Every human being alive (I’m no exception) likes people who agree with him or her. Hearing what we want to hear gives our brains a positive jolt. Gathering with like-minded people makes us feel “at home”. It’s human nature. Heck, it’s the reason I started visiting this blog (which is Bruce’s), years ago.

We also like to think that our heroes / important authorities would agree with us. This can be used for a marketing advantage. For example, if you dislike Donald Trump or his key supporters, you can get a leg up – in terms of having on-the-fence people read you or believe you – if you pretend to speak for the Republican party, as Ana Navarro does.

Or you could go Reagan. I’ve seen many folks quote (or re-tweet) a certain anti-Trump presence calling themselves The Reagan Battalion.

For my part, I’ve always felt a tad suspicious of them. They never struck me as especially Reagan-esque, or as linked to the Reagan legacy in some extra way that would justify claiming his name. The name strikes me as a marketing effort to say “Believe us, because we promise, Ronald Reagan R Us! Totes legit!”

I tend to be suspicious of Argument from Authority, and its variations like Argument from Biography, or Argument from What I Claim To Be. This is one reason (there are others) why I don’t talk my biography here on GP. My presence sort-of-tells people I’m gay, and my handle (ILC) announces my general ideology; other than that, I work to make my information/arguments stand on their merits.

Anyway: Lucian Wintrich, a gay Trump supporter and journalist, has done a piece critical of The Reagan Battalion that may be of interest. He says they were part of the anti-Milo campaign earlier this year (which I agree was a smear pile-on and as such, not the tiniest bit Reagan-esque). Wintrich links to other journalism that ties The Reagan Battalion to Democrat money and sketchy activists, per FEC and IRS filings.

This is one where I don’t claim to know “the truth”; just pointing out the article and letting people comment.