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 don’t recall such criticism of Obama’s deportment and temperament when he gave Hillary and others the finger on TV (which he’s done a number of times), nor do I recall such criticism when Obama told his followers to “get in peoples’ faces” and “bring a gun when they bring a knife”.
“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. “Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it."
Reagan was a realist. He dealt with the communists long before he ever got to DC. When he was president of the SAG it was full of communist agitators who only wanted to cause trouble and disruption but Reagan managed to hold things together. When he got to Dc he managed to work with a Congress that despised and ridiculed him and achieved historic wins...because he was willing to negotiate and compromise and take what he could get.
Just because you say that having an American citizen mother makes a child born in Canada a natural born citizen of the USA does not make those who disagree with you foolish. Ted Cruz was a US citizen from birth by virtue of federal statute. About that there is no dispute. The question is whether that also makes him a natural born citizen. If you go back and look at the understanding of “natural born citizen” at the time the Constitution was drafted, this issue is in no way as clear as you make it out to be. All caps and name-calling is a generally a sign of insecurity over one’s position. If arguing that Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen truly is crazy, perhaps you would not feel the need to scream about it. BTW, this is a legal issue not a “birther” issue - we know exactly where Ted was born: in Canada.
“Conservative” has become a buzzword used by the RNC/GOP to keep people on the reservation much like welfare has been used to keep blacks on the Democrat plantation.
It has lost all meaning when most of those using the word do not want to conserve the nation.
Without a country, what is there left to conserve?
Refusing to uphold the rule of law is not conservative.
Refusing to stop the influx of fraudulently documented foreigners is not conservative.
Refusing to stand with the citizens is not conservative.
It’s getting to the point where I don’t consider myself a conservative anymore when I look around and see how many that do call themselves that are on board The Cheap Labor Express.
There is nothing remotely conservative about anyone unwilling to stand for the rule of law and the citizens.
Without a nation, there’s nothing to conserve.
Glad to see there are still a few like minded people here on FR. Thought the world was gone. Everyone went “bubba” one me.
Let that sink in. Rush Limbaugh is such a committed conservative that he didn't even brother to vote for Reagan. No Limbaugh is not going to tell me who is and is not a conservative.
They all work for The Cheap Labor Express as propagandists.
I have a feeling this article has a lot to do with Salem Media :
Salem Media
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_Media_Group#Political_activities
They’ve endorsed Cruz and are fighting tooth and nail to make their endorsement count...they’ll never turn towards Trump. They would have probably chosen Bush, had he ever stood a chance. That’s how “conservative” they are.
Morton Blackwell is a conservative who is a fairly hard-nosed conservative and who has endorsed Ted Cruz. He is also a political activist and an “expert” on RNC Rules...he’ll be front and center jockeying to ensure his endorsement wins, but to no avail, at the brokered convention. The party is eager to eliminate both Cruz and Trump...We’ll have to wait and see if Trump’s popularity among voters and the voters say will be tossed out the window for the elite’s RINO preference.
Morton Blackwell
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morton_Blackwell
Check this out, too, regarding Salem
Excerpt:
“Politics as an industry – Salem Communications [radio talk show (Hugh Hewitt), Red State (Eric Erickson), now also Twitchy (Michelle Malkin), Hot Air (McCain), NRO, Townhall, Human Events, Bearing Arms] apparently have the same general ideological world view -regarding immigration- as Rupert Murdoch and The Wall Street Journal, etc.”
Excerpt 2:
“In 2014 (sorry, cannot recall the date), Salem Radio hosted a conference call with Senator Marco Rubio to address the Gang of Eight legislation and “set the record straight.” All national and local talk hosts were urged to take part. I am one of their local hosts, and what I heard that day was troubling.”
Insider Reveals Salem Media Was Part of The Coordinated Gang-of-Eight Manipulation
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/03/07/insider-reveals-salem-media-was-part-of-the-coordinated-gang-of-eight-manipulation/comment-page-2/
Trump wants to fix social security and save Medicare. He seems to favor preserving it and not tearing it down. He isn’t for draconian measures. But some on this site thinks Trump will reform entitlements/welfare in order to move the money to social security and Medicare. I also know he has said he won’t let anyone die or not get the care they need. He don’t sound hot headed so he won’t destroy the system just to make cuts. I feel he will tread carefully and do the right thing. Someone like Rand Paul would do too much too fast causing its own set of issues.
Trump is a doer not a blow hard who is all talk and no action.
Limbaugh the Lesser; A legend in no one’s mind.
You’re right, Trump isn’t a conservative. But he isn’t a liberal either. Nor is he a partisan on either side of the fence. Historically, he’s contributed almost equally to candidates from both parties, which isn’t terribly unusual for a businessman of his stature.
Trump is a populist, but not the populist that the media and the GOP try to portray, i.e., a person who only says what he things people want to hear. Unlike other so-called populists, Trump really is as pissed off and fed up as we are. Notice that he doesn’t use teleprompters, notes or even talking points. And, while he occasionally contradicts himself (what person doesn’t), his recognition of what is wrong with our country and his passion and commitment to righting those wrongs is consistent and clearly resonates with many Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and independents alike.
No, Trump isn’t a conservative, but he is a patriotic American who honestly wants what’s best for America and American citizens and while I may disagree with him on a few things, at this point, that’s good enough for me.
It is you who are the fool.
I was not talking about Trump’s personal life I was talking about his political positions. I believe in principals, not the people espousing them. If Cruz were to change on Israel or the Life issue I would no longer support him.
I support positions, not the candidate. Cruz is the most conservative, so I support him.
Movement conservatives are suicidal and Donald Trump believes in defending the country, its lawful citizens and its borders.
Thank you. Very well articulated.
“We cannot allow these people to come into our country.”
He may not be ‘conservative’ but at least he speaks up
It is well past the time to nit pick about the purity of a label. Action speaks:
Trump will secure the border with the wall and keep out the criminal illegals. This is not racist, this is to protect American citizens (including American citizens of hispanic origin!) from the illegals bringing in heroin, diseases and crime.
Trump will bring back manufacturing jobs and protect American jobs.
Trump is pro second amendment rights.
Trump will nominate a conservative Supreme Court Justice.
These are the bed rock priorities required to save America and must be done this election cycle.
Pointless debate on how “conservative” Trump is, becomes the equivalent of the proverbial “How many angels can dance on the point of pin?”
Irrelevant.
Finally an honest Trump supporter. I actually have a lot of respect for your post and your position. It is consistent and heartfelt.
I would only say anger is not a platform. But again it is refreshing to have a Trump supporter clearly articulate why they support him, and not try to claim he is conservative.
Another Cruzlim reduced to typing in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS SO THAT WE WILL FINALLY FOCUS ON JUST EXACTLY HOW DERANGED HE REALLY IS. More balanced folks confined their use of capitals to a few key points.
STOP MAKING A FOOL OF YOURSELF
Wouldn't want to have missed that point either. I have a genuine question. Is it an insult if it is delivered by someone who is emotionally unbalanced?
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.