More on Conservatives Talking Trump at Georgetown


Yesterday we told you about this public conversation at Georgetown.  Today we are learning a bit more about what was said at the event.  Here is a taste of Rhina Guidos’s piece at The Catholic Spirit:



Rev. Moore said Trump’s appeal was in his authenticity and because he says exactly what he’s thinking.

“I just think that’s false,” responded Ponnuru. “He doesn’t speak his mind, he lies all the time. … He speaks authentically if we define authentic as not being restrained by norms of decency, manners. Let’s be accurate about the actual phenomenon going on here. The fact of the matter is, it is a minority of Americans who will say that they think of the president as a good role model for children, that they think of him as honest, that they think of his as decent, that they think of him as sharing their values.”

Many have rationalized Trump’s behavior and minimized his flaws, Ponnuru said, and “it’s coming across in a way that is very bad for the future of the social life of Catholics and evangelicals” and widening an already large generation gap.

“What is the long-term trajectory that this puts us on as conservatives?” Ponnuru asked. “That’s an open question. There is reason for worry.”

Gerson said religious leaders, such as evangelicals, are not just another interest group, but are leaders supporting the reputation of the Christian Gospel. He said he feared the decisions some are making have alienated the young, minorities and are “doing some serious long-term damage” to the causes they embrace.

Read the entire piece here.

Ramesh Ponnuru, an editor at the conservative National Review, is absolutely right about court evangelical Johnnie Moore’s appeal to “authenticity.”

One thought on “More on Conservatives Talking Trump at Georgetown

  1. “Talking Trump” was one of Trump’s major advantages during the 2016 campaign. Whether he was actually “telling it like it is” is beside the point; in contrast to the other Primary candidates (except for Bernie Sanders), he CAME ACROSS as Blunt and Direct. Everyone else sounded like every word out of their mouths had been written by lawyers and spinmeisters and vetted by focus groups before being read off the teleprompters. In that sort of background environment, “Talking Trump” would stand out as being Blunt, Direct, and Authoritative.

    To me, the 2016 general election was one of those choices like 1932 Germany. In our case, a Cersei Lannister or a Benito Mussolini — you have to choose one! Both major parties succeeded in nominating their WORST Possible Candidate.

    * On the Dem side, this was Triumph of the (Clinton Machine) Will — no other Dem could be permitted to stand between Cersei Lannister and The Iron Throne.

    * On the GOP side, this was a couple decades of “I’M MAD AS HELL AND I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANY MORE!!!!!” finally reaching Critical Mass. In-Your-Face Messiah politics like Ross Perot in 1992, but harnessing a similar dynamic with a different base like Barack Obama in 2008. (In Messiah politics, an important thing is to remain a relatively-blank slate and let your most desperate base project all their Second Coming & MIllenial Kingdom fantasies upon you.)

    Any Dem other than Hillary could have beaten Trump by a landslide.
    Any Rep other than Trump could have beaten Hillary by a landslide.


Comments are closed.