Conservatism vs Populism

[jstaff]

By almost any metric Ted Cruz is the most conservative candidate we have running in the primary. In 2008 and 2012 there was a large voice that said "No more RINO's", "Give me a conservative or I won't vote", and my favorite "It's not about electability, it's about principles". Millions stayed home rather than vote for the lesser of two evils, allowing a wishy-washy moderate Republican to lose to a hard core, fire breathing, far left Democrat. It was a matter of principle, they said.

I wonder what principle is at work here now, that causes so many Freepers to jump, with both feet, on the Trump bandwagon. The arguments I hear are:

-Cruz is too inexperienced, he should wait a few years. (Trump has zero experience.)

-Trump is a rich, successful businessman. (So are George Soros and Tom Steyer.)

-Trump is more electable because he appeals to both sides. (John McCain likes to reach across the aisle.)

-Trump is not afraid to tell it like it is. (Almost nothing he says is original thought, it's all been said before, many times.)

So, fellow conservatives, in the spirit of helping a senile old man to understand, I ask "why?" To keep things simple for us old people please just pick one of the choices below.

a. You changed your mind about only supporting a conservative.

b. You were joking about only supporting a conservative.

c. You think Trump is the only conservative.

d. You forgot what a conservative is.

e. You just want to stir stuff up.

I respect everyone's right to speak their mind and make their own choices based on whatever criteria they choose.

But, I just don't get this one.

[Calpublican]

Did not see his most recent speech, but he has made several softer statements lately.

In the 50’s Democrats weren’t so crazy left. By today’s standards Kennedy in the 60’s was conservative.

If Trump is elected and tries this deportation, there will be so many injunctions and lawsuits and protests it will be crazy. Many so-called Republicans in the House and Senate will side with Democrats to defeat Trump’s efforts.

[Marie]

It does it *no* good to vote in the perfect conservative if they can’t get anything done.

If I agreed with Carson on 100% of everything, I’d still choose Trump.

Why?

Because I cannot imagine Carson strong-arming China. I cannot imagine the ‘nice’ guy pushing and bullying congress into doing the right thing.

It boils down to the economy.

Without jobs and a thriving economy, NONE of the rest matters.

I am not voting for a husband. I already have one.
I am not voting for a ‘buddy’. I have several.
I am not voting for a rabbi. I already have one.

I AM VOTING FOR A FREAKING *LEADER*.

I want to vote for a man who can actually *do* something.

If Trump delivers on 10% of what he hopes to do, he’ll accomplish more than any conservative politician since Reagan.

If you are an honest person, you’ll watch this speech and you’ll understand what we see in him. It starts at minute 28:00.

(Doubt you’ll bother.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAbPS3UulGQ

[Psalm 144]

“Do you know if we ever got an answer on why he voted for the Corker amendment?”

Nope. Don’t hold your breath for one either. I’m getting a bit irritated with the posturing about the immaculate conservatism of Cruz. He isn’t perfect. None of them are. Not one.

I could vote for Cruz, and will happily do so if he is the nominee, but the job is on him to connect with people and he isn’t doing it. Thus far he is failing to engage 90% of the base. The weird and condescending pretense that Cruz is Galahad in brylcreem is not helping his cause either. Added arrogance by his groupies is the last thing he needs. He projects enough of his own.

[central_va]

I did a search in your post for the word -wall-. I go zero hits. That there is the reason why you have no clue.

[Psalm 144]

“The whole point of my post was to needle those Freepers who made such a big deal of staying home in 2012, because, they said, they didn’t have a conservative option. I will not call them out by name because that violates the user agreement for posting.”

In other words, you are skating as close to trolling as you think you can get away with.

And lest I forget, to hell with Bishop Willard. I hope he does force his way into the race so I can vote for someone else - anyone else - a fourth time.

[central_va]

Cruz is conservative but also VERY establishment. His wife is a wall street "insider" and Cruz is obliviously a passenger on the Cheap Labor Express. He wants to increase H-1b visas 500%. that should tell you every thing.

So you can shout "populist" at Trump supporters and I can retort establishment at Cruz supporters.

[Ohioan]

The willingness of some Conservatives, who feel a need to assert some form of academic credentials, to label other Conservatives, who express themselves in a more common vernacular, as "populists," has long been an impediment to all of us working together against those who seek to deconstruct the American heritage.

I have been seeking a way to fight what is, in my experience, a false & contrived dichotomy, for over half a century. It hurts us in so many ways--including preventing those with similar philosophies, patriotism & American roots, from actually getting things done in Washington.

I hesitate to list specific instances, because those with the priorities of one faction, at any one time, will rush in to defend their avoidance of another faction's priorities--even though they are based in large measure on kindred values--by denouncing some aspect in that other factions approach. But I will give an example of what happens when we do come together.

Ronald Reagan's victory in 1980 was based on a coming together of the Goldwater Conservatives in the Republican Party & the Reagan Democrats (who were basically those Democrats who had supported George Wallace in 1968 & 1972. William Rusher, the publisher of National Review, but more pragmatic than the founder, Bill Bucley, wrote a book in the mid-1970s, on the potential for that coming together, which correctly predicted the dynamics that followed.

We need to understand that different styles, different emphases, different support groups, must not be allowed to make us fail to recognize opportunities to work together to take America back from those who are destroying an American future.

[Ohioan]

Working for a Wall Street firm does not necessarily suggest that the employee of the Wall Street firm would put Wall Street special interests ahead of America's interests. That is unnecessarily insulting to Mr. Cruz.

There is no reason for those who support Trump & Cruz to get into foolish exchanges with those who are presently supporting one or the other. As one of the former, I simply make a point consistent with my first reply, immediately above.

[central_va]

The divide is not “liberals vs conservatives”. It’s globalists vs. Americans.

If we elect an American president for the first time since 1984, we can work out all the other stuff among ourselves. If we elect a globalist, there won’t be enough left of “us” to work out anything.

And all you “global economy” people here - you are no better than the Clintons. Shame on you all.

—Jim Noble

[Psalm 144]

“There is no reason for those who support Trump & Cruz to get into foolish exchanges with those who are presently supporting one or the other.”

Agreed. Read post 40 and draw your own conclusions about the entire thread.

[Ohioan]

The focus on the "globalist" label, is slightly off target. The "globalist" mentality, which first surfaced as a major factor in American politics, at the time of the League of Nations debate, which our side won, hands down, but on which the internationalist, unfortunately, have never given up; is only one facet of the anti-American movement that is undermining the cultural heritage that almost everyone here at Free Republic supports.

If you focus merely on those business interests, such as those that control what is loosely described as the Republican establishment, you overlook the damage done by all of the domestic programs, movements, agitations, etc., that reflect the war on our culture--and hence sense of community--which has been flourishing in Academia & among its parrots in the mass media, for over two generations.

The "globalist" business interests would not dare be so aggressive, if our public still expected all Americans to behave like they understood the responsibility all of us have, as Americans, to preserve uniquely American interests.

The rush to ship manufacturing overseas, used to be at least tempered by an understanding of social duties to our immediate neighbors and fellow countrymen. But as the war on heritage--on duty to country, to cultural, social & legal continuity--has declined, so have the traditional restraints on acting without responsibility to your fellow countrymen.

The Leftwing immigration policy since 1965 also reflects this tragic decline in a sense of responsibility to the continuity of our people, as a people. We need to reawaken a healthy intolerance for domestic Quislings.

[central_va]

A true libertarian is not a patriot, a lot of what we see now is the result of “reverse jingoism”..

[Pelham]

“-Cruz is too inexperienced, he should wait a few years. (Trump has zero experience.) “

I haven’t heard the ‘inexperience’ argument. I have heard the ‘unlikely to win argument’. Cruz doesn’t have the name recognition and isn’t commanding enough support even among Republicans. So some of us moved to choice #2.

“-Trump is a rich, successful businessman. (So are George Soros and Tom Steyer.) “

Trump’s business success indicates his ability as an executive and an understanding of what business confronts in dealing with government. I’m not aware of why that would put him in the camp of Soros and Steyer any more than Romney’s wealth did.

“-Trump is more electable because he appeals to both sides. (John McCain likes to reach across the aisle.)”

The conflation of two different meanings of appeal. One sense being “liked” the other being “solicitation”.

“-Trump is not afraid to tell it like it is. (Almost nothing he says is original thought, it’s all been said before, many times.) “

Humble truths are like that. They are no less true for being unoriginal. It’s just uncommon to hear them coming from the mouth of someone running for office.

“So, fellow conservatives, in the spirit of helping a senile old man to understand, I ask “why?” To keep things simple for us old people please just pick one of the choices below. “

The choice that you didn’t include. He’s a patriot who has a fan club that includes Ted Cruz.

[Pelham]

“You and I and some other Freepers hate the GOP E, but we love the truth and we love the country more than we hate the GOP E. A lot of folks obviously hate the GOP e more than they care about the truth.”

You have this unerring ability to pat yourself on the back while disparaging others. It truly is a gift. Sort of.

[Zionist Conspirator]

They like Trump because he will restore Ethnic America (ie, a country that consists exclusively of people of northwestern European descent). Which is ahistorical because of 1)the Indians and 2)Blacks who have been here for almost four hundred years and are the second oldest settler ethnic group (right behind WASPs).

The racial purification of America is declared the only issue, since homosexuality is caused by not being northwestern European. It took northwestern Europeans to "invent" heterosexuality, marriage, conservatism, the family, and everything else. These things arose from Germanic/Celtic chromosomes, not from G-d A-mighty.

Trump is nothing in the world but a liberal who has decided to play the role of a "right wing" populist. He is the white Obama and he is trying to create a movement that corresponds to and reflects "BlackLivesMatter," "La Raza," etc.

No, I don't think Trump is a Nazi or anti-Jewish or anti-Israel, and I have been poo-pooing the fears of those who think a Trump presidency would actually be dangerous. But considering that he's been latched onto by the "White Panthers," I'm not so sure now. And I certainly don't believe he has the slightest concept of the separation of powers.

Outside the United States the Right has always been about glorification of the "blood and soil" of the "sacred motherland" (and there's a different one for everybody). Now the American Right is in danger of making the same ghastly mistake.

[Ohioan]

The Founding Fathers behavior basically defined both patriotism and libertarianism, in the American context. Just who do you consider one or the other? A patriotic American is certainly not in favor of the present climate of usurpation in Washington.

[Jim Noble]

The “conservative movement” has failed, decisively. Republican globalists have achieved victories in Republican districts so they can join with their partner globalists who win victories in Democratic districts to finish the job started long ago of destroying our beloved nation.

The technique the globalists have used - divide et impera - is ancient. Their tools, in America, are particularly well-suited to a media-run, instant gratification society. Even among relative political sophisticates such as ourselves, time is wasted discerning whether someone is a “conservative” or a “liberal”, obscuring the important divide - is the candidate an American, a patriot, or is he a globalist?

The scales fell from my eyes on this question after the Bush disaster (no, I don’t “miss him yet”). George W. Bush flew under a conservative flag, feeding us boob bait under the masterful guidance of the “architect”, and the results of his eight years would have pleased Woodrow Wilson himself. I should have known, when his casus belli for the disastrous Iraq expedition involved Saddam Hussein violating “UN resolutions”, as if ANY act of that body could justify the loss of a single New Hampshire infantryman. But, I too was inspired by his speech from the ruins - we all were, to one degree or another.

Anyway, I digress. The globalists have gained enormous territory since 1989. They have brainwashed a generation, they have formed what to them appears an unbeatable coalition in Washington, a Uniparty in effect if not in name, they enrich themselves personally at our expense while they devise our ruin, collectively.

Can anything be done? I don’t know. I DO know that a man who can form the words “I will make America great again” is a man who may, possibly, grasp the desperate straits into which we have fallen. I DO know that a man who has prevailed over the incredibly corrupt political and regulatory structures in New York and New Jersey, again and again, has taken the measure of our “rulers”.

I’ve said here, more than once, that I would vote for Bernie Sanders before I would vote for Jeb Bush, because Bernie Sanders is an American while Jeb Bush is not (fortunately, fate is not going to challenge me in this way).

If we elect an American as President for the first time since 1984, and over the amazing power of the infotainment-financial-Uniparty iron triangle which rules us, we can work out all the secondary issues among ourselves. If we elect a globalist, who is prepared to consolidate the gains of HW Bush-Clinton-GWB-”Obama”, we are finished.

With Marco Rubio or Hillary Clinton in the White House, even our debating society here will become irrelevant.

You know the line in “Master and Commander” when the doctor sneers at the idea that Nelson’s love for King and country made him warm? You know Aubrey’s reply? “The fact that it was Nelson who said it made our hearts glow”?

There may still be enough of us whose hearts glow at the idea of making our beloved nation great again, however much the left, the neocons, National Review and Fox News, may sneer. I hope so.

GO TRUMP!

[Jim Noble]

The ruling coalition is united around several things that the people are against. They are skilled at setting up phony issues (or issues that don’t concern the Federal government) to break up the formation of any possible other coalition.

Republicans and Democrats agree that the purpose of the State is redistribution. How much, and to whom, and under what circumstances, there are disagreements. But no elected officials of either Party believe that it is wrong to take from you and give to another of their own choosing, for reasons that make sense to them.

Republicans and Democrats agree that you have “rights” - lots of them. They also agree that any question ABOUT your “rights”, or whether or not something IS a “right”, should not be decided by a political process because that is “divisive”. So, they both agree that the voice of “the People” as contemplated in Articles IX and X can only be voiced by nine unelected life tenure judges, and that five of them, at any time or for any reason, can give new “rights” and take away old ones, particularly if those old ones arise out of majority voting.

Republicans and Democrats all believe in “diversity”. They, ignoring completely the results of all social science research on this subject, and contrary to millennia of human experience and wisdom, believe that the more “diverse” our country, its institutions, and any private entities within her become, the more cohesive and productive we will become.

Republicans and Democrats almost all believe in “free trade” and “immigration”. These things are good for various constituencies of both parties while they wreck the economy and the nation.

Many of the People, perhaps a majority, do not believe in any of these things. But in our existing system, captive as it is to the MSM-mandated “process” for choosing two candidates for POTUS neither of whom will change a thing, leaves the People with no voice.

After 1984, I believe the Uniparty came to a consensus - “Never again another Reagan”. They devised a scheme to set Americans against one another over issues that elections cannot alter, so they could pursue their globalizing agenda in peace.

They have been very successful. Up until now.

[mkjessup]

That is a truly superb post Jim, and you have absolutely hit the nail on the head.

I think you should put your post #57 up on your profile page permanently and post a link to it in your tagline, just sayin’, it’s that good.

[mkjessup]

That should have read “your post #58” (although #57 is really good too!)