To me, that’s the REAL problem. The Republicans, as individuals and as a party, won’t repudiate the guy who won a presidential election. This is what used to be called cowardice, back when that was a concept. We’re supposed to have some bedrock principles and value. Trump doesn’t (well, he has one—promote Donald Trump). Trump is dangerous, but wouldn’t be if his party made it clear that beyond-the-pale words and actions made him persona non grata.
The bit about the Constitution in this particular statement doesn’t worry me. January 6th, and the incredible lack of reaction thereto, did and does. The bit about election fraud in this particular statement, which is unambiguous, did and does. Mind you, Trump probably by now believes his own lie there, but it would be nice if his fellow Republicans at least said “poor Trump; he’s gone round the bend. Of course we can no longer have him in a leadership role in the party, though we wish him well” or something.
Maybe some of the journalists(?) of these outlets had sold their souls and are relieved now to be able to express what they really thought all the time.
The National Review doesn’t pretend to be news media. It is purely right-wing opinion pieces. (Similar to The Nation or Mother Jones, albeit different politics.) But they were never on the Trump train. They’re wrong within normal parameters.
As for the rest… I wonder if it’s ever occurred to the remaining Trump sycophants that shortly they will be defending a man who appears at a press conference with his underpants on his head ranting about how the shape-shifting aliens are beaming rays into his head, and closing off by shouting the N word over and over again.
I mean, that’s where it’s heading at this point, and if they want to try to parse that future press conference into “What he really meant” or “but but Biden is worse”, then good luck to them.
But most are pointing out the Constitution is Important, but saying very very little about Trump by name. I mean after all, their own power comes from the Constitution, and they fully intend to be in power long after Trump is done as a force. Which is honestly where they expected to be during Trump’s 4/8 years in their original calculations - “if he would only just rally the rubes and let us rule.” being the unspoken objective during his time.
The National Review was founded by and follows the precepts of William F. Buckley, Jr. and is very much in the mold of the traditional Conservative movement which includes free trade, respecting personal freedoms versus “states rights”, and open immigration policy. It is pretty much the anathema of Trumpy autocracy.
Republicans may be very gingerly trying to distance themselves from Donald Trump, but many of them are very openly adopting Trump-like political stances, rhetoric, and attitudes toward elections and the democratic process. This is not going away even if Trump himself fades into the orange shag carpet of a shitty hotel he bought and drove into bankruptcy.
Of course not. McConnell is a savvy politician. I suspect that he strongly dislikes Trump, and wishes that Trump would just ride off into the sunset. But, McConnell doubtlessly realizes that, at this point in time, he needs Trump’s supporters (and, by extension, Trump) in order to maintain, and increase, both his (McConnell’s) personal power, and the power of the GOP.
Unless and until his political calculus indicates to him that overtly opposing Trump won’t jeopardize the above, he will not say nor do anything that would pit him against Trump.
The National Review has never approved of Trump or anything he did. That they delivered an anti-Trump message isn’t at all surprising. They’ve been doing that for the past six years.
He took an oath to uphold the Constitution. Not an oath to stay in office by any means that he thinks will work.
Many of the Republicans who took that oath are currently in violation of it. The fact that this is true, and that there are some voters who don’t care or are in favor of this, doesn’t excuse McConnell, or anyone else violating that oath, one bit.
To be clear, I wasn’t trying to excuse McConnell (whom I feel is pretty loathsome, and who is “political” in the most cynical sense of the word); I was simply explaining why it should come as no surprise at all that he refused to take a stand on supporting Trump as a potential presidential nominee.
