ADVERTISEMENT

Question for Predarat

nashvillegoldenflash

Hall of Famer
Dec 10, 2006
7,377
206
63
After reading the article below, can you understand why a Reagan conservative like myself has a problem with Donald Trump, who may sound conservative about illegal immigration today but has never been a consistent conservative in his life. Can you not see why BBJ and myself would rather support Cruz who has a history of consistent conservatism than someone like Trump?

Donald Trump Is No Conservative

His early support in the GOP reflects an inability to distinguish between plausible champions and charlatans.

There is an Ivy League grad who has spent most of his life in Manhattan, where he is chauffeured around in limousines. He frequently brags to strangers about his massive personal wealth. In public statements, he has advocated government healthcare, a woman’s right to an abortion, an assault weapons ban, and paying off the national debt by forcing rich people to forfeit 14.25 percent of their total wealth. When the man married his third wife, he invited Bill and Hillary Clinton to the wedding, and he has given many thousands to their political campaigns and their foundation. He’s donated many thousands more that helped elect Democrats to the Senate and the House. And George W. Bush was “maybe the worst president in the history of this country,” the man said in 2008. “He was so incompetent, so bad, so evil.”

On paper, this is not someone you’d expect to excel in the 2016 Republican Party primary. But Donald Trump is excelling. Thanks to his celebrity, a few epic flip-flops, and his willingness to pander to the most xenophobic element of the GOP’s base, the real-estate developer and reality-TV star is polling near the top of the field. While he is unlikely to win the nomination, he may well appear at the presidential debates and continue to tarnish the GOP brand in the eyes of Hispanic voters. “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best,” Trump said during his official announcement. “They’re sending people that have lots of problems. And they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people.”

As execrable as those highly misleading beliefs would be if earnestly held, it is arguably worse for a man to disingenuously stoke xenophobia to advance his political prospects.

Thus it is worth noting that, after Mitt Romney’s 2012 loss, Donald Trump told the website Newsmax that Republicans would continue to lose elections if they came across as mean-spirited and unwelcoming to people of color. Democrats were kind toward illegal immigrants, Trump said, whereas Romney “had a crazy policy of self deportation which was maniacal. It sounded as bad as it was, and he lost all of the Latino vote. He lost the Asian vote. He lost everybody who is inspired to come into this country.” He added that the GOP needs a comprehensive solution to “this incredible problem that we have with respect to immigration, with respect to people wanting to be wonderful, productive citizens of this country.”

These discordant statements praising and savaging immigrants are not entirely unlike one another—they’re both framed as bold efforts to tell it like it is. Donald Trump is a master at that affectation. He seems as if he is fearlessly stating his core convictions, consequences be damned, even when he is being a shameless poseur.

Some conservatives understand this.

At National Review, where Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and Herman Cain, the populist poseurs of the last election cycle, were treated with as much respect as contempt, the rise of Donald Trump has been met with a mix of horror and open disdain.“I truly, honestly, and with all my heart and mind think Donald Trump’s most ardent supporters are making a yuuuuuuge mistake. I think they are being conned and played,” Jonah Goldberg, the author of Liberal Fascism, wrote. “I feel like a guy whose brother is being taken advantage of by a grifter. I’m watching helplessly as the con artist congratulates him for taking out a third mortgage.”

Other National Review writers concurred. “Donald Trump has been a conservative for about ten minutes,” Jim Geraghty wrote. Ramesh Ponnurunoted Trump’s bygone support for legal late-term abortion. Rich Lowry, who wrote an ill-considered Politico column using Trump’s remarks as if they were a good peg to persuade people to cut back on legal immigration, has criticized him for failing to adequately learn about the subject matter he is discussing, calling some of his remarks on immigration “completely absurd.”

Says Mona Charen, not to be outdone:

It seems that Trump is the answer only if the question is: Why can’t we get more oafish egomaniacs into politics? Just when the Republican party needs finesse and sensitivity when discussing immigration; just when it needs to focus on issues that unite all sectors of the electorate, including Hispanic and Asian voters; it gets a blowhard with all the nuance of a grenade.

And even that biting criticism cannot compete with the derisive takedowns of Kevin Williamson, who has recently published the following remarks about The Donald:

  • “Donald Trump may be the man America needs. Having been through four bankruptcies, the ridiculous buffoon with the worst taste since Caligula is uniquely positioned to lead the most indebted organization in the history of the human race.”
  • “...the self-made man who started with nothing but a modest portfolio of 27,000 New York City properties acquired by his millionaire slumlord father, barely out of his latest bankruptcy and possibly headed for another one as the casino/jiggle-joint bearing his name sinks into the filthy mire of the one U.S. city that makes Las Vegas look respectable, a reality-television grotesque with his plastic-surgery-disaster wife, grunting like a baboon about our country’s ‘brand’...”
  • “His announcement speech was like Finnegans Wake as reimagined by an unlettered person with a short attention span.”
  • “The value of speaking one’s mind depends heavily on the mind in question, and Trump’s is second-rate.”
  • “Trump’s performance-art character is butch in the sense that certain gay icons are butch — bikers, cowboys, and the rest of the Village People — and appealing to certain men for similar reasons, one of which is overcompensation for threats against their virility.”
  • “The problem with messiah complexes is that there’s no way to know whether you are going to rise on the third day unless somebody crucifies you. Trump has announced, and I say we get started on that.”
Amid those zings, Williamson also astutely observed that Trump “brings out two of the Right’s worst tendencies: the inability to distinguish between entertainers and political leaders, and the habit of treating politics as an exercise in emotional vindication.

(click web address below for the full article)

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/07/donald-trump-running-for-president/398345/
 
That article reaks like a leftist rag. However yes I do understand the concern with Trump am taking the same concerns under consideration. He has a few points he harps on, but has not produced much more. If he does not produce more substance he will probably gradually lose voters and his numbers will go down. Just gotta hope they do not go to the likes of jeb or Rubio. As for Ted Cruz, I though he showed well in the debate, loved his "Im not your guy" segment. It will be very interesting to see how the polls shake out on Monday/Tuesday.
 
I tend to agree with you about the article and debated whether I should have even posted it. However, since I agree with the premise of the article that Trump is not a conservative, I decided to post it although I know The Atlantic is not a conservative publication. The reason the article reads like a leftist rag is because the author is a libertarian. In an interview with journalist Matt Lewis, Friedersdorf stated that he has right-leaning views but that he does not consider himself to be a doctrinal conservative or a member of the conservative movement. Writing for The Atlantic, Friedersdorf laid out his argument for why he refused to vote for Barack Obama in 2012 and was supporting Gary Johnson in his bid for president as the Libertarian Party candidate. In retrospect, I wished I had found a better article to post but when I stumbled across this one I just decided to go with it. Like you, I winced when I first read it but still believe Friedersdorf made his point that Trump is not a conservative whether you agree with him or not.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, here is what Thomas Sowell wrote about Trump.

The Trump Card
With Hillary Clinton's multiple misdeeds coming to light and causing her political problems, reflected in her declining support in the polls, both she and the Democratic Party have reason to be concerned. But both of them may yet be rescued by "The Donald," who can turn out to be their Trump card.

Donald Trump has virtually no chance of becoming even the Republican Party's candidate in 2016, much less being elected President of the United States.

The reason is not hard to understand: Republican voters simply do not trust him, as the polls show. Nor is there any reason why they should trust him, given his chameleon-like changes in the past.

Why then is he the "front-runner" in the polls?

One reason is arithmetic. When there is a small army of Republican candidates, each with a tiny set of supporters, anyone with enough name recognition to get the support of a fifth or a fourth of the Republicans polled stands out, even if twice that many Republicans say they would never vote for him.

When both kinds of Republicans are counted, Donald Trump is both the "front-runner" and the leading pariah. The danger is not that he will get the nomination, but that his irresponsible talk will become the image of the Republican Party, and that his bombast will drown out more sober voices that need to be heard, thereby making it harder to select the best candidate.

More is involved than arithmetic, however. Many Republican voters are so disgusted with their party, especially over its repeated betrayals of them, and of the country, especially when it comes to immigration, that they are immediately attracted to anyone who voices the outrage they feel.

Donald Trump has turned this opening phase of the 2016 primaries into The Donald Trump Show. All of this might be very entertaining, if this were not a crucial juncture in the history of the country and of the world.

But, while all this political theater is going on, the world's leading promoter of international terrorism -- Iran -- has gotten a "deal" that all but guarantees that they will have nuclear bombs and, not just incidentally, intercontinental missiles to deliver them.

Iran doesn't need intercontinental missiles to reach Israel, which is closer to Iran than St. Louis is to Boston. Send not to know for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee.

We can only hope that, somewhere among the many Republican candidates, there is someone who can, as president, make the hard decisions and take the hard steps required to undo the utter disaster that looms ahead, as a result of Barack Obama's feckless foreign policies.

If ever there was a time to carefully sift through all the aspiring Republican candidates, in hopes of finding just one who might be up to the superhuman task ahead, in order to head off a nuclear catastrophe, this is surely the time to look for a solid, wise and steadfast leader.

A shoot-from-the-hip, bombastic show-off is the last thing we need or can afford. As for the Democrats, their leading candidate -- Hillary Clinton -- was one of the architects of the foreign policy disasters that can turn into world-changing catastrophes.

As for the Republican mob scene, it is a challenge just to remember all the names of the candidates. These include many who must know, in their heart of hearts, that they have no real chance of getting the nomination. But, unless they withdraw, the public's attention may well be fragmented over too many candidates for them to find a truly promising candidate for president.

My own view is that the last thing we need is another great talker with no track record of actually taking responsibility for running a government at any level. Among the Republican candidates are some governors whose records are worth scrutinizing. But the sooner the talkers are gone, the better. We can only hope that Donald Trump will be leading the procession of talkers headed for the exit. But don't count on it.

Worse yet, 36 percent of Republicans polled recently say that they would vote for Trump if he ran as a third-party candidate. That would virtually guarantee victory for Hillary Clinton. "The Donald" could definitely be the Democrats' Trump card.

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2015/08/04/the-trump-card-n2034124/page/full
 
Donald Trump is not conservative but he is not fringe
There are many who view Trump as an unserious and a fringe candidate whose followers are little more than the 2016 version of Ron Paul’s goofs. National Review nearly has a collective aneurysm at the mention of his name and, contra The Federalist’s David Harsanyi, the debate on Thursday was far from substantive and the questions asked showed very clearly that Fox Newsset out to sandbag some candidates, and Donald Trump was one of them.

This is simply self-defeating thinking. Anyone with access to several billion dollars is a very serious candidate.

The idea that Trump’s supporters are some fringe element of racists and xenophobes that have coalesced around a ‘man on horseback’ is similarly mistaken.

In the aftermath of Thursday’s debates, an outfit called Echelon Insights polled a group of likely Republican primary voters who had watched the debates. They tweeted the results.

debate-poll.jpg


If we assume this poll is as accurate as any other poll, and let’s recall that the polls that determined who was on the stage Thursday were often very skeevy, we can see that the percent of likely primary voters who thought Trump won (we can probably assume that these are his supporters to a great degree) is pretty close to the overall poll numbers he gets nationally.

The same poll also shows what we already know: that Donald Trump is pretty much a Northeast Republican. He certainly is not attracting any measurable support within the GOP from any fringe element. Now I might quibble over the axis labels but when you look at who Trump is grouped with it is hard to disagree that the methodology is consistent.

debate-poll-issues.jpg


When asked why they supported their particular candidate this is what respondents had to say:
debate-poll-reasons.jpg


Again, no surprises (okay, maybe supporting Santorum because of experience is a shock).

There is nothing surprising in this poll, but is verifies what anyone outside the political-activist bubble knows. People are sick and tired of the GOP, they are sick and tired of spin, they are sick and tired of Obama and they want a candidate who is politically incorrect and who will fight to win. Actually, they want EXACTLY what we here at RedState have been campaigning for since I joined the site in 2004. The problem now is that we have what we want but we’re finding we don’t really want it.

Unfortunately, the GOP establishment (for reasons I completely understand), and we here at RedState (for reasons I can’t fathom), are sliding slowly and inexorably towards excommunicating Trump and his supporters. Not because they are more loud or obnoxious than any other candidate supporter but because Trump is an unpopular candidate and because a fringe elements of racists are attracted to his views on immigration… not because of what he proposes but because of how he has voiced those views. This is the type of action that gets the GOP, rightly, labeled as the stupid party.

The GOP tried twice to marginalize another very rich guy named Ross Perot who also spoke his mind (just like with Trump this was not an unalloyed blessing). As a result we twice had Bill Clinton elected with less than 50% of the vote. If we continue to treat Trump and his supporters the way we are treating them we have no one but ourselves to blame when Hillary Clinton is inaugurated in 2017.

http://www.redstate.com/2015/08/08/donald-trump-conservative-fringe/
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT