Why Not David French

Alex Griswold: David French May Be Worth Considering

In All Posts, Conservatives, Elections, Featured by Lorie Wimble2 Comments

Anyone who endorses David French at this point before he’s been vetted, interviewed, or even declared as a Presidential candidate is too wrapped up in their #NeverTrump blankets to see reality. Then again, anyone who dismisses French without similar research is also mistaken as Mediaite’s Alex Griswold points out.

Griswold doesn’t think French has a chance. He has no reason to endorse him by promising to vote for him. However, he’s also looking at the overall situation and realizing that there are plenty of protest votes to go around. Many who are currently voting for Donald Trump are actually voting against Hillary Clinton. The same thing can be said for Clinton “supporters” who are simply opposed to Trump. In this strange election cycle, who’s to say that French couldn’t emerge as the anti-Trump and anti-Clinton vote?

We don’t know what we don’t know. That’s the point. There’s no need to jump on a bandwagon that doesn’t have wheels yet, but there’s also no reason to dismiss him if you’re one of the millions of voters unhappy with either of the choices (or Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate). Give him a chance to announce his candidacy and receive the appropriate level of vetting before going in either direction about him.

Comments

  1. Pingback: Hillary's press conferences, two Syrian Christians, and Trump's Brexit: yesterday's links

  2. Ken Sears

    Questions:
    Does anybody else have the right to jump into the presidential campaign now, at this late date? Shouldn’t anyone presuming to run for the White House have been tested by the grueling process of the primaries? Isn’t it unethical to mess up Trump’s chances now by being a spoiler?
    Answers:
    1. Everybody has a right to jump into the campaign at any point up to filing deadlines, of course. It’s a non-starter to talk about who has a “right” or not. As for this “late date”, it’ s only the start of June. In most of the countries of the world, the November elections would still be a distant rumble of thunder coming from over the next mountain range. It’s America’s virtually perpetual presidential campaign that is the anomaly, I dare say the pathology.
    2. The primaries are intra-party affairs, entirely the creation, and process, of the political parties, and have nothing whatsoever to do with “the rules”, much less the laws, of our country’s election process. To assume that every candidate must “go through the primaries” is EXACTLY the same as assuming that the two major parties OWN, by some sort of law or divine right, America’s presidential election process. BULLETIN: they don’t.
    3. This man French wouldn’t be in the news if the GOP voters had chosen, say, Kasich or Rubio. Americans who can’t stomach Trump have a right to look elsewhere. Also, everybody who was in the primaries has been more or less lusting after the presidency for a long time. Isn’t there something to be said for a guy who WASN’T in the primaries EXACTLY because “the power and glory” weren’t on his radar screen? I’ve often joked that anybody who wants to be president must be a bit crazy…which doesn’t speak well of any president! But it does speak well of a person who really wasn’t considering it until the urgent need was pressed on him.
    4. Since when did it become the 11th commandment that “Thou shalt not vote for the candidate thou truly likest if thy vote risks making the candidate thou abhorrest the winner?” Since when have we all become beholden to stifle our minds, strangle our consciences, and vote according to the Orthodox Strategy? Is THAT what “America” means now? Please tell me it isn’t so.
    5. The hu-u-u-gest irony, of course, is Trump supporters fiercely objecting to anything that disturbs the time-honored PARADIGM, i.e., the script, the way it’s SUPPOSED to play out from this point forward–you know, all the Republicans-slash-conservatives faithfully line up behind the WINNER and march into November under the banner of “Party Unity”. So as long as Trump was still scrambling for the nomination, he exulted in being the paradigm-shattering bull-in-a-china-shop, not worrying very much who he slandered, smeared or vilified…or whether any of it had much basis in reality.
    Now, all of a sudden, “The Paradigm” is sacrosanct? Really?
    And we all have to get in line and say “Yes, sir”?
    REALLY?
    I don’t think so.

Leave a Reply