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 or #NeverTrump? Haley Barbour and Charles Murray Disagree
On the podcast today, Rob and I interviewed two genuinely brilliant men. Haley Barbour, the former governor of Mississippi, has dedicated the better part of his life to the Republican Party. He helped transform the South into a central component — perhaps the central component — of the GOP base, then served in the Reagan administration (where he and I became fast friends), and then as chairman of the Republican National Committee. Charles Murray has written half a dozen books, including two of the most important works the conservative movement has ever produced. His 1984 masterpiece, Losing Ground, detailed the case that the expansion of welfare did more harm than good to the very people it was intended to help; twenty-eight years later, Coming Apart chronicled in heartbreaking detail the growing gulf between a prosperous new class and those beset by wage stagnation and dissolving families.
Although Haley and Charles joined us at different points in the podcast, Rob and I asked each man the same question: If Donald Trump were to capture the Republican nomination, should we vote for him or support an independent candidate instead? Rather than paraphrase, I’ll let each explain, in his own words, how he answers the most important question conservatives may face this year.
Here’s Barbour:
And here’s Murray:
Two patriots, two fine, deeply-informed minds—and two utterly opposed answers.
Over to you, Ricochet.
Published in Politics
^This.
They are both right. So lets forget the question and insist that Cruz is electable. A confident, solid majority, or appearance of a majority is not without influence. If we get to the convention with more non Trump delegates we can do it. If not we’ll have to get something from Trump we must have. A court appointment, secretaries of State and Defense. Republicans, especially conservative Republicans think too much. The future is not knowable so all we can do is place some big lumpy things in the road that are hard to ignore. These things aren’t intellectual, they are biblical. Forget the past you cant change it, don’t worry about the future it’s out of your hands, but do the right things right down and it helps shape that future whatever it might be.
The lesser of two evils is still evil. As much as I hate Hillary or whatever hack the Democrats run, I can’t vote for a man whose politics and personal behavior I despise evn if I despise the other side more. My vote defines who I am. The couch is looking like a great place to be on Election day.
#NeverTrump
Barbour chooses his words somewhat carefully. I didn’t take his response as an endorsement of Trump. I took his response as an indictment of a third party (which isn’t possible now) and an endorsement of voting for the Republican nominee over Hillary.
Barbour and other Republican Party hands are careful to make the distinction between Trump and the Nominee. There clearly is thinking that the nominee will be someone other than Trump and probably other than Cruz or Kasich.
What is there to say on this topic that hasn’t already been said a million times?
Answered the Internet: “Whatever I said. That, of course, is original and thoughtful.”
That is funny! – and a little too close to the truth
That is why it’s in my image library. The only difference between me and that cartoon is my wife doesn’t ask if I’m coming to bed.
Peter, I’m really surprised that you and Rob concluded that Gov. Barbour’s view was “compelling.” Since when is it conservative to mindlessly defer to “the people”? I assume there is something Trump could say or do that would make Gov. Barbour wash his hands and not vote for Trump or Hillary—where would he draw that line?
Lincoln drew his own line in the sand when it comes to achieving justice in our country. For him, “[t]he answer is simple. Let every American… never violate in the least particular, the laws of the country; and never to tolerate their violation by others.”
Applying his reasoning to our situation today, it doesn’t matter whether voting for a third-party conservative candidate would ensure a Clinton victory. While Trump and his supporters may have correctly identified violations of laws, it’s wrong in and of itself to remedy those wrongs by installing someone to mimic President Obama’s unconstitutional executive actions for conservative ends (as Trump has promised).
Fidelity to the Constitution and our laws has been the GOP’s bread-and-butter–Lincoln said we can’t sink to “mob law” to end slavery, Scalia argued judges can’t legislate from the bench.
What should be clear is that a Trump nomination represents a clear break with kind of politics envisioned by Lincoln—if that’s the choice Gov. Barbour makes, he should admit it. Don’t we believe there are more important things than winning?
No!
I’m no longer sure this is a good assumption.
That’s what he argued, but he did legislate from the bench. Only Thomas actually lives by that standard.
Have you heard the expression: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good?
We may well be left with the “least good” candidate at the end of this process, but it’s still better than what’s on offer from the other side.
And that’s the only choice that matters. That was Barbour’s point.
Yes. But if you don’t win you don’t get those either.
I’m not sure that “don’t descend into mob law!” is my definition of perfect, nor is Trump anywhere close to my definition of good enough. And Barbour’s wrong–we have a multitude of choices other than Trump or Clinton (assuming Trump wins the nomination).
Where do you draw the line?
Where’d you get that phrase “good enough”? Who said that?
What other choices?
Given the options, at anything that would lead Hillary to be elected.
I’ve now had a chance to listen to Barbour’s full statements… I still disagree with his views on Trump but boy was he dead on when discussing how we got here etc. Similar to Mona in a lot of ways.
Somehow the talk radio crowd never got around to mentioning the need for 60 votes in the Senate and rather than hammering Joe Manchin or whomever for the lie of being a “moderate” Democrat, they just slammed other Republicans. Imagine if Joe Manchin had been slammed all the time on the radio instead of McConnell and West Virginia had flipped that seat.
I’m with Haley.
There is obviously a lot to this, but once the Republicans gained control of the Senate, they should have taken up all those bills sent over by the house and forced the Dems to filibuster them and use that to paint the Senate Dems as obstructionist (and possibly picked off enough dems to force Obama to veto some things).
Instead, they appeared to have just said, “Let’s not bother because it will take effort and just get filibustered instead, so let’s go raise campaign donations instead.”
If politics is just theater, the GOP put on the paint drying movie when people wanted something more like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
That is a false alternative. Hillary is not the answer. But she isn’t a republican.
Interestingly, the foundation of Conservatism seems to be in disagreement with Barbour’s point, it is based on the premise that millions of primary voters can and will be wrong, and we cannot give them the power to act as a mob any more than we can give the government power to act unilaterally.
I think the difference is that, while I may disagree with nearly every policy position HRC holds, I don’t think the country faces an apocalypse it otherwise wouldn’t in the next four years if she wins (I seem to be in the minority here on this belief). An HRC administration would provide conservatives a chance to regroup and better pitch our arguments to the public in two years. A Trump presidency, on the other hand, would mean four years of conservative/Republican scrambling to distance themselves from Trump’s “policies,” his hate-mongering, and unimaginable injury to our position on the world stage. I’d take the loss and fight back harder next time rather than take a win in name only and then spend four years on the run from it.
So I just listened to the podcast in its entirety. Barbour wasn’t as bad as I was prepared for, but he’s wrong.
Charles Murray is exactly right… and, at the risk of being that guy, I have been saying almost verbatim what Murray says on countless episodes of “Flyover Country.”
That character is essential to conservatism is undeniable.
If your primary concern is being blamed for the decisions you make then you are not executive material to begin with. For that reason I was hoping for a governor to be the candidate of the Republican Party but am delighted it is not likely to be an inexperienced senator.
wait… you think any of the senators involved are less experienced than Trump?
And I think the criticism of Trump is not that he will be blamed for his decisions, but that he will forever be the media-face of Republicans, as he is the perfect embodiment of the liberal caricature of us. WE will be forever blamed for his mistakes, of which there are sure to be a great many. Granted, Obama isn’t exactly being blamed for his own mistakes, but history may prove to judge differently than our current media class.
I won’t pretend that I know all the inner workings of the Senate but wasn’t part of the problem that Harry Reid used every trick in the book in committee or parliamentary rules to prevent floor votes on just about everything?
Reid did when he was senate majority leader. That’s why I said “once the Republicans gained control of the senate”, because Reid could not longer do that at that point.
One of the best podcasts ever. Thank you Rob and Peter!
This Trump not Trump is not easy, but also focus on your comments about Nancy Reagan– her rootedness in reality. This is the difference between Barbour and Murray as well. Murray is an intellectual. He lives in the world of abstractions and analytical conclusions. There is a false reality there all us conservatives are familiar with. We live too much in it. Our abstractions are necessary for us to understand reality, but they are not reality and we must not confuse them. Hillary and the Democratic party are reality. There is no hope, no influence, no common ground with her. That is not true of Trump. First we must stop speculating and focus on a Cruz win. Then we have to have a strategy to shape and influence the Trump reality. What we cannot do is allow our abstract concerns about his deep flaws to lead us to the reality of Clinton.
I think because of the rules of the Senate, without 60 votes the Minority Leader still has enormous power on scheduling/blocking votes or getting things out of committee.