Among many, but I'll admit this is a less 'objective' reason to withhold my vote. There are many reasons I can imagine for not supporting Trump this time around. But one reason that keeps buzzing about my mind comes to the front when I recall this scene from the movie A Knight's Tale.
As a movie, it's one of those rare cases where I agree with Deacon Greydanus' review. At the end of the day, the two least interesting characters were the leads. Everyone else, villain included, was infinitely more interesting. Sorry Mr. Ledger. Plus the whole theme of 'what is so big about nobility' was lost when the main character ignores every beautiful common maiden in Europe to obsess over a rather cardboard, one dimensional noblewoman.
Nonetheless, the scene above, whenever I think on it, brings me right back to Trump. Did you catch what Edward the Black Prince says? He says 'Your men love you. If I knew nothing else about you, that would be enough.'
Well, guess what. Almost none of Trump's men - or women - love him. In fact, one of the fastest growing demographics nowadays is 'former members of Trump's staff willing to shaft Trump.' It isn't hard to see why.
After all, Trump thinks nothing of trashing and hashing anyone who doesn't lick his boots on command. Even a loyal supporter who dares deviate just once can become the target of his verbal assaults. The minute - the second - anyone, including his supporters, deviates from Trumpspeak, he's all over them like a bad suit. It's as if nothing matters but total obedience to The Man.
Hence why finding former aids and staff who are willing to testify to the eternal yuckiness and vile evil of Trump is like finding football fans in Ohio State Stadium. A man who seems to encourage betrayal and turncoats and hatred from his associates rather than anything close to love and loyalty is telling. To quote the Black Prince, if I knew nothing else about Trump, that would be enough.
While I agree with the reasoning here as a stand alone proposition, I am almost daily reminded that any of the putative candidates on the Democrat side will almost certainly be worse. Hillary's comments yesterday certainly affirm that belief even though viewed in a rear view mirror. This may be one of those elections where voters enter the voting booth firmly holding their noses and reminding themselves that even the Almighty allowed Israel an unsatisfactory ruler from time to time to remind them that their real benefice comes from a place rather higher than this earth.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong. I never lose sleep over the fact that Hillary was not able to continue the Obama era juggernaut. Yet under Trump, while we won so many temporary battles, we seem to be losing the overall war, as the Trump era motivated and galvanized those seeking to destroy our nation. Plus, I keep running into Trump's tendency of not really being loyal to anyone else - at least when they fail to get in line and do what he says. Plus, his general lack of loyalty to things like set principles. Consider now that he has become a darling of the pro-choice movement, which has pointed to him as extra ammo in the fight to keep abortion legal and on the law books.
DeleteOn the other hand, there have been plenty of politicians -- certain Kennedys come to mind -- who inspired fanatical love and loyalty from their associates, who were nevertheless total scumbags. So no, it doesn't really tell us a whole lot, except that some people have superior political skills. The reason I didn't support Trump was because he spoke loudly and carried a small stick.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned below, the fact that the Clintons also seemed to instill a surprising amount of loyalty does not mean that this is, in reality, 'the only thing that matters.' But the surprisingly low amount of loyalty Trump seems to inspire among so many, coupled with his lack of loyalty to those who don't fall in line, more than makes me take note.
Deletewith his lack of loyalty to those who don't fall in line, more than makes me take note.
DeleteFunny you say that since the Clintons are rather... infamous in who they'll sacrifice to get their way.
They were, and yet they usually threw those under (or perhaps worse) who threatened them. When it came to people who merely disagreed or openly challenged this or that idea, they seemed to stay in the pocket. With Trump, even his supporters, when they dared to question the vaccine he personally invented, received his customary broadsides.
DeleteI remember in the days running up to the last election, how "good Catholics" were bemoaning Trump's alleged morality (or lack thereof) and could not vote for such a person. And then we received the natural consequences of the election with Joe Biden (who had a moral compass) and all the rest. So I find your reasoning odd. Repeating Obama's famous line, elections DO have consequences. Are you ready to live with the next set?
ReplyDeleteActually, I remember in the late 90s when Democrats and leftwing pundits argued that we need to get over this puritanical obsession with the president's morals and character. When Russ Moore pounced on evangelical conservatives for voting for Trump, he forgot to mention the other side of the hypocrisy.
DeleteI'll need to see specific examples before I judge. If you're talking about some like Mark Milley, that traitor should be hung (and I'm not being hyperbolic). And there's several other backstabbers he had which I don't blame Trump for savaging. (If you want to discuss his hiring choices, yeah there were problems too - different essay.)
ReplyDeleteI've heard of others Trump has stood behind, and I've heard enthusiastic praise from employees of his too. If anything, that brings me into agreement with your principle here (which I do agree with). In my observation, the lower the man in Trump's organization, the more they love him. It's those higher up that often seem to run afoul. So like I said, I need to see which examples you mean to agree with you or not. Otherwise it sounds like so much other media spin where they just report on Trump's words without ever mentioning the back stabbing.
I’m in agreement with this position. I’d want to see the same.
DeleteTrump came into office with all the bureaucrats pointing knives at him. His alliances with established politicos were already tenuous at best, and his is not the only big ego in town. It’s politically advantageous to hate on him if you want to curry favor with establishment money.
Also, (responding to DG’s OP) do you think Biden’s men love him? Of course not! He’s a useful tool in the revolution, but since the ends justifies the means he’s propped up and covered for.
In my mind, I recall the stunning level of loyalty that Reagan often inspired (oddly the Bushes being among the least loyal, but still obliged to pay lip-service). I remember the Iran Contra hearings, and the attempts to get people to stab Reagan in the back. Heck, I remember in the 90s that conservatives would scratch their heads over the fierce loyalty that non-Dick Morris individuals had for the Clintons. Of course that proves that technically, fierce loyalty isn't enough. But in Trump's case, there seems no end to those who worked with him who aren't willing to throw him under the bus. I think on John Bolton, or the 'make money off my betrayal' Cassidy Hutchinson. I'm not saying they aren't traitors or untrustworthy people. But there is a marked difference I see where loyalty is concerned. Part of this might be that Trump himself seems to have little loyalty, even to his own supporters, where running afoul of his designs are concerned.
DeleteJohn Bolton... not much of an improvement. lol (And I do think some of the reaction to Bolton is overblown - and I still don't think very highly of him.)
DeleteI'll admit there's something weird to the Clinton cult of personality - though I guess that would be an addendum to your principle: WHO is loyal to the person in question?
Stalin had some weird and fanatical loyalists of him too. I'm not going to say that makes him a better man than Trump. This is again why I say, "check the context." If Trump says, "I'd like to reduce our world footprint. Pull our boys out of Syria." and someone like Milley then lies to Trump and keeps the troops in the region against his orders - is that really a sign of Trump's lack of character?
Let me use a metaphor to kind of explain why your post reads so weird. Imagine Trump had an aim that aligned with your interests. Something like "we're going to try and promote Christianity in our nation again!" Then several people around him all disagreed with his aim and constantly worked against him to undermine that goal. You're then turning around to say, "Wow, all these people disagreeing with Trump is just a sign of why I shouldn't vote for him!"
I mean... Ok. But I think you're forfeiting the right to complain about the direction of the nation and culture. (and I think we're discovering a big clue as to why little changes or improves)
Don't get me wrong. I'm not president of the John Bolton fan club or anything. As for Stalin, loyalty there was always tough to gauge, given the cost of not being fully loyal. This isn't to say no other president had turncoats, or other presidents couldn't give a good back stab when convenient (again, thinking of Dick Morris here). But you have to admit, you could gather a pretty good football team with extra player from those who have turned on Trump. And the tendency Trump has of demanding total conformity to his ideas or watch your tail, might well be a reason.
Delete
DeleteAnd then there are articles like this. I know Chesterton said it’s a shame how few politicians are hanged, but I think it’s a travesty how few propagandists are. In a world where the ends justifies the means, it’s a miserable society where very little common ground or unity can be reached.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2023/11/general-mark-milley-trump-coup/675375/
Mmmmm.... How quickly we forget.
ReplyDeleteI get your point, yet I think your analysis has missed a few concerns.
I think your choice of movies to talk about Trump is quite apt. In both cases, you have an outsider who shouldn't mean anything to anyone...become the winner of the fight. The nobody peasant ultimately is knighted and gains the lady's hand; the outsider business-man ultimately compelled the "political class" to pay attention by winning the election.
In neither case did the established ruling order give over willingly. That's the point.
Many Republican leaders detest Trump mostly because he didn't merely rock their boat, he sought to nearly capsize it.
Never forget how the major media downplayed Pres Clintons foibles in the 90s, while blasting Republicans in Congress. I think Democrats have healthy infighting occur, we simply don't see it because major media won't report on it.
If GOP leaders seek for Trump to be less a head-ache, ..they need to develop a firmer backbone. They need to be willing to publicly fight for their ideals, work to control the narrative. If they settle for "not-quite-as-bad-as-you-think", they'll lose.
Like the knight in the movie, Trump ultimately won what he won because he refused to take 'no' for an answer. Certainly many Republicans have been willing to give it, almost as much as Democrats.
I agree with everything you said. But I wish it was anyone other that Trump, who has shown himself to be rather intolerant of non-obedience, and rather slipshod in maintaining his principles. As I said above, he has become a major player for the pro-choice activists fighting against the post-Roe America he helped establish. Plus I recall his calling hellfire down on those resisting the vaccinations that he took credit for. It could be these reasons that he seems to illicit so little broad loyalty from significant numbers of his associates.
DeleteAs things stand I just vote AGAINST whomever the Dems put forward. I haven’t voted FOR anyone since Reagan.
DeleteAnd like Fred Reed, who despises Trump, Trump has my vote because he advocates ending our proxy war against Russia. Doesn’t mean I consider Trump to be welcome at our dinner table.
If the Dems put up RFK jr and Tulsi Gabbard I would be tempted to vote Dem for the first time ever. Not going to happen though.
The Democrats are the only things capable of making me come close to voting for Trump. My concern is how long will he remain not being what I vote against Democrats for. Given some of his recent statements.
DeleteAgree with Mr. Davies. Preach all you want about what an egomaniac Trump is, and his other faults. Then vote for the dude and pray he wins, because the alternative may not be survivable. As LBJ is rumored to have said about some banana republic dictator or other, “He may be a sonofab***, but he’s OUR sonofab****.”
ReplyDeleteI get there is a case to be made there. Though his recent stabs at pro-lifers trying to limit abortions, and his coming down on people over the vaccines he invented, all make me wonder how much of an ally he'll ultimately be in the crucial issues.
Delete