The New Republic

I have felt for some time now that Donald Trump is running. He will not even come close to winning the nomination, though. He is a clownish figure in ways, a caricature of himself, but he is also canny. He is stroking the Republican base now and his numbers show it. 2012 is going to be interesting.

- liberalref

April 28, 2011 at 11:29am

I agree that Trump is running -- at this point, he has gotten too far out on the limb to withdraw without losing a massive amount of face (always an important consideration for a real estate developer). The interesting thing is that Trump's business empire -- unlike many other large enterprises -- is largely built around the Trump brand. What will happen when that brand gets tarnished and dragged through the mud in the course of a partisan political campaign? We're already seeing it with the big drop-off in ratings for Celebrity Apprentice and gay groups boycotting Trump's casinos and hotels due to The Donald engaging in the requisite gay-bashing in Iowa. The longer this goes on, the more damage Trump's brand will suffer. Perhaps someone ought to tell The Donald that there really are not enough birthers out there to pick up the slack for Trump's various ventures from all the disgusted people who will want nothing to do with a racist, know-nothing Presidential campaign.

- wildboy

April 28, 2011 at 11:47am

Trump is not a developer and hasn't been for a long time; he licenses his name to developers. His business is being a huckster, much like Paris Hilton's business is being a celebrity. While I don't doubt he has created many jobs in his huckster business, I'm not so sure he would be much help as President creating an entire economy built on being a huckster; though to be fair to Trump, there are those who believe our economy is already built on being a huckster - why do we buy all that worthless junk?

- rayward

April 28, 2011 at 12:00pm

I don't know. Part of me wants to simply defer to those of you on here much brighter than I, and if you insist he's running, well.... but seriously, what could he possibly have to gain? He's a goofy bastard, but he's not crazy, he knows he can't possibly win (the general, that is. He could be laboring under the belief he could actually win the nomination, because let's be frank, he actually could. I agree it's tremendously unlikely, but it is possible). Being in the limelight? He gets that without the run. Being able to hear "Former Candidate for President of the United States" every time he's introduced? I suppose that would be cool, for the first dozen or so times, then it's just a constant reminder you lost. Add to that the fact that the presidential campaign trail is uniquely grueling. I can't imagine somebody doing it knowing they're going to lose and still be willing to see it through. Anyway, I thik he's going to announce on the Apprentice finale (which is when, btw?) that he's decided not to run. That's my $2 bet.

- Tristan

April 28, 2011 at 12:10pm

The Donald has a giant ego, Tristan, as well as lust for attention. That explains it all.

- liberalref

April 28, 2011 at 12:37pm

I can see Chait is taking Trump seriously by the sort of almost flattering photo he chose to accompany his post. On CNN and MSNBC they took some pains to select such snapshots as show Trump as a fool, a loudmouth, and even a thundering nutcase. Frankly, like shooting fish in a barrel. Trump to me always looks ridiculous, with that silly coiffed hairdo and his small, fish-like mouth. He is a very unappetizing specimen, and I don't see him being able to be the Republican nominee, simply because he is too full of himself. No one has anything to teach him; he knows it all. He is a real estate man, not a political leader. And no matter how delighted were the conservative constituents with the way he managed to dent Obama's sangfroid, and force him to do something he avoided doing for two and a half years, I can't see them being duped by someone who has only lucrative real estate deals to recommend him.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 12:55pm

Over at the always despicable Politico, they had a conservative regular on The Arena, of all people, post a comment to the effect that if the media were really doing their job, the birther controversy would have been laid to rest a long time ago. The actual birth certificate has been available for perusal in Hawaii's records. If the bastards in the MSM (I've come to the point where I am deriding the supposedly liberal MSM) cared more about covering the news correctly rather than advancing a storyline, they would have dispatched reporters to look at it, and every time festering piles of shit like Trump (not mine, read it somewhere) made their wild accusations, politely refuted them as part of the story. The unfair shit that our first black president has had to go through makes me sick.

- NR409654

April 28, 2011 at 1:18pm

Sorry Jon, the ultimate unprincipled operator is still Dick Morris. Ralph Reed is merely a UUO in training, a hot prospect from a Triple-A league.

- boyski

April 28, 2011 at 1:20pm

Jon, you have written in the past that you do not believe the Tea Partiers are racists. Yet now you write that "most Republicans" believe Obama is an affirmative action case, a mediocrity "who benefited from his race at every stage of his life". If "most Republicans" believe this, then virtually all Tea Partiers must -- and it is a thoroughly racist viewpoint. By the way, I think you make an excellent point about Trump's segue from birtherism to racism. But I would argue that you have been way too forgiving of these code-talkers in the past.

- koppgeo

April 28, 2011 at 1:23pm

Trump is an idiot-savant, with an emphasis on idiot. I think the affirmative action card is unwise to play because, at the end of the day, Obama graduated in the top 10% of Harvard Law School (Magna Cum Laude). He was also the editor in chief of the Law Review, which you are only eligible to serve on if you are towards the top of your class. That said, I think the fact that this argument could even potentially resonate, despite Obama having graduated with distinction from a top Ivy Law School, shows how screwed minorities must be in general. What if you are merely an average Harvard Law Student who is a minority, do you even have a chance to be taken seriously, if Obama isn't?

- sokol8

April 28, 2011 at 1:24pm

Listen. The Affirmative Action smear is straight-up racism.

- Sophia

April 28, 2011 at 1:35pm

So. If Trump is running, and running on that, we have just officially become a backwards nation and are in very big trouble.

- Sophia

April 28, 2011 at 1:35pm

Ha-hah! No. It will never be time to take Trump seriously. He may run for President. He might imaginably win the Republican nomination. The world may even take some sort of freakish Bizarro turn straight out of the imagination of Hunter Thompson deep in the throes of an ether binge leading him to become President of the United States, but even then, no, it would not be time to take him seriously.

- janus

April 28, 2011 at 1:38pm

Does anyone believe that someone like Trump doesn't have ten truckloads of weird, suspicious, and unappealing stuff in his background that will take about week for the media to unearth and that will just bury him? Also, strapping that dog to the roof of the car is going to come back to haunt Romney. It'll be like a canine version of Bill Ayers for Obama. Not that Obama strapped Ayers to a vehicle, but -- well, you know what I mean. Potential embarrassment.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 2:09pm

- "It's a longshot, but I wouldn't say anymore it couldn't happen.". Mr. Trump, meet your newest mark. Any hustler will tell you they're half-way home if they gain your confidence. Trump doesn't need to take ownership to make his money. He makes you believe anything can happen, using his name and your money. He lends his name, grabs his share and walks away. He's done it with buildings and golf courses and couldn't resist cashing in by lending his name to Primary Inc.

- michaelg

April 28, 2011 at 4:17pm

"The Affirmative Action smear is straight-up racism." I find this statement bizarre. If affirmative action is a racist smear, why is it an on going policy?

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 4:20pm

whether he's actually running and whether he should be taken seriously strike me as completely separate propositions. and, irony, Trump's unappealing stuff is right out there on display. His marital/relationship track record, that is publically know, makes Gingrich look like a piker.

- miceelf

April 28, 2011 at 4:40pm

"On display" and "being pawed over 24/7 for several weeks/months" are two different propositions.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 4:51pm

"On display" and "being pawed over 24/7 for several weeks/months" are two different propositions.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 4:51pm

Noga, the comment was not that affirmative action in general is a racist smear, it was that attributing Obama's admission to Columbia and Harvard to affirmative action with no data to back it up is a racist smear. Do you take issue with that theory?

- NR409654

April 28, 2011 at 4:52pm

"Trump's unappealing stuff is right out there on display. His marital/relationship track record," miceelf doesn't beat about the bush. Of all the many facts known about Trump, that could be legitimately deployed against him as a serious presidential candidate, he pounces right onto the least relevant, and most sensational. I would have expected this from a constipated evangelical, not a self declared progressive liberal. Or whatever.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 4:55pm

"Do you take issue with that theory?" If you mean the theory that Obama is concealing a record of being accepted to university due to affirmative action, then I don't know. How can I? If you mean do I find the proposition, that he did get into university due to AA, objectionable, then the answer is no.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 4:59pm

There was a version of affirmative action in Israel when I was a student. I knew a few of students who got into university with the help of the new regulations. They were invariably brown skinned persons who grew up in poor families in rural places where they did not have the discipline or good enough education to be able to make it otherwise. They were all outstanding students who graduated and went on to get higher degrees and have really great careers. I can't see how this can be held against a person, if he/she actually proves that all that was needed for him or her to excel was a little boost.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 5:08pm

Actually, my question was regarding Sophia's original theory: that to attribute Obama's admissions to the Ivies to AA with no data to back it up is racist.

- NR409654

April 28, 2011 at 5:14pm

Then my response to sophia's theory (according to your reading) remains the same. How can it be a racist smear if it is a policy supported by special legislation and the people who benefit from it approve of it.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 5:23pm

That's great, Noga, but with respect I'd point out that that was Israel, a nation with a certain amount of lateral civic connection and community solidarity in its traditions. I may be wrong but I doubt there was a huge outcry at that particular policy for e.g. (I'm guessing here) Yemeni or Ethiopian Jews? Unfortunately, we are talking here about the United States, a country where a significant number of people live in zero-sum paranoia and believe that if someone gets "a little boost" it will always be to their disadvantage. So they develop a myth of boosts that take everything away from honest hardworking white folks and give it to lazy undeserving blacks.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 5:27pm

With respect, then, ironyroad, your and others' attitude with regard to affirmative action as a racist smear only confirms to those who suffer from "zero-sum paranoia" that there is indeed something illegitimate about the whole concept.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 5:38pm

Wait wait -- I didn't say any mention of affirmative action per se is a racist smear. That's a big jump. I was drawing some distinctions that arose out of your analogy and have to do with the historical landscape of attitudes to race there as opposed to here. Are you saying you think there's no difference between Israel and the US in this respect?

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 6:00pm

LOL, noga is spraying all over this thread with characteristic prolificity and lack of reading for comprehension. Reminding me why I don't especially miss the Spine. As to the Donalds' marital history, one does't have to be evangelical to deplore personal dishonesty and a utilitarian view toward relationships generally and women in particular. And last time I checked, evangelicals are allowed to vote in this country. As to whether claim Obama is the beneficiary of AA is a smear. A knowingly false claim about someone that is intended to harm them is in fact a smear regardless of whether it would actually represent something bad about someone's character. In the south in the 20s, claiming that a white politician had black ancestry would be a smear. The fact that this is the case doesn't mean that there is anything REALLY wrong with having Black ancestry, merely that there is in the minds of the recipients of said message. A smear doesn't have to be a false statement about *real* inferiority, merely about *perceived* inferiority.

- miceelf

April 28, 2011 at 6:02pm

What can I say, miceelf, I know you are trying hard but you are no icarusr.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 6:06pm

So, noga, a white politician in the south, in the 1920s. Their opponent claims that they have Black ancestry. Smear or no?

- miceelf

April 28, 2011 at 6:08pm

"Are you saying you think there's no difference between Israel and the US in this respect?" No. And that is not the focus of the discussion here, is it? I responded to Sophia's claim that "The Affirmative Action smear is straight-up racism." and I'm still talking about that. I only inserted the Israel record as an example of how people can and should regard this matter. Only if you accept that affirmative action diminishes the academic achievement of its beneficiaries can you complain that the charge of AA's education is a racist slur. My assumption is that AA is only valid for a short time, until the student picks and catches up on his or her own steam. If he doesn't do well, he will drop out, as many students do even when they get into university with a straight A average. I see not reason to bothered by these bogus accusations or even to take them seriously. If Obama did or did not get a boost then all the more reason to be open about it. Either way, he did extremely well. So why play Trump's mind games? As I said on another thread, sunlight is the best disinfectant. It's the appearance of trying to conceal things that makes them look suspicious. I remembered a short story by Guy de Maupassant that makes that point: http://www.classicshorts.com/stories/string.html "Maître Hauchecome of Breaute had just arrived at Goderville, and he was directing his steps toward the public square when he perceived upon the ground a little piece of string. Maître Hauchecome, economical like a true Norman, thought that everything useful ought to be picked up, and he bent painfully, for he suffered from rheumatism. He took the bit of thin cord from the ground and began to roll it carefully when he noticed Maître Malandain, the harness maker, on the threshold of his door, looking at him. They had heretofore had business together on the subject of a halter, and they were on bad terms, both being good haters. Maître Hauchecome was seized with a sort of shame to be seen thus by his enemy, picking a bit of string out of the dirt. He concealed his "find" quickly under his blouse, then in his trousers' pocket; then he pretended to be still looking on the ground for something which he did not find, and he went toward the market, his head forward, bent double by his pains." And needless to say, this mistake ends in a catastrophe.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 6:20pm

"So, noga, a white politician in the south, in the 1920s. Their opponent claims that they have Black ancestry. Smear or no?" Haven't you noticed that we are now almost a century later? And half a century after the civil rights revolution in the US? Anyway, whether a racist smear is intended or not, it is the reception that matters. If you treat AA as a racist smear, you are de facto admitting that there is something ethically wrong with this policy. If you respond to a person who has been openly anti gay rights by jeeringly pointing to a certain aspect of his behaviour or looks that may suggest he is a suppressed or a closeted homosexual, then you unwittingly re-enforce that person's claim that there is something wrong with being gay. After all, if you genuinely believe that there is nothing iffy about gayness, why would you try to insult the person with exactly the same kind of identity?

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 6:44pm

of course, and there's no vestige of racism in the US at all. I agree, it's the reception that matters. I don't think there's any thing wrong with affirmative action, you don't either. But let's not pretend that there's not a significant portion of people in the US who DO think there's something wrong with it, and they are the intended recipient of this, not us. But you either already understood this, or never will.

- miceelf

April 28, 2011 at 6:48pm

Understanding and empathizing with a visceral racist attack takes a level of humility simply not present in some people. Their narcissim is a shame, but ultimately their loss. I suspect our society may go to this base place for awhile, unleashed by this seasons ugly pandora's box of American stupidity named Trump. But I posit that we may have come too far to have it lead the day. Republicans have already lost Latinos for a generation, at minimum. They've never given the first shit about the African American vote, no one expected them to start now. But I have a gut feeling that majority of Americans of any race will come from our decent place on this and eventually recoil. He'll unleash alot of ugliness, damage, fear and loathing between his fellow citizens, another shame. But this is a nation where the majority of people now support gay marriage and repeal of DADT. Obama is manifestally a decent family man, as they say, hardly someone worth this treatment. I hope I'm right. Trump is such a stupid airhead of a man, such a joke in New York - considered a silly vulgarian meathead by all races and classes. I still can't believe how far the media has taken him on this garbage. This is really about the dismal state of the media more than anything else.

- WandreyCer

April 28, 2011 at 7:22pm

Mentioning Donald Trumps colorful marital history is an objective fact - and most people could care less about his antics. Assuming someone is judging him simply by bringing up a a clear political liability is about the person making the assumption, not the person stating the obvious. The Republican party has been tedious morality scolds on the personal lives of others for about 40 years now, of course his history is a valid topic for objective discussion of his chances at the nomination. Again, attacking the motives of the person mentioning the obvious says nothing about the person being attacked. Trumps stupidity is much worse. (Wait until you read an interview with Marla Maples - you have not heard stupidity until you've heard her. She's awe-inspiringly bone stupid, it should be fun to have her back).

- WandreyCer

April 28, 2011 at 7:31pm

Noga don't be silly, and/or disingenous. Trump is saying that Obama, because he is dark, only got into good colleges because of Affirmative Action and not because he is intelligent and deserving. It is code for "he didn't deserve to be there and the fact that he was in there meant some good ol' white boy didn't get to go." It's a dog whistle as they say, appealing to racists in America, who have come crawling out of the woodwork lately. It's code for "Obama is Stealing Your Birthright As A White Person." PS you know darn well why we have Affirmative Action, it's because of the appalling legacy of slavery and anti-black racism in the US, which has consigned millions upon millions of people to poverty, bad neighborhoods and poor schools because of their color.

- Sophia

April 28, 2011 at 8:31pm

PS, "intelligent and deserving" should be in quotes, I forgot. Because this is a fact: intelligent and deserving people of color, and also women, are theoretically but factually NOT EQUAL in America - still. Women only make $.77/$1.00 for equal work with men and the Republicans just shot down a bill addressing that issue. Go figure.

- Sophia

April 28, 2011 at 8:33pm

Wandrey as to Marla Maples, remember Ivana Trump: "Don't get mad, get everything!" :)

- Sophia

April 28, 2011 at 8:34pm

I'm not sure if it's the focus of the discussion, Noga, but you yourself offered the Israeli example, and I felt entitled (as it didn't come with a consumer warning label) to draw the distinction that should be made, indeed must be made, between the nature of social consensus in Israel as opposed to in America. So I'm happy to accept your comment that you "only inserted the Israel record as an example of how people can and should regard this matter" on its merits, and point out once again the boring but undeniable fact that the United States is a different country, where these things have a different and to some extent far nastier history.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 8:48pm

This discussion shows signs of veering towards that discussion we had when Marty Peretz made a statement about Obama being rescued by his generals. Apparently if someone like me does not see racism in such statements or puts a question mark next to the question as to whether affirmative action should be used as a marker of racial insults then she must be morally obtuse or just plain disingenuous. Thanks for that, Sophia. I won't forget the compliment, or the patronizing. I once linked to a discussion I had with an Arab blogger who said to me: Your kippa is showing ... . Ironyroad did not think it meant that blogger was an antisemite. As I recall he took some pains to explain to me that HE saw it differently. I guess racism is always in the eye of the beholder. And always when that claim somehow serves the beholder's view in some way. So what else is new?

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 9:24pm

Mice, any number of liberals and other non-conservatives think that there is something wrong with affirmative action, including our own John McWhorter. You toss off a non-defense of aa in one sentence and then move on. This will not do. Aa in the main aids middle-to-upper middle class African- Americans, and not poor ones. Even the fashionable radical and uneven academic and hip-hopmeister, Cornel West, favors class-based aa. There is the notion, quite plausible, that aa hurts those it is designed to help. All of this seems to have passed you by. No surprise there, though.

- liberalref

April 28, 2011 at 10:21pm

Nothing else is new, noga, as you QED'd.

- liberalref

April 28, 2011 at 10:26pm

I think racism is not "always in the eye of the beholder," but rather I believe it takes on distinct and provable forms in social intercourse. The fact that in some circumstances a kind of paranoia can take hold in which people see racism when it's not there is quite a different issue. As in that Woody Allen movie, when he's convinced the waiter didn't say "do you?" "He said 'Jew?'" There are hypochondriacs, of course, but their existence doesn't disprove the existence of illness. Luckily, or we'd all be in trouble. At no point did I ever say you were morally obtuse or disingenuous. I do think there are some things about American history, especially in regard to race, that you don't get so clearly. Marty Peretz? Now there's a different matter. I don't understand your reference to antisemitism and an Arab blogger.

- ironyroad

April 28, 2011 at 10:40pm

"I don't understand your reference to antisemitism and an Arab blogger." No, I didn't really expect you to remember. Never mind.

- noga1

April 28, 2011 at 11:01pm

How about the other points I made? The more relevant ones to the current discussion that you are apparently so interested in focusing on. BTW, to the best of my knowledge, I never made any comment regarding an Arab blogger that had anything whatsoever to do with defending or relativizing an antisemitic comment. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I'd like to see it.

- ironyroad

April 29, 2011 at 12:18am

libref, apparently you don't like AA and that's fine, but the discussion was about the reason for the claim that Obama benefited from AA, not the merits of it. Is there any evidence that Obama benefited from AA? What's the reason this claim is made, sans evidence? Any thoughts about that?

- miceelf

April 29, 2011 at 6:20am

"How about the other points I made? " What other points? You explained your view that "racism is not "always in the eye of the beholder,"". And then you proved your point by completely forgetting the example I provided (sorry, I can't find the reference though I tried). So what else is there to say? There are cases of dead serious racism but more often there are cases of people trying to make political hay from imagined racism (as "progressives" who are always at pains to argue that Jews are ultra sensitive about antisemitism, became very aggrieved by Sara Palin's use of the term "blood libel").

- noga1

April 29, 2011 at 8:01am

Perhaps this will jog your memory. I linked to this blogpost: http://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/herzl-was-an-anti-semite-in-disguise/#comments

- noga1

April 29, 2011 at 8:02am

Noga, I know, I remembered it earlier. I didn't say I didn't remember the case of the Arab blogger. I said I didn't understand the reference because I don't believe I made any comment that could have been read as excusing or relativizing antisemitic remarks or attitudes. My other point, for what it's worth, involves the very different history of race in Israel vs. the U.S. and why affirmative action might occupy a different niche in each country. It occurs to me that there's something very interesting about the origins of AA in the United States, but it's a longer topic and we're already on p.2. Maybe it will come up again.

- ironyroad

April 29, 2011 at 12:06pm