That’s a little presumptuous, saying “us conservatives” when you now express views that are anti-conservative, particularly against the Electoral College which insures the states the power to choose the President instead of allowing large population centers in a few large cities to disenfranchise the states in such an election.
When anyone is appointed in a process that goes against the established electoral process, that is not government of the people’s choosing. Same applies to unilateral legislating away of electoral processes.
The phrase “not socialist in any meaningful way” is nebulous. Many concern trolls have claimed the same of Red China.
I think maybe you've misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I am actually a huge supporter of the Electoral College, and if you let me, would repeal the 17th Amendment, reverting election to senators back to the state legislators. I am well aware of the downsides of pure democracy (mob rule), and don't espouse it in any way.
That being said, even though you have a good understanding of this concept, you seem to have fallen into the same trap the left seems to use against us, and that is: automatically assuming that if something is "less democratic" it is inherently bad.
Suppose now, that there is an alternative way to select a particular official in your Constitution and basic law, and this power is available to the President. Now, lets further suppose that said President not only enjoys the popular support of the people, but has been repeatedly been re-elected by the same people (under the same Constitution). Under this supposition, why is it somehow evil for this President to utilize a particular Constitutional power of his office in a situation that he feels calls for it? (Not to mention the fact that he has shown in the past his willingness to use this power judiciously and temporarily to solve a particular problem).
If the action was somehow an arbitrary use of power, unsupported by the Constitution and laws, then I would wholeheartedly agree with you, but this is simply not the case here.
I think the most important quality in a conservative...really, in any thinking man...is consistency of reasoning and thought. If you do indeed believe in the concept of self-determination, and in the idea of a Constitutional republic, you cannot then throw these ideas right out the window just because it is Vladimir Putin who happens to be wielding that Constitutional power. Like I said in a previous post, this is no different than simply asserting "Orange Man Bad" as a reason Trump should not be able to wield his Constitutionally delegated power.