Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by SEC_Chick

You can't put the National Review in the same sentence as Breitbart and Fox. They did what they could to prevent Trump in the first place, every contributor I follow on Twitter did not vote for him, and if you recall, they had a Republican debate they were sponsoring pulled over their Against Trump cover issue.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ovement-menace

I have found the NRO runs the full gamut of the right, from total wack-o lunatic paranoid fringe cases to hardened fascist ideologues to the rational but misguided. There is plenty there that would be at home in Breitbart or Fox.

I think conservative outlets face a problem. They don't survive if they don't throw red meat to their base, which has a core group of lunatics in it. The center-right, outside of a couple libertarian outposts, is no longer capable of supporting its own political infrastructure. Politico tried to be a center-right outlet, but soon found mostly the left read it. The Hoover Institution used to be viewed as hard-core establishment right, and is now seen by the right as a bunch of liberals with the occasional eggheady beta-male.