Previous post
Day One of the Republican National Convention 2024 is in the history books, and the speakers couldn’t have been chosen wiser. Amber Rose, for instance. Talk about a shot across the bow.
Ms Rose’s short and to-the-point speech last night hopefully drove home some points to her 2.5 million fans on Instagram. And one political analyst on the Democrats’ side took notice. Van Jones noticed how important Amber’s presence and words were at the convention.
CNN senior political commentator Van Jones warned that TV personality and model Amber Rose’s address to the Republican National Convention in support of former President Trump was the “most dangerous speech” for the Democratic Party.
The pundit expressed trepidation over the fact that Rose, a person of color with mainstream fame, spoke at the RNC, noting that she’s appealing to people in liberal circles who may be frustrated with Democratic policies. – MSN
Well, yes, she is a person of color. She has a racially diverse family. But Tim Scott, Mark Robison, Wesley Hunt, and John James also spoke last night. You can read about their appearances from Victory Girl Toni.
Van Jones is probably concerned about Amber’s turnaround regarding Donald Trump. This is all thanks to her Dad challenging her to prove what she used to believe about Donald Trump being a racist. After doing her research, Amber discovered nothing but media lies. And now she is on full blast.
That, my friends, is what has Van Jones taking notice and calling Amber’s experience and speech dangerous to the young Democrats who may be on the fence.
And then you have people like Matt Walsh trying to use old tactics like shaming someone. What’s the matter, Matt? Are you afraid you are losing your base? Using this language is not the way anymore, and Donald Trump knows it. He is reaching across the aisle and pulling the people in. My advice to Matt Walsh is to get on board or be left behind with the #NeverTrumpers
The RNC gives a primetime speaking slot to a pro-abortion feminist and self-proclaimed slut with a face tattoo whose only claim to fame is having sex with rappers. Truly an embarrassment. Not a single voter will be mobilized by this person.
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) July 16, 2024
And really, Matt, I am so glad you are so pure and sinless, never making a mistake or stupid decision in your youth. Matt’s words are not the way to attract the people we need on our side. Some may think we don’t need young people like Amber Rose and her fans on our side. I beg to differ. For decades, the Democratic Party has had the edge with young voters.
Admittedly, I had never heard of Amber Rose before last night. When she was speaking on stage, I had no idea who she was. The only thing I knew was what some were screeching online about her being some p*rn star. And now she is speaking at the Republican National Convention. FYI, Amber is not a p*rn star.
Donald Trump isn’t just talking about uniting the country. He is doing it. Inviting Amber Rose to speak at the convention with her message hopefully appeals to others like her to at least do their own reflecting and turn off the government propaganda, leading them to think for themselves.
Just like JD Vance was selected as his vice president, the old Republican guard may have just been put on notice. How long has the GOP been talking about needing to connect with the younger, next generation? Now is the time, and it is being led by Donald J. Trump.
People like Amber Rose and JD Vance were like me in 2016. I was not entirely confident that Donald J. Trump knew anything about leading a country at that time, so I wrote a different candidate’s name on my ballot in 2016. But Donald proved me wrong, thankfully, and in 2020, I wholeheartedly and proudly voted for Trump.
Amber said in her speech last night that this country is in trouble. When you go to the grocery store, you are shocked. When you fill-up your gas tank, you are pissed. When you turn on the news, you are exhausted.
And you know in your heart, it wasn’t this way under Donald Trump. American families were better off when Donald Trump was President.
We were safer, wealthier, and stronger.
Though Amber is a superstar now, like JD Vance, she began from humble beginnings, just like most of us. Having Amber Rose speak at the Republican National Convention was smart and refreshing. She opened up this old gal’s eyes and heart a little wider.
WELCOME INSTAPUNDIT READERS!!
Feature Image: Mingle Media TV, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons/edited in Canva Pro
GWB says: OK, I’m going to push back a bit on this one.
While it is good that people are seeing through the media lies, and that some people with problematic views might come on over and vote for Trump….
There is a problem here that goes back to the “Trump is not a conservative” and “these people are not red-pilled” points I keep making. Great that those kids vote for Trump, but what happens when someone on Trump’s side then tries to enact the conservatism actually required to correct course? What happens when those folks do not vote for the conservatives in their states because of abortion and the states all go thoroughly blue? What happens when people would like to restore morality as a basis of conduct and all the hedonists who voted for Trump refuse to vote for the conservatives?
If he can bring them over, then win them to conservatism, GREAT! But I don’t see that happening. Trump can accomplish a lot if he has Congress working with him. Otherwise, the Deep State is once again going to prevail. (Trump is starting out a lame duck.) OR, you can work long-term, by grooming successors who are strongly conservative and get them elected all across the country, at state and federal levels. The second one isn’t going to be successful if all your “converts” really don’t convert. If they’re just voting for you because the other guy is so incredibly awful even the Vichy are offended, then it doesn’t mean anything.
It’s nice that she has been disabused of the media lies. But has she looked at the cultural lies she’s believed that make her a Progressive? Can she look at the Constitution and say “Oh, hey, that’s all good stuff”? Can she aim for something better than massive government and globalism? Those are the questions.
Can anything (other than a personal visitation by Jesus Christ Himself) turn a person 180 degrees all at once? So rare that I can’t even think of a single name.
Once you have a crack made in a mind, where they will listen to facts, you are on the way to winning. The key is to accept that they have managed to wake up to reality in ONE way, and keep working on bringing them to full awareness.
Make them pariahs because they don’t agree with you on EVERYTHING (or, worse, didn’t agree for their whole life), and you will never reach them. They will go back to the fantasy – because that fantasy is at least COMFORTING.
GWB says: I will agree with that. But that requires actually working to bring them around. And triumphalist rhetoric about how he has all these non-conservatives voting for him leaves out that ongoing work that is required. IMO that’s setting yourself up for failure.
(And I’m a BIG fan of saying that electing a President or Congress won’t save the nation. You have to go out and convert – evangelize, even – the electorate back to a Christian morality and the founding principles of Americanism. Without that, human nature keeps rolling on.)
Cameron says: Honestly, I like Matt and enjoy his takes on things.
But frankly, he’s being a bit of an asshole on this topic. As Catturd said “There it is – the dumbest take in X history.”
WKAIII says: Litmus paper does not good government make. We are watching the Left’s self-immolation, based on its extremist demands for lockstep hive-mind compliance to The Narrative. For us, to make the same mistake would be to suffer the same results.
It is one thing to have a personal moral code; such things are necessary for a stable life, but it must be understood that politics is never clean, simple or pure as the driven snow. The GOP has for too long been the party of rigidity and not reality; that was what drove people who were “kinda” or “mostly” like us, but not “totally” like us, over to the other side. They are now coming home because we are now a little wiser to the ways of actual life.
If inviting people in who would not have been a part of your Grandfather’s GOP is needed in order to push back against the gender-, grievance-, and power-hungry scourge threatening our kids, freedoms and lives, then so be it. You find commonality where it serves the best purposes, and you overlook the rest as an aspect of the messy, muddy world we live in. If “you simply can’t” because reasons, that’s yours. Don’t let it keep you from voting rightly in November. You can be privately judgmental all you want to, afterwards.
GWB says: While I agree to some extent, I think your analysis (and others’) falters in not recognizing that this is not politics. The problem is a difference in worldview.
I’m not against seeing these people as allies in the immediate conflict. But if you then go making the government with them, you will end up right back where we are now – because these people do not (as of yet) actually believe in the fundamental things that need to happen to get us back to a free Constitutional Republic. They are still believing Progressives. You can accept them in if you’re going to also 1) either acknowledge the coalition won’t last, or 2) go to work converting them to an actual “conservative” Constitutionalist.
WKAIII says: Hmm. I have a difficult time separating worldview and politics when in a political arena, which this is. I understand the aspect of, “but will they stay loyal?” and my answer is, “If we accomplish our goals, it won’t matter.”
Once we have restored the Republic and they find that the Progressive Left was indeed a den of mendacious vipers, I believe their weltanschauung will shift. It may not swing all the way to a comfortable right, but it will no longer be pinned to the left. For us, the side that hates politics, this is as good as any victory. Once a decidedly non-political outlook can be achieved, the rest follows suit since a life of simple freedoms begets a more moral and responsible living style.
So, I think your option #2 is not only the easier of the set but also the more organically possible. Success breeds success and when we have reestablished a sound economy, un-politicized the schools, quashed our foes with oceans of cheap energy and given all but the most ardent, self-loathing Fellow Traveler a reason to once again be a proud American, they will see.
GWB says: Y’all got linked on Insty by Glenn! Nice job.
Jorg X McKie says: Mat Walsh has, unfortunately, lately veered into Tom Nichols territory. He IS Old Guard, and has probably spent too much time being in the minority (or the wilderness or something). If you’re going to change the course of our nation you’ll need more than just a slim majority winning elections. You’ll need a large majority of even those who don’t vote in order to get the change made AND accpeted. Trump may be able to do that.
But I’m afraid that, just like in 2017, he won’t be opposed just by Democrats but by the GOP Establishment. They are wimps, but relentless in the pursuit of their own personal goals.
GWB says: And not just winning elections. You need to actually implement the things for which people elected you.
Rex says: A lot of republicans are pro-life before they’re republican. While many of us understand that we won’t win a total victory for our cause overnight (or even in our lifetimes) and will have to be satisfied with “changed language” and incremental wins, and while it’s true that Matt Walsh is basically in a-hole mode all the time nowadays, it’s going to get harder and harder justifying a vote for a party that’s thoroughly abandoned the defense of preborn life.
Some people *will* tolerate the country burn down around us rather than vote for a pro-abortion politician. We don’t have to make that choice yet, but the republicans — and Victory Girls — would do well to remember that.
.jpg){kind=link}
11 Comments