Trump keeps looking better

Donald Trump, with his extraordinary hair and orange tinted skin (which, given that he’s a Presbyterian, gives the name Orangeman a new meaning), was interviewed for a half hour by Sean Hannity tonight. The second half of the interview will be broadcast Friday night. Unlike the professional Republican politicians, Trump is alive, he says what he thinks, he freely (and amusingly) expresses his ego and idiosyncrasies (“I’m very rich, people will be shocked at how rich I am”), and he addresses issues the politicians avoid, such as Obama’s birth, and I think this is why he is receiving so much support.

Another promising aspect of Trump is his position on Iraq. In his reply to Hannity on that subject, he said nothing about spreading democracy. Instead, he’s unhappy that we invested so much in occupying and rebuilding that country and have gotten nothing out of it. He said that as a result of our weak policies there, the instant that U.S. forces leave, Iran, our enemy, will take over Iraq along with its oil fields, making Iran the most oil rich country on earth. He said that in exchange for all we expended in Iraq, we should have taken over their oil fields.

Whether or not that’s a realistic idea (I myself have suggested in the past that in order to become independent of the Muslim world, we may need to appropriate the Mideast oil fields), what is refreshing is that Trump approaches the problem from the point of view of America’s interests, not of some abstract ideology about democratizing the Muslim world at our own expense—not to mention the expense of the thousands of American soldiers whose lives and limbs have been lost in that insane experiment.

For background on Trump, the Wikipedia article about him is worth reading.

- end of initial entry -

Greg W. writes:

Trump is refreshing in that he is a what-you-see, what-you-get guy. He is not a politician. He could not care less about offending someone.

Where Trump is extremely rich, which may turn people off, he is also in some ways “Everyman” in that he says in public, on national television mind you, what the pusillanimous politician says only behind closed doors. He speaks not as a populist politician but as a populist everyday Joe. This will resonate with many people. Everyone knows Trump. He cannot hide behind rhetoric and doublespeak as many politicians can and do. He does not speak like a politician, and if he starts, people will know he’s being phony. This is a major plus for Trump, and he knows it. He is free to say whatever he wants, to attack anybody, because he is NOT a politician.

I’ve always thought that a businessman running the country is a great idea. Trump is certainly that. The problem I foresee is he is now not only a savvy businessman, but a celebrity. When a celebrity talks politics that isn’t part of the liberal paradigm, it’s seen as “who cares what this guys says, he’s a star.” Had he remained ONLY a businessman, I think he would have a greater chance. Either way, I’ll take Trump with his flaws over Huckabee, Newt, Sarah, or Mitt any day of the week. Why not?

April 15

The blogger OneSTDV writes:

I share your positive impression of Trump, but has he already started pandering to blacks? Salon reports:

Appearing on a radio show hosted by the New York Post’s Fred Dicker this morning, Trump took on the “frightening” level of support that President Obama enjoys from black voters, bragged that “I’ve always had a great relationship with the blacks,” and saluted Hillary Clinton—whose 2008 campaign against Obama was dogged by occasional suggestions that it was catering to racial and cultural resentments—for all the work she’s done for “the black population.”

He certainly doesn’t seem adept at this though—”the blacks,” “the black population.” I also like his criticism of the “frightening level of support,” as that’s not something you’re supposed to notice and if you do, you’re supposed to accept it as is or denounce it as a failure of racist conservatives.

LA writes:

In his interview with Hannity, Trump kept saying that China is taking money from us, but it wasn’t clear what he meant, and Hannity didn’t ask him. This, from the Wikipedia article on Trump, makes it clearer. I’ll quote the whole passage:

Trump’s political stances included the following:

* Pro-life

* Against gay marriage

* Anti-gun control

* Advocates for the repeal and replacement of Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

* Anti-foreign aid

* Supports a fair trade policy and believes generally that the People’s Republic of China should be considered more of an adversarial competitor, subjected to significant import tariffs as a response to China’s currency policy in order to help balance the U.S. budget.

* Believes the U.S. should disengage in Iraq and Afghanistan

Paul K. writes:

Today’s Drudge Report (4/15/11) tries to make Trump look foolish by reprinting what he had to say about Obama and George W. Bush immediately after the 2008 election, in which he had endorsed McCain.

Trump said, “”McCain, really, that was almost an impossible situation. Bush has been so bad, maybe the worst president in the history of this country. He has been so incompetent, so bad, so evil that I don’t think any Republican could have won.”

Of the newly elected Obama, Trump said, “I think he has a chance to go down as a great president. Now, if he’s not a great president, this country is in serious trouble … I think [Obama’s] going to lead through consensus. It’s not going to be just a bull run like Bush did. He just did whatever the hell he wanted. He’d go into a country, attack Iraq, which had nothing to do with the World Trade Center and just do it because he wanted to do it.”

I felt much the same way Trump as Trump did in November 2008 about the awful, reckless incompetence of the Bush presidency, as well as a certain hope—soon dashed, unfortunately—that Obama would try to rule as a centrist. I’m not sure that Bush attacked Iraq just “because he wanted to do it,” but he demonstrated very poor judgment.

When Trump says, “I’ve always had a great relationship with the blacks,” I think he may be on to something. He has the sort of forceful, in-your-face personality that blacks admire. Blacks certainly have little respect for the cringing, pandering, phony liberal; but then, who does?

LA replies:

Cringing, pandering liberals.

Andrew E. writes:

Not to brag, well yes a little bit, but I sent this comment to VFR in August ‘07:

“Why don’t we just take the oil fields? What are they—Iraqis, Iranians—going to do about it? Why ruin our entire army if it’s merely the oil weapon we can’t lose? Isn’t everyone—Democrats, Republicans—always talking about finding ways to end the wealth transfer to the Middle East? Problem solved.”

I look forward to Trump laying out his views on legal and illegal immigration. While a full, traditionalist position is very unlikely I think we’ll see Trump advocate effective, common sense policies. I could see him pushing for ending birthright citizenship and family reunification as well as favoring general and significant reductions in legal immigration to help improve the labor markets for U.S. citizens. Maybe Trump will get into some of that in the second part of Hannity’s interview tonight.

T. Craig writes:

Trump has been on the Michael Savage radio show several times. He answers questions directly, and has the same refreshing pro-America stance.

When asked whether he could beat Obama in the 2012 election, Trump had no doubts that he could win. He said that the difficult part would be getting the Republican nomination.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at April 14, 2011 11:08 PM | Send