Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 42 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    I’m calling my band Southern Umbrage.

    • #31
  2. Troy Senik Member
    Troy Senik
    @TroySenik

    Quake Voter:As a very reluctant Trump voter, voting for the administration, court picks and agency heads and NOT THE MAN, I was helped by hearing Troy’s trademark cogent brief against a Trump vote. Helped because I found it unpersuasive. It was a good try though. The connection between Trump department heads and court picks and the tyranny of experts seems to be misplaced. Do you want Trump and his advisers (and his personal lack of expertise) making the picks for Justice, Energy, Commerce, Education et al. or Hillary based on her own “expertise.”

    Perhaps I wasn’t all that cogent in my delivery, because this is actually a mischaracterization of my argument. Or — probably more accurately — a conflation of different threads.

    The “tyranny of experts” discussion was not an argument against Trump. I was making the broader point that the “he’ll surround himself with the best and brightest” rationale is not a useful insurance policy for any president — because the best and brightest will (A) often be wrong and (B) often disagree. The only person who gets to sort out the arguments is the POTUS himself, which means at the end of the day it still comes down to one man’s judgment.

    The actual argument against Trump that I find more persuasive is, as I referenced on the show, that his illiberalism and nascent authoritarian tendencies are potentially a bigger long-term threat to the country than Hillary’s continuation of the progressive agenda. I have no idea whether that will prove true, but it’s an extremely high-risk bet either way. In the end it’s a prudential judgment for conscientious conservatives  — and I know extremely sensible people on both sides of that divide.

    • #32
  3. Quake Voter Inactive
    Quake Voter
    @QuakeVoter

    Troy Senik:The “tyranny of experts” discussion was not an argument against Trump. I was making the broader point that the “he’ll surround himself with the best and brightest” rationale is not a useful insurance policy for any president — because the best and brightest will (A) often be wrong and (B) often disagree. The only person who gets to sort out the arguments is the POTUS himself, which means at the end of the day it still comes down to one man’s judgment.

    The actual argument against Trump that I find more persuasive is, as I referenced on the show, that his illiberalism and nascent authoritarian tendencies are potentially a bigger long-term threat to the country than Hillary’s continuation of the progressive agenda. I have no idea whether that will prove true, but it’s an extremely high-risk bet either way. In the end it’s a prudential judgment for conscientious conservatives — and I know extremely sensible people on both sides of that divide.

    I tend to locate the tyranny of experts in government agencies, particularly legal, planning and health departments, environmental advocacy groups, academia and and all the jump-up experts in the media who frame and dominate the discussion on every topic.

    Trump is no conservative but if he survives the coming fury of the next three months he will be the most anti-liberal president in memory, and the most hated by liberal elites.  Perversely, I feel his intellectual laziness and basic ignorance of process could create a strong conservative cabinet government, particularly in the unsexy departments which drive most of the agenda.

    Populate a Trump cabinet and compare it to a Clinton cabinet. Is there any comparison?

    Compare Trump’s likely picks not only for SCOTUS, but for the circuit openings GOP senators have kept vacant (another accomplishment of the do nothing Senate GOP), with Clinton’s.  Again, any  comparison?

    Granted, populating an administration around a petulant bully clown is far from ideal.  And supporting a presidential candidate while solacing yourself with the likelihood of his subsequent impeachment is no morale booster.  But populating Clinton’s cabinet around the most corrupt left wing harridan in American history is just not preferable to me.

    No escaping or evading your authoritarian concerns or the potential long-term damage to the GOP and the country if the circumstances of his election and composition of his cabinet can’t direct and restrain Trump.

    There is also the danger of Trump’s personal style in those policy areas — particularly international summit politics — where diplomacy, genuine expertise and collective cabinet nous can often be, well, trumped by glamorous showbiz posturing and dealmaking.

    Yet re both these concerns he isn’t running against Truman.

    No avoiding a verkakte vote this year.

    • #33
  4. RyanM Inactive
    RyanM
    @RyanM

    @quakevoter, I hear everything you’re saying, and regarding the immediate future, I think your argument has merit. That is, if you could separate the people from the movement. The key difference is, with Hillary, it really is Obama’s third term. With Trump, I feel like the conservative movement won’t ever be able to unscramble the egg… you might say we’re past that point, but I think a trump candidacy might be a really hard lesson learned, while a trump presidency would be scrambling the egg.

    • #34
  5. Kaladin Inactive
    Kaladin
    @Kaladin

    Thanks to everyone for listening and commenting.  I won’t apologize for the length, it’s just what we do.

    And on the 6,397th day, God created the pause button, for in 30 years Ricochet members will need it dearly.

    • #35
  6. Julie Snapp Coolidge
    Julie Snapp
    @JulieSnapp

    As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    • #36
  7. Troy Senik Member
    Troy Senik
    @TroySenik

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ;)

    • #37
  8. Titus Techera Contributor
    Titus Techera
    @TitusTechera

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ?

    Does anyone ever say Arkansawyer in Arkansas?

    • #38
  9. Julie Snapp Coolidge
    Julie Snapp
    @JulieSnapp

    Titus Techera:

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ?

    Does anyone ever say Arkansawyer in Arkansas?

    Not the native Arkansans I know. It’s generally people from out of state. Like when they say ArKANSAS (where Kansas is pronounced like the state). Also similar to Montana being called Montucky. We (Terry and I) live in Bozeman, Montana and it constantly gets called “Bozeangeles, Montucky”. Just kind of makes my eye twitch. :P

    • #39
  10. Julie Snapp Coolidge
    Julie Snapp
    @JulieSnapp

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ?

    Oh yeah? I actually did not know that about you. What part of Arkansas?

    • #40
  11. Troy Senik Member
    Troy Senik
    @TroySenik

    Julie Snapp:

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ?

    Oh yeah? I actually did not know that about you. What part of Arkansas?

    Anywhere along I-40. I used to drive back and forth between Nashville and Los Angeles once every six weeks or so.

    • #41
  12. Julie Snapp Coolidge
    Julie Snapp
    @JulieSnapp

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:

    Troy Senik:

    Julie Snapp:As an Arkansan, Troy. I’m incredibly offended that you implied I was racist!

    As the Ricochet contributor who has probably spent the most time in Arkansas, I’m happy to publicly testify that it is a state filled with lovely people.

    That one imaginary guy in my hypothetical is a real piece of work though. ?

    Oh yeah? I actually did not know that about you. What part of Arkansas?

    Anywhere along I-40. I used to drive back and forth between Nashville and Los Angeles once every six weeks or so.

    I’m sorry. :( That’s a really boring road to be on. I used to live in Jonesboro before I moved up here.

    • #42
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.