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.

[Ohioan]

Trump came up with a very effective line, last week, about wanting our children to have the "dream." as opposed to the Third World pouring over the Southern border.

I think that a simple campaign--but one appreciating the basic motivations that have inspired people throughout the centuries--is the best way to unhorse the mountebanks that are misleading us.

Contrast the words of the Founding Fathers, who showed far more & far clearer understanding of the psychology involved in human interaction, than those systematically betraying us.

The latter have benefited by the slavish compulsion of the mass media to parrot what they were indoctrinated with in College; but once really challenged, they are absolutely hapless in a debate. I leaned that in one of the colleges long involved in the indoctrination, my freshman year; and have never lost a debate with a "Liberal" since. When correctly challenged, they have nothing to rely on but the bogus arguments that they heard from Professors, who basically taught their wish lists as premises for a new--and completely bogus--reality.

You mention the recent--and certainly not missed--George W. Bush. Consider how completely George Washington answered Bush's every contention (in Bush's idiotic 2nd Inaugural Address) from his 18th Century Farewell Address: Washington/Bush Debate.

Similar contrasts can be offered by republishing Jefferson's Views on how Welfare worked in 1782 Virginia; Washington's plea for a Swiss like system for arming American youth; Jefferson's reason for cutting corners to buy Louisiana--directly relevant for understanding the terrible damage being done by not protecting our Southern border.