Fidelity to the Constitution

 

There has been a Twitter dust up between Dan McLaughlin of National Review and Tom Nichols of The Atlantic. Mona Charen decided to weigh in with this:

This strikes to the heart of one of the deepest schisms on the right. Most on the right (excepting perhaps Ms. Charen) look at the direction that the left is taking and see little adherence to the Constitutional order. Look at President Biden’s recent statement on Thanksgiving about how it’s madness that we still allow the sale of semi-automatic firearms. To the left, the Constitution is a barrier to what they want to accomplish, which they see as a progressive utopia.

But to some on the right, especially those who see Donald Trump as the greatest threat to (insert beloved institution here), he is a greater threat than the left’s slow wearing away of our system. I can understand that point of view, even if I don’t agree with it. The problem that we, the right and especially the GOP has, is that this isn’t a circular firing squad like normal, it’s not even cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face, it’s a deeper and fundamental problem that may not have a resolution. People may have disliked Mitt Romney and they didn’t vote for him, and…he lost, but had he won, would a sizable portion of the right have abandoned conservatism and promoted and voted for Barack Obama?  The idea that Donald Trump is so much worse than any other President that has ever held the office is hard to imagine, even as someone who voted for McMullin in ’16.  For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation?  Do they even want one?

That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump, and everything to do with what goals the conservative movement has, or is trying to achieve. The political right, and to a lesser extent the GOP is really an amalgam of various movements that align themselves into a coalition politically. Individuals may align to various levels with one or more of these groupings, but don’t have to be more than one. Some have opposing aims and goals and the conflict causes tension in the GOP and, to a lesser extent in the right itself. What are these groupings?  My list, and it’s always changing is as follows:

Social Conservatives – this contains two large and somewhat overlapping groups the Pro-Life and Trad-marriage groups. There is often an odd dichotomy between authoritarian tendencies and great compassion at an individual level.

Fiscal Conservatives – often can care less about social issues and willing to sacrifice defense to try and balance the budget, some ties to the Rockefeller Republicans of yesteryear.

Nation Defense Conservatives – see the primary role of the government as projecting strength so it doesn’t have to be used. Willing to spend profligately on defense, but usually not on anything else.

Neoconservatives – left the Democratic party when they became pacifists after Viet Nam. Often in conflict with the social and fiscal Conservatives. Differ from the National Defense group in that they see a moral need to use US might to bring freedom to the oppressed.

Paleoconservatives – I tend to use this to define isolationist, but it is more complex. They tend to want smaller government, protectionism in trade, and a strong military that isn’t used much. Often hold strong social conservative views as well.

Libertarians (small l, but it’s the start of a paragraph) – small government, leave people alone, don’t get involved in wars, don’t have the government involved in people’s lives (often very much at odds with Social Conservatives)

Chamber of Commerce Conservatives

Cocktail Conservatives

Judicial Conservatives

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 138 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already,  . . .

    You’re right about that.

    • #31
  2. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, . . .

    You’re right about that.

    Well hi Drew.  I was listening to the “Hacks on Tap” podcast last night.  The consensus was that with the big Democrats wins in Michigan and Pennsylvania, those are no longer swing states but “Lean Democrat” states.

    There are only three swing states left, Arizona where I live, Georgia where Bryan lives, and Wisconsin where you live.*  Whichever party wins two out of the three states in 2024 will win the Presidency.

    I hope that Trump is not the nominee so I can come home to my Republican Party.  This last year, I swung into action, after the August primary.  In 2024, I will swing into action in the Spring when we know who the Republican nominee is.  I hope to be working for a Republican victory, but that is completely determined by if Trump is the Republican nominee or not.

    *There is an argument that there is a fourth “swing” state, namely Nevada, where they elected a Republican Governor, while re-electing a Democrat Senator.

    • #32
  3. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? Do they even want one?

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    My issue is those people who dislike Trump’s character flaws, but like his policies, yet still wouldn’t vote for him. Obviously policies do not matter to them.

    Neither does character for that matter. First Clinton then Biden were the alternatives. Yikes, it should have gotten easier to vote for Trump in 2020 on character alone.

    When Trump clinched the nomination I determined that I woukd vote for Clinton over Trump. That lasted about 15 minutes and then I just resolved to not vote for Trump. I would have abstained from that race but felt that McMullin offered a non-zero chance of actually winning. I think there is a difference between not voting for a person you don’t like (as many did with Romney in 12) and voting for a candidate that opposes your policies. I understand not liking Trump, but where Gary and I part ways is his active support ans voting for Democrats. 

    • #33
  4. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, . . .

    You’re right about that.

    Well hi Drew. I was listening to the “Hacks on Tap” podcast last night.

    That stuff pollutes your mind. You should read a classic novel instead.

    • #34
  5. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? Do they even want one?

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    My issue is those people who dislike Trump’s character flaws, but like his policies, yet still wouldn’t vote for him. Obviously policies do not matter to them.

    Neither does character for that matter. First Clinton then Biden were the alternatives. Yikes, it should have gotten easier to vote for Trump in 2020 on character alone.

    When Trump clinched the nomination I determined that I woukd vote for Clinton over Trump. That lasted about 15 minutes and then I just resolved to not vote for Trump. I would have abstained from that race but felt that McMullin offered a non-zero chance of actually winning. I think there is a difference between not voting for a person you don’t like (as many did with Romney in 12) and voting for a candidate that opposes your policies. I understand not liking Trump, but where Gary and I part ways is his active support ans voting for Democrats.

    I have voted third party three times since 1972, namely in 1976, 1992, and 2016.  It took a lot for me to vote Democrat in 2020.  I hope to not do that again for another 48 years, until 2068, when I will be 116 years old.  

    • #35
  6. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, . . .

    You’re right about that.

    Well hi Drew. I was listening to the “Hacks on Tap” podcast last night.

    That stuff pollutes your mind. You should read a classic novel instead.

    Oh Drew, you might learn something new.  Give it a try.

    • #36
  7. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, . . .

    You’re right about that.

    Well hi Drew. I was listening to the “Hacks on Tap” podcast last night.

    That stuff pollutes your mind. You should read a classic novel instead.

    Oh Drew, you might learn something new. Give it a try.

    Nope. I don’t listen to political podcasts. Or any podcasts. Certainly not going to listen to one with “campaign consultants” which must be the biggest scam going in Washington.

     

    • #37
  8. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    If you did this for Democrats, there would be one category: Progressives.  OK, I can think of two types of Progressives: the violent, and those who look the other way.  All serious debate is within the GOP and has been for a long time.  This ought to be a strength, and would be unquestionably so if Democrats had not kicked out opposing views and marched in unison to the Left.  

    • #38
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Sandy (View Comment):

    If you did this for Democrats, there would be one category: Progressives. OK, I can think of two types of Progressives: the violent, and those who look the other way. All serious debate is within the GOP and has been for a long time. This ought to be a strength, and would be unquestionably so if Democrats had not kicked out opposing views and marched in unison to the Left.

    No, there is a strong contingent of what I call or have heard called “Union Democrats”, who are fairly conservative, but who vote left to (ostensibly) lock in benefits.  Scratch the Midwest and see.

    • #39
  10. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    BDB (View Comment):

    Sandy (View Comment):

    If you did this for Democrats, there would be one category: Progressives. OK, I can think of two types of Progressives: the violent, and those who look the other way. All serious debate is within the GOP and has been for a long time. This ought to be a strength, and would be unquestionably so if Democrats had not kicked out opposing views and marched in unison to the Left.

    No, there is a strong contingent of what I call or have heard called “Union Democrats”, who are fairly conservative, but who vote left to (ostensibly) lock in benefits. Scratch the Midwest and see.

    I was working on an ad last night for an electrical workers’ union and downloaded one of their newsletters to see if I could find some boilerplate language or even some images I could use.

    Not only can the left not meme, they can’t produce a good looking newsletter either. You’d think with all the lefty graphic designers out there . . . but nope.

    And yes, in the newsletter they were promoting Democrats with all the usual Democrat labor-union stuff. But it’s true that they are pretty conservative folks. I’m not sure what it’s going to take to shake them loose from the “We’ve always voted Democrat!” mindset. Democrats going full woke certainly helps open a few eyes. Scott Walker made a few inroads with labor unions by helping creating more jobs and bringing more industry in Wisconsin. But for the most part, the union bosses know the game and that hooking up with Democrats brings power and money.

    • #40
  11. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    • #41
  12. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    • #42
  13. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    Surely you must be joking. I can’t even feed my family thanks to the Democrats you elect.

    • #43
  14. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    I can’t even feed my family thanks to the Democrats you elect.

    I am so sorry to hear that.  I understand that there are jobs in Florida, North Dakota and Texas, which are all conservative states.  Have you considered moving?

    • #44
  15. Stina Inactive
    Stina
    @CM

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    I can’t even feed my family thanks to the Democrats you elect.

    I am so sorry to hear that. I understand that there are jobs in Florida, North Dakota and Texas, which are all conservative states. Have you considered moving?

    Not that easy.

    • #45
  16. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Tom Nichols and Mona Charen are your reminders that there are a lot of people who coasted to fame pretending to be conservatives but have since been revealed as garden-variety Democrats who have nothing interesting to say.

    I was a long-time Mona Charen fan from reading her columns. Then I happened upon one of her podcasts; she was soo condescending toward the “little people,” I decided I wasn’t interested in anything she had to say.

    She lost me too – she used to have principles but now she is driven by ‘what the neighbors think’. 

    • #46
  17. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    Ya know, Gary, what Drew’s getting at is that organizations like National Review, etc., don’t help organize or sponsor things like voter registration drives and so on. They organize cruises.

    Someone like Scott Pressler (whom I first learned about via Twitter) goes to various states/cities and organizes voter registrations drives to specifically get more people registered as Republicans. He has been pretty successful at this. He does this via small donations, and he has NO support from the national/state parties or “GOP-adjacent” organizations, such as Hillsdale or NR. (As an aside, he also organized neighborhood clean-ups in Baltimore and LA. In Charm City his team removed 30 tons of garbage from the streets.)

    THIS is what the right should be doing. Not only organizing the drives, but training people in each state to organize these drives themselves, Pressler also does this when he goes into a state/city. Instead we get magazines and cruises.

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for such things, but one would think the party would give some backing and support to these efforts. After all, these are the foundations of the the party. But the GOP has been failing at it.

     

    • #47
  18. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Stina (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    I can’t even feed my family thanks to the Democrats you elect.

    I am so sorry to hear that. I understand that there are jobs in Florida, North Dakota and Texas, which are all conservative states. Have you considered moving?

    Not that easy.

    You are right.  I didn’t mean to be insensitive.  I wish him well.

    • #48
  19. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    Ya know, Gary, what Drew’s getting at is that organizations like National Review, etc., don’t help organize or sponsor things like voter registration drives and so on. They organize cruises.

    Someone like Scott Pressler (whom I first learned about via Twitter) goes to various states/cities and organizes voter registrations drives to specifically get more people registered as Republicans. He has been pretty successful at this. He does this via small donations, and he has NO support from the national/state parties or “GOP-adjacent” organizations, such as Hillsdale or NR. (As an aside, he also organized neighborhood clean-ups in Baltimore and LA. In Charm City his team removed 30 tons of garbage from the streets.)

    THIS is what the right should be doing. Not only organizing the drives, but training people in each state to organize these drives themselves, Pressler also does this when he goes into a state/city. Instead we get magazines and cruises.

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for such things, but one would think the party would give some backing and support to these efforts. After all, these are the foundations of the the party. But the GOP has been failing at it.

    This is exactly right. And then NR looks around and can’t figure out why the Democrats beat us all the time. So they blame Trump.

    Why? Because the right spends foolishly. The left spends for power.

    Or if you prefer, the left are the ants working furiously and tirelessly for every election. The right are the grasshoppers with cocktail parties and cruises. And they are losing.

    • #49
  20. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    At this point — this age — I consider myself to be an observer of the passing parade. Still, I hope that Adams was wrong: 

    Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

    John Adams

    • #50
  21. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? Do they even want one?

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    My issue is those people who dislike Trump’s character flaws, but like his policies, yet still wouldn’t vote for him. Obviously policies do not matter to them.

    Neither does character for that matter. First Clinton then Biden were the alternatives. Yikes, it should have gotten easier to vote for Trump in 2020 on character alone.

    When Trump clinched the nomination I determined that I woukd vote for Clinton over Trump. That lasted about 15 minutes and then I just resolved to not vote for Trump. I would have abstained from that race but felt that McMullin offered a non-zero chance of actually winning. I think there is a difference between not voting for a person you don’t like (as many did with Romney in 12) and voting for a candidate that opposes your policies. I understand not liking Trump, but where Gary and I part ways is his active support ans voting for Democrats.

    There is a difference,  just not a large one. None of us are an island, and we’re aligned with one team more than the other whether we like it or not. The Fetterman voters know the game. So do most of us, but we’re also fed up with always playing second fiddle and the rest of the band throwing a fit when we step up. Most of the time we sit back down in our place, but sometimes the band just needs to break up if we’re going to reach for actual accomplishment and satisfaction. Either way we’d be a minority. 

    Besides, McMullin? For character? For a non-zero chance of winning?

    • #51
  22. David C. Broussard Coolidge
    David C. Broussard
    @Dbroussa

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? Do they even want one?

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    My issue is those people who dislike Trump’s character flaws, but like his policies, yet still wouldn’t vote for him. Obviously policies do not matter to them.

    Neither does character for that matter. First Clinton then Biden were the alternatives. Yikes, it should have gotten easier to vote for Trump in 2020 on character alone.

    When Trump clinched the nomination I determined that I woukd vote for Clinton over Trump. That lasted about 15 minutes and then I just resolved to not vote for Trump. I would have abstained from that race but felt that McMullin offered a non-zero chance of actually winning. I think there is a difference between not voting for a person you don’t like (as many did with Romney in 12) and voting for a candidate that opposes your policies. I understand not liking Trump, but where Gary and I part ways is his active support ans voting for Democrats.

    There is a difference, just not a large one. None of us are an island, and we’re aligned with one team more than the other whether we like it or not. The Fetterman voters know the game. So do most of us, but we’re also fed up with always playing second fiddle and the rest of the band throwing a fit when we step up. Most of the time we sit back down in our place, but sometimes the band just needs to break up if we’re going to reach for actual accomplishment and satisfaction. Either way we’d be a minority.

    Besides, McMullin? For character? For a non-zero chance of winning?

    At the time his character flaws were not apparent.  And he had more of a chance of winning than if I wrote-in Condi Rice. :-)

    • #52
  23. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? Do they even want one?

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, but here goes. I disagree that this “has nothing to do with Donald Trump.” This has everything to do with Donald Trump for me.

    Before 2020, I really did not like Trump for a whole bunch of reasons, but mostly cultural. I disliked the sound of his voice. I disliked how he disrespected McCain and Flake. I disliked his racialism. I disliked his protectionism and strange relationship with Putin. I disliked Trump’s arrogance. Based upon my dislikes, for the first time in 48 years I voted for a Democrat for President in 2020.

    All of that shifted after the 2020 election and what I see as his manipulation of others. And it locked in irrevocably after January 6, 2021. People who I respect are offended when I say this, so I will try to say it in a respectful manner. The impact on me, personally, of watching the riot at the capitol on January 6, 2021, approaches the impact of September 11, 2001. Yes, I know that far fewer people died on January 6th, than on 9/11. I do not want to dishonor their deaths. But January 6th had an impact on me akin to my parents for the attack on Pearl Harbor. My parents locked in over Pearl Harbor. I locked in over January 6th. My strong dislike of Trump was transformed into irrevocable opposition to Trump and all that was forged on January 6th.

    Do I want to reconcile with those people who voted for Trump? Sure. I love and respect my mother, my brother and my fellow Ricochetti. I want Republicans to win, to the degree that they are more than Trump acolytes. With only one exception (Tom Horne), I voted a Straight Republican Ticket in 2022, provided that the candidate was not endorsed by Trump, and all of the Republicans I voted for won.

    I yearn for Reagan. But I am not willing to reconcile with Trump himself, or accepting the argument that the January 6th election was stolen. For better or worse, after January 6th, I am a radicalized member of NeverTrump, and his endorsement is poison to me, and that is where I draw the line.

    Too bad you probably don’t realize that your dislike for Trump was likely based entirely on what was being fed to you by the media, for their own purposes.

    • #53
  24. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Buckpasser (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Freeven (View Comment):

    David C. Broussard:

    For those that chose that part, who never accepted Trump and continued to fight him, can there be a reconciliation? …

    That problem has nothing to do with Donald Trump…

    I guess I’m not following, because it seems to me that — “for those who never accepted Trump” — the problem has an awful lot to do with Trump. They don’t seem to have minded his policies so much as his character.

    I hesitate to say anything, because you have heard it from me already, but here goes. I disagree that this “has nothing to do with Donald Trump.” This has everything to do with Donald Trump for me.

    Before 2020, I really did not like Trump for a whole bunch of reasons, but mostly cultural. I disliked the sound of his voice. I disliked how he disrespected McCain and Flake. I disliked his racialism. I disliked his protectionism and strange relationship with Putin. I disliked Trump’s arrogance. For the first time in 48 years I voted for a Democrat for President in 2020.

    All of that shifted after the 2020 election and what I see as his manipulation of others. And it locked in irrevocably after January 6, 2021. People who I respect are offended when I say this, so I will try to say it in a respectful manner. But the impact on me, personally, of watching the riot at the capitol on January 6, 2021, approaches the impact of September 11, 2001. Yes, I know that far fewer people died on January 6th, than on 9/11. I do not want to dishonor their deaths. But January 6th had an impact on me akin to my parents for the attack on Pearl Harbor. My parents locked in over Pearl Harbor. I locked in over January 6th. My strong dislike of Trump was transformed into irrevocable opposition to Trump and all that was forged on January 6th.

    Do I want to reconcile with those people who voted for Trump? Sure. I love and respect my mother, my brother and most people at Ricochet. I want Republicans to win, to the degree that they are more than Trump acolytes. With only one exception, I voted a Straight Republican Ticket in 2022, provided that the candidate was not endorsed by Trump, and all of those Republicans won.

    I yearn for Reagan. But I am not willing to reconcile with Trump himself, or accepting the argument that the January 6th election was stolen. For better or worse, after January 6th, I am a radicalized member of NeverTrump, and his endorsement is poison to me, and that is where I draw the line.

    My issue is those people who dislike Trump’s character flaws, but like his policies, yet still wouldn’t vote for him. Obviously policies do not matter to them.

    And much of what they took to be his “character flaws” were just lies from the media.

    • #54
  25. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    David C. Broussard (View Comment):

    Besides, McMullin? For character? For a non-zero chance of winning?

    At the time his character flaws were not apparent.  And he had more of a chance of winning than if I wrote-in Condi Rice. :-)

    Nothing from nothing leaves nothing.

    • #55
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    Ya know, Gary, what Drew’s getting at is that organizations like National Review, etc., don’t help organize or sponsor things like voter registration drives and so on. They organize cruises.

    Someone like Scott Pressler (whom I first learned about via Twitter) goes to various states/cities and organizes voter registrations drives to specifically get more people registered as Republicans. He has been pretty successful at this. He does this via small donations, and he has NO support from the national/state parties or “GOP-adjacent” organizations, such as Hillsdale or NR. (As an aside, he also organized neighborhood clean-ups in Baltimore and LA. In Charm City his team removed 30 tons of garbage from the streets.)

    THIS is what the right should be doing. Not only organizing the drives, but training people in each state to organize these drives themselves, Pressler also does this when he goes into a state/city. Instead we get magazines and cruises.

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for such things, but one would think the party would give some backing and support to these efforts. After all, these are the foundations of the the party. But the GOP has been failing at it.

     

    Yes, even if I could afford an NR cruise, there are so many better uses for the money.  Even relatively small things like paying off the balance due for student lunches at school, for kids whose parents may have trouble even covering the “copayment” for “reduced price” programs.

    • #56
  27. Zafar Member
    Zafar
    @Zafar

    BDB (View Comment):

    I’m assuming that a cocktail conservative is the neo-Rockefeller-wannabe commentariat.

    A mocktail conservative is…sober Milo?

    • #57
  28. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Zafar (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    I’m assuming that a cocktail conservative is the neo-Rockefeller-wannabe commentariat.

    A mocktail conservative is…sober Milo?

    Leave Milo ALONE!

    • #58
  29. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Trump’s behavior did not improve, and Trump attacked any Republican who disagreed with. On the good side, we got three Supreme Court Justices; on the bad side, we had Charlottesville and Putin, and Trump purging the Republican Party of everyone he disagreed with.

    There is not a stick of truth to any of the obvious meaning here outside of getting some SCOTUS picks done.

    People like you chose to walk. That’s not a purge. That’s defection. And so on.

    I read this word differently.  But it still applied.

    • #59
  30. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Stina (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oik (View Comment):

    On the left, they organize for power.

    On the right, they organize for charter cruises.

    I’ve not gone on a cruise, have you?

    I can’t even feed my family thanks to the Democrats you elect.

    I am so sorry to hear that. I understand that there are jobs in Florida, North Dakota and Texas, which are all conservative states. Have you considered moving?

    Not that easy.

    It is for the condescending ultra-rich.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.