Revisiting the Loyalty from the So-Called Basket of Deplorables

Social media reaction to President Donald Trump signing the 2,200 page $1.3 Trillion Omnibus spending bill for the remaining six months of FY 18 has been swift and sharp.  Many who want to Drain the Swamp lamented that Mr. Trump caved in on a spending boondoggle which made Democrat leaders like House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 11th) and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer quite happy.   But in the wake of this spending spree, Trump loyalists took to Twitter as “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their leader (sic)” with a tenacious and acrimonious approach.

Basically, Deplorables dictated that you are either with him or against him. No criticisms could be countenanced. Agreeing to the Omnibus may have been a bad choice, but what did you expect him to do when everything is arrayed against him. Wondering whether President Trump lost his legislative leverage was considered heresy and such nay sayers were implored to “Stop bitchin’ and get crackin!”.

Reflecting upon the irrational response of Deplorables, it was reminiscent of trepidations of a Troll Party takeover of the GOP as Mr. Trump entered the Republican run for the White House.  That analysis did not anticipate that Mr. Trump would be the last man standing after the Republican 2016 Presidential primaries, much less that he would win the White House that November .

If one were to try to characterize these voters, one would presume that they are previously dis-affected with the political process. Consequently, they seem to dismiss the present political process or are ignorant of the workings of the system.  The Trump phenomenon points to a charismatic ordinary man who is a successful non politician who is poised to shake up the system.

It is easy to appreciate Deplorables’  exasperation over how the political system is not working well, but when one dialogs with them about details of how to change, it devolves into populist platitudes or invincible ignorance about governance of our constitutional Republic.  Tellingly, one colloquy with such a Trump-eteer was summarized as: “pugnacious, smearing and ambiguous”, which seems consistent with contemporary experience. 

Sen. Rand Paul

When pressing for practical policies aside from the ambiguous “stand by your man”, there is a tendency of deflection.  It was surprising that one interlocutor tried to shut down realpolitik post Omnibus analysis by insisting one had no right to comment unless one had a PhD in Political Science.  

Rep. David Brat 

Yet a few exchanges later, the tenor had changed to insist that you have to do your own homework and you didn’t read the Omnibus bill.  Well, neither did Congress, but trusted sources like Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and Representative David Brat (R-VA 7th) had highlighted egregious examples, but then those pearls of wisdom were suspect because it was mouthing others’ opinions.

For a political junkie who is not part of the Establishment, it can be vexing to have what could be characterized as a dialog with the deaf.

In many ways, this voter segment was an able army in the 2016 election cycle, especially when the opposition was so antithetical. Viscerally, they were probably aligned with Steve Bannon’s “burn down the house” approach to politics.



With the benefit of hindsight, it is easier to see this nascent Troll Party (ironically nicknamed “The Basket of Deplorables) by Hillary Clinton, as being praetorian populists, who are inclined to advocate any line from their dear leader. While it would seem that Deplorables tend to be individuals previously alienated from the political process and who are oriented toward an instinct to "Drain the Swamp", this must take place with conventional politics under our rule of law system. It may be appealing for a President to rail against earmarks, but unless there is a constitutional amendment for the Line Item Veto, these obtuse budgetary battles carry the day. 

Ex Speaker John Boehner

Others who want to Drain the Swamp may well be the rump of Constitutional Conservatives who were instrumental in sweeping the GOP back into power in the House in 2011 and the Senate in 2014.  Despite their tenure on Capitol Hill, they have not successfully infiltrated Republican leadership (though they were decisive in declaring the chair vacant and ousting Speaker John Boehner from power in 2015). 

There have been other prospective rifts in the alliance between Deplorables and Tea Party types, most notably prior to the Schumer shutdown in February 2018, in which President Trump called the Democrats’ bluff about DACA and there was a brief budgetary shut down. Those of a conservative bent expressed consternation that Trump had abandoned his mantra to “Build the Wall” to regularize a large swath of illegal immigrants. Because Schumer was blamed, this did not cause a serious split among those who want to shake up the system. 

It is my supposition that President Trump’s acquiescence on the Omnibus cram down spending spree may precipitate a waning of enthusiasm among the conservative base. This six month funding of the federal government increased domestic spending by 13% while busting the sequester caps on military spending.  Fiscal conservatives wonder if the Federal government will ever really reduce its spending willingly and adding over a trillion in half a year is unsustainable and virtually indistinguishable from the Obama era.

Big “Build the Wall” backers will be chagrined at how President Trump’s primary election promise has been thwarted.  Sure, the Trump Administration brags that $1.6 Billion has been allocated and work will start the next business day.  But if one looks at the specifics, it’s half that amount and there are provisions that the funds can not be spent on any of the Wall prototypes that President Trump traveled to California to inspect. Of course, building the wall is currently estimated to cost $26 Billion, so the allocation is a drop in the bucket.  Maybe Mexico will pick up the rest of the tab. Moreover, despite the pugilistic rhetoric about fighting jurisdictions which thwart immigration laws, Sanctuary Cities received full funding in the Omnibus.

If the conservative base is less than enthused about supporting the Administration, things may become bleak for Republican majorities in the House and the Senate.  In the Senate, the 2018 cycle should be challenging for Democrats to achieve a majority, as they have to defend 25 of 33 seats up for election. But Republicans hold a slim one vote majority, and Senator John McCain (R-AZ) has spent lots of time back in his home state convalescing from acute cancer.

In the House of Representatives , a shift of two dozen seats will bring Democrats back to power. Considering the court imposed redrawing of districts in Pennsylvania, the GOP is likely to lose up to five seats. If Democrats take over the House, they are more likely to impeach President Trump on nearly any grounds rather than work with him.

Despite the apparent depressing of conservative enthusiasm because of President Trump signing the Omnibus bill, the Democrat National Committee and the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee are dead broke whereas the RNC and the RNCC are flush with cash. Perhaps the smart money is voting with campaign contributions.  However, as the 2016 cycle showed, money is not everything, otherwise it would be Madam President Hillary Clinton.

Some Deplorables are insisting on social media that President Trump has more cards up his sleeve about the budget, and proffer a prediction that Omnibus language is only a suggestion and that the Chief Executive will do what he wants, such as using the military to build the border wall.  If this novel approach was actually pursued, it would be enjoined by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a nanosecond and would give substance to Democrats filing new articles of impeachment. But it would gladden the heart of the Basket of Deplorables for a bit. 

Martha McSally on Courage

Today Rep. Martha McSally (R-AZ 2nd) announces her candidacy for the U.S. Senate to replace Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ). 

The Republican field is already populated by Dr. Kelli Ward, a candidate endorsed by Steve Bannon, and Joe Arpaio, the 85 year old long-time ex Maricopa County sheriff renowned for his tough treatment of criminal aliens who was recently pardoned by President Trump.

[L] Dr. Kelli Ward [R] Ex Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Arizona GOP candidates for US Senate

Although Democrats need to defend 25 of 33 Senate seats in the 2018 election cycle, including in 10 states in which President Trump carried in 2016, Republicans are worried about losing their slender control of the Senate.  Senator Jeff Flake's (R-AZ) decision not to stand for re-election puts another "safe" GOP seat up for grabs.

In some respects, the GOP primary might be made up of voters with trollish Trump-eteer tendencies (infamously redubbed by Hillary Clinton as the "Basket of Deplorables") who think that strong immigration stances are the way to win via Arpaio's reputation and rhetoric.  Kelli Ward had positioned herself to be a Bannon disruptor of the GOP Establishment,  but now is backing away from "Sloppy Steve" after his fall from grace in the "Fire and Fury" fiasco.  

Establishment Republicans hoping to avoid a repeat defeat akin to the Alabama special election, seem to favor McSally to keep the seat as she has legislative experience and is not an agitating lightning rod. However, when an ex fighter pilot urged her colleagues to "grow a pair of ovaries and get the job done", such a candidate might not be exactly safe for the go along to get along in the so called Senate country club in the District of Calamity (sic).

Does Fire and Fury Signify Nothing?

Author Michael Wolff bragged to BBC Radio that  his book "Fire and Fury" will help the public to see that Trump is the Emperor who has no clothes and that realization will end his presidency.  While that is great copy designed to stoke book sales, it does not jibe with reality.

Speaking of reality, consider "Fire and Fury"'s prologue, which admits that Wolff included contradicting narratives and many may be boldly untrue.  Including, it would seem, Wolff's supposed "interviews" with President Trump.  When a prologue basically states that he is just printing lies "in a Trumpian fashion" with no editorial discretion nor effort to ferret out the truth, it makes the narrative quite dubious.

Wolff has intimated that he has some of the interviews on tape.  If so, release them as the publisher Henry Holt takes two weeks to rush print a second edition.  Ex Trump White House strategist Steve Bannon had profane prognostications about Russiagate and scathing assessments of the First Family.  This sounds plausible considering the persona of "Sloppy Steve",and Bannon never really denied the quotes. It would be interesting, however, to hear his state of sobriety as well as put his charges on a time line.  Civic minded journalists anxious to impeach might want to facilitate testimony for Special Counsel Mueller.

Wolff thinks that books flying off the shelves at tony District of Calamity bookstores is a bellweather for the end of the Trump presidency.  But away from the talking heads circuit on the Eastern seaboard, it is unlikely that "Fire and Fury" is electrifying the public or changing minds.

On the one hand, those suffering from progressive Trump Derangement Syndrome will eat up the Wolff accusations, and other politicos will presumably buy books which soon after will be repurposed as door stops.  But they are willing to buy anything which comports with their confirmation bias.  

For example, a Twitter wag circulated a post about President Trump demanding "The Gorilla Channel" be available for watching in the residence on his first night at the White House.  



Even after it was disclosed that many Trump haters had been taken for a joke posting, MSNBC's Joy Reid insisted that it still rang true.  





And there was also the Los Angeles Times Op/Ed columnist who contended: "Why we believe Michael Wolff? Because, for now, it is too good not to". 

On the other hand, Trump's so called Basket of Deplorables will brush off any accusations against the 45th President.   And many Republicans who were not keen on Trump will see the liberal media campaign against him and have a "rally around the flag" effect.

It would seem that the major effect of the "Fire and Fury" rollout is the self-immolation of Steve Bannon.  At the 2017 Values Voters Summit, Bannon re-emerged after his ouster from the West Wing of the White House with a strategy of declaring war against the GOP Establishment.  That would be in alignment with the Trump "Drain the Swamp" rallying cry.  

[L] Steve Bannon [R] Judge Roy Moore

To that end, Bannon championed failed Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore. But Bannon's caustic comments in "Fire and Fury" towards his boss and the Trump operation at the campaign and in the White House exemplifies his "burn the whole system down" reputation, thus alienating him from Trump devotees.  Now Bannon is without obvious political allies and he may well lose his bully stick platform with Breitbart News. 

Even some scrupulous left-of-center friends wonder why Wolff's tome has drawn so much attention, considering his sloppy journalism.  It seems like the most plausible answer is that "Fire and Fury" is another means to feed the beast to stoke hatred against Trump. 

In order for "The Resistance" to prosper, it needs to maintain the Orwellian "Two Minute Hate" that inspired a half million women gather on the National Mall on January 21st 2017 to protest President Trump's inauguration as 45th U.S. President wearing "pussy hats". 

Women [Who Hate Trump] March, January 21, 2017, Washington, DC

But when that failed to engender follow-up identity politics mass protests, the emphasis shifted to Russiagate.  But after a yearlong barrage of "Russia, Russia, Russia" negative news against Trump, it seems that Hillary! 2016 campaign and Democrat operatives were the ones colluding with the Russian Federation.  The emphasis on sexual harassment did not turn towards Trump but instead implicated many liberal media and entertainment figures.  So now, it seems that the modus operandi is highlighting Trump Administrative infighting, cementing the man-child meme of the Commander in Chief and perpetuating the myth that Trump's end is near. 

"Fire and Fury" may not signify nothing, but the implosion of Steve Bannon might not have been the outcome which the Trump-hating industry would desire in the long run.

Stephen Bannon Declares War Against Republican Establishment

Although he opened his 2017 Value Voters Summit speech by echoing Ecclesiastes about the time of the season, former Trump Senior Adviser Stephen K. Bannon kept true to his street fighting instincts by declaring political war in a bombastic address to Evangelical voters in Washington DC.

Bannon voiced frustration that many Republicans in the Senate were either Janus faced or openly hostile to their President Donald Trump.  Bannon particularly took aim at Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Senate Foreign Policy Chairman Bob Corker (R-TN).



To wit, Bannon declared war on the GOP Establishment.  As Bannon is no longer shackled as a White House West Wing advisor, Bannon is free to support the Trump nationalist populist agenda from the outside.  Bannon intimated that he is working hard to primary many RINOs who do not support the Trump agenda.

Bannon claimed that there is time for Establishment sinners to repent, but otherwise he insisted that Deplorables will come after those not supporting Trump during the 2018 primaries.  

FRC President Tony Perkins at VVS17

This message was well received by the Values Voters Summit crowd.  A constant theme during the three day conference of politically active Evangelicals was "Drain to Swamp."  To underline that sentiment, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins honored his Louisiana roots and jocularly dressed in muck wear to open the Value Voters Summit. 

The GOP's Milo Test?

Last week, CPAC seemed to have scored a coup in landing provocateur extraordinaire Milo Yiannopoulos as the "Conservative" Political Action Committee's keynote speaker. Yiannopoulos was slated to speak about free speech on campus, as he was at the center of the UC Berkeley riots at the start of February.   

However, less than three days later on Washington's Birthday Observed (a.k.a. Presidents' Day), this honor was unceremoniously yanked from Milo, after Yiannopoulos made some statements which seemed to condone pederasty.  Yiannapoulos' book deal also was cancelled.

Many new to the political scene in support of President Donald Trump seemed ideologically enamored to Milo's in-your-face publicity stunts and alt-right rhetoric.  Whether this episode establishes the high mark for Alt-Right infiltration of Republicans or it underlines the tension between the establishment GOP and the so-called "basket of deplorables" nationalist populist wing remains to be seen. 

Ed Rollins on The Deplorables

At a Democrat fundraiser in New York, Democrat Presidential nominee Hillary Clinton (D-NY) labeled half of her Republican opponent Donald Trump (R-NY) as being a Basket of Deplorables. 

This created a political firestorm over the weekend and she tried to walk the statement back a bit, to little avail Judge Jeanine Pirro labeled this gesture as a "half assed" apology and elicited an angry animus. 

Trump supporter Ed Rollins took a different tact--ridicule.