Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Donald Trump and the "Conservatism" of the Establishment
03-17-2016, 07:02 PM,
Donald Trump and the "Conservatism" of the Establishment
Donald Trump and the "Conservatism" of the Establishment

<p>So-called conservatives are planning a closed-door meeting in two days with an eye to running one of their own as an independent if Donald Trump secures 1,237 delegates prior to the July convention in Cleveland. <p><a href=""></a> <p>Would this be the political suicide of the Republican Party? One can hardly help but suspect so, especially given that it should be obvious: a third party run by a so-called conservative Trump opponent would divide an already thin GOP vote and give Hillary the election in a landslide. <p>The global elites, as I’ve noted on many occasions, want Hillary Clinton in the White House in 2017. That is the plan. It has probably been the plan for a number of years. For a while, in fact, some of us were floating the idea of a different psy-op: Trump and Hillary were working together, with Trump’s specific aim the destruction of the Republican Party. The two have been friendly in the past. Trump gave money to the Clinton Foundation. There is room for a few question marks. <p>Why are we here? (Not in the metaphysical sense, but at this particular point with the Republican Party rapidly unraveling!) <p>Because there is no intellectually serious conservatism anymore! I wonder what would happen if someone asked those conveners, plotting to run one of their own as an independent, what they are trying to conserve, what would happen? I have asked this of people who said they were conservatives, and from the response, it was clear: they hadn’t understood the question. <p>If conservatism were still alive in the U.S., what such a question is asking would be clear. It is not about ‘American exceptionalism,’ whatever that can mean now, after our war machine has laid waste to a goodly portion of the Middle East. It is not simply about business, although free enterprise might be one of its derivatives. <p>It is a set of principles. Read Russell Kirk: <p><a href=""></a><p>How many in the GOP “leadership” have even heard of Russell Kirk? <p>What is clear is that many confuse conservatism with things it has little or nothing to do with. Conservatism is not globalism, although it need not reject global trade when there is a reason for it, a genuine comparative advantage, and what results is conducted voluntarily and above board. It is not unconditional support for “big business.” It is not support for greed. It is not even about the white race! These confusions play directly into the hands of the chief opponents of conservatives, doctrinaire liberals (in the latter twentieth century use of that term). <p>I very much doubt, of course, that Trump is a conservative in Kirk’s sense. Given that anyone prying far enough into his background will discover that Ted Cruz is a closet globalist, there are at present no conservatives in this race, and none anywhere on the horizon at present. There are only unabashed globalists and warmongering sociopaths like Hillary Clinton, a guy who calls himself a democratic socialism (Bernie Sanders), empty suits (the rest of the GOP candidates), and Donald Trump. That Trump may be the only hope of stopping a Hillary Clinton presidency is a true index of where we are. <p>Indeed, hard demographics may be against Trump’s being able to stop Hillary. While he has support from law-abiding Hispanics and law-abiding blacks, as well as the white working class and many students, in the final analysis, when November gets here, these numbers may fall well short of what is needed to stop Hillary, even assuming a Trump-Hillary match-up. There are simply too many Black Lives Matter types, too many Hispanic immigrants who despise Trump, and too many a-woman-needs-a-man-like-a-fish-needs-a-bicycle single career women (twentysomethings through fortysomethings). These latter will all vote for Hillary. <p>If the GOP Establishment runs an independent, their independent may get the vote of the Chamber of Commerce crowd — also far too small to make a dent (although as I’ve noted, that isn’t the point). <p>We will see, as events play out, whether a credible case can be made that Hillary was the intended victor in this campaign from the get-go, and what many voters in an admittedly very diverse country wanted was never relevant. The latter should start considering the independence movements that are hovering in the background, pretty much out of sight. But they should read the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist first—not to mention Russell Kirk. <p>This being Thursday, this will be the final <i>Daily Donald</i> for this week.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)