I've had the conversation multiple times. It's the reason I wrote this. I allow, of course, for the possibility that I'm wrong, but I'm skeptical that some "conservative savior" will emerge after a Trump loss and steer the party in a direction away from populism.
One thing I didn't mention is Trump's post-election power, should he lose. It's near-certain in my mind that anyone who runs for the GOP nom in 2028 will have to play nice with Trump and echo his priorities in order to get the Trump-fan vote.
Double so if the Dems continue their lawfare against him.
I understand their viewpoint, and I do understand that they find some of his actions totally disqualifying, no matter any utilitarian argument or assessment of the other candidate and party.
I do think that at least some are using the "get back to normal" argument as a mask for their more personal dislike, but since I'm not a mindreader I'm not going to dwell on that.
I never did and still do not understand why people want to vote based on an emotional response rather than facts and policies. Not all Trump policies are good, but the alternative, in my opinion, is catastrophic. I’m not fear mongering. I’m paying attention. A Harris administration will tax “unrealized capital gains”. Think about just that for a minute. Research the term. Single issue voters are a scourge on the country. If I was a single issue voter, say based on being for/against (insert hot button issue here) I would essentially be voting against a candidate that has many other policies that are far more positive for the country than where we are now. I think with my brain, not my heart. I will never understand voting against a candidate because you “don’t like” that candidate, as a person. As Mr Anderson has already stated, throwing out the baby with the bath water is a tactic many democrats or never trumpers are willing to do because of muh reproductive rights! Get out there and vote Tuesday! If you haven’t already!
I think that some people believe that Harris won't be able to do that much with a GOP Senate, which looks likely. I don't agree, especially given what I've written about "the machine."
Yes, absolutely agree. I am also frustrated with single issue voters, and/ or voters who vote for a candidate the like because of personality. Those two things are how we got where we are now
I've been saying for 9 years that when his opponents call Trump "The personification of grievance," they're correct. But rather than address those grievances, they've doubled down on them.
What do those "conservatives" want to conserve? They have ceded everything to the Left, without much of a fight.
I only see grifters hoping their gravy train will resume, but I don't see the party taking back any of the NT crowd. It won't be "their" party, ever. Once T is gone, NT will be of no use to the Left, and will be discarded like "garbage", which will be poetic justice ;-)
Many of these NT Repubs use Trump as a smokescreen to hide their own complicity in seeing conservative voters turn to Orange McBadman. Trump's political legacy will have far less to do with him and far more to do with a dystopian system in which such a candidate became possible. There would be no place for a Trumpian figure in a healthy, well-functioning republic.
A guy like him would have no reason to run. But the republic is neither healthy nor well-functioning. And a significant cohort of Repubs are half the reason why that is.
Perfectly said. I've been trying to explain this to never-Trumpers and moderate Dems for years and they just write it off as "defending Trump." Even something like January 6 wouldn't have happened without this reactionary populist shift to the insanity of the Left. They pushed a subset of the population to the breaking point and that subset is extremely volatile. They'd be volatile without Trump around and they'd find someone else.
Needs to be read by all NeverTrumpers.
I've had the conversation multiple times. It's the reason I wrote this. I allow, of course, for the possibility that I'm wrong, but I'm skeptical that some "conservative savior" will emerge after a Trump loss and steer the party in a direction away from populism.
One thing I didn't mention is Trump's post-election power, should he lose. It's near-certain in my mind that anyone who runs for the GOP nom in 2028 will have to play nice with Trump and echo his priorities in order to get the Trump-fan vote.
Double so if the Dems continue their lawfare against him.
Never Trumpers strike me as people who are more than happy to throw the baby out with the bath water.
I understand their viewpoint, and I do understand that they find some of his actions totally disqualifying, no matter any utilitarian argument or assessment of the other candidate and party.
I do think that at least some are using the "get back to normal" argument as a mask for their more personal dislike, but since I'm not a mindreader I'm not going to dwell on that.
I never did and still do not understand why people want to vote based on an emotional response rather than facts and policies. Not all Trump policies are good, but the alternative, in my opinion, is catastrophic. I’m not fear mongering. I’m paying attention. A Harris administration will tax “unrealized capital gains”. Think about just that for a minute. Research the term. Single issue voters are a scourge on the country. If I was a single issue voter, say based on being for/against (insert hot button issue here) I would essentially be voting against a candidate that has many other policies that are far more positive for the country than where we are now. I think with my brain, not my heart. I will never understand voting against a candidate because you “don’t like” that candidate, as a person. As Mr Anderson has already stated, throwing out the baby with the bath water is a tactic many democrats or never trumpers are willing to do because of muh reproductive rights! Get out there and vote Tuesday! If you haven’t already!
I think that some people believe that Harris won't be able to do that much with a GOP Senate, which looks likely. I don't agree, especially given what I've written about "the machine."
Especially with gop senators like cornyn, murkowski and collins.
True, but better than Harris with a Democrat majority Senate.
Yes, absolutely agree. I am also frustrated with single issue voters, and/ or voters who vote for a candidate the like because of personality. Those two things are how we got where we are now
I've been saying for 9 years that when his opponents call Trump "The personification of grievance," they're correct. But rather than address those grievances, they've doubled down on them.
What do those "conservatives" want to conserve? They have ceded everything to the Left, without much of a fight.
I only see grifters hoping their gravy train will resume, but I don't see the party taking back any of the NT crowd. It won't be "their" party, ever. Once T is gone, NT will be of no use to the Left, and will be discarded like "garbage", which will be poetic justice ;-)
Many of these NT Repubs use Trump as a smokescreen to hide their own complicity in seeing conservative voters turn to Orange McBadman. Trump's political legacy will have far less to do with him and far more to do with a dystopian system in which such a candidate became possible. There would be no place for a Trumpian figure in a healthy, well-functioning republic.
A guy like him would have no reason to run. But the republic is neither healthy nor well-functioning. And a significant cohort of Repubs are half the reason why that is.
Perfectly said. I've been trying to explain this to never-Trumpers and moderate Dems for years and they just write it off as "defending Trump." Even something like January 6 wouldn't have happened without this reactionary populist shift to the insanity of the Left. They pushed a subset of the population to the breaking point and that subset is extremely volatile. They'd be volatile without Trump around and they'd find someone else.
I'm basing my vote on one simple question: Who would the Delta House vote for? The answer is obvious.
You said it better than I could Peter, thank you