Historically, I've enjoyed Jay Nordlinger's columns and Impromptus for National Review. And I hope to again in the future. Right now, not so much.
Along with the rest of the NR crowd, he's decided Trump is as bad, in his own way, as Clinton and he'll have nothing to do with either. That makes philosophical sense, but much less so in the real world unless one is ready to join Ruth Bader Ginsburg in emigrating to New Zealand, which I'm prepared to wager he's not, nor am I.
One of the two - Trump or Clinton - will be president and those who remain here will live with that reality. "None of the above" isn't a rational choice for those who care more about country than party. Think Supreme Court appointments.
Reading Nordlinger's understandibly negative characterization of attacks on his position by angry Trumpites, I get a couple of overriding impressions. First, it seems much of his reaction is one of social class snobbery, a snobbery he shares with George Will whom he defends.
Trumpites are so de classe, they're obviously hard to stomach for the classical music critic and world traveler that Nordlinger is. Class prejudice is unattractive, particularly that directed downward toward the lesser orders.
My second reaction regards Nordlinger's objections to Trumpites' plaints about "globalism" and "open borders." He is of course correct that NR has supported neither, at least with any consistency.
What Nordlinger doesn't get is their sense a conservative voice like NR opposing Trump gives aid and comfort to Clinton who supports both globalism and open borders. If Trumpites don't make that point as clearly as they might, blame their preoccupation with careers not demanding wordsmithery as a prerequisite.
