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.
The Legions of Brexit, the Legions of Trump
The parallels are too obvious to ignore … and almost too trite to voice. Our cousins of the “special relationship” variety across the pond have seized the torch and plunged off into the gathering gloom. Are we going to follow?
It has happened before.
Resolve in the face of Communism and belief in the Free Market brought Thatcher to the forefront in Britain. Reagan – only a step behind – followed. The thirst for a lean, market-oriented third way produced Tony Blair. And he was followed by his doppelganger Bill Clinton. And now not a candidate but a populist movement swells among the descendants of Albion. A small flame of national identity, a hunger for self-determination and mostly a common-sense recognition of the perils of the invading hordes, be they bureaucrats or barbarians, has taken hold.
And Britain has just said “frankly Brussels, I don’t give a damn.”
So what will the logical coda of this etude be in the Colonies? Is the great wheel of history turning in the direction of … Donald Trump?
Unelected bureaucrats meddling in our way of life – telling us what light bulbs we can use, what bailout funds for profligate socialists we must prop up – and all the while conveying their condescension and disdain of us: do we have to tolerate this?
Invasions of our country by the world’s impoverished and the world’s intolerant; taking our jobs, threatening our citizens and demanding that we display tolerance toward their way of life: don’t we have a choice of who we let in here?
Global trade relations that allow the masters of the universe to ignore borders and treat our workers as broken, dispirited and overpriced units in comparison to the less-educated, cheaper and more pliable units of China, Indonesia and elsewhere: we know how much money they have but how many votes does that entitle them to?
Do you still think that Donald Trump is a huckster – a latter day P.T. Barnum – selling nothing but cheap and worthless snake oil to zombie fans of reality TV? Because consider, when those zombies awoke today to see all of the talking heads in fire alarm mode and the esteemed heads of this or that commission of this or that international ruling body looking like they’d just been informed of some life-changing surgery they would have to undergo, do you think that those zombies – who had only remotely even heard the word “Brexit” before – do you think they reflexively worried about their 401k plans? Hell no! They don’t got no stinking 401k plans. You know what those zombies did? They laughed!
And then what about the polls and the betting markets and the recently buoyant financial markets that are reeling today? No one thought that “remain” was a sure thing, but the smart money was on the jet black colt with the exquisite breeding. The aging chestnut mare (of uncertain parentage) was so easily made the object of ridicule that the educated bettors never bothered to ask whether, after all, she could run or not.
How much are the elites here in America fooling themselves as well? Are they still betting that the Trump phenomenon is a shallow circus act with no relation to the emerging zeitgeist (forgive me Angela)? Because I tell you once and once again: the movement is one.
And so fellow conservatives – fellow Ricochetti – I say that today is a day for unambiguous celebration. Today is a day for the Children of Paradise to dance and for us to dance with them. Let the next few months until, oh, around November be an experiment on what happens when democracy overrules the entrenched interests and dynamism defeats stasis.
And let’s see if the day after election day the zombies who love reality TV will laugh again.
[If you enjoyed this post and are not a member of Ricochet, please join and say hello in the comments. Also, please check out the Harvard Lunch Club Podcast, and this week’s episode: “No Mention of ISIS.”]
Published in General
Why shouldn’t we think of the 16 million who didn’t vote for Trump?
It is not true of all, but it is evident this is true of many of the Trumpers.
If my not supporting Trump helps Hillary, why does my not supporting Hillary not then support Trump?
You are correct that some on the right will vote for Hillary, but every survey I have seen of the NeverTrumpers shows that number is much smaller than those who will a) only vote down ballot, b) write in a name, or c) vote third party.
It is interesting how your logic inevitably comes down to NeverTrumpers doing what they have declared they will not do and throw their support behind your own candidate, no matter how objectionable we find him.
We generally recognize that Trumpers, whether enthusiastic or reluctant, are genuine in their desire to vote for Trump. It would be nice if you would show us the same courtesy when we say we believe he would be a disaster for this nation.
Is this a parody? Or do you honestly not believe that your fellow members can look at all available candidates and come to a reasoned decision that neither are acceptable?
Very few NeverTrumpers praise Hillary. I expect you and I agree a lot on immigration, I just don’t believe Trump will do anything about it.
I believe Trump is an (unwittting) Trojan Horse for the progressive left. His instincts are statist, which means his solutions will be statist. No more statist than Hillary’s, but statist nonetheless. The problem is when his statist trade policies and statist health care policies get implemented and drive us further into economic crisis, because he has an R after his name the Republicans will get blamed. I would rather the the pain caused by the coming statist policies get blamed on the Democrats.
It is not true that most NeverTrumpers praise Hilary for her accomplishments – this is mendacious and given that you have interacted with many NeverTrumpers at Ricochet who have told you this means that you are intentionally imputing bad faith on fellow members.
No, but @DemsRRealRacist is one you should look into and you’ll see what I’m getting at. Sure, you can say that neither of the two choices are good ones. But that doesn’t mean one of them won’t win. So it’s simple: Clinton or Trump.
Spare me.
All too many of the nevertrumpers I see not just here but elsewhere can’t manage to hide how much better they like Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump.
They have every right to that opinion, and I hold no grudge against them for it.
I just wish they’d stop preening about it.
Pleas put up links to fellow members saying they prefer Hilary to Trump. You won’t find any from me. I doubt you will find more than a handful from any members. Furthermore, I as a committed NeverTrumper am telling you that I find both objectionable for different reasons.
So what is happening here is that you are not acting in good faith. Please stop.
There is a reason it is NeverTrump and not ForHillary.
My experience with nevertrumpers differs, and about immigration I have learned that the usual suspects of the GOP absolutely will not do anything about illegal immigration, no matter what.
Republicans already get blamed for everything, which is something they appear to be fine with, perhaps because they believe this helps them advance their one true love of globalism.
You can feel free to vote as you choose, with the idea that eventually the left will gift us with a catastrophe so thorough that even the bitterly unpopular globalist wing of the GOP will seem a better choice for the electorate. But I doubt that will happen in time enough to prevent a catastrophe so thorough that the United States will cease to exist.
But I decline to repeat myself.
Don’t tell me I’m not acting in good faith. It strikes me as an attempt to get me banned, which is certainly not a good faith criticism. And don’t tell me what opinion I should form about nevertrumpers, either.
If you folks can’t vote for either candidate I have sympathy for you. If by some terrible accident of history Jeb! had managed to stumble his way into the nomination I’d be in the same sort of boat.
Vote your conscience. That is certainly honorable.
But for Pete’s sake just stop patting yourselves on the back.
We get it. You don’t like Trump. Message received.
Stop misrepresenting our positions and I’ll stop accusing you of bad faith.
Hmm. I wonder what he would have said if “leave” had lost? Or is he so smart that he, and he alone, knew how the vote would turn out, even months ago?
I find this argument unassailable. So I am going to help Trump by not backing Hillary.
Mr. Axe, this is the second time that this point has been made today. So let me clarify. I mean this to apply to people whom I think would prefer to live in the possible future where Trump wins in 2016 rather than the one where Hillary wins, i.e. people who, when pressed, would admit that Trump is the lesser evil but, because he is *an* evil, still refuse to vote for him.
For those who really cannot distinguish the possible futures I don’t claim that not voting is helping Hillary. This ought to be a small sample, though.
People who think, for example, that the conservative movement would be better served by Hillary winning and then taking back the Republican Party in 2020 are not in this group. They are in the group who should obviously vote for Hillary. (George Will evidently is one of them…fine for him).
My only argument is this context is that not voting (or voting for a someone whom you yourself believe has no chance of winning) is, in a game theory sense, not rational. (unless it is just too much trouble to get to the polling place, or something like that).
I think it was smart to be on the scene in either case. It was where the cameras were likely to be. And I have no doubt that Trump and his team are smart enough to know what was going on when.
So he can read a calendar. But no extra credit for being able to tie the British vote to his own movement. Not only didn’t he know ahead of time how it would turn out, he didn’t know after the fact how Scotland voted.
I am in that small sample. I think about it all the time. I ask myself, “When I find out who won on election night, which result will make me feel a bit better than the alternative?” I honestly don’t know the answer. They are both “evils” to me, though of different natures.
The idea that someone would really prefer a Trump future to a Hillary future but won’t support him would be silly. That much is true. However, I know quite a few people who won’t support Trump, but I don’t know any such who also prefer a Trump future. That is where you and I disagree. There are aspects of that Trump future that I find so objectionable that I can’t say that I prefer it to a Hillary future. And I really, really hate Hillary.
I am fine with people who really feel they can’t distinguish. And I guess that, contrary to what I said before, there are bound to be many such people on the border. Normally such border people are in the ideological middle but this is not, I understand, a normal election.
Some of these people include Richard Epstein, John Yoo, Jay Nordlinger, Mona Charen, Kevin Williamson, and Charlie Cooke. These are thoughtful people whom I hold in the highest regard. Maybe you do, too. That doesn’t mean anyone has to agree with them. I mention them not to appeal to authority but only to show that I am not alone in hewing to the middle ground.
I think most of us on the NT side believe the Trumpers have evaluated the facts and come to a different conclusion than we have, leading them to vote Trump. We just believe they are analyzing the facts incorrectly.
On the other hand, based on what I keep hearing them say, it seems like the Trumpers believe that we have analyzed the the facts and come to the same conclusion, and yet won’t vote for Trump out of some misplaced party loyalty, snobbishness, or preening self importance.
I’m a bit tired of having to explain that yes, we really do believe he can be as bad, perhaps worse, than she.
Good grief, Michael, please read what we are saying. No one, absolutely no one, claims that sitting out the election rather than voting for Trump doesn’t help Hillary – to the tune of exactly one vote. On the other hand, if I had to vote for one of them I would vote for Hillary, so the better interpretation is that my sitting out the election actually helps Trump.
However, both of these interpretations miss the point entirely. We have two candidates who are completely unqualified to be President, and who are morally repugnant. I will not vote for either of them. You can call that “virtue signalling” and “sanctimony” if you like, but that’s just your way of changing the subject. I’m not worried about “signalling” anything. If nobody knew how I was voting, I would still not vote for Trump. That’s not “signalling” virtue. It’s just plain virtue. It’s doing the right thing. And speaking for myself, I will do the right thing as I see it, no matter what cockamamie spin you try to put on it.