This year, a WFB-less National Review stood Against Trump and got steamrolled.
Trump made the Republican Party his third party. Nationalism replaces globalism. Buy America trumps free trade. The Wall goes up over the protests of the Chamber of Commerce and Wall Street.
Buchanan is on top of the world. Consider this week's column:
As for the issues dividing Trump and Speaker Paul Ryan, Trump appears to have won the argument, if the debate is decided by voter preferences rather than Beltway preferences.
Trump’s denunciation of NAFTA and other “free-trade” deals Ryan supports is echoed by Sanders, who opposed those deals when they were up for a vote. Hillary Clinton no longer rhapsodizes over husband Bill’s NAFTA, and signals she will not support Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership in a lame-duck session.
Ryan professes to be a man of principle. Why does he not then stand by his principles, as Goldwater did, and bring up TPP for a vote?
Is Paul Ryan’s “immigration reform” package as popular inside his party as Trump’s tough line? It would seem not. The longer the primaries went on, the closer the other GOP candidates moved toward Trump. And if Ryan believes in it on principle, why not bring it up?Well, we know why.
Buchanan was harsher in his previous column:
Forty-eight hours after Donald Trump wrapped up the Republican nomination with a smashing victory in the Indiana primary, House Speaker Paul Ryan announced that he could not yet support Trump.
In millennial teen-talk, Ryan told CNN’s Jake Tapper, “I’m just not ready to do that at this point. I’m not there right now.”
“[T]he bulk of the burden of unifying the party” falls on Trump, added Ryan. Trump must unify “all wings of the Republican Party, and the conservative movement.” Trump must run a campaign that we can “be proud to support and proud to be a part of.”
Then, maybe, our Hamlet of the House can be persuaded to support the elected nominee of his own party.
Excuse me, but upon what meat has this our Caesar fed?And on May 5, 2016, Buchanan got to pay back Poppy Bush:
“The two living Republican past presidents, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush, have no plans to endorse Trump, according to their spokesmen.” So said the lead story in The Washington Post.
Graceless, yes, but not unexpected. The Bushes have many fine qualities. Losing well, however, is not one of them.
And they have to know, whether they concede it or not, that Trump’s triumph is a sweeping repudiation of Bush Republicanism by the same party that nominated them four times for the presidency.
Not only was son and brother, Jeb, humiliated and chased out of the race early, but Trump won his nomination by denouncing as rotten to the core the primary fruits of signature Bush policies.
Twelve million aliens are here illegally, said Trump, because the Bushes failed to secure America’s borders.Now I really liked George Walker Bush, but eight years later, after Barack Obama succeeded in giving away what soldiers won in Iraq, we must move on.
Elections matter, but so do results. In the marketplace of ideas -- and this election is about ideas and whether the nation will be part of a One World government, or the land of the free and home of the brave -- the neocons have lost and the liberals are about to get their ass kicked.
Trump's plan was simple: Beat the neocons, then beat the liberals, and finally, move into the white House.
Buchanan is loving it. This is his time. This is his year.