DOUGLAS V. GIBBS<---------->RADIO<---------->BOOKS<---------->CONSTITUTION <---------->CONTACT/FOLLOW <----------> DONATE

Sunday, March 13, 2016

RINO Ex-Senator D'Amato: Trying To Stop Trump @ Convention "Will Spark Revolution"

by JASmius

The man who gave us "Senator Chucky Schumer" is, I think, a vast distance behind the intellectual curve over what's going on with Trumpmania:

Former Senator Al D'Amato, R-NY, says any effort to take away [the] nomination from Donald Trump at the Republican convention in Cleveland this summer is likely to cause a "revolution" in the party.

Do tell.  Is this a tacit admission and approval of the mob violence that Trump foments from his supporters (at least until they're confronted by a bigger mob)?  If so, that convention might be even more "entertaining" than even I imagined.

Speaking Sunday to John Catsimatidis on his popular talk show, D'Amato blasted Mitt Romney for his recent anti-Trump speech, saying that the 2012 GOP presidential nominee shouldn't mobilize against the real estate mogul.

Why not, Al?  Isn't he entitled to his opinion, and to act upon it, just like you?

"You've got people like that trying to stop Trump....

The "real sin," apparently.

....and I think they should be ashamed of themselves," D'Amato said.

Why, Al?  Wouldn't you be doing the same thing in their position?

"If they want to be for a candidate, be for a candidate, come out for the candidate, campaign for the candidate. But don't just go on with this business, 'We want a stalemated convention so that the powerbrokers – whoever's left of them – can decide.'"

They're against Trump.  They want to stop him.  A brokered convention is probably the only (and highly unlikely) way left to possibly accomplish that, and is part of, in a last resort sense, that very campaigning.  C'mon, Al, you were part of the "establishment," once; you must be aware of all this.

D'Amato warned that such a measure would drive away the voters that the real estate mogul has attracted to the party and would alienate the rest of Trump's supporters.

Al, Trump's supporters are already alienated from the party.  That's why I've been calling it a hostile takeover for the past nine months.  It seems lost in all the Trumplican rationalizing and excuse-making, including on this very site, that Trump and his supporters are not conservatives - either defectors or "never-were's" - and their hostile takeover of the GOP will displace and exile true conservatives - which, yes, includes the dreaded "establishment" - from national politics in favor of an older strain of "politically incorrect" statism with fascistic personality cult overtones - call it an Americanized "Mussolini Template" - that will abandon the "defectors" in the Trumplican ranks as soon as he has the nomination and thus no longer needs to pander to their imagined right-wing sensibilities (i.e. "anger" at all the wrong people) anymore.  And judging by the unthinking depthlessness of their devotion, it will be far, far too late before they ever realize how badly they're getting swindled.

"If they do that, I think that there's going to be a revolution. I think that the many people who have come to the party or supported Donald are gonna lose heart and faith in it. Let the process work out, don't try to engineer it."

The "revolution," Al, has already happened.  What stopping it via a brokered convention would be is the counter-revolution.  Which would be a heartening thing to see, since the November election is lost to us anyway thanks to this insanity, and this would constitute conservatism defending its home.  But given that, as I've said many times before, the GOP "establishment" is conventionalist, not counter-revolutionary, in temperament, I think the scenario you fear is a hopeless pipedream.

Unless George Will is right, and the Trump tide will finally start going back out after Rubio loses Florida on Tuesday and drops out of the race.  Which I don't think the Bow-Tied One is.

But if that did happen, if, as polls have consistently shown up to now, Trump can't win a two-man race, and Ted Cruz arrived in Cleveland with slightly more delegates but not a majority, meaning....a brokered convention, does anybody believe that Trumplicans won't throw a pissing fit if their candidate doesn't get the nomination anyway?  That they will accept ANYBODY else as GOP nominee, no matter how fair and square their guy would have lost?  Anybody who does is deluding themselves.

Which is why the November election is already lost.  The GOP civil war is here, the party is split no matter who wins in Cleveland, and it will likely never be reunited.

Tea Party mission accomplished.

Reagan wept.

Oh, and here's another "See, I told you so" for your collection....

Exit question: Why should the ultimate "deal-maker" have anything to fear from a brokered convention?

No comments: