Establishment or Dissent. Which one is it?

mitt_romney_speech_on_donald_trump

I’m struck by the hypocrisy coming out of the Trump camp.  In fairness, the “camp” I am referring to is not so much Donald himself but those who support him and seemingly gravitate to the term of surrogate.  Having spent an entire year hearing how Trump is anti-establishment, and following his success among voters sick and tired of the usual ways of Washington, I wonder by what right do Trump’s people insist that all Republicans should back their candidate?

I’m not questioning the legitimacy of his candidacy, solely based on the fact that he got to where he is through a Democratic process, but to aggressively demand that the likes of Romney, Ryan and the Bush’s have some sort of obligation to support him now that he is the presumptive nominee is opportunistic hypocrisy at its worst.  It’s almost like Trump’s surrogates are saying, “we won, now fall in line whether you like it or not”.

This issue does a lot to crystallize the major issues people have with the specter of a President Trump.  As one who is not convinced he is actually a racist demagogue but still potentially very dangerous, I see this issue as a very clear indication of what we might be looking at should he ascend to the position of leader of the Free World.  A presidential candidate’s benefits and dangers are not merely based on their words or actions but very much based on the impact those words and actions have on their supporters.  Trump’s responses to those who choose to not support him are very much what they’ve been throughout his campaign, mocking ridicule and name calling.  As non-presidential as that might be it’s not dangerous per se.  But his surrogates grab the torch from him and then take a different approach.  They go on the attack against those who choose not to support him, taking the approach of almost bullying them into changing their positions. It’s just a matter of time till the names of those Republicans not supporting him will be spoken of by Trump’s surrogates with the same venom they have when speaking of the Clintons or President Obama.  But what is the deal here?  If they are so anti-establishment, how does it make any sense for these surrogates to claim wrongdoing on the part of the establishment types unwilling to support their candidate?  If you are anti-establishment how can you demand the establishment concede? It’s one or the other, make your pick.

I know it’s a free country, for now at least, and that no laws are being broken when Trump’s followers go on the attack against his opponents, but the climate being created is a volatile one at best, and just like in international conflicts that are deemed powder kegs, the slightest misstep or out of the ordinary event could cause a disaster.  Trump might really love Hispanics, not just Tacos, but the danger in his candidacy remains, not just because of him but because of those who follow him.

LIKE THIS POST? SHARE IT ON FACEBOOK OR TWITTER

HOW TO BUY THE BOOK

READ MORE OF WHAT I HAVE TO SAY IN THE DAILY COLUMN

JOIN “THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL” ON FACEBOOK

GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL IS NOW ON TWITTER @gcimovement

IN CONJUNCTION WITH GLOBAL COALITION FOR ISRAEL

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: