There Is No Intellectual Case for Donald Trump Over Ted Cruz

Item one: Last week Donald Trump said he could pay off the entire national debt, roughly $19.2 trillion, in eight years — while slashing taxes. The Washington Post’s Wonkblog went to the trouble of running the numbers and discovered that Trump’s plan would require 24 percent economic growth, every year, for eight years. To put that in perspective, the previous record for growth was 19 percent in 1942, the first full year of America’s involvement in World War II. For Trump to deliver on his prediction, the economy would have to grow from $17 trillion to $90 trillion in only two presidential terms.

Or, as the Post put it, “There is math, there is fantasy math, and then there is Donald Trump’s economic math.”

Item two: Last week a fellow by the name of Mytheos Holt wrote an extended piece for The Federalist headlined, “The Intellectual Case for Trump I: Why the White Nationalist Support.” Holt’s piece essentially breaks down into two parts. In part one, Holt tells us in detail exactly how smart and well-educated he is. In part two, he proceeds to say a series of incredibly stupid things, culminating in an extended analysis of how Trump can appeal to a woman he calls “Sylvia,” a rather radical white nationalist (also known as white supremacist) who can apparently dig Trump’s alleged “pro-Western” philosophy.

Well, we already knew Trump had the racist vote nailed down. But there is a difference between a self-styled “intellectual” making a case for Trump and an actual “intellectual case.” An actual intellectual case depends on such things as facts, logic, and reason — all of which are notably missing in virtually any statement mouthed in support of the Donald.

We have long since passed the twilight-zone stage of the race for the GOP nomination. In one corner is Ted Cruz, arguably one of the smartest men in Washington, a person with unquestioned anti-Establishment street cred, a man who helped block the infamous Gang of Eight’s misguided immigration reform, a constitutional scholar, and a person with intimate knowledge of the workings of every level of American government. In the other corner is a man so completely ignorant — so completely venal — that his best rhetorical tactic is to bury his countless gaffes in an avalanche of insults and lies.

Even if one skips over the monumentally important matters of law and policy and simply stampedes straight to the political horse race itself, there is no logical or reasonable argument for Trump over Cruz.

Read the rest of David French's op-ed HERE.

If you like what you see, please "Like" us on Facebook either here or here. Please follow us on Twitter here.