Buchanan: Can Trump be stopped?


Patrick J. Buchanan
World Net Daily
October 20, 2016
Link to original

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump

Three months ago, this writer sent out a column entitled, “Could Trump win?” meaning the Republican nomination.

Today even the Trump deniers concede the possibility.

And the emerging question has become: “Can Trump be stopped? And if so, where, and by whom?”

Consider the catbird seat in which The Donald sits.

An average of national polls puts him around 30 percent, trailed by Dr. Ben Carson with about 20 percent. No other GOP candidate gets double digits.

Trump is leading Carson in Iowa, running first in New Hampshire, crushing the field in Nevada and South Carolina. These are the first four contests. In Florida, Trump’s support exceeds that of ex-Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio combined.

If these polls don’t turn around, big time, Trump is the nominee.

Excerpt. Read more at source.

Get AQ Email Updates

21 comments on “Buchanan: Can Trump be stopped?

  1. As always, we can post non-Catholic subject matter from Catholic writers/organizations. Pat is reportedly a Trad.

  2. I opine that the Donald will be a presidential candidate in the fall 2016 campaign whether on the Republican Party ticket or his own. If the latter, then whoever is the Republican candidate will come in third.

    • Agree right down the line with you, Tom. There IS no GOP candidate to begin with. Carson’s VERY wobbly on the hottest issue – the culture of death – among Catholics and fervent mega-church even-jelly-cals, so he’s toast, too.

      The rest, as John Nance Garner put it, ain’t worth a warm pitcher o’ spit.

  3. Trump will be sworn in on January 20, 2017.

  4. Wow – so I guess he’s getting a warm reception even here on AQ. His appeal seems to be very broad-based.

    At first I was very hesitant to support him – despite the fact that I’ve met him in person and found him to be a good guy. He was gracious enough to let me take a pic of my wife and him. This was before he was running.

    However, as time went on, he got “real.” He has a better second amendment plan than any candidate I’ve ever seen. A national right to carry? Who could have dreamed that? He also want to drastically cut taxes and, finally, give us real borders again.

    He’s also good on a lot of other issues, like defunding Planned Barrenhood, killing common core and cutting the EPA and Dept. of Education.

    One of the things I like best about him is that he isn’t owned by anyone in the donor class. No other candidate can say that.

  5. He has shaken up the GOP and that is why he is ahead in the polls, IMO. Even though he has some moral deficiencies in the Marriage and Respect for Life arenas, as I said long ago, we’re electing a leader not a pope. One thing is for certain he will demand respect from the enemies of our country, not all of whom are foreigners. Whether I can in fact vote for him is another matter.

  6. He has my vote ! The only candidate with any guts !

  7. I agree with you guys about Trump. He’s the best out of the lot. I hope he wins too.

    But as we know the establishment (the Dem and Repub establishment which are basically one and the same) aren’t going to go down without a fight.

    IMO their acolytes in the media, and in the lodge will do all they can to derail Trump’s candidacy. One way or another.

  8. The enthusiasm here is a bit surprising. I’m watching, pulling for Cruz. It seems that it would be OK to vote for Trump as he would defund PP and end ObamaCare extermination of the elderly, which is where it’s going. Ending death panels was enough to get me to vote for Romney, although I still feel sick about that. I sat out Dubya both times, and have been proven right about that.

    • “The enthusiasm here is a bit surprising.”

      I’m surprised too, as trads are a tough bunch and I didn’t think Trump would see much support here.

      My main reason for liking him is that he’ll sideline the establishment/donor/bankster class clampdown that has been turning ALL of us into their fungible production units for decades now.

      • Yep, I’m all for that. It’s wholesale theft, the road to serfdom (I borrowed that!). Ending the EPA will take a big burden off the poor and probably save some lives. Separation of school and state would be great, too.

        It’s hard these days to weigh candidates. I usually start with legalized murder, and if both candidates are on par, e.g., both proabort, I’m done, unless there is another category of murder, e.g., Obamacare death panels, euthanasia. Right now, that clearly distinguishes Trump and Cruz. The next category is perversion. I don’t think I could vote for a homo no matter what. Then comes socialism.

        The dilemma often happens that candidates differ by degree, but not categorically. That’s when I don’t vote, e.g., Dubya and ¡Jeb! Nowadays Dems are 100% pro-abort, pro-euthanasia, pro-homo, and pro-socialism, but not all GOP’ers are — just many are. Isn’t it horrifying we’ve descended this far?

  9. It’s not surprising to me that Trump finds support among us Trads. Most of us, I believe, are “no-nonsense” types who have fled the novelties of the “new church” and are firmly convinced that we have been lied to, not only by the hierarchy of our church but by the political leaders of our country. We are desperate for one who not only talks the talk, but walks the walk. We’re tired of the bozos and want the “real deal” both in politics and, most especially, in our church. Trump offers us a refreshingly new candidate who has enough personal wealth to not worry about political “deals” and such. If only we had such a candidate in the hierarchy of our church.

  10. [If “we can post non-Catholic subject matter from Catholic writers,” then here’s the latest from the New York Times’ token Catholic on the Donald]

    Trump Voters and Ted and Jeb

    Ross Douthat
    OCTOBER 20, 2015

    One of the interesting phenomena of campaign 2016 is how many Republicans are determined to see Donald Trump’s campaign as 1) an essentially trivial and content-free affair and 2) basically in the same political lane as prior right-wing, base-rallying primary candidacies. In this interview with Sasha Issenberg, Jeb Bush strategist Mike Murphy offers both takes at once, first comparing Trump to a “Kardashian” and a “beer brand” running for president, and then offering this view of where Trump’s voters might go after his allegedly-inevitable collapse:

    Yeah, I think in his lane the guy with the most opportunity will probably be Cruz. Voters have some resistance, it seems, to go to Cruz, there’s something there they don’t like, but in that lane I would think he’d have the opportunity. Walker tried to get into that business and got squeezed out too early to really know, but if I had to make a hypothetical I’d probably guess that. But we think it’s a minority lane, so a lot of what we want to do is consolidate the regular Republican, positive-conservative lane. That means the real competition from our point of view, the main competition over the long run, are we think weaker candidates in our lane that we can overcome. There are people we have respect for, but there’s Governor Christie, Senator Rubio,Governor Pataki, Governor Kasich—that’s the vote we’d like to consolidate. Carly Fiorina pulls a little from both sides, probably more in our data from the other lane.

    What’s interesting is that this view of the Trump constituency isn’t just confined to the Bush campaign; it’s seemingly shared by Cruz himself, who has gone out of his way to avoid clashing with the Donald in the hopes of picking up his supporters down the road. And it’s not necessarily all wrong: Trump has run hard on the immigration issue, Cruz is probably further right than the rest of the field on immigration, and to the extent that Trump supporters privilege that issue above all others he’d be a natural second choice.

    But at the same time I think there a couple big misunderstandings in Murphy’s analysis. The first one, which is widely shared (in our latest “Moviegoers,” I try to correct my colleague Frank Bruni’s version), is the idea that Trump’s message is essentially negative and pessimistic, and thus that it stands in contrast to the “positive-conservative” vision that Jeb and others want to offer. The reality is that Trump is offering, yes, a witheringly negative assessment of (among other things) Washington D.C., the Republican Party’s leadership, various movement-conservative assumptions, and everything America’s leaders have done these last fifteen years on foreign and domestic policy. But his ultimate message isn’t one of doom and despair; it’s the promise that we can, in fact, make America great again! That we can win wars, and win trade wars too, and have wild prosperity, and show the Mexicans and Chinese who’s really boss! That there’s nothing wrong with America that can’t be solved by electing a winner like Donald Trump as our supreme leader, and clearing out all the fools and frauds who’ve betrayed our American birthright! Etc.

    And then the second misunderstanding is the idea that Trump is just rallying the most conservative primary voters to his banner. Again, yes, he has some ideologically-conservative support, but as Ron Brownstein and John Judis have pointed out — and as Josh Kraushaar emphasized in his column yesterday — a lot of Trump’s constituency is more working class, more politically moderate, and somewhat less religious than the median G.O.P. voter. He’s much closer to a Perotista/radical middle candidate, in other words, than he is to a movement-conservative, RINO-hunting right-wing purist … which is why RINO-hunting enforcers like the Club for Growth are chomping at the bit to take him on.

    This reality makes me a little bit dubious of the assumption that if Trump fades, his voters will just naturally swing to Cruz; I’m just not sure the Texas senator’s mix of on-his-sleeve evangelicalism and Tea Party positioning is a natural fit for a secular-ish blue collar constituency. Where they would go I’m not sure (though at the moment they aren’t exactly going anywhere!), but the irony of Murphy’s misreading is this: The real Trump message (growth! opportunity! greatness!) is arguably a version of the one that Jeb Bush is supposed to be offering with his “why not 4 percent growth” pitch, and the real Trump constituency (working class, economically moderate) is roughly the constituency that Bush’s “right to rise” message was seemingly supposed to win. And indeed, if you eyeball the polling around the time that Trump entered the race, it sure looks like he took some support from Bush and Marco Rubio, both of whom dipped as he began to rise …

    Which means that so long as Team Jeb — and this goes for Team Rubio, too — thinks their only mission is to consolidate the 10-12 percent of the primary electorate currently backing Christie/Kasich/Fiorina/Pataki (once Jeb gets that Pataki supporter, he’ll be set!), they’re missing an important reality: Any “establishment” path to the nomination, no less than the more right-wing path that Ted Cruz wants to trace, depends on getting a bunch of the people currently backing Trump and Ben Carson to swing to Jeb! or Rubio.

    Maybe, as Kraushaar suggests, Carson’s supporters are a riper target for establishment consolidation, since they’re more affluent/educated/female than Trump’s. But Carson supporters are also more conservative than Trump backers, and Carson polls very well among evangelicals (who are often affluent, educated, and female), a constituency that actually does seem like the natural place for Cruz to make gains. Whereas Trump, right now, sure seems to have a lot of the moderates that a candidate like Jeb needs to win in, say, New Hampshire — to say nothing of in the general election. So it would seem like Jeb’s campaign might want to recognize that Trump is actually in their lane, in ur base stealing ur v0ters as the internet might say, and that they aren’t going to break 20 percent if they can’t win some of those Trump-supporting moderate conservatives back.

    Maybe they do know that, and that’s the idea behind Jeb’s ongoing, none-too-effectual spats with Trump. But based on Murphy’s analysis, they seem a little distance from understanding the true nature of Trumpism, and how and why it has the Republican establishment on its heels.

    [See douthat.blogs.nytimes.com/?s=trump for more of Douthat on the Donald]

  11. How about we get him to convert to Catholicism, guide him to full traditionalism, and slip him into the next papal conclave?

    • Pope Francis Excommunicates Donald Trump from Catholic Church Citing Un-Christian Behavior

      Alexander Crouton-Skitch
      National Report
      August 2015

      VATICAN CITY – The most severe form of religious penalty – excommunication – has been delivered to Republican presidential front-runner and real estate mogul Donald Trump by Pope Francis, sources close to the Vatican report.

      Citing “behavior recognized as un-Christian to the community of the faithful,” the papal decree does not bar Trump from entering church, nor does it strip him of his faith; rather, it excludes him from participation in the sacraments of the Church, and will serve as a strong message that will “hopefully guide him toward repentance, and bring him back to the path of righteousness.”

      During an Aug. 19 interview, Trump was asked what he would do if Pope Francis were to criticize either him or capitalism during the pontiff’s upcoming September visit. Trump’s reply was that he’d remind the Pope that ISIS was out to get him. Some Trump supporters say the excommunication order was in response to Trump’s comment.

      Observers also point to several other incidents which may have informed Pope Francis’ decision, including Trump’s initial response to a violent attack on a homeless Hispanic man by two brothers in Boston, inspired in part by Trump’s repeated calls to deport all illegal immigrants.

      Trump’s widely criticized reaction did not include a denunciation of the assault, suggesting what some feel was his approval:

      “I will say, the people that are following me are very passionate. They love this country. They want this country to be great again. And they are very passionate.”

      Trump has since changed his tone a bit, tweeting a condemnation on Aug. 21.


      Prior to this controversy, Trump outraged the Hispanic community during his presidential announcement speech, calling Mexicans rapists and drug dealers, then doubling down on the derogatory comments when faced with mounting criticism. His dismissal and mocking of Univision news anchor Jorge Ramos during an Iowa press conference on Aug 25 further alienated the Hispanic community. “Go back to Univision,” said trump to Ramos, before security ejected the Spanish-language journalist and author from the room.

      His now infamous remark suggesting that Fox News’ Megyn Kelly was menstruating during the first Republican primary debate also was widely condemned. He has since reignited a Twitter feud in which Kelly was referred to as a “bimbo,” prompting Fox News head Roger Ailes to call on Trump to apologize to Kelly.


      Although these actions could certainly be construed as un-Christian, it is highly unlikely Trump will change his tone or behavior, since another “bible” has been his guide. Trump’s 1987 book The Art of The Deal, relies heavily on the widely-read 1952 best-seller The Power of Positive Thinking, written by minister and author Norman Vincent Peale. Although highly influential, Peale’s book and its ideas were generally not accepted by mental health experts.

      No formal comment has come from Trump concerning the Pope’s condemnation.

      Originally from the Langerhans Islets, Alexander Crouton-Skitch practices journalism with what he calls “a motivational surgeon’s scalpel.” As co-founder and charter member of the Longines Symphonette Society, he is proud to be internationally recognized as its President Emeritus.

      – See more at: nationalreport.net/pope-francis-excommunicates-donald-trump-catholic-church-citing-un-christian-behavior/#sthash.Fl22uILU.dpuf

      • Breaking: Donald Trump Fires Pope Francis

        [AQ Press] After receiving notice of his excommunication, the Donald returned the favor. Noting the pope’s meddling in economics while admitting his lack of knowledge, Trump said, “You think you can feed a billion people by preaching socialism? Who do you think gets up early to drive the tractor, drive the truck, stock the shelves, bake the bread? All I can say is, “You didn’t build that.” So until you can find something constructive to add, stop tearing down what works. You’re fired.”

  12. Of all the candidates, he has the highest likelihood of making lib’s heads explode. In the absence of a truly Catholic option, I’d vote for him on entertainment potential alone.

Leave a Reply