The House and the Trump Factor

What does all of this mean to Republican chances of retaining their congressional majorities?

The one thing everyone should glean from this cycle is simple — never promise to deliver what you can't, and always deliver what you promise.

"Who do these nothings think they are?"

I can tell you who Paul Ryan is.

And who he was.

He rode into DC as the Donald Trump of entitlement reform - an issue at least as important as immigration. Taking on the establishment and embarrassing Obama on national TV during the health care summit and on economics. He was a young conservative star looking to finally address major problems.

That is who Paul Ryan was.

Today is a soft-charging advocate for those type of issue and become a hard-charging advocate for other less-than-helpful things - like more immigration. Paul Ryan was just as passionate about shifting the unconstitutional entitlements away from the federal government as Trump is about keeping invading immigrants on the other side of the border.

Both guys are right about the main issues which brought them to political power and fame. It's a crying shame that time and space did not align such that they could cooperate to accomplish BOTH: Ryan's prior top priority and Trump's top priority. They are very related topics. Kill the entitlements and most the illegal immigrant flow will stop.

I'm not sure why this is so hard for some to understand, but as awful of a Speaker has he's been and wrong about immigration and such... I still believe it is Ryan's great hope to radiate entitlement out to the states, privatize SS, etc type of great things.

Paul Ryan did not forget about his primary stuff, he just fell into the Boehner/Mcconnell plan of not fighting Obama and waiting for an R over the White House.

Then, BOOM, that plan blew up when The Donald became the presumptive nominee. I assume I'll be promoted to establishment myself for pointing this out, but...

...from Paul Ryan's perspective, Trump represents Obama's third term!

And he is correct about that, at least regarding entitlements. The Don, who on most issues has tended to start as far right as he can bend and then slide left from there, actually started on the left hand side of entitlements. He loves them and promises NOT to change them.

What is Ryan today? He is Trump tomorrow. Potentially, anyway.

At least Ryan did not turn left until after a couple/few elections.

Trump made enough left turns just this past week that he is still heading in the same direction.

Which is to say he is well on his way to being The New Establishment.

My part of this Trumpian bargain is that I'll agree to dance into the general election with him. All I ask in return is for some of his more avid supporters ease off on his lipstick for a while. I already know what he is. And what he isn't. And I'm still voting for him. That's how bad Hillary is.

Very well reasoned and cogent opinion. I learned from it very clearly your view point. My concern is his unfettered free trade ties to the donor class and its effect on out Nations people, jobs, manufacturer, industry and, in deed. it’s national security and identity.
As I have written, “conservatism” seems yet undefined by any one I have challenged to define it. All I get is some nebulous platitudes. I guess its like Justice Stewart definition of “Pornography” . “ You know it when you see it.” but to me there is nothing more conservative than Nationhood—borders— fair trade deals , strong military and kill isis and take their oil to pay for it—You see that as liberal? . He said Boys taking showers with girl in high school is a state issue — Not an edict from Lynch. He said minimum wage should not be set by federal law and let the States do it because they know what the economy is in that state. He is anti abortion , anti planned parenthood baby killing on public money, and on and on. I guess you thank he is a liberal — I dont.

"...“conservatism” seems yet undefined ...nebulous..."

The term conservative itself is somewhat meaningless if not juxtaposed with progressive.

It has been my experience that people who identify as conservative are really stating that they are principle-driven in their political reasoning.

They would more accurately be called libertarian or constitutionalist in many cases, essentially lovers of what America was founded upon - individual-based freedom and strictly limited central government.

Trump is neither of the latter two things. To the extent he demonstrates any solid conviction to principle it is in old fashioned nationalism.

Nothing inherently bad about loving your country in general. It's certainly better than border-less one-worldism of the Left. But nationalist principle does not define the relationship between individuals and the government.

Socialists sometimes do the nationalism thing too - as we all recall WWII. Not that I'm making the dreaded N-word comparisons here. Just pointing out that being a nationalist might be fine, but it says nothing about a candidate's respect for my God-given Freedoms. Nor for our nation's other founding principles and documents.

On the other hand, proclaiming that health care and education are primary functions of the central government does show a profound disrespect for those founding principles.

I don't think Trump is a liberal socialist in the same sense as Hillary or Bernie. But in the sense that he does not possess or profess the Freedom-oriented libertarian / constitutionalist principles which would prevent him from considering some of their big-government ideas as somehow good.

Trump believes in the rule of men. As opposed to the rule of law. For example, he doesn't oppose Obamacare as he should on the principles of individual liberty, limited central government, etc. He just thinks it's designed / implemented by the wrong men.

Again, even with all his flaws and his often nebulous basis for his positions, I am voting for him. The fact that he is not today grounded in original American principles is worrisome to those of us who still value them. However, the fact that he clearly does seem to wish well for America is a great step forward from Obama.

again that is well reasoned. I disagree on your conclusion regarding Trump’s position regarding obamacare. Let me explain why. He is for the repeal of obamacare and replacement with competitive based insurance offered across state lines. He know that we must have a program for the indigent as perhaps we have now with emergency room care. Actually, I like the idea of national health care for the disadvantaged because the doctors would be salaried and we could buy in bulk— If you want better care — go pay for it — you choose.
I really am lost at your perception that Trump is adverse to limitation of individual liberty and let me cite his success in business. He is for the return of education to the community level. His entire life has been in the liberty of entrepreneurship. I see no statist in him. I abhor the taking of our liberty ( or even more of it) . What greater position of liberty than to abolish the EPA? I would agree that he is not a purist but that hardly makes him a promoter of the “Rule of men” over the rule of law. An example is his “rule of law “ bent is immigration. Obama is the “rule of Men”” by unconstitutional proclamation. Trump merely want to enforce the rules that are already in the Law.
I enjoyed the discussion and you thoughts. Take care.

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.