He Will Fight Them on the Beaches

trump winstonPeople have strong feeling about political leaders. They love ’em or hate ’em, so to speak. I, too, suffer from partisan-political feelings.

Donald Trump isn’t the very model of a modern PC gentleman. Nonetheless, I am inclined to believe that beneath his unrefined exterior he is fundamentally decent. I struggle to see how you can raise such accomplished and loving children if you are an outright jerk. On the other hand, I find Hillary Clinton thoroughly disagreeable. I believe that her actions rank with those of infamous liars, shysters and carpetbaggers of yesteryear.

Do you see what I mean? I am hopelessly compromised. And so are those in the other camp. When it comes to Clinton and Trump the gap between opposing views, as the Donald might say, is huge. I regularly correspond on politics with an American lady I met on a trip to Israel. This is what she wrote in the course of a recent exchange.

I’m simply flummoxed that someone as [over-kind compliment deleted out of modesty] as you would find a bloated, thoughtless, mendacious, self-aggrandizing playground bully “the only candidate for the times… the best candidate by far, not the least worst.”

Here is Jody commenting on QOL on a recent piece of mine:

Trump is a dangerous narcissist of the type the Phillipines people are dealing with right now; he’s every bit as vulgar, offensive and unstable as Duterte.

There will no meeting of minds on the character of the two candidates. There seldom is when it comes to presidential politics, but this time the order of disagreement is on a different scale. Trump is uniquely polarizing. For the sake of the argument let us say that he has some worrisome personality traits. The question is whether his foibles are fatal to being a good president.

I don’t know for sure. No-one knows exactly how a potential leader will perform until they assume leadership. Bill Clinton, for example, had a foible or two and seemed to do OK, particularly after his ‘pivot’ towards the conservative side. What is clear to those paying attention is that the times are crying out for ‘a disrupter’ not someone who offers more of the same.

Dwelling on personality must be put in context of the perilous situation facing America and, by extension, Western civilization. American voters face two starkly different futures. Here is just a taste.

Islam inside and out has to be confronted. Trump will do that. Clinton won’t. Allowing in job lots of  tens of thousands of Muslim refugees is a never-ending recipe for bringing the European problem to America. Once done it can’t be undone. It will metastasize and bring misery. No matter what how peaceful you know your Muslim neighbour or workmate to be, the goal of their creed is to take over. If you don’t get that, you don’t get anything — and your granddaughters will get what they don’t deserve.

The Third World’s population is rising rapidly as the West’s is static or declining. Strong and secure borders are required to keep out hordes of political and economic refugees. Trump will build strong borders. Clinton won’t. Don’t get that? Then face being inundated by welfare recipients and seeing neighborhoods change in ways that you won’t like. Keep your daughters indoors after that.

The US economy is in a mess, as are most Western economies. Even without a moment’s study of economics, or even with the dubious benefit of a course of study delivered by some left-wing economics hack, do you really believe that raising taxes and doubling down on environmental regulations will rescue the economy? Lowering business taxes and reducing regulatory obstacles, including on fossil fuel development, are the only effective tools left in the locker. Trump will use them. Clinton can’t. Don’t get that? Then you will see more industrial wastelands, more unemployment, more inner-city disenchantment and violence.

America’s military is depleted and depleting. Trump will build it up again. Clinton can’t and won’t. Think Russia and Eastern Europe, China and the South China Sea, Iran and nuclear weapons, North Korea and nuclear weapons, North Africa and Islamic terrorism, Afghanistan and Islamic terrorism, the Middle East and Islamic terrorism. Without a strong America mayhem awaits. Make the wrong choice and it might be advisable to build a well-stocked bunker.

Think the social fabric that made America great is unraveling? You ain’t seen nothing yet. Just wait a year or two after Clinton has refashioned the Supreme Court.

Periodically, history throws up unforgiving times. The year 1940 was an unforgiving time. Lord Halifax might have made a good British PM in 1940 if not for Hitler. As it happened, a man of singular talent, though not to everyone’s taste, was required. We live again in unforgiving times.

Some people say we can’t take a chance on Trump. I say we can’t take a chance on dumping Trump. Trump is no Churchill, but he is made for these times. No one else I can think of would be out there unashamedly, and rightly, prosecuting the case for coal, oil and gas, for building a wall, and for stopping Muslim immigration.

A final thought, apropos many white tertiary-educated women and others, including precious conservatives, whose sensibilities that ‘awful ruffian’ so upsets. Wake up in the morning with Clinton in the White House. Feel somewhat flat and resigned to Washington politics as usual? Well, if it happens, you helped make it so. Enjoy!

38 thoughts on “He Will Fight Them on the Beaches

  • Patrick McCauley says:

    A significant unspoken ‘aspect’ to Trump ( and Tony Abbot) …. is that they are ‘male’ … in the traditional – break through – penetrating – form of ‘problem solving thinkers’ … that most women are not. Men are on the nose – though they still retain the fundamentals necessary for the survival of the liberal democratic freedom making form of government that has taken ‘civilisation’ to its present zenith. Many of those who seek to make us ‘equal’ seem to have forgotten ( or devalued) what we already have. Trump and Abbot will close the doors – shirtfront the terrorists – and put the men back to work. Sensible women know this, and there are many who will vote in a Trump or Abbot … if for no there reason than to allow ‘feminism’ to survive.

    • prsmith14@gmail.com says:

      I agree with your comment Patrick. According to the polls, Trump is winning easily among men and losing easily among women. There seems to be a prevalent and misguided view on the part of many women, and among some men, across economics and politics, that what has been gained will be held as a matter of course. It can be lost. And whether feminists like it or not, the lot falls to men – and prominently those despised white men – to hold the ground.

      • Lo says:

        You guys are being a bit hard on women. Most women, many women? Perhaps you are right but gosh, you are generalising.

        • Lawrie Ayres says:

          He is generalizing but how many Golda Meirs, Margaret Thatchers or Boadiceas were there? Not many. History has been largely left to the men for good or bad and many women seem to like it that way so they have someone to blame when it goes pear shaped. It may well go back to the foundation of our species when men did the hunting and defending and women did the cooking and nurturing. Sexist? Probably in today’s thinking but not so during WW2.

          Trump is the only hope for the West because he is a man with many of their collective faults but also with their many strengths. Those so called conservatives who will vote for Hilary are so many turkeys voting for Christmas to be held twice a year.

          The left are terrified of Trump because he will very likely expose their shortcomings just as the SA blackout exposed the uselessness of wind power.

          What is bemusing is the corruption of Hilary that escapes perusal by the press. The left has formed a praetorian guard around her while attacking Trump; that, in itself, should ring alarm bells loud and clear.

    • Warty says:

      Vis a vis Turnbull I was an Abbot supporter, but he was not Trump: Tony was still part of the establishment, and engaged in his own Muslim appeasement events (and it also played a part, though not only, in his failure to pursue the appeal of s.18c). The problem is that our civilisation has gone beyond its ‘zenith’ way beyond, which is why cultural Marxism has infiltrated our schools, our universities, our police, our armed services and some of our churches. Trump may not be able to reverse the same in America, but he will have a bloody good go, and installing his own judiciary will be a start.
      Whether Trump is brash, makes faux pas, abuses hell out of Hillary really doesn’t matter a damn: time for being polite and measured has long since gone.

      • ian.macdougall says:

        Which only leaves one question, Warty: exactly how will the demagogues Trump “make America great again” without the devastatinmg consequences of trade wars that he is apparently oblivious to, unlike most conservative economists?

        Be careful what you wish for.

        • Warty says:

          Ian, I am sure you’re old enough to remember that similar things were said about dear Ronald Reagan, a ‘failed actor’, someone who ‘lacked the intellect’ to run the most powerful nation in the world. But he did, and they even use terms like ‘Reaganomics’ in relation to a man who was deemed a dunderhead. What Reagan did, as you know, was to surround himself with serious advisors, including possibly the best Secretary of State America has ever known. Strange things often happen to people once they have assumed power, something almost magical, and they rise to the occasion, and the nation is protected. I say sometimes, because I doubt the same has happened under Obama.
          I trust Trump will rise to the occasion, but I also need to point out, it is not about Donald Trump, it is very much about the discontent that has given rise to a Trump, and that cannot be swept under the carpet.

    • Olihamcam@hotmail.com says:

      I am a female reader and occasionally make comments on articles. I find myself mostly agreeing with male views like yours, Patrick, Bill Martin’s and Peter Smith’s. Jody in my early days of Quadrant reading made some excellent arguments but I just can’t understand how she could choose Clinton (even whilst holding her nose) over Trump. Pertinent points made by Peter and those who have commented in agreement. Obviously, none of us know how it will play out, but Clinton will take the West into a place where we definitely do not want to go.

  • Homer Sapien says:

    Trump is brilliant in surrounding himself with good men. Carson is one of them.

  • mvgalak@bigpond.com says:

    I do not , necessarily, subscribe to the view of “women as non-warrior types”, folding up in case of a danger, going to pieces and losing it. Think Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir, who did not shy away from the tough decisions and actions, necessary to ensure the survival and a military victory of their respective nations.
    On the other hand, the personal lasciviousness did nor prevent JFK and Bill Clinton to pursue an aggressive course of action, when warranted.
    The cryptic relationships both Roosevelt and Churchill had with their respective spouses still await the full disclosure. Both, Clementine Churchill and Eleanor Roosevelt had had rather close relations with the then USSR, exerting an extraordinary influence on their husbands’ policies. For better? For worse? Who knows…
    I do know, though, that Hillary is loathed by a large number of employed American women and is loved by those on welfare.The number, who supports her just because she is a woman is surprisingly relatively insignificant. I , therefore, believe that the separation line goes deeper and further than just a gender – it is about the future and policies.

  • bemartin39@bigpond.com says:

    Put superbly, once Again Peter!

    It is perfectly reasonable to be uneasy about a Trump presidency. He is an unknown quality and quantity. On the other hand, supporting or even just failing to be terrified of a Clinton presidency is an unmistakable sign of ignorant lunacy!

    • prsmith14@gmail.com says:

      You’re too kind Bill. Appreciate your comment. It is a hopelessly divided political world. I simply cannot understand how anyone of commonsense, in these threatening times, could contemplate putting Mrs Clinton with her lefty and Islamic mates into the White House. But the other side is equally convicted. And then we have the conservative never-Trumps who apparently would rather see ‘crooked Hillary’ installed rather than Trump. Go figure! We shall see how it pans out in November. I am keeping my fingers crossed.

  • Jody says:

    I stopped reading when I saw “fundamentally decent”. Can’t believe this comment!!!!

    • prsmith14@gmail.com says:

      Shouldn’t have stopped reading Jody, I quote you further down.

      • Jody says:

        There’s simply no room for doubt: Trump is mentally unstable. Again, more atrocious comments today – this time about people who have been given terminal health determinations. Seriously; he’s barking mad.

        • ian.macdougall says:

          I have a great deal of confidence in Donald Trump, and I live in the certain hope that he will at all times do what is best for the fortunes and interests of Donald Trump.
          Someone said the other day something to the effect that those who support Clinton include (a) those who have worked for her, and (b) those who have had business dealings with Trump.

    • bemartin39@bigpond.com says:

      Seeing that the only choice is between the two candidates Jody, would you actually prefer Clinton in the Whitehouse? If so, please refer to my previous comment for which I could not, in good conscience, apologise.

      • Jody says:

        There being absolutely no other candidate I’d have to vote for Clinton whilst holding my nose. It’s absolutely Hobson’s Choice for the Americans. And, unlike some, I don’t blame the Republicans. They’ve been divided for a long time but Trump has never been a Republican. The whole US model is broken, IMO. Too bad for them.

  • Another View says:

    Well said Peter.
    I’ve been following the Benghazi & email scandals via Breitbart and have been simply staggered at the politicking going on from the FBI, the Department of Justice. Add to that the Clinton Foundation. I don’t mean to sound like my Nan about city women running the CWA, back in the 60’s: “…but really, they aren’t quite the class you want running the show are they…” (I’d also like someone to explain why my hard earned Tax $’s were “donated” to the Clinton Foundation)

  • Keith Kennelly says:

    I had a bet just after Tony Abbott was knifed. I got great odds on a double. Trump as president and Abbott to return to PM within the next 4 years.

    Im not gloating(yet) but it’s starting to look like an astute bet.

  • brian.doak@bigpond.com says:

    Peter Smith sensibly spoke up for Trump while saying nothing about Abbott. Others have unwisely brought up Abbott because a moments reflection on his past performance reveals he and his roly poly jolly treasurer were conservative rockets that failed to launch.

    I think our best hope in Australia may be Peter Dutton with Christian Porter as treasurer. Dutton takes no stick from the ABC and as an ex-policeman will not feel the urge to arrest Pauline Hanson but as a fellow Queenslander may be smart enough to swap preferences with her [Abbott, one will recall, did the opposite on these 3 things and he really was a ‘wet’ conservative with his PPL and his no spending cuts for the ABC etc].

  • Jody says:

    My sister flew out for NY today to help with “Hillary’s campaign” at the election. She’s breathless about Mrs. Clinton’s feminist credentials (and her genitals). There’s no trying to tell her that Clinton’s brand of feminism is of the white bread, middle class, glass ceiling, opportunistic variety. You know, the kind where she berates the women who have had affairs with Bill. That kind of feminism. The one without dignity.

  • en passant says:

    Is your comment above designed to explain to us why you would vote for Mrs Pimp?

    • Jody says:

      It was designed to show that there are women about who are prepared to vote for somebody simply because of their gender and nothing else. Especially when they have nothing else.

      The broader questions which implied by all this are: ‘what is the future of the United States without leadership’?…’what roll will a vastly diminished US play in the free world?”….’what will it take to steer the US forward to prosperity and stability’?

      Some very tough and unpleasant decisions will have to be made to remedy the ills of the USA, and a government which is addicted to welfare and grievance, debt and open door policies simply CANNOT succeed.

  • Jody says:

    Just to clarify my views on Mrs. Clinton there is this!


    So, the stark choice for the USA is between a malignant narcissist and an habitual liar.

    • ian.macdougall says:

      In campaign mode, Trump seems to me to assume that he can reinforce the Mexican frontier with steel, concrete, barbed wire etc, etc, without any adverse consequences (for the US). Well, as a make-work program, it is probably better than getting those on the dole, relief, susso (or whatever the correct term is) to ‘work’ for their money by shovelling sand from one pile to another and back again, but only just. It will no doubt provide stimulus for a time for the Barbed wire, concrete, steel and associated industries, but it will be at the expense of the US, not Mexican, taxpayer. Moreover, when it is finally in place, it will not be privatisable. Big drawback IMHO.
      But the other big assumption is that he can cut US imports from China, with no consequences for the US. If Milton Friedman and F.A.Hayek were still around, they might have made a contribution to his awareness in that regard, though arguably it would have a proverbial snowball’s chance of sinking in.
      If Trump becomes POTUS, it will be party time. Said party will be as if held in a roller-coaster car; during a major earthquake.

  • en passant says:

    Your words were “There being absolutely no other candidate I’d have to vote for Clinton whilst holding my nose.” Trump is a candidate, but you still prefer the candidate who is a crook, a habitual liar, pay-for-play, incompetent, starts wars, gets good people killed in Benghazi, enables the sexual crimes or her ‘husband’, demeans and destroys the women involved – and claims to be for the rights of women, is big on welfare giveaways and incompetent on jobs, economics and energy, supports open borders and …. How hard do you have to hold your nose?

    As I said earlier, if democracy was working she should have less chance of getting elected than week old roadkill. Ah, but I overlooked the Jody’s of this world hold hold their nose to avoid the stinking smell.

    I won a bet on BREXIT, though I was not confident that the British would see the light. I am not confident on Trump, but how much would you like to bet on the outcome of an election in which dead people, illegals voting and anti-Trumpers give the HillBillary Mafia a head start?

  • dsh2@bigpond.com says:

    I agree with the arguments put by Peter Smith. Trump may be a vulgarian in this PC world but he has policies which America, and the world, needs whereas with Clinton we have a socialist crook with no morals and no policies other than to become US President. I realise that Trump is an unknown entity as a politician but he has shown a strength against some of the most vicious attacks and does not swerve to pander to the PC elites. He has also shown a slightly unorthodox choice in his running mate. Pence, who comes across as a safe pair of hands. If Trump appoints other capable people if he becomes President then the partisan lefties will be completeloy outdone.

    • ian.macdougall says:

      …he has policies which America, and the world, needs….

      And what precisely would they be? (NB: Vague waffle like “make America great again” hardly counts as policy.)

  • Don A. Veitch says:

    The GOP is doomed.
    If there is an ‘October Surprise’, before the election,
    eg: a Russian SS400 from Tartus shoots down a USAF bomber in a no-fly-zone after another US bombing ‘accident’,
    then Trump might win,
    and we move closer to the The Really Big War in the Middle East -the dream of war monger neo-cons since Bush I & II.

    However, as is more likely, the Presidential/Congress/Governorship elections will be a wipe out for the GOP. The Republican Party will collapse, the southern strategy is dead, not enough angry white males, GOP is un-electable. Americans are sick of pointless wars and Republican threats to shut down government.

  • pgang says:

    We are of the same mind on this Peter. Trump is America’s last hope now. With some luck and the grace of God he may even be the catalyst to blow the whole PC nightmare into oblivion.

Leave a Reply