Never Say Never Again

 

The great irony of politics is that it rewards loyalty with neglect and heaps attention on the uncommitted. Saying your vote can be counted on is a guaranteed way to get ignored, while letting it be known that you’re willing to deal (for the right price, of course) means people will fawn over you. It’s not a good system, it’s just the one we’re stuck us with.

If conservatives ever knew this, we forgot it completely when Donald Trump strode onto the political stage. As I describe in a piece on The Federalist, very nearly all of us — NeverTrumpers, Trumpkins, and ReluctantTrumpers alike — overcommitted ourselves at the outset, losing whatever degree of influence or control we might have had over the Republican nominee.

As a practical matter, the [NeverTrump] strategy was an abject failure. It persuaded too few Republicans to deny Trump the nomination. Additionally, the movement’s habit of offering opposition without alternative made it seem stubborn and childish on the one hand, while its elite nature—at least, in its early stages—gave it the air of a frustrated parent falling back on a because-I-said-so defense. […] The smarter—though, more difficult—move for Trump opponents would have been to state that they could not support Donald Trump under current circumstances, and to offer a brief explanation of how they could be persuaded to change their minds.

It needn’t have been likely that Trump would meet these conditions, so long as it were possible. Nor would it have required critics to pull their punches. “I will never support Donald Trump for president,” and “I cannot support Donald Trump for president now because of reason x,” are dissimilar only insofar as one’s future standards or Donald Trump’s behavior are likely to change. If the former is secure, then offering an incentive for good behavior would only have been to NeverTrumpers’ advantage.

But it’s not just the NeverTrumps who overcommitted themselves. Dennis Prager — who opposed Trump throughout the primaries but who argues that conservatives became morally obliged to support him once he became the nominee — provides an almost perfect example of the dangers of telling a candidate that it’s all-but-impossible for them to lose your vote:

There is nothing inherently wrong with Prager’s judgement that, given the stakes, it’s best to vote for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. But [arguing] that Clinton’s awfulness obliges one to vote for Trump removes any possibility of influence over the candidate. Though Prager has continued to criticize Trump regularly, it should come as little surprise that the candidate has taken so little heed; if NeverTrumpers have locked themselves out of negotiations, Prager and those like him have locked themselves in.

If you want to know who’s to blame for our current mess, the person who stares back at you from the mirror is probably a good starting point.

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

There are 304 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Tom Meyer, Ed.:

    cdor:

    Tom Meyer, Ed.: 4

    Are there any editors at Ricochet who are not nevertrumpers?

    There are not: Neither Claire, nor I, nor Jon are voting for Trump.

    If you don’t mind, I’m curious what you think should have been done about this. Should we have hired another editor for the sake of balance, regardless of whether there was need or means? Or should one of us have been fired, simply to make room for a Trump supporter? Maybe we should have ditched either Epstein or Yoo from Lawtalk, as I believe they’re both NeverTrump, too.

    I didn’t suggest anything should be done, but now that you bring it up…at least here it is, written in black and white, there isn’t a single editor at Ricochet who is supporting Trump. In spite of the efforts of some of your paying members ( about 45%) this site could really be subtitled in some way as anti- Trump. I like the phrase “Every bump is a thump when it comes to Trump”.  Maybe you should consider that. It would at least be honest. I just got through conversing with Midge about this. One can’t easily overcome one’s biases, especially when one doesn’t even try. As editors using your position to decide who is being offensive, it is only natural that you will find issues where those with a different point of view may not.

    Thanks for your time.

    • #301
  2. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    cdor:I didn’t suggest anything should be done, but now that you bring it up…at least here it is, written in black and white, there isn’t a single editor at Ricochet who is supporting Trump. In spite of the efforts of some of your paying members ( about 45%) this site could really be subtitled in some way as anti- Trump. I like the phrase “Every bump is a thump when it comes to Trump”. Maybe you should consider that. It would at least be honest. I just got through conversing with Midge about this. One can’t easily overcome one’s biases, especially when one doesn’t even try. As editors using your position to decide who is being offensive, it is only natural that you will find issues where those with a different point of view may not.

    Thanks for your time.

    There was a conversation yesterday about the Left-leaning sites that one reads.

    Ricochet is the most Left-leaning site that I read. Both Townhall.com and even National Review have so much more balance than the Main Feed here regarding opposing the alarming socialist agenda of the would-be Dictator in Pantsuits.

    If it wasn’t for the Member Feed, and this community of really good and decent people, I wouldn’t spend any time here.

    Oh … and Zubrin. He is always good for a hearty belly laugh.

    • #302
  3. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Columbo:

    cdor:I didn’t suggest anything should be done, but now that you bring it up…at least here it is, written in black and white, there isn’t a single editor at Ricochet who is supporting Trump. In spite of the efforts of some of your paying members ( about 45%) this site could really be subtitled in some way as anti- Trump. I like the phrase “Every bump is a thump when it comes to Trump”. Maybe you should consider that. It would at least be honest. I just got through conversing with Midge about this. One can’t easily overcome one’s biases, especially when one doesn’t even try. As editors using your position to decide who is being offensive, it is only natural that you will find issues where those with a different point of view may not.

    Thanks for your time.

    There was a conversation yesterday about the Left-leaning sites that one reads.

    Ricochet is the most Left-leaning site that I read. Both Townhall.com and even National Review have so much more balance than the Main Feed here regarding opposing the alarming socialist agenda of the would-be Dictator in Pantsuits.

    If it wasn’t for the Member Feed, and this community of really good and decent people, I wouldn’t spend any time here.

    Oh … and Zubrin. He is always good for a hearty belly laugh.

    Never more shocked than when I found Zubrin on this main feed!

    • #303
  4. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Columbo: Ricochet is the most Left-leaning site that I read.

    Well there’s your problem.

    • #304
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.