What the likes of Steve Schmidt never acknowledge is their own complicity.

[Garrett78]

We can all appreciate eloquent criticism of Trump. But the implication that Trump happened in a vacuum, or that the Republican Party has only in the last 3 years shown itself to be rotten to the core, is absurdly out of touch with reality. Those who worship at the altar of Saint Ronnie refuse to make the obvious connection between Reagan's dog whistling (as well as the dog whistling of every Republican since) and today's Republican Party (including both its base and its elected officials). They refuse to make the obvious connection between 50+ years of increasingly cruel and unhinged rhetoric and policy (going back to Nixon's Southern Strategy) and the rise of Trump.

Why does this matter, one might ask. It matters because the mentality that refuses to make the aforementioned connections is the same mentality that will insist all is well (or back to 'normal') once Trump is gone, as if all was well pre-Trump, which it most certainly was not. Allowing that narrative to take hold in the public consciousness -- and you can be sure that's the objective of the likes of Bill Kristol -- would endanger us all. Long before Trump came along, the Republican Party was arguably the single most powerful/influential threat in the modern world. That will remain true post-Trump. And we had all better work hard to make sure that narrative is the one that dominates.

[BannonsLiver]

1. I don't really need them to do that

For one, their culpability is a given. Two, if I’m interested in what they have to say it doesn’t matter to me that they have warm feelings for Saint Ronnie. Individual mileage may vary, of course.

[Garrett78]

2. Narrative is extremely important, and my issue is with what happens when Trump 2.0 comes along.

When a smarter and more charismatic demagogue rises to the top of the Republican heap.

Never Trumpers refusing to acknowledge their complicity, and suggesting that Trump happened in a vacuum, sets the stage for a very dangerous and false narrative.

Messaging is so, so crucial. It must be made clear that the GOP, with or without Trump, endangers us all.

[BannonsLiver]

8. I've accepted the fact most will never see it that way

That doesn’t necessarily mean I won’t listen to what they have to say about current events. I think everyone here can agree Reagan was one of the worst presidents we’ve ever had, but in reality there a lot of people who think he was a sweet old man who liked jelly beans. Rick Wilson or Steve Schmidt self immolating on air for past sins won’t fundamentally change that.

I’ve also accepted the fact there is always going to be a chunk of Americans who believe just as passionately as we do that Democrats are a threat to the Republic. And still more who can’t make up their mind or are willfully ignorant. I don’t ever see a day where we completely master a narrative to the point that the other side is rendered irrelevant or in ashes. I do thank you for your thoughtful reply. This topic tends to get kind of nasty.

[Garrett78]

12. My hope isn't to convince the Never Trumpers of their wrongdoing.

My hope is that Democrats and responsible members of the media will work hard to make sure an honest narrative takes hold in the public consciousness, and not the bogus narrative that the likes of Bill Kristol and Steve Schmidt are already attempting to establish.

As an example, there was a failure to properly push back against the "liberal media" narrative, and that has taken a serious toll. Republicans beat the "liberal media" drum for decades and it became a household term--it took hold in the public consciousness, as I say. Instead of defending the media or weakly denying the "liberal media" claim, there should have been a vehement counter-offensive about media consolidation in the hands of a few giant corporations, about the tendency to promote false equivalencies, about fluff, about giving equal time to lies and obfuscation, and so on. Now, though, we have members of the media going out of their way to not seem "biased" toward reality, toward facts. Losing the media messaging war has cost us dearly. Narrative matters. It matters a lot.

[hlthe2b]

26. I agree. No one is naive' about reformed R's or Never Trumpers. I'm tired of posts suggesting

that we ARE or demanding they get their unlimited pound of flesh.

It is self-defeating and quite frankly a bit of biting off one's nose to spite their face.

[Celerity]

38. +100000

[lame54]

3. He wants the dems to get rid of Trump...

So he can get his party back

[Garrett78]

4. My point is that he and his party made Trump possible.

There was a steady progression into madness over the last 50 years that led us to this moment. But the Never Trumpers would have us all believe all was well, then the GOP went mad for a few years, and then all will be well/normal again post-Trump. They're in denial and it's dangerous.

[moondust]

5. At times I've wished

somebody would ask the likes of Schmidt, Nicolle Wallace, Rick Wilson, etc., what it was that drew them to the Republican Party, what kept them there, and if there are still some things they like about "Republicanism"--whatever that is.

My view of the Republican Party is that starting with Reagan's "trickle-down" economics, deregulation, attacks on organized labor and "big government," etc., they became essentially a gang of would-be kleptocrats. They weren't identified as such because that description didn't enter the popular consciousness until fairly recently with Putin and some others and they kept it hidden better. Now it's much more obvious.

[Garrett78]

7. It goes back even further.

To the backlash to the Civil Rights Movement, Nixon's Southern Strategy, the Powell Memo (a blueprint for corporatocracy) and the Moral Majority nonsense. But, yeah, the Reagan years put madness into overdrive. Never Trumpers, though, worship those who got us into our present predicament. I'm yet to hear one acknowledge that fact. They're out of touch with reality and their denial risks setting the stage for a bogus post-Trump narrative that will, if it takes hold, prove very threatening.

[concreteblue]

44. Good points.

It can probably be argued by someone more well versed in political history than us that the current state's origins predate even those events.
In my mind it the gasoline was poured on it when Flush Rimjob hit the air in '84(?) and the subsequent repeal of the fainess doctrine.
The rise of Hate radio and Fox "News" Entertainment established the "Democrats bad" narrative and reinforced it for the last 40 years.
In my mind this is the reason that Trumpansies can not be reasoned with.

[madaboutharry]

6. Democracy by definition needs at least a two party

system. I’m not sure if the Republican Party is the best one to be part of that since republicans have demonstrated that democracy is not something they actually value. Maybe a new party will emerge that isn’t controlled by lunatics.

[Garrett78]

14. In fact, they've been actively working for ages to undermine democracy.

As I wrote somewhat recently:

The AG actively trying to undermine the FBI and intelligence agencies is surreal. But it follows a pattern. The Republican Party (including Never Trumpers) has been trying for decades, with quite a bit of success, to undermine trust in government. Run up debt so as to cut entitlements, have corporations write legislation, deregulate industry, install heads of departments whose mission it is to erode those very departments, deny the stark reality of racial injustice, etc.

Since the likes of Putin also wish to undermine democratic institutions for the purpose of self-enrichment, Putin and Republicans make for interesting bedfellows.

This is a war of ideologies: we vs. me. "It takes a village" vs. "every person for themselves" (cheating permitted...nay, encouraged). The likes of Barr, Bannon, Mulvaney, Pompeo et al. are especially dangerous--they're white nationalists, isolationists and despise secularization.

They've seen the writing on the wall (social progression, increased secularism, changing demographics, etc.), so their tactics have become increasingly extreme in recent years (intense voter suppression and gerrymandering, full-throated attacks on science and public education, persistent attacks on the "liberal media" to help shift the Overton Window, stealing a Supreme Court seat and packing the judiciary with right wing ideologues, aligning with dictators who share the goal of undermining democracy for personal enrichment, replacing the dog whistle with a bullhorn, and so on). They take comfort, though, in a tyranny of the minority system which, paradoxically, makes major structural reform nearly impossible to bring about for the very reasons why such reform is so desperately needed.

If this current cast of characters is still in power after 1/20/21, the damage wrought may be irreparable.

I wonder how many people (not on DU but nationally) view Trump as an anomaly or someone who just happened in a vacuum and how many people recognize that Trump is a symptom of a much larger problem (to which the GOP as a whole has long been contributing). I certainly come down on the side of the latter, and at the same time recognize how crucial it is that we remove Trump from office as soon as possible, as he's an especially diseased carrier pigeon for the ideologues who are taking advantage of his narcissistic appeal to the tens of millions of racists, sexists and xenophobes. I also wonder if seeing the big picture (or being helped to see it) would dissuade even a fraction of Trump's soft support (the portion that approves of him but not strongly) from continuing to support him. Are 100% of his supporters really okay with the world Republicans are seeking to realize? If so, they'll regret it.

[elleng]

9. TIME to APPRECIATE those who have changed their minds and

come over to the light; without doing so do we spend the rest of time 'I told you so?' USELESS.

[Garrett78]

11. They haven't done that, and that's my point.

They haven't changed their minds or come over to the light. They're in denial and want us all to believe Trump is merely a blip for which the pre-Trump Republican Party (including themselves) bears no responsibility.

[Lock him up.]

17. They would become irrelevant if part of the hundred million never-voters...

... who are sympathetic to progressive values - but who, so far, can't motivate themselves to vote for whatever reason(s) - would be convinced to vote for Dems all down ballot.

They would become perpetual losers. Stop worrying about them and register new voters, work the phones (GOTV)!

[Garrett78]

19. It's not a matter of worrying about them, per se. See post #12.

[meadowlander]

18. Steve Schmidt, John Heileman, etc haven't "come over to the light"

they've just refused to back a losing horse. It was one of the two of them that only a few weeks ago was at *great* pains to make the point on Morning Joe (another Dem come lately with big ideas for our party) that Trump used to be a Democrat and that if they were allowed to run a *real* Republican like Nikki Haley or Mitt Romney they would be crushing all of the Democratic contenders by double digits.

Once Trump is gone, they will go back to being Republicans, spinning absurd bullshit on Fox News and claiming we should all "move on" because it was Trump that was the problem and not gerrymandering and vote suppression and the electoral college and Citizens United and cable media propaganda and the Tea Party and the white supremacist/Christofascist base of their party and their party's contempt generally for the rule of law as long as they can keep grasping on to power.

They will blame Trump on the Democrats and try to go back to business as usual instead of making any of the systemic changes that we obviously need to make in order to prevent this all from happening again in a few years. With an actually smart Republican who will let us slip into a fascist dictatorship without getting caught.

These people are entertaining and useful but never imagine for a second that they are on our side.

[Garrett78]

20. Bingo!

They aren't reformed. They're in denial.

[JHB]

29. They're not even in denial. They're in positioning...

Last edited Wed Dec 4, 2019, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

That's been the case since even before the election: positioning themselves to be the wise men calling the shots once Trump flames out and crashes. Since he didn't, a number have bowed and knuckled under, but a portion -- particularly ones who've found secure perches in political media -- keep up the fight.

Why shouldn't they? They get paid more for less work than they were doing before, which was the daily work of fostering and feeding the Republican base that now hates them and loves Trump.

I'm all for using the tools at hand, which can include these people, but perspective is everything. Once we've done the heavy lifting to corral the hellbeast these people set loose, they're going to shiv us in the kidneys and smile while doing it.

"Their Republican party" that they want back is the one that impeached Bill Clinton over a blow job, stole Florida in 2000, passed massive tax cuts for the rich, used an attack on this nation as an excuse to launch an entirely different pet project war, actively sabotaged government at all levels, launches smear campaigns at anyone in the way of their agenda, and doggedly obstructs Democratic administrations at every, every, every turn as if their lives depended on doing so.

And never forget: as fun as the comments may be from Rick Wilson and others, every time a political show has them on to opine what Democrats should do, it makes the people who caused this problem a comfortable part of the media landscape while crowding out people who weren't wrong, who saw this coming and called it right.

But such people would disrupt the "both sides" beanbag chair a lot of national media likes to cozily sink into.

[Garrett78]

35. I agree with all that but I do think they're in denial about their complicity.

I don't think they get that they helped lay the groundwork for Trump.

[JHB]

36. That probably varies by person

Some may be in varying stages of denial, but I'm sure others just shrug it off as "that's how the game is played".

[pecosbob]

10. Every ten years or so the Republicans go off the reservation again

Nixon, Reagan, Dubya...and Dems scold them and maybe even put a flunkie or two behind bars for a bit like Ollie or Scooter. Then just to show exactly how not sorry they are for their past transgressions they rehabilitate their flunkie felons, put them in charge of collecting yet more dirty money and double down on their criminality. Republicans as a group have long believed that the end justifies the means, whether legal or not. Their campaign finance structure is one huge RICO case waiting for an uncompromising Attorney General to come along.

IMO at least for Zippy Stone to do real time would give some closure.

[sueunderh]

13. So true!

While I do enjoy Nicole Wallace's MSNBC show, I can never, ever forget that she coined the term "pals around with terrorists" and put it in Sarah Palin's vile mouth.

[madaboutharry]

21. Do you have a link for that?

For Nicolle coining the term “Pals around ....”.

Nicolle ended up hating Palin and needed to go into therapy because she was having mental health issues she claims were caused by Palin.

[JHB]

30. Here's one:

Steve Schmidt was part of that too.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/07/-pals-around-with-terrorists-palin-wasnt-that-rogue-after-all/21044/

Whose idea was it for Gov. Sarah Palin to attack Barack Obama as a guy who "pals around with terrorists?" Palin's camp has always insisted that the McCain high command endorsed the stratagem, while folks close to McCain have accused Palin of going "rogue" and pointed to the "pals around" attack as an example of how Palin simply could not be controlled. The idea that Palin was hard to manage as a candidate and ignored the advice and wishes of McCain's senior advisers is explicated in some detail by Todd Purdum.

But on the subject of linking Obama to ex-Weatherman Bill Ayers, it turns out that Palin hadn't gone rogue. Balz and Johnson answer this question pretty definitively. They've obtained an e-mail from campaign adviser Nicolle Wallace sent to Palin on the morning of October 4rd, with an attached New York Times article about Obama's relationship with Ayers.

Turns out that the McCain campaign was a week away from running an ad linking Obama to Ayers. The e-mail from Wallace, according to Balz and Johnson, reads as follows: "Governor and Team: rick [Davis], Steve [Schmidt] and I suggest the following attack from the new york times. If you are comfortable, please deliver the attack as written. Please do not make any changes to the below without approval from steve or myself because precision is crucial in our ability to introduce this."

McCain HQ had suggested the following line: "This is not a man who sees American as you and I do -- as the greatest force for good in the world. This is someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists who targeted their own country."

[madaboutharry]

32. That is terrible.

I think I will send her a message at MSNBC and ask if she ever apologized for this.

Thank you for the information.

[ToxMarz]

45. I enjoy her a lot now too

But how can she be so smart and not have realized what she was a part of all those years that culminated in THIS! I seriously question her judgment, and that makes her intelligence dangerous. She can be duped, apparently quite easily. I have a sneaking suspicion she will return to the republican party when this is all over, and claim/believe it is now pure and virtuous thanks in no small part to herself. It can never be virtuous, it exist solely as a criminal enterprise to extract power and wealth for its rich overlords, that's all. It will lay low renewing their power and influence and eventually we will be right back where we are today, and Nicole will be surprised, never having seen it coming, and all the while serving it's goals.

[B Stieg]

15. Well said!

Thx!

[Duppers]

16. Yes! 👍

K&R

[malaise]

22. Yesterday DU's favorite Bushie (Nicole Wallace)reminded all of us that she worked for Lady Blah Blah

aka Sarah Palin. I did laugh - you couldn't reach Don the Con without that ignorant lady.

[Whiskeytide]

23. Schmidt picked Palin. That's all you need ...

... to know to understand him.

[DeminPennswoods]

24. Schmidt has repeatedly acknowledged that was a mistake

Last edited Wed Dec 4, 2019, 12:04 PM - Edit history (1)

when he's apearanced on Deadline:WH. So has Wallace.

[Whiskeytide]

25. True. He says it was ...

... a mistake. What else could he say at this point? Picking her then is indefensible now. She was the beginning of the end of the GOP’s charade of decency.

But he met her then. He vetted her then. She is what he wanted to put a heartbeat away from the office.

The fact that he put her there in the hopes of winning 2008, with zero regard for whether she was fit for office, shows where is priorities lay.

I like what he says now as much as anyone. Wallace too. But let’s not forget where they came from. They are not democrats. They are republicans who are locked out of the Asshole Club ... for now.

[JHB]

31. What does that have to do with the price of beer?

He went with his instinct (and long-established standard conservative operating procedure) to hit low and vicious and stir up as much bile as possible in order to push for his team. After the dust settled he can say "oops, bad call", but that bile still stayed churned up.

Every second of time on screen mouthing away is time taken away from other people who had a sounder analysis of what was happening at the time, and who also aren't biding time until they can get back to the same things they were doing before 2015: hitting low and vicious and stirring up as much bile as possible in order to push for their team.

[GeorgeGist]

27. Perhaps someday Steve can wax eloquently...

On the rise and fall of the Republican Party.

[Loki Liesmith]

28. It's not important to me

[colsohlibgal]

33. Any Port In This Storm

But.....the damage Reagan did, particularly in tax rates, is incalculable. And it started the Republican trend of being more than OK with Actors and rich non Politicians.

[uponit7771]

34. THIS !!!! Someone needs to tell them the kGOP was for voter suppression BEFORE Trump !!!

[PatSeg]

37. Well said

Today's republicans haven't changed because of Trump. They are showing their true colors.

[Demonaut]

39. he's come to jesus. lay off

[tblue37]

43. He tried to help Starbucks billionaire Schultz run a spoiler campaign. nt

[Garrett78]

46. No, he hasn't. That's my point. He's just anti-Trump, and he helped make Trump possible.

[dajoki]

40. Absolutely...

I have never given those never-trumpers any acknowledgment, they are the reason we are where we are. And you know that they will get right back to their pre-trump dirty tricks.

[appalachiablue]

41. K/R I have limited tolerance for this crew and people who fawn over

them and ignore the realities pointed out here because of personality, are problematic.

[tblue37]

42. + a brazillion! K&R. nt

[Gore1FL]

47. I largely agree. They happily used the base when it was convenient.

While I appreciate their joining us in slaying the beast, as you say, they helped grow it.

What I will give the Steve Schmidts and Nicole Wallaces of the country credit for, is that they have an honest ability to come up with a thoughtful positions That's not to say I would agree with those positions, but they wouldn't be based on bullshit and whimsy.

If there is going to be a back to normal then we are going to need people like this. We have to be careful and not pull a Paul Bremer on the Never Trumpers.