Trump: “Let’s get to be a little establishment.”
In attacking Ted Cruz today, presidential candidate Donald Trump revealed exactly why I really don’t trust him, and consider him no different than Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, and all the other fake conservatives the Republican Party has been foisting on us for the last twenty years.
“You know what? There’s a point at which: Let’s get to be a little establishment,” Trump told the crowd at the South Point resort and casino. “We’ve got to get things done folks, OK? Believe me, don’t worry. We’re going to make such great deals.”
In other words, expect from Trump (who still is essentially an old-fashioned liberal Democrat) the same kind of horrible budget and political deals we been getting from the Republican leadership for the six years — doing nothing to stop the Democratic Party’s leftwing agenda.
Trump criticized Cruz for being “strident”, thus preventing him from compromising with the Washington leadership. To that I say, “Amen!,” and loudly. The time has come for some real stridency, not the verbal fake stridency of Trump, who sometimes sounds like a tough guy but in the end is going to endorse everything the Democrats have been pushing, albeit in a less radical way.
Once again, I must add, that should Trump be the Republican candidate, I will still vote for him. Trump is not the radical leftwing ideologue that is Sanders. Nor is he corrupt like Clinton. He will at least act to delay the worst leftwing policies, thus delaying the final collapse slightly. And delay is still good in this context, as it will give us an opportunity to right the ship later before it sinks.
On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.
The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.
The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News
In attacking Ted Cruz today, presidential candidate Donald Trump revealed exactly why I really don’t trust him, and consider him no different than Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, and all the other fake conservatives the Republican Party has been foisting on us for the last twenty years.
“You know what? There’s a point at which: Let’s get to be a little establishment,” Trump told the crowd at the South Point resort and casino. “We’ve got to get things done folks, OK? Believe me, don’t worry. We’re going to make such great deals.”
In other words, expect from Trump (who still is essentially an old-fashioned liberal Democrat) the same kind of horrible budget and political deals we been getting from the Republican leadership for the six years — doing nothing to stop the Democratic Party’s leftwing agenda.
Trump criticized Cruz for being “strident”, thus preventing him from compromising with the Washington leadership. To that I say, “Amen!,” and loudly. The time has come for some real stridency, not the verbal fake stridency of Trump, who sometimes sounds like a tough guy but in the end is going to endorse everything the Democrats have been pushing, albeit in a less radical way.
Once again, I must add, that should Trump be the Republican candidate, I will still vote for him. Trump is not the radical leftwing ideologue that is Sanders. Nor is he corrupt like Clinton. He will at least act to delay the worst leftwing policies, thus delaying the final collapse slightly. And delay is still good in this context, as it will give us an opportunity to right the ship later before it sinks.
On Christmas Eve 1968 three Americans became the first humans to visit another world. What they did to celebrate was unexpected and profound, and will be remembered throughout all human history. Genesis: the Story of Apollo 8, Robert Zimmerman's classic history of humanity's first journey to another world, tells that story, and it is now available as both an ebook and an audiobook, both with a foreword by Valerie Anders and a new introduction by Robert Zimmerman.
The ebook is available everywhere for $5.99 (before discount) at amazon, or direct from my ebook publisher, ebookit. If you buy it from ebookit you don't support the big tech companies and the author gets a bigger cut much sooner.
The audiobook is also available at all these vendors, and is also free with a 30-day trial membership to Audible.
"Not simply about one mission, [Genesis] is also the history of America's quest for the moon... Zimmerman has done a masterful job of tying disparate events together into a solid account of one of America's greatest human triumphs."--San Antonio Express-News
Hey Mr. Zimmerman,
Been following you on & off since I read your book on Apollo 8. I really appreciate your insightful political comments, along with your science-pursuits. Try and catch you on John Batchelor as much as I can, as well.
I was 8 years old in December of 1968, when my parents drove us to Florida to watch Apollo 8 launch. Most impressive thing I have ever seen in my entire life! To this day, I remember everything about the launch & the tour of NASA.
Keep up the good work!
Wayne
I think you are right on the mark…especially with the comment “no different than Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, and all the other fake conservatives the Republican Party has been foisting on us for the last twenty years.”
Remember, Dole was one of only two Republicans to vote against the balanced budget amendment (which would choked off his beloved gov. spending), and where federal debt. has increased from less than 5 trillion to ~20 trillion since then! And Romney essentially created Obama Care in Massachusetts. And Bush gave up on free market corrections with his bail out and too big to fail policy, which Obama then continued even bigger.
Trump says almost nothing specific and gets away with it…except for immigration, where I agree with him completely, and is the basis of his support. But he supported Obama Care, Blasio, Hillary and Bill, and any number of “progressive” policies and people. He now explains that as essentially ‘I lied to get what I wanted’. I think that says it all with regard to Trump.
I expect that if one were to look at his business record one would find that most people who deal with Trump get badly burned, and there is very little real productivity involved (someone has to lose)…but like any good con man, he usually skates off untouched , but richer.
Trump begins to lay out his foundation: Rebuild military, health savings accounts, balanced budget in 5 years (?),
take out Obamacare, realistic tax incentives to attract business and repatriate corporate funds to the U.S., reverse all of Obamas executive orders etc.
http://redstatewatcher.com/article.asp?id=4080
Like it has been said, Trump will be way, way better than any democrat in the race and probably better than most republicans. Many surprises, both good and not so good? You Betcha, as one shrill Alaskan hillbilly might say. It may be a roll of the dice but at this point and given his numbers where else might this go?
As I am writing this I am listening to the radio and it is being thought that Bloomberg will enter the race in the democrat party if Sanders is going to be their candidate. Bloomberg, who has been every flavor of candidate except conservative, was a pretty good mayor of NYC but his tendencies to be elitist, New World Order and dictatorial eliminate him for me.
I will still roll the dice with Trump, or Cruz.
The more I hear of and from Trump, makes me believe you Bob. Personally, I like Dole: Dole bananas, Dole pineapple—. The person that Trump reminds me of is Brian Mulroney. I voted for him and lived to regret it when he brought in the hated GST. From a large majority government, he lead the party to to two seats nationally under the puppet Kim Campbell. The debt continued to skyrocket and jobs flew out of the country so fast, it made the head spin.
So if world politics is any indication (and I believe it is) your doubts about Trump seem justified.
I bought into an amateur astronomy scam and the wording of no specifics and talk about how great things were going to be, lead me to lose. Trump reminds me of the scammer.
Cruz seems legitimate (for a politician).
However, I have said before that emotion will be the key factor in your next election and Trump will probably win. Will it be better than Hillary or Sanders? Probably. Concern is warranted!
This is one topic which I sincerely hope I am wrong. The USA is, right now, the worlds greatest hope for stability.
Looking at the brighter side, I think this turns out to be a bad move for Mr. Castro.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/julian-castro-possible-vice-president-218119
And while were all at it lets relearn to laugh at ourselves.
https://youtu.be/9cs9jP2ILOw
Robert wrote: “should Trump be the Republican candidate, I will still vote for him.”
Trump has stated that single payer healthcare works, advocates for a wealth tax, proposes tariffs, and says a lot of other things that “Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, Romney, and all the other fake conservatives the Republican Party has been foisting on us for the last twenty years” have not said or proposed. He is very different from the other progressives in the Republican Party, because he has never been or considered himself to be a conservative. He still does not claim that privilege.
I am OK with you choosing to vote for Trump, just so long as you understand that you are rewarding the dirty politics of the Democrats: infiltrating and co-opting the Republican party. When Democrats, such as Bloomberg, run as Republican, they are trying to ensure that no matter who you vote for, Democrat or Republican, you vote Democratic.
You may want to consider finding another candidate, third party or independent, who better conforms to your political views. Rewarding the bad behavior of the Democrats is not worth the delay of a day or two in the destruction of the United States that Trump would assure happens.
m d mill wrote: “very little real productivity involved (someone has to lose)”
Someone has to lose only when there is little productivity involved. When there *is* productivity, then everybody wins, because there is more to go around. If there is only one pie to share, then when someone has more, someone else has to have less. When another pie is produced, everyone can have more. Productivity good; stagnation not so much.
Romney did not create “Romneycare;” he only signed it into law while disagreeing with it, saying that it was what the people wanted. I believe that he should have forced the state legislature to override a veto; that is what politics is all about.
Cotour wrote: “Bloomberg, who has been every flavor of candidate except conservative, was a pretty good mayor of NYC”
This is the guy who wanted to tell you how large your Pepsi or Coke could be. He succeeded in forcing restaurants to stop putting salt on their tables. Crime increased under his watch. He did plenty of terrible, bad-mayor deeds as mayor. If Bloomberg is your idea of a good mayor and you think that Trump is not a Democrat (“Trump will be way, way better than any democrat in the race”), then you are not nearly as conservative as you think.
You certainly do cherry pick when attempting to make your points Edward:
“Bloomberg, who has been every flavor of candidate except conservative, was a pretty good mayor of NYC but his tendencies to be elitist, New World Order and dictatorial eliminate him for me.”
This is my entire quote, did you notice the extra words after “pretty good mayor” ?
The collective meaning of all of those words means that in general he was an acceptable mayor for NYC, I do point out that he is much too “elitist” and “New World Order” and “dictatorial”, not exactly how you characterized what I said, is it?
IMO a Bloomberg run as an independent, which is what he appears to be investigating, would ensure a win for the republicans, probably Trump. Trump is a more likable character than Bloomy. This clip puts Bloomy right up there on the uncomfortable meter with Palin.
https://youtu.be/O9KMgRamba0
I think you misunderstand me. I will vote for Trump if my choice is him and any candidate in the Democratic Party, including Bloomberg. If a credible third party candidate appeared I would definitely consider that candidate, but I also know that it is extremely unlikely. We are going to have to choose between the Republican or the Democrat in November. Accept it.
If Bloomberg runs as a third party candidate, then it is essential that the Republicans nominate Cruz, as this will be the ideal scenario to get him elected. The moderates and liberals will split between Bloomberg and whoever the Democrats choose, and the conservative will win.
At the point at which Bloomberg, if he is indeed investigating running, makes his move Trump will have already in theory won a couple of primaries beating Cruz and pushing him further down. The more likely scenario and not your ideal is Trump continues to steam roll the field and becomes the candidate. At that point he might want to begin indicating that Cruz would be his #2? But you can already see the problem with that can’t you?
Yes, Trump is talking about legally challenging Cruz’s entire validity as a candidate! This is all of course speculation, if Trump were to get to where he wants to be, and thats what it looks like will happen, he may have some relatively unknown for the #2 spot? I would suspect a very strong woman.
Note: He was very nice to Gov. Hailey at the SC debate, I could live without her also, from evidence of her state of the union response she is just a standard republican tool. So why was Trump so nice to her? She basically called him out, disrespected him, in her SOTU reply, and not in the nicest of ways. Trump likes “nice”.
And that will probably be the concession / deal Trump has agreed to with Prebis / the republican leadership if he was to lead the pack and become the candidate. Much like Reagan was forced to accept G.Bush sr., the party must have its levers of control in place given the unhappy nature of the citizenry. They do not dare lose all of their control.
And that will be Trumps first sellout, but thats how the game is played, you have to give a little to get a little.
I consider Mr. Trump more a populist than a liberal or conservative. Like him or not, he has a charisma that compels thousands to show up at his rallies. He taps into public anger at Obama’s policies and excesses. The demographic of his supporters is broader-based than any other current politician, regardless of party. If he was running as a Democrat, he might be leading in Dem polls as well. He defies political science. He horrifies the GOP establishment. Political pundits laughed at his candidacy for months; not anymore. He is arrogant, often crude, and hypersensitive to criticism. Other candidates are smacked down whenever they attack him. Putin respects him, unlike Obama, whom he has referred to “as a child.” My wife, a professional person and small business owner, is now leaning towards him. I asked her why and she replied, “He makes sense.” As a Whig, I don’t have a dog in this fight. But I concur with Bob. If the choice is Trump or a Dem, I would vote for the former, because Hillary or Bernie, among other things, would certainly appoint a lib to the Supreme Court if given the opportunity.
As Ted Cruz and his father says, by their fruits you shall know them. A vote for the lesser of two evils, whether it be Satan or Lucifer, is not truly a choice. You either play the rigged game by their rules, then get the liar and chief that they picked… Or support the person with a “proven” record that would uphold and support the constitution and the rule of law.
Supreme Court judges that he may nominate may never make it through the nomination process because of Rino (Republican in name only) and socialist democrats. They will need to be removed to bring this country back from the brink. (we know who they are, we have their voting record)
The primaries are important because they cannot falsify that vote. The general election is on a pre-programmed computer that I wish somebody would hack to find out who wins the election next year.
“Let’s make America great again” is starting to sound more and more like “hope and change”. Different words, with the same objective letting you fill in the blank with what they mean, being disappointed in what you got because it was nothing like the advertisement. Then they will blame you for the change that occurred because it was not what they intended. “This is not who we are!” “This is not American”
As a side note, I think Donald has found out where the politicians get their money and he’ll use this to bankroll the fence making the Mexicans pay for it.
Taxes paid to the Federal Reserve from non-entities on fake Social Security numbers are treated as donations. Undocumented workers pay hundreds of billions of dollars with no legal representation, paper trail or congressional oversight. US has no right or ability to regulate foreign citizens. (This is why the border has been wide-open for 40 years, free laundered foreign money)
This slush fund can be used by Donald, as President and leader of the party, to pay his builders and make himself truly rich building a magnificent fence! With the help of eminent domain, there will be no limits to what he can accomplish for himself, his friends, and the other corporate cronies that fill our government seats. As for the people, he will declare America great again… Probably by Executive Order, just to fulfill his promise.
So, if you vote for a snake or a scorpion, don’t be surprised if it turns on you. You knew what it was before you voted. ” it’s just business, that’s how things get done.”
One hand washes the other, and the blood swirls down the drain of forgotten history…
Please elaborate, why does a country not have the right to regulate its borders or foreign citizens ? (where are these foreign citizens from?) Who says a country has a right or does not have a right to do so?
” US has no right or ability to regulate foreign citizens. (This is why the border has been wide-open for 40 years, free laundered foreign money)”
Robert wrote: “We are going to have to choose between the Republican or the Democrat in November. Accept it.”
No, I accept that if Trump is the Republican candidate, we will be choosing between the Democrat candidate and the Democrat candidate, as Trump still is most definitely a liberal Democrat. He continues to think like one, because he is one — a crony capitalist one. This is why he proposes additional taxes, thinks that single payer healthcare works, etc.
I am asking you to not reward the Democratic Party, to not vote for a Democrat who runs on the Republican ticket. Choose a candidate who would rather do things that might help the nation grow instead of one who would prefer to bankrupt the nation for their own petty gain. If there is none, then don’t vote for the Democrat dressed in Republican clothing.
Cotour wrote: “did you notice the extra words after ‘pretty good mayor’?”
Yes, and my point was that he was not anywhere close to being a good mayor — pretty, acceptably, or otherwise.
Cotour wrote: “you have to give a little to get a little.”
And this is how we lost our liberty, in the first place. We gave a little income tax in order to get a little free stuff (those of us who do the paying — and we pay far, far more than we were promised — are still waiting for the free stuff). We gave our right to choose how to spend our own money in order to get lower cost healthcare (yet the cost only skyrocketed, and several other liberties were taken from us during the implementation of the supposedly affordable healthcare). George H. W. Bush even gave a little on taxes in order to get, in return, a little reduction in spending; but he never got the little that he was promised, and both actions led to his failure to be reelected.
Let’s stop giving a little, because we don’t get the promised “little” in return.
Negotiating with the devil is a losing game. He takes the offering and fails to uphold the agreement.
D K Rögnvald Williams wrote: “Hillary or Bernie, among other things, would certainly appoint a lib to the Supreme Court”
Trump is just as certain to do the same.
Max,
Is this the snake you wrote about? Trump pointed out this snake in a recent speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHIcVuqQgVo
Everyone,
There has to be a reason to vote. If it isn’t to get what we want from our politicians, then why do we bother voting? Electing people to represent our interests is the purpose, so let’s shake this defeatist attitude, stop rewarding deception and betrayal, and start insisting that our elected officials perform as we elected them to perform.
As Max said, when the choice is between Satan and Lucifer, you don’t really have a choice. Refuse to make the choice between tyranny and tyranny.
You apparently are suggesting that if Trump is the candidate, then you won’t vote at all. This is irresponsible and a cop-out.
As I noted, Trump is not the same as Clinton, Sanders, or anyone the modern very radical leftwing Democratic Party would nominate. He will not be what we really need, but he will certainly slow the process towards full tyranny and totalitarian government power. With that as a choice, it is essential to pick the lesser evil, as it will help delay the arrival of that full tyranny, thus giving Americans a chance to turn the ship around.
To not vote means you give up your power entirely, and accept defeat. It is this logic that I think gave us Obama to begin with, since many many conservatives refused to vote in both the 2008 and 2012 elections because the Republican candidate wasn’t perfect. Yet, those same conservatives also know that without doubt things would not have been as bad with either McCain or Romney.
Trump might or might not appoint a lib to the Supreme Court. Hillary or Bernie certainly would.
Robert wrote: “You apparently are suggesting that if Trump is the candidate, then you won’t vote at all.”
I will not vote for Trump. I will look for whoever comes closest to what I want, and if no one is right of fascism* then defeat is certain, We the People will shortly lose what little power remains, and I will not vote in the presidential race. Other than tyranny, what would I be voting for (alternate reading: “what do you think that you would be voting for”)?
You suggest that things would not be as bad under Trump, but a couple of days worth of delay of the final tyranny is not worth selling out to that tyranny, validating it with a vote. To vote for Trump is to give up your power entirely to Trump’s administration. There will not be any more opportunity to turn the ship around than we would have under Clinton, Sanders, etc.. Under any of those people, we have only two options left to us: the US Constitution’s Article V, and the option stated in the Declaration of Independence**.
But, I am OK with you voting for Trump, just so long as you understand that it is similar to the Iranian Deal. They still get their nukes, they merely had to agree not to announce them under Obama’s watch. With Trump, we still end up with tyranny, just a bit later than under Clinton, Sanders, etc..
Robert wrote: “It is this logic that I think gave us Obama”
Not if those who did not vote had believed that McCain and Romney were just about as left-wing as Obama and would also bring tyranny to the USA. If they merely did not think that they were right-wing enough, then your assessment would be correct. If they were single-issue voters, and no candidate fit their single issue, then you would be correct. However, since the Republican Party is behaving like Democrats, it is difficult to determine whether these stay-at-homes thought that there was a difference between the candidates.
* Fascism is often mistaken as right-wing, but it is not. NAZI Party is English for National Socialist German Worker’s Party. They were socialists, which is a left-wing concept. The confusion may come from the way that socialists in Europe viewed the fascists. From their point of view, the NAZIs were not left-wing at all; they seemed right-wing. From the point of view of Americans during WWII, they were far left. Today, they may seem right-wing to many Americans, now that we have moved so far to the left that even Trump seems to pass for a conservative — even to the point that some people think that he might not nominate liberal justices to the US Supreme Court, which is another sign of how Americans have lost sight of the liberty we once had.
Fascists are capitalists, but they are crony capitalists, not free market capitalists. They are willing to let the citizenry own their own businesses, but the government will tell them how to run them, rewarding businesses that are friendly and punishing enemies.
Trump is at least fascist, since he advocates for directing businesses as to how to run themselves. He would prefer to force companies to manufacture in the USA rather than to entice them with a free market environment.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fascism
** It would certainly have surprised the Founding Fathers that we went almost a quarter millennium without needing to do so, as they had estimated that a revolution would be necessary every couple of decades or so in order to keep our liberty.
I am rooting for one or both of the two political solutions to the tyranny that is growing around us: that the next president and Congress redirect the nation and that the Supreme Court finally realizes that its job is to protect our liberty, not the government’s tyranny; or that the states call a convention for proposing amendments.
After telling us you will not vote for Trump under any conditions, you concluded by saying: “I am rooting for one or both of the two political solutions to the tyranny that is growing around us: that the next president and Congress redirect the nation and that the Supreme Court finally realizes that its job is to protect our liberty, not the government’s tyranny; or that the states call a convention for proposing amendments.”
In the first case, I don’t know how you can dream the Supreme Court will rule in your favor while at the same you cede the power to name Supreme Court justices to the Democratic Party by your decision not to vote. As D K Rögnvald Williams noted in an earlier comment, “Trump might or might not appoint a lib to the Supreme Court. Hillary or Bernie certainly would.”. Moreover, but not showing any willingness to fight for your rights, you will signal to the powers in Congress (from both parties) that they have nothing to fear from you. They also will respond accordingly, which means your hope that they will “redirect the nation” is a hollow hope.
As for calling for a convention to amend the constitution, be careful what you wish for. The same people you despise in Washington are going to be damn sure that such a convention provides them what they want. And they above all will know how to manipulate a small gathering like that.
Much better to exercise your vote, even if you have to hold your nose to do it. Trump ain’t perfect, and I don’t want him as my choice, but he ain’t going to be as bad as you think. He certainly won’t be as bad as Clinton or Sanders.
Having said that, let me make it very clear that I am not a Trump supporter. My deepest hope is that Republican voters will see Trump for what he is, an old-fashioned Democrat running in sheep’s clothing, and vote for Cruz instead in the primaries. In the general election Cruz will easily beat Clinton, who is without doubt the worst presidential candidate I have seen in my entire life, or Sanders, who is so honestly socialist he will terrify the most casual voter.
It was stated earlier that Romney had “romneycare” forced upon him.. Not so!!
Romney always vigorously defended the Massachusetts health care system he signed into law .
That was his biggest problem…he could not seriously criticize the Obamacare calamity. He approved of the big (State) government health collective in Mass., which said a lot about his underlying philosophy.
Robert wrote: “In the first case, I don’t know how you can dream the Supreme Court will rule in your favor while at the same you cede the power to name Supreme Court justices to the Democratic Party by your decision not to vote.”
By voting for the Democrat Trump, I would be ceding the same thing; Trump is a Democrat and will rule as a liberal. Worse, I would be involved in doing it. Trump is not going to magically change his stripes if he becomes president. He will be the same liberal that he is now. His behavior may change, but his behavior now is one that is designed to get him nominated as a Republican nominee. Do not mistake the label for the man. Bloomberg also is *still* a Democrat, despite his 12-year label to the contrary. What is he thinking of doing if Democrat Clinton is indicted? That’s right, take her place.
I don’t dream that the Supremes will change their stripes, either. I just hope for a hopeless outcome, but that outcome most definitely will not come about if Democrat-in-Republican-clothing Trump puts more liberals on the Court. It *might* happen if an actual conservative puts Justices in place who believe in power for We the People, as the US Constitution spells out.
Robert wrote: “The same people you despise in Washington are going to be damn sure that such a convention provides them what they want.”
Look around you. These people are already usurping power at a record pace. A convention of the states gives us a better chance than we have now, and it can’t strip us of power any faster than the usurpers are doing now. The states are (literally and figuratively) much closer to We the People than those Washington “elites” are.
Robert wrote: “Much better to exercise your vote,”
Not if you are going to vote for the putz who will take away your power. The more people who vote in his favor, the more he feels empowered to do as he pleases. After all, as Obama once said, He won. Making a win larger just makes him more confident that what he wants is what you want, too.
Helping Democrats win as Republican nominees only encourages more Democrats to run on the Republican ticket. Thus, more and more elections will give you less and less actual choice. You end up forced to accept the Democrat — so what good was your vote in the first place. It is more like the Soviet Union, except with two members of “the party” on the ballot instead of one. For God’s sake, don’t encourage them to do that to us.
To not vote is a vote against all who are on the ballot. Since there is not a “none of the above” that would force a new election, withholding our vote from the undesirable candidates is the only other option that we have.
I am very much aware that you do not support Trump. However, voting for him at any level supports him, encourages him, and feeds his ego. It is when an elected official eke’s out a win that he becomes fearful of the voters. If you give him a large victory, then he feels that he can do no wrong, even if he were to shoot someone in a very public place, violate basic national security measures, or give an enemy the ability to have a nuclear bomb.
m d mill wrote: “Romney always vigorously defended the Massachusetts health care system he signed into law .”
He was against it when he signed it. With his signature on it, it became an albatross around his neck. To not defend his signature would have made him look the fool for signing it — although I think that he was a fool for signing it. He becomes emotionally committed to the bill.
As I said, since he thought it was not a good idea at the time, he should have vetoed it and forced the legislature to override his veto. To sign it is similar to voting for a candidate that knowingly will be bad for the country (once you vote for him, you become emotionally committed).
It has to take a lot of demonstrated downside, and a long time, for a politician (such as Bill Clinton) to admit, in retrospect, that some of his laws were not such good ideas.