Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Confessions of an #AlmostNeverTrumper … And What Could Make Me Change My Mind
In one of my first posts for Ricochet, I outlined what I thought was the most important aspects of picking a president: understanding their core values and priorities. The presidency is a huge job where enormous amounts of information comes the way of the president who, being human, has only so much time and attention. That’s part of the reason why all presidents are ultimately a bit of a disappointment. At best, a president will only be able to accomplish a few things and those things need to be very important if the country is to benefit.
For an example of clear priorities, take Ronald Reagan. First, he had to arrest the economic free fall America was in after Carter, which he did by fighting inflation, tax reform, and giving confidence to the business community by breaking unions and asserting a steady economic hand. Second, he moved on to winning the Cold War by accelerating a military build-up at home while exploiting Soviet economic weaknesses wherever ever he found opportunity. After effectively winning, Reagan was able to turn his attention to ensuring that George H. W. Bush could succeed him and cement his legacy. To be fair, he only slowed (rahter than truly curtailed) the administrative state, and his judicial nominations were a very mixed lot. He also compromised on immigration, not grasping what the new immigration regime doing to the country, nor the effect his amnesty would have on the future.
The point of this brief summary is that — taking his presidency as a whole — Reagan moved the entire country and culture in a healthy way his legacy benefits us still to this day. For more proof, just think to the priorities of the first Bush, how he carried them out and the different outcome he achieve despite real competence and massive success at his priorities.
Which brings me to Donald Trump. I believe that Trump is, vaguely, a Republican rather than a Democrat in disguise. Trump’s politically incorrect rhetoric is genuine and — to the extent he panders — he finds pandering more palatable when it’s to Republicans and our interests than to Democrats and theirs. Second, it’s no coincidence that he saw the market opportunity on the Republican side. While Hillary Clinton had some of the Democrats’ most powerful interest groups wrapped-up, the Republicans manifestly and obviously did not have any leader that was connecting to the base in a powerful way. This provided Trump with a great opportunity to make headway and then win the Republican nomination.
With Trump now the presumptive nominee, we have to look at what his core. For his whole life, Trump has been driven by his own success. This shows in the way he treats vendors, old women that stand in the way of parking his cars, the students at Trump University, and his branding deals that got him his money even if the venture was a failure. In a businessman and a showman, this is not necessarily a bad trait and Trump’ success does somewhat speak for itself.
My problem is that this desire of Trump to simply win for his own benefit continues while he is a presidential candidate and the face of a movement. His primary advisors are his own children, and he shows great reluctance to change his behavior for the benefit of anyone else. Since this campaign is about him, why should he change for anyone else? The RNC and other Republicans are far more likely to change for the benefit of Trump, not the other way around. So what if the RNC did not do the primary GOTV operations for the presidential campaign? They will do so now because they must change to suit Trump, and it suits Trump to have the RNC do GOTV.
As far as I can tell, Trump is still operating on the principle that the presidency is about him and it is about him winning. If Trump wins, that will be his core principle. Everything will be about Trump winning, what makes him feel like he wins, what makes him feel like he is having a legacy. This negates Trump’s main talent of making making deals because what we want from a great negotiator is the achievement of the right goal; great negotiation toward a bad goal is not a good thing.
Take Reagan and Gorbachev at Reykjavik. Our president walked away with nothing and — in doing so — won the Cold War. Everything in Trump would have screamed for him to make a deal and bask in the glory of having done so. Where would we be today if that happened?
There are also the matters of experience and ideology. The president receives way too much information for any one man to process, so it must come to him pre-filtered. Trump has neither the ideology nor the experience in politics and global affairs to help him navigate through all that he doesn’t know, and will not know when to push advisors, ask for more options, or how to get a view outside of his own bubble. The people he trusts and respects are not more knowledgeable in these areas that he is, so it’s likely that the winner of these arguments will be whomever best stokes Trump’s ego and makes him feel like his option is the “winning option” for Trump.
This also limits the benefit of having Republicans fill the posts in his administration. Lacking a solid ideology, Trump will judge his appointees by how they make him look. This means there will be little real reform and, if someone really tries to do something good, Trump will not know if he should back him or not.
One thing we know for sure is that Trump is not winning when he limits his own power and ability for action. That means the executive will continue in his imperial ways; if you like the Obama Administration that way, you are going to love a Trump Administration.
A Trump Presidency based on Turmp’s core principles will lead to a great deal of failure, many liberal victories, a few conservatives ones, a terrible foreign policy, and a likely rise in corruption given the need to get Trump’s ear to make anything happen. Conservative victories will be accidents and, when the Democrats roll Trump, he will be extremely hard to resist. His mistakes will color the entire Republican party and his foreign policy mistakes will most likely be huge.
On the other hand, a Trump Presidency means we beat the Democrats, which has it own advantages.
Trump has no loyalty to any ideology, which means he has no commitment to any hard position, even on immigration; from what I have seen, Trump will deliver us the Senate Gang of Eight bill, albeit slightly modified, and his rhetoric on border security will give him cover to follow his instincts of a big business guy who likes cheap, imported labor. There is really no downside for Trump in doing a deal like that.
I see a Trump Presidency that would be just as disastrous as Clinton’s, though disastrous in differet ways. Moreover, these failures will come home to roost on our barn, leaving the Democrats clean to elect a far-left ideologue without the Clinton baggage. That would not be a victory.
So how can I can my mind be changed? I need is evidence that Trump’s core principles align with mine. I would need to see evidence that Trump is acquiring experienced hands that he actually listens too, and that he is honing his knowledge on policy so he can bring conservative reforms. I would need to see him willing to sacrifice his own instincts for the betterment of the Republican/Conservative movements. In essence, I need evidence that he is willing to sacrifice for the good of the country even if it means that he is not personally “winning.” Until I see that, voting for Trump is just voting for a disaster every bit as much as voting for Clinton would be.
Even if Trump changed, I’d hardly be an enthusiast and would never expect him to be a great president. I could, however, accept that he actually is the lesser of two evils and that his presidency — while not being good — would good enough to earn my vote.
Published in Politics
If you can see a path to becoming a Trump supporter, you’re not a “Nevertrumper” in my book.
As I keep noting, never is a really long time.
I’ve repeatedly said Trump could earn my vote between now and November. Unfortunately, I don’t expect him to try.
I think there are a lot of people with a conflated idea of the presidency and they tend to be people who were politically aware during the Reagan years. I was a little kid in the 80’s and only became politically aware during the Clinton years, and lets just say my view of the presidency is more cynical.
Presidents like Reagan, are rare and a president like Coolidge probably wouldn’t be possible today, maybe Reagan too. Our culture has changed and this election is a reflection of that and many of us are going to have to come to grips with that. The Democrats and their policies are destructive to our politics and our culture. They need to be stopped, period. That’s it. We can’t have another Democrat president.
I think Trump is there for a reason. Some of you don’t like that but again our culture has changed, thanks to decades of leftist indoctrination through education, media and pop culture. Trump is a man of this time and does actually reflect our current culture. So look around, we’re a more vulgure culture that is just a fact, I don’t like it but I think that is the way to get elected. I supposed those who supported Trump in the beginning wanted someone who was willing to roll around in the muck with the left, too many conservatives aren’t willing to. Also Trump is 69 he will be a one term president, see who he picks for VP before going full Never Trump
I said in a past comment and I’ll say it again: Apologize – sincerely! – to John McCain and all other POWs and I might possibly think about giving Trump another look. Until then he is unfit to be Commander in Chief.
And Hillary Clinton is.? She lied to the parents of the Benghazi victims over their coffins and continues to lie to them, where is their apology.
This isn’t a decision between Trump and mother Teresa, it’s between Trump and Hillary And she’s worse.
Yes, in some ways Hillary is worse than Trump (and in some ways less worse – we don’t need to delve at the moment). And yes, either Hillary or Trump will be the next President of the United States. But I don’t have to have a hand in that. If Hillary is elected the blame will go to those who voted for her, not to those of us who refuse to vote for someone equally as abhorrent. I will vote third party, probably Libertarian, and later on that night sleep the sleep of the innocent.
Denial ain’t just a river in Egypt, but enjoy your rest.
If there was dramatic change in the way Trump began to handle things nearly anyone in the NeverTrumper camp would take a new look at him. People say “never” because they assume, probably correctly, he will not change.
Yeah. The point of my post is to at least to make an attempt to explain why the normal methods of arguing about “lesser evils” and how “terrible Hillary” is don’t really make a difference to me and instead let people know what kind of evidence would be game changing.
Actually my point is that all Presidents are like Reagan and Coolidge. They all are receiving too much information and have short comings. They all will focus on only certain areas and will only be able to accomplish certain things. Reagan was different in that he had both experience and a good well thought ideology to help him do his job.
Remember Reagan very likely broke the law in the Iran-Contra affair. But when he broke the law it was not for sex acts, or political point scoring but to help a people fighting Communist Tyranny and free innocent men from their brutal kidnappers. That is my kind of law breaking. In this day and age it almost seems refreshing.
Bush the First had his own priorities and had great experience but had a weak ideology and that led him to destroy his very successful presidency. Clinton had terrible ideology but huge political experience so he did not accomplish much that was world changing but he kept his Presidency alive. I could go on but I hope you see my point.
Trump has no experience and no ideology all he has is his desire to seen as successful and winning. That means he will make titanic mistakes of epic proportion that will likely leave us in a disastrous position, at least as bad off as Hillary in four years. It is not that he is vulgar and crass. Though I dislike that but if he was vulgar and crass with the right experience and a solid ideological out look I would vote for him after crawling over broken glass to get to the polls.
What denial? Trump will be at leas as disastrous as Hillary the two main contenders of the nomination do not deserve to be President the fact that one of them will win does not mean I must fight for and support either one of them.
Pure speculation as to how trump will be as president as we don’t have a political record to go by, although we do have a business record. Hillary we have a lot on record we Know her judgment as to world affairs as reflected with Benghazi, Lybia, how she got humiliated by Russia and her reset button, and calling Assad a reformer. We know she insanely paranoid and compromised national security and herself by having an insecure server that was almost certainly hacked. She is beholdened to foreign leaders and businesses who paid her and her husband off though speaking fee or donations to her sham of a foundation. Don’t you think those people will want a return on their investment if she becomes president?
She will also be protected by the Democrats in congress, the supreme. Court and the media to basically be Obama’s third term, Trump will have none of that.
Who is more Likley to be impeached if necessary Trump or Hillary? Who will have the media chomping at the bit to expose every little indescretion going on in the White House, Trump or Hillary?
the left is ruining this country and Hillary is a leftist and needs to be defeated, period.
How does having an impeached Republican President help the country long term?
My point is Trump will be held accountable in a way Hillary Clinton never will be. That is the point
OK.
I don’t see the upside of electing someone that you think is likely to be impeached, but reasonable people can differ.
I have always thought one of the strongest arguments in favor of Trump was that we could impeach him but say we did impeach him what would happen then? The Democrats would have the opportunity to elect an extreme left winger with a congressional majority and Trump’s legacy will simply be the destruction of the Republican party. We gain nothing from the impeachment because the Dems will say impeachment is great for Republicans but off limits for the Dems. The Democrats might fumble the chance, as I am on record as thinking, but it is an extremely dangerous move to give them the opportunity that a Trump presidency is almost sure to give them.
Trump business record is what I am going by that is how we can know he will be a terrible president. His only experience is building his brand and conducting himself in semi-illegal ways to makes sure he always gets the best deal. These instincts of his will carry over into the White House and that is how he will conduct his business there. It will be disastrous.
Hillary is at least as unworthy to be president as Trump and her tenure may very well give Republicans opportunities in the future as Hillary will flail about and fail to deal with the host of problems that Obama is leaving her. When you weigh the options it is just about a wash between the two.
My point was not that I want to elect someone who will be impeached. My point is about accountability. We have two choices Trump or Hillary (I doubt some hail Mary pass will be made at the convention) one of them will be president. Who will be more likely to be held accountable by congress, the media, etc….?
This is the thing that I don’t understand about Trump supporters they know that he can be impeached they think it is likely that he could be impeached yet voting for him is a good idea?
Sure the Dems will protect Hillary but that protection comes with severe political costs for them. The Dems have been nearly destroyed as a national party by Obama, Clinton may very well make them a rump party ripped apart by in fighting and as different factions try to wrest control of the party from the defunct Clinton coalition.
The unraveling of Trump administration will help Republicans how? How will help the country? Trump is amateur with no guide posts to help him sort out the problems of his administration. The press and the Democrats will eat him alive. What evidence do we have that Trump will thrive and survive in these conditions? The Trump the failed president is almost assured.
The upside is that the alternative is at least as bad and impossible to remove. Being able to mitigate a disaster is to be desired.
I think you are too optimistic about the Dems being ripped apart by infighting. They are a coalition with nothing in common except the power to loot the country. They will rally around themselves. If the Reps disappear completely, the Dems might split, but as long as they can point to a common enemy that threatens their gravy train, they will survive. The Reps will split first, as we can see this cycle.
1: It removes the current belief on the part of Democrat rank and file and Low information voters that Republicans only impeached Clinton because he was a Democrat.
2: Making impeachment of the executive more “common” (2x in 25 years instead of 2x in 140 years) makes it more usable in the future as a lever to reduce the power of the executive branch to a more balanced level with the Legislative.
I don’t think that will be the outcome, but reasonable people can differ.
I don’t think I am being too optimistic. There is a reason that the unifying leaders in the Democratic party are Obama and then white people in their late 60s and early 70s. Hate is not a very unifying proposition. Reagan was universally hated on the left but it was only after three defeats in a row that the Democrats unified behind something new. The Democratic coalition has winners and losers and just one fault line is gay rights not a very popular focus in African American circles. Asians in California find little common cause anymore with competing ethnic groups as the white middle class continues to flee California. If Trump were to win and Clinton be defeated the Democrats would go after each other throats to find a new governing coalition. The hatred for Trump would not be enough. It would be unifying only in that each faction would compete with each to show who hated Trump the most.
If Hillary is a failed president and loses her second general election the same thing will manifest itself as hard left madness will grip the party and wreck terrible damage. Our greatest danger is a Trump win following by a disastrous presidency or a two term Clinton Presidency where she drains the left-wing swamps in her own party unifies for a successor. Clinton may not do that but we should not give her the chance too either.
We need to quit comparing everyone to Reagan – it’s a different era. Trump has a big ego – but look at today’s world leaders. Also look at the alternative – we’ve had 8 years of O – someone who never ran a company, a city or state, never met a payroll, nor have any of his immediate staff of advisers. Other than Rose law firm, neither has Hillary. Trump over his life has made mistakes – the Clinton’s mistakes are bigger. Trump has provided jobs for thousands, paid taxes, provided health benefits. He’s not afraid of competition, strong personalities. His family is business-savvy and successful.
We have very big problems on the home front and abroad. Hillary did not meet these problems, nor did Obama – they left things more difficult for the next president. Hillary (and Elizabeth Warren) badmouth the rich, yet they’ve taken more dirty money from anyone – the Clinton Foundation, fundraisers. Trump uses his own money.
There is no Reagan to rescue us. A new president will be tested by our foes, and agenda set for them right off the bat like GWB. The Russians aren’t hacking to find info on Hillary. She already handed our enemies what they needed with the server. If she is sitting in the Oval office, well…..I’ll take my chances with the ego.
You make many valid points in your post that I can understand and align with although I am quicker to decide that I can accept and hope the nation can handle a Trump presidency.
What made Reagan great was his insight to a more limited role for the federal government and the presidency than that expounded by the progressives. He had great overall success as CoC. He tried to do the right thing on immigration but put to much trust in others to follow through. He also had sound thoughts on fiscal discipline and reducing the size and influence of the federal bureaucracy but this is not an easy task. It is easy to see why the progressives hated him and now his legacy.
On the issue of what Trump said about John McCain and POW’s versus Clinton’s failure to act in support of Americans in jeopardy in Benghazi, it’s a difference between what one said and the other did (or failed to do). I think Trump would have acted where Clinton did not.
Trump made an error in attacking McCain… for having been a POW for goodness sake. That was silly. Sometimes I do wonder if McCain gets a lifetime pass. There isn’t even a Democrat more critical of conservatism than McCain. He’s the go to Republican whenever the media needs an insider Republican to criticize his own. Trump has definitely shown himself to stand behind Vets and I believe he overwhelmingly receives their support. He wants to give Vets the ability to receive healthcare anywhere. I agree. We should dismantle the VA and give all Vets a Medicare card. Why do we even have the huge duplicate bureaucracy of a separate medical system for Vets? It’s a huge waste of money.
It will be Trump or Clinton making SCOTUS appointments, overseeing national security, etc. Who do you prefer?
I prefer Trump on Scotus, Military, Energy, Economy, Foreign Policy…what else is there? Please, give me something else to prefer him for…as opposed to Clinton.