This Man Is the Most Dangerous Political Operative in America, Joshua Green | Bloomberg | 8 de octubre de 2016
“Bannon is a kind of Jekyll-and-Hyde figure in the complicated ecosystem of the right—he’s two things at once. And he’s devised a method to influence politics that marries the old-style attack journalism of Breitbart.com, which helped drive out Boehner, with a more sophisticated approach, conducted through the nonprofit Government Accountability Institute, that builds rigorous, fact-based indictments against major politicians, then partners with mainstream media outlets conservatives typically despise to disseminate those findings to the broadest audience”
“Breitbart came along as promoter and ringmaster. When I spoke with him afterward, he described Bannon, with sincere admiration, as the Leni Riefenstahl of the Tea Party movement.”
Ivanka and Jared’s Power Play, Lizzie Widdicombe | New Yorker | 22 de agosto de 2016
“Ivanka’s husband, Jared Kushner, a thirty-five-year-old real-estate developer, who owns the New York Observer, has become what the Times described as Trump’s “de facto campaign manager.” He has acted as a liaison with dozens of influential figures, including Henry Kissinger, Paul Ryan, Rupert Murdoch, and, until recently, Roger Ailes. Ivanka has counselled Trump on his rhetoric and his policy choices, and Jared was instrumental in the running-mate selection.
Ivanka and Jared are an unlikely couple to represent the ticked-off populism that has emerged as Trump’s Presidential theme. Sleek, tall, and patrician, they went to élite schools: he attended Harvard and New York University; she went to Georgetown and Wharton. They live on Park Avenue, where talk of “the wall” refers more rarely to the border with Mexico than to the climbing facility at the local Equinox.”
Kellyanne Conway’s Political Machinations, Ryann Lizza | New Yorker | 17 de octubre de 2016
“Conway took over, the campaign was foundering, owing to Trump’s repeated insults to the parents of Humayun Khan, a soldier killed in action in Iraq. Polls showed that Trump was losing to Hillary Clinton by up to ten points. By the time of the Chester speech, four days before the candidates’ first debate, Conway and her team had brought the race to a near-tie. Trump, reading from a teleprompter, sounded almost like a conventional politician as he spoke about “breaking up the special-interest monopoly” and described America as “a nation of strivers, dreamers, and believers.” Conway was being lauded as the “Trump whisperer”—the only person who could persuade him to prepare for his crucial showdown with Clinton.
Conway worked for Newt Gingrich in the nineties, when he was rising in the House of Representatives, and in 2012, when he ran for President. Gingrich, who is one of Trump’s most prominent supporters, told me that he had recently observed Conway and Trump on Trump’s plane. “They have very good chemistry,” he said, adding that previous advisers had made the mistake of trying “to reshape him.”
America’s Leading Authoritarian Intellectual Is Working for Trump, Jonathan Chait | New York | 2 de febrero de 2017
“Michael Anton describes the government (pre-Trump) as ‘the junta’. This cannot be dismissed as mere rhetorical exaggeration. To Anton, the rising share of the nonwhite population is a foreign invasion: “The ceaseless importation of Third World foreigners with no tradition of, taste for, or experience in liberty means that the electorate grows more left, more Democratic, less Republican, less republican, and less traditionally American with every cycle,” he writes. He describes the children of immigrants as “ringers to form a permanent electoral majority.” The racial and political implications of this argument are both clear and extreme: Anton believes the white Republican base is the only legitimate governing coalition. Democratic governments are inherently illegitimate by dint of their racial cast.”
The Flight 93 Election, Publius Decius Mus (Michael Anton) | American Greatness | 5 de septiembre de 2016
“One of the paradoxes—there are so many—of conservative thought over the last decade at least is the unwillingness even to entertain the possibility that America and the West are on a trajectory toward something very bad. On the one hand, conservatives routinely present a litany of ills plaguing the body politic. Illegitimacy. Crime. Massive, expensive, intrusive, out-of-control government. Politically correct McCarthyism. Ever-higher taxes and ever-deteriorating services and infrastructure. Inability to win wars against tribal, sub-Third-World foes. A disastrously awful educational system that churns out kids who don’t know anything and, at the primary and secondary levels, can’t (or won’t) discipline disruptive punks, and at the higher levels saddles students with six figure debts for the privilege. And so on and drearily on. Like that portion of the mass where the priest asks for your private intentions, fill in any dismal fact about American decline that you want and I’ll stipulate it.
Conservatives spend at least several hundred million dollars a year on think-tanks, magazines, conferences, fellowships, and such, complaining about this, that, the other, and everything. And yet these same conservatives are, at root, keepers of the status quo. Oh, sure, they want some things to change. They want their pet ideas adopted—tax deductions for having more babies and the like. Many of them are even good ideas. But are any of them truly fundamental? Do they get to the heart of our problems?”.
Diego Beas es experto en política estadounidense. Es autor del libro La reinvención de la política: Obama, internet y la nueva esfera pública (Península).