens its effectiveness. True radicals never win popularity contests, as being a radical is hard work.

Bernie is no radical, not as I understand and have experienced the word. Nor is Hillary exactly "status quo"

I use the word evil sparingly, but I've seen too much of it to reject it as a concept or a word. Armchair psychology and first causes and the concepts of "right and wrong" do it no justice. There are thoughts, additudes and concepts and actions that words like "wrong" is simply not adequate.

[Cary]

36. I find fascism to be evil

Appealing to raciql anxiety is a hallmark of the evil of fascism. As for radicals, your definition works for me.

[cali]

39. I suggest you do some more research. Yes, it is a hot topic in philosophy circles

not as you passively aggressively sneer, a topic that's merely of interest to college sophomores.

And you're kind of getting into a conversation that you haven't really been privy to- which usually leads to a basic misunderstanding of the conversation in which one is joining.

[Cary]

46. Forget philosophy.

Let's talk psychology.

I don't have numbers but a large segment of the population is sociopathic. There is no cure for.a sociopath. In fact treatment only makes them more effective sociopaths.

A sociopath will use anything, including your good will against you. You cannot reason with a sociopath. If you encounter one your best and only real option is to totally avoid them.

You don't want to call sociopaths evil? You want to reach out? You want to reason with them?

Lotsa luck.

[reACTIONary]

53. All good points. And take note that....

.... one of the religious right's key litmus tests is the profession that "evil exists".

[liberal N proud]

11. Maybe they looked in a mirror and they hate what they have become

Nah!


They hate that he is a full color display of what they have believed for decades and they can no longer deny it.

[TrishaJ]

13. Negraponte thinks Trump

would be dangerous?? Isn't that like the POT calling the KETTLE black?

[Loki]

14. Kinda like that "sowing and reaping" thing.

This "Southern Strategy" has become their Frankenstein. There will always be the 25 to 30 percent of people that want this brand of hatred, misogyny and racism and I say let them have it, make them own it, because they can't win without it.

[subterranean]

15. It is just because they think he will lose badly.

If Trump was ahead in the polls, or at least close, I don't think they would be speaking out against him like this.

[BumRushDaShow]

18. ^^^THIS^^^

Plus the RW hate talk radio (and Faux), that they allowed to dominate the past 30 years, continues to formulate their "brand" and stoke their loons, and they refuse to take them on lest they get "primaried".

[Martin Eden]

16. Dr. Frankenstein came to hate the monster he created

The doctor deserved all the grief and pain for what he had wrought.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

17. Negraponte is respected by these clowns?

[turbinetree]

19. This is the culmination of the republican party that started in 1964

and has finally come to this after 55 plus years, denial and the mantra of hate and fear.

Sorry, but the individual's in this article saying that they despise (herr drumpf).

They have been enablers of this for years and now they are trying to find cover, it is not going to happen, it reminds me of the saying : “You can't see the forest for the trees.” Well they are the forest and they are the trees, they are standing there, trying to hide.

For years they have been passing legislation and doing things of dividing / blaming people, spreading hate and fear, some more than others, but it has always been the same outcome, with the same back drop, adhere to there party.

Susan Collins has always tried to look like some moderate, in my eyes she is not, at critical junctures in her position of office she sided with her party against the core principles of helping people of this country and is a party player

Ryan is a cold bloodied libertarian of Ayn Rand style of dog eat dog , what has he really done--------------attack the working poor and the middle class

And has for the Cato Institute lets look at this fine assembly of libertarians and others.
Everyone of these people on this list and others are funding right wingers, too still have control and maintain control of the local and state and federal offices of government, and still spew hate and fear

http://www.cato.org/board-of-directors

And has for Negraponte---------he sat in the chair in the UN in 2003 and helped sell the lie that killed 4,685 military, thousands of civilians, hundreds of NATO military and private contractors at a cost that is still on the books at over three trillion dollars and climbing


They, don't like what they have created and see a fraud leading there party, maybe they should get up in the morning and take a really hard look at themselves in the bathroom mirror and finally say they created this mess its time to own up to it, the fraud

[Jade Fox]

24. thanks!

[turbinetree]

35. Your welcome ..its really sickening to see the MSM doing what they are doing in fact ...............

it is reprehensible

Honk--------------------for "Our Revolution"

[CTyankee]

22. And Hillary has a Paul!

Dr. K is her guy and is lucky to have him in her corner!

[Buckeye_Democrat]

23. They created him with their RW media. Behold your creation, Republicans...

[Blue_Tires]

31. Let them choke on it

they created this frankenstein monster

[Cary]

37. I don't see how they avoid choking

Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch either.

[ucrdem]

38. Ha. Their new-found principles are touching, also ridiculous, but never mind

Where were these fine scruples in 2000 (Shrub), 2003 (Iraq), 2004 (shrub aain), and 2006 (Senesenbrenner immigration bill) for example? They lined up like first graders behind the nastiest teabaggers, neocons and PNACers without a peep and now they're concerned for Islamic and Hispanic sensibilities, right. They're scared he might win and kick them to the curb. Fine, let them tear down their own candidate all they want because he's not stepping aside until he loses.

[TonyPDX]

42. They birthed him. Now they have Rosemary's Baby to nurse.

[elleng]

44. 'Funny,'

seeing OP thought you were referring to Potus OBAMA!

[keithbvadu2]

45. It is the republican 'elite' who want Trump out. The repub/cons base loves him.

[LiberalLovinLug]

47. But the idiocracy they created lurvs them some Don

[PatrickforO]

48. I agree with your OP, but what scares the crap out of me is this recent horror that has

emerged from Trump's flapping jaws. Second Amendment solution???????????????????????????????????



So, Cali...what do we do when a major party candidate who has been inciting hatred, racism, xenophobia, religious war, using nuclear weapons and who clearly doesn't have much of a clue about ANYTHING, says something downright dangerous like this?

I mean, isn't there some way we can have guys in white coats come and take Trump away? Or, maybe people in full police armor...

I'm just absolutely infuriated that ANY candidate for the highest office in the land would stoop so low.

Yes, I know Trump is absurd and a huge target for comedians, but this? There isn't anything funny, or clever or anything about what he did and he should be removed as a candidate immediately because of it. Immediately.

[Feeling the Bern]

49. Those assholes created this monster. Now they can't control it

The death spiral of the Republican Party is now fun to watch.

[calimary]

50. Well, I've been saying this for awhile...

Both TO, and ABOUT the GOP. Forget the crudeness, but...

"YOU climbed into bed with him. Now he gets to fuck you."

[riversedge]

51. K and R.

[roaminronin]

57. Trump is not smart enough

to get the subtlety of the historic dog whistles. The RNC has nominated a Howard Beale and who actually believes his own pomp and BS. Ryan has been waiting on the results from his state primary, which he won tonight, to take any action. But Ryan knows Trump is blowing their cover and must be dealt with and soon.