The Guest Editorial in Variety (of all places) has some wonderful phrases in it, going 'way off the Deep End:
The kicker is that the author of this Republican-bashing freewheeling piece is Rob Long — “a contributing editor for National Review and co-founder of the conservative community website ricochet.com.”
I’m afraid it will be anticlimactic. Trump will have it sewn up going into the convention. Not to say I wouldn’t mind munching on popcorn and watching fists and teargas fly, and it would be cool if Dan Rather got himself carried off the floor by a bunch of thugs for old times’ sake, but I don’t think it will have as much drama and fireworks as we might hope.
Ah, if only they were willing to live their beliefs, (and allow in those guns they love so much and think should be everywhere, yknow, for safety reasons!)
Now that would make for a convention we’d all tune in to. Part of me believes it might just be the antidote to the frothy rhetoric/bald faced lies. Maybe if everyone was armed the speakers would be less inclined to stirring up their constituency!
I believe the Secret Service (and probably the venue’s insurance carrier) put the kibosh on that one.
Well, we don’t NEED Secret Service there if everyone has guns, now do we? 
Democrats have been experiencing this for years? I admittedly don’t watch the convention coverage very closely, but I don’t really remember any of this happening in meaningful amounts since the Vietnam era.
I think the original piece is referring to the disparate elemenmts within the Democratic Party fighting amongst themselves, with no clear direction. The Republicans , despite the veryt different philosophies of their constituencies, have shown more party discipline and moved in lockstep. That’s what is now breaking down in the party.
I don’t think he’s saying that the Democrats have been having rioting in their convention. Not since 1968, anyway.
Yeah, but to a Republican, anything that a Democrat has done over the last 100 years is still happening and all Democrats do it on a daily basis.
Yea, the article seems like a kinda silly effort to project 1968 forward onto the present day Democratic party, which hasn’t been particularly disorganized over the last two or three decades, anyways.
I think he’s sort of doing the opposite with the GOP as well, pretending that the GOP’s current trouble controlling its base started with Trump. But the GOP has been dealing with upstart, anti-intellectual candidates primarying establishment picks since 2008, and had to depend on Dem votes to pass bills out of the House since they won the majority. Trump just seems like the most prominent example of an ongoing process.
(post shortened)
That is one very entertaining article. Seriously.
Unfortunately for Rob Long, the Democrat collective, media outlets, and others have been predicting the demise of the GOP since at least 2009 and they’re still wrong. They ignore the fact that many voters don’t seem to care what the professional pundits and media talking heads have to say about this issue.
Currently, you have millions of voters who disregard the will (demands?) of the pundits, media, and the usual party power brokers and vote for Trump and Bernie. But, but, but that’s just not possible. Why don’t these voters listen to, and obey, the pundits, media, and power brokers anymore?
My guess is that many voters are tired of listening to the horseshit being spewed by people who can’t/won’t believe that the voters could possibly form their own opinions without receiving direction from the professionals.
Maybe Rob Long is looking at this issue wrong?
If you remember, the Tea Party was formed by individual voters who were disenchanted by the SSDD politics coming from the usual GOP power brokers. The purpose of political parties is to get candidates elected. Fewer elected candidates means less political power. No elected candidates means no political power. The Tea Party has become one of the most successful grassroots political parties ever because the Tea Party did managed to elect enough candidates to upset the plans of both the Democrat and Republican parties. Change has been coming from within the party.
The Democrat Party is facing it’s own Tea Party-type movement from the supporters of Bernie Sanders. It appears that many more voters have grown tired of the SSDD politics coming from the usual power brokers running the state and national Democrat parties. How many types of delegates did they say there? How did Hillary end up with hundreds of delegates before anyone even voted? Why isn’t the DNC supporting both of their leading candidates equally? This system just doesn’t seem fair. Maybe I and my friends can change things? If the Bernie supporters stay strong, change will come from within the party. But it won’t be easy.
In the mean time, I’ll continue to read articles like Rob Long’s and laugh.
Do Not Call Up Any You Cannot Again Put Down, Wizard Santelli.
The National Review hates, hates, hates Trump. Anything one of its mindless minions says can be discarded except for enertainment and schadenfreude.
He also doesn’t seem to have noticed that the Republican Convention doesn’t operate under Robert’s Rules but House [of Representatives] Rules. That’s actually been a major controversy, with Solomon Yue loudly advocating for Robert’s Rules to make the convention more “democratic” and the RNC loudly ignoring him. If Long doesn’t know that, he’s even more worthless than one would think. [limbo voice](How low can we go?[/limbo voice]
You might compare his ignorance with that of doorhinge.
Guess what? The same Koch brothers who heavily funded the success of the Tea Party have abandoned Trump and may covertly support Clinton. Oh, those plucky anti-establishment true Americans by the millions and all their power over the world.
Did I mention schadenfreude? Yeah, but let’s say it again. Schadenfreude.
. . . not only does not exist, but is a Not Even Wrong sort of notion.
It’s not even grammatically correct! (if http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_even_grammatically_correct doesn’t link to anything, it should.)
I’m sure Ted Cruz will be along any day to tell us how people would be banging their siblings and eating human flesh all the time if there weren’t a law against it.
Although I don’t think the Republican convention will be this bad, I would see the reform party convention of 2000as a better match than the Democratic conventions of the 1960’s.
(post shortened)
Funding for political parties comes from many sources. Funding doesn’t guarantee votes. Lots of money has been spent on losing campaigns.
Voters vote and their numbers still count. Voters are voting for Bernie and Trump because they do not like the SSDD politics of the established political parties. There are many highly paid professionals who are more than willing to tell the voters how they should vote and how stupid the voters are for not voting the way the professionals told them to. It’s becoming apparent that many voters don’t care what the highly paid professional pundits and media types have to say. It’s just more of the SSDD blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda, yadda, political horseshit that more and more voters have learned to tune out.
doorhinge, do you think Rob Long is part of the Democrat collective?
Hahahaha. A collection of Democrats would be a Democrat collective. Your denial of that fact doesn’t change reality. I guess that makes you not even wrong. (Whatever that means.) 
