Posted on 09/02/2015 7:24:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Lucky for me that I’ve never thought my blogging made a lick of difference to anyone or else reading this last night would have left me looking for a new job. HuffPo came up with a simple yet brutally effective way of testing Republicans’ tolerance for Trump’s ideological heresies: They polled people on universal health care, affirmative action, the Iran deal, and Social Security and simply swapped out Trump’s endorsement of the policy in each question for some prominent Democrat’s. Would Republicans like the Iran deal any better if they thought it had Donald Trump’s approval and not just John Kerry’s?
As it turns out, they sure would. For some segment of the GOP, it seems, politics is nothing more than Team Red/Team Blue tribalism. Policy differences are mere details.
Which is to say, if it wasn’t before, the “MacGuffinization of American politics” is now a bipartisan phenomenon.
Kerry’s endorsement of the deal generates a 52/20 D/R split. Trump’s endorsement turns that into … near parity, 54/53. By sheer coincidence, within 10 minutes of this HuffPo survey dropping yesterday, Charles Cooke went live on NRO’s website with a new post agonizing over how Trumpmania seems to have convinced some conservatives to discard their principles overnight. How can it be, he wondered, that the segment of the GOP that’s complained most loudly about RINO deviations from conservative orthodoxy over the past five years would suddenly clasp the biggest RINO of them all to its breast?
A handful of months ago many of those who now make up Trump’s rank-and-file were ideological perfectionists who hated the GOP’s leadership, believed to their souls that the country was becoming a socialist hell-hole, and insisted vehemently that they had sat out the 2012 election because Mitt Romney was such a terrible squish. Today, by dint of some dark and unholy magic, these wannabe purists have hitched their wagons to Donald Trump, the greatest shape-shifter of them all.
Thus it is that an array of self-described “true conservatives” have put themselves in the awkward position of supposing that an “assault weapons” ban isn’t that big a deal after all. Thus have the pioneers of litmus testing lined up obediently behind a guy whose position on Planned Parenthood is identical to Hillary Clinton’s. Thus have the Scalia-citing “constitutional conservatives” taken to lionizing a man whose primary criticism of the liberty-shredding Kelo v. New London ruling was that it didn’t go far enough. Thus have the screaming eagles of Twitter and beyond taken to contending that the class-conscious tax hikes that the America-hating communist Bernie Sanders proposes are akin to apple-pie-and-motherhood when they’re floated by Donald Trump.
Little did we know how quickly “take America back” would disintegrate in the face of a little pop culture.
“We have reached a moment,” Steve Schmidt told WaPo, “where conservatism isn’t defined by issues anymore for a big percentage of the country.” Is that true? Is “conservatism” really more of a cultural attitude now, at least in its populist version, than a collection of policy principles derived from the conviction that the surest way to maximize individual freedom is to limit government? Cooke writes of Trump’s heresies, “Honesty requires us to acknowledge that had President Obama endorsed exactly the same policies and rhetoric, the reaction from the Trumpkins would have been little short of nuclear.” He’s right, and if he’s right about that, how is Schmidt wrong? If anything, Cooke’s error is in assuming that Trump convinced people to discard principles that were dearly held rather than considering that it was something else all along about conservatism that’s been dearly held and that the principles were accepted only because they were assumed to be part and parcel of that something else. If Trump can protect that “something else,” whatever it may be, who cares if the policies that have traditionally been bundled with it get thrown away?
Two important caveats to HuffPo’s study, though. One: Trump was the only Republican they tested, a bad oversight given the assumption that he has some singular talismanic ability to move conservative opinion on policy through his cult of personality. I’d be curious to see how voters would react if they thought Ben Carson or Marco Rubio or Scott Walker supported the Iran deal or universal health care or whatever. I doubt the effect on righty opinion would be as great as Trump’s endorsement, but I bet it wouldn’t be zero either. To some unknown extent, what you’re seeing in these numbers isn’t a “Trump phenomenon,” it’s a partisan phenomenon. Tell a group of low-information Republicans that someone on their side, whom they respect, has endorsed affirmative action and you’ll see the numbers move, assuredly. The question is, by how much?
Caveat two: It ain’t just Republicans who suddenly find themselves questioning their principles when they learn that some famous political figure supports or opposes one of their core beliefs. Which party moved more in this test of universal health care upon learning that Donald Trump thinks it’s a good idea?
Republican support for universal health care rose 28 points thanks to Trump’s seal of approval. Democratic support for universal health care dropped, however, by … 36 points. How many Dems out there are true believers in the ObamaCare dream and how many are mindlessly in favor for no better reason than that Barack Obama thinks it’s a keen idea? Note too that it’s not just a matter of the sheer number of Dems changing their position here, it’s a matter of going from heavy majority support to less than 50 percent in favor. Trump’s backing can turn an 82 percent Democratic consensus into a 46 percent plurality. And if you think that’s a fluke result, try this one:
Republican support for affirmative action rises 18 points with Trump’s backing but it’s still a small share of the party that’s in favor. Democratic support for affirmative action drops 19 points with Trump’s endorsement, once again crossing from a majority consensus (64 percent) to a plurality one (45 percent). Many more issues would need to be surveyed in this way to try to draw a firm conclusion about which party has more hacks willing to go along with whatever their leadership says, but there’s at least as much reason from this to believe Democrats would win that contest as Republicans would. Any lefties out there up for some Cooke-style soul-searching about how quickly liberals drop their principles once they find out that the guy from “The Apprentice” agrees with them?
Exit question: How do you do a poll like HuffPo’s and not test people on what Trump’s support does to opinion on whether we should tax the rich? That’s probably his most prominent break from conservative orthodoxy to date, one that threatens to upend partisan polarization in Washington if it catches on. Someone test that, please.
What a steaming pile. Just one example: Trump is knowledgable enough about firearms to say ARs aren’t “assault weapons.” He is just referring to fully automatic weapons.
Trump said he would fund “the good parts”. he didn’t say if that was arms and legs or internal organs.
Someone should ask.
Right on.
Bottom line: If we clean out the Illegals, then we’ll maintain a country where conservatives can win...at that point we can do battle on the other issues.
If we don’t clean out the Illegals, then it is simply over for us, our children, and probably our grandchildren, as Amnesty will leave conservatives on the ash heap of history.
We have one chance to stop this, and only ONE CHANCE. And it’s not Cruz, he’s simply not up to it, at least for this election cycle. It is Trump, warts and all.
In a perfect world, Bush Jr. would have NEVER let the country get flooded with Illegals, and we’d be busy fighting the Dems on abortion, taxes, education, and everything else. But this world is not perfect, and we are left having to fight the Dems on Immigration first, and then, assuming we win, we can move on to other issues.
“I understand the anger with the Establishment, but we have several candidates who have executive experience, are proven conservative, and are not members of the Establishment. And none of them is Trump.”
Who are they? Have they announced? Figurina came out yesterday and told that Kentucky elections clerk to shove it, and earlier sided with Megan Kelly because Figurina also knows what it’s like to “be a woman” in a man’s world. Carson just came out for Amnesty tonight.
Are you thinking Huckabee?
“Trump backers will swallow anything he hands them.”
All good and fine, did you see the hole in Carson’s foot tonight? His 15 minutes of fame are over.
“Ann Coulter even said he could perform abortions in the Oval Office and she would not care.”
Yep, and I have NO DOUBT that the Brits would have been fine with Churchill performing abortions at #10 if he felt like it - as long as he WON the goddam war.
Except Trump is not on the same side as me.
I’m a conservative. He is most obviously not.
“Doctors don’t create jobs, crooked businessmen with political payoffs create jobs”
The Trump is still sounding like a 12 year old on Twitter.
You can’t rip up the deal—its not in a presidents power to do that—Trump explained it very well—BUT he can go over it with a fine toothed coom and make them sick to every bit of the contract—and if they break one—Then its Hell to pay!
The good parts are whatever parts the GOP has chosen to fund.
Obviously the GOP sees some value to these parts, otherwise it would take some action, any action, to stop this practice.
But instead they said they aren’t going to take any action at all.
So, you know, it really doesn’t matter what Donald said, Geron, because the party that you and I voted for and put into power IS COMPLETELY FINE WITH IT, AND IS COMPLETELY FINE WITH YOU AND ME PAYING FOR IT.
“Except Trump is not on the same side as me. I’m a conservative. He is most obviously not.”
He’s more conservative, BY AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE, on the only issue that matters at this point.
But you’re welcome to waste your vote, as you see fit.
I did not see this. Do you know what show that occurred on or where I might be able to see that?
I am voting for Cruz. Trump does not have any conservative history. Politically Trump is at best a fence sitter and at worst a limousine liberal. Neither kind can be trusted.
Yep, there’s a thread on it tonight. Looks like Carson doesn’t get it - I’m not surprised - running for the top job is not something that you can prepare for when you’re rewiring people’s brains.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3332388/posts
No problem...sad to see him go off into the sunset, but hopefully Trump/Cruz get most of his support.
YOU, make me laugh.
That’s freakin awesome. Gotta admit.
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.