Trump's Appeal to Conservatives

[jillian]

"When a true genius appears in your world, you may know him by this sign; that all the dunces are against him in a confederacy."
—Jonathon Swift

Awesome. Who was he referring to?

not nutty steffie baby, that's for sure.

wrong..I'm a ******* genius...don't feel threatened by my geniusness

see, I was right that you weren't referring to steffie.

 

[LoneLaugher]

stop projecting.

I've a very warm person.

LL is not a normal person.

There is something seriously wrong with that guy.

Are you obsessed with me? It sure seems like it.

Being such a warm guy, would you pee on me to save my life if I was on fire?

Hell no. The world would be better without a soulless monster like you in it.

That's interesting. What's do you think the worst thing I've ever done is? Consider that for a minute. If I am a monster.....what monstrous things have you imagined me doing?

With a sociopath is could be anything. Or it could be nothing. You might just be a complete asshole who manages to stay within the letter of the law.

Still, completely soulless, dead inside.

How did you feel when I told you that I'd feed you if you were hungry and clothe you if you were cold. Did that make you feel dead inside?

 

[S.J.]

Yeah! Common sense! it doesn't take experience, gravitas or superior intellect. All we need is a guy with common sense. We need someone to make our problems sound simple.....then we can have simple solutions! Weeeeeeeee!

Unlike the two Dem candidates who have NO sense.

 

[Boss]

I don't know why everyone is Assuming his supporters have to be Conservatives. Unless someone has gone to one of his rally's and took a poll of everyone there. Then I find this offensive to just assume that's who is supporting him. Where did this attacking your own Republican party supporters come from? That used to be a no no. But then so did attacking a candidates baby with downs syndrome.

Conservatives have taken a bum rap for many years because we've been "led" by a series of people who don't really understand what Conservative philosophy is. Reagan understood, but since Reagan we've had the Bushes, McCain, Romney, etc. None of them understand Conservative philosophy. They understand Republicanism... they might understand Social Conservative ideology... they might be a markedly better alternative to Socialist left ideology but none of it means they truly understand core Conservative philosophy.

I think a lot of Trump's support are philosophical Conservatives whether they identify as that or not. The "brand" has been so damaged by the "FAR RIGHT" rhetoric from the left which has simply gone unchecked for years that a lot of true Conservatives simply no longer identify as such. They don't want to be labeled "Teabagger Wackos" or denigrated as religious nuts, homophobes and racists. It's not who they are and not what they believe.

 

[Wilbur Right]

That's interesting. What's do you think the worst thing I've ever done is

Have you looked at that orange hair with
a yellow hat AND THAT BOW TIE?
Satorial splendor? I think not.
Nuff said.

 

[Seawytch]

I don't know why everyone is Assuming his supporters have to be Conservatives. Unless someone has gone to one of his rally's and took a poll of everyone there. Then I find this offensive to just assume that's who is supporting him. Where did this attacking your own Republican party supporters come from? That used to be a no no. But then so did attacking a candidates baby with downs syndrome.

Conservatives have taken a bum rap for many years because we've been "led" by a series of people who don't really understand what Conservative philosophy is. Reagan understood, but since Reagan we've had the Bushes, McCain, Romney, etc. None of them understand Conservative philosophy. They understand Republicanism... they might understand Social Conservative ideology... they might be a markedly better alternative to Socialist left ideology but none of it means they truly understand core Conservative philosophy.

I think a lot of Trump's support are philosophical Conservatives whether they identify as that or not. The "brand" has been so damaged by the "FAR RIGHT" rhetoric from the left which has simply gone unchecked for years that a lot of true Conservatives simply no longer identify as such. They don't want to be labeled "Teabagger Wackos" or denigrated as religious nuts, homophobes and racists. It's not who they are and not what they believe.

So tell us what you believe Reagan understood that Bush, McCain or Romney "didn't understand"? What set Regan apart from them? Do you really think Regan, who raised taxes, gave amnesty, traded arms for hostages, cut and run AND supported gun control, would be welcome in today's GOP?

 

[Wilbur Right]

Conservatives have taken a bum rap for many years because we've been "led" by a series of people who don't really understand what Conservative philosophy is.

We are just some poor boys whose intentions are good.
Oh lord please dont let us be misunderstood.
Eric Burdon almost.

Actually, Republicans/Conservatives are reaping their just rewards from years of being lying assholes.

the mistake of invading Iraq and blowing up the economy made many people not trust ANYtHING a Repub/Con says.

I have noticed that you have the same problem boss. Disbelief.

 

[NightFox]

Conservatism is actually the antithesis of Ideology. It is the pragmatic approach to problem solving. Reasoned and rational solutions that are time tested and proven as opposed to some rigid ideological bent that must be adhered to in all circumstances. Looking at a problem from all sides and formulating a strategy which considers the human equation. Not being so tied to an ideological difference that you can't see any other possibility before you. It's not "go along to get along" but rather a reasoned pragmatism which considers both sides of the coin.

This makes sense but only to a degree, American Conservatism does and always has revolved around PRINCIPLE and this is where Trump utterly fails, without conservatism's principles of individual responsibility, limited government, the primacy of individual liberty over collectivist authority, fiscal responsibility and reverence for traditional values then it becomes a meaningless label (like progressivism and liberalism have become meaningless in the American Lexicon).

Trump and his supporters may call him conservative but when measured against the historical record of American Conservatives he doesn't even come close (think William Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan), if Trump is allowed to be the standard bearer for the conservative movement then "conservative" will become just another meaningless term that is slung around by sloganeers and charlatans (it's already in danger of becoming that now).

Personally I'm a libertarian, I know exactly what that means and there is no ambiguity to me; I do however have a great deal of commonality and respect for principled American Conservatives and would not want to see that great tradition become another morass of unprincipled political expediency which is what I think Trump will do to it if he's allowed to get away with passing himself off as the face of American Conservatism.

 

[Boss]

Conservatism is actually the antithesis of Ideology. It is the pragmatic approach to problem solving. Reasoned and rational solutions that are time tested and proven as opposed to some rigid ideological bent that must be adhered to in all circumstances. Looking at a problem from all sides and formulating a strategy which considers the human equation. Not being so tied to an ideological difference that you can't see any other possibility before you. It's not "go along to get along" but rather a reasoned pragmatism which considers both sides of the coin.

This makes sense but only to a degree, American Conservatism does and always has revolved around PRINCIPLE and this is where Trump utterly fails, without conservatism's principles of individual responsibility, limited government, the primacy of individual liberty over collectivist authority, fiscal responsibility and reverence for traditional values then it becomes a meaningless label (like progressivism and liberalism have become meaningless in the American Lexicon).

Trump and his supporters may call him conservative but when measured against the historical record of American Conservatives he doesn't even come close (think William Buckley, Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan), if Trump is allowed to be the standard bearer for the conservative movement then "conservative" will become just another meaningless term that is slung around by sloganeers and charlatans (it's already in danger of becoming that now).

Personally I'm a libertarian, I know exactly what that means and there is no ambiguity to me; I do however have a great deal of commonality and respect for principled American Conservatives and would not want to see that great tradition become another morass of unprincipled political expediency which is what I think Trump will do to it if he's allowed to get away with passing himself off as the face of American Conservatism.

But again, Libertarian is an ideology. I am also socially libertarian and I think most philosophical conservatives are. I'm not personally supportive of gay marriage but if the people of my state want to vote for it then I think they should have that right and I'll live with what they support. The same for abortion... it should be up to the people of the state to decide and I can live with it or without it. I'm opposed to Big Government statism and very much a constitutional originalist but if people want to follow the amendment process and change the constitution, they have every right to do that.

When you use the term "conservative movement" what do you mean? Because when I think of a movement, it makes me think of ideological movements. Social conservatism is an ideological movement. That's fine, I have no problem with social conservatives just like I have no problem with social libertarians or even social liberals... but our federal government is supposed to collectively represent us all, it shouldn't be guided by ideology. I'd rather have someone who isn't part of any movement and simply utilizes conservative philosophy and approaches to problem solving. I think Trump would be that kind of president.

 

[Boss]

Conservatives have taken a bum rap for many years because we've been "led" by a series of people who don't really understand what Conservative philosophy is.

We are just some poor boys whose intentions are good.
Oh lord please dont let us be misunderstood.
Eric Burdon almost.

Actually, Republicans/Conservatives are reaping their just rewards from years of being lying assholes.

the mistake of invading Iraq and blowing up the economy made many people not trust ANYtHING a Repub/Con says.

I have noticed that you have the same problem boss. Disbelief.

Well, Wilbur, you're a partisan liberal hack and like I said in the OP, we have to set aside your sentiments here because we're currently trying to pick OUR candidate. It's already a given that whoever we select is not going to meet with your approval. Therefore, your viewpoints in this thread are irrelevant. You're dismissed.

 

[Seawytch]

Yoo Hoo, Boss...I asked you a question.What you believe Reagan understood that Bush, McCain or Romney "didn't understand"? What set Regan apart from them? What wouldn't brand Reagan a RINO in today's GOP?

 

[Wilbur Right]

Well, Wilbur, you're a partisan liberal hack and like I said in the OP, we have to set aside your sentiments here because we're currently trying to pick OUR candidate. It's already a given that whoever we select is not going to meet with your approval.

Bossy, is it painful to be so stupid?

I have said and I will say again I would vote for Kasich in a heartbeat.
He is my first choice.

Hardly my fault that repubs pick the most unelectable candidate they can possibly find.

You all had Huntsman, you have Kasich.
But for some weird ass reason you all dont want to win the White House.

It is much easier to be the little bitches that Republicans are, than to be in a position that requires leadership.

You think Mitch the turtle is a leader? Cruz? Ryan? Rubio? Palin?

there are no leaders in the Republican party. tRump is a Democratic plant. LMAO.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Yoo Hoo, Boss...I asked you a question.What you believe Reagan understood that Bush, McCain or Romney "didn't understand"? What set Regan apart from them? What wouldn't brand Reagan a RINO in today's GOP?

Bossy dont like hard questions. they tax his ability to think conservatively. And you know how he feels about taxes.

 

[Boss]

Yoo Hoo, Boss...I asked you a question.What you believe Reagan understood that Bush, McCain or Romney "didn't understand"? What set Regan apart from them? What wouldn't brand Reagan a RINO in today's GOP?

I think Reagan understood (and articulated) Conservative philosophy. It's not about ideology. Reagan was a "RINO" before being a RINO was a thing. The establishment GOP didn't like him any more than they currently like Trump... he wasn't a Republican ideologue.

You see... an ideologue has a set of ideological principles that are important to them. Those principles become the rigid standard for everything they do. There is nothing wrong with that in of itself, I think Reagan had ideological principles, but he governed with a Conservative philosophy which is quite a different thing. Conservative philosophy sets aside ideology for the sake of pragmatic results.

For instance, you might be ideologically opposed to increased spending but if increasing spending also means you can cut taxes and stimulate a stagnant economy, perhaps that is the pragmatic solution that needs to be done at that time? Conservative philosophy often means stepping away from your ideology and using common sense pragmatism to come to a solution that works.

 

[Boss]

I have said and I will say again I would vote for Kasich in a heartbeat.
He is my first choice.

Proving once again your total irrelevance.

 

[NightFox]

But again, Libertarian is an ideology.

Not exactly, it's a philosophy not an ideology since it's easily (and best IMHO) applicable beyond the boundaries of political theory; it is based on the foundational principles of non-aggression and property rights, one (can) live ones life at all levels based on it's teachings.

When you use the term "conservative movement" what do you mean? Because when I think of a movement, it makes me think of ideological movements. Social conservatism is an ideological movement. That's fine, I have no problem with social conservatives just like I have no problem with social libertarians or even social liberals...

IMHO The "conservative movement" as generally understood casts as fairly wide net since it encompasses the ideas of a number of prominent conservatives of the last half century or so from the classical liberal bent of Senator Goldwater to the Paleo-Conservatism of Buckley and Kirk to the Social Conservatism of Reagan (and to a lesser degree Bush the Younger). All these "flavors" have at least one thing in common; adherence to principle over expediency, of course they also share a lot of commonality with respect to public policy and economic positions but the most critical thread that connects them are the principles which I pointed out earlier.

but our federal government is supposed to collectively represent us all, it shouldn't be guided by ideology. I'd rather have someone who isn't part of any movement and simply utilizes conservative philosophy and approaches to problem solving. I think Trump would be that kind of president.

What do you mean by "represent" ? IMHO Governments are not instituted to "represent" anything, they are instituted as a means for one group of people to band together in defense of their lives, liberty and property; going beyond those boundaries has historically led to oppression, disenfranchisement and ultimately dissolution. The intent of the founders was to create a Federal Republic with implicitly limited powers pursuant to those ends because they looked through the lens of history and attempted to learn from the mistakes of the past (see Roman Republic->Empire->Dissolution).

I agree with you though , it shouldn't be guided by ideology, it should be guided by both the letter of the law (in our case the U.S. Constitution) and the principles upon which the Republic was founded (specifically popular sovereignty and the primacy of individual liberty). The problem with Trump isn't his lack of ideology, it's his lack of any coherent set of principles coupled with his disregard for the rule of law; in this regard he's just like every other egomaniac populist demagogue in history and thus his future actions are completely unpredictable (since he has no boundaries).

 

[PredFan]

Likely it's that many conservatives feel betrayed by "conservative" politicians. In 2010, we sent a bunch of them to Washington and what did they do? Nothing. They gave Obama whatever he wanted. We sent more conservatives in 2014, what did they do? Exactly the same thing. The only conservative we sent to Washington that did what we sent him to do was Ted Cruz.

Not being a true conservative isn't necessarily a bad thing in the minds of many.

 

[Toro]

Conservatives are ideological, no different than liberals.

Trump is appealing to intense opposition and frustration of hardline conservatives towards illegal immigration.

He's also appealing to conservative's sense that America's role in the world has been diminished.

He is also appealing to conservative's frustration with the establishment.

He is appealing to blue collar, uneducated workers, who have been capitalism's losers over the past 30 years.

Little else matters to conservatives who support Trump.

 

[Boss]

But again, Libertarian is an ideology.

Not exactly, it's a philosophy not an ideology since it's easily (and best IMHO) applicable beyond the boundaries of political theory; it is based on the foundational principles of non-aggression and property rights, one (can) live ones life at all levels based on it's teachings.

When you use the term "conservative movement" what do you mean? Because when I think of a movement, it makes me think of ideological movements. Social conservatism is an ideological movement. That's fine, I have no problem with social conservatives just like I have no problem with social libertarians or even social liberals...

IMHO The "conservative movement" as generally understood casts as fairly wide net since it encompasses the ideas of a number of prominent conservatives of the last half century or so from the classical liberal bent of Senator Goldwater to the Paleo-Conservatism of Buckley and Kirk to the Social Conservatism of Reagan (and to a lesser degree Bush the Younger). All these "flavors" have at least one thing in common; adherence to principle over expediency, of course they also share a lot of commonality with respect to public policy and economic positions but the most critical thread that connects them are the principles which I pointed out earlier.

but our federal government is supposed to collectively represent us all, it shouldn't be guided by ideology. I'd rather have someone who isn't part of any movement and simply utilizes conservative philosophy and approaches to problem solving. I think Trump would be that kind of president.

What do you mean by "represent" ? IMHO Governments are not instituted to "represent" anything, they are instituted as a means for one group of people to band together in defense of their lives, liberty and property; going beyond those boundaries has historically led to oppression, disenfranchisement and ultimately dissolution. The intent of the founders was to create a Federal Republic with implicitly limited powers pursuant to those ends because they looked through the lens of history and attempted to learn from the mistakes of the past (see Roman Republic->Empire->Dissolution).

I agree with you though , it shouldn't be guided by ideology, it should be guided by both the letter of the law (in our case the U.S. Constitution) and the principles upon which the Republic was founded (specifically popular sovereignty and the primacy of individual liberty). The problem with Trump isn't his lack of ideology, it's his lack of any coherent set of principles coupled with his disregard for the rule of law; in this regard he's just like every other egomaniac populist demagogue in history and thus his future actions are completely unpredictable (since he has no boundaries).

"Represent" is inherent in the word "Republic" It is essentially 'Public' and 'Represent'... Republic. Our government is a representative republic. The intent of the founders are basically what is my understanding of Conservative philosophy... (as opposed to radical ideology.) What makes a "good conservative" can be debatable but it is often my experience this delves into particular ideological leanings more than a clear understanding of what Conservative philosophy is.

And Libertarian CAN be a philosophy but the modern day Libertarian is an ideologue with a rigid ideological agenda. Libertarian and Conservative philosophy are actually close cousins and the founders held both philosophies.

 

[Boss]

Conservatives are ideological, no different than liberals.

Some of them clearly are.