Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    14 May '16 18:101 edit
    As most of the Republican establishment continues to fall meekly into line behind Trump, there are still pockets of conservative thought that wholly reject him and urge a third party run. Of course, this will make a Hillary victory 99% rather than say 80% certain but this article in the Weekly Standard makes a principled case for such a candidate:

    With Donald Trump the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, conservatives face their biggest crisis in generations. Professional Republicans are mostly boarding the “Trump Train," convinced their self-interest requires party unity, but principled conservatives find the choice between the dissolute, erratic Trump and the liberal, corrupt Clinton unacceptable. What comes next for them?

    This insurgency should field a candidate for the White House in 2016, which would require a leader to offer him or herself to the voters on the November ballot. Trump and Clinton are the most unpopular nominees in the history of polling, so why can't the people elect a fresh face or a trusted elder statesman over these unsavory characters? Moreover, the danger for down-ballot carnage with Trump as the nominee is substantial, and an independent may provide electoral cover for vulnerable conservative officeholders.

    Yet the calling for an independent candidacy is higher than this, for the ideals of conservatism are at stake. Trump is not like Barry Goldwater or George McGovern, decent men who were out of step with their times. They may have been unelectable, but at least each was bound by commitment to his principles. Trump has no principles and is quite pleased for us to know this. As he told California Republicans a few weeks ago, "Folks, I'm a conservative, but at this point, who cares? We got to straighten out the country." Real conservatives believe that it is their ideas that will "straighten out the country," but for Trump these were empty talking points offered to secure the nomination.


    By selecting such a character, the Republican party has abandoned its commitment to conservatism. This is a dangerous development. Parties in the United States are meant to be more than just machines to further ambitious politicians, they are supposed to promote broad principles for the general welfare. The GOP was, for generations, the vehicle for advancing conservative ideology. This year it won't be.

    Some may comfort themselves that Trump is sui generis, a one-off never to happen again. But why assume that? If the Republican party will abandon its principles for a failed casino mogul best known for tabloid antics and a reality TV show, what won't it abandon them for?

    Conservatives cannot let this pass without a response, which is why an independent candidacy is essential. It isn't just a way to win the White House or hold the line in Congress, it is a statement of purpose and a warning to the Republican party that commitment to conservative ideas comes before party loyalty. If the party abandons the principles that have guided it for decades, it may no longer count on conservative support.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-lessons-of-1912/article/2002374

    I doubt it will happen but it's an interesting idea. What do Republicans here think of Mr. Cost's points?
  2. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    14 May '16 18:15
    Nobody with a gram of brain cares an inch about who is the puppet
    in the Oval Office serving the interests of true power.
  3. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    14 May '16 21:17
    Originally posted by Seitse
    Nobody with a gram of brain cares an inch about who is the puppet
    in the Oval Office serving the interests of true power.
    The "true power" being...?
  4. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    14 May '16 21:20
    You know, I would've loved to see a presidential race between Sanders and Ron Paul. They would've had the greatest presidential debates in history.
  5. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    14 May '16 22:54
    If this were to happen, Republicans would never win another election.
  6. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    14 May '16 22:57
    Originally posted by vivify
    The "true power" being...?
    Neither you nor I. That narrows it down a bit. Let's keep digging.
  7. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26719
    15 May '16 02:58
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    As most of the Republican establishment continues to fall meekly into line behind Trump, there are still pockets of conservative thought that wholly reject him and urge a third party run. Of course, this will make a Hillary victory 99% rather than say 80% certain but this article in the Weekly Standard makes a principled case for such a candidate:

    Wit ...[text shortened]... t will happen but it's an interesting idea. What do Republicans here think of Mr. Cost's points?
    The problem with the Republican party is that their 'conservatism' comes from different angles. The party elite are concerned primarily with economic conservatism, but use social conservatism to motivate the base to vote for them. This is the dynamic highlighted by Thomas Frank in his book 'What's The Matter With Kansas'. The problem for the Republicans is that during this election cycle, that same old bait and switch routine by the party elite has fooled no one. The base, it turns out, really doesn't care about trickle down economics and aren't going to vote for candidates who are going to do nothing but deliver more of the same.
  8. Standard memberbill718
    Enigma
    Seattle
    Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    3298
    15 May '16 04:08
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    As most of the Republican establishment continues to fall meekly into line behind Trump, there are still pockets of conservative thought that wholly reject him and urge a third party run. Of course, this will make a Hillary victory 99% rather than say 80% certain but this article in the Weekly Standard makes a principled case for such a candidate:

    Wit ...[text shortened]... t will happen but it's an interesting idea. What do Republicans here think of Mr. Cost's points?
    I agree 100%. The GOP needs to stand on the principles of conservatism, and not be swayed by the fact that the voters, in overwhelming numbers rejected the "real conservatives" in favor of Trump. The will of the voters are just an inconvenience...right? 😲
  9. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39965
    15 May '16 08:04
    Originally posted by bill718
    I agree 100%. The GOP needs to stand on the principles of conservatism, and not be swayed by the fact that the voters, in overwhelming numbers rejected the "real conservatives" in favor of Trump. The will of the voters are just an inconvenience...right? 😲
    The question isn't what the Republican party should do but what conservatives should do.
  10. SubscriberWajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    Provocation
    Joined
    01 Sep '04
    Moves
    65540
    15 May '16 08:19
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    If this were to happen, Republicans would never win another election.
    I think the opposite is more likely true. It's a massive decision but they need to sabotage Trump in any way they can to save the party, write this election off, let hilliary really make a mess then save the day next round. Hope the dermos don't do too much damage to the country.
  11. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    15 May '16 13:17
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I think the opposite is more likely true. It's a massive decision but they need to sabotage Trump in any way they can to save the party, write this election off, let hilliary really make a mess then save the day next round. Hope the dermos don't do too much damage to the country.
    It's already too late...and remember that immigration thing? They will go with the dems every time.
  12. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    15 May '16 16:54
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    I think the opposite is more likely true. It's a massive decision but they need to sabotage Trump in any way they can to save the party, write this election off, let hilliary really make a mess then save the day next round. Hope the dermos don't do too much damage to the country.
    The founders set up a system of government where the power to alter things isn't that great. The damage that either Hillary or Trump can do is always going to be reversible, just as is any damage Obama has done is.
  13. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    16 May '16 15:05
    No such thing as a Conservative party, only parties that try to dupe Conservatives to vote for them.
  14. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    16 May '16 15:16
    Originally posted by Eladar
    No such thing as a Conservative party, only parties that try to dupe Conservatives to vote for them.
    Certainly, neither the Democrat nor the Republican party is truly conservative.

    Then even people aren't purely one or the other either.
  15. Joined
    12 Jul '08
    Moves
    12091
    16 May '16 15:31
    Originally posted by normbenign
    Certainly, neither the Democrat nor the Republican party is truly conservative.

    Then even people aren't purely one or the other either.
    It is true that the word Conservative really means nothing in the US because it means different things to different people.

    Those in the NE see it as "Pro-Big business" which translates to Corporate Welfare and tax breaks.

    Real American see it as freedom from the government.
Back to Top