President Trump is watching them driven before him, and listening to the lamentation of their women. The media is still fighting him the best they can, but team Trump has mentioned plans to 'rotate' access in the press room, so that's obviously going to change too.
"But Tom" I hear you say, "This is all political talk. You don't like writing about politics anymore."
That's very true oh faithful reader. Here's why I mention it.
Easy times make weak men, which make hard times, which makes strong men. For the right, it looks (on the surface anyway) like in spite of chuck Schumer's lonely and pathetic attempts to hold back the tide, this is going to be an easy time. We'll get judges, regulatory rollback, tax reform, immigration enforcement, gun rights. The only debate is the order of their arrival. We're going to get all the things we hope for. And that will make us weak, just like the left is now.
Trump is bound to disappoint. It's inevitable. And if he disappoints enough then we're going to get another Obama. Maybe someone like Corey Booker. And when we do, it will be the liberals who go door to door looking for the first born son of every conservative household to slaughter to their gods. Trump reform could be washed away just as quickly as Obama 'hope and change'.
And the only way this will ever be any different is if we win the war of ideas. Trump may be many things. But he will never, ever, be a big 'ideas' President.
I've been out here on the far right for a long time. And I've listened to men I greatly respect draw support from the fringes. Wanna hear a lucid and literate guy draw support from the fringe? Listen to one of Jarred Taylor's speeches at the Amren conference. He's no firebrand, and he's not the evil demon that the left portrays him as. But he's accustomed to getting his support from outside the mainstream.
The language and messaging required to draw support from the middle is different than that. It should be more basic. Simpler. It should stick to obvious and comparatively inoffensive truths. Truths that can't inevitably be reconciled with the progressive narrative. It should focus on the underlying fabric of the entire idea set with the goal of inching people away from the left. And to do that, it should be framed in a manner that most people who don't care much about politics are accustomed to hearing.
In my view dialectic questions would be the best format. For example:
If we really are a multi-cultural society that means people behave differently. So what's wrong with recognizing that blacks and whites think, feel, and behave very differently on a variety of subjects?
If they do behave differently, then what's wrong with saying that some small aspect of that behavior, like the propensity of young black men to commit crime at rates far above other groups - above black women, above older black men, and above other groups in general - isn't bad for both their broader community and themselves?
A progression of question along these lines makes the discussion much more palatable to the center. Much more so than saying 'blacks commit more crime than whites" which is true, but just doesn't go down well in many circles.
What we need to do to give the Trump changes legs, is to change the minds of the liberals who right now, are busy watching their religion collapse after the eviction of their high priest. And the only goal we should have in that discussion, is persuading them to open their eyes to the true nature of things, and get them to recognize that the truth was never something they ever really needed to be afraid of.
I desperately hope that the ideas of the Alt-Right that are based on facts, become a part of a broader mainstream right. But to convince people of them we need to stop focusing on shock value and start focusing on incrementalism. The slow and methodical persuasion of the majority of America. The left will never be more angry, more disheartened, or more hopeless than they are right now. That's the time to try to win converts by reminding them that they never had to be afraid of us.