Posted on 02/29/2016 6:17:14 PM PST by VitacoreVision
Pat Buchanan: Regardless of nominee, Donald Trump surge marks 'death rattle' of establishment
...
We hear wails that the nomination of Trump would mean the end of the conservative movement. But how so?
If Trump won and conducted a conservative government, it would validate the movement. If Trump won and turned left, it would inspire an insurgency like Ronald Reagan’s in 1976, when the Ford-Rockefeller-Kissinger administration moved too far toward detente.
If Trump ran and lost, the conservative movement would have President Clinton to unite and rally the troops against.
One recalls Barry Goldwater’s historic wipeout in 1964. But, in 1966, Republicans made the greatest gains in a generation, and went on to win the presidency for 20 of the next 24 years.
Undeniably, a Trump presidency would mean an end to the Bush and establishment policies on trade, immigration and intervention.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Like becoming worker bees in the apparatus of Government and becoming bureaucrats that becoming part of the unchecked regulatory machine that moves the progressive movement forward via stealth.
Incorrect. Trump is not running under the free trade, open borders, interventionist GOP brand. Hence, Mr Buchanan’s point.
Incorrect. Trump is not running under the free trade, open borders, interventionist GOP brand. Hence, Mr Buchanan’s point.
Since Trump has won, and defeated them, what will the ideology-only conservatives (such as Levin, Beck, etc.) talk about and write about through November?
>>Like becoming worker bees in the apparatus of Government and becoming bureaucrats that becoming part of the unchecked regulatory machine that moves the progressive movement forward via stealth.
Exactly. Just as it matters less who votes than who counts the votes. They know that their system works best with a body of law that covers everything, and then all they need to do is to become the people who enforce the laws, rules, and regulations to their advantage.
I’m buying a pitchfork today. The peasants will be heard.
>>True. But it’s also true that America is considerably more socialist now than it was 50 years, ago, despite Reagan.
The only thing that shows me is a sucker is born every minute. 40 odd years, a majority with a (R) President AND/or Congress, and not a single-step back toward our lost Republic.
“We’re always waiting for the ‘perfect’ so we can make our big move and save the republic.”
I’m sorry, the LAST time the less-than-perfect was settled upon, we got the following *fine* Compassionate Conservative ideals: NSA, TARP, DHS, broken borders, Religion of Peace, NCLB, etc.
I think Trump should pick Cruz to head the Justice Department.
They'll live to regret that move...
>>I’m sorry, the LAST time the less-than-perfect was settled upon, we got the following *fine* Compassionate Conservative ideals: NSA, TARP, DHS, broken borders, Religion of Peace, NCLB, etc.
We also got 9/11 and two wars and we started that presidency with a Deomcratic Party that was out for blood and a pissed-off media. Remind me, who was the “perfect” candidate in that primary? GWB might be remembered differently if certain events had or had not occurred. But, how many people were talking about the UniParty in 2000? We know from hindsight that it existed before then, but very few of of us knew it and when we mentioned it right here, we got flamed for our tinfoil hat theories.
You point backwards to demonstrate why we shouldn’t do something in the future. History matters, but the context of that history matters too. Can you understand how much the world, the nation, and the people have changed in 16 years?!? Just because something worked in the past does not guarantee success in the future, or vice-versa. The Progs work with the conditions that they find HERE AND NOW. We need to learn to accept reality as a part of our plans as well or they will keep moving the ball in their direction.
Ah, so history/context matters...when subverting or not supporting the Constitution?
I don’t recall anything being ATTEMPTED by the ‘Right’ to reverse from the Socialist path. The majority of what I pointed out happened with a Congress and W.H. populated with the, so called, ‘small govt’ party.
What ‘reality’ do you propose to ‘readily accept’? We’re a Democracy? The Constitution is a ‘living, breathing’ document? What, HERE AND NOW, gets us BACK to a Free Nation and People?
He will clean her clock. He will wipe her like a rag.
We need a “Freedom Movement” that enters on constitutionally limited central government and state sovereignty. Helpful along those lines would be repeal of the 17th Amendment and probably a term-limit amendment. I’m becoming convinced that we should take away as much as possible allowing career politicians. I’m beginning to believe that career politicians are per se corrupt.
As I've said before, I can understand how liberal Republicans get elected in "blue states" like Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, etc. Romneys, Giulianis, Patakis, Christies etc. are the only type of Republican who could get elected in those states. How McCain and his girlfriend Lindsey haven't been eliminated in the primaries of their states (Arizona and South Carolina, which are solidly Republican and conservative) is a mystery to me. Or maybe it isn't so mysterious, because we all know the power of incumbency and having the RNC political machine backing you.
"Bushism" has defined the Republican brand since 1989. Every nominee from 1988 on has been cut from more or less the same cloth, and Trump's rise is proof that Republican voters want an alternative. This revolt the and political instincts that Trump represents are more permanent, reliable, and trustworthy than Trump himself.
Put down the kool-aid and turn off Fox News. Just a week ago they were saying Trump's ceiling was 35% ...now it's 45-49%. I predict in two weeks (March 16) it will be near 60%.
>>I don’t recall anything being ATTEMPTED by the ‘Right’ to reverse from the Socialist path.
Me neither. The Progressive agenda moved forward even when Reagan was in office. The “Right” has never been in power in our lifetimes. We’ve been led by Globalists, Progressives, and Neocons since the end of WW2. The things that you would call Conservative are not important to a majority of decision-makers (in government and in business) and never have been. But they lead us to believe that they share our values and we believe in the hopes that, this time, it will be true. And we are always left disappointed, while the Progs always seem to inch forward.
Guess what. That what “progressive” means. When they chose that name over a century ago, it was their game plan from Day One. Go read what Senator Robert La Follette said in the first decade of the 20th century.
Understanding our nation is like understanding Christianity. You can choose to think in feelings and then find proof texts to support them. Or you can study systematic theology and know how all the pieces fit together. Most Cruztians are proof texters and that lack of mental discipline extends into their politics as well.
I have to admit that I was completely convinced that when establishment candidates (Christie, Jeb, Carly, etc) dropped out, their voters would automatically go to another establishment candidate (Rubio). I was surprised to see Trump's numbers go up instead.
But your point regarding Fox News is well-taken, I've been ignoring them for years, since it was clear almost from day one that they're just propagandists for the RNC and the GOP establishment.
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.