Email Michael
EmailDIANE MEDVED: You support Trump? Here’s my Reply
Mar 15, 2016
36 Comments
BY DIANE MEDVED
Recently someone I respect sent me a newsy email in which he casually mentioned that he supported Trump.
It was as if a giant elephant just fell into the room. “How could you possibly support Trump?” I asked, agog.
I do try to understand; I read articles with quotes from Trumpites, and they say the GOP front-runner expresses their anger, or he says what they’re thinking, or he’s politically incorrect and will shake everything up, or he’s a deal-maker and running the country is about deals….
…
Comments (36)
Leave a commentATTENTION: The link to read the full blog doesn't work.
Diane, Why do I like Trump? Because he's not a puppet for the elite.
Why do you not like Trump?
Because he's not in the establishment clubs, so if he was elected, AIPAC won't be in charge of our foreign policy, conservative Americans (real ones, not Neocons) would be. I know that scares the hell out of Zionists like you, and for good reason. For who is going to fight all of Israel's (major) illegal wars if the Americans quit doing it for them? What will you guys do with yourselves if we start doing things right like putting our soldiers on our borders instead? (who needs a wall built of metal or stone when we have troops with M16's?)
Interesting that you feel we need troops on our borders to protect us from the "Mexican rapists" who are bring us "drugs" and "crime" according to Donald Trump. The reality is people, not "rapists" are crossing our borders illegally for the opportunity that exists here in greatest county on earth to find work. Its not about "drugs" or "crime", its about jobs. The real criminals are the employers who continue to hire workers that are here illegally. As long as there are businesses that offer jobs to people who come illegally, people will keep coming here illegally.
All Trump's 20 foot wall is going to do is create a market for 21 foot ladders, which will probably be made in a factory owned by his supporters who employ illegals to keep their costs down and their profits up.
Did I say rapists? No, I didn't, liar! And that sure is a pathetic attempt to change the subject, buddy. But FYI, even the so called human rights groups say that 100% of all females crossing our southern border (including children) are raped. So by keeping a porous border, we are actually encouraging it. I agree that employers are a big problem and I want to send employers that knowingly hire these parasites to prison (for a minimum of 10 years + a 1 million dollar fine).
P.S. Did you know that Mexico has Women Only buses? Do I really need to explain why? OK, you're a Libtard or a phony conservative like Medved, so….I will.
Women and children were sick of getting molested and/or raped every time they rode the bus somewhere!
You really shouldn't post while drinking. Trump represents true conservatives? Hilarious. He's nearly as liberal as Hillary. I can see you're adopting the liberal anti-Israel position and Trump and the democrats war lies. Of course human rights groups say the women and children are being raped. That is a talking point FOR allowing them into the country. In what demented world does the porous border cause rape. I'm sure the rapists are raping people both in Mexico and as they enter the country. I seriously doubt it is 100 percent because some of these groups come as family units, but even assuming that was true does not mean that 100 percent of the men are raping and it certainly doesn't reflect on the victims. This is a STUPID talking point because it allows the argument to devolve into whether all the immigrants are rapists and hard criminals (which they are not) instead of focusing on the facts that they are illegally entering the country and flooding the labor force and straining our schools, hospitals, etc. Philip is right, blaming the immigrants here (who are often assaulted and/or exploited) is not a winning position. Most of them are simply trying to make a better life for themselves and their kids. That doesn't make it right, but really, who among us, if living in Mexico or some of these other third world sewers, wouldn't try to get our family into the United States? I'm not for open borders, and in fact think that we need to greatly limit even legal immigration at least for the near future, but as Philip noted, we're not going to stop people from coming unless they know they cannot get jobs. We need to strongly enforce existing laws while mandating e-verify, and ensuring that they are not receiving food stamps, welfare benefits, etc. We should fine them $50K for every illegal worker they hire and treble it if they are paying these workers less than prevailing wage or putting them in hazardous or degrading working conditions (these are the only reasons they hire such workers to begin with). This could be argued not as racist or discriminatory but as anti-exploitation, which it would be. The word will get out, most will stop coming and many here will return on their own. This approach will work and doesn't have the negative connotation of ripping them out of homes, separating families, and calling them criminals and/or parasites (really? this is not helpful). Your rant doesn't even make sense. They are tired of getting raped in Mexico so we should make sure they stay there? How will this win over moderate voters who think it's a crime to test medicines on animals?? This is the type of rhetoric that the left seizes upon to call us who want to enforce the borders racists and bigots and allows them to avoid arguing the merits. It doesn't seem to matter to Trump or his zombie followers but it should. Many voters are fooled by this tactic. That is why the left keeps using it. We need to stop giving them ammunition. It may make you feel better but it doesn't help solve the problem and in fact shifts the focus away from it.
Pure lunacy. Ask any law professor at any law school in the U.S., what is the law regarding illegal immigration, and he or she will tell you exactly what it is. Now, add your personal commentary, corollaries, amendments and anecdotes if you want. But the law is clear. I am a California resident who has personal sympathy for illegal immigrants/undocumented workers also, because I personally know many. But the law is the law. President Obama has deported so many illegal immigrants that Jorge Ramos named him the "Deporter in Chief".
No matter what Donald Trump's rhetoric was about the subject (and you are misquoting him, but I think you know that), it does not change the fact that the law is the law, no matter how you or I feel about it. I would rather have a guy who is brash, but tells the truth, than a smooth operator like the current president, who speaks with a silver, forked tongue.
Mexico isn't sending their best, why can't you see this. I know, half my family is from Mexico.
John, John, how foolish you are going to feel when the media turns against Trump and makes supporting him akin to belonging to the KKK. Trump NEVER had a chance to win the White House. It was all a con to give the voters someone so ugly, unstable, and racists that Lying Hillary could actually win.
I'm foolish? If Trump never had a chance (as you claim), then you are admitting to a conspiracy by the same oligarchy that is allowing our porous border. Their plan is to ruin the U.S. with Aztecs and Europe with Africans and Muslims. And it's working really well. Israel and the Vatican like to guilt trip us into allowing every parasite that illegally enters our country to stay, yet they don't allow anybody into their respective countries. Even Mexico has a wall on their southern border!
John, the "conspiracy" you claim is by the Left who KNEW that the only way that Hillary could be elected was to present someone so bad that the voters would have no choice. It was a brilliant con and you guys fell for it. Remember what I've said when the MSM comes after Trump.
Take a moment, before you write another post to research all the cons that Trump has pulled; you'll realize that he was the PERFECT guy to sell the "wall" and his target was people like you. They knew that you wouldn't care about Isis, lost of rights thru a stacked SCOTUS, the replacement of PC for religion, the expansion of government to build and maintain a wall as long as they can promise to get rid of the Mexicans. You want that so bad, you have forgotten that you are supposed to be a conservative that would never tolerate bullies.
Oh yes, you will, if you have enough honesty, feel foolish for being taken in this Liberal con. Let us hope, for the sake of your soul, you will also feel shame.
John, I didn't write that you said 'rapists". I quoted your candidate, The Donald. However, you quickly jump in with a ridiculous and unsubstantiated claim that "100% of all females crossing our southern border (including children) are raped". As Ronald Reagan said, "There you go again". Sigh…
Trump is not a conservative. After he loses the general election and the GOP loses important House and Senate seats on his coat tails, you might understand why the RNC was so concerned with stopping him now. Elections have consequences. Be careful what you wish for.
It might be because Trump is an immature and totally unqualified con man who has never run a successful business in his life and inherited his money from his father. He is a lifelong Democrat who voted twice for both Clinton and Obama and less than a year ago was pro-abortion, pro-amnesty, and in favor of socialized medicine. He is so ignorant of the Constitution that he thinks that Supreme Court justices sign bills and conduct investigations. He could probably not pass a citizenship exam, and his knowledge of foreign policy is non-existent.
He is so personally immature that he reacts to criticism like a pouty little girl. He routinely threatens his opponents, which in someone of an essentially authoritarian political outlook is not a good sign. His foreign policy is a disaster and would endanger our national security. In fact, a prominent geopolitical analysis firm rates his election as a top ten threat to global security, on a par with Islamic terrorism disrupting the world's economy!
There is a difference between being willing to be politically incorrect and being a boorish ass. Trump is the later, and you and all the other Trumpistas have been conned. In November you will be in for a surprise. Trump will be crushed; any other Republican would have won this year. And Trump will probably cost the Republicans both houses of Congress in the process.
And don't you dare blame those of use who refuse to vote for him. The moment he was nominated the GOP was doomed. The defeat will be entirely the fault of you and all the others who allowed themselves to be taken in by an unstable, authoritarian con artist.
Actually, what scares people is that there are actually people who support bullies. Who is so ill informed that they don't realize they are being conned. Who truly believes that the rest of America is conservative. Who don't get that there wouldn't be any politicians running as Liberals if this fantasy was even remotely true. Who uses 40 year old labels like "establishment" (what is this the 60s?) and pre-civil rights talking points of racism and bigotry.
This is plain ugly and heartbreaking. And yes, scary that there are still people like that calling themselves Americans and horrifyingly Republicans.
Some valid points but I don't think Trump's supporters give a rat's petutty about conservatism because he isn't one. I believe a conservative message can win in America but it must be tolerant of people's different degrees of conservatism and quit vilifying people/candidates we mostly agree with to the benefit of those we mostly disagree with. This is what the dems do. They don't all worship at the altar of climate change, higher taxes, and political correctness (to name just a few of the left's "issues") but they cobble together a coalition by realizing they can't possibly get everything they want and win. Someday we should try that.
No they don't. It is and always has been about destroying the party they claim to be the base of; a party they hate and have zero respect for. They have never understood the value of working together, tolerance, civility. Like children, they are attracted to loud noises and flash and have followed the king of mean down the ugly hole. They are NOTHING like their conservative parents. They are quite alike to their liberal brethren, hating the "establishment" in the name of their half baked "principles".
Remember this day Curt, for it is the day that the ONLY party capable of reversing the Obama agenda and limiting the Liberal dogma DIED.
When Hillary becomes president and she leads the world's greatest military to protect this country the same way she did Benghazi, when she stacks the Supreme Court with Judges that will change the fabric of this nation, when Isis and Black Lives Matter with the help of our indoctrinated children torch our land, when political correctness replaces religion. REMEMBER THIS DAY.
Now all Rubio haters can take this country to hell.
Dianne.
I support Trump because I have no other choice. Unlike "pure" conservative, I stand with Republicans on most of the issues but "free trade". I'm strongly against free trade anti globalization stand is my number one issue. Trump is a perfect fit for me despite all his other shortcomings. The other would be Sanders, but Sanders fails on all the social issues that are important to me.
And that is EXACTLY how the rest of the voters will feel come general election day, after a ton load of Trump's hate, racist, ugly words hit the media. Between socialist Sanders, lying Hillary and unstable Trump, they will have NO CHOICE but to put ANOTHER Liberal in the White House.
Good going Jack.
Nani,
Trump is a New York liberal.
Jim, yes he is, running the greatest political con in a long time. And those claiming to be the base of a party they hate and have zero respect for are falling for it. The time will come when they will see what fools the talk show mafia and conservative media has made of them; they were ripe for this con.
They were told that they were OWED something–a political ENTITLEMENT.
They were told that the "ESTABLISHMENT" was corrupt and had to be taken down–something we heard from the Liberals in the 60s, they even used the same label.
They were told that "telling it like it is" is good, being "honest" was more important than being civil. That being "real" was preferable to being civil.
They were told that expanding the government and writing a blank check to build a war was worth it–to protect jobs, "job protectionism" just like union bosses told their Liberal workers.
They were told to "trust" and "believe" in ONE man–that this man KNOWS what is best and how to get the best "deal" and to "win"–a liberal mantra believing that there are those more qualified to know what is best.
Every talking points by the TSM and Conservative pundits sounds so Liberal because long ago, they joined their liberal counterparts. People were attracted to the Republican party because they were the "grown ups" and because they were optimist. Now they are just as negative as Liberals with the same solution: trust someone else to make decisions for you. The difference is that Liberals pretend to be the nice, tolerant people, while conservatives are happy to judge and expect perfection–and everyone falls short of perfection.
The con is brilliant but it couldn't have happened without the talk show mafia and conservative pundits making sure that the "base" was unhappy and feeling entitled.
Well said Nani. You are intelligent and brave. Cruz is the only viable and competent one left.
JD
I don't think you understand… Nani hates Cruz more than Trump.
Don't you know, she think Kasich is the Savior in Chief.
His policies are of no consequence, because he is civil.
And speaking of civility, why does Nani accuse everyone of being uncivil, while she spews lies, hate and name-calls as bad as anybody.
She rejects conservatism and has advocated for Hillary over Trump.
It is sad and pathetic, but she is indicative of the self-destructive nature of some, who have infiltrated The Republican Party.
If you think free trade has been bad for jobs, wait until you see the results of tariffs. If you'd rather not, read up on the last time we tried tariffs. The Smoot Hawley Tarrif Act, and the ensuing retaliatory tariffs by America's trading partners, is considered by most economists both now and at the time, as the reason that American exports and imports decreased by more than half, while doubling unemployment and driving up prices.
If you think free trade has been bad for jobs, wait until you see the results of tariffs. If you'd rather not, read up on the last time we tried tariffs. The Smoot Hawley Tarrif Act, and the ensuing retaliatory tariffs by America's trading partners, is considered by most economists both now and at the time, as the reason that American exports and imports decreased by more than half, while doubling unemployment and driving up prices.
Are you the dumbass that married Michael Medved ? One loser plus one loser equals two losers . Please swallow your suicide pills and relieve yourself of your misery
Isn't it strange how now bad manners and rudeness is becoming the norm? You really ought to waste your time where it would be appreciated. Right now, it no longer shocks. The attention you seek is sad and pathetic.
Sad and pathetic? That sounds like RUDENESS AND BAD MANNERS.
Shockingly Ironic…. even by your strange standards Nani.
Unless one of the losers is you. You're loser enough to surpass millions. Interesting how Trump supporters behave just like him. Anyone who disagrees is a stupid loser. For years this has been how liberals argue their stupid positions because they can't argue the merits. No surprise that Trump, a liberal, does the same.
Jason
Not anyone, just you and Nani.
Support our candidate, otherwise there is no excuse for your stupidity.
Whatever.
Who is Diane Medvede ? She must be the air head that married michael medvede . Poor woman probably needs to check herself into a mental hospital
Well calling people names is not the answer, Diane I don't think the contined voting the same people into office is a sign sanity and as someone who deals with that you should know what promises have they kept I see none of the major issues. And as Reince recently came out and said the nominee is auditioning, so that is proof our vote does not count and all the facade put out by this private party is another bit of proof, the person leading does not meet the expectations so the 2 who filed paper work on the first of this year Mitt and Ryan most likely will be the chosen one and you most likely will continue to act all surprised while we get Hillary in because people like you can't be honest.Mitch even came out and said he would support Hillary over Trump.
I don't think I will get an answer but I would like to know why you mislead people ? What purpose does it accomplish,I don't want to have a president who is hand picked by others who think they know better than me,that is not what was meant by our founders.
I will support Trump and if people like you derail the process by changing the rules as was done last time then I will not vote and there are many who will do the same
Priebus is a joke as RNC chair, but pretty sure he meant that the campaign for president was an audition for the job. While I certainly agree that the party could fight harder against the liberal agenda, the idea that Republicans have stood down is just talk show blather designed to raise ratings. The GOP did not cast a single vote in favor of Obamacare. Despite all the gang of eight hysteria, the house republicans blocked that bill. Obama's executive amnesty cannot be stopped by the house. The courts have tried to stop it but the administration skirts that by ordering border patrol to stand down and back off the border. Not one republican supported the Iran Nuclear Deal. Yes, a republican put forward a bill that tried to kill the deal and required a veto-proof majority, but understand the Obama administration had already determined not to treat this disaster as a treaty but an agreement and bypass Congress altogether. The republican move was intended to at least get Democrats on record supporting Obama. Republicans are totally united in opposition of Planned Parenthood (other than Trump), and they have forced lower though not balanced budgets. Again, it is pretty hard to push through tax and spending reform when the other party holds the white house and Republicans lack override majorities.
As long as they have a corrupt and compliant attorney general, democrats will continue to ignore the constitution. Republicans are virtually powerless to stop any of this without a veto-proof majority. Yes, I hear stupid, no-talent, Sean Hannity carping on and on about the "power of the purse", but we cannot shut down the government over every issue. You might think that is a winning approach but it isn't. Gallup's most recent poll shows Obama's approval rating at 50%! Astonishing! It is clear that most people are not overly concerned with his executive overreach. The longer a "shutdown" goes on the less people would support it. This is especially true because Obama will pick and choose where government is shut down all the while scaring the hell out of seniors by suggesting it will be their social security checks.
I'm a Ted Cruz supporter but I feel this approach is a tatical mistake because it really has very little chance of working and puts us in a defensive posture when there is no need to be in one. The argument changes from what Democrats are doing to what Republicans are doing (though it takes two to tango and shut down the government) as it is always spun as the GOP doing the shutting down. The focus should be on the unpopular policies that the GOP is pursuing. I know there is also this idea that we should send up bills to the president to veto, but that is what Democrats want. First, it makes the GOP look weak and feckless. Everyone knows Obama and democrats' positions on these issues, it's not like we're "exposing" them. Second, it gives them additional ammunition to shut off debate. The congress has voted and the law was not approved, they will say, after the GOP fails to override. Many Americans, right or wrong, will shrug their shoulders and move on, just as many have from the Supreme Court's decision on gay marriage. "Well, the Court has spoken." People get tired of beating their heads against the wall. They are busy leading their lives. Before long, it's just like an annoying noise that they tune out and ignore.
In the meantime, we've ginned up Republicans to turn on each other based not on policy but really on tactics. Then comes Donald Trump, who is a liberal and really lifetime political power broker, who starts spewing venom at everything in sight and a small plurality of the part mistake that for him being on the side of the people. The other candidates, believing he will flame out on his own, refrain for the most part from criticizing him, hoping to pick up his support. Then they dally as they all hope to be the anti trump candidate and wait too long to drop out. Now, we are faced with the very real possibility that we will have a nominee that wasn't supported by most Republicans. And yes, I get the math that he got the most support in a divided field and that no one else got a majority either, but it is pretty clear as the field at long last winnows that the vast majority of support for the departed candidates has gone to someone other than Trump. The majority rule is not something new and it is part of the process for exactly this reason. In 1976 we faced a potential divided convention but Ford was able to sway enough delegates to avoid it. Trump may not reach 1237 but he is very likely to have more than anyone else. If he cannot sway the delegates to back him (ala Ford) it is his own fault and will be because he has ran such an incendiary campaign. It is said that politics makes strange bedfellows but I think it will be hard for Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich delegates to swing to a candidate that has acted like a adolescent bully and adopted democratic talking points against his rivals. Under normal circumstances this would probably be a challenge for Cruz as well because he has not made many friends among the other candidates either, but given the alternative (Trump), I think he might be able to sway them. Kasich is at this point angling for either the VP or a cabinet position. He knows he's not going to win but hopes he can play kingmaker to his own benefit. The party is not going to parachute someone in. This is a Trump talking point designed to rile supporters who may be starting to come to their senses.
Not that any of it matters. Trumpeteers will not support the GOP nominee if it is anyone other than their guy and it doesn't matter if he loses in a contested convention or whether Cruz somehow sweeps most of the remaining contests and reaches 1237 himself. They will still feel they were robbed and claim the "establishment" denied their guy. If Trump wins, many principled conservatives will likewise sit out the election (this one included) though that will not be the reason Trump loses. He will lose independents, women, young voters, and all non-white groups by record-setting margins. Remember, Romney won white voters and conservatives by record margins. Even if Trump does marginally better (which is hard to imagine given that he can't even win the majority republicans), he will almost certainly run much worse with the previously mentioned subgroups than Romeny. He keeps saying he will win New York but the best he has done in polling in that state is minus 23 to Hillary (and it wasn't in the latest poll).
So, we will have President Hillary Clinton, who hard to imagine, may be more left-wing and incompetent than the current idiot. She will replace Scalia with a Sonia Sotomoyor or Elena Kagan clone (or worse, though that's hard to imagine) and will make it easy for Ginsberge and other liberal justices to retire and be replaced by a like-minded justice, meaning liberals will lock in a 5-4, 6-3, or 7-2 majority (depending on whether Kennedy and/or Roberts are feeling liberal or conservative that day) for decades–and that's assuming Kennedy and Thomas can hold out for a republican administration.
So, for the foreseeable future, the Court is lost, and with it we can expect further encroachments on religious liberty and gun rights (if they survive at all), permanence of Obamacare, open borders, and no holds barred abortions. They may even try to reverse the decisions related to campaign finance. Trump supporters may think it's ideal to have a candidate who self-finances his campaign (though he really isn't, he is accepting donations and has gotten billions in free media) but think of what that will mean if codified into law or even popular culture: only the really rich will be able to run for office. Is that what we want. Instead of someone who answers to donors (so to speak) we will get someone who answers to no one. If we think that we want Trump behaving like Obama but it will be alright because at least he's doing things we like, we had better consider how "flexible" he's been in the past and will probably be in the future (not that it will matter since he will lose to Hillary).
So, dark days for the Republic, in my opinion. My hope rests in holding on through a one-term Hillary administration, crossing my fingers that Thomas and Kennedy remain on the bench and maybe even Breyer and Ginsburg. Then, if conservatives and mainstream Republicans can come to their senses and realize that they must compromise with each other or continue as an irrelevant party, they can nominate a serious candidate. If it's not too late at that point we might be able to reverse some of the disastrous policies we are likely to endure for the next few years.
Wow! What a profound commentary! Jason, you nailed it! Mi
Does anyone else find it ironic how Nani complains about rudeness and name-calling, while she name-calls people who favor Trump as dumb, racists. Then she talks about bullies, while she tries to bully people into voting for ANYONE other than Trump…. Including Hilary.
What an absolute FRAUD YOU ARE!!!
This isn't about supporting Trump…. This is about stopping The Democrats and preventing a further plunge into libtard hell.
Diane, did you marry a gay man… or is he REALLY straight but has a woman's voice?
Does his whining annoy you??