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.
Trump Reconsidered
“Donald Trump” by Michael Vadon. Via Wikimedia Commons.
It’s time for those of us holding our noses at Trump to reconsider our approach. He’s not our cup of tea, but he may be a cup we have to drink from. Barring a minor miracle in Iowa, or a major one in New Hampshire, Trump is going to be our nominee. He may even be the president. It’s time we tried to make that unwanted cup as palatable as possible.
What is at stake here is not our pride or our good taste, but the future of the country we love. After the depredations of Obama’s rule, we conservatives do not have the luxury of holding our breath until our preferred candidate materializes; we owe it to America to try to make the best of a potential Trump presidency.
The attitudes expressed by George Will, Jay Nordlinger, Mona Charen, and others whom I admire are wrong: rather than be embarrassed by Trump or worry that he will tarnish the conservative movement, conservatives should be taking a page from the Left and try to bring The Donald into the fold. In short, we need less public fulmination and more private persuasion.
I have nothing against Trump as a person. His bluster and crassness are unappealing to me, but my real reservation about him is that he does not grasp the wily ways of the Left and thus will be duped into policies that will work against his intended purpose. Remember the governorships of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jesse Ventura.
The testimony of Conrad Black and others has shown me a side of Donald Trump I did not think existed. They both attest to his kind support during their times of trouble. This speaks to magnanimity, something sorely lacking in our times. The norm of our days is that your conservative friends vanish when you are accused of anything, however unjustly. Trump stands by his friends. I am not arguing that Trump is Mitt Romney — a person of exemplary moral character — but that he could be somebody we could do business with.
Conservative thought leaders should approach Trump quietly and respectfully in an attempt to alert him to the dangers that litter the ideological landscape. This may already be going on behind the scenes, but if it is not, it should happen, pronto. That delegation should be led by Conrad Black and Larry Kudlow, resplendent in their finery. It should also include George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Jay Nordlinger and Mona Charen all dressed as penitents, unshod and wrapped in sackcloth.
Published in Politics
_(cropped).jpg#/media/File:Donald_Trump_(14235998650)_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
I like what you are saying, I just don’t trust Trump to see it in his interest when his track record shows crony capitalism above all other principles have benefitted him immensely. Why eliminate the EPA when they can be an effective tool against economic adversaries. Why reduce regulation across the board when they can be retooled to advantage/disadvantage ones own interests/opponents?
Considering Trump’s popularity is primarily based on emotional response to his statements on immigration feelings matter.
Everybody is worried about Trump’s ideology, but I think it matters little. With a Trump presidency Congress will finally be able to function again as then it won’t be Rep vs. Dem it will be Congress vs. The Donald. If The Donald is elected president, I predict very rapid feelings of regret from the American electorate. He will have little support and Congress and SCOTUS will work hard to limit the powers of the Executive. The Donald will not engender Mussolini or Hitler like devotion (nor do I believe he has those totalitarian attitudes within him). In the long run, The Donald will do more for bipartisanship and a return to Constitutional governance then any president (excepting maybe Silent Cal) in history – not due to his constitutional conservative ideology – but despite his complete lack of it.
He has policies?
@ Sal and Donald Todd,
If Trump is the nominee Hillary will win regardless, so I’m perfectly justified in a masturbatory vote. Even in the unlikely event that he wins, we’re likely to see nothing more than a Republican version of Obama; and take one step closer to Caesarism. I deplore the man utterly, and will not be a party in any way to his political ambitions.
If that causes Donald Todd to question my convictions… well, I’ll just have to learn to live with that.
Every politician’s appeal is based on emotion, but we like to pretend tax plans matter instead.
Cruz supporters like that he stands up to GOP leadership and don’t like hearing detracting statements. His haters hate that he is or seems insincere (often it’s the seeming that’s more important.)
A lot of Rubio supporters talk about how aspirational or young or handsome he is. I half expect that Peter draws hearts around “Mrs. Peter Rubio” on his podcasts notes he crushes on him so hard.
Conservatives are no better than liberals I this regard: we just adore different types of idols.
I think that all the other candidates are genuinely attentive to what they say. That is why they are so painful to listen too. They parse and talk around issues because they do intend to only be held to what they have said. The success in remaining consistent down the road is an issue and must be examined. But I do think that they operate under the principle that they will be held to what they say, when saying it.
Yes, several very specific and well authored policies on his website.
He may not be either of our choice for ideal candidate, but the lack of research from either his supporters are detractors is nearly unlimited.
I’m not picking on you in particular, Sal, because lots of people on Ricochet make this argument. I’m arguing against the argument. Let’s look at some numbers. Yudansha’s profile says Denver for the hometown, so I looked up Colorado’s 2012 election results. Barack Obama had 113,099 more votes than Mitt Romney. The Libertarian candidate (Gary Johnson) had 32,262 votes. All other independent and third-party candidates had a combined total of 23,555 votes. So in 2012, if Yudansha had persuaded every single Libertarian and other third-party voter to vote for Mitt Romney, Obama still would have carried Colorado by over 57,000 votes. I don’t care for the notion that a person is obligated to vote for someone they can’t stand because the other mainstream party candidate is even worse.
What part of preserve the value of citizenship, secure the borders and get less one sided trade deals are not ‘the country’s concerns”?
Trump is living proof that a snake can reproduce with a cockroach.
Then he is fully qualified as a republican.
I recognize his success at the lip service he pays to the issues.
It’s entirely possible that the next President will elevate four justices to the Supreme Court, based on age alone. Heaven forbid that anything happens to the next two, agewise, who will both be in their 70s by the end of the next Presidential term. And then, of course, we all know that anything’s possible, healthwise, at any time, for any of us.
Isn’t this the single biggest reason to do everything possible to keep Hillary Clinton out of the White House? If not, why not?
Flawed as some of the Republican Presidents’ Court nominees have proven themselves to be, just consider the alternative.
There is no reason to suspect Trump’s nominees will be better. None.
Brent, are you sure you don’t mean a Reptilican?
Sure you do. You have a lot more influence on the selection committee.
Keep in mind, too, the last Democratic President’s successful Court-packing escapade. The 1942 Supreme Court that gave us Wickard had eight of the nine Justices as FDR appointees. It was downhill from there for the next several decades.
I’ll take my chances with Trump nominations over Clinton’s.
Eric Hines
TRUMP THE SHARK!
No, it isn’t a vote for Hillary, and I can prove it with a spreadsheet. (It used to be that conservatives were good with math. What happened?)
So I guess my choice is lip service versus outright disdain and scorn for not wanting open borders. Sorry, but I will take a chance on one who says he will close the border over the ones stuffing their pockets with COC money who will open it wider.
As opposed to Republicans who are snakes trying to mate with a shoelace?
Excellent point, but it doesn’t take into account just how much distrust and badwill the GOP establishment has built up over the years.
I recall discussing the candidacy of Mitt Romney at this very site, and a frequent topic was whether or not he really intended to repeal Obamacare. Strange, because he frequently said that he would. Pondering this, I finally concluded that terribly few people took anything any establishment figure said at face value. Instead, every sentence was carefully parsed with the intent to discern its true meaning, as if we were discussing the Pravda editorial about the latest Soviet five year plan.
I blame the Bushes. The first infamously broke his promise not to raise taxes, which I heard about for years after. The second infamously refused to secure the US border, disastrously mishandled the Iraq War, and presided over an economic collapse.
In my opinion the Bush presidents aborted two likely eras of Republican political dominance, doing great damage to the GOP brand and to the nation itself.
That’s a tough burden for their friends and supporters in present GOP to overcome, and it appears that they simply cannot.
I’m comfortable in making the assertion that of all the candidates, on both sides, Trump is the least likely to restrict even one illegal immigrant from entering our country. He cares not one wit and his personal interest lies elsewhere. He does set a nice stage with bellicose speech and conservative-ish policies, I believe him least of all.
I think the important question is: Will they be worse?
Is it not funny how those that once told everybody to toe the GOPe line, to suck it up hold their nose and just vote the GOP in during the last few elections are now ready to cut and run when the primary process does not go the way they like?
Considering that Trump is actually trying to respond to the wants of the people who might elect him, as contrasted by those who want the votes but not the opinions of the voters, I can imagine a welcome feeling for someone pulling the oar in the right direction.
Thank you sir.
I was going to make the same point.
Yudansha, I am surprised to learn that you are an oracle. You’ve already figured out who wins and broadcast it repeatedly. You’ve also decided that your vote is coming from the groin. Given the Clinton’s record for living in that vicinity, maybe that is the way to figure out who to vote for; but I’ll pass on that.
Live with it.