McMullin's NYT Op-Ed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now look for Manchin and Heitkamp to bolt the party or lose their seats in 2018.

But then they are not east coast or west coast liberals so who cares?

They're politicians who want to be reelected. It's anyone's guess what they really believe, if anything g.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Very ironic a former CIA officer would claim to be interested in the rights of Americans.

You have no idea what the CIA has done to protect Americans - including you. Get off your high horse and move to another country if you feel organizations like the CIA aren't trying their best to protect Americans. Once you move, let us know how your rights are being "protected".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been following Evan Mcmullin on Twitter since the election and I've been very impressed. I'm a democrat but I would seriously consider voting for him. To me, he comes across as honorable and a thinker like Obama.

I wonder if you would have been as impressed with him had he not been opposed to Trump.

Well, I'm not sure how to separate the two in this case. I'm sure you are right because you can't really square his principled vision and defense of the constitution with what Trump is doing. My hysteria about Trump is not about policy. It's everything else. I'm honestly jealous of Trump supporters. I wish I thought he was great and this was good for America. Instead, I've been in a state of constant anxiety since the election.

Exactly. Liberals/progressives/democratics are neurotic and anti-intellectual. Every policy difference or political disagreement is a matter for utter hysteria and paranoia. Witness all those people actually breaking out into tears and throwing temper tantrums when Hillary lost. What immaturity!

And you think you people should be running things?

LOL

+1000
I have zero interest in this country being run by people who need safe spaces to process any slightly uncomfortable action.

Who are the hysterics again? Because it isn't liberals who are making up conspiracy theories and bringing rifles to pizza restaurants.

Ah, but it is liberals who are calling for the removal of the American flag at Hampshire College, or calling for the end of the electoral college (because their candidate didn't win), or posting tearful diatribes on social media (because their candidate didn't win), or calling millions of people "racist," (because their candidate didn't win). Unfortunately, nowadays liberals have become a running joke due to their over-the-top hysterical overreaction to this election.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been following Evan Mcmullin on Twitter since the election and I've been very impressed. I'm a democrat but I would seriously consider voting for him. To me, he comes across as honorable and a thinker like Obama.

I wonder if you would have been as impressed with him had he not been opposed to Trump.

Well, I'm not sure how to separate the two in this case. I'm sure you are right because you can't really square his principled vision and defense of the constitution with what Trump is doing. My hysteria about Trump is not about policy. It's everything else. I'm honestly jealous of Trump supporters. I wish I thought he was great and this was good for America. Instead, I've been in a state of constant anxiety since the election.

Exactly. Liberals/progressives/democratics are neurotic and anti-intellectual. Every policy difference or political disagreement is a matter for utter hysteria and paranoia. Witness all those people actually breaking out into tears and throwing temper tantrums when Hillary lost. What immaturity!

And you think you people should be running things?

LOL

+1000
I have zero interest in this country being run by people who need safe spaces to process any slightly uncomfortable action.

Who are the hysterics again? Because it isn't liberals who are making up conspiracy theories and bringing rifles to pizza restaurants.

Ah, but it is liberals who are calling for the removal of the American flag at Hampshire College, or calling for the end of the electoral college (because their candidate didn't win), or posting tearful diatribes on social media (because their candidate didn't win), or calling millions of people "racist," (because their candidate didn't win). Unfortunately, nowadays liberals have become a running joke due to their over-the-top hysterical overreaction to this election.

Let me help you out. Your Brietbart-loving jerk circle is not representative of the population. So your "running jokes" are just that. Your own.

[Anonymous]

Ugh. This whole thread is the evidence that centrist, moderate people *confuse* people on both sides. I am a centrist, and online (not IRL), I get confusion whenever I say something awesomely moderate, measured, balanced.

The most confusing arguments are being fought above. McMullin can't criticize because he ran against him? What? That means no credibility? Huh? Somehow there is a debate about the Bannon-circle-jerk? What does that have to do with McMullin?

NR wrote one slightly negative piece, whereas other authors on NR like him. He actually represents everything they stand for: intellectual conservatism.

Again, this thread = evidence for the craziness that is 2016. So so partisan. People cannot handle hearing an impartial truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been following Evan Mcmullin on Twitter since the election and I've been very impressed. I'm a democrat but I would seriously consider voting for him. To me, he comes across as honorable and a thinker like Obama.

I wonder if you would have been as impressed with him had he not been opposed to Trump.

Well, I'm not sure how to separate the two in this case. I'm sure you are right because you can't really square his principled vision and defense of the constitution with what Trump is doing. My hysteria about Trump is not about policy. It's everything else. I'm honestly jealous of Trump supporters. I wish I thought he was great and this was good for America. Instead, I've been in a state of constant anxiety since the election.

Exactly. Liberals/progressives/democratics are neurotic and anti-intellectual. Every policy difference or political disagreement is a matter for utter hysteria and paranoia. Witness all those people actually breaking out into tears and throwing temper tantrums when Hillary lost. What immaturity!

And you think you people should be running things?

LOL

+1000
I have zero interest in this country being run by people who need safe spaces to process any slightly uncomfortable action.

Who are the hysterics again? Because it isn't liberals who are making up conspiracy theories and bringing rifles to pizza restaurants.

Ah, but it is liberals who are calling for the removal of the American flag at Hampshire College, or calling for the end of the electoral college (because their candidate didn't win), or posting tearful diatribes on social media (because their candidate didn't win), or calling millions of people "racist," (because their candidate didn't win). Unfortunately, nowadays liberals have become a running joke due to their over-the-top hysterical overreaction to this election.

Let me help you out. Your Brietbart-loving jerk circle is not representative of the population. So your "running jokes" are just that. Your own.

PP here, and I never read Breitbart, nor does anyone I associate with. Believe it or not, plenty of Trump voters aren't the extremists you love to paint them as. Though it does seem the liberals have more than their share of fringe element extremists, doesn't it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. This whole thread is the evidence that centrist, moderate people *confuse* people on both sides. I am a centrist, and online (not IRL), I get confusion whenever I say something awesomely moderate, measured, balanced.

The most confusing arguments are being fought above. McMullin can't criticize because he ran against him? What? That means no credibility? Huh? Somehow there is a debate about the Bannon-circle-jerk? What does that have to do with McMullin?

NR wrote one slightly negative piece, whereas other authors on NR like him. He actually represents everything they stand for: intellectual conservatism.

Again, this thread = evidence for the craziness that is 2016. So so partisan. People cannot handle hearing an impartial truth.

+100
Here on DCUM, you're not allowed to be a moderate centrist, especially if you consider yourself somewhat conservative.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Surprised there isn't already a thread on it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/opinion/trumps-threat-to-the-constitution.html

I'll admit he seems to be working overtime to uphold the Constitution and call out the possible threat a Trump Presidency poses:

We cannot allow Mr. Trump to normalize the idea that he is the ultimate arbiter of our rights. Those who can will need to speak out boldly and suffer possible retaliation.

His twitter feed is also a nice respite from PEOTUS:
https://twitter.com/Evan_McMullin

I think he's spot on to point out these issues. I keep saying that Trump may do some good things for America, but in the long-run he is an undeniable threat to our democracy. Most of those who voted for him did so with the hope that he would not keep his campaign promises. He is accountable to no one. There's no way that's good for us in the end.

? I thought Trumpsters voted for him because they actually *wanted* him to keep his campaign promises. If this is true.. that they hoped he *woudn't* keep his promises, then I seriously don't understand why they voted for him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let me put it this way and it is an exaggerated analogy: if David Duke wrote an editorial about the hazards of multi-culturalism, I would not give his comments any consideration even if he cited some legitimate arguments.

This is not to compare McMullin to Duke but a critic has to have some basic credibility before one can take the individual's critique seriously.

I get your point, but I don't think it's an accurate analogy. McMullin, as I understand it, entered the race as a spoiler *because* he perceived Trump as a threat to the Constitution. It's not like this is his latest argument in a series of trying to discredit Trump. This op-ed sums up the entire reason he has opposed him from the start. If he were just a generic #NeverTrump-er, I would find your analogy more apt.

McMullin and other "never Trump" Republicans fundamental objection to Trump was that he was not a genuine conservative ..... and they are right about this. Trump has no fealty to any ideology which is both a strength and weakness. Their other concern was that he was not beholden to the "establishment" and special interests which made him less pliable.

His adherence or lack of adherence to the constitution was something that surfaced later.

As a former Republican, my concern about Trump was that he was a narcissistic whack job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've been following Evan Mcmullin on Twitter since the election and I've been very impressed. I'm a democrat but I would seriously consider voting for him. To me, he comes across as honorable and a thinker like Obama.

I wonder if you would have been as impressed with him had he not been opposed to Trump.

Well, I'm not sure how to separate the two in this case. I'm sure you are right because you can't really square his principled vision and defense of the constitution with what Trump is doing. My hysteria about Trump is not about policy. It's everything else. I'm honestly jealous of Trump supporters. I wish I thought he was great and this was good for America. Instead, I've been in a state of constant anxiety since the election.

Many Trump voters don't think Trump is "great." Instead, they see someone who may actually get things done. I don't care for Trump much, but I voted for him for this reason. He's not a politician and I'm hoping he governs the way he's run his businesses. With common sense.

As in outsource jobs and hire foreign workers to make things cheaper?

[Anonymous]

No idea what he might do. Total wild card. The only plus is that he *might* be ruled by some form if common sense. Common sense that both establishment parties have lacked.

And I hope our existing institutions, good people on the left and right, and the constitution will protect us from any encroachment on freedom. I'm trusting in those things more than ever. I think that's what McMullin was getting at. Remember the basis and foundation. Remember to call him out, politicians, even if it's personally damages you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No idea what he might do. Total wild card. The only plus is that he *might* be ruled by some form if common sense. Common sense that both establishment parties have lacked.

And I hope our existing institutions, good people on the left and right, and the constitution will protect us from any encroachment on freedom. I'm trusting in those things more than ever. I think that's what McMullin was getting at. Remember the basis and foundation. Remember to call him out, politicians, even if it's personally damages you.

OMG, this is the funniest thing I read all day.

Do you pay attention to the news, PP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No idea what he might do. Total wild card. The only plus is that he *might* be ruled by some form if common sense. Common sense that both establishment parties have lacked.

And I hope our existing institutions, good people on the left and right, and the constitution will protect us from any encroachment on freedom. I'm trusting in those things more than ever. I think that's what McMullin was getting at. Remember the basis and foundation. Remember to call him out, politicians, even if it's personally damages you.

I can't tell if you voted for him or not, but if you did hoping people and institutions can keep him in check that's really naive. The first line of defense against having the US government take away our liberties is the voting process itself. If we don't elect people with authoritarian tendencies, we don't have to hope we won't fall victim to them. It reminds me of the parable about the guy in the flood arriving in heaven to a confused deity after turning down a raft, a boat, and a helicopter claiming "God will save me".

[Anonymous]

I think we should all start supporting moderates on either side. People like Susan Collins or McMullen. Tweet your support as as an American, not as a partisan.
If Trump is the price to pay for a new era of moderates in both parties I will take it with joy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No idea what he might do. Total wild card. The only plus is that he *might* be ruled by some form if common sense. Common sense that both establishment parties have lacked.

And I hope our existing institutions, good people on the left and right, and the constitution will protect us from any encroachment on freedom. I'm trusting in those things more than ever. I think that's what McMullin was getting at. Remember the basis and foundation. Remember to call him out, politicians, even if it's personally damages you.

I can't tell if you voted for him or not, but if you did hoping people and institutions can keep him in check that's really naive. The first line of defense against having the US government take away our liberties is the voting process itself. If we don't elect people with authoritarian tendencies, we don't have to hope we won't fall victim to them. It reminds me of the parable about the guy in the flood arriving in heaven to a confused deity after turning down a raft, a boat, and a helicopter claiming "God will save me".

They voted for Trump thinking the alternative was worse. They hope the system can take care of the excesses of Trump; they knew it would not take care of the flaws of Hillary...and I can *sort* of see the rationale there.