Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

A prominent Republican friend of mine recently took to Facebook to blast Hillary Clinton for her previous attachment to a Chicago-based Community Organizer named Saul Alinsky, author of the book "Rules for Radicals". The book, published in the 1970s, is dedicated on the cover page to the greatest radical of them all - Lucifer.

As some of you may recall, Obama was a big fan of Alinsky as well and known to use his tactics, described as "The 13 Rules for the Left". I remember this being a big issue eight years ago during the 2008 election cycle. More importantly, after Obama won the election, I picked up Alinsky's book from the library so that I could familiarize myself with the tactics the Left used to win the election and see if there were any weaknesses in them. From what I could gather then, and believe still, there is no logical/rational/ethical way to combat Alinsky's attacks and still retain the moral high ground or a principled platform. In short, the rules result in a "win at any cost" style strategy that is the campaign equivalent of thermonuclear war - you will destroy your opponent, but you cannot escape unscathed.

Which brings me back to my friend's Facebook post. He used Hillary's affinity for Alinsky as a good reason not to vote for her. I can agree with that sentiment, but it brought to mind the rather unusual way in which the current Republican candidate rose to power. As I reflected on his methods during the RNC Presidential Campaign, it occurred to me that Donald J. Trump relied heavily on Alinsky's tactics. So effective was his use of the Rules for Radicals that without any political experience or any defined policies of his own, he managed to remove every other candidate from the field.

First, a review of Alinsky's rules:
Alinsky’s 13 Rules for the Left:
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (Are you feeling disenfranchised by the Republican Party? Fear not. Trump is rich and he agrees with you.)
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Above all else, portray confidence - even ego. The alternative looks weak. I'm Trump, I'm rich, I'm successful. I should know)
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (Wanna look good on TV? Why not go with a Reality TV star...)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (Conservatives, in particular, are very fond of living by a code of ethics - which is a key weakness to exploit by someone without any)
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (This was probably Trump's biggest tool - "Lyin' Ted" comes to mind - ridicule your opponent until he implodes, as Cruz did)
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (What did the people want? An anti-establishment candidate. What did Trump give them? An anti-establishment candidate who proved it by constantly bashing the establishment)
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (In other words, create new controversies to always stay in the news - this is Trump's forte)
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Twitter attacks at the rate of at least 8-12 per day kept up unrelenting pressure, and were amplified by injecting them with scathing ridicule)
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Remember Trump's threat to "reveal" stuff about Ted Cruz's wife? Never did, probably couldn't, but he hovered that one for weeks)
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign. (Continually assaulting Cruz's character led to his implosion)
11. “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Trump constantly played himself off as the underdog - as the crusader, the anti-establishment, the savior from hordes of scary Mexican immigrants, etc)
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (What was Trump's criticism of everyone else's immigration policy? That it wasn't strict enough. When pressed for policy specifics, he didn't have any - until he was nominated. Then he co-opted his opponents' policy) :-o
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This, again, is the core of Trump's primary strategy - attack the individuals. Attack attack attack! And, of course, make it as personal as possible)


In summary, Trump is the PERFECT disciple of Saul Alinsky, the Community Organizer who praised Lucifer and touted "win at any cost" strategies. In word, deed, and principle he has embodied the far left's tactics for seizing power. How else could he systematically destroy 15 reasonable candidates? How else could he have so little substance behind him yet still rally emotional support?

Conservatives are against Community Organizing radicals without morals, ethics, or anything resembling solid character and noble attributes. We want honorable leadership, not continuous attacks and shady backgrounds. This is the primary reason conservatives are against Trump and leaving the Republican Party in droves. The wolf is in charge of the hen house - which, consequently, is also on fire in an earthquake zone while under quarantine for smallpox.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

sorry, it just occurred to me that the above is horrendously long. My apologies to those who couldn't make it and my kudos to those who could :ymapplause:

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:A prominent Republican friend of mine recently took to Facebook to blast Hillary Clinton for her previous attachment to a Chicago-based Community Organizer named Saul Alinsky, author of the book "Rules for Radicals". The book, published in the 1970s, is dedicated on the cover page to the greatest radical of them all - Lucifer.

As some of you may recall, Obama was a big fan of Alinsky as well and known to use his tactics, described as "The 13 Rules for the Left". I remember this being a big issue eight years ago during the 2008 election cycle. More importantly, after Obama won the election, I picked up Alinsky's book from the library so that I could familiarize myself with the tactics the Left used to win the election and see if there were any weaknesses in them. From what I could gather then, and believe still, there is no logical/rational/ethical way to combat Alinsky's attacks and still retain the moral high ground or a principled platform. In short, the rules result in a "win at any cost" style strategy that is the campaign equivalent of thermonuclear war - you will destroy your opponent, but you cannot escape unscathed.

Which brings me back to my friend's Facebook post. He used Hillary's affinity for Alinsky as a good reason not to vote for her. I can agree with that sentiment, but it brought to mind the rather unusual way in which the current Republican candidate rose to power. As I reflected on his methods during the RNC Presidential Campaign, it occurred to me that Donald J. Trump relied heavily on Alinsky's tactics. So effective was his use of the Rules for Radicals that without any political experience or any defined policies of his own, he managed to remove every other candidate from the field.

First, a review of Alinsky's rules:
Alinsky’s 13 Rules for the Left:
1. “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (Are you feeling disenfranchised by the Republican Party? Fear not. Trump is rich and he agrees with you.)
2. “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Above all else, portray confidence - even ego. The alternative looks weak. I'm Trump, I'm rich, I'm successful. I should know)
3. “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (Wanna look good on TV? Why not go with a Reality TV star...)
4. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (Conservatives, in particular, are very fond of living by a code of ethics - which is a key weakness to exploit by someone without any)
5. “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (This was probably Trump's biggest tool - "Lyin' Ted" comes to mind - ridicule your opponent until he implodes, as Cruz did)
6. “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (What did the people want? An anti-establishment candidate. What did Trump give them? An anti-establishment candidate who proved it by constantly bashing the establishment)
7. “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (In other words, create new controversies to always stay in the news - this is Trump's forte)
8. “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Twitter attacks at the rate of at least 8-12 per day kept up unrelenting pressure, and were amplified by injecting them with scathing ridicule)
9. “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Remember Trump's threat to "reveal" stuff about Ted Cruz's wife? Never did, probably couldn't, but he hovered that one for weeks)
10. "The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition." It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign. (Continually assaulting Cruz's character led to his implosion)
11. “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Trump constantly played himself off as the underdog - as the crusader, the anti-establishment, the savior from hordes of scary Mexican immigrants, etc)
12. “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (What was Trump's criticism of everyone else's immigration policy? That it wasn't strict enough. When pressed for policy specifics, he didn't have any - until he was nominated. Then he co-opted his opponents' policy) :-o
13. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This, again, is the core of Trump's primary strategy - attack the individuals. Attack attack attack! And, of course, make it as personal as possible)


In summary, Trump is the PERFECT disciple of Saul Alinsky, the Community Organizer who praised Lucifer and touted "win at any cost" strategies. In word, deed, and principle he has embodied the far left's tactics for seizing power. How else could he systematically destroy 15 reasonable candidates? How else could he have so little substance behind him yet still rally emotional support?

Conservatives are against Community Organizing radicals without morals, ethics, or anything resembling solid character and noble attributes. We want honorable leadership, not continuous attacks and shady backgrounds. This is the primary reason conservatives are against Trump and leaving the Republican Party in droves. The wolf is in charge of the hen house - which, consequently, is also on fire in an earthquake zone while under quarantine for smallpox.
Good gosh!! What a force fit and melange.

First of all, you seem to be quoting Alinsky shown by your quotes, but where does the stuff come from after your quotes? I.e., how much of your enumerated items came from him, you, or someone else.

Just taking 12, he had very distinctive policy positions and hasn't really taken anything from any other candidate after he got the nomination, but has stuck to his positions.

A fundamentally flawed view of Donald Trump.

User avatar
rewcox
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5873

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by rewcox »

iWriteStuff wrote:sorry, it just occurred to me that the above is horrendously long. My apologies to those who couldn't make it and my kudos to those who could :ymapplause:
Much shorter than an Amonhi one!

I've learned that Trump has asked Arnold Schwarzenegger to be his leading General in the fight against ISIS. Trump is quite impressed with Build Wall!
image.jpeg
image.jpeg (148.15 KiB) Viewed 1506 times

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote: Good gosh!! What a force fit and melange.

First of all, you seem to be quoting Alinsky shown by your quotes, but where does the stuff come from after your quotes? I.e., how much of your enumerated items came from him, you, or someone else.

Just taking 12, he had very distinctive policy positions and hasn't really taken anything from any other candidate after he got the nomination, but has stuck to his positions.

A fundamentally flawed view of Donald Trump.
Sorry, should have clarified - my comments are in RED in the quoted section.

As per "sticking to his positions":

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/09/06 ... n-pt-1.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's a blowin' with the wind. He's gotta shift to a more moderate view to not chase off every thinking individual in America, and he's proven a willingness to do so. Look for more to come.
Fundamental: affecting or relating to the essential nature of something or the crucial point about an issue.
Tell me how any of my observations about his tactics are "fundamentally flawed".

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:
larsenb wrote: Good gosh!! What a force fit and melange.

First of all, you seem to be quoting Alinsky shown by your quotes, but where does the stuff come from after your quotes? I.e., how much of your enumerated items came from him, you, or someone else.

Just taking 12, he had very distinctive policy positions and hasn't really taken anything from any other candidate after he got the nomination, but has stuck to his positions.

A fundamentally flawed view of Donald Trump.
Sorry, should have clarified - my comments are in RED in the quoted section.

As per "sticking to his positions":

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/09/06 ... n-pt-1.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's a blowin' with the wind. He's gotta shift to a more moderate view to not chase off every thinking individual in America, and he's proven a willingness to do so. Look for more to come.
Fundamental: affecting or relating to the essential nature of something or the crucial point about an issue.
Tell me how any of my observations about his tactics are "fundamentally flawed".
You still haven't answered my question about the wording after the quoted portion and your red. Where does that come from?

IWS, another CNN quoter. But what does one expect from someone enamored of Gary Johnson, the faux Libertarian, social justice warrior.

As mentioned, you have a fundamentally flawed view of Trump and his followers.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:
larsenb wrote: Good gosh!! What a force fit and melange.

First of all, you seem to be quoting Alinsky shown by your quotes, but where does the stuff come from after your quotes? I.e., how much of your enumerated items came from him, you, or someone else.

Just taking 12, he had very distinctive policy positions and hasn't really taken anything from any other candidate after he got the nomination, but has stuck to his positions.

A fundamentally flawed view of Donald Trump.
Sorry, should have clarified - my comments are in RED in the quoted section.

As per "sticking to his positions":

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/09/06 ... n-pt-1.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's a blowin' with the wind. He's gotta shift to a more moderate view to not chase off every thinking individual in America, and he's proven a willingness to do so. Look for more to come.
Fundamental: affecting or relating to the essential nature of something or the crucial point about an issue.
Tell me how any of my observations about his tactics are "fundamentally flawed".
You still haven't answered my question about the wording after the quoted portion and your red. Where does that come from?

IWS, another CNN quoter. But what does one expect from someone enamored of Gary Johnson, the faux Libertarian, social justice warrior.

As mentioned, you have a fundamentally flawed view of Trump and his followers.
larsenb - the CNN link was a VIDEO; not an article, not even commentary, but an interview with Ben Carson talking about Trump's recent changes in immigration policy. He was discussing it. Or go google it yourself. There are numerous articles from the last two weeks about Trump's shift in policy - he's co-opting his former opponents' policy. Real original.

BTW your comment proves you didn't even bother to click on it. Thanks. Which beggars the question: why should I provide you more sources which you will not bother to read? You have shown several times now that you won't even digest a complete message before throwing up on it. Whereas you are more eloquent than Fiannan, your retorts are beginning to sound very similar.

Because I am a sucker, here is your source for the quoted section not in RED:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you click on the note next to the Rules, it shows that the portion I quoted is directly from Saul Alinsky's book, Rules for Radicals. Please try reading something before tossing out false accusations again. I'd recommend the whole book as a comprehensive study.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote: IWS, another CNN quoter.
"Trump’s Shift in Immigration Stance Echoes Obama Administration Policy"
http://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-shif ... 1472599365" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Is Trump Flip-Flopping On Immigration? Yes Or No, It's Sure Been Confusing"
http://www.npr.org/2016/08/30/491804727 ... -confusing" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Trump says he's open to 'softening' immigration laws in 'Hannity' town hall"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08 ... -hall.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Team Cruz on Trump’s immigration shift: Told you so"
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/t ... ion-227382" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In her new book, Ann Coulter says there is only one truly mortal sin Donald Trump could commit. As it turns out, he committed it the same day the book was released.
"Until the bleeding has stopped, there's nothing Trump can do that won't be forgiven. Except change his immigration policies," Coulter wrote in her new tome, "In Trump We Trust."
http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/26/media/a ... migration/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

oops don't read that last one.
ITS_A_TRAP.jpg
ITS_A_TRAP.jpg (66.16 KiB) Viewed 1469 times

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:
larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:
larsenb wrote: Good gosh!! What a force fit and melange.

First of all, you seem to be quoting Alinsky shown by your quotes, but where does the stuff come from after your quotes? I.e., how much of your enumerated items came from him, you, or someone else.

Just taking 12, he had very distinctive policy positions and hasn't really taken anything from any other candidate after he got the nomination, but has stuck to his positions.

A fundamentally flawed view of Donald Trump.
Sorry, should have clarified - my comments are in RED in the quoted section.

As per "sticking to his positions":

http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/09/06 ... n-pt-1.cnn" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

He's a blowin' with the wind. He's gotta shift to a more moderate view to not chase off every thinking individual in America, and he's proven a willingness to do so. Look for more to come.
Fundamental: affecting or relating to the essential nature of something or the crucial point about an issue.
Tell me how any of my observations about his tactics are "fundamentally flawed".
You still haven't answered my question about the wording after the quoted portion and your red. Where does that come from?

IWS, another CNN quoter. But what does one expect from someone enamored of Gary Johnson, the faux Libertarian, social justice warrior.

As mentioned, you have a fundamentally flawed view of Trump and his followers.
larsenb - the CNN link was a VIDEO; not an article, not even commentary, but an interview with Ben Carson talking about Trump's recent changes in immigration policy. He was discussing it. Or go google it yourself. There are numerous articles from the last two weeks about Trump's shift in policy - he's co-opting his former opponents' policy. Real original.

BTW your comment proves you didn't even bother to click on it. Thanks. Which beggars the question: why should I provide you more sources which you will not bother to read? You have shown several times now that you won't even digest a complete message before throwing up on it. Whereas you are more eloquent than Fiannan, your retorts are beginning to sound very similar.

Because I am a sucker, here is your source for the quoted section not in RED:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If you click on the note next to the Rules, it shows that the portion I quoted is directly from Saul Alinsky's book, Rules for Radicals. Please try reading something before tossing out false accusations again. I'd recommend the whole book as a comprehensive study.
A good idea when you quote something, is to accurately source it, instead of relying on someone clicking on a side link for an explanation. You're not being a sucker for clarifying what you posted; it's just common courtesy.

I read a lot of links. Some I don't, because I judge it a waste of time. Your thesis that Trump is following the Saul Alinsky rules is just another attempt to denigrate Trump, which is the name of the game for anti-Trump folks. I'm not really interested unless to comment how off the mark or spun the accusations may be. And yes, I could spend a lot of time going through each point and putting it through my own filter. This may help an outside reader, but it ain't gonna have any effect on a died-in-the-wall anti-Trump person such as yourself . . . or IA . . . or rewcox. Jason may be a bit more open, though.

I'm reaching diminishing returns on this effort.

As I've mentioned in a couple of posts, Greg Bell finally woke up to what he and others were doing with this regard, and actually wrote a fairly accurate piece about Trump and the people he resonates with . . . . as far as it went. Koudos to him. I seriously doubt you could ever reach a point where you could be as objective about the Trump phenomenon and those who support him as Bell became. Your animus toward him is too great.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote: Your thesis that Trump is following the Saul Alinsky rules is just another attempt to denigrate describe Trump, which is the name of the game for anti-Trump folks.
There, fixed it.

There's a connection between his primary campaign strategy and the Rules for Radicals. The real question is whether that was intentional or accidental. Neither excuses it. I believe if nothing else, the correlation between his strategy and the rules proves he is a natural at destroying good men for his own personal gain. That, again, is not a bonus in my book.

I don't think I could be any more objective than you can at this point re: all things Trump. You've made up your mind about him, and so have I. May he prove the benevolent unicorn of conservative ideals you hope he is.

It is of some assurance that 86% of Utah Republicans saw the same things I see. I doubt they will be any easier to convince than the rest of the voting population in the general election.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

Hey, wait! Where have we heard this before?
The Right has taken Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and shoved it up where #TheResistance don’t shine.

...Bizarrely, the guy who picked up the standard and carried it forward when our beloved commander was felled by fate was a New York billionaire with no identifiable ideological foundation who instinctively understood the one thing that could make up for his other failings: He knows how to fight liberals and win. For Donald Trump and the revitalized conservative movement, Alinsky's book isn’t some dusty old commie tome - it’s a lifestyle.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschl ... e-n2284892" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Called it. B-)

Even his main supporters admit he used Alinsky against the left. Am I still denigrating him now? Or are his supporters? :-?

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by Silver »

Hey, iWritethesongsthatmaketheyounggirlscry! (Are you going to hate on me for not providing proper attribution of copyrighted material?)

Just seeing this thread for the first time...

Would you please, pretty please, not disturb the slumbering Republicans? It upsets their worldview when you point out truthiness.

User avatar
ajax
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8014
Location: Pf, Texas

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by ajax »

Silver wrote: ...the slumbering Republicans?
Not really slumbering. They've gone back to their roots. The party of Lincoln was the big-government party of protectionism, industrial policy, civil-liberties violations, and war.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by Silver »

ajax wrote:
Silver wrote: ...the slumbering Republicans?
Not really slumbering. They've gone back to their roots. The party of Lincoln was the big-government party of protectionism, industrial policy, civil-liberties violations, and war.
You know what, ajax? I am always tickled by how you can correct me with the best material ready to go in an instant.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:Hey, wait! Where have we heard this before?
The Right has taken Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and shoved it up where #TheResistance don’t shine.

...Bizarrely, the guy who picked up the standard and carried it forward when our beloved commander was felled by fate was a New York billionaire with no identifiable ideological foundation who instinctively understood the one thing that could make up for his other failings: He knows how to fight liberals and win. For Donald Trump and the revitalized conservative movement, Alinsky's book isn’t some dusty old commie tome - it’s a lifestyle.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschl ... e-n2284892" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Called it. B-)

Even his main supporters admit he used Alinsky against the left. Am I still denigrating him now? Or are his supporters? :-?
Problem is, many of the Alinsky rules appear to be common sense.

kenedy
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 1

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by kenedy »

I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:Hey, wait! Where have we heard this before?
The Right has taken Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and shoved it up where #TheResistance don’t shine.

...Bizarrely, the guy who picked up the standard and carried it forward when our beloved commander was felled by fate was a New York billionaire with no identifiable ideological foundation who instinctively understood the one thing that could make up for his other failings: He knows how to fight liberals and win. For Donald Trump and the revitalized conservative movement, Alinsky's book isn’t some dusty old commie tome - it’s a lifestyle.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschl ... e-n2284892" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Called it. B-)

Even his main supporters admit he used Alinsky against the left. Am I still denigrating him now? Or are his supporters? :-?
Problem is, many of the Alinsky rules appear to be common sense.
So "denigration" is now just a "common sense" approach? You practically accused me of slander when I pointed out the origins of his tactics months ago, now it's "common sense"? Well, alrighty then. :-\

FWIW, I really hope he's everything you thought he would be.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

kenedy wrote:I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...
Explain?

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:
larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:Hey, wait! Where have we heard this before?
The Right has taken Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals and shoved it up where #TheResistance don’t shine.

...Bizarrely, the guy who picked up the standard and carried it forward when our beloved commander was felled by fate was a New York billionaire with no identifiable ideological foundation who instinctively understood the one thing that could make up for his other failings: He knows how to fight liberals and win. For Donald Trump and the revitalized conservative movement, Alinsky's book isn’t some dusty old commie tome - it’s a lifestyle.
http://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschl ... e-n2284892" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Called it. B-)

Even his main supporters admit he used Alinsky against the left. Am I still denigrating him now? Or are his supporters? :-?
Problem is, many of the Alinsky rules appear to be common sense.
So "denigration" is now just a "common sense" approach? You practically accused me of slander when I pointed out the origins of his tactics months ago, now it's "common sense"? Well, alrighty then. :-\

FWIW, I really hope he's everything you thought he would be.
Sounds like you may need to retreat to your safe space, IWS. The denigration would simply consist of you and your supporters trying to paint Trump black as supporting or being in alliance with Alinsky's goals/objectives. Which is simply not the case.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

iWriteStuff wrote:
kenedy wrote:I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...
Explain?
Additionally, tough for me to take someone serious who had voted Republican the last several elections, but this time around voted for Darrel Castle, knowing full well that this was effectively increasing Hillary's proportion of the total vote, vs. Trump.

This is an indication to me that your dislike/hatred/revulsion of Trump is so great that the above fact never bothered you. So, you and I are simply on different wave length regarding Trump.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by Silver »

larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:
kenedy wrote:I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...
Explain?
Additionally, tough for me to take someone serious who had voted Republican the last several elections, but this time around voted for Darrel Castle, knowing full well that this was effectively increasing Hillary's proportion of the total vote, vs. Trump.

This is an indication to me that your dislike/hatred/revulsion of Trump is so great that the above fact never bothered you. So, you and I are simply on different wave length regarding Trump.
That makes me on a different wavelength from you too, Larsen, and glad for it. You and the other Trump supporters, unable to defend Trump's words and actions, always fall back to your lame false dichotomy of, "Well, gee, he's better than Hillary."

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

Silver wrote:
larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:
kenedy wrote:I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...
Explain?
Additionally, tough for me to take someone serious who had voted Republican the last several elections, but this time around voted for Darrel Castle, knowing full well that this was effectively increasing Hillary's proportion of the total vote, vs. Trump.

This is an indication to me that your dislike/hatred/revulsion of Trump is so great that the above fact never bothered you. So, you and I are simply on different wave length regarding Trump.
That makes me on a different wavelength from you too, Larsen, and glad for it. You and the other Trump supporters, unable to defend Trump's words and actions, always fall back to your lame false dichotomy of, "Well, gee, he's better than Hillary."
Of course, we're on a different wave length, Silver. Are you just discovering that?

And no, I've been able to defend many of Trump's recent actions. I absolutely LOVED his latest press conference. I'm just not interested in playing your anti-Trump game. It reminds me too much of the Deseret News ( ;) ), which I've almost come to loath for their tendency to do the same thing.

And saying Trump vs. Hillary is a false dichotomy, simply underscores our differences. Trump had many, many positive positions, which he is attempting to follow through on. Hillary had zilch, with most of her agenda and goals on the negative side of the ledger . . .and is a thoroughgoing globalist/traitor and murderess to boot.

Silver
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5247

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by Silver »

Just billionaires looking out for billionaires, folks.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by iWriteStuff »

larsenb wrote:
iWriteStuff wrote:
kenedy wrote:I am not agree with Trump's decision here.He's totally wrong about that...
Explain?
Additionally, tough for me to take someone serious who had voted Republican the last several elections, but this time around voted for Darrel Castle, knowing full well that this was effectively increasing Hillary's proportion of the total vote, vs. Trump.

This is an indication to me that your dislike/hatred/revulsion of Trump is so great that the above fact never bothered you. So, you and I are simply on different wave length regarding Trump.
Funny, I don't harbor "dislike/hatred/revulsion" of Trump at all. I disagree with him and do not support him, same as I did six months ago. Perhaps you're too defensive of Trump to understand the difference between disagreement and hatred, but there's a world of difference and reasonable discussion is only possible when you understand it.

Please, re-read any post of mine and you'll see that I've never falsely accused him of aligning with Alinsky's policy goals. I accurately pointed out that his methods are the same. And now both you and the rest of his supporters agree with that statement and call it "common sense". Seems I haven't changed my opinion; you have.

Safe space? Seriously? I'm no liberal, I haven't complained/protested/rioted about the outcome of the election, and I've been watching very carefully to see how serious he is about achieving his central promises. So far, the "end the globalist", anti-Goldman Sachs narrative has been completely debunked. Goldman is closer to him than his own wife at this point, including the Soros disciple Mnuchin he put in at Treasury. He's even considering more Goldman guys to fill positions at Treasury. As per Globalists in general...

Wilbur Ross, Commerce Secretary, spent his career sending jobs to Mexico and China.
Rick Perry, Energy Secretary, is a well known "RINO globalist".
Rex Tillerson, "the very definition of a globalist" (Bill Kristol)

http://www.redstate.com/jaycaruso/2016/ ... lobalists/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.therightscoop.com/rex-tiller ... l-kristol/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Who is hiding in a bunker denying reality now? And please don't give me that "he hires globalists to fight globalists" garbage. It's pure nonsense.

Final thought: whatever happened to "LOCK HER UP"? Big campaign promise failure, and sadly the one I would have gladly welcomed.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10920
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: Trump's Rules for Republican Radicals

Post by larsenb »

Silver wrote:Just billionaires looking out for billionaires, folks.
You prove my point regarding your outlook on Trump vs. Hillary.

Post Reply