The End Game for NeverTrumpers: A Response

 

This is a response to @polyphemus’s post entitled “What is the End Game for NeverTrumpers.” It started out as a comment, but I decided to make it its own post because despite several servers full of Trump commentary on this site, I honestly don’t feel like my perspective has been well represented all that often. So here we go.

What I want, first and foremost, is a commander in chief who I trust to do everything humanly possible to ensure the security of the country. That requires a certain amount of knowledge and a certain amount of judgment. I find Trump terrifyingly lacking in those departments and genuinely fear that something terrible will happen because of the combination of his ignorance and his impulsiveness. I’d just feel much better with a steadier finger on the trigger. (Mike Pence would do nicely.)

That’s always, ultimately, been my problem with Trump. He’s like a naked short on an overvalued growth stock. Yeah, there might be a lot of upside to the trade, but the downside risk is uncapped and unlimited. It’s a risk I’d just rather not take.

Ideally that meant — back in the day — a better nominee. Didn’t happen. Obviously. Despite a wealth of better options.

As of election day, honestly, hard as it is to say, I trusted Hillary more. Didn’t like her. Didn’t trust her. God knows I didn’t want to live through four years of her disastrous presidency. But given a choice between four years of guaranteed Hillary deterioration in the state of the country and Trump who, whatever the upside potential, comes with a small but not insignificant risk of absolute, sudden, complete (like, nuclear war or World War III complete) catastrophe, I would have limited my downside risk and sucked it up and taken Hillary.

Today the choice is Trump or Pence, and that’s a no-brainer. I pick Pence. Period.

And if you want to talk about 2018, or 2020, I think we’ve got a problem, regardless of what happens to Trump. We put a guy who’s demonstrably unsuited in the White House. We tied our wagon to him. And a lot of the electorate (polling suggests it’s a sizeable majority) has noticed. We’re very likely going to get punished, no matter what happens to the Trump administration. But it’s never too late to at least make things better by doing the right thing and correcting a mistake. It’s about the country, not the politics.

So end game? From where we are now? I’d like to see the President resign and ride off into the sunset, leaving government to people with the knowledge and temperament to handle it. Hopefully that will continue to include a good cadre of Republicans and conservatives even after the next couple election cycles. But from where we sit now, I suspect that there’s going to be some not insubstantial losses on our side no matter what happens to Trump, and I’m prepared to live with that.

All in the service of limiting the downside risk and living to fight another day.

Published in Politics
Tags: ,

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 172 comments.

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

    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    • #1
  2. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    Beautifully put.  I’ve been one of the people who’s complained about the media’s dishonesty and I stand by those gripes, but first things first.  We need a trustworthy hand on the nuclear trigger more than we need any of our other conservative concerns addressed.  I care more about that than I care about tax cuts, health care, and bathroom access combined.  Trump simply fails to meet the minimum requirement for the job so that anybody, and I mean anybody, who does meet it is a better alternative.

    • #2
  3. Nanda Panjandrum Member
    Nanda Panjandrum
    @

    Thanks for being a voice in the wilderness, @catorand!  (May you be shielded from “incoming”.)

    • #3
  4. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    I can see your starting point okay and how you could have that viewpoint even if I didn’t agree. Events since the election have turned me from a reluctant Trump voter into a strong Trump supporter. That’s not because of any reassessment of his abilities in the specifics of handling the job, but the actions of the opposition including the existing bureaucracy have insured that I made a correct decision coupled with his appointments and rollback of regulations. We might be looking at a far different public image of the present state if we didn’t have this craziness perpetrated and perpetuated by the Democrats and the media and the ensconced intelligence community about the ‘Russian thing’ that, to date, based on actual facts or evidence, isn’t a thing at all. Just remember, much, or even most,  of President Trump’s present negative public image results from this one evidently false issue. It would be nice to see him operate without this extra burden.

    • #4
  5. Polyphemus Inactive
    Polyphemus
    @Polyphemus

    Cato Rand: Today the choice is Trump or Pence, and that’s a no brainer. I pick Pence. Period.

    I wish it were that easy. I really do. If it were, I’d take that trade in a heartbeat. But that is not what is facing us. I personally think that your fears about Trump are overblown. I don’t see him as an existential threat the way that you do. I guess that is what divides us. That and the risk aversion you portray. Trump would have to be a very different sort of man for me to follow you down the path of choosing the poison of a Hilary presidency over the risk of Trump. Whatever Trump may be (buffoon, egotist, charlatan, undisciplined showman, whatever) I just don’t see the dangerous lunatic or malevolent authoritarian that you apparently see.

    What I am beginning to see is a fire being fanned into flames by the Left that has the potential to get out of control. There is a lot of danger in what they are doing now and if it truly breaks out and brings down a presidency, it can be bad for us in a whole lot of ways. I don’t see it playing out with installing Pence and everyone goes home happy. This situation, to me, is the risk in our face. This is the one that you ought to fear more than the remote Nuclear Apocalypse scenario that your gaze is fixed upon.

    • #5
  6. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    I made this comment in another thread

    During the election, I kept hearing promises from the Trump supporters that they would be critical of him when he deserved it. Now, whenever Trump does something objectively stupid, his supporters continue to criticize the people that criticize Trump.

    Trump deserves criticism often, as did Obama and Bush before him. We are not a country that worships our leaders (and we are not a country that swears personal loyalty to our leaders).

    FWIW, early on, I was pleasantly surprised by Trump’s first month or so in office, but my fears that he is going to cause serious damage to the Republican brand have increased dramatically since then, basically back to where they were before the election.  It seems like he is doing his level best to fulfill my worst fears of his presidency.

    I am truly baffled that people that were willing to (appropriately) dump all over both Bushes are suddenly unwilling to criticize Trump because he has an R next to his name.

     

     

    • #6
  7. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    It started long before Trump, but we Americans on both sides need to assess our attitude towards duly elected representation.  Do we really want to continue on this path where if you, personally, did not support the winner of an election, you consider it acceptable, even your duty, to overturn that result?

    If that is all the respect that Americans now have for the result of an election, we are closer to the end than I thought.

    Make no mistake, I opposed most of what Obama did.  But not to the point that I ever forgot that he was the rightful president- because I was in the minority when I voted against him.  I didn’t respect him or his policies, but I did, and do, respect the will of the voters.  They may make boneheaded (IMHO) choices at times, but as they say, democracy is the worst form of government, save all the rest.

    And the first principle of democracy is sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, but if you don’t respect the result when you lose, you have no business expecting the result to be respected when you win.

    So, voice your opposition to policies he proposes.  But don’t entertain dreams of overturning the election.  Not if you want democratic principles to survive.

    • #7
  8. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    PHenry (View Comment):
    So, voice your opposition to policies he proposes.

    We are having this entire discussion because Trump supporters can’t stand the fact that conservatives are doing just that.

    • #8
  9. Karl Nittinger Inactive
    Karl Nittinger
    @KarlNittinger

    PHenry (View Comment):
    So, voice your opposition to policies he proposes. But don’t entertain dreams of overturning the election. Not if you want democratic principles to survive.

    The issue that isn’t recognized here is that voicing any opposition to Trump is equated with, “dreams of overturning the election”. This is precisely the same as the blind devotion to Obama that caused his supporters to equate any opposition to him with, “racism”.

    • #9
  10. SarahCorinne Inactive
    SarahCorinne
    @SarahCorinne

    I guess I’m confused about the people defending Trump here…

    Do some people not think that Trump shared intelligence information with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador (not to mention letting them into his office with full Russian press)? Does it not make you uncomfortable that it seems as though he made a rash decision in firing Comey (its merits outstanding) and completely botched a simple firing? The other matters surrounding Comey in terms of what Trump may or may not have said or done that would be inappropriate remain a question, but Donald Trump has not earned the benefit of the doubt and furthermore they seem well within his character. After the past few weeks of hearing one story from his communications staff and then finding that to not be accurate or true, why should I believe anything that comes out of the white house, whether its from staff or the president himself?

     

    Finally in the past few days there have been quite a few troubling items…The advance people telling Israeli officials the Western Wall is not a part of Israel, which was followed up by a report in the Times of Israel today with a screen shot from a video promoting the president’s trip with a map of Israel that doesn’t include the West Bank or Golan.  And not to forget President Erdogan not only being warmly received by our president, but feeling empowered afterwards to go to his embassy and sick his bodyguards to assault protesters on US soil. I like to think that I shouldn’t attribute to cunning or malice what can be explained by incompetence but when does it rise to gross negligence?

    • #10
  11. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    A-Squared (View Comment):
    We are having this entire discussion because Trump supporters can’t stand the fact that conservatives are doing just that.

    Karl Nittinger (View Comment):
    he issue that isn’t recognized here is that voicing any opposition to Trump is equated with, “dreams of overturning the election”

    Cato Rand: Today the choice is Trump or Pence, and that’s a no brainer. I pick Pence. Period.

    Are we all discussing the same post?

    • #11
  12. Karl Nittinger Inactive
    Karl Nittinger
    @KarlNittinger

    PHenry (View Comment):
    Are we all discussing the same post?

    I think it is pretty clear that the first two of the three are direct replies to a post in the comments. Taking them out of context doesn’t negate their legitimacy.

    • #12
  13. TooShy Coolidge
    TooShy
    @TooShy

    So what you want is Trump to go away and Pence installed?

    You have more or less started out by saying the following: “I hope Trump has a mild heart attack and so decides to retire. Trump then goes back to Trump Tower and has a lovely life and Pence becomes president. I would like that because it would be good for the country.”

    But that is a purely hypothetical scenario which is extremely unlikely.

    And then you say “Today the choice is Trump or Pence, and that’s a no brainer. I pick Pence. Period.

    But how is that going to happen? How do you get from Trump to Pence?

    Back in the real world, what is happening is that the Democrats are talking about impeachment.

    Back in the real world, the only way you get from Trump to Pence is by impeachment.

    And unless it turns out that Trump has really done something heinous, the only way impeachment can happen is by a kangaroo court using falsified charges.

    And I think a kangaroo court working on falsified charges would be a huge, huge disaster for the country.

    Do you have another scenario in mind in how we get from Trump to Pence?

    Look, I was not a fan of Trump during the primaries. Not at all. But I suspect what you are prescribing as a cure is much, much, much worse than the disease. In fact, I think it would kill the patient.

    • #13
  14. Karl Nittinger Inactive
    Karl Nittinger
    @KarlNittinger

    TooShy (View Comment):
    Back in the real world, the only way you get from Trump to Pence is by impeachment.

    And unless it turns out that Trump has really done something heinous, the only way impeachment can happen is by a kangaroo court using falsified charges.

    With each passing day, the idea that anyone is going to need to “falsify charges” becomes more and more remote. The latest, and most significant yet, being (from 30 minutes ago): Trump Told Russians That Firing ‘Nut Job’ Comey Eased Pressure From Investigation :

    WASHINGTON — President Trump told Russian officials in the Oval Office this month that firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, had relieved “great pressure” on him, according to a document summarizing the meeting.

    “I just fired the head of the F.B.I. He was crazy, a real nut job,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document, which was read to The New York Times by an American official. “I faced great pressure because of Russia. That’s taken off.

    • #14
  15. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    This is exactly correct.  You need someone worth defending if you want your gripes about media bias to have any purchase beyond the right wing entertainment media.

    • #15
  16. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    PHenry (View Comment):
    Are we all discussing the same post?

    Which was created in response to Polyphemus’s post criticizing conservatives for having the audacity to criticize Trump.

     

    • #16
  17. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Cato Rand: a small but not insignificant risk of absolute, sudden, complete (like, nuclear war

    Really?    Really?     You really, honestly and genuinely think that Trump would, in a fit of pique, nuke someplace?!?!?     I find that hard to believe.

    • #17
  18. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    This is exactly correct. You need someone worth defending if you want your gripes about media bias to have any purchase beyond the right wing entertainment media.

    Actually, it’s exactly wrong.    You won’t defend someone who is being wronged because they fail to live up to your standards?     Anybody recall the line in the good book about casting the first stone?   And it’s not ‘some bias in the media’ it’s waaaaay beyond that.

    • #18
  19. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    This is exactly correct. You need someone worth defending if you want your gripes about media bias to have any purchase beyond the right wing entertainment media.

    Actually, it’s exactly wrong. You won’t defend someone who is being wronged because they fail to live up to your standards? Anybody recall the line in the good book about casting the first stone?

    This depends on if you believe he is being wronged doesn’t it?

    • #19
  20. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    Do some people not think that Trump shared intelligence information with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador (not to mention letting them into his office with full Russian press)?

    Didn’t Trump say in his campaign that he thought it would be a good thing if we could establish friendly relations with Russia instead of having to treat Russia as our worst potential enemy?

    • #20
  21. Karl Nittinger Inactive
    Karl Nittinger
    @KarlNittinger

    Ekosj (View Comment):
    And it’s not ‘some bias in the media’

    Indeed it isn’t…as we seem to be finding out everyday this week….

    • #21
  22. Karl Nittinger Inactive
    Karl Nittinger
    @KarlNittinger

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):
    Didn’t Trump say in his campaign that he thought it would be a good thing if we could establish friendly relations with Russia instead of having to treat Russia as our worst potential enemy?

    Well, he certainly appears to be a man of his word, at least in that regard….

    • #22
  23. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    I completely agree. I feel like recently there’s been a lot of discussion on the site regarding the news bias and how the media is dialed up to 11 – as if that is the real problem here. The problem is Trump. The criticism is valid but it kind of feels like remarking about how your neighbors need to cut back their hedges while standing in front of your own house engulfed in flames.

    Defending Trump because there is some bias in the media doesn’t make sense to me. Two wrongs don’t make a right and from where I stand Trump is the greater threat, not the media.

    This is exactly correct. You need someone worth defending if you want your gripes about media bias to have any purchase beyond the right wing entertainment media.

    Actually, it’s exactly wrong. You won’t defend someone who is being wronged because they fail to live up to your standards? Anybody recall the line in the good book about casting the first stone?

    This depends on if you believe he is being wronged doesn’t it?

    And that is demonstrably true

    • #23
  24. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    Just remember, everyone, that never Trump ended with the election. All the never Trumpers are back on the team! So just because a conservative now buys in to every manufactured outrage from the left and the new york times, don’t call them never Trump.  It’s just constructive criticism.

    Just because they employ impeachment rhetoric, it doesn’t mean they are part of the opposition. They just want to steer him towards more conservative policy.

    And if you think you should defend the president against their accusations, it’s only because you are a mind numbed Trump sycophant. See, they have every right, maybe even a duty, to carp and decry every detail they can find opposition to.  But anyone who tries to rebut the onslaught is trying to shut them up and deny them their heart held beliefs.

    Got it?

     

    • #24
  25. SarahCorinne Inactive
    SarahCorinne
    @SarahCorinne

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    Do some people not think that Trump shared intelligence information with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador (not to mention letting them into his office with full Russian press)?

    Didn’t Trump say in his campaign that he thought it would be a good thing if we could establish friendly relations with Russia instead of having to treat Russia as our worst potential enemy?

    Yes, but there working room between treating a country as your “worst potential enemy” and treating a country as an ally. Trump betrayed the confidence of a close, working ally to share information with a country that has not proven itself trustworthy in the fight against ISIS. Under Obama, Russia used information we gave them regarding the location of rebel groups and even hospitals, not as a means to avoid those spots, but instead as targets. What reason have they given us to trust them with information?

    There are ways of ameliorating diplomatic relations that don’t include sharing intelligence sent to us from allies.

    • #25
  26. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    Under Obama, Russia used information we gave them regarding the location of rebel groups and even hospitals, not as a means to avoid those spots, but instead as targets.

    I’m not privy to the details here. When Obama did this was it in the Washington Post the next day, anonymously, that Obama had betrayed the country?

    • #26
  27. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Cato Rand: Today the choice is Trump or Pence

    What?!?!?     No    That is just plain wrong.     Today, there is no choice     You don’t get to choose again until 2020.    If you want a Mulligan, go golfing.    (But don’t bother keeping score because, [redacted])     The President, for good or ill, has been legally, Constitutionally elected.    Attempting to undue those results and subvert a Constitutional election to get a President you prefer is hardly a conservative position.

     

    • #27
  28. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Ekosj (View Comment):

    Cato Rand: Today the choice is Trump or Pence

    What?!?!? No That is just plain wrong. Today, there is no choice You don’t get to choose again until 2020. If you want a Mulligan, go golfing. (But don’t bother keeping score because, apparently, you cheat) The President, for good or ill, has been legally, Constitutionally elected. Attempting to undue those results and subvert a Constitutional election to get a President you perfer is hardly a conservative position.

    Continued- that is exactly the kind of “I know better than everyone else” … “What I can’t win at the ballot box I’ll finagle a way to get through non-electoral means ” claptrap that a conservative should abhor.

    • #28
  29. SarahCorinne Inactive
    SarahCorinne
    @SarahCorinne

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    Under Obama, Russia used information we gave them regarding the location of rebel groups and even hospitals, not as a means to avoid those spots, but instead as targets.

    I’m not privy to the details here. When Obama did this was it in the Washington Post the next day, anonymously, that Obama had betrayed the country?

    Well Obama didn’t casually bring it up while touring the oval office, it was in the course of military operations and it only came to light after the fact. Just pointing out that the Russians have not given us reason to trust them.

    Personally, I don’t allow what the Washington Post does or does not cover to change my opinion on whether it was a good or bad thing. Obama’s Syria policy was and still is the greatest dereliction of duty in recent history, whether the Washington Post agrees with me on that doesn’t matter. And it doesn’t have anything to do with whether Trump is in the wrong here.

    • #29
  30. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    SarahCorinne (View Comment):
    Personally, I don’t allow what the Washington Post does or does not cover to change my opinion on whether it was a good or bad thing. Obama’s Syria policy was and still is the greatest dereliction of duty in recent history, whether the Washington Post agrees with me on that doesn’t matter. And it doesn’t have anything to do with whether Trump is in the wrong here.

    My reference to WaPo had nothing to do with your opinion, it was only to illustrate that Trump has major influential public opponents that Obama did not. Obama had many opponents but they had little influence on his actions as President other than preventing damaging legislation from being enacted after 2010. I think it is true that in addition to bias in polls, the WaPo, NY Times, CNN and other tv outlets are significantly affecting Trump favorable/unfavorable through bias reporting. Obama had opposition, but not from these sources.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.