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.
David French Is Not a Serious Conservative
The one area where we have had strong movement, gun rights, he attacks. Idolatry? Please. French wants to compromise and give up on progress made.
But, that is not the real reason he is not a serious conservative. No, this is just icing on the cake. Proof, if you will, of his nature. He proved he was unserious when he genuinely considered Bill Kristol’s plan to run for President and try to get the election thrown to the House. A serious conservative would never have courted a constitutional crisis because he did not like the GOP nominee.
So, of course, French is against standing our ground on guns. What else can we expect from a man who thought it would have been a good idea for our Republic to be selected President after 90%+ of the voters voted for someone else.
Published in General
Supposedly, the shut downs and suspensions of gun stores for paperwork errors has quadrupled under the Biden administration. It sounds like it’s pure harassment. Don’t vote for Democrats.
Reaganism is its own cult of personality, much in the same way Democrats fetishized FDR and Kennedy. Reaganism died on January 20, 1989. It was never in alignment with the wishes of the establishment GOP and to pretend otherwise is absurd.
Deleted.:
I have often wondered why NR shot itself in the foot with the “Against Trump” cover and inside content. I think of it as an unforced error or an ‘own goal’.
Instead, they could have put their preferred Republican candidate on the cover with a major piece about why that candidate is just what we need right now.
Would have made the same point without the temper tantrum that (I believe) they will never fully recover from.
I’ve heard him talk to an Austrian economist and he really knows that stuff. I just don’t see how you can enable Democrats in any way after that. Same thing with George Will. He has an interview with reason magazine from about eight years ago. Great original thinking about libertarianism. Then he votes Democrat.
Watching the Principles First crowd dance around their Biden votes has been disgusting. You can’t tell me that group isn’t a tool of Omidyar and Google. 3/4 of the people on their stage every year are the names that Gary has in his post.
Kellyanne Conway talks about this on the latest Newt Gingrich podcast. It’s an outstanding interview. They systematically got rid of all of Reagan’s people. The worst one was Paul Volcker. Why would you do that? Reagan could explain in playing English why populism and Socialism is breaking out now. It started with 41.
I think they took it out from the pay wall, but I highly recommend the interview of David Stockman’s on Real Vision. Everybody hates him, but what is he wrong about? People have all of this crap their heads about what the GOP was. I’m not so sure.
So tiresome. I’m so tired of people throwing around accusations of “cultist” in place of an argument.
It was a matter of time and place. I agree that it was over the top even given that, but, as I recall, Trump was not even the nominee at that point.
Say something clear and original about public policy. We aren’t voting for student council.
This isn’t really my bag, but Kellyanne Conway says that leaders affect polls. I get tired of non-professionals babbling about electioneering and polls and they never say anything about public policy. Figure out how the system is screwed up and then go from there.
This!!!! Reagan was the Trump of his day….both the left and establishment Republicans thought of Reagan in 1980 just as David French et al think of Trump…..I’m not comparing the two regarding policy or political acumen but they were each perceived the same way…..if the 1976-1980 Reagan was here today David French and The Dispatch would be Never Reaganers…..
I agree. I think French is wrong in his conclusions and he is nut-picking. But he’s hardly alone–which is a big part of the problem! Just look at this thread. There are accusations of people being warped by anti-Trump and pro-Trump delusions. To say nothing of how most of us, myself included, so often talk about the Left. We accuse others of being unable to see the Truth, but seldom try to engage the policies. Maybe we should all try a little more humility.
I don’t agree with this. I’ve seen one anti-Trump guy be somewhat good at this and I think most of the pro Trump camp is very good with saying original things about public policy.
The Minnesota anti Trump types basically just spew tedious boiler plate. Look at the principals first orbit. Those guys are ridiculous.
French isn’t in Kristol league – Kristol is a political grifter
and he isn’t Jen Rubin (she is insane)
It’s French’s sanctimony that gets me – he acts like he is a sole principals Christian and Conservative left in the USA – really tiresome
I don’t think being behind a paywall is an effective counter, in any respect.
Excellent analysis. Most of us do vote with our personal feelings.
In typical NR fashion you leave out pro-choice, which along with looking favorably upon working women and same sex partnerships are other attractive, distinguishing values strongly identified with the competing brand — and popular majorities.
Sympathy for the American working class is the big one the liberals had and let get away.
R’s too often lose on the seeming compassion of being “sympathetic to the downtrodden.” It becomes a bidding war they can’t win. Ask the downtrodden whether they prefer bootstraps values and tough love or cold hard cash. Fortunately the D’s always overpay, and this go-round the public can plainly see the relationship of massive handouts to inflation unchained.
All true.
French seems to think the left will want to reach some sort of compromise on this issue. They won’t. They want to disarm us, and would if they could.
Remember, the vote for McMullin was engaging in a plan to throw the vote to the House and have them select someone that 90%+ of the people did not vote for. In the name of “Democracy”
That is how I remember it.
The GOPe had it in for Reagan early on.
It was utter hypocrisy. Places like NR called for Trump to support the nominee if he lost. When he won, they refused to support him. Different rules for different people I guess.
That is Never Trump in a nutshell
Just curious. What was that subtitle?
BTW, I think titles are generally not writen by the actual authors, or at least headlines aren’t. Over the years I have heard many complaints by authors about how their work was titled. Still, it probably isn’t far off from Mr. French’s intention.
I know he has fans. And granted I live in the northwest, most every Trump supporter I know is closer to James Lileks’ view than those who think he is pure gold for the values we claim to share. That does NOT mean I respect the NT movement. But being against Trump before he got the nomination is no mark against NT, in my view. And I believe the Never Trump issue came out before he won the nomination, so those who lump NR with the NT crowd are stretching. Lots of us voted for Trump reluctantly, to stop Hilary. His and his proxies’ shenanigans post-election lost me. I voted for him twice. I doubt I could after Nov. ’20. So there’s that.
Very true.
Bill Kristol calls himself a “Reagan Conservative.”
He tried to help a corrupt Democrat Clinton crony become governor of Virginia.
His current gig is running a left-funded media outfit that opposes Republicans and supports Democrats.
A lot of Bush-Republicans are very into this “reach across the aisle and compromise” thing. I don’t think it’s because they’re naive, I think it’s because they agree with Democrats on most things.
I was ABT (anyone but Trump) in the primaries, but it’s the “Never” part that is pure foolishness. “Never say never.” Trump’s personality issues don’t begin to weigh against the utter evil and destructiveness of the Left. I’m sorry, but if people can’t bring themselves to support Trump against the Left in the eventuality that he’s the nominee, they’re complicit in the destruction of the country and our (my) kids’ future.
That’s not a correct timeline of the Against Trump issue. It was published in January 2016 as an attempt to get someone, anyone, else nominated. After the primaries were over, the writers generally split between NT and the binary choice argument in favor of Trump.
I get that people hate NR for that issue, but at least get that right.
Bryan there is a massive difference between religious cultists, and political “Cults of Personality.” I did not call you a “cultist.” I am saying that Trump promotes a “Cult of Personality” where he insists that Republicans adopt his Big Lie.
I remember being angry when some Panthers showed up with guns at voting stations. They didn’t shoot anyone, but it seemed like a threat. I guess it all depends whom you identify with.
The left is lost, but the middle is persuadable. So rhetoric matters. A kid with a gun is not a win friends and influence people image, I think. A kid being shown how to use a gun by a cop or a father would be something else.
To get out the message that responsible gun ownership is a civil right like any other is hard. One thing would be to stress how many inner city people legally acquired guns after the mostly peaceful demonstrations. Since the dems claim to care about that population, their denial of the right to self-defense would count. But at the moment, we are worried about attackers, not hobbyists, hunters, or reasonably prudent citizens.
In any case, the focus on guns is a way to avoid the tough problem: the presence of the deranged in the general population.
It is a very good article and worth your time.
He points out all the times David came out for gun rights.