You Should Really Watch the Trump Gettysburg Address

Longtime readers know that I am not a fan of the Trump candidacy or the rise of populism/progressivism in American politics over the last eight years.  There is a great deal that I disagree with Trump on — his connection to Planned Parenthood executives, his anti-immigrant stance, his opposition to free trade.

…but you really need to watch this (fast forward to the 1:35:55 mark).

If you ever wanted to know what a sober, measured, patient version of Trump would have looked like?  Here it is.

Trump doesn’t back down on his themes, but it is perhaps the most articulate and clear exposition of the Trump movement contra the political left in America.

Run it in the background for 30 minutes.  It really is worth your time.

  • Stephen Spiker

    Highlights (all from after the 1:35 marker):

    — We’re going to bring back jobs and factories. (No, you’re not)

    — We’re bringing in thousands of people, we have no idea who they are. (No, we’re not)

    — Voter fraud is widespread and massive (no, its not)

    — Hillary Clinton should have been barred from running for office

    — Free trade is horrible

    — Increase federal government spending

    Yeah, no thanks.

    • Taipei101

      um… thanks Stephen… but we’re all stocked up on corruption and lies in America… go sell Clinton’s establishment somewhere else

      • He’s not. He’s trying to sell mainstream conservatism.

        • Jean Baptiste Bellegarde

          It what Stephen’s selling is mainstream conservatism, I’ll pass.

          • Stephen Spiker

            I’m selling limited government and fiscal responsibility. Good luck with passing.

          • Jean Baptiste Bellegarde

            Unfortunately what passes for Republican these days limited government and fiscal responsibility are talking points for campaign purposes. It sure the hell ain’t how they legislate once in office…

          • Stephen Spiker

            Whether that’s true or not, doesn’t make someone who doesn’t even campaign on limited government or fiscal responsibility a conservative.

          • H G


            You’re vote will favor Hillary. Period.
            No fiscally responsible, limited gov’t voter would ever do that.

          • Stephen Spiker

            So the fiscally responsible, limited government thing to do is to support one big government spender over another?

            That’s just silly.

          • H G


            You support the better of the two.

          • It’s not for everybody.

          • H G

            Apparently it’s not for BD authors.

          • You can’t help yourself, can you?

          • H G

            Calling it like this conservative sees it.

    • It would be nice for Shaun Kenney to respond to this comment.

    • H G

      No conservative would be so wrong about Trump or his plan.

      Hillary is the flawed candidate, tested and failed official, the criminal politician in the race. You probably didn’t know that.

      • Stephen Spiker

        Hillary being bad doesn’t make Trump better.

        • H G

          Sure it does. It makes Trump far, far better than Hillary.

  • old_redneck

    Do you wake up each morning and swallow a handful of stupid pills?

    I listened to the speech live. Then listened to it again. Thank God I listened on an empty stomach.

    Same old crap.

    Trump’s presence at Gettysburg defiled hallowed ground.

    Here’s more analysis of the Trump speech.

    • John Frank Reacher

      Lincoln was far more of an actual racist than even the media portrays Trump to be.

      • Scout

        And . . . ?

        Lincoln was an early to mid-19th Century American from border states. Trump is an Ivy-League educated, 21st Century New Yorker. Lincoln’s moral genius was that he could say clearly, at a time and in places where the thought wasn’t popular, that slavery was a moral evil whose spread throughout the growing nation could not be countenanced. That was a visionary, clear-headed, courageous position.

        What is Trump’s position of moral courage?

        • John Frank Reacher

          Fair points, but Lincoln was also an ardent segregationist.

          • Scout

            Again, so what? He was a product of his times. He was morally and ethically advanced compared to his contemporaries and had the intellect and political spine to campaign on his beliefs. The evils of segregation were products of Jim Crow and the Dixiecrats, many of the descendants of whom somehow were allowed to find their way into the Party of Lincoln in recent decades. Lincoln was long dead before all that came into view.

            I can’t imagine why you think that is a point that has any meaning whatsoever, particularly in our times.

          • John Frank Reacher

            To my knowledge, Mr. Trump has never been an ardent segregationist. So, as an apples-to-apples comparison — Mr. Trump is MLK Jr. compared to Abe Lincoln.

            So what if Lincoln was a product of “his times”?

          • Scout

            incredibly ignorant historical present-ism. Comparing Lincoln unfavorably to Trump on issues of political moral courage is as counter-factual as so much of what Trump says at his rallies. “Apples-to apples” my arse. The only way I can explain how this kind of thing can be uttered by literate people is a complete lack of historical knowledge. This is like saying that Trump is a Nobel-calibre molecular biologist because he knows more about germ theory than did Pasteur at the beginning of his career.

  • John Frank Reacher


  • Lawrence Wood

    Even way back in Iowa while working for one of the “failed fifteen” it was apparent to me that with Trump there was the message and the messenger. Some will say there is no such thing but alas that view of politics is of the rather unsophisticated variety often found among consistent electoral losers and hard core right wing religious social conservatives awaiting their political messiah.

    For the rest of us and most modern voters today we aren’t in my opinion looking for perfection we are looking for policy solutions. All to frequently today (lately always) we receive neither. Will Trump be effective in delivering on all 28 of his message points, of course not, as you may notice quite a few include the descriptor “working with Congress”, something he readily acknowledges.

    Isn’t this in and of it’s self a giant leap forward from Obama’s rule by executive order if you can look past the man and evaluate just the checks and balance message he is projecting? Many would say, NO never, and that is their prerogative, but if you are expecting something more personally palatable to miraculously appear on your ballot Tuesday, Nov. 8th, it of course as you well realize, is not going to happen.

    There is one other interesting spin off to this rejection of the man vs the message choice and that is if you are a political operative and expect the statewide voter base to grudgingly accept “your proposed” man’s message when they have no real motivation to vote for the man himself you have effectively cut your own ground out from beneath your plea by your past choices and actions. Not a smart move in my opinion, but then of course everyone has one, opinion that is, but if you job is pushing winning candidates across the finish line sometimes it’s best to just keep them to yourself.

    • Stephen Spiker

      Why should we believe that Trump will be better than Obama on ruling by Executive Order, when Trump has explicitly promised to do more of the same?

      • Lawrence Wood

        Somewhere in the middle of this Gettysburg speech around statement fourteen or fifteenth I believe he addressed EOs by claiming he would “Cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama”.

        So will he then be able and willing to turn around and follow that up with other questionable constitutional edicts himself after so openly painting himself in such a political corner? Not impossible of course but clearly if that is going to be your modus operandi to govern not a wise move to make right up front.

        Regardless the issue with EO’s are more lack of will and willingness to assert legislative branch rights and privilege then anything else. I might ask you when is congressional membership going to grow themselves a political backbone and assert and protect their constitutionally defined rights?

        • Dan

          If you actually believe that Trump or anyone among his close advisers has the slightest clue as to whether a particular Executive Order is unconstitutional, well then…

  • Wally Erb

    I think I prefer Trump’s points and “contract with the voters” rather than the socialistic proposals outlined in Hillary’s agenda.

  • H G

    It was an excellent speech and an excellent plan.

    Meanwhile, Clinton revelations pile up — and go ignored by BD.

  • Scout

    Re Gettysburg, and Trump’s decision to use that site:

    “In great deeds something abides. On great fields, something stays. Forms change and pass, bodies disappear, but spirits linger, to consecrate ground for the vision-place of souls. And reverent men and women from afar, and generations that know us not and that we know not of, heart-drawn to see where and by whom great things were suffered and done for them, shall come to this deathless field, to ponder and dream.”

    Maj. General Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.

    I cannot feel that Mr. Trump lived up to General Chamberlain’s expectations of future generations.

  • H G

    Face it BD, Clinton is far, far worse to a degree which increases with every wikileaks revelation.

    Some of the recent highlights…

    Payed disrupters at Trump rallies that have incited violence
    Oversampling in polls to maximize their benefit to the Clinton campaign
    Soros linked voting machines in competitive states
    Anti-gun plants in town hall meetings
    Collaborating with reporters and getting debate questions prior to debates
    Hillary dreams of open borders
    The Iran deal is admittedly horribly flawed
    “Money in the bank” for Sanders
    Believed Obama committed massive voter fraud in Colorado primary
    Hoped for other than Islamic terrorist responsible for CA shooting
    Knowingly criminally deleted emails

    Bottom line, Hillary is not only a horribly flawed politician whose experience can only be defined as a colossal failure, but a snake in the grass. A political opportunist that is not the least bit troubled or moved by the truth.

    Oh by the way, did I mention she is a total liberal?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.