When Republicans appoint judges, we have absolutely no idea how they will turn out.
Many of those “100” will turn out to be David Souter or Anthony Kennedy.
On the other hand, Donald Trump is the most “Conservative” candidate who has a chance to be elected, so there is no other practical choice but Trump in 2020.
My top two issues are immigration and budget deficits, and I research both of them every day.
In my opinion, there is almost no evidence that Trump is a Conservative on immigration or deficits.
“In my opinion, there is almost no evidence that Trump is a Conservative on immigration or deficits.”
I agree Trump hasn’t done much on immigration (although he did have an excellent position on it when he ran), and certainly wasn’t in much of a hurry for the wall (although now he’s trying to catch up), but just who is a conservative on immigration, Drama Queen from Texas, who was about to side with the Democrats on opposing the emergency?
As to the deficit, get used to it, the country doesn’t give a crap if it means cutting back on their beloved social programs - and any Republican who tries to do something serioius about it gets BURIED politically. Trump would have been buried in 2016 if he talked about ‘reforming’ entitlements - that likely has, maybe, 30% approval these days. Americans are simply TOO STUPID to understand what happens once the balloon pops with $25T in debt.
As to the judges, other than getting a list from David Duke, it’s difficult to see how he could get a more reliable bunch...it’s the judges themselves that suck, as you do point out. But we’re stuck.
In my opinion, there is almost no evidence that Trump is a Conservative on immigration or deficitsPlease define "conservative on immigration" and where he's failed that wasn't the fault of judges or congress blocking him.
Deficits can be handled with increased cash flow. Which he has accomplished
It sounds to me like you're trying to making excuses for your never-trumper ways. Or just not paying attention to reality.
Let’s drop vague terms like conservative and talk about those who believe in the original intent of the constitution. My own opinion which, combined with a ten dollar bill, will buy a cup of coffee almost anywhere in America is that only a very tiny percentage of Americans would support the original intent of the constitution. It would mean open carry of weapons, no tax on wages, only men who owned property and paid taxes could vote, a huge portion of the federal government, certainly well over half of it anyway, would disappear. There would be no federal taxes sent to Washington to be redistributed to the states, no department of education, no homeland security, no social security, no medicare, the list goes on and on. Personally I think we would have been better off to stick with original intent but I cannot imagine any way now to go back to it. What is the point of all this rambling? It is to say that if “conservative” means someone who wants to stick with the status quo then we don’t need conservatism, we need activism but the exact opposite of the activism championed by fruitcakes and snowflakes on the left. We as a nation will never consider voting for what we really need which is to return to what made America great originally and it bears no resemblance to anything that is being proposed on the right, let alone the left. I was born five days before D-Day and I don’t recognize this country now, I may as well have been abducted by aliens and transported to the planet Dummkopf. Thirty years ago I would have loved to be able to drop twenty years of age but now I have no desire to be even one day younger.