Conservatism Inc.’s Giddiness Affirmed

By | 2016-10-16T09:15:29+00:00 October 16th, 2016|Tags: , , |
Print Friendly

american greatnessAdam White, a research fellow of the Hoover Institution in Washington, D.C., asked me if I could envision any circumstance that might cause me not to support Trump. I responded—like any sensible person would—that of course I could.

Now he wants go through every possible action, revelation, or eventuality and have me serially affirm or deny whether this one or that one might cause me not to vote for Trump. He considers this a great dialectical victory. I see it as yet more proof of the intellectual rot at the heart of conservatism. Agree to disagree!

In any case, White’s taunts only further confirm the thesis he claims to reject: he and other conservatives are giddy over the prospect of a Trump loss because they look forward with pleasure to knowing that said loss will upset Trump’s supporters. That pleasure evidently outweighs whatever misgivings they may have about Hillary Clinton—a woman conservatism has claimed to despise and oppose for 25 years—becoming president.

About the Author:

Publius Decius Mus
Publius Decius Mus, or "Decius," is a Contributing Editor of American Greatness.
  • Severn

    While the anti-Tumper faction in the GOP loves to imagine themselves as deeply serious, deeply principled people, all the evidence is that that are petulant, bratty children who would casually destroy the country in a fit of petulance.

    The only “principle” which they seem to hold dear is that they are – or should be – the natural leaders of the right, and that it is acceptable for them to join forces with the left if the conservative base rejects their staggeringly incompetent and ineffectual “leadership”.

  • Adam W

    Publius, you could have just quoted my own explanation, for your readers to judge for themselves. It’s simple, as stated on twitter: “.@PDeciusMus I’d be happy that Trump lost, unhappy that Hillary won, and disappointed that some Republicans foisted Trump upon the party.”

    That’s when you replied by accusing me of having “contempt” for Trump supporters—and like I said then, and gladly repeat now, you’re simply wrong. I have no contempt for them at all. I just would have preferred that the GOP find a better candidate—a hope I maintain today, although of course it’s getting quite late for that now.

    JD Vance offered a dozen tweets on how he thinks of Trump’s supporters. I agree 100 percent with him: https://twitter.com/jdvance1/status/785192312200503296

    I don’t conflate Trump with his supporters. He would be ruinous. They are a diverse set of people, including lots of very good folks.

    This isn’t complicated, so please stop trying so hard to mischaracterize what I’ve said, let alone what I believe or how I feel.

    • RDittmar

      Decius’ headline – Conservatism Inc.’s Giddiness Affirmed.
      Your tweet – I’d be happy that Trump lost.

      So is your beef that happy and giddy are not exact synonyms or is there some arithmetical weighting scheme implied by the rest of your tweet:

      Happy + Unhappy + Disappointed = Vaguely Dissatisfied (not Giddy!)

      • Adam W

        Nope. He says I’ll be giddy because Trump’s supporters will be disappointed. Not true. If Trump loses, I’ll be happy Trump isn’t president because he’d be an awful president. (I’ll be unhappy that Clinton is president.) Publius wants to turn this into a dispute between “Conservative Inc.” (his term, not mine) and Trump’s supporters, for reasons known only to him.

        • RDittmar

          I see. You want a cause in which Trump supporters have invested large amounts of time, money, energy and hope to end in abject failure and disappointment for them. This per your re-iteration of same will make you happy. When you’re popping the champagne corks, however, you will studiously put the profound disappointments of Trump backers out of your mind and only savor the moment for your own Epicurean reasons. I guess that it’s kind of like the omelet being worth the breaking of all those eggs.

        • Severn

          If Trump loses, I’ll be happy Trump isn’t president because he’d be an awful president.

          Not true. He might be an awful president from the perspective of your particular narrow niche within the GOP.

        • Conrad O’Connor

          This is a dispute between Trump supporters (even reluctant Trump supporters who were Cruz primary supporters like myself) and Conservatism Inc. because Conservatism Inc. has made clear it is at peace with (a) the Democrats’ open-borders agenda, (b) a Clinton-stacked SCOTUS that will be implacably hostile to liberty for at least a generation, and (c) a scorched earth attack against GOP primary voters that dwarfs in its ferocity any attack they have managed against the Obama administration.

          When such people claim they are “unhappy” at an eventuality they work tirelessly to effect, it is reasonable to doubt their veracity. Unless of course they sincerely believe Trump is a greater threat to ordered liberty than Clinton. If so, they should make that case — please feel free to make it yourself. I have not seen anyone even attempt, much less make, such a case.

    • jack dobson

      We never will join your types in any future endeavor. Either Trump wins or we go home permanently. Enjoy playing token opposition if your candidate Hillary wins.

  • Dave Edwards

    Weak article.

    • Party of Lincoln

      And pathetic. Decius conflates “giddiness” with the reflection upon the sober reality that Trumpism is not a politically viable nor philosophically coherent nor morally defensible governing agenda.

      A regime that establishes religious tests for entry into the United States, that “loosens up the libel laws” so that politicians make intimidate the press, where Americans born in the United States are stripped of their citizenship, where he the commander in chief would order his generals to commit war crimes and where the chief executive would attempt to remove judges if they defy his wishes is not a regime worth saving.

      In New Hampshire, a state which Trump will lose, the state motto is “Live Free or Die”. If conservatism is to have any meaningful meaning whatsoever, it is that our individual rights are not granted and taken away at will by the government, but are unalienable. Those of us sincerely believe that our rights are unalienable would rather die than not live as free men and women. Decius would be wise re-read the Declaration and the Constitution, consider their meaning seriously and reflect upon what was truly at stake during the Civil War before asking us to support a man who openly mocks the Declaration and Constitution.

      • anonaccount

        If someone thinks anyone will even remember what the Declaration or the Constitution are after Clinton appoints 3 or 4 more Ruth Bader Ginsburgs and amnesties 11-22 million people who do not know what these are – they are sorely mistaken.

        • zoomie

          A better description would be Delusional

          • anonaccount

            To the extent that there are any sincere members of the NeverTrump faction (the most vocal ones seem to affiliated with a certain Gang / support gang activity), I would be curious to hear their umpteenth “outreach plan” / autopsy in a landscape of at least 15 million new Democrat voters by 2020.

      • Eric Johnson

        When has Trump mocked the Declaration or the Constitution? What utter rubbish! Your argument is nothing more than a meaningless appeal to ideological “purity” as if Conservatism was some type of damned religion. It is not nor has it ever been such a thing.

        If we are going to stick to Conservatism as a religion analogy, then Publius is the Martin Luther we so desperately need. You house of worship is built on sand. It has failed at everything it has tried to do, all the while the Punditry Priesthood makes excuses for the politicians the faithful elected into office.

        Now we see these ideological puritans smile with glee over an ACTUAL criminal getting into the highest office in the land, all to teach a lesson to the yokels in flyover country for getting uppity and not voting as they were told.

        • Party of Lincoln

          Eric, no one suggests ideological purity here. But conservatism has to mean, if it means anything, fidelity to the primacy of individual rights and institutional bulwarks to guarantee those rights. When Trump proclaimed that he wanted to “open up the libel laws” for the purpose of intimidating his critics, he crossed a fundamental line. We cannot have a government which has the power to silence the press or of free speech. Conservatives who willing to cash in their freedom for partisan gain or the “last man” comforts of material gain may as well be liberals.

          We’ve been clear here that Trump is the lesser of two evils. Not even Decius praises Trump personally in glowing terms. He recognizes that Trump is severely flawed and that he’s likely to lose to Hillary. But Decius’s thesis is that Trumpism points the way to American Greatness. That even if Trump himself loses, that Trumpism is the path to the restoration of the republic. Decius also proclaims that the republic will die on November 8 if Hillary is elected, but no sane person actually believes that and I trust Decius will be hard at work on November 9. The Flight 93 metaphor is a useful metaphor to train the mind onto the stakes of this election, but it’s hyperbole that’s well over-cooked and strains the credibility of conservatism, or at least the conservatism of the west coast Straussians.

          For those of us who were desperate to ensure that Hillary was defeated in November, for many of the reasons Decius described, we were devastated when we saw that the Republican Party nominated the one candidate who guaranteed here election: Donald J. Trump. The wreckage of Trump’s candidacy for the Republican Party, conservatism and the damage to the country that Hillary will do cannot be overstated. Given that we have two evils from which to choose, I’ll choose the lesser evil in Trump (Johnson is a clown and Stein is a Marxist), but it’s with incredible heartbreak that the candidate that we picked — and I am as much to blame as the Republicans who voted for him in the primaries — is the one candidate who may as well have been Hillary’s chauffeur. My dispute with Decius and his ilk is their celebration of Trump and Trumpism as a realistic path for conservatism into the future. The country has changed dramatically since the 1950s and if we wish to be part of the future we must recognize the reality of the present.

          • Eric Johnson

            So you feel so greatly in the importance of Freedom of Speech that you are willing to prevent a newspaper from being sued for printing demonstrably false information? Under the Sullivan vs. New York Times decision, I can run around the whole internet falsely claiming that you have sex with a farm animal and that there is NOTHING you can do about it. Or say you, I can only imagine as a decent law abiding fellow, were running for public office in New York and the Times went and published a hit piece saying you were a tax cheating cocaine addict.

            Would you not like to sue and force the Times to print a full retraction? Liberals and Progressives do not follow the rules of polite society. While we argue over policy, they smear us with every dirty trick in the book. Have you not forgotten about Democrats getting a bunch of psychologists to print a statement calling Barry Goldwater “crazy”? What about all those smears against President Bush? Or what of Glenn Beck calling Trump’s wife a “lesbian porno star”?

      • zoomie

        Interesting point about commiting suicide. I concurr. The velocity to that destination will accelerate if hrc wins.

        If methods that put you into a place called the coffin corner are continued, you go outside the envelope to death.

      • Severn

        Yes, your support for Clinton is “politically viable philosophically coherent and morally defensible”.

        In your twisted fantasies.

        “If conservatism is to have any meaningful meaning whatsoever, it is that our individual rights are not granted and taken away at will by the government, but are unalienable”

        None of which “Conservatism Inc” believes.

        • Party of Lincoln

          Yes, because support for a Republican who has actually been a Republican for years and NOW a Democrat for most of his adult adult while bankrolling the Clintons and praising the excellent work that Bill did as potus and Hillary as SOS is exactly the same thing as supporting Hillary in your twisted, idiotic “logic”.

          Let’s be clear about the facts. Donald Trump is a trust fund baby who lost his shirt playing the casino market in Atlantic City and had to be bailed out by the New York banks. He has been a liberal Democrat for most of his adult life who supported the Clintons his Bill’s presidency, particularly during the Lewinsky matter, before praising Hillary again for her “great” work as Secretary of State.

          See this:

          <<>>

          Had we not known that Trump was a lifelong supporter and bankroller of the Clintons and had we not known that Donald consulted Bill extensively in the run up to his announcement on June 16, 2015, one might forgive the delusion that Trump is actually in this race to beat Hillary Clinton.

          But we also know that Trump never self-funded, as he promised he would. And that he has attempted to raise funds from the very establishment that he claims to promise bringing down. But let’s assume Trump is just being really frugal with his own fortune, which claims to be close to $10 billion, that spending the roughly $1 billion that it would take to beat Hillary is not a wise use of precious resources.

          How does one explain his refusal to invest in a GOTV operation? One can have the “greatest and most beautiful” rallies but if you don’t have an operation on the ground to turn out your voters you’re not going to win an election.

          Believe what you want to believe about his “greatness”, but Trump has done everything possible to lose this election, starting with his gratuitous attacks on large segments of the electorate to his obsession with ad homimen attacks to his decision, a logical one for a candidate with no interest in winning the election, to refuse funding an effective GOTV operation.

          It didn’t have to be this way. We should have gone with Cruz, or even Rubio or Kasich, to defeat the Clinton machine. Yet the one man who could guarantee her election is the one man we nominated.

          When Trump effectively clinched the Republican nomination after the Indiana primary the three happiest people on earth were Hillary and Bill Clinton. And of course Donald Trump.

          You’ve been played for a fool but you may take comfort. You are not alone.

          • Severn

            Trump has not been “a Democrat for most of his adult life”, you blathering idiot.

            Even more annoying than your inability to think straight is your inability to get the simplest facts correct.

            http://www.newsmax.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=2bb02f57-c48b-4d17-858d-4179c80c092f&SiteName=Newsmax&maxsidesize=600

          • Party of Lincoln

            Sigh…

            Donald Trump changed political parties at least five times: report

            By Jessica Chasmar – The Washington Times – Tuesday, June 16, 2015

            Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump switched political party affiliations at least five times since the late ‘80s, according to voting records obtained byThe Smoking Gun.

            Mr. Trump, who after years of teasing the idea announced on Tuesday his GOP bid for the White House, may soon have to answer for why he left the party as recently as 2011.

            Mr. Trump registered for the first time in New York as a Republican in July 1987, only to dump the GOP more than a decade later for the Independence Party in October 1999, according to the New York City Board of Elections.

            In August 2001, the billionaire enrolled as a Democrat. Eight years later, he returned to the Republican Party, The Smoking Gun reported.

            After only two years as a registered Republican, Mr. Trump left the party again, and in December 2011 marked a box that indicated, “I do not wish to enroll in a party.”

            Mr. Trump returned to the GOP in April 2012, The Smoking Gun reported.

            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/16/donald-trump-changed-political-parties-at-least-fi/

            According to the Washington Times, which in no way can be described as a pro-Hillary media outlet, Donald Trump was a Democrat between August 2001 and December 2011, before registering as a Republican in April 2012.

            More important than his voter registration or his moral depravity are his professed political beliefs, a subject which we have exhausted here. He is views have changed radically over the years on issues such as immigration, abortion, minimum wage, taxes on the rich, and much, much more. Whatever one might want to say about Donald Trump, it cannot be said that he is a man of towering principles.

            This is ridiculous. Do whatever you makes you feel good. All Trump offers is an illusion, whether it’s the illusion that if you buy one of his crappy Chinese-made suits or stay at one his his cheesy hotels, all he offers is the illusion that you’re living the “Trump lifestyle”. Live the illusion while those of us who are serious about this country get to work to clean up the mess that Hillary will leave us because we nominated an unprincipled buffoon named Donald J. Trump.

          • Severn

            Changing political party five times is not consistent with your previous idiotic assertion that he was “a liberal Democrat for most of his adult life”.

            Your ability to cut and paste passages which specifically refute your contention while seemingly not noticing that such is exactly what you are doing is equal parts funny and embarrassing. According to your own source, Trump has NOT been “a liberal Democrat for most of his life”.

            If Hillary is the next president, it will because of the tireless efforts on her behalf by unprincipled buffoons like yourself.

            PS – when you are you going to change your name again? As I’ve pointed out to your repeatedly, Lincoln was a populist, a nationalist, and a trade protectionist. All the things you find so abhorrent in Trump.

      • Brother John the Deplorable

        Sadly, it takes two paragraphs of rubbish before you get to a valid point.

        Meanwhile, there isn’t any such body of cohesive, political philosophy as “Trumpism.” Those of you thrashing vigorously against such a thing are no more coherent than Marxists railing against “capitalism” as if it were a conscious choice that had been made, and not simply the result of leaving people alone to pursue their own interests.

        We’ve already had various criteria by which entry into the United States was permitted or denied, and raging against such a thing as if that’s not “who we are” (and if anyone utters that phrase in my presence, my foot will be up his as s so far he’ll need a dentist to get the shoe leather out) is to allow the current insanity to prevail; there isn’t any such thing as “birthright citizenship,” and the sooner it ends, the better.

        Trump was at the top of the field on Day One because he said things no one else anywhere in elective politics had said, certainly not one running for the White House. He used the word deport without first using the word can’t. The American public understands that that’s the first problem that needs solving, and if is lost, then nothing else you believe in will matter ever again.

        I predict that in the event of a Trump presidency, the Congress — no matter who occupies it — will find their voice unlike at any time since the late 1860s. I guarantee that in the event of a Clinton win, the Congress will become utterly irrelevant apart from the odd stamp-of-approval on some legislation or appointment.

        • Party of Lincoln

          Yes, you’re absolutely correct there is no cohesive, or coherent body of thought that could be called Trumpism. It is a random jumble of mostly, but not exclusively bad ideas that would make America weaker, not stronger.

          Let’s take the demand that we deport 10-12 illegal aliens. Sounds great, of course, but its negative economic and social impacts would be profound. It would have a direct cost of about half a trillion dollars (for the deportations alone) and a far greater ultimate cost.

          Let’s consider the 45% tariffs on products imported from China. If nothing else, it would raise the cost of Trump suits by 45%. Anyone who thinks we can “trade war” our way to prosperity only deludes himself.

          Let’s finally consider one of the most chilling “reforms” proposed by Trump: the implementation of a database to track Muslims living in the United States. Yes, that’s what we need — a federal surveillance program to track our daily whereabouts.

          The problem isn’t that Trump doesn’t have a few good ideas. He does. He proposes to cut taxes and streamline, or eliminate where justified, federal regulations. Bravo. But he goes well beyond that to metastasize an already oppressive administrative state into one that would jeopardize our individual freedoms. His fawning of Putin is extremely worrisome. Praising dictators and creating a surveillance state with mass deportations are perfect boxes to check among the paranoid crowd here.

          Trump and Bannon are a virus that has been injected into the Republican Party. they have been found out by most Americans, but a hard core few still buy their schtick and counted on to be loyal viewers when they start Trump News Network. They’ll buy his t-shirts and hats, maybe even pay to attend his rallies.

          All the while Donald and Hillary will be laughing all the way to the bank.

          • anonaccount

            Not to interrupt, but is the half trillion figure to deport (as the law prescribes) the 10-12 million illegals – is that based on Operation Wetback’s costs when ~1,000 agents were employed to deport ~1 million by the Ike admin?

          • Party of Lincoln

            The number comes from an American Action Forum estimate of between $400 and $600 million to successfully deport all 10-12 million illegal aliens. Building the wall itself would come in at a relatively low cost of $25 billion, which Trump promises will be paid for the Mexicans. Believe him!

          • anonaccount

            OK. Thanks. Just so we are all on the same page from Wiki (mileage varies obviously): “In July 2013, Politico reported that the group [American Action Forum – I think it is actually “Network”] has spent more than $750,000 in ad buys on promoting the Gang of Eight immigration bill S.744.” In sum – they are Gang affiliates.

          • Severn

            It’s curious to see a person calling himself “Party of Lincoln” specifically repudiating all the principles of Lincoln. You think and talk exactly like a modern leftist. Whether that’s because you are one and are pretending to be a Republican (as so many leftists do) or because you’re not smart enough to know history and philosophy is something I still haven’t been able to pin down.

            The American Action Forum is a who’s-who of corrupt crony capitalist GOPe insiders. None of the people involved with it are remotely conservative and they are as desperate for open borders as any Democrat is. Their “estimates” for the cost of expelling the illegals are pure fantasy.designed to serve their own self-centered goals.

          • Stanley1

            Nobody is talking about mass deportations as serious policy. The serious approach is known as “attrition by enforcement” (what Romney called “self-deportation,” a term he picked up from Kris Kobach). Google on it and start reading. Attrition certainly involves deportations, but just at the “retail” level, not cartoonish house-to-house dragnets or anything like that.

    • Brother John the Deplorable

      Weaker response.

  • RDittmar

    I always have to preface these remarks by saying I still think Trump has very good chance of winning this thing, so I am not trying to be defeatist. But my thought is that if Republican quislings and their Conservative, Inc. flunkies do manage to throw this thing to Clinton, I will return their giddiness by making it a point to gloat over all of their future failures and setbacks. I assume a lot of them are feeling their oats right now because their Left-wing buddies in the NPR green room are showing them strange new respect for the first time in many a moon. That will end the instant they express opposition to Clinton or support for some GOP initiative. I think it would be fun at that point to haunt their comment boards and taunt them just as mercilessly as the Left for being backward or racist or uptight or for whatever the media attack line of the day consists of. Heck, if you do it well enough the Libs might pay you to troll professionally and I know I could do a lot better job insulting those guys than some Bernie bro that doesn’t understand the way they think. If they manage to anoint a low-energy failure like ¡Jeb! as the nominee in 2020, I’ll particular enjoy gloating over each drop he takes in the polls and laughing at each embarrassing gaffe he makes and pointing out how it’s totally impossible for him to win.

    • jack dobson

      Totally there. Let’s win this thing, though.

      • RDittmar

        With you 110%. I don’t want to get cocky because that’s just one more thing about the Conservative, Inc. quislings that I’ve grown to loathe. I still put Trump at even money though, and if I’m still breathing I’ll be pulling the lever on the 8th.

        • Brother John the Deplorable

          I suspect, possibly wishfully, that not only will Trump win in a blowout — cf., Wilder effect — but he will prove to have very, very long coattails.

          • RDittmar

            I don’t know if you’ve heard of The Z-man or read his blog, but he did a very interesting analysis of voting patterns earlier in the year that I think still holds a lot of relevance:

            http://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=7596

            There’s no real reason to believe that Cankles will be the beneficiary of the record Black turnout that Obama was and Hispanic turnout is never very big no matter how much attention is given to it. I’m just too cautious to ever get cocky about these things, but I don’t see much that’s changed since The Z-man did his analysis.

          • jack dobson

            The North Carolina Republican Party headquarters were firebombed tonight, and there has been continuous violence directed at Trump supporters. It would be rational if they lied to pollsters. I’m not saying that is happening but it is a real possibility.

          • Drew Krenke

            I’m a yuge Trump supporter – but I’ll be voting against McCain and then looking forward to the opportunity to throw Jeff Flake out too.

            The mistake the Tea Party made was allowing themselves to become a midterm election vehicle for Republicans. It would be a huge mistake to repeat the same with the Trump movement.

            A new, Nationalist party is the only way to go…
            It’s a short term set back in Congress, but in the long term we get the country fixed.

        • jack dobson

          The unhinged personal attacks from the media and the party establishments indicate a great uncertainty, at a minimum, in those quarters. Just to put it on the table, the attempts to federalize the election due to alleged fears of Russian tampering are at best suspicious, too.

    • Scott Carroll

      I plan to employ this exact strategy. If this political marriage is well and truly over, I see no reason to defend them any longer. If Trump loses the Right will be fractured permanently. There will be a party that services upper-middle class people and business interests and a party that services the working class, religious folks. There might be some occasional cross-pollination between the two but the uneasy coalition in effect since Reagan is over.

  • anonaccount

    George Will, out of all of the anti-Trump / NeverTrump Conservatism Inc., is the only honorable member. He resigned the GOP and will likely, like Charlie Crist in Florida, will soon be a Democrat writing passionately in progressive rags like MotherJones and appearing on MSNBC promoting “Blue Dog Democrat” point of view.

    As Decius hinted in Flight 93 and subsequent essays, this is the last election where the NeverTrumps will be relevant.

  • minnesoter

    Yeah, this is definitely personal. NeverTrumpers will not be welcomed back to the party.

    • anonaccount

      They will disappear regardless of who wins the election. In the one case (which I fear is now more likely – thanks in large part to NeverTrumpers) because the GOP will no longer be a national party – this is barely the case as is given the immigration policies that the GOP aided and abetted for decades. A party that is technically there, but not seriously contesting national or statewide elections in 40 states and has no input on policy as the junior partner. In the other case – it is unclear what fraction of the GOP these NeverTrumpers represent given that their preferred candidates (Bush, if not Bush then Marco or Kasich) did not even break 25% of the primary vote.

      • minnesoter

        Yes, I agree. The “geniuses” of the NeverTrump supper-club have painted themselves, with hot tar, into a corner of their own selection.

        I am but one conservative news/analysis/opinion consumer, but know that I am FAR from alone. There are NeverTrump sites and talkers out there whom I will NEVER give a second chance. They despise me and my fellow GOP base voters? Good enough. I despise them. This is personal. I will not retract or entertain their excuses. The stakes are just too high. A Hillary presidency would destroy the GOP, at the least, and my country, at the worst.

        • anonaccount

          National Review opined sometime in March: “The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities [i.e. where the GOP gets a lot, if not most, of their votes] is that they deserve to die.”
          Wall Street Journal’s Bret Stephens added shortly thereafter: “It’s important that Donald Trump and what he represents — this kind of ethnic quote, ‘conservatism,’ or populism be so decisively rebuked that the Republican Party, the Republican voters will forever learn their lesson”.

          Conservativism Inc. thinks of the voters much the same way as Hillary / the Left does. At least they are on the record now. They should do the honorable thing (since they are such guardians of morality) and just follow in the footsteps of the Cotton Whigs and formally joining the Dem. party. Except the Dem. party does not have much use for them either – their latest Heritage Foundation symposium on block-granting Medicaid and the munificence of lower long-term cap. gains tax interests no one anymore. It is not policy-relevant either way.

  • jack dobson

    The #NeverTrump people are the most unprincipled whores the republic has produced. They claimed to be pro-life, and the second they got butt hurt they supported a pro-abortion candidate who would extend Roe as far as the eye could see. And on an on. They are nothing but corporate and war machine shills and deserve to be treated like the criminals they are.

    Vote Trump and laugh last.

    You should have asked White if he actually believes in anything, Decius, but you are too much of a gentleman.

    • Shep

      However they’re actually against abortion for Jewish babies.

  • Brother John the Deplorable

    The gloating from Democrats, the entire press, the three networks, all of cable TV, newspapers, press agencies, … and damn near everywhere outside sites like these will be intolerable. Coming from those thought to hold goals at least passingly similar to ours will be salt in the already fatal wound.

    • Severn

      One thing that’s become painfully obvious is that many “conservatives”, especially those in think tanks and “institutes”, do not have goals even passingly similar to ours. Faced with these two opposing philosophies, they instinctively side with Clinton.

      “My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the Hemisphere,” – Hillary Clinton

      “We will no longer surrender this country, or its people, to the false song of globalism. The nation-state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony. I am skeptical of international unions that tie us up and bring America down, and will never enter America into any
      agreement that reduces our ability to control our own affairs.” – Donald Trump

  • Shep

    People like Adam White were fought against once before. This time we must be strong and finish the job.

  • des111168

    The word “Conservative” has become a hateful thing to me, as there’s nothing conservative about these people, and they hate people in the hinterlands that are REALLY conservative… wanting to conserve community, culture, family, etc.

  • Rick

    In reality, most of Trump’s policies are very similar to the prior Repub candidates. For example, Romney was “Repeal and replace Obamacare; China is a currency manipulator; self-deport all illegals; etc.” Not all that different than Trump except for the wall and making Mexico pay for it.

    The real objection of the think tank crowd is how Trump is conveying his message. They want him to communicate in a way that conforms to their sensitivities and jargon. This is why Clinton is a survivable event to them. She talks and acts more like them than does Trump.

  • ClarkKent

    ALL ELITIST will ALWAYS attack the ‘movement’,
    Special Shame to rino in this most critical hour.
    Let ‘THEM’ eat cake!

    … may they perrish under the same sword they’ve born against us all.
    -Stop the rally goons and the fire bombings killary.

    ?faithfully deplorable
    POLLS:
    IBD. com, Rasmussen, Pew….
    can you say ‘winning!’?
    ?#I love corruption