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.
Confessions of a Reluctant Trumper
Having exuberantly joined the Communist Party of the United States in 1925, Whittaker Chambers became dismayed both with Stalin’s show trials and purges as well as with the hideous realities of collectivism before finally breaking faith in 1938. “I know that I’m leaving the winning side for the losing side,” he wrote of his decision to join with the West, to which he would later add, in a letter to his friend Ralph de Toledano:
It’s the realization … that this side is in its plight because of its stupidity, and cannot get out it because of its stupidity, and cannot help anybody … because of its stupidity — it’s that that’s killing us. And the stupidity of well-meaning friends is far more destructive than the malicious mischief of outright enemies. When you have to face the fact that they cannot, simply are unable, to act like grownups, then you know that it’s hopeless and all that we have tried to do is for nothing.
“So we’re doomed,” the antagonist might ask, “because too many of our fellow citizens can recite the names of all 15 American Idol winners but can’t name three people who signed the Declaration of Independence, and wouldn’t know the Federalist Papers from Federal Express?” Well, yes, there’s that part of it to be sure, but Chambers was reaching for a deeper point, as K. Alan Snyder observed several years ago over at First Principles. “He seems to have taken to heart the Christian doctrine of man’s depravity,” writes Snyder. Or, as Tolenado himself observed, “the struggle was no longer between Communism and Western civilization, but one in which Western civilization was destroying itself by betraying its heritage.”
As proof of the everlasting relevance of Chambers’ point, I offer as Exhibits A and B, the Democratic and Republican presidential nominees. And while acknowledging that the choices in this election are not binary, though with the understanding that the results will in fact be so, I will cast my vote for Donald Trump, though I suspect that I too am joining the losing side.
To be sure, I’m not suggesting that Mr. Trump will lose the election. On the contrary, while both candidates possess superhuman powers of self destruction, Trump seems increasingly adept and stylistically nimble while Clinton’s stodgy and stunted delivery of yesterday’s dusty and failed big-government prescriptions is about as inspiring as a toothache. So while it is still possible that Trump could win the election, the larger point is the arrested civic development of too many voters, combined with the willingness of too many in political and media circles to intellectually prostitute themselves that resulted in the elevation of these nominees in the first place.
For those of us still yearning for a genuine conservative and constitutionalist option, we had one viable alternative to Trump, and yet there were those on our own side who chose at the defining moment to take a polemical tire iron to him and then bemoan the rise of the eventual nominee.
Mr. Trump’s deviations from conservative orthodoxy and the animating convictions of the Founders are as well known as his departures from basic decency during the Republican primaries. Never mind the historical reality that increases in the minimum wage result in more jobs lost, or that a new entitlement of paid maternity leave is unaffordable, or that expanding an already imploding Medicaid program betrays a Venezuelan level of policy understanding. The fact is that these ideas, usually emanating from the left, have no place either in the Constitution or in the conservative lexicon, and Mr. Trump’s cheerleaders at Fox News and elsewhere do him no favors by refusing to urge that he make a course correction.
There are a few subjects, however, on which Mr. Trump seems more in sync with the imperatives of the moment. He is correct, in my opinion, when he maintains that border control is essential to national sovereignty and safety, even as securing one’s doors at night is essential to the peace and protection of family and home. His insistence on a robust and powerful military underscores America’s experience that weakness not only invites aggression, it nearly guarantees it. His eager display of a list of impeccably credentialed originalist jurists to fill judicial vacancies is comforting and contrasts nicely against the sort of statist enablers who would populate America’s courts in a Hillary Clinton administration.
And it is here, where the potential damage a Trump administration could inflict with tariff hikes and entitlement expansions that would make Bernie Sanders’ socialist heart flutter must be compared with dead-certain catastrophe of Hillary Clinton’s immigration initiatives which would spawn millions of new government-dependent citizens who would cement a permanent Democrat party majority and a foreign policy of weak-kneed vacillation in which Iran gets the bomb, ISIS gets a de facto welcome mat, and America gets attacked.
“But what difference does it make if, as you say, the die has been cast and yours is the losing side,” asks the antagonist? To which I answer: Perhaps precious little. A Trump win would be little more than a holding action for a finite period of time — a slowing in the descent of a trajectory that was set in 2008 and locked in in 2012. But I must try.
As for those who simply cannot bring themselves to cast a vote for Donald Trump, they will get no quarrel from me. Faced with a candidate who has spent decades supporting leftist policies and candidates with his words and finances, who even now instinctively lurches leftward on important issues, who has demonstrated a troubling lack of intellectual and philosophical curiosity about the Constitution or the detailed policies inherent in the job he seeks, and who gleefully trafficked in the sleaziest kind of personal slander and character assassination against his primary opponents that we’ve seen in generations, it is little wonder that there are many who cannot support the man.
Similarly, I find nothing troubling in the recommendation to “vote your conscience,” which is precisely what I will do while respecting those whose conscience leads them to a different conclusion. Reluctantly, and only because I see certain and immediate doom both in Mrs. Clinton’s congenital corruption and her Alinsky-like policies, I will move in Donald Trump’s direction. But I won’t march in formation. Which is to say that I won’t suspend my critical faculties nor check my principles and convictions at the door. When he swerves left or reverts to ugly and half-witted personal slurs, I will criticize him as vigorously as I do when Harry Reid reverts to similar form.
Several years ago, I don’t remember exactly when, Sean Hannity played a nice little gag on his audience. For the better part of his syndicated radio program one day, he pretended to switch ideological sides, saying at one point that he had encountered a homeless person while on his way to work, and he was just tired of it all and thought that liberals had the most compassionate ideas after all. He even fielded a call from someone doing a remarkable impersonation of Al Gore, who called to congratulate him on his sudden conversion.
Oh how his apoplectic callers raged and protested until finally, toward the end of the program, he confessed that it was all a joke and solemnly pledged that he would never abandon his conservative principles because to do so would be to jettison his credibility with his beloved audience. Then along came a Trump. These days, the host that I’ve listened to from my days in military uniform to my days driving an 18-wheeler across the country, who used to rail against new and unaffordable entitlement programs and minimum wage hikes that cost jobs, now makes excuses for them when they emanate from The Donald.
If Mitch McConnell, who bears a great deal of responsibility for the rise of Donald Trump, had suggested a hike in the minimum wage, or federally funded maternity leave, or an expansion of Medicaid, Sean’s head would have exploded on live radio. These days, however, he lashes out and hurls bombastic threats toward all who practice the ideological consistency he once pledged to his audience, while repeatedly criticizing Ted Cruz and others for abrogating their own pledges.
Speaking of which, does anyone reading these words doubt that if Harry Reid, who has a history of making baseless and absurd charges against people on the right, had suggested that a conservative candidate’s father had been involved in the assassination of a United States President, Sean Hannity would be demanding proof? Does anyone dispute that if Sean had a chance to confront Reid on such a malicious lie, that Reid would be lucky to emerge from the interview with a single shred of respectability? And yet, when Donald Trump trafficked in such a tinfoil hat absurdity, Sean inexplicably suspended his own standards of honest skepticism and, verily, now demands that others do likewise.
If I had been invited to the Hannity household for Thanksgiving dinner, and responded to the invitation by lying, loudly and repeatedly, about Sean’s parents, suggesting they were complicit in a murder, would Sean rescind the dinner invitation? Dignity and respect for the truth suggests that he would, but applying his current criteria, I suppose I could justifiably call him out for breaking his word. A candidate for president who requires these sorts of contortions and intellectual gymnastics of his most ardent followers is a lamentable person, and were Donald Trump’s opponent almost anyone other than a congenital liar like Hillary Clinton, I would not be able to vote for him.
And for the record, those who feel it is somehow necessary to trash conservative scholars and those who are educated and well versed in conservative philosophy and history in order to wave rhetorical pom-poms for a candidate who is by temperament and history neither conservative nor particularly versed in constitutional governance, forfeit their right to argue from a position of conservative principle with any credibility.
Jonah Goldberg, whom I’ve had the pleasure of meeting, is neither arrogant nor snobbish, as Sean maintains, but rather, a gracious and engaging gentleman blessed with a powerful mind and impeccable intellectual honesty. While I differ with him on a few particulars (I don’t believe he thinks the nation has reached the precipice of disaster just yet while I think we’ve throttled right over it like Wile E. Coyote in one of those Warner Brothers cartoons) I respect his opinion and recognize that we will need people of similar knowledge and capacity in the days ahead.
So, recalling how the US made common cause with a grisly killer like Stalin when WWII raged and the fate of the world required such an alliance, I will make common cause with Donald Trump in the hope that our rate of descent can be slowed just enough to give my grandkids a chance. I judge it an act of necessity, but not necessarily reputable. As Whittaker Chambers wrote with such moving eloquence from the very center of despair itself, “Like Noah, I just hammer away at the Ark, keeping an eye on the historical weather. It is written: And the Flood destroyed them all. For even God gets bored, I suppose.”
Published in General
We are afraid of Hilary because we know what she plans to do.
We are afraid of Trump because we don’t know what he plans to do.
Better the devil we don’t know, because we know which one congress will be able to control.
Dave, we come to different conclusions on Trump but that was a real pleasure to read.
There’s so much in this article that I like, Dave. I won’t be joining you when you make your bet on Trump, but I can absolutely respect you for being honest about what you’re doing while refusing to throw stones at people you understand are just standing by their own principles.
Thanks for that.
Eliza3636, welcome to Ricochet.
If you have not been lurking, I can tell you that there very few fans of Trump here at Ricochet, but there are plenty of us who make up the Rabble Alliance, who did not back Trump in the primaries but are solid for Trump now.
The Virginia part of my family tells me they are all Trump supporters, but they don’t dare mention it in public. They also believe they have a lot of friends who are the same way.
I think there is some truth to the hidden Trump voters.
My wife, who has been for Trump since day 1, was polled recently and claimed to be undecided.
I asked, why not tell them Trump? Her response, was “F them.”
LOL
Of course he did, because you’re immune to reality, Fred. Hillary emits fire and brimstone, as a manifestation of Satan would.
That is because your city is ruled by anarchy. Is this true?
Yeah, help Hillary. All your words mean nothing.
I’m currently at the end of Day 7 of a bicycle ride starting at my home in southwest Michigan, up to the Ludington ferry across Lake Michigan, then across Wisconsin to Winona MN (where I’ll be tomorrow if I can dodge the thunderstorms) and then to points further west.
Based on yard signs and signs in store windows of small-town America, Trump will win the election at about a ratio of 1000 votes to 1. And that 1 is being generous, but I have to put something there because a ratio of 1000 to 0 isn’t a ratio. The only Hillary signs I’ve seen have been a few that say “Hillary for Prison 2016.” I did see one yard sign close to home that said the household votes Democratic, though.
Of course, what I’m seeing is not representative of America as a whole. But in many election year rides over the past 20 years, I’ve never before seen such a lopsided ratio for a national or state election. Doesn’t mean that Hillary won’t win. Those who are dependent on her oppression of the people for their socio-economic status will have to suck it up and vote for her, even if they aren’t enthusiastic or proud enough to put up a yard sign. And there is a considerable number of people like that.
How does one erase a “double” post?
Can you not erase a comment from a thread?
Well written. My position is “nevertrump?” Like many I have very deep reservations about the man.
But, also like several others, I live in a very blue state (California in my case) so I can vote Libertarian or for that other guy who is running and not worry that it will make a difference in the outcome. Where would I come down if I were in a I were in North Carolina or Florida? Hard to say. I live in a liberal area, am married to a liberal, my kids to to a liberal high school (though so far they seem ok….) and I work for a liberal non-profit where capitalism was railed against at our staff meeting yesterday.
So would I pull the handle for Trump in a swing state – maybe. Would I admit it? That is the hard question.
Isn’t that kinda like saying to @kcmulville–and anyone else who feels like KC Mulville–You’re deplorable? For what you think? So shut up?
Just wondering. ;)
Thoughtful and gracious as usual, Dave. I must confess I have grown weary in the last couple of weeks of being told that I’m on various levels of the moral depravity scale if I don’t vote for Trump. I appreciate the posture and reciprocate.
I don’t think anyone would find anything on this site that I wrote that castigates someone for voting for Trump. If I did say such a thing, I would be happy to repent and apologize. If you feel you must vote for Trump for various (and numerous) reasons, God bless you. You are patriots trying to do the best for our country. I simply cannot do it.
I’m likely going to vote for Evan McMullan, an actual conservative guy, and he’s a local (to me) from Auburn, WA. Being in Washington state, if Marx or Trotsky were heading the Democratic ticket, they would likely win the state (King County, at least).
Agree.
Honestly, this is all we ask for. Most of the hostility that has taken hold of the conservative movement would disappear if Reluctant Trumpers would simply accept that Never Trumpers are motivated by sincere concerns over Donald Trump’s temperament and qualifications, and not by hidden, nefarious, anti-American, “cocktail party” motives. If more Reluctant Trumpers reacted like you we’d be in a much better place.
Dave Carter I understand exactly how you feel and feel much the same way. I disagree about Trump thinking he really won’t buy us much time because he will make a victory for conservatives in 2020 impossible. Still you won’t get any argument from me about your vote. You do what you do for honorable reasons. There are no good choices in 2016 we each must do what we think best for the future.
Interesting observations. Safe travels,…and watch for those trucks.
If we are faced with the choice of continuing the rapid downward spin of destruction or a slower downward holding pattern, I say a different path is to be found.
Yeah – I agree with you on Republicans/conservatives electoral chances in 2020 (and beyond) if Trump wins in 2016
Us Rabble Alliance rabble also have sincere concerns over Trump’s temperament and qualifications, and we can see how you come to a different conclusion. We see the contest as between Team Trump and Team Hillary, however, and there is no comparison; Team Hillary is much more dangerous.
Few of us have any ire for ordinary members who are sadly NeverTrump. It is the chattering class that gets us riled. Opinion-shapers of the “center-right,” pundits, columnists, podcasters, Contributors and Editors who continually beat the NeverTrump drums are the ones who set us off. They are working feverishly to elect Team Hillary. It will take a long time to heal this growing rift.
I am a Trump supporter. That choice was made for me during the primaries. He will say and do some things that I disagree with, but everything Hillary says and does I disagree with. It’s really pretty simple. There is something inherently good in Trump…as Pence says, “You can’t fake good kids.” And even though his approach is not small government, he is a businessman through and through. As such, the chances of him controlling wildly out of balance spending are exponentially better than Clinton. As a matter of fact, I don’t believe there are any areas that Trump’s views are not more conservative than Hillary’s. There is a chance that Trump will make an excellent President and do very well for our country while Hillary would do very well for herself at the expense of our country. @davecarter thanks for your thoughts. I concur with your conclusion.
TRUMP/PENCE 2016
What I’m saying is that there are 2 parties. Democrats already oppose conservatives. So we’re down to one. We lost that in the primary. So for now there is no conservative party.
If Trump loses, conservatives can try again in 4 years. If he wins, that essentially permanentizes a new party personality. The things you and I believe in will no longer be on the political table.
This is the trade off. A few years of better than Hillary for taking limited government off the table permanently.
Thank you for saying this. I have certainly not taken this away from my interactions with some members of the rabble alliance.
Okay, I see your point, and I suppose it’s the point at which our views diverge. My concern is that if Trump loses, the demographics of legalizing and making voting citizens of millions of previously illegal immigrants will render the Republican arithmetically obsolete regardless of what personality it embodies. Add to that the effects of four more years of weakness abroad and an iron-fisted government at home (against which Republicans in Congress will do exactly nothing), and limited government will be under the table.
True. My wife and I both loathe the thought of voting for Trump. We will be voting against Hillary. Unsurprisingly, Dave’s post is as good a defense as i have read for choosing the lesser of two evils.
There is an argument, @davecarter, that Trump hastens our fall–towards Center Left Fascism instead of towards Far Left Socialism. (The Donald is not Hitler–he’s Mussolini.) There is also an argument that if Hillary is “allowed” to win (without my vote, of course) that we do not get another 8 years of free fall. Instead, after scoring the historic double of first woman elected and most corrupt person elected, she “remembers” that she is sicker than she lied, and resigns.
No Trump; No Hillary. What a wonderful world.
Beyond that, thanks for a great post that recognizes the seriousness of purpose and long view of those of us who were NeverTrumpers from Day One.
Yes, I agree with this with the proviso that I’d change the last word in your post from “permanently” to “the foreseeable future”. I guess I’m a little less of a pessimist than I thought I was.
Legit concerns of course.
But Obama said in the state of the union, “We won.” In other words, winners get to do what they want. Conservatives say “No, that’s not how this works.” Trump says, “That’s loser talk. Let’s win and do what we want.”
That Trump supports our policies and would be better than Hillary doesn’t matter much if we lose the “That’s not how this works” ground. The future wil be just us vs them for who runs the machine. A nation of men and not of laws.
Maybe that’s already in the cake. Maybe I’m naive to think we can hold that off. But it is what the election is about. We need to think in those terms.
I can out-pessimist the best of them!
I used to say for a generation. But how does it flip back? How does a conservative ever come out of a primary against someone promising to deliver what the people want?
I am with you wholeheartedly, except I still am not sure I can bring myself to vote for the man. I probably won’t know until Election Day. The only thing that gives me a smile is the thought of having Hillary face the humiliation that she was defeated by a reality show star and reputed huckster.