On 2022-11-23, TE <
rando...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 8:02:34 PM UTC-5, JGibson wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 16, 2022 at 4:33:39 PM UTC-5, GrtArtiste wrote:
>> > This is from the National Review, perhaps the most respected
>> > conservative publication that has existed in my lifetime. You can agree
>> > or disagree as you choose but for me...this is priceless:
>> >
>> >
https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/11/no/
>> >
>> > GrtArtiste
>
>> Is it going to be any more effective than this was?
>>
>>
https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/01/donald-trump-conservative-movement-menace/
>
> National Review is establishment GOP, the party of Washington DC. not of the rank and file.
> I read NR for decades, almost everything they wrote, dead tree and digital, until about a decade
> ago, I can't recall the last time I've read any of their stuff.
>
> Trump isn't conservative or establishment or DC. The NR would rather have Clinton, either one,
> than Trump. Status quo buys the scotch and pays for Georgetown thinktanks.
>
Can't agree with your characterization. They didn't want Trump, for sure, but didn't
endorse Biden or Clinton either. The recent election shows why Trump is bad, as the
candidates embracing his "stop the steal" crap ran 5-7 points behind generic Republicans.
NR is completely behind DeSantis or Pompeo, both of whom could be expected to pursue
Trump-like policies without the toxic baggage of said petty narcissist.
--
How far can you open your
mind before your brains
fall out?