Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Confessions of a Never Trumper: Why I’m Hopeful

Confessions of a Never Trumper: Why I’m Hopeful

A new beginning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7eJpWOY3r18

My anti-Trump rantings, concerns, conjectures, and complaints are well chronicled in the LI annals. Those have not changed. But looking ahead to the next administration, I’m hopeful.

I’ve been critical of Trump from day one. That won’t change. He’s a politician (now) and they’re never to be trusted. But it’s refreshing that the tone of the incoming administration is one that loves our country and sees her for the good she is rather than shaming her for her shortcomings. That much is a welcome change.

I’m encouraged by his cabinet picks and the experience they bring to the table. Some are Beltway standard fare. Many are not.

Watching our federal bureaucracy freak out over looming agency cuts is delicious. I imagine it exactly as portrayed in The Weed Agency — everyone scrambling to justify their all important, “America-saving”, taxpayer-funded federal desk jobs.

Among his many legacies, President Obama leaves a demolished Democratic party that is hell-bent on fording the river. Calls for unity have been met with petulant temper tantrums and delusions of illegitimate elections. Miscalculations were made by both sides during the campaign process. I too looked at campaign norms and not at what the tea leaves were saying. There’s only one party that’s been introspective and willing to understand where they went wrong, and it’s not the Democrats.

When it was apparent Trump has destroyed Hillary, I blogged:

The only expectation I have of elected officials is that they fail to live up to expectations. I remain skeptical of Trump and his despotic tendencies. But skepticism of elected officials is healthy. Trump won, Republicans maintain control of The Hill — they better not eff it up this time. Individual liberty must be guarded vigilantly, even, and especially after electoral victory when the temptation to hang out and ride the waves is strongest. We’ll finally be able to gauge Republican seriousness on legislative issues like the repeal of Obamacare.

Little has changed from my initial reaction to Trump’s ascension to party nominee. I have always and still believe that our best hope of change is not in our elected officials. Months ago I wrote:

Am I rudderless, distraught, or incensed because Trump is the Republican presumptive nominee? Never. I still believe America is the best damn country God ever gave to mankind. We were birthed out of loathe for traditional rule and for many of us, that hasn’t changed. We survived a turbulent infancy, realigned out of necessity, withstood a Civil War and dire economic conditions and we’re still standing. I’ve worked on campaigns, organized grassroots coalitions, exposed corruption, and have had the privilege of telling people’s stories. I still believe our best hope of changing course is not in the ballot box, but in our communities, families, and culture. From the day I accidentally ended up in the conservative movement, working to restore dignity to our way of life has been my focus. That has not changed because of our nominee. Politicians are not our leaders, nor are they our rulers. They are employed for one reason — to represent us.

I will not espouse hatred of those who hold opinions contrary to my own, but will always fight with love. My vote is no more important than yours or his or hers. “We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly affects all indirectly,” wrote Martin Luther King, Jr. from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama. “Let us fight passionately and unrelentingly to the goals of justice. Let’s be sure that our hands are clean. Let us never fight with falsehood an violence and hate and malice, but always fight with love,” he said. The road ahead is rough and rocky, but I remain hopeful that America’s best days lie ahead. There is always hope, even when we struggle to see it. Elections are important and have consequences for supporters and dissenters alike, but our best hope of righting the ship is in how we live.

This is the core of what I believe and what I attempt to accomplish daily, both here on the blog and in real life. Regardless of how this election pans out, life and its most important bits — family, love, friendship, and kindness, remain unchanged. The sun will still rise tomorrow and we all have a destiny to fulfill.

I remember what 2008 felt like and how scary it was to imagine what an Obama presidency might be like. Half the country is experiencing that same unsettled fear. We’d all be better offer extending a hand, offering encouragement, and finding common ground than yielding to the “I told you so, we won! nah nah nah!” temptation. The last eight years have been horribly divisive. It’s up to us to mend the divide. For better or worse, we’re all in this together.

I’ve never known blogging without President Obama as a foil. But a new president won’t change what we do here. Professor Jacobson blogged about this last month. With an emboldened, hair on fire progressive foe and an openly hostile establishment media, our raison d’etre is more apparent than ever.

There’s no way of knowing what lies ahead, but I’m confident the Trump crew will be vastly unlike any other administration we’ve seen.

Maybe we’re only delaying the inevitable — that’s certainly possible. But the perpetually hopeful optimistic, idealistic bit of me is hopeful. And at the very least, willing to give President Trump the same “wait and see” courtesy I gave President Obama.

By some miracle we survived the Obama years mostly intact. I’m sure we’ll survive Trump too.

We remain vigilant in the insurrection. Vigilant, happy warriors.

Follow Kemberlee on Twitter @kemberleekaye

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:

Comments

UnCivilServant | January 20, 2017 at 7:13 am

I am still reserving judgement.

I’ve also noted that with all the hyperbole the extereme pro- and anti- camps have thrown about, the worst thing that could happen for either of them is also the most probable – that he will be merely average.

I like the choice for the EPA and a few other offices, I don’t like the choice for SoS, and I’m still waiting to see who he nominates for Scalia’s seat. If he does half the damage to the calcified dead weight in washington as promised, I’d we satisfied.

    UnCivilServant in reply to UnCivilServant. | January 20, 2017 at 7:13 am

    *I’d be satisfied.

    (I have no idea how I made that error)

      Sorry? Whats the extreme hyperbole being thrown about by the pro-Trump camp?

      What is it about people who absolutely cannot castigate Obama without first doing some virtue signalling of their own about how much they hate Trump.

        UnCivilServant in reply to mailman. | January 20, 2017 at 8:32 am

        I have run into people who regard the incoming president in the same overblown nigh messianic nonsense light that lefties did with Obama’s arrival. So, yeah, there’s hyperbole from both sides.

        I’m not really sure what your last statment had to do with the previous one, or what I’d said.

          Ragspierre in reply to UnCivilServant. | January 20, 2017 at 9:19 am

          Nothing. It had to do with nothing you said. You were edging into ThoughtCrime, and the goon-squad of the cult could not permit that.

          MattMusson in reply to UnCivilServant. | January 20, 2017 at 9:24 am

          A return to a competent Center would be considered Messianic after 8 years of incompetent leftists.

          Tom Servo in reply to UnCivilServant. | January 20, 2017 at 10:26 am

          Of course the messianic stuff is nonsense, but really, how much of that is just people taking advantage of the opportunity to make the left’s heads spin around while they projectile vomit green? After having that kind of crap force fed to us for 8 years, you can’t fault people for enjoying a bit of payback.

          I have to admit that it makes me laugh nonstop when I watch or read those who are absolutely convinced that this is the advent of LORD NIGHTMARE, PRINCE OF SORROWS AND GOD OF ALL TERRORS!!!

          Charles Blow in the NYT had a column a couple days ago, in which his only point was that he couldn’t understand why the rest of the country wasn’t running around in total terror every minute, like he was.

          To recycle a line from Oscar Wilde, you’d have to have a heart of stone not to laugh at a scene like that!

This conservative pro life grandma continues to be heartbroken and with no positive expectations. I don’t consider the man to be psychologically stable and fear his impulsive striking out anyone with whom he disagrees.
The primary voters are responsible for this threat to the free world.

    Tom Servo in reply to Lee Jan. | January 20, 2017 at 10:38 am

    If you are truly pro-life as you say, then you should take heart that thanks to this politician who has many personal flaws, there is now a very good chance that abortion is going to continue to become very rare, and that Planned Parenthood will be set back severely. If he had lost, the opposite would be true and outfits like The Little Sisters of the Poor would have continued to be hounded by the Federal Government. That will not happen now.

    Since you are pro-life, I will make the assumption you have strong religious beliefs. In that light, I humbly offer a quote from St. Paul that has always given Christians comfort in uncertain times: “And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good” – Romans 8:29 And this isn’t meant to sugarcoat anything; remember this was written by a man who was about to be imprisoned and executed for his beliefs. Nevertheless, Paul never wavered from this belief, and neither should you.

    Easy, grandma.

    JoAnne in reply to Lee Jan. | January 20, 2017 at 6:27 pm

    Oh, for pity’s sake. Get over it. As the four of four, grandmother of nine and another on the way, I am more hopeful than I have been in years. The man has made great cabinet picks, told them they are free to speak their minds, and is treating government as it needs to be treated. A business deal with the people at the table. He doesn’t speak in soaring tones, he’s downright blunt and to the point, a welcome change for me.

I’ not sure to which exact spot we are headed, but we’ve turned away from the cliff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5TwT69i1lU

America is always changing and that’s OK, just as long as the foundations remain steady and solid.

Becoming a drone in the Liberal Progressive Utopia would be just as mind numbing as living under sharia law, soul crushing. I hope we have dodged that bullet for the next 4 years….we’ll see.

Josh Hammer wrote just before the Iowa caucus…

We movement conservatives presently stand at a crossroads. For those of us deeply committed to the ideological and philosophical moorings of our movement—a Burkean skepticism of “sophisters” and “calculators,” a Hayekian eschewing of would-be grand ambitions in favor of the free market’s “spontaneous order,” a Kirkean emphasis in transcendent natural order and private property sanctity, and a Buckleyite synthesis of traditionalism, constitutionalism, laissez-faire, and anti-totalitarianism (be it communism or jihad) alike—there is simply no getting around the obvious fact that Donald Trump is not only anathema, but indeed represents an existential threat.”

I agree generally.

On election eve he wrote…

Conservatism is going to lose this evening in the race for leader of the free world, regardless of which Democratic Party-donating Big Government New Yorker prevails in the Electoral College vote tally. Tomorrow morning, the restorative project commences.”

I agree emphatically.

Today he wrote…

#AlwaysPrinciple
In concrete terms, what that means is straightforward. The goal of the conservative, during the Trump presidency, must be to neither reflexively oppose Trump nor reflexively shill for Trump. The goal for us must be, like a well-trained home plate umpire, to call balls and strikes as we see it. And we will call those balls and strikes not out of fealty to ad hoc cults of personality, but out of fealty to our timeless principles.”

And, as Jonah Goldberg, Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro and every other conservative have said in slightly different ways, it’s not our job to prop up T-rump. It’s our job to tell the truth and act on it.

The nightmare is over. A new day has dawned. It is too soon to tell what kind of a day it’s going to be, but if Kemberlee Kaye is hopeful, I am hopeful.

“By some miracle we survived the Obama years mostly intact. I’m sure we’ll survive Trump too.”

So you’re equating Trump with the POS.

How magnanimous of you. /s

If you’re not sure about Donald Trump, focus on this: it’s not Hillary Rodham Clinton taking the oath of office today.

    UnCivilServant in reply to rinardman. | January 20, 2017 at 10:00 am

    While I am indeed thankful for that, New Yorkers are not famous for implementing limited government. (Spoken as a lifelong New Yorker.)

Henry Hawkins | January 20, 2017 at 9:55 am

I Don’t Know How To Love Trump

I don’t know how to love Trump,
What to do, how to move Trump.
I’ve been changed, yes, really changed.
In these past few months when I’ve seen myself
I seem like someone else.

I don’t know how to take this
I don’t see why Trump moves me.
He’s a politician, he’s just a politician.
And I’ve had so many politicians before
In very many ways, Trump’s just one more

Should I bring Trump down? Should I scream and shout?
Should I speak of love – let my feelings out?
I never thought I’d come to this – what’s it all about?

Don’t you think it’s rather funny
I should be in this position?
I’m the one who’s always been
So calm, so cool, no lover’s fool
Running every show – Trump scares me so.

I never thought I’d come to this – what’s it all about?

Yet, if Trump said he loved me
I’d be lost, I’d be frightened.
I couldn’t cope, just couldn’t cope.
I’d turn my head, I’d back away,
I wouldn’t want to know –
Trump scares me so.
I want Trump so.
I love Trump so.

My concerns about Trump were that his overheated rhetoric & inexperience in government would drive him make some really bad policy decisions, and having an intelligent & experienced cabinet is an important check on that, so I agree that his early picks have been very encouraging.

I think on social & domestic policy there are some easy wins- clearing out regulation, tax reform, replacing Obamacare, promoting school choice, deporting criminal aliens, etc and I am getting more excited about finally seeing some progress. But on foreign policy there are no easy answers no matter how simple it may seem – remember how Iraq was originally seen as a “Quick Win” by the neocons, then Democrats took over and said the same thing about Libya.

I do know the US can’t fight ISIS, Iran, Russia, and China all at the same time, which probably means that in order to make progress in one area we’ll have to cede ground in another, and certainly means we’ll have to make some distasteful allies along the way. And I also do expect to see the end of the EU within the Trump Presidency, probably in the form of one big financial mess.

    Mac45 in reply to tyates. | January 20, 2017 at 11:57 am

    Actually, the Iraq invasion of 2003 WAS a quick win. The invasion by foreign jihadists was, possibly, unforeseen, but it allowed the US to concentrate the bulk of the international jihadist fighters in one place and kill many of them. The problem with Iraq was that the Bush administration got caught up in nation building, rather than the simple occupation of an enemy nation and then had to deal with the pending assumption of power by Barack Obama who was determined to remove all US troops from Iraq. The whole point of invading Iraq was to place a continuous US military presence [some 80,000 troops] smack dab in the middle of the Middle East and right next door to Iran, a major sponsor of international terrorism. When Obama removed the troops, he not only made the whole invasion a waste, but he created a vacuum into which ISIS could expand. So, the foreign policy in Iraq was pretty simple. Troops in Iraq = stability. No troops in Iraq = chaos.

      tyates in reply to Mac45. | January 20, 2017 at 1:43 pm

      So you’re saying that we ended up fighting two wars in Iraq basically – one with Saddam, which we won quickly, and then another with the Jihadis which we also won, but it took more time since we were trying to do nation building at the same time. That’s actually a great summary / assessment.

        Mac45 in reply to tyates. | January 20, 2017 at 4:20 pm

        You got it. What most people do not realize was that the long term goal of Gulf War II. This was simplyn to check, or possibly checkmate, Iran by putting 80,000 US or Coalition troops right on the southern Iranian border. This is what the US and NATO did in Europe to forestall Russian expansion. It would also have placed those same troops smack dab in the middle of the Middle East, where they would have been a constant reminder of US military might. They would have been a stabilizing influence. However, Obama made it clear that he was going to remove US troops from Iraq as soon as he took office. G.W. blocked that b y entering into an agreement with the Iraq government to maintain certain troop strengths in Iraq until 2011. And, as soon as the US troops were out of Iraq, ISIS and othe Iranians moved in.

        The initial foreign policy goals were simple. But, when Obama abandoned the plan, all hell broke loose and all the blood and treasure that we spent there was wasted, in the long run. Now we have to do it all over again.

        Mac45 in reply to tyates. | January 20, 2017 at 4:50 pm

        Also, take a look at Afghanistan. Once Osama bin Laden was out of Afghanistan, there was absolutely NO reason for us to stay there. The country has NO strategic value at all. And, we have to cross potentially hostile territory to provide logistical support for our troops. This exercise in nation-building has been a complete disaster. We should have been out by 2005, at the latest. Instead, we are still losing men and women there for no good reason.

        This is a classic example of failed foreign policy.

American Human | January 20, 2017 at 10:45 am

It seems to me as if the pick of the Big-Shots as cabinet members is going to be a good thing. This is what a good leader does, he surrounds himself with people that he considers leaders, not smart-alecks.
For example Tillerson is/was head of a company that was larger than the State Department. He’ll be able to see where the large slabs of flab are and start exorcising them. He knows how to keep tabs on a large corporation/agency and how to manage it.
Clinton never understood that because she was only in it for herself. The same for Matis and the others. Successful people who know HOW to accomplish things. Politicians don’t care about accomplishing things.
“Me First” is becoming “You First”.

Driving to work this morning, I was reminded of a YouTube video that I bookmarked from 8-11-2009. Pennsylvania’s newly declared “Democrat” Senator Arlen Specter held a townhall meeting in Lebanon, PA. This is why Trump was elected: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgpSoiiWNww

Yes, a sleeping giant has been awakened and Arlen Specter is worm food and a perfect example of why term limits need to be in place.

    Tom Servo in reply to G. de La Hoya. | January 20, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    I forgot about Snarlin’ Arlen. Had to learn the hard way why both sides of any conflict always end up hating turncoats. He should have read the story of Benedict Arnold more carefully.

“I remain skeptical of Trump and his despotic tendencies.”

What does that even mean?

It might mean you need to re-think your understanding of how the world works.

    Ragspierre in reply to BrianE. | January 20, 2017 at 11:27 am

    As the Suit Case Simpson character in “Jesse Stone” says…

    “The information is out there; you just have to let it in”.

The anti-Trump people always amaze me. I find their posturing almost funny, if it wasn’t so terribly sad.

These people all profess to be diametrically opposed to the path charted by the liberal/progressives, then turn around and state, categorically, that they are opposed to a candidate who appears to be diametrically opposed to that same path. Do they really oppose the current status quo?

Then there are those who are anti-Trump because of his personal management style. They decry him as being crass, crude, vulgar, unpolished and, essentially, plebeian. He may be all of those things. But, much of the American plebiscite can identify with that. This country has had a tradition of plain speaking. “Ride well, shoot straight and always speak the truth.” – Herodotus. Yet, as we have become a nation of lawyers, many people seem to feel it is better to obfuscate, than elucidate.

Then we have those who are convinced that a Trump administration will cost them something, personally. As the man has not assumed the office yet, it is a bit premature to entertain this notion as fact. But, every Presidential administration for the last 100 years has cost some members of the American society something. That is known as compromise. And, like it or not, compromise is the bedrock of a society.

Will Trump be a President for all the people? No. But, then the same can be said for every other President, especially Barack Obama. Will he manage to deliver on all of his campaign promises? Probably not. He will have to fight the entrenched establishment forces in the Congress to do that. Will the USA be a better place following his Presidency? We’ll see.

So, I say to the anti-Trumpers, get back to me in four years when we have seen what a Trump Presidency can accomplish. Until then all you have is dislike and fear, all of which is built upon speculation. Trump represents REAL hope and change. Give him a chance to deliver.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 20, 2017 at 12:10 pm

    As stupid a piece of shutupery as any of the many appearing here from a T-rumpian cultists over the past many months.

    I can assure you that it won’t work. Der Donald doesn’t get a four year free ride any more than Barracula did, nor should he. If you believe what you wrote, you’re nobody worthy of the term “American citizen”.

    What we have…quite opposite of “dislike and fear”…is the objective appraisal of what Mr. Establishment has been, is, and our ablility to predict he will be based on what we know about REALITY.

    Not “hope and change”.

    What you, and other slavish followers here, can expect is a vigorous opposition based on sound conservative principles. Every day. All day.

    You can expect compromise on policy. NEVER principles.

      You mean the same “conservative” principles exhibited by the current “conservative” politicians in Washington? The same “conservative” principles exhibited by YOUR favorite “conservative politician, Ted Cruz? The same man whose wife has been a high placed employee for Goldman Sachs and whose whole career has been closely tied to the establishment Bush family?

      Sorry, but the “conservative” movement was taken over by the Establishment decades ago. It is now a part of the Uniparty right along ide the liberal/progressive movement.

      It is fine for the people of the US to demand that President Trump perform as he promised. But, please do not attempt to invoke “conservatism” to give irresponsible criticism any validity.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | January 20, 2017 at 1:31 pm

        You are a flucking liar.

        Your Great God Cheeto has appointed SEVERAL Goldman-Sachs alumni, several voting Deemocrats, and at least one recent Soros employee. Not a flucking word from your lying mouth.

        You lying sack of filth.

        Tom Price is a BIG Boehner water-carrier, and has a C CR rating.

        And FLUCK you and your broke-dick opinions of who is and is not conservative.

        YOU gave up any right to even make that criticism when you sucked T-rump.

          WOW. Such a cultured, nuanced response. I must have struck a nerve. Possibly an inconvenient truth.

          Given all the people that you just named, you should be happy that Trump is in the White House. These are the same people that Cruz has worked with and supported for years.

          What was your objection to Trump, again?

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2017 at 2:34 pm

          Oh, I think it’s pretty well established that I hate a liar, and you are a liar.

          Duh.

        I’m confused a bit here, Mac. You object to Ted Cruz in part because his wife is a former “high placed” employee of Goldman Sachs. Did I miss your objections to Trump because he picked a former Goldman Sachs PARTNER for his cabinet? /just curious

          I was simply make a point to show Rag’s ridiculous opposition points.

          Ted Cruz is what he is. He is a smart, clever politician. He, by the standards of the Washington Uniparty is more conservative than most. But, he is also a member of the establishment. He rose in politics working for G.W. Bush. Much as I admire Bush, he was at best a moderate, politically, and is an entrenched member of the financial establishment. Cruz toed the establishment line as the Texas Attorney General and was the lawyer to many big establishment businesses. His wife has been a long time member of Goldman Sachs, giving him even stronger ties to the establishment. And, he was a Washington insider.

          Being the savvy politician, and very bright guy, that he is, Cruz saw the development of the anti-establishment movement in America. And, he took steps to identify himself as an anti-establishment outsider. He made several well publicized votes and stances, in the Senate, to bolster that image, even though he had no effect on the outcome in these cases. He also supported some controversial establishment issues such as TPP and immigration reform [read amnesty]. But, he was all set to run as the anti-establishment outsider. The GOP even fielded 15 candidates to minimize the anti-establishment support that Cruz was expecting. Then, enter Trump. First of all, he was NOT a professional politician. He IS a successful businessman. He does not have any VISIBLE ties to the establishment. Then, when he was attacked by virtually the entire Establishment; politicians, the media, big business, as well as the liberal/progressives, including both the Democrat and Republican Parties; he became THE anti-establishment candidate. And, Cruz was out of the running.

          Would Ted Cruz have made a good President? Perhaps. But, to the voters, he was not the anti-establishment candidate that the voters were looking for.

      murkyv in reply to Ragspierre. | January 20, 2017 at 1:30 pm

      The more you huff and puff, the smaller and more insignificant you become.

“He’s a politician (now) and they’re never to be trusted.”

Plenty of other reasons to be skeptical, but this piece of ‘logic’ suggests that no elected official can ever be trusted.

I was also a Never Trumper, and I knew that this election would be a washout because it became Trump vs. Hillary. I voted write-in, because I could not honestly vote for either one.

Of course, I knew that one of them would be likely to be elected. However, I can say that I remained loyal to my position, because sometimes one has to be when there is this kind of choice.

Now that Trump is inaugurated, we have no choice but to see how he does. I do not have to like the president. But I am hoping for him to succeed. I would also hope that if he does, he will consider not running for re-election in 2020 (there are only a few presidents who did that, but under the circumstances if things are as polarized as they are now, I am not sure what purpose it would serve) and yield to Pence or another Republican who would have also done the same thing without the polarization.

I am sure that there are many who will disagree with this. So be it. I will still stick to my position, because I cannot forget how Trump got here even if earlier campaigns were just as polarizing.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to sheldan. | January 20, 2017 at 12:07 pm

    You are far from alone.

    The fundamental flaw in your thinking is that the polarization is ours.

    It isn’t. The Left has labelled every Republican since Reagan as the second coming of Hitler. What we said and what we did didn’t matter.

    What you’re seeing now is enough people realizing that civility is seen as weakness, so why bother? They want to be civil? Them first.

      Tom Servo in reply to SDN. | January 20, 2017 at 1:11 pm

      They labelled Reagan as the second coming of Hitler, too. I remember those years, and I remember how today’s never-trumpers spent all 8 years of Reagan’s presidency fighting everything he did, and denigrating him constantly.

      Same old, same old.

        Ragspierre in reply to Tom Servo. | January 20, 2017 at 1:24 pm

        Your “memory” lies. You lie. And you do it stooooooopidly.

        Henry Hawkins in reply to Tom Servo. | January 20, 2017 at 2:19 pm

        Name one.

        Wow. You do know that President Reagan was president almost forty years ago, right? How many “Never Trumpers” do you think are pushing sixty? They’d have to be, according to you, to have voiced opposition to and “fighting everything he did” (unless you think that they did that–AND you are aware of it–from their cribs, grade, and high schools).

        Let’s not get all nuts here.

          tom swift in reply to Fuzzy Slippers. | January 20, 2017 at 4:07 pm

          Having trouble with that concept, huh?

          Well, we’re not all dumb kids. I was voting for Presidents long before Reagan. And most of my contemporaries are still around. It may take us a while, but we can still crawl out of our bottles of formaldehyde and breathe air long enough to drag ourselves out to vote.

          LOL, Tom! I’m no spring chicken myself, but it seems to me that the majority of “Never Trumpers” are well under 60 (or more, if we are to be accurate, anyone ranting against Reagan throughout his presidency and “fighting” him every step of the way, would most likely have been over twenty at the start of Reagan’s term.). So, yeah, I have trouble with that concept. Most Republicans who did not support Reagan at first, later did. Who are these mystery Republicans who fought against Reagan and are now “Never Trumpers”?

          Trump does well with demographics likely to have been around (and aware, vocal, etc.) when President Reagan was in the White House (i.e. those over 60, or more realistically, those closer to or over 70). My point isn’t that we non-spring chickens can’t toddle to the polls in our walkers, it was that it’s not really accurate to say that “Never Trumpers” spent all eight years of Reagan’s presidency denigrating him and fighting what he did every step of the way. That’s not just unrealistic, it’s surrealistic.

          George Will, among others.

    Barry in reply to sheldan. | January 20, 2017 at 1:19 pm

    Some people are so used to losing, they have accepted defeat. They will not fight back. There is no “clean toga” to save you.

    But not all of us. Some of us will fight with any and every weapon on hand.

      Henry Hawkins in reply to Barry. | January 20, 2017 at 2:20 pm

      Please describe your fight and the weapons you used.

        Words, here and elsewhere in support of defeating the GOPe.

        Speech, talking with people.

        Time, spent campaigning for Cruz, then Trump.

        Money, donated first to Cruz, then Trump.

        Those are the primary weapons one uses in a free, democratic country. When that changes other weapons may be used as required.

        How about you, Henry?

          Henry Hawkins in reply to Barry. | January 20, 2017 at 6:05 pm

          Never saw you go all John Wayne before. Those are basic things that many/most people do. I do the same pretty much. I’m also active in local politics, was a local founding Tea Party organizer. I write 2-3 conservatism-themed articles per month elsewhere on the internet.

          I don’t drink personally, but I would suggest that every ounce of liquor a conservative drinks is an ounce a liberal cannot drink. To the front, your country needs you.

          Barry in reply to Barry. | January 20, 2017 at 6:30 pm

          John Wayne.
          I suppose, if you meant the man rather than the actor.

          Since I’m guessing we are close in age, then you have seen the decline of freedom and liberty in this country that began around 1960. The prog project has never been rolled back, only slowed a bit in the 80’s. It has been accepted as fait accompli by a large part of the population. At least 30% of the population desires all out control of everyone’s life.

          I don’t give a damn what anyone thinks about Trump. We will see what he does and judge from there. My initial judgement was quite simple, he was an American in the classic sense, and proud of it. Everything else flows from that. He is not of the “clean toga” group, no one that has any chance of winning will be. Losing guarantee’s further prog progress. Winning, may slow it, may stop it, may reverse it. Warts and all, Trump was the only one I saw with a chance to defeat the Clinton juggernaut. We only know that he did. Perhaps some other candidate would be a better President. We will never know. I’ll ride the horse we have until a better one comes along. And I will continue to work to see the American project of freedom and liberty strengthened.

    “…I cannot forget how Trump got here…”

    Try to remember the forces that tried to prevent him ‘getting here,’ and consider the alternative.

    Trump, like Churchill, is a warrior. Trump, like Churchill, was facing some serious evil. Trump’s win, like Churchill’s, was our victory.

    Churchill faced violent fascists across the Channel, we faced violent fascists right here at home. We still do.

    The bullet this country dodged is just about impossible to describe, short of having to live through the surreal hell of it having hit.

Welp, this thread has been polluted by the usual T-rumpian turd swirl of lying myrmidons.

Damn same…

#NeverTrump’ers ride in the back seat of the clown car.
#NeverHireNeverTrump
#NeverLinkNeverTrump
#NeverTweetNeverTrump

Trump kept Hillary out of the Oval Office.

And Trump has thrown a wrench in the Obama/Soros/Caliphate/Doctor Evil/Worldwide Socialist Paradise plans for the conquest of America.

YES!

Two home runs. If he can keep it up, great; but I don’t require more to consider him a great success and a fine American.

Anything he can manage from now on is a bonus.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to tom swift. | January 20, 2017 at 6:13 pm

    Hillary kept Hillary out of the White House and if you think Trump has ended the progressive push on globalization, your home run fence must be about 50 feet from home plate. They don’t quit, they merely change gears and tactics.

Kemberlee, nothing wrong at all with holding Trump’s feet to the fire. That was why I supported him – I knew he would be impeached for things they would let Hillary get away with.

The problem is that many Never Trumpers wanted to knock Trump out of race after he was last man standing, effective Ely throwing the race to Hillary. For that betrayal they will never be forgiven.

And unfortunately, I’m afraid that in the coming years, your many justified criticism of Trump will be drowned out by lefty hyperbole and childish name puns like we see here from Never Trumpers like Rags.

But I wish you good fortune in the wars to come. And now it begins.

Rag: “…can expect a vigorous opposition based on sound conservative principles”

But not from you Rag. You have discredited and disgraced yourself on this blog. You have no credibility, as you have allowed your hatred and bitterness to destroy whatever message you intended.

You will be placed at the Sore Loser table, alongside the libtard kiddies who scream that Trump is going to send them to the death camps.

“you are an idiot”

says the guy who has impaled himself with his own sword.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | January 21, 2017 at 11:35 am

    But, Fen, that’s just your idiot opinion.

    #AlwaysPrinciple
    In concrete terms, what that means is straightforward. The goal of the conservative, during the Trump presidency, must be to neither reflexively oppose Trump nor reflexively shill for Trump. The goal for us must be, like a well-trained home plate umpire, to call balls and strikes as we see it. And we will call those balls and strikes not out of fealty to ad hoc cults of personality, but out of fealty to our timeless principles.”

    And, as Jonah Goldberg, Mark Levin, Ben Shapiro and every other conservative have said in slightly different ways, it’s not our job to prop up T-rump. It’s our job to tell the truth and act on it.

    That’s reality.

    On the stupid scale of 1-10, 10 being the highest level, allahdimwit is a 10. You are only a 9, so there is that.

    Imagine, the winner being magnanimous. What a concept.

    I thought you claimed to have character, or something.

    Hey, bonus question, have the bushes played golf with Clinton lately?

      Ragspierre in reply to Barry. | January 21, 2017 at 6:30 pm

      Hey, moron…

      Did you hear ANY Boooooooosh baiting boobs with “Lock her up”…???

      No.

      Another question for a moron…

      Who’s in power now? Not BOOOOOOOSH! Magnanimity is swell; what about the rule of law? You and other T-rump sucking cultists PRETENDED to care about that. Not now, of course…because SUCK THAT T-RUMP…!!!

      Allapundit is quanta smarter that you, and more honest, you lying sack of filth.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend