Make Donald Drumpf Again

March 7, 2016

Donald Trump’s followers don’t primarily support him because of his positions on the issues.  If their priority were immigration enforcement, they would all be for Ted Cruz.  Trump’s stated positions appear to move to and fro according to what he considers to be to his personal advantage at any given moment.  This is both why Trump must be stopped and why it is so difficult to stop him.  (How can you rationally argue his supporters out of positions they did not adopt rationally in the first place?)

Rather than his policy positions, Trump’s real political strength appears to be, well, strength, or at least alpha-male posturing.  We know he must be a great winner, for he has told us so himself; as if further to reassure himself and us, he also tirelessly belittles and mocks all his rivals.

In this context, mocking and belittling Trump is not only fair game; it may well be the only thing that can stop him.  To that end, John Oliver suggests that we demote Trump to “Drumpf”, an ancestral form of his family name from the old country.  (See this vulgar but funny twenty-minute segment of Oliver’s TV show.)

The New York Times asks, “Donald Drumpf: A Funny Label, but Is It Fair?”

Despite mistaken impressions, Mr. Trump and his recent relatives had nothing to do with the surname change.

Understood:  The name didn’t change when a grandfather came through Ellis Island, it changed in Germany more than 300 years ago.  But that doesn’t change the answer to the Times’ question.

Not only is belittling Trump fair; it may well be the only thing that can stop him.

9 Responses to “Make Donald Drumpf Again”

  1. […] are saying that Donald Trump, a. k. a. Drumpf, is unstoppable.  They say that Romney’s well-reasoned and well-articulated case against […]

  2. […] 2000 — Donald Trump, a. k. a. Drumpf, left the Reform Party, and denounced David Duke by name as a […]

  3. Will S. Says:

    It’s funny, because it sounds kinda like Donald Duck, except Germanic, but really, doncha think it’s a juvenile tactic?

    Would it be so awful is Trump crushed movement conservatism, and gave people the chance to rebuild it, in a party other than the Republicans, from the ground up, without the Mitch McConnells, and the Kay Bailey Hutchisons, and all the damned liberals / moderates / rich bastards who don’t give a toss about the working stiffs? And who bow and kowtow to political correctness on everything from gay rights to Muslims, etc.?

    What happened in Indiana, when they tried to go against gay marriage – imagine a party not beholden to business elites…

    Why not start again, afresh?

    • Yes it’s a juvenile tactic. I think Mr. Trump has possibly demonstrated that the 2016 presidential race cannot be won without juvenile tactics, unfortunately. It’s a strange age we live in, but I don’t therefore want the pro-liberty side unilaterally to disarm.

      I would be curious to hear in more detail how Trump’s presidency would or could lead to rebuilding movement conservatism, what that process would look like, etc.

      One obvious problem (but not the only problem) is that Trump is exactly one of those “damned liberals / moderates / rich bastards who don’t give a toss about the working stiffs” (he has in fact personally hurt and taken advantage of working stiffs in the past—see a few examples below), who was in fact parroting the politically correct conventional wisdom (such as that Mitt Romney’s proposal of “self-deportation” was “maniacal” and “crazy” and will accomplish nothing but costing Republicans elections) less than four years ago.

      • Will S. Says:

        Thing is, Trump has stretched wider the Overton Window of acceptable political discourse; even if he accomplishes just one or two of his promises; e.g. banning Muslim or heck all immigration, for a while, and/or builds a wall along the southern border, he will have accomplished far more than any recent Republican president ever did, for national identity matters. Yes, he’s a rich liberal bastard. But he’s for the people, unlike other rich liberal bastards.

        Anyway, even if he loses, the fact that he may devastate the party under whose banner he’s running – or if he bolts and runs as an independent, equally devastate them by taking the base away, may be enough. Allowing unPC ideas to be articulated, paving the way for future politicians to do so (maybe even non-Hispanic, WASP / Germanic ones!), may be an even better service than his actually winning. His candidacy itself is the main thing, IMO.

  4. […] Donald Trump, a. k. a. Drumpf, has bought another friend. […]

  5. […] of the problem with the Romney strategy.  He recommended that everyone vote for whichever non-Drumpf candidate is in the lead in each state according to surveys.  It sounds good in theory, but what […]

  6. […] Nate Silver at 538:  It was a good night for Cruz, a bad night for Drumpf. […]

  7. […] Conman Don was never the guy who “tells it like it is”; he’s always been the guy who tells it like he thinks most of his audience want to hear at the moment.  As soon as his political calculus changes (maybe as soon as the general election), he’ll be so anti-wall you won’t even recognize him.  He’ll happily tell you what a hatemonger you are for being against illegal immigration, and he’ll sound just as convincingly “sincere” and matter-of-fact as he does now. […]

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: