Founded in 1955, it leaned heavily toward selling racism as the genteel mark of a superior intellect. The publication was founded by the late William F. Buckley, whose only legacy worth honoring is his son Christopher – who, despite being conservative, has written some pretty amusing books.
Advertisement
“Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favour of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones”, the editors say in their piece.
As voting nears in the U.S. Republican presidential nominating contests, some influential conservative voices are saying they adamantly do not want either of the current frontrunners, billionaire real estate mogul Donald Trump or Texas Senator Ted Cruz, to be the party’s nominee in November’s national election.
The National Review says its 2015 audited circulation is 150,000, and that it is the largest-circulation conservative magazine in the nation.
“In a country with more than 300 million people, it is remarkable how obsessed the media have become with just one-Donald Trump”, writes Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, apparently without irony.
An American conservative magazine found itself disinvited from co-sponsoring a presidential primary debate Thursday night after it published an entire issue devoted to tearing down Republican front-runner Donald Trump.
“Debate partners can’t have a predisposition towards or against any candidate”, RNC chief strategist and communications director Sean Spicer said in a statement.
Review publisher Jack Fowler appeared to take the move in stride. “Small price to pay for speaking the truth about The Donald”, Fowler wrote on National Review Online’s The Corner.
National Review is a failing publication that has lost it’s (sic) way.
“This is a crisis for conservatism”, said talk show host and author Glenn Beck in one of the essays.
“Not since George Wallace has there been a presidential candidate who made racial and religious scapegoating so central to his campaign”, Cato Institute president David Boaz wrote.
The National Review’s attack on Trump is nothing less than a declaration of war by establishment Republicans against so-called Tea Party Republicans.
Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, reacted to Trump’s response with a dig at his politics, and his grammar.
The accusers also drilled into Trump’s policy choices, with novelist Mark Helprin offering a comprehensive takedown in a single sentence.
“Against Trump” began trending on Twitter by Friday morning.
Hence their dilemma. So the second- and third-tier intellects gather all their brain power to address the issue of How Do We Stop Trump?
“The late, great, William F. Buckley would be ashamed of what had happened to his prize, the dying National Review!”.
Advertisement
Trump has taken heat for using the term “anchor babies” during his speeches on the campaign trail.
