Save the Party; Abandon Trump

 

shutterstock_69030448The reason the United States has not become just another European-style welfare state is that one of our two major parties is officially committed to limiting the growth of government while encouraging the growth of the private sector. Moreover, only the GOP has anything like a faithful approach to the Constitution, and it has appointed judges with a sound view of the Constitution. Republicans often betray these core principles – the list of GOP failures is long – but having core principles has moved the party in the right direction: tax reform, welfare reform, school choice, block grants, and even spending restraint (at least when compared to the Democrats).

Politics is a long game. Notwithstanding all the usual RNC hyperbole about this being the most important election ever – and the apocalyptic visions of a President Clinton – the survival of our republic is not at stake. The survival of the Republican Party, however, is.

If Trump wins, the Republican Party will own everything that Trump does. He will define the party. What does that mean for the GOP? Donald Trump is not a conservative. He is not pro-growth. Like European politicians, he sees the economy as a zero-sum game. He doesn’t talk about growing the size of the pie, he speaks for those who believe that somebody – an immigrant, a politician, a financier – has deprived them of their rightful slice of the pie.

To the extent he has articulated policies, they would be disastrous. He wants to rip up trade agreements and provoke a disastrous confrontation with Mexico – using cash remittances from the US as a bargaining chip to force Mexico to pay for “the wall.” He would attempt mass deportations of Mexicans and impose a religious test on new immigrants.

He has said almost nothing about shrinking the role of the federal government (except in education). Tellingly, he resists all calls to cut entitlements. What makes anyone think that a President Trump – a man addicted to power – would do anything to undercut his own power by shrinking the federal government? What makes anyone think that a President Trump would not eagerly follow in President Obama’s footsteps in ruling by executive order?

Abortion? He asserts that he recently became pro-life because of one acquaintance who decided not to abort her child and who, instead, gave birth to a child who became a “total superstar.” Classic Trump: Would it be ok to abort a child if somehow you knew the kid was going to be a “total loser” (e.g., if the kid had a disability like that reporter Trump made fun of)? His understanding of the issue is so shallow that he has suggested that mothers, rather than abortionists, should face prosecution for abortions.

Which brings me to the one issue that so many people consider decisive: the Supreme Court. Come on. The Constitution and social issues are simply not priorities for Trump. Does anyone really believe that a President Trump would expend political capital to nominate a conservative justice? Why bother? Far more likely, he’ll nominate someone who will breeze through confirmation so that he can make “deals” with the Senate about things that really matter to him. Even Ronald Reagan settled for Justice Kennedy. I have absolutely no confidence that Trump judges would be materially better than Clinton judges.

So, what to do? We save the party. Give all your support to down-ticket Republicans and none to Trump. Hope that Trump loses badly – so badly that he and his biggest supporters walk away from the GOP in disgrace. And hope that principled conservatives are there to rebuild the party for 2020.

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 223 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Adam Freedman:If Trump wins, the Republican Party will own everything that Trump does. He will define the party. What does that mean for the GOP? Donald Trump is not a conservative. He is not pro-growth. Like European politicians, he sees the economy as a zero-sum game. He doesn’t talk about growing the size of the pie, he speaks for those who believe that somebody – an immigrant, a politician, a financier – has deprived them of their rightful slice of the pie.

    Fellow #NeverTrump here, but I think Trump does favor growth, though he doesn’t emphasize it nearly to the extent he does the someone-took-it-from-you thing. If he reversed the emphasis, I wouldn’t have a great problem.

    • #1
  2. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    Adam Freedman: Hope that Trump loses badly – so badly that he and his biggest supporters walk away from the GOP in disgrace.

    Yup, makes sense:

    1. Throw people out of the party
    2. ?
    3. Party gets bigger!
    • #2
  3. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Adam Freedman: He would attempt mass deportations of Mexicans and impose a religious test on new immigrants.

    The former is unnecessary toward the goal and bad policy. On the latter, I do not believe the constitution imposes any restriction on what criteria we use for immigration. I would not, for example, have first-principles objections to severely restricting immigration from Muslim majority countries and I believe such a thing would be wholly constitutional. If I’m recalling correctly, Richard Epstein agrees.

    • #3
  4. Johnny Dubya Inactive
    Johnny Dubya
    @JohnnyDubya

    Abortion? He asserts that he recently became pro-life because of one acquaintance who decided not to abort her child and who, instead, gave birth to a child who became a “total superstar.”

    Hoo, boy.  I had not heard that story.  Indeed, it is classic Trump.  An astoundingly shallow take on a serious moral subject.  If it came to light that the story of his acquaintance was manufactured, that would make it all the more classic Trump.

    • #4
  5. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    Adam Freedman: He would attempt mass deportations of Mexicans and impose a religious test on new immigrants.

    Sounds like a good plan to me.

    • #5
  6. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Adam Freedman:Abortion? He asserts that he recently became pro-life because of one acquaintance who decided not to abort her child and who, instead, gave birth to a child who became a “total superstar.” Classic Trump: Would it be ok to abort a child if somehow you knew the kid was going to be a “total loser” (e.g., if the kid had a disability like that reporter Trump made fun of)?

    I agree that that was super-creepy.

    Adam Freedman:His understanding of the issue is so shallow that he has suggested that mothers, rather than abortionists, should face prosecution for abortions.

    Stipulating that I’m weird on this issue, I actually thought Trump was right on that. If abortion is murder, then the women who hire abortionists should be guilty of solicitation of murder. Gosnell is a monster, but let’s not forget that those women brought their unborn babies* to him for the purpose of murdering them.

    * I don’t think there can be any question that a 23-week-old fetus is a baby.

    • #6
  7. Tom Meyer, Ed. Member
    Tom Meyer, Ed.
    @tommeyer

    Adam Freedman:Which brings me to the one issue that so many people consider decisive: the Supreme Court. Come on. The Constitution and social issues are simply not priorities for Trump. Does anyone really believe that a President Trump would expend political capital to nominate a conservative justice? Why bother? Far more likely, he’ll nominate someone who will breeze through confirmation so that he can make “deals” with the Senate about things that really matter to him.

    This is why I’m unmoved by the “But judges!” argument, especially as it’ll move the goalposts on what counts as a “conservative” judge. That said, I don’t think there’s any question that — taken on their own — Trump’s nominees here will be better than Clinton’s.

    • #7
  8. Marion Evans Inactive
    Marion Evans
    @MarionEvans

    The anger is now on the other side, the neverTrump side that has been deprived of a good candidate. We wouldn’t be here if the GOP hadn’t messed up so badly, starting with winner take all rules in so many states. GOP will pay a heavy political price. I can’t vote for any candidate who has voiced support for Trump. See you in 2018.

    • #8
  9. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    Politics is a long game indeed and it leads inevitably toward centralization, rent seeking,  decay and conquest.  It’s not a pendulum that sways back and forth, it’s organic growth of healthy tissue or diseased tissue. This is has always been true, civilizations reach a point where the organized interests can’t be stopped, the freedom that gives rise to human flourishing and vitality erodes then disappears and death ensues.  I know of only one exception.  Japan would centralize, the palace would rot but instead of being conquered by invading armies, it’s central government was conquered by regional war lords and the process began all over again.   No foreign country is able to invade and conquer us, it’s taking place because of demographics and geography, as it is in Europe.   That’s the old form and ultimately more effective than invading armies.  But that’s just a symptom of the dysfunction and rot, the problem is always the same, centralization, growth of rent seeking which empowers the rent seekers, weakens those who might resist.  The Republican party still makes the right sounds but what has it done since RR ?  It’s part of the rent seeking rot.  Trump may be part of the same decay, but getting rid of him will destroy the party by giving the source of the disease 8 more years.    Look what Obama was able to do in just 8 years.  The death of the Republic isn’t the issue?  Nonsense.

    • #9
  10. Mate De Inactive
    Mate De
    @MateDe

    Ok instead of tearing my hair out in frustration with this post. Please never Trumpers, give me a scenario in which the country and the constitution can survive a Hillary Clinton administration for 8 years. She will appoint leftist judges at every level not just the Supreme Court. She put more of her henchmen into the bureaucracy to pump out more regulations that will benefit her donors and supports but hurt anyone who opposes her. Her presidency also indicates a complete breakdown of the rule of law, she broke the law and compromises national security for her own benefit. How can she be president and commander in chief if she can’t be trusted with classified information. Convince me the US and the world can survive her.

    • #10
  11. TempTime Member
    TempTime
    @TempTime

    Woke up this morning.  Signed in to Ricochet.  Saw this.  Sign off.

    Hoping everyone else who sees this does the same.  But before I go … the election is about the Country, it is not about You.

    What to do? Read the first line.

    • #11
  12. Hartmann von Aue Member
    Hartmann von Aue
    @HartmannvonAue

    Well, back in February (? or was it March, it was late winter/early spring I think, anyway) I wrote here on Ricochet that I though that we in the #NeverTrump camp should tie the rotting corpse of the GOP around Trump’s neck, let them drag each other down, form a new party and set our sights on the future. Events since then have only strengthened my conviction that this is the best course of action.

    • #12
  13. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Mike LaRoche:

    Adam Freedman: He would attempt mass deportations of Mexicans and impose a religious test on new immigrants.

    Sounds like a good plan to me.

    Remember when you used to claim you were a conservative?

    [Editors’ Note: Personal attack. You know better.]

    • #13
  14. Otium Inactive
    Otium
    @Otium

    Adam Freedman: Hope that Trump loses badly –

    Translation: 

    We love losing and allowing Democrats, liberals, leftists and anarchists to further destroy / define our nation. Let’s give Hillary two  liberal / leftist SCOTUS appointments and stand  proud whilst witnessing  our diminishing influence.

    TRUMP will not lose badly. If he loses at all,  it will be a nail biter and due entirely to ” conservatives” like you who make the perfect the enemy of the good.   Laura Ingraham was 100% right:

    “I want to say this very plainly: We should all—even all you boys with wounded feelings and bruised egos, we love you—but you must honor your pledge to support Donald Trump now.” she said. 

    • #14
  15. Jordan Inactive
    Jordan
    @Jordan

    Adam Freedman: Abortion? He asserts that he recently became pro-life because of one acquaintance who decided not to abort her child and who, instead, gave birth to a child who became a “total superstar.”

    This is perhaps the most human reason to become pro-life.  Not some commitment to abstractions, but a personal experience which changes your mind.

    • #15
  16. KC Mulville Inactive
    KC Mulville
    @KCMulville

    I don’t much care for Trump, but frankly, I don’t much care for the Republican Party either.

    I’m a conservative, not a Republican. Since no one seriously associates Trump with conservatism, I seriously doubt that conservatives will take much of the blame. The media will try to pin the tail on every donkey in the room, but they do that every election, no matter who is running. The Republican Party, on the other hand, is likely going to take a huge hit. (As well it should, in my opinion.)

    The survival of the Republican Party is probably not going to be determined by Trump … it’ll be decided by most of the down-ticket races. If Trump gets hammered (and although I despise Hillary, I’m guessing that’s the likely outcome), but the party keeps the House and maybe even the Senate, then Trump may be nothing but an ugly storm that passed through. If the GOP loses the Senate, that’ll be tougher. That’s when you’ll see some non-Republican alternatives start to form.

    • #16
  17. Kofola Inactive
    Kofola
    @Kofola

    Adam Freedman: Hope that Trump loses badly – so badly that he and his biggest supporters walk away from the GOP in disgrace.

    I hate to break it to you, but the GOP is now becoming the party of Trump. You’re the one who’s being sent away from the party in disgrace. Conservatives better start organizing an alternative political organizations now, or will be left in the dust.

    • #17
  18. Hartmann von Aue Member
    Hartmann von Aue
    @HartmannvonAue

    Otium:

    Adam Freedman: Hope that Trump loses badly –

    Translation:

    We love losing and allowing Democrats, liberals, leftists and anarchists to further destroy / define our nation. Let’s give Hillary two liberal / leftist SCOTUS appointments and stand proud whilst witnessing our diminishing influence.

    “I want to say this very plainly: We should all—even all you boys with wounded feelings and bruised egos, we love you—but you must honor your pledge to support Donald Trump now.” she said.

    Translation: We know our candidate is a venal ignoramus and something of an imbecile, we’re scared he’s going to lose and we will use every rhetorical means, no matter how low, to wheedle, cajole, threaten and intimidate people of good conscience who reject Trump as a candidate into voting for him against their better judgment and well-founded convictions.

    Response: If you want to drag Captain Orange across the finish line, do it yourself. A vote for Trump is a vote for Hillary in Drag ™.

    • #18
  19. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Last night was the mile marker where the Republican Party acknowledged its transformation to the 1970’s Democrats capable of selectively quoting Reagan.

    There will be a new party on the right and the lines were drawn this week.

    • #19
  20. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Jamie Lockett:

    Mike LaRoche:

    Adam Freedman: He would attempt mass deportations of Mexicans and impose a religious test on new immigrants.

    Sounds like a good plan to me.

    Remember when you used to claim you were a conservative?

    Is national sovereignty and enforcing the rule of law not conservative? If not I am happy to shed any pretense that I was ever a conservative.

    • #20
  21. Otium Inactive
    Otium
    @Otium

    KC Mulville: If Trump gets hammered (and although I despise Hillary, I’m guessing that’s the likely outcome)

    I disagree with this conventional  take. I think the turnout of the hitherto unprotected class of working class Americans –who sat home and allowed Mitt to get creamed– will shock you and those who admit (e.g.,  Nate Silver) that they do not know how to poll Trump’s support.

    The folks who argue that Hillary won’t be so bad and is preferable to Trump are not genuine conservatives.   They are establishment  shills. Their rice bowls are threatened. And it shows.

    • #21
  22. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    BrentB67: Is national sovereignty and enforcing the rule of law not conservative?

    They are, obviously, but so is enforcing them through the rule of law. This is both/and, not either/or.

    • #22
  23. Otium Inactive
    Otium
    @Otium

    Hartmann von Aue: venal ignoramus and something of an imbecile,

    So , tell us how you  made billions while raising three  kids as successfully and impressively as the ” ignoramus and imbecile” has.  At this point the decision is binary and the risks to the principles we conservatives hold dear are huge if Hillary wins.

    This is not that hard. Even nitwit W tried to appoint his personal lawyer to the high court and conservatives revolted. Trump will be held to a conservative SCOTUS appointment(s) ands will follow through.

    • #23
  24. Marion Evans Inactive
    Marion Evans
    @MarionEvans

    Kofola:

    Adam Freedman: Hope that Trump loses badly – so badly that he and his biggest supporters walk away from the GOP in disgrace.

    I hate to break it to you, but the GOP is now becoming the party of Trump. You’re the one who’s being sent away from the party in disgrace. Conservatives better starting organizing an alternative political organizations now, or will be left in the dust.

    An assertion made with no evidence. Remember he got less than 50% of the primary vote. He is the nominee because of winner take all rules which the GOP if it survives will be wise to change in 2020.

    • #24
  25. PHenry Inactive
    PHenry
    @PHenry

    Save the party.  Abandon #NeverTrumpers.

    Helpful?  or counter productive?

    Its time to revisit Reagan’s position after he lost to Ford in the primary of  ’76.  He lost.  He disagreed vehemently with Ford and the GOPe of the day.  But he not only didn’t sabotage the winner, he came out in full support.  He lost with grace and he put the party’s and the country’s interests above his own.  And his supporters did the same.  Once the smoke of the primary cleared, and the winner was determined, the party came together to STOP DEMOCRATS.  It failed, Ford lost and gave us Carter.  But Reagan lived to fight another day.

    And you know the rest of the story.

    • #25
  26. Marion Evans Inactive
    Marion Evans
    @MarionEvans

    Otium:

    KC Mulville: If Trump gets hammered (and although I despise Hillary, I’m guessing that’s the likely outcome)

    I disagree with this conventional take. I think the turnout of the hitherto unprotected class of working class Americans –who sat home and allowed Mitt to get creamed– will shock you and those who admit (e.g., Nate Silver) that they do not know how to poll Trump’s support.

    The folks who argue that Hillary won’t be so bad and is preferable to Trump are not genuine conservatives. They are establishment shills. Their rice bowls are threatened. And it shows.

    This would sort of make sense if the thrice married, twice bankrupt casino owner was a conservative.

    • #26
  27. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    The King Prawn:

    BrentB67: Is national sovereignty and enforcing the rule of law not conservative?

    They are, obviously, but so is enforcing them through the rule of law. This is both/and, not either/or.

    I don’t understand. If someone breaks the law, comes here illegally, or overstays a visa, and they are discovered what is wrong with deporting them?

    • #27
  28. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    PHenry:Save the party. Abandon #NeverTrumpers.

    Helpful? or counter productive?

    Its time to revisit Reagan’s position after he lost to Ford in the primary of ’76. He lost. He disagreed vehemently with Ford and the GOPe of the day. But he not only didn’t sabotage the winner, he came out in full support. He lost with grace and he put the party’s and the country’s interests above his own. And his supporters did the same. Once the smoke of the primary cleared, and the winner was determined, the party came together to STOP DEMOCRATS. It failed, Ford lost and gave us Carter. But Reagan lived to fight another day.

    And you know the rest of the story.

    I am not sure the analogy holds today. Reagan believed, correctly, the Republican party had a conservative future. It was ~decade removed from Goldwater.

    I am not sure that is analogous to today. We are ~3 decades removed from Reagan and until lately with some freshman Senators and about 40 in Congress there is little conservative about the Republican party.

    • #28
  29. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    PHenry:Save the party. Abandon #NeverTrumpers.

    Helpful? or counter productive?

    Its time to revisit Reagan’s position after he lost to Ford in the primary of ’76. He lost. He disagreed vehemently with Ford and the GOPe of the day. But he not only didn’t sabotage the winner, he came out in full support. He lost with grace and he put the party’s and the country’s interests above his own. And his supporters did the same. Once the smoke of the primary cleared, and the winner was determined, the party came together to STOP DEMOCRATS. It failed, Ford lost and gave us Carter. But Reagan lived to fight another day.

    And you know the rest of the story.

    Reagan declined to endorse Ford during his convention speech too.

    • #29
  30. N.M. Wiedemer Inactive
    N.M. Wiedemer
    @NMWiedemer

    PHenry:Save the party. Abandon #NeverTrumpers.

    Helpful? or counter productive?

    Its time to revisit Reagan’s position after he lost to Ford in the primary of ’76. He lost. He disagreed vehemently with Ford and the GOPe of the day. But he not only didn’t sabotage the winner, he came out in full support. He lost with grace and he put the party’s and the country’s interests above his own. And his supporters did the same. Once the smoke of the primary cleared, and the winner was determined, the party came together to STOP DEMOCRATS. It failed, Ford lost and gave us Carter. But Reagan lived to fight another day.

    And you know the rest of the story.

    Ford wasn’t a lying moral degenerate criminal- both Trump and Hillary are. They’re unfit for public life much less the highest office of the land. In a better world they’d both be in jail right now and Hillary would be facing the gallows for treason.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.