Posted on 03/22/2016 5:14:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
This short essay is in response to a friend who asked me to explain how Donald Trump is unacceptable to "movement conservatives."
Let's first acknowledge that many Trump supporters don't even claim to be conservative -- though others do -- and Trump himself is rather dismissive on the point, so they may consider this column a meaningless academic exercise. But a Trump supporter asked, so I'll try to explain.
Because I think my questioner was inquiring mostly about issues, I won't delve into Trump's apparent lack of presidential temperament and public deportment -- as reflected mostly in the debates and his speeches -- other than to suggest that they betray values that don't strike me as particularly conservative.
On the issues, Trump appears to have no ideological core. He can't sufficiently define "conservative" and, when pressed, says that even Ronald Reagan wasn't that conservative. Trump cites Reagan's earlier affiliation with the Democratic Party as his excuse for having supported liberal causes and politicians all his life, though unlike Reagan, Trump can never point to a personal conversion. He prefers to work with the uncompromising, extremist left, represented by Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, rather than defeat it.
But having no internal conservative antenna, what goals would he seek to achieve through his legendary negotiating wizardry? Indeed, many conservatives sense that Trump is not one of them because while he champions national sovereignty and patriotism, he evinces no understanding of conservative ideology and much less of the Constitution and its design of limited government. Under some political pressure, Trump promises to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, but there is no indication he has any real commitment to this vital principle.
It's not just that Trump, for a presidential candidate, is conspicuously ill-informed on political science and policy but also that he has no abiding allegiance to conservative policy solutions, as evidenced by his flip-flops, which are wider-ranging and more frequent than those of other notorious flippers. Even on his signature issue of immigration, he's exhibited a surprising openness to soften his positions. In any event, he is easily less reliable on this issue than Ted Cruz.
Movement conservatives are also uneasy with Trump's conflation of "Art of the Deal" business practices with conservative governance. Trump's success in creating thousands of jobs signals to conservatives that he is a friend of business, but it doesn't assure them that he comprehends the government's role (or lack thereof) in creating a job climate. Presidential statecraft isn't the same as private entrepreneurship. Government doesn't "create jobs"; it enacts policies and laws to remove the shackles of government so that the private sector can flourish on its own power. A private CEO is under different constraints than the president. Though Trump's acolytes boast that he "knows how to get things done," he won't -- and shouldn't -- enjoy the same latitude to operate as president.
Trump seems disinclined to laissez faire and too comfortable with a major role for the federal government on economic issues. More troubling is his support for tariffs and protectionism, which could significantly damage our economy. Tied to this issue is one of the most distressing developments of this campaign: the emergence of class warfare themes emanating from the "right."
Trump gives lip service to reducing spending and balancing the budget but offers few specifics; see his hollow promise to end fraud, waste and abuse. Experts believe that his fiscal plan would lead us into further debt. Having been coached to prepare a tax plan palatable to conservatives, he has made some progress here, but he is disturbingly open to punishing the "wealthy" through progressive tax policies -- which would add more fuel to class tensions and be counterproductive for the economy.
Trump stubbornly refuses to reform Social Security, which is on a collision course with national insolvency and cannot be "saved" by robust economic growth as Trump glibly contends. We have more than $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities with our entitlement programs, and no marginally informed person believes we can simply grow out of this inevitable train wreck. In refusing to acknowledge that or put forth a plan, Trump has sided with demagogic liberals.
It's not just on economic issues that Trump betrays an alarming lack of knowledge. Indeed, Trump substitutes slogans for serious policy proposals on many issues, and conservatives instinctively know that he doesn't get it -- that he's not even interested in getting it.
Accordingly, Trump's promises to make America great again and to restore winning are pathetically devoid of specific plans to achieve those goals. No presidential candidate in my lifetime has demonstrated less command of the issues than Trump, and his lack of intellectual curiosity and interest cannot be adequately remedied by his selecting smart advisers. We need someone at the helm who has an understanding of important issues and who will be guided by conservative instincts. Instead, Trump has shown a tendency to favor strong government action to get "results" -- more government, more authoritarianism, not less. This is a serious danger signal to conservatives.
On a smattering of other issues, Trump's conservative bona fides are in doubt, from affirmative action to the Second Amendment to universal health care to religious liberty to the Iran nuclear deal to his professed neutrality on Israel and Palestine to his dubious support of life, including his endorsement of federal funding for America's premier abortion factory, Planned Parenthood. I realize he and his supporters vehemently deny some of these criticisms, but I've heard his disconcerting statements on them, even if he later modified or retracted them.
Trump has been brilliant in hijacking anti-government sentiment and in amplifying his immigration and trade message through manipulating the press, and I admit he might seek to honor some of his basic campaign promises. But we have no assurance beyond these few issues that Trump would behave or govern like a limited-government conservative, and because of his practiced vacillation and refusal to commit to many other issues, he'd have a mandate to do what he darn well pleases -- and that's more than a little scary to me.
It concerns me that after Americans had finally united in strong opposition to Barack Obama's leftist record, the movement was co-opted by a populist with a super-amped megaphone. The solutions to America's problems are not some hodgepodge of policy goals fueled by nationalistic pride that is untethered to principles of limited government. You don't restore America's greatness by burning the house down, especially when you can remodel it from the inside out through a rededication to America's founding principles and constitutional conservatism.
I could better understand the support behind Trump if there weren't an infinitely superior candidate in Ted Cruz, who would specifically address the problems that plague us -- and without abandoning the principles that made America unique in the first place.
Conservatism was made to serve man, not the other way around.
Of course he isn’t, never has been, never will be. But that is one of his smaller flaws.
Utah’s “on line voting’ being run by a Soros operative.
LOL what an effete weenie.
Brilliant article and brilliant post. That is why I could never support Trump. He is NOT a conservative.
The 2016 GOP Primary has brought up an old divide in Conservatism. There currently is a war being waged between the Dogmatics and the Realists. The Dogmatist care nothing about political realities, only the purity of the candidates political dogma matters to them. The Realist understands you have to be able to advance the political ball down the field to achieve the goals of the dogma. The Realist understands some times a flawed tool is going work better then the flawlessly poltical pure tool.
Reagan, who was a realist, wrote about it.
By Ronald Reagan in his autobiography An American Life
“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. “Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.
The Dogmatic at NR, Town Hall, Red State and the rest of the “Conservative” media sneer at the realist as being “nihlistic towards DC and the GOP”.
It is not Nihilism, it Realism. Since 1988 Conservatives have faithfully pledges their treasure and time to the GOP. Despite elections successes in 1988, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010 and 2014 what have Conservative gotten from the GOP?
Prosperity? Nope worse economy since 1979.
Reduction in Government-nope as expensive, corrupt, incompetent, intrusive and bigger then ever
Supreme Court? Nope as far left as it has ever been.
A Nation secure? Nope at risk in a dangerous world. Military broken, exhausted and overextended.
A respect for rule of law and the Constitution? Nope. Government, and society, is more lawless then it has ever been.
A healthy growing vibrant society? Nope stagnant, or in decline, everywhere in every way.
So, it not Nihilism, it Realism. It is a realistic assessment that doing the same thing again this year electorally is going to continue this decline and degradation from DC.You can only overcome inertia in any system with force. So we need to force DC out of it denigrate path onto a new path. So why Trump rather then Cruz?
I know this falls on deaf ears with 100%ers at NR, Red State and other “Conservative” media but the fact remains, we are a Constitutional Republic that rests on the notion that the people’s Representatives in Government know how to compromise and negotiate.
This feeling that Cruz will ride into DC and dictate the Conservative Media’s 100%er terms to everyone else there is simply wishful thinking. What is more probable is Cruz would be a GOP Carter.
Carter was the same sort of religious political puritan who went to DC and assumed he would dictate his political dogmas to everyone there. The record shows how badly that idea failed.
“Conservative” politicians talk a good game and then go to DC and accomplish nothing. After 30 years of fail, it is time to try another solution. The winning candidate is, brace yourselves.... going to have to cut DEALS! And some times those deals require..compromise!!!
Another fail point for the “Principled Conservatives” is they think only as far as the election. Then once they win their purity candidates go to DC and fail against the inertia of the DC/Media political machine. 1988-1994-1998-2000-2002-2004-2010-2014 are all example of where this “Next election” mindset has failed.
Trump is merely the 1st wave of a multi wave assault. Cruz might do for a follow up wave, he is not a 1st wave candidate. Without Trump to lead the way, the Cruz boat would of either been ignored because it was irrelevant, or been shelled into oblivion by the $10s of millions of GOPE attack ads.
The 1st wave job in any assault is to shatter the defenses and open the road for the follow up waves. No matter how flawed you think the vessel is, Trump is the best 1st wave political assault team we have had to hand in my lifetime.
We need to use Trump for all he is worth to shatter the corrupt, “my party right or wrong” mindset that grips vast swaths of the electorate. Break that inertia, get the people thinking outside the party label box and real change is possible. Do not an we slide into a stagnate European style decline that will not end in my lifetime. Cruz shares that agenda point but is not as well equipped by background and media following to achieve that break through as Trump
We either win this now or we have little chance of ever doing it again politically. Once we win we must relentlessly stay on the attack election wave after election wave until we are dead.
I am really not willing to leave this fight to my kids and grand-kids. We have let the ship of state drift since Reagan in the hands of the “smart people”. We failed and must redeem that failure.
This is our generation’s “go” time
Following in his brother’s footsteps.
Talk Radio is the home plate of Dogmatic Conservatism. They live. For them theory of “Conservatism” is more important then anything else
The 2016 GOP Primary has brought up an old divide in Conservatism. There currently is a war being waged between the Dogmatics and the Realists. The Dogmatist care nothing about political realities, only the purity of the candidates political dogma matters to them. The Realist understands you have to be able to advance the political ball down the field to achieve the goals of the dogma. The Realist understands some times a flawed tool is going work better then the flawlessly poltical pure tool.
Reagan, who was a realist, wrote about it.
By Ronald Reagan in his autobiography An American Life
“When I began entering into the give and take of legislative bargaining in Sacramento, a lot of the most radical conservatives who had supported me during the election didn’t like it. “Compromise” was a dirty word to them and they wouldn’t face the fact that we couldn’t get all of what we wanted today. They wanted all or nothing and they wanted it all at once. If you don’t get it all, some said, don’t take anything. I’d learned while negotiating union contracts that you seldom got everything you asked for. And I agreed with FDR, who said in 1933: ‘I have no expectations of making a hit every time I come to bat. What I seek is the highest possible batting average.’ If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.
The Dogmatic at NR, Town Hall, Red State and the rest of the “Conservative” media sneer at the realist as being “nihlistic towards DC and the GOP”.
It is not Nihilism, it Realism. Since 1988 Conservatives have faithfully pledges their treasure and time to the GOP. Despite elections successes in 1988, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010 and 2014 what have Conservative gotten from the GOP?
Prosperity? Nope worse economy since 1979.
Reduction in Government-nope as expensive, corrupt, incompetent, intrusive and bigger then ever
Supreme Court? Nope as far left as it has ever been.
A Nation secure? Nope at risk in a dangerous world. Military broken, exhausted and overextended.
A respect for rule of law and the Constitution? Nope. Government, and society, is more lawless then it has ever been.
A healthy growing vibrant society? Nope stagnant, or in decline, everywhere in every way.
So, it not Nihilism, it Realism. It is a realistic assessment that doing the same thing again this year electorally is going to continue this decline and degradation from DC.You can only overcome inertia in any system with force. So we need to force DC out of it denigrate path onto a new path. So why Trump rather then Cruz?
I know this falls on deaf ears with 100%ers at NR, Red State and other “Conservative” media but the fact remains, we are a Constitutional Republic that rests on the notion that the people’s Representatives in Government know how to compromise and negotiate.
This feeling that Cruz will ride into DC and dictate the Conservative Media’s 100%er terms to everyone else there is simply wishful thinking. What is more probable is Cruz would be a GOP Carter.
Carter was the same sort of religious political puritan who went to DC and assumed he would dictate his political dogmas to everyone there. The record shows how badly that idea failed.
“Conservative” politicians talk a good game and then go to DC and accomplish nothing. After 30 years of fail, it is time to try another solution. The winning candidate is, brace yourselves.... going to have to cut DEALS! And some times those deals require..compromise!!!
Another fail point for the “Principled Conservatives” is they think only as far as the election. Then once they win their purity candidates go to DC and fail against the inertia of the DC/Media political machine. 1988-1994-1998-2000-2002-2004-2010-2014 are all example of where this “Next election” mindset has failed.
Trump is merely the 1st wave of a multi wave assault. Cruz might do for a follow up wave, he is not a 1st wave candidate. Without Trump to lead the way, the Cruz boat would of either been ignored because it was irrelevant, or been shelled into oblivion by the $10s of millions of GOPE attack ads.
The 1st wave job in any assault is to shatter the defenses and open the road for the follow up waves. No matter how flawed you think the vessel is, Trump is the best 1st wave political assault team we have had to hand in my lifetime.
We need to use Trump for all he is worth to shatter the corrupt, “my party right or wrong” mindset that grips vast swaths of the electorate. Break that inertia, get the people thinking outside the party label box and real change is possible. Do not an we slide into a stagnate European style decline that will not end in my lifetime. Cruz shares that agenda point but is not as well equipped by background and media following to achieve that break through as Trump
We either win this now or we have little chance of ever doing it again politically. Once we win we must relentlessly stay on the attack election wave after election wave until we are dead.
I am really not willing to leave this fight to my kids and grand-kids. We have let the ship of state drift since Reagan in the hands of the “smart people”. We failed and must redeem that failure.
This is our generation’s “go” time
Trump will have that covered.
David, at this point in the history of the United States I really don’t give a damn.
Which is fine. After all, that’s no different than the faithful in Utah, right?
Salem Witch Media strikes again.
The boycott list: HotAir, The Right Scoop, Townhall, Redstate, Twitchy, Human Events, Bearing Arms.
All are pawns in service to Salem Witch Media's incessant jihad against Donald Trump.
Wondering if we'll see 106% turnout in Utah .......
Funny I don't recall him denouncing G.W. Bush as a liberal for shoving through the Medicare Part D bill -- even threatening to primary any conservative who opposed it.
Conservatives?
They seem to be bent upon feeding the beast they created, and allowed to be created: conserving their power and money first. Freedom and liberty are way down the list of priorities. Out of touch; “ Let them eat cake”
No more remuneration for representation.
Gone Jesse on ‘em!
“— and without abandoning the principles that made America unique in the first place.”
What “principles” are being “abandoned”?
Illegal immigration?
Sounds eerily like one of Obama’s “our shared values” speeches.
Where were all these purists when Mitt Romney — who gleefully bragged of having inspired ObamaCare — was the frontrunner in 2012?
I am slow today. I don’t understand your reference to Utah.
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.