Posted on 02/26/2016 9:07:46 AM PST by Kaslin
There's still time to turn it around, of course. But now that many conservatives are moving from the bargaining phase to the depression phase of the Kubler-Ross model, we can begin to grapple with the prospective reality of a Trump-vs-Hillary general election.
Whether you're an ideological conservative, a proponent of limited government or someone who believes that the president has too much power already, you shouldn't think of this matchup as a contest between horrifying candidates. Rather, you should ask yourself which scenario would be more damaging? I'm pretty sure you'd find that Donald Trump is the form of the Destructor.
But Hillary Clinton is the worst, most evil liberal ever!
Yes. You can count on it. Clinton, as you may have noticed, does not have the charisma of Barack Obama. Not only would she be divisive and ethically compromised, but she would also galvanize the Right. Republicans would almost certainly unite against her agenda, which would be little more than codifying Obama's legacy: a collection of policies that half the country still hates.
She won't be able to pass anything substantial. The most likely outcome is another 4 to 8 years of trench warfare in Washington D.C., giving conservatives a pass for a number of winnable, state-level issues. There will probably be, if historical disposition of the electorate holds, a Republican Congress. (Who knows what happens to Congress if Trump is elected.) Hardly ideal. But unless you believe that an active Washington is the best Washington, gridlock is not the end of the world.
The myth that Democrats get everything will persist. But despite plenty of well-earned criticism, the GOP has been a more effective minority party than constituents give them credit for. People are frustrated, but the conservative idealists have been gaining ground since the tea party emerged. The tea party's presence has put a stop to an array of progressive reform efforts that the pre-2010 GOP would surely have gone along with.
Just as some Republicans are already warming to the idea of his candidacy, the temptation in Congress to follow "Trumpism" -- a philosophy based on the vagaries of one man -- will be strong. Trump's inclination is never to free Americans from the state, but rather to do a better job administering the state ("we're gonna take care of everybody!") through great deals and assertive leadership. Or in other words, everything the Founding Fathers didn't want the presidency to be.
So, while gridlock will still hold up most of the issues conservatives care about, chances are high -- considering his long history of supporting big government -- that Trump would try and cobble together a populist coalition for the polices that conservatives hate. This will end up marginalizing ideological conservatism from within the party.
I mean, what will Reaganites gain from this presidency? The idea that Trump could dismantle Obamacare -- when, in reality, he backs many of its components and has yet to offer any genuine solutions -- is a fantasy. The idea that Trump would name originalists to the Supreme Court is equally risible when you consider that Trump has shown absolutely no hint or inclination that he understands what originalism entails.
But the people of the working class are mad! How dare you disrespect their concerns?
There's a difference between caring about the plight of working stiffs and embracing isolationism, high tariffs and other policies that would destroy working class long-term prospects. Is everyone supposed to surrender to mercantilism because it makes 30 percent of angry voters feel better? You can't let a mob run your party. And it's not a mob -- it is hyper-populist or constructed around a cult of celebrity or even because it's angry -- though all those things are true. The problem is that it's incoherent and nihilistic.
It's worth pointing out that the chances of Trump's protectionist policies passing -- with a bipartisan coalition of progressives and right-protectionists -- are far higher under Trump than Clinton. Why should free traders help facilitate this kind of disaster? So they can brag about having a Republican president?
None of this is to argue that the conservative movement or the Republican Party is in good shape, that the status quo is working well or that the leadership doesn't deserve what's coming. I'm not saying someone shouldn't blow up the Republican Party. I'm saying that that someone shouldn't be an unprincipled imposter. Because at some point there's going to be a counterrevolution. Those who swear up and down that they would never vote for Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio because they aren't conservative enough shouldn't be surprised that a large faction on the Right -- more than likely, the larger faction on the Right -- won't support a candidate who is adversarial to its belief system. To support Trump would be an exercise in pure partisanship. For conservatives, it would mean facilitating their own destruction. It makes no sense.
The Great Conservative has now SWERVED to support the 8Gang Cabana Boy.
Cruz is now the Great Conswervative.
Not even possible.
A random third-grader, a hospital patient in a coma, a gorilla with learning disabilities......NONE OF THEM could POSSIBLY do a WORSE JOB of being President than Barack Obama.
“But now that many conservatives are moving from the bargaining phase to the depression phase of the Kubler-Ross model, we can begin to grapple with the prospective reality of a Trump-vs-Hillary general election.”
I hate to say it but I’m at that point too.
Next week are Minnesota’s precinct caucuses and I plan on voting for Ted Cruz.
The only way I’ll support Trump is if he’s our party’s nominee in November. As long as I have a choice in the matter, I’ll not back him a bit.
Blah, blah, blah....
Written by an establishment guy trying to protect the elites interests through dis-information...
Hillary won’t be the Dem candidate this fall.
I disagree. Trump would not be the kind of Disaster Hillary will be.
However, Trump will signal the complete disaster and end of Reagan Conservatism as having any kind of viable voice in politics in the USA. Forever.
Townhall = eGOP.
Trump hasn’t been part of the eGOP “scene” in DC and those that have spent their entire lives climbing the social ladder in the eGOP are scared they won’t retain their positions if Trump wins. Period. THAT is why they oppose Trump.
...they would never vote for Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio because they aren’t conservative enough...
My complaint is NOT that they are not conservative enough.
My complaint is that they refuse to listen to the American Voters and only listen to those who pay them big bucks.
Oh please thse sort of childish rants pretending to tell people what the future would bring based on nothing more then the authors emotion base opinions simply discredit both the author and the publication as chicken little style hysteric.
Conservative media better get their emotions uncontrolled and return to reason soon. Candidate come and go, this sort of emotionally hysteric temper tantrums follows authors, and publications, around forever.
Vote for the lesser of two disasters. Just another modern day election in the USSA.
Give us three examples of this "effectiveness"? has ANY item of either the 2010 or 2014 GOP agenda been acted on? Answer NO. If you will not stop lying to yourselves GOP bots, at least stop trying to lie to us.
Pure BS. Not getting your perfect candidate anointed is not the "end" of anything.
Cruz cannot be trusted.
But you don't have a choice. Cruz last night said if it's Rubio v Trump he'll support Rubio. Also, Cruz supported Fast Track, the Corcker (Iran deal) amendment, and pushed for legalization of illegals before he ran for Pres.
Establishment = Tyranny = Big Money = Shadow Government
Cruz = Rubio = Establishment
Sorry, David at Townhall has become unhinged in such a statement IMHO.
The GOPe is showing its true colors. Seemingly willing to inflict another four years of Obama policy (which is absolutely destroying the Republic) on the nation rather than have a GOP President who is not GOPe.
This is serious stuff...and every conservative and God-fearing American should stand against it.
Too many words. I almost feel like these pundits are pleading for their lives.
From the article...
“Trump’s inclination is never to free Americans from the state, but rather to do a better job administering the state (”we’re gonna take care of everybody!”) through great deals and assertive leadership.”
Bingo!
Trump will fail miserably and I can’t wait to see all the cultist when it happens. I’m sure they’re rah rah him straight to hell.
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.