Tuesday, January 09, 2018

Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to

Victor Davis Hanson is asking questions:
For all his gossip and intrigue, [Michael] Wolff offers little insight into why such a supposedly disruptive and dysfunctional campaign team won the presidency. The victory, according to Wolff, was to the surprise of Trump and his advisors themselves! The logic of Wolff’s argument is that a pathetic Trump team that did not really wish to beat Clinton, Inc. If true, that paradox would say what exactly about Hillary’s fate? That wasting a mere year to win something you do not want is preferable to spending 17 years scheming in vain for your life’s ambition?

Wolff’s ogre purportedly sloppily eats Big Macs in bed, golfs more than Obama did, has no hair at all on the top of his head, and at 71 is supposedly functionally illiterate. OK, perhaps someone the last half-century read out loud to Trump the thousands of contracts he signed. But what we wish to know from Wolff is how did his trollish Trump figure out that half the country—the half with the more important Electoral College voice—was concerned about signature issues that either were unknown to or scorned by his far more experienced and better-funded rivals?
And more:
Why did not a well-read Marco Rubio or later Yale Law graduate Hillary Clinton focus on unfair trade and declining manufacturing, illegal immigration, unnecessary and optional overseas interventions, and the excesses of the deep administrative “swamp” state?

Who discovered these issues or knew how to develop them? Was it really the feisty Corey Lewandowski? The genius Paul Manafort? How, then, could Wolff’s idiot grasp that these concerns were the keys to flipping purple swing-states that had previously been written off as reliably Democratically patronized clinger/irredeemable/deplorable territory by far better informed and more tech-savvy campaign operatives?
Wolff doesn't care about any of that, really. We just need to know the Leader of the Free World is icky. We did know all that -- Le Grand Orange has been in the news since the early 1980s -- yet he got millions of people to vote for him. Why? Hanson is not done asking questions:
Furthermore, given that Wolff argues that the Trump inner circle seems to be little different from the Trump of “The Apprentice” reality TV fame, why, then, would half the country vote for someone who has orange skin and combed over yellow hair, and is supposedly paranoid to the degree of eating junk food out of fear of being poisoned?

What does that ribaldry say about the voters lack of confidence in the more normal Harvard or Yale Law alternative nursery of properly schooled presidents? Is Trump’s crudity tolerable given the 2016 alternative of breaking federal law by setting up a home-cooked email server, and lying about it, but doing so with the fawning admiration of bicoastal elite culture?

If, in reductionist terms, half of the country accepted the crude antithesis of refined New York-Washington establishment expertise, why exactly was that?
I've come to believe what's happening here is an exercise in negation, a Goodbye To All That to technocracy and the cult of expertise that has been building along the Potomac since Herbert Hoover, or even Woodrow Wilson. If the meritocracy has no evident merit, the whole thing collapses.

6 comments:

jerrye92002 said...

I think the answer is that DC was not a meritocracy but an aristocracy who ruled by divine right (in their minds). After about three generations of inbreeding, you are bound to end up with idiots for rulers.

R.A. Crankbait said...

Yet the campaign colluded with the Russians to win an election that they didn't want to win?

Now that the pseudo-meritocracy model has been ash-canned, Oprah Winfrey is your next president. Followed by President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGUNPMPrxvA

Mr. D said...

Yet the campaign colluded with the Russians to win an election that they didn't want to win?

I assume that's nuance. It may seem like cognitive dissonance, but that’s because we’re lacking in nuance. It’s a meritocracy thing; you wouldn’t understand.

Gino said...

jerrye has is right on the nail head. everybody in DC is related to somebody else in DC, or from DC, or were born into their aristocracy. much like Hollywood, actually.

Bike Bubba said...

Well said on all the "things Wolff says that cannot be believed." One might infer that the leftist media either thinks that we can't tell, or worse yet they can't tell themselves. I don't know which is scarier, really.

jerrye92002 said...

What is scariest is that a lot of people believe what these highly accomplished liars tell them.