We're All One Big Happy Uniparty, Cyberflirting and Making the Ha-Ha's

We're all TwitterFriendz here.

This is the Rule 34 of Cocktail Circuit punditry.

Meanwhile, Max Boot writes another Washington Post piece asking why Republicans can't just be Democrats.

You know-- getting down to the questions that Real Republicans are always asking.

I didn't read his article due to the paywall. Okay, that's a lie. I didn't read his article because he's Max Boot.

But @Molratty did. Here's her reaction:

Absent from this piece is any explanation of how Trump threatens the rule of law any more than some of his predecessors did. Kind of an important part of the argument, isn't it?

I'm one of those persuadable Trump skeptics. I'd prefer he wasn't the president. I'm not a fan of most of his behavior. I am open to the possibility that he's doing irreparable damage to presidential norms and expectations of conduct.

But it would take an extraordinary case to convince me he poses such a unique danger that I should generically vote for politicians with whom I vehemently disagree just to restore order. This piece comes nowhere near making that case.

Boot doesn't even try to make it. He just assumes you agree with him and then complains that people aren't doing enough. And, he doesn't bother addressing the problems with Democrats and their policies or why his concern about Trump should override those problems.

This is a recurring theme with anti-Trump Republicans. It's nothing but a rant. It's not persuasive and makes the person making the argument seem unserious.

...

I honestly think a lot of these guys are subconsciously driven by not wanting to be associated with "those yucky people." It's disappointing to see presumably rational and thoughtful writers sink to this depth.

posted by Ace of Spades at 12:37 PM

| Access Comments