National Review devotes an entire issue to "Against Trump"

There’s a lengthy editorial by the editors here. Over here is a list of shorter pieces by well-known conservative authors including Glenn Beck, John Podhoretz, Cal Thomas, Mona Charen, Yuval Levin, Thomas Sowell, and others.

When he first entered the race in June, everyone thought he would monkey around front of the camera for a few days and leave. When he rose to first place in the polls, everyone thought it was just the “silly season” and when voters started thinking seriously, Trump would sink. After every outrageous lie, insults, and preposterous promise of action, the pundits assured us that Trump had finally gone too far and his supporters would finally move away from him. I know of nobody who predicted what would happen correctly; I certainly didn’t predict better than anyone else.

Now voting begins in 12 days and more and more people are getting the impression that dismissing Trump as an crazed ape with a microphone was not a good idea. It’s looking increasingly like the Republican primary is his to lose, and rather than just expecting him to vanish quietly after awhile, instead the establishment will need an all-out blocking effort that may or may not succeed.

And the establishment isn’t going to go all-out since Trump’s successor as frontrunner would probably be Ted Cruz.

I doubt many Trump supporters are reading National Review.

Indeed, given that anti-establishment feeling seems to be driving a good chunk of his popularity, having the NR spend a whole issue trying to attack him might do Trump more good then bad.

(also, is that cover meant to be a spoof or take-off of something?)

I wouldn’t have predicted the current state of affairs, either, but here’s a prediction I will make. I already said it in another thread. It’s not a question of “if” but of “when” Trump’s campaign implodes, and major opposition like this is only going to grow if he continues to be prominent. The lead article on the CNN web page today was about who was worse, Trump or Cruz, and which had the potential to cause the most damage to the GOP. If Trump thinks this is rough, he ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.

Trump’s demagoguery works to attract a small but fiercely loyal minority, and that’s more than enough to assure his celebrity and the draw of the Trump brand in business, but it’s not enough to win elections across the country. And he’s not going to change because selling snake oil is all he knows and demagoguery is all he has. But by the time the dust settles, the GOP may irrepairably damaged for this election cycle. “The Party of Stupid” isn’t really a selling point. The re-emergence of the Horror from Wasilla to endorse Trump just helps to reinforce that that’s just what it is, though.

Looks to me like the establishment rather have Trump than Cruz.

This is going to have a huge impact on all three of the Review’s regular readers.

But, the problem is that the consensus appears to be that Cruz would be worse. He would drag down the rest of the ticket even harder than Trump. And everyone in his own party loathes him, but they think Trump might be workable in the unlikely event that he won. The attempts to make Jeb or Rubio happen seem to be failing miserably.

I definitely predicted a Trump implosion by now, but I’m getting less and less certain of it. This makes me more nervous as the economy seems to be stalling, that anything can happen.

Not mutually exclusive.

An understatement to say the least. The last two words are superfluous.

Seems to me that the National Review is trying to wash their hands of Trump, saying “don’t blame us if he is nominated and the party collapses”.

It’s more like “OMG they figured out we are a bunch of useless old farts, we better make sure Hillary wins so we can blame everything on her”.

There. I fixed your post for you. :smiley:

I agree with this snippet from Michael Medved:

Of course the nomination is Trump’s to lose. His supporters do. not. CARE. what the establishment says of him, and anything done to smear Trump just makes his followers pine for him even more.

This election is not going to Bush or Rubio, and frankly I’m sick as Hell of all the pundits saying that one of those two is “inevitable.”

At some point, you have to cope with reality.

You have to keep up, no one is saying that anymore.

Lindsay Graham’s take on Cruz v. Trump:

“It’s like being shot or poisoned,” the South Carolina Republican said. “What does it really matter?”

It’s not as if their dislike of Trump is somehow new-found. Here’s their response to his entering the race back in June, colorfully entitled “Witless Ape Rides Escalator”.

The National Review doesn’t need to win over Trump supporters who are around 35% of the primary electorate. They just need to prevent too many of the other 65% going over to him when the race settles down with 2-3 contestants.

Trump has lasted far longer than anyone expected but the establishment still has some cards to play. One is a concerted attack on him from conservative news outlets like the NR. The other is a full-blown negative ad campaign attacking his many weaknesses. That will also happen some time in the next month. This race is far from over. Remember a big chunk of primary voters are only starting to pay serious attention.

Trump will thrive as long as the “establishment lane” is crowded. However at some point not too long after the NH primary it will likely be down to one establishment candidate against Trump and Cruz. That’s when the real contest begins.

My very dedicated, right-wing-nut, Tea Partying coworkers read the NR religiously. Two of them flew together to DC for a TP rally a while back, and they turn (and return) the television to Fox all day long hoping to brainwash the unaware as they eat lunch. (Quote “All the other channels are propaganda!”) They love, love, love both Trump and Cruz and have been fretting over who would win the nomination, although they would be happy with either.

I wonder how they are feeling today? Almost makes me want to go to work to find out.

Well, not really.

Right, Trump is coasting on an aura of inevitability and up yours. That’s extremely valuable … until it gets broken. If Cruz wins in Iowa, Trump is what he calls others. A loser. He’ll get ugly, and not in the way that makes only his enemies hate him. He already has high negatives and a low ceiling that gives others room to maneuver.

Cruz is conventionally beatable. The Establishment can find a candidate to throw at him.

Remember that Iowa and New Hampshire don’t look like the other 48 states. Winning there is not usually meaningful or predictive. (Santorum won by a few votes after a recount and Ron Paul was a close third. This was in a record turnout … of 20% of registered Republicans.) Once the campaigns have to spread themselves thin to cover the entire country, the early tactics no longer work.

The primaries start after New Hampshire. That’s a weird truth because it’s in certain players’ interests to pretend otherwise, and since the media is one of them everything you see and hear is skewed. That’s the good news. This is the one thing you get to unskew the data on and be right.

Not without moving their lips, anyway.