Posted on 03/22/2016 5:14:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
This short essay is in response to a friend who asked me to explain how Donald Trump is unacceptable to "movement conservatives."
Let's first acknowledge that many Trump supporters don't even claim to be conservative -- though others do -- and Trump himself is rather dismissive on the point, so they may consider this column a meaningless academic exercise. But a Trump supporter asked, so I'll try to explain.
Because I think my questioner was inquiring mostly about issues, I won't delve into Trump's apparent lack of presidential temperament and public deportment -- as reflected mostly in the debates and his speeches -- other than to suggest that they betray values that don't strike me as particularly conservative.
On the issues, Trump appears to have no ideological core. He can't sufficiently define "conservative" and, when pressed, says that even Ronald Reagan wasn't that conservative. Trump cites Reagan's earlier affiliation with the Democratic Party as his excuse for having supported liberal causes and politicians all his life, though unlike Reagan, Trump can never point to a personal conversion. He prefers to work with the uncompromising, extremist left, represented by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, rather than defeat it.
But having no internal conservative antenna, what goals would he seek to achieve through his legendary negotiating wizardry? Indeed, many conservatives sense that Trump is not one of them because while he champions national sovereignty and patriotism, he evinces no understanding of conservative ideology and much less of the Constitution and its design of limited government. Under some political pressure, Trump promises to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, but there is no indication he has any real commitment to this vital principle.
It's not just that Trump, for a presidential candidate, is conspicuously ill-informed on political science and policy but also that he has no abiding allegiance to conservative policy solutions, as evidenced by his flip-flops, which are wider-ranging and more frequent than those of other notorious flippers. Even on his signature issue of immigration, he's exhibited a surprising openness to soften his positions. In any event, he is easily less reliable on this issue than Ted Cruz.
Movement conservatives are also uneasy with Trump's conflation of "Art of the Deal" business practices with conservative governance. Trump's success in creating thousands of jobs signals to conservatives that he is a friend of business, but it doesn't assure them that he comprehends the government's role (or lack thereof) in creating a job climate. Presidential statecraft isn't the same as private entrepreneurship. Government doesn't "create jobs"; it enacts policies and laws to remove the shackles of government so that the private sector can flourish on its own power. A private CEO is under different constraints than the president. Though Trump's acolytes boast that he "knows how to get things done," he won't -- and shouldn't -- enjoy the same latitude to operate as president.
Trump seems disinclined to laissez faire and too comfortable with a major role for the federal government on economic issues. More troubling is his support for tariffs and protectionism, which could significantly damage our economy. Tied to this issue is one of the most distressing developments of this campaign: the emergence of class warfare themes emanating from the "right."
Trump gives lip service to reducing spending and balancing the budget but offers few specifics; see his hollow promise to end fraud, waste and abuse. Experts believe that his fiscal plan would lead us into further debt. Having been coached to prepare a tax plan palatable to conservatives, he has made some progress here, but he is disturbingly open to punishing the "wealthy" through progressive tax policies -- which would add more fuel to class tensions and be counterproductive for the economy.
Trump stubbornly refuses to reform Social Security, which is on a collision course with national insolvency and cannot be "saved" by robust economic growth as Trump glibly contends. We have more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities with our entitlement programs, and no marginally informed person believes we can simply grow out of this inevitable train wreck. In refusing to acknowledge that or put forth a plan, Trump has sided with demagogic liberals.
It's not just on economic issues that Trump betrays an alarming lack of knowledge. Indeed, Trump substitutes slogans for serious policy proposals on many issues, and conservatives instinctively know that he doesn't get it -- that he's not even interested in getting it.
Accordingly, Trump's promises to make America great again and to restore winning are pathetically devoid of specific plans to achieve those goals. No presidential candidate in my lifetime has demonstrated less command of the issues than Trump, and his lack of intellectual curiosity and interest cannot be adequately remedied by his selecting smart advisers. We need someone at the helm who has an understanding of important issues and who will be guided by conservative instincts. Instead, Trump has shown a tendency to favor strong government action to get "results" -- more government, more authoritarianism, not less. This is a serious danger signal to conservatives.
On a smattering of other issues, Trump's conservative bona fides are in doubt, from affirmative action to the Second Amendment to universal health care to religious liberty to the Iran nuclear deal to his professed neutrality on Israel and Palestine to his dubious support of life, including his endorsement of federal funding for America's premier abortion factory, Planned Parenthood. I realize he and his supporters vehemently deny some of these criticisms, but I've heard his disconcerting statements on them, even if he later modified or retracted them.
Trump has been brilliant in hijacking anti-government sentiment and in amplifying his immigration and trade message through manipulating the press, and I admit he might seek to honor some of his basic campaign promises. But we have no assurance beyond these few issues that Trump would behave or govern like a limited-government conservative, and because of his practiced vacillation and refusal to commit to many other issues, he'd have a mandate to do what he darn well pleases -- and that's more than a little scary to me.
It concerns me that after Americans had finally united in strong opposition to Barack Obama's leftist record, the movement was co-opted by a populist with a super-amped megaphone. The solutions to America's problems are not some hodgepodge of policy goals fueled by nationalistic pride that is untethered to principles of limited government. You don't restore America's greatness by burning the house down, especially when you can remodel it from the inside out through a rededication to America's founding principles and constitutional conservatism.
I could better understand the support behind Trump if there weren't an infinitely superior candidate in Ted Cruz, who would specifically address the problems that plague us -- and without abandoning the principles that made America unique in the first place.
I think his political appointments will be the same way. Trump won't appoint Scalia clones, he will appoint whatever brown-noser makes him look good at that given moment in time.
When I first read your comment I thought the same thing and was going to comment before realizing your sarcasm. Well done BTW. So sad to see so many here, not being sarcastic when they attack Conservatism and are so willing to swallow the bromide of Trump’s statist populism.
Another condescending Cruz supporter. You people like to request things of other people like your hero lawyer. I don’t need a court decision, I can read the Constituion for myself.
Trump has given more to Republicans, but only because he has donated $463,450 to Republicans and just $3,500 to Democrats since 2012.
And, you sure were right to mention the Republicans Trump has supported. Standouts are Lindsay Graham’s 2014 reelection campaign (Graham + Rep. Party of S.C.) for $12,600 and Kentuckians for Strong Leadership (Mitch McConnell’s PAC) for $10,000 in 2014 and $50,000 in 2013.
I think I’ll change my tagline! :-)
“My husband Registered our son and daughter when they were six weeks old with the American Consulate in Munich, Germany.”
OK, I have to admit. All this time I have known you on FR, I thought you were a man! It sure is easy to make incorrect assumptions on the interwebs!
You see the first 3 letters in my Freeper name (Kas) are the last three letters in my maiden name, and the last 3 letters (lin) are the last 3 letters in my married name. I put them together and out came Kaslin :)
Considering some of the comments posted on FR since Trumpmania came to town (e.g., Trump needs to be made dictator to clean up this mess....), nothing is "painfully obvious".
Standard protocol. You make a claim, you back it up.
I can read the Constituion for myself.
Reading and comprehension can be, and often are, mutually exclusive.
BTW, not knowing how to spell constitution doesn't support your claim to understand the Constitution.
Like I said. You are a condescending jerk just like your hero Cruz. Enjoy Utah tonight. It’s your last Cruz victory of the year. Ted’s finished, he just doesn’t know it yet.
Unlike you Trump idolators, I don't idolize Cruz or indulge in hero worship in general. Simply put, out of the field of candidates I thought that he was the best candidate to forward the mantle of conservatism.
And, unlike you Trump swooners, if Cruz doesn't win I won't lose any sleep.
Ted’s finished, he just doesn’t know it yet.
If Trump wins, conservatism is finished and we'll all know it.
;-)
You’re 100% correct. tRump supporters, like the Donald himself, turn everything they are around and accuse others of being what they are. It makes them feel better about themselves. Superior just like the Donald.
We are not the ones who sit on a pretend “Rally” thread and tell each other how great we are and how the Donald is the only one who can save us. Yesterday one of them even said that she just knows the “Hand of God” is on the Donald and that’s why he is going to be pesident.
What a steaming pant load. He’s been consistant.
Well sure...can’t do something like actually respond to the substance of the arguments, now can we?
Trump attacked conservatives first - straight out the gate at this Phoenix campaign rally right after launching this campaign. He openly attacked us and what we stand for and told us “you conservatives - get used to it!” Anyone paying the least bit of attention knows this man is not a conservative and is an outspoken opponent of conservativism and constitutional principles of freedom and limited government. We have fought his kind ever since this forum has been around...until about 8 months ago, then a substantial number of those among us decided to embrace big government statism.
Well sure - he’s “common sense conservative” who attacked conservatives and what we stand for openly at his Phoenix campaign rally - right out of the gate. And he has consistently been a big government statist - the solution to everything is more and more government and more powerful executive authority and has voiced support for using his wealth and power to silence critics and has openly called for more of the same, opposes private property rights, praises Planned Parenthood, etc. So that’s what they are calling a “common sense conservative” these days. How times change.
Well sure - he’s “common sense conservative” who attacked conservatives and what we stand for openly at his Phoenix campaign rally - right out of the gate. And he has consistently been a big government statist - the solution to everything is more and more government and more powerful executive authority and has voiced support for using his wealth and power to silence critics and has openly called for more of the same, opposes private property rights, praises Planned Parenthood, etc. So that’s what they are calling a “common sense conservative” these days. How times change.
So you didn’t mind it when Trump attacked conservatives and what we stand for straight out of the gate shortly after launching his bid, and has continued to do so throughout the campaign? That’s quite a contradiction.
‘Trump says anything that comes to mind that he thinks will resonate with the drones at the particular moment.’
Like Brussels for example ...
Flashback: New York Times mocked Trump for saying ‘there is something bad going on’ in Brussels
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3412471/posts
Donald Trump Warned About Condition of Brussels Before Terrorist Attack (Churchill of Our Time)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3412340/posts
~~~
Or like his border policy. Just a populist riding the wave, right?
[quote]
As far back as 2000, in his book, The America We Deserve, [Trump] condemned illegal immigration, said that illegals needed to leave the country, and insisted we should put the interests of Americans before those of immigrants (even legal ones). By 2011 in the chapter, ‘It’s Called Illegal Immigration for a Reason,’ in his book Time to Get Tough, Trump came down very hardline on the border, saying we need to build a wall, greatly increase border patrol agents, deport illegal criminals, stop giving anchor babies citizenship, etc. So, yes, I think his calling for the border to be secured for the last 16 years is long enough for me to trust that he will actually do it, especially considering all the heat he’s taken for his position. — FenwickBabbitt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.