The First Step Is Admitting You Have a Problem

 

Regarding President Trump, there are currently several divisions on the Right. While not including everybody, these probably cover most:

  1. Trump was my guy all along. MAGA!
  2. I voted for someone else in the primary but with serious reservations and crossed fingers, I voted Trump to prevent Hillary. Policy-wise, I’m pleased.
  3. I didn’t vote for Trump, but the economy, courts, and geopolitics seem pretty, pretty good.
  4. Never Trump. Ever. Never eva!!!

The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles (and cigar-group friend) penned “Can We All Finally Admit Trump Is A Good President?

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

The Iran Deal in tatters, three American hostages safely returned from North Korea, which now offers to denuclearize and end the Korean War after 68 years, five top ISIS leaders captured — and that’s just this week. On the domestic front, in just a year-and-a-half, landmark tax reform has made the U.S. more competitive, fewer illegal aliens are entering our country than at any time in the past 17 years, and dozens of federal judges have taken the bench to defend the rule of law and our constitutional system. According to a poll from CNN of all outlets, more Americans today think the country is headed in the right direction than at any time in over a decade.

The Left unsurprisingly remains steadfast in their opposition to President Trump. What’s disappointing is that a handful of “Never Trump” Republicans remain equally unwilling to admit the obvious: Donald Trump is a good president. Indeed, the remaining anti-Trump voices on the Right seem more desperate than ever to take down the president, if only to prove that, actually, they were right all along.

Michael Knowles is no dummy. Yale-educated, podcast host at Ben Shapiro’s Daily Wire and author of the best blank book ever written, Michael posits some truths that many on both the Left and Right could use a good dose of: reality.

We understand the interminable Never Trump anger. After all, Trump traded five extremely dangerous and hardened terrorists for one Army deserter while adjoined by the deserters suspicious looking parents in the White House Rose Garden. Oh, wait … that was the last guy. Today, ISIS has been reduced to a handful of knife-wielding basement-dwelling neckbeards stabbing randoms on the streets of North Mecca (Paris).

But there was this: Trump used State Dept. funds to interfere with and fail to prevent the re-election of Prime Minister Netanyahu. Oh, that was also the last guy. Today we see Israelis dancing in the streets as America had the audacity to recognize Jerusalem as their capital (something every former President campaigned for but never had the guts to acknowledge officially). Meanwhile, Iranian-sponsored Hamas uses the poor Palestinian people as cannon fodder while the White House Press Pool clutches pearls 6,000 miles away.

The list can go on: North Korea, Syria, Tax Reform, etc. It’s not necessary to present the impressive number of achievements in Trump’s first 16 months, but even intellectually honest liberal friends whisper that Hillary probably couldn’t have gotten this done, even if those policies were liberal.

Granted, we are not there yet, anything can happen, but from a conservative perspective, we’re quickly heading in the right direction.

Where are the Never Trumpers on these stunning seismic geopolitical events? You can find some remaining “neocons” on MSNBC or CNN as contributors whose talking points are similar to the liberals they are supposedly countering. They second guess or downplay every achievement, while incessantly cheerleading any and all unsubstantiated leaks on the Mueller investigation or who said what in the White House.

Who needs Fire and Fury from a leftist partisan hack when you get the same breathless narrative from these people on the “right.” While Trump is working to peacefully end the 60-year-old Korean Conflict, they are nattering about porn stars while spending their days trolling Twitter arguing with strangers. This is their life now. #Sad.

The worst part is, they present themselves as the moral arbiters of Conservative, Inc. In their mind, it’s still their show. Complain, and you’re a “Trump Snowflake.” Disagree and you’re a [expletive] Neanderthal, probably uneducated and seeking sponsors for your bowling league.

People correctly tell them this is the reason Trump won, except the NYC/DC/LA elites were usually on the left. But now, their smug, condescending act has become tiresome and boring. So, like millions, we have tuned them out.

We used to like respect these people. We bought their books, watched their interviews and even went on their rip-roaring cruises.

Right after the election, in an interview on my show, one said, “we hope Trump succeeds.”

“Magnanimous,” I replied. After all, it was. They fought tooth and nail against him. “If Trump succeeds, we all succeed,” I’d say.

Then the less than enthusiastic “Yeah… Well, we’ll see.” They were still smarting from their loss.

But it’s almost a year and a half later. Ego is helluva drug and the Id doesn’t easily crack. I didn’t complete my Ph.D. in psychology but I learned enough to know denial when I see it. In psychoanalytic theory, we learned denial is a defense mechanism used to minimize our anxiety. To not admit truths allows us to refuse to accept those facts while remaining adamantly married to our own rigid ideas. In other words, a drone.

Intransigence from those who can’t admit success by this President where there clearly are successes is one such example, and that denial is forever changing the conservative landscape. One can argue Trump changed the landscape, and that’s a valid point. But his policies and appointments are most certainly as conservative as we have seen from any traditional Republican President, and would otherwise be supported by most everyone who values national security, smaller government, and economic policy. We can argue over his process but, so far, the results are unmistakable.

Those once highly respected “thinkers” have all but a few original fans left, while their new followers seep from the same free-speech-fearing, big-government-advocating corners who want the demise of the conservative movement. These people have been relegated to be used as weapons against the President by the antiquated news media and hysterical left (but I repeat myself), only to be eventually disposed of if and when the left regains total power.

To what ends? Maybe the obstinacy stems from a fleeting hope when an impeached President Trump waves his fingers in V formation from Marine One as he’s escorted from the White House, they will be given a token post in a 2020 Kamala Harris administration.

Hate to think they put themselves above country so maybe it’s just appearances. Remaining virtuous and just, and being right, means you can preen across social and print media. Some of these people are brilliant, well-read academics, historians, and their opinions used to matter. We would anticipate their every word (even if we couldn’t understand some of them) as we felt smarter for the time we invested.

No longer. They have joined with the hyperbolic shrill left who aren’t dissimilar to emotionally unstable 13-year-old girls. There are fewer tantrums in a Judy Blume book.

Refusing to even acknowledge this President has beaten the odds and is becoming what may be one of the most pivotal presidents in modern times isn’t a right or left thing, it’s history. And for many of us, we see this group along with the unhinged left desperately attempt to rewrite history as it happens, all so they end up on the correct side.

If President Trump continues on his trajectory, over the next two/six and a half years the credibility factor of many of our former conservative icons will continue to diminish. Or, they can admit things aren’t Armageddon by simply saying “Hey, I may still not like him personally, but he’s achieving many of the same results I would have wanted of any Conservative President. Now let’s work together on the things we all agree on.”

Why is that so hard?

Published in General
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 264 comments.

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

    A-Squared (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman:

    While not including everybody, these probably cover most:

    1. Trump was my guy all along. MAGA!
    2. I voted for someone else in the primary but with serious reservations and crossed fingers, I voted Trump to prevent Hillary. Policy-wise, I’m pleased.
    3. I didn’t vote for Trump, but the economy, courts, and geopolitics seem pretty, pretty good.
    4. Never Trump. Ever. Never eva!!!

    The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles (and cigar-group friend) penned “Can We All Finally Admit Trump Is A Good President?

    “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

    Can someone explain to me why category 1 isn’t also exhibiting a foolish consistency?

    My refrain is that the EverTrumpers and NeverTrumpers are far more alike than they are different.

    Because in politics winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing. 

    • #91
  2. Dave Sussman Member
    Dave Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    I wish category 1 people would take yes for an answer sometimes.

    Jamie, what ‘yes’ are you referring to?

    Trump has had everything stacked against him, in many cases from within his own party and yet he’s still winning. Whatever your opinion of the man, it’s quite a lesson in tenacity.

    We’re having Michael Walsh back on this weekend. His latest article shows just how unlikely Trump’s policy wins have been.

    In short, this has been the most effective administration since FDR’s first term. And it’s being accomplished in the teeth of the so-called “resistance,” which includes the overt hostility of nearly all the mainstream media, the embedded civil service, the Democrats, the never-Trump Republicans, rogue elements of the intelligence and investigative agencies and Robert Mueller’s investigation into charges of “collusion” with the Russians.

    • #92
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Michael Walsh is really smart. 

    • #93
  4. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    A-Squared (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman:

    While not including everybody, these probably cover most:

    1. Trump was my guy all along. MAGA!
    2. I voted for someone else in the primary but with serious reservations and crossed fingers, I voted Trump to prevent Hillary. Policy-wise, I’m pleased.
    3. I didn’t vote for Trump, but the economy, courts, and geopolitics seem pretty, pretty good.
    4. Never Trump. Ever. Never eva!!!

    The Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles (and cigar-group friend) penned “Can We All Finally Admit Trump Is A Good President?

    “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

    Can someone explain to me why category 1 isn’t also exhibiting a foolish consistency?

    My refrain is that the EverTrumpers and NeverTrumpers are far more alike than they are different.

    Because in politics winning isn’t everything, it’s the only thing.

    It matters what you’re winning and one should never sacrifice the long term for short term gains. 

    • #94
  5. Jim Beck Inactive
    Jim Beck
    @JimBeck

    Afternoon Dave,

    Thanks for your responses to so many of our folks commenting,  your engagement with us makes life on ricochet fun.

    What are the threats to our liberty?  From “The Intimidation Game”, Strassel;  let’s remember what happened to Catherine Engelbrecht of the King Street Patriots, “At the beginning of 2011 the IRS showed up to audit two years’ worth of business taxes.”….”the FBI would contact Engelbrecht six times—-four phone calls and two personal visits.””the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms showed up for an audit”…OSHA came for an audit in July and “sent Engelbrecht Manufcturing a $25,000 fine”….”In November,  the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality arrived for an audit”

    As the the IRS story heated up Obama called for a DOJ investigation.  Again quoting from Strassel; ‘…FBI director Robert Mueller appeared before Congress.  Mueller was flummoxed by even the most straightforward questions about the status of his so-called investigation.  He didn’t know how many people had been interviewed.  He didn’t know how may agents were working the case. He didn’t know who was the lead investigator.”

    So here we have a political small fish, not much different than the folks here at Ricochet, yet Engelbrecht was ground under by the govt because she was on the wrong team.  Look what they did to her and still some say Trump is scary. What was the response in 2011 by the Kristols, Jonahs, Hayes, Dr.Ks? Nothing. It is so bad that one of our Ricochet pod casters during the election said that he was worried that Trump would weaponize the govt, and yet when it had been done not a word of worry.

    So here we are with the FBI and former intelligence folks trying to nullify the election and what are our wise thinkers worried over, Trump’s tweets.  Many conservative writers are wise in their own eyes, and we/me the deplorables are confused and hoodwinked by Trump.  Well it is good to know who your allies are.  This use of the govt to muzzle conservatives is our greatest danger, it covers all departments including the EPA, State, not anything Trump can do.

    • #95
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):
    It matters what you’re winning and one should never sacrifice the long term for short term gains. 

    This is contingent on one’s current views of our structural problems and the political system. The left is very good at keeping the ground they take, and they don’t care how they take it. 

    • #96
  7. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    I wish category 1 people would take yes for an answer sometimes.

    Jamie, what ‘yes’ are you referring to?

    Trump has had everything stacked against him, in many cases from within his own party and yet he’s still winning. Whatever your opinion of the man, it’s quite a lesson in tenacity.

    We’re having Michael Walsh back on this weekend. His latest article shows just how unlikely Trump’s policy wins have been.

    In short, this has been the most effective administration since FDR’s first term. And it’s being accomplished in the teeth of the so-called “resistance,” which includes the overt hostility of nearly all the mainstream media, the embedded civil service, the Democrats, the never-Trump Republicans, rogue elements of the intelligence and investigative agencies and Robert Mueller’s investigation into charges of “collusion” with the Russians.

    Dave, many of us who still criticize the president do so for reason beyond momentary policy gains. Unfortunately other than tax reform most of Trumps wins, great wins, have been by reshaping executive priorities. As Pres. Obama has shown us those gains are easily swept away by the next administration. Like Obama, Trump has failed to marshall his own party in congress and drive them toward an agenda. He either lacks the desire or the skill to do it – I don’t know which. Couple this with a public persona that makes it harder for his own party to side with him and turns off entire generations of voters and makes the long term prospects of these good policies look grim. Yes the deck is stacked against him, but he makes it even worse with his behavior and incessant tweeting. Despite what people here say these things matter. 

     

    • #97
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    @jimbeck Perfect. Great post. 

    • #98
  9. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):
    Like Obama, Trump has failed to marshall his own party in congress and drive them toward an agenda. He either lacks the desire or the skill to do it – I don’t know which.

    He lacks the skill. No civic experience, ever. If the GOP had any brains they would see this and help him.

    • #99
  10. Dave Sussman Member
    Dave Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Jim Beck (View Comment):

    Afternoon Dave,

    Thanks for your responses to so many of our folks commenting, your engagement with us makes life on ricochet fun.

    What are the threats to our liberty? From “The Intimidation Game”, Strassel; let’s remember what happened to Catherine Engelbrecht of the King Street Patriots, “At the beginning of 2011 the IRS showed up to audit two years’ worth of business taxes.”….”the FBI would contact Engelbrecht six times—-four phone calls and two personal visits.””the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms showed up for an audit”…OSHA came for an audit in July and “sent Engelbrecht Manufcturing a $25,000 fine”….”In November, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality arrived for an audit”

    Catherine joined us for a shorter episode late last year. Fantastic guest.

    http://ricochet.com/tag/catherine-englebrecht/

    • #100
  11. Dave Sussman Member
    Dave Sussman
    @DaveSussman

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    I wish category 1 people would take yes for an answer sometimes.

    Jamie, what ‘yes’ are you referring to?

    Trump has had everything stacked against him, in many cases from within his own party and yet he’s still winning. Whatever your opinion of the man, it’s quite a lesson in tenacity.

    We’re having Michael Walsh back on this weekend. His latest article shows just how unlikely Trump’s policy wins have been.

    In short, this has been the most effective administration since FDR’s first term. And it’s being accomplished in the teeth of the so-called “resistance,” which includes the overt hostility of nearly all the mainstream media, the embedded civil service, the Democrats, the never-Trump Republicans, rogue elements of the intelligence and investigative agencies and Robert Mueller’s investigation into charges of “collusion” with the Russians.

    Dave, many of us who still criticize the president do so for reason beyond momentary policy gains. Unfortunately other than tax reform most of Trumps wins, great wins, have been by reshaping executive priorities. As Pres. Obama has shown us those gains are easily swept away by the next administration. Like Obama, Trump has failed to marshall his own party in congress and drive them toward an agenda. He either lacks the desire or the skill to do it – I don’t know which. Couple this with a public persona that makes it harder for his own party to side with him and turns off entire generations of voters and makes the long term prospects of these good policies look grim. Yes the deck is stacked against him, but he makes it even worse with his behavior and incessant tweeting. Despite what people here say these things matter.

     

    I don’t disagree with any of this, although one can argue his tweeting and unconventional methods may be why things have been working so well on the larger stage. 

    • #101
  12. Cato Rand Inactive
    Cato Rand
    @CatoRand

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):

    Larry3435 (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    Out of curiosity who exactly is this post directed at? The three or four pundits that remain NeverTrump? Do the Rubins and Kristols of the world really occupy that much of your time?

    ^This. The anti-NeverTrumpers’ obsession with the unending horror of NeverTrumpers In Our Midst should put Mueller to shame, with his piddly-squat obsession about Russian collusion. Never have so many been so incensed by such an insignificant few.

    There does seem to be an element of “I’ll never be satisfied until all the witches have been burned” in some of the anti-Nevers. Combined with an unwillingness to acknowledge that most of us former Nevers (not all, but most) have been very happy to acknowledge Trump’s successes, and to root for them, even if we’re not necessarily willing to consequently completely overlook his shortcomings (which are pretty readily apparent too).

    I don’t think that is a widespread opinion. I know some NT’s, some friends in this thread, who have happily placed themselves in #3. I never told anyone which number I was BTW.

    It’s the #4’s that have doubled-down, becoming a fifth column against what most consider some significant conservative wins.

    I don’t understand either the 1s or the 4s.  No president is perfect and none so far (knock wood) has been Hitler.  All I’ve ever seen make sense is to call balls and strikes and to declare victory if there are more of the former than the latter.

    • #102
  13. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    I wish category 1 people would take yes for an answer sometimes.

    Jamie, what ‘yes’ are you referring to?

    Trump has had everything stacked against him, in many cases from within his own party and yet he’s still winning. Whatever your opinion of the man, it’s quite a lesson in tenacity.

    We’re having Michael Walsh back on this weekend. His latest article shows just how unlikely Trump’s policy wins have been.

    In short, this has been the most effective administration since FDR’s first term. And it’s being accomplished in the teeth of the so-called “resistance,” which includes the overt hostility of nearly all the mainstream media, the embedded civil service, the Democrats, the never-Trump Republicans, rogue elements of the intelligence and investigative agencies and Robert Mueller’s investigation into charges of “collusion” with the Russians.

    Dave, many of us who still criticize the president do so for reason beyond momentary policy gains. Unfortunately other than tax reform most of Trumps wins, great wins, have been by reshaping executive priorities. As Pres. Obama has shown us those gains are easily swept away by the next administration. Like Obama, Trump has failed to marshall his own party in congress and drive them toward an agenda. He either lacks the desire or the skill to do it – I don’t know which. Couple this with a public persona that makes it harder for his own party to side with him and turns off entire generations of voters and makes the long term prospects of these good policies look grim. Yes the deck is stacked against him, but he makes it even worse with his behavior and incessant tweeting. Despite what people here say these things matter.

     

    I don’t disagree with any of this, although one can argue his tweeting and unconventional methods may be why things have been working so well on the larger stage.

    You may be right. I think it’s probably offsetting. 

    • #103
  14. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    All I’ve ever seen make sense is to call balls and strikes and to declare victory if there are more of the former than the latter.

    That’s where I can cut the number 1’s a little slack.  I’m not a neutral observer.  I care who wins.  Politics is a team sport, and it’s helpful to cheer on your guy even if you didn’t pick him and even if he sometimes swings at pitches outside the strike zone.

    • #104
  15. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    All I’ve ever seen make sense is to call balls and strikes and to declare victory if there are more of the former than the latter.

    That’s where I can cut the number 1’s a little slack. I’m not a neutral observer. I care who wins. Politics is a team sport, and it’s helpful to cheer on your guy even if you didn’t pick him and even if he sometimes swings at pitches outside the strike zone.

    Yeah but you still call him a bum when he does. 

    • #105
  16. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):
    Undying loyalty to POTUS isn’t how we operate and you shouldn’t expect that to change. The fact that since 2016 you think that needs to change might be evidence that we bet on the wrong horse.

    I didn’t say undying loyalty. Why do people always add hyperbolic superlatives to what I say? I also didn’t say anything needs to change since 2016.

    • #106
  17. dajoho Member
    dajoho
    @dajoho

    Sussman.  For. The. Win. 

    • #107
  18. Phil Turmel Inactive
    Phil Turmel
    @PhilTurmel

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Phil Turmel (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman:

    If President Trump continues on his trajectory, over the next two/six and a half years the credibility factor of many of our former conservative icons will continue to diminish. Or, they can admit things aren’t Armageddon by simply saying “Hey, I may still not like him personally, but he’s achieving many of the same results I would have wanted of any Conservative President. Now let’s work together on the things we all agree on.”

    Why is that so hard?

    Because, for them, that is not enough. Not enough to restore to them the mantle of “Trusted Conservative Oracle” they used to flounce around in. As noted by philo, they’ve suffered a permanent loss of credibility. Admitting they were wrong about Trump, and admitting that they should have voted for him, could have restored some if not all of their lost credibility. If done in a reasonable length of time. I think that grace period ended around the time the tax reform bill was signed.

    I don’t think they ‘should have voted for him’ nor do I expect to hear that. Everyone should keep their own counsel. But it would have been good for the most ardent among them to at least give his policies time to percolate before jumping in front of every camera that would have them.

    Ah, but the value of any oracle, conservative or otherwise, is foresight, not hindsight.  Without admitting they should have voted for him, they are just another ankle-biter in hindsight.  Any excuse for not voting for him means they have not corrected their powers of prediction, and are therefore useless as an oracle.  Making their commentary no better than the applause or condemnation from the John Q. Public reading their work.

    • #108
  19. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Jim Beck (View Comment):

    Afternoon Dave,

    Thanks for your responses to so many of our folks commenting, your engagement with us makes life on ricochet fun.

    What are the threats to our liberty? From “The Intimidation Game”, Strassel; let’s remember what happened to Catherine Engelbrecht of the King Street Patriots, “At the beginning of 2011 the IRS showed up to audit two years’ worth of business taxes.”….”the FBI would contact Engelbrecht six times—-four phone calls and two personal visits.””the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms showed up for an audit”…OSHA came for an audit in July and “sent Engelbrecht Manufcturing a $25,000 fine”….”In November, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality arrived for an audit”

    As the the IRS story heated up Obama called for a DOJ investigation. Again quoting from Strassel; ‘…FBI director Robert Mueller appeared before Congress. Mueller was flummoxed by even the most straightforward questions about the status of his so-called investigation. He didn’t know how many people had been interviewed. He didn’t know how may agents were working the case. He didn’t know who was the lead investigator.”

    So here we have a political small fish, not much different than the folks here at Ricochet, yet Engelbrecht was ground under by the govt because she was on the wrong team. Look what they did to her and still some say Trump is scary. What was the response in 2011 by the Kristols, Jonahs, Hayes, Dr.Ks? Nothing. It is so bad that one of our Ricochet pod casters during the election said that he was worried that Trump would weaponize the govt, and yet when it had been done not a word of worry.

    So here we are with the FBI and former intelligence folks trying to nullify the election and what are our wise thinkers worried over, Trump’s tweets. Many conservative writers are wise in their own eyes, and we/me the deplorables are confused and hoodwinked by Trump. Well it is good to know who your allies are. This use of the govt to muzzle conservatives is our greatest danger, it covers all departments including the EPA, State, not anything Trump can do.

    This! Thank you, Jim!

    • #109
  20. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Phil Turmel (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):

    Phil Turmel (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman:

    If President Trump continues on his trajectory, over the next two/six and a half years the credibility factor of many of our former conservative icons will continue to diminish. Or, they can admit things aren’t Armageddon by simply saying “Hey, I may still not like him personally, but he’s achieving many of the same results I would have wanted of any Conservative President. Now let’s work together on the things we all agree on.”

    Why is that so hard?

    Because, for them, that is not enough. Not enough to restore to them the mantle of “Trusted Conservative Oracle” they used to flounce around in. As noted by philo, they’ve suffered a permanent loss of credibility. Admitting they were wrong about Trump, and admitting that they should have voted for him, could have restored some if not all of their lost credibility. If done in a reasonable length of time. I think that grace period ended around the time the tax reform bill was signed.

    I don’t think they ‘should have voted for him’ nor do I expect to hear that. Everyone should keep their own counsel. But it would have been good for the most ardent among them to at least give his policies time to percolate before jumping in front of every camera that would have them.

    Ah, but the value of any oracle, conservative or otherwise, is foresight, not hindsight. Without admitting they should have voted for him, they are just another ankle-biter in hindsight. Any excuse for not voting for him means they have not corrected their powers of prediction, and are therefore useless as an oracle. Making their commentary no better than the applause or condemnation from the John Q. Public reading their work.

    I think the big reveal for me has been how little I need to listen to the predictions. Toto has pulled back the curtain, so to speak.

    • #110
  21. Drew, now with Dragon Energy! Member
    Drew, now with Dragon Energy!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Ed G. (View Comment):
    I didn’t say undying loyalty. Why do people always add hyperbolic superlatives to what I say?

    Because the only thing they’ve brought to the battle is an army of straw men.

    • #111
  22. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):
    Yeah but you still call him a bum when he does. 

    Fans, sure.  Teammates, I hope not.

    • #112
  23. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Songwriter (View Comment):

    Dave Sussman (View Comment):
    It’s important we make it clear that conservativism believes in the individual, and the Left believes in the state. The players are all just chess pieces that will eventually be replaced.

    Rinse. repeat. Rinse. Repeat. Over and over until this message soaks in.

    (From a definitive #2 on your list.)

    Actuually, I think conservatism believes in both individual and state. We’re not progressives for sure, but we’re also not libertarians. Federalism and subsidiarity don’t boil down to individualism alone; IMO these ideas are best-practice strategies for maintaining an appropriate balance and are not ends in themselves.

    Can’t argue with your well-made point.  Perhaps Dave’s original point might have been stated with more nuance, but I don’t think he was being genuinely exclusive. I think he was referring to what each group holds in higher esteem.

    • #113
  24. Chuck Enfield Inactive
    Chuck Enfield
    @ChuckEnfield

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):
    Undying loyalty to POTUS isn’t how we operate and you shouldn’t expect that to change. The fact that since 2016 you think that needs to change might be evidence that we bet on the wrong horse.

    I didn’t say undying loyalty. Why do people always add hyperbolic superlatives to what I say? I also didn’t say anything needs to change since 2016.

    So you said you’ve been talking about loyalty since 2016.  That suggests something changed then, but you didn’t say what.  Then you spoke about transactional support, suggesting that support for Trump shouldn’t be transactional.  I’ll concede that there’s room between transactional loyalty and undying loyalty, but you didn’t exactly spell it out.  So now we’ve got it bracketed.  Transactional loyalty isn’t enough, and undying loyalty is too much.  Where do you suggest we set the bar?

    • #114
  25. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Chuck Enfield (View Comment):
    Undying loyalty to POTUS isn’t how we operate and you shouldn’t expect that to change. The fact that since 2016 you think that needs to change might be evidence that we bet on the wrong horse.

    I didn’t say undying loyalty. Why do people always add hyperbolic superlatives to what I say? I also didn’t say anything needs to change since 2016.

    Ed, I wouldn’t say this is true of you, but there seem to be many Trump loyalists who respond to any criticism of Trump with accusations of “NeverTrumper!” and “disloyal!”  That suggests (to me, at least) that those people demand absolute loyalty to Trump – no criticism allowed.  Now if those folks want to tell me that I am taking their position too literally and that they should not have to preface every remark with a lot of disclaimers and limitations, that’s fair.  But, on the other hand, those of us who sometimes criticize Trump also should not have to preface every remark with a lot of disclaimers and limitations (e.g., “I’m just calling balls and strikes.”).  

    I think the number of people who fall in category #1 of the OP is pretty small, but I think the number of people who fall in category #4 is even smaller.  Those people who talk about #4 as if it was some massive barbarian hoard that requires constant berating are, in my humble opinion, very far off base.  As I have said before, I think you can count the number of #4’s who comment here on Ricochet on your thumbs, and probably have one hand left over.  Why do we need dozens (probably hundreds) of posts hysterically decrying the great danger posed by “NeverTrumpers”?

    • #115
  26. Drew, now with Dragon Energy! Member
    Drew, now with Dragon Energy!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Larry3435 (View Comment):
    Why do we need dozens (probably hundreds) of posts hysterically decrying the great danger posed by “NeverTrumpers”?

    “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty!”

    • #116
  27. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    Drew, now with Dragon Energy! (View Comment):

    Larry3435 (View Comment):
    Why do we need dozens (probably hundreds) of posts hysterically decrying the great danger posed by “NeverTrumpers”?

    “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty!”

    Eternal vigilance for things that don’t exist is the price of paranoia.

    • #117
  28. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    Extremism is defense of Trump is no vice, or something like that. 

    • #118
  29. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Larry3435 (View Comment):

    …  there seem to be many Trump loyalists who respond to any criticism of Trump with accusations of “NeverTrumper!” and “disloyal!” That suggests (to me, at least) that those people demand absolute loyalty to Trump – no criticism allowed

    We aren’t talking about loyalty to Trump. We’re talking about loyalty to our side, loyalty to the cause of uniting against the Left. Never in our history has this been more important. Everyone is just so prickly right now. We’re talking past each other. Speaking for myself, I’m no fan of the man as an individual. All of you need to get it through your heads that we see him the same way you do. We know he’s a boor. We know he’s crude and crass. We get it and we don’t care, because we see the Big Picture and it looks to us like you guys don’t.

    When some of you talk as if the reason we don’t care is that we were raised by wolves or our parents are first cousins or we just aren’t as well bred as you, we get annoyed.

    The Democrats have been commandeered by forces of the Left that all too few, even among the Democrats who are being their Useful Idiots, seem to understand. This is no time for any of us to be showing off our punctilious sensibilities to etiquette and Good Manners. Get over that and get behind the president whether you’d invite him over for dinner or not. There’s a lot more at stake than making everyone aware of your discerning tastes.

    The Democrats circled the wagons around a disgusting dirty old man getting blow jobs in the Oval Office. They’d do the same even if he’d been caught in bed with a boy and a German Shepherd. But we can’t even unite around a man who has done more for the country and for Conservatism than anyone in the last 40 years. Sorry but I do not get it.

    • #119
  30. Drew, now with Dragon Energy! Member
    Drew, now with Dragon Energy!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Larry3435 (View Comment):

    Drew, now with Dragon Energy! (View Comment):

    Larry3435 (View Comment):
    Why do we need dozens (probably hundreds) of posts hysterically decrying the great danger posed by “NeverTrumpers”?

    “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty!”

    Eternal vigilance for things that don’t exist is the price of paranoia.

    This has nothing to do with paranoia. It has to do with knowing who has your back in a fight, and who will quickly turn and give the enemy an assist.

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.