Today: Nevada (and musings on conservatism, the GOP, and the establishment)
Another day, another primary. This primary season has felt like a runaway train to me, hurtling down the tracks with no brakes on.
Another thing that’s become clear this year is that the members of the GOP “establishment” are not all-powerful puppet masters pulling all the strings. The Trump phenomenon proves to me that they can’t even really control their own primary process, because I have little doubt they did favor Jeb Bush and don’t like Trump (although I think they hate Cruz even more). They couldn’t make the Jeb! phenomenon happen because voters actually have minds of their own, and because Jeb was a bad candidate for this time and place.
That doesn’t mean that the establishment doesn’t have its own interests and candidates it supports and pushes. But I ask you, why shouldn’t they? Why should they be immune from promoting what they see as their own interests, which they may even see as being in everybody’s interests? What’s more, even though I consider myself a conservative, over the years I have grown tired of the constant carping of much of the conservative wing of the party that they are insufficiently listened to. The reason is that conservatives actually don’t make up the majority of the GOP.
So maybe the main reason Cruz isn’t doing all that well is that—in addition to the Trump phenomenon, which is definitely a factor—is that he’s very conservative and also non-charismatic. And I say this as a person who supports Cruz (in fact, he’s been my frontrunner for some time) and who thinks he would make a good president.
Sometimes I think Reagan spoiled conservatives. A myth was engendered that said the country really wanted a conservative. First of all, the country in 1980 was a very different country than it is today, and I’m not sure Reagan could have been elected in say, 2008 (I think he could now, but only because the Democrats’ field is so weak). But second of all, Reagan didn’t win in 1980 because the voters suddenly decided they had become conservatives, he won because there were enough voters like that and because of his winning (literally) personality.
Oh, and if conservatives run off and form a third party, that’s the best way to assure that the left wins.
And don’t forget that it’s the culture—particularly education and its leftward pull, in my opinion—that has created this set of affairs in the first place. Many things have paved the way for this possible (probable??) Trump vs. Hillary battle, involving the worst two presidential choices in a single year in American history, but some are cultural and include the glorification of celebrity and of symbol and chatter over substance. Just as Obama was not about Obama but about the American people, so Hillary and Trump are not about Hillary and Trump, they are about what the American people are willing to accept and even admire.
Reagan spoiled us. Both Ted and Marco sounded Reagan themes when I saw them.
One difference between then and now is that there are so many more issues and the stakes are higher. Russia was tough but I submit radical Islam is worse. Illegal immigration today was nothing like it was in the 80s. SSM was unthinkable. Debt as a percentage of GDP is really dangerous. Things are worse and we are desperate. Losing to the Dems now looks like a disaster.
I support Cruz as well and agree he’s not very charismatic. I plan on voting for him in the primary…that is, if he’s still in the race! He is, to me, the lesser of two evils.
Isn’t that what it always comes down to?
“Losing to the Dems now looks like a disaster.”
Losing to the Dems for the past 50 yrs has been an ongoing disaster. I’ve stopped trying to discuss simple math facts with my liberal relatives (Like -The $19 Trillion Debt is a cliff that will be here sooner rather than later.)
They have no clue about non-political soundbites. To them it is all the Republicans i.e Bush fault. It is like they drank the same kool-aid the WWII Germans drank. The fault cannot be with “dear leader”. It has to be someone else. 🙁
“It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere.” –Voltaire
It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so. Mark Twain
Conservative constant carping was portent of political (social, cultural) implosion due to GOP/Cons monumental hubris — to say nothing of collaboration. It was no different than Jeremiah’s carping about what would await Israel. And wouldn’t you just know it… they turned out to be right. Nemesis had made an appearance and lo and behold… there was Trump. The lesson to all political parties but especially the stupid party? Think yourself little gods at your own peril.
Take a read of Shakespeare’s Tempest, Act. I, scene 1. See whether it doesn’t make a fine metaphor for our circumstance as lovers of our republic, and the state of republican (small r) politics today. Those who are competent to rule in a republican manner today, who understand the meaning of such a form of rule are all overwhelmed with the press of necessities, while those who presume to themselves the authority to rule intervene to no good purpose. And all will suffer the loss of the ship.
The GOP establishment agenda is rejected by conservatives and Trump Fans because the GOP establishment agenda is to maintain the status quo for the GOP establishment. This agenda is contrary to their advertising and campaign promises. The frustration with the GOP establishment is borne from the hypocrisy and lies and the realization that they’re playing us just as badly as the Dems are playing their base.
Rubio’s saying one thing in Spanish and another in English is so typical of this attitude. I don’t think he stands a chance. Trump’s doing well because he’s trashing the GOP establishment in the campaign which is a crowd pleaser. But he’ll buckle under and deal in practice, the establishment knows this. Cruz is the opposite. He’s not good at portraying the joy of being an iconoclast, bringing people along with him. Too smart to be President Camacho. People are leery of his brain and more comfortable with Trump and his constant neverending screwups.
“First of all, the country in 1980 was a very different country than it is today”
It’s truly sad that you can make such a statement and still not realize this election is all about immigration. If you got that then you’d be bashing Cruz and Rubeo on that issue 24/7 instead of Trump until they got their head out of the sand on immigration.
I’ve read what you’ve wrote about Cruz on immigration and it doesn’t sell because it’s the same establishment talking points from 20 years ago. Not believable at this point.
Every day in every way I agree more and more with Mencken:
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.”
boxty:
It is truly sad you think I don’t understand a topic—immigration—that I’ve written 83 posts on at this count, and understand very well as one of the most important issues of our time.
I bet you haven’t read most of them. And yet it doesn’t stop you from making assumptions about what I think.
What I think is that it’s enormously important (not the only issue though). And you know what? Donald Trump’s position is not much different than anyone else’s except in rhetoric. Cruz is almost identical to Trump, except he doesn’t say one thing and then take it back, over and over, and he understands that he won’t be a dictator (Trump won’t either in this regard, but he’d like you to think he can wave that magic wand of his and fulfill all your desires).
Trump is selling you a bill of goods. He’s going to deport 12 million people—how? With his own money and his own troops? And then he’ll let most of them back in? If you believe that—or if you believe it’s a good way to fix the problem—I’ve got a bridge you-known-where to sell you, real cheap.
End birthright citizenship? How? By decree? Congress won’t do it, and there’s not the support for an amendment. I happen to be in favor of ending birthright citizenship—and have written several posts on the subject. But the idea is going nowhere.
And you know what else? The change in this country is NOT just immigration. It’s creeping leftism, as well as change in the global economy and the popular culture, and many of those changes have nothing to do with immigration and have been going on for a long long time.
boxty,
Do you think Trump’ deportation plan is believable? He trashed Romney for trying to tackle the issue 4 years ago. He lies and trashes people all the time.
The reason this election is about immigration is that too many people were too lazy to analyze the situation and support reasonable proposals. All they can deal with are Trump soundbites. Many are the same ones who formed the circular firing squad in the last election.
vanderleun:
And you expect the “it” that they will get, good and hard, won’t affect YOU? Do you think YOU deserve it?
Mencken was an elitist, and that’s about the kindest thing I can say about him. What a guy:
However, I must say I agree with him on this one, a description of the political race on the national level:
However, I disagree with “moron,” although that’s possible, too. It’s the old “fool vs. knave” thing. I see it as “knave” rather than “fool.”
We have a bull in a china shop, two devout conservatives, a Maybe OK, and on the other side a batsh*t democratic socialist and an unindicted treasonous felon.
Gramsci has won.
HL Mencken was right.
Next stop,Weimar. All aboaard! The train is leaving the station.
Thanks, Neo
For making the very fine point that Ronald Reagan was elected not just because he was a conservative but because he was Ronald Reagan — and immensely likable man who stirred Americans belief in themselves as Americans. The left hated him, of course, and made as much fun of him as they could. But he was still able to tap into a vast reservoir of national pride, common sense and common decency. Does such a reservoir exist now. I really wonder. The culture (as you have eloquently and repeatedly pointed out) has changed so. Immature. Overly sentimental. Snark prone. Politically and economically ignorant (drawn to the foam flecked maunderings of Uncle Bernie). Can you imagine the filth and vituperation that would be poured out on Reagan today! Ironically, because we are the least racist country in the world (and possibly in history), we Americans took it upon ourselves to elect a President largely because he was black. So we put that “issue” behind us, but as it turns out, we made a terrible and perhaps irrecoverable choice of a man. A sad drama indeed. Next on the bill? Farce.
“Cruz is almost identical to Trump [on immigration], except he doesn’t say one thing and then take it back”
Cruz last night to Bill O’Reilly: “You better believe” I’ll order mass deportations of illegal immigrants, too. Which conflicts with his earlier statements on the matter. You can read more about it here.
Excellent post at Ace on the “You can’t deport 12 million” argument: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/361698.php
We shouldn’t concede the point to the Left.
In the 80s the country was really center right in its political thinking. However, there were not as many hard core conservatives as today. There were few conservative publications, talk radio shows, and no blogosphere. To read conservative opinion you had to subscribe to Buckley’s National Review and watch Buckley’s PBS show, Firing Line, on TV. The Democrats were far more centrist. Scoop Jackson Democrats were liberal on domestic policy but still fiscally rational and hawks on defense. There are no such Democrats today.
The country is now center left, mostly due to the brainwashing that’s been going on in our education system and the leftist bent of the MSM. There are more conservatives today due to talk radio, the blogosphere, Fox news, and more conservative magazines. However, the amount of conservative opinion available today is still quite small when compared to the MSM, Hollywood, and academia. Pop culture is leftist and trending more so everyday.
The Democrats as a whole are much further left than they were in the 80s but there are more conservative true believers. My guess is that there are 15-20% of the population who are Democrats that are true blue Marxists. About 15% of the population is hard core conservatives. What is called the GOPe represents about 25 – 30% of the population, which holds moderate to conservative views. The remaining 35% of the population are moderate Democrats who get their views from the MSM, Hollywood, pop music, etc. and tend to vote and think as leftists do. That means the Democrats hold about 55% – 45% advantage – we are a center left country.
The unfortunate truth is that the hard core leftists have the big megaphones, know how to play really dirty (Alinsky’s rules), and unlike conservatives, they never give up. They play a long game while conservatives are more interested in life outside of politics. Politics is religion to the hard core left. In that way they resemble the Islamists.
I have been watching and participating in politics since the 60s. I have believed that the country could become center right again since the Reagan revolution because I saw what happened under his leadership. He was a man who could go over the head of Congress (all Democrat then) to the people, who responded by calling/writing their Congress Critters. He never got spending under control but he rebuilt our military, relaxed regulations on business, and fought the good fight against the Greens (Remember James Watt, his Secretary of the Interior?). He moved the needle to the right. George H. W. Bush sort of held the center, but Clinton did almost exactly what Obama has done. He catered to the greens, regulated the heck out of businesses, and decimated the military. Reagan’s business revolution continued in spite of Clinton’s best efforts . (When the economy gets moving, it takes major anti-business moves to rein it in.)
“W” was a moderate conservative, but he managed to get some pro-business tax reductions and less regulation passed. He also rebuilt the military. He was busy trying to combat the Islamic jihadis, which required him to do deals with Congress he might not have done otherwise. One failure was that he tried to bring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac under control. “W” tried, but couldn’t get the votes. That, along with the Wall Street invention of MBSs, CDOs, etc. that were rated AAA by the ignorant (and greedy) ratings agencies, led to the crash of 2008, which was blamed on Bush policies. (It’s far more complex and long ranging to be all his fault.)
We all know that Obama’s policies have wracked up record debt, decimated the military, catered to the Greens, been anti-business, ruined our international reputation/standing, promoted racial division, and created more dependency among citizens. We’re back where we were in 1980 after Jimmy Carter, but the population is center left and our economy is even weaker. Unfortunately, I don’t see a Reagan in our future. But a “W” type might slow the leftward drift. Maybe that’s all we can hope for. Sorry to sound so pessimistic, but this campaign is not making me optimistic.
Birthright citizenship could be resolved easily. Find an anchor baby voting in the next election and prosecute him in state court in a state like Nebraska or Kansas. Crime? Voting as a non-citizen. State Supreme Court rules and SCOTUS accepts cert. State courts have full authority and jurisdiction to decide the case.
If Hillary wins in November we know how it is decided.
My plan avoids the federal courts.
Surprised no local DA or state AG hasn’t done it yet. Plenty of counties in Nebraska (Dawson, Sarpy, Platte, Dakota) where it would work.
Ann:
You should always go to the actual transcript when you want to know what was actually said rather than the spin on it.
Take a look at the transcript of Cruz’s O’Reilly appearance. Do you really think it’s some reversal of a previous position? I don’t. The articles about it that claim it is use truncated quotes from it, taken out of context (sound familiar?).
It’s a complicated point that Cruz is making, but the first thing to understand is that there are two separate and only somewhat related issues. One is what to do with people who overstay visas that were legally issued. As far as I know, ALL the candidates are for tracking them more efficiently and being able to deport them if they overstay. During part of this discussion (for example the part about the Irish guy with two kids) that’s a discussion about overstaying a visa, and it represents the mainstream Republican candidate position of all the candidates (maybe not Kasich, but I’m not as familiar with his position).
The other question is illegal immigrants, such as those who have sneaked over the border and never had visas to begin with. That’s the larger problem in terms of numbers. Cruz has previously said he doesn’t want to start a whole new program and system to hunt after then all and deport 12 million. But he has also said the following all along (in addition to a wall for prevention):
He was merely against some huge new system to get all the illegals in a big sweeping program. He still is against that. He is announcing nothing new here, and anyone saying so is spinning it.
That doesn’t mean he couldn’t reverse himself in the future, I suppose. But he didn’t do it in that interview.
I am really getting tired of trying to unspin spin. It’s futile. The spinners are faster and get much further than I do.
“the members of the GOP “establishment” are not all-powerful puppet masters pulling all the strings.” neo
True, the days of smoke filled rooms are gone. But they are highly influential, which the RINOs in Congress consistently demonstrate.
Now that Jeb! has failed, the GOPe has pivoted to backing Rubio. If Rubio fails and Trump gains the nomination, they’ll seek a private ‘accommodation’ with Trump. If Cruz somehow pulls off the nomination, he’ll get minimal backing from the GOP and if he somehow beats the democrat, they’ll hamstring him in Congress, biding their time till a ‘more favorable climate’ appears.
“Why should they be immune from promoting what they see as their own interests, which they may even see as being in everybody’s interests?” neo
As long as their interests do not harn America’s interests, they have a perfect right to promote them. Reason and logic are the tools that allow us to determine whether our interests conflict with America’s interests. Loyal Americans do not place private interest before country.
That conservatives actually don’t make up the majority of the GOP is irrelevant, all that is relevant is allegiance to the Constitution. That the great majority of Americans are not loyal to the Constitution is a condemnation of them.
“A republic, if you can keep it!” B. Franklin
“Don’t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.” A. Lincoln
Cornhead — there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell that birthright citizenship will be overturned. While I happen to agree that a good argument could be made that children of persons in the country illegally should not automatically be citizens at birth, there is no federal court, and probably few state courts, which would even touch the notion with a 10-foot pole. And since the case, if brought in a state court, would immediately be removed to federal court as implicating a federal right, there is no chance of it happening. Sorry.
Geoffrey Britain: who are the “GOP Establishment” and exactly how have they pivoted to Rubio? I saw Reince Priebus on TV the other night and he certainly was as dumbfounded and confused as anybody on what the hell is going on and what to do about it.
You are right that a majority (I don’t know if it’s a great majority, but it’s certainly a majority) of Americans are not loyal to the Constitution. But how the hell is that the fault of the “GOP Establishment,” whoever they may be? I’d say it’s an inherent aspect of human nature — a republic, and the Constitution, are just too hard for most people to understand and follow. They want to be told what to do by a strongman and be taken care of cradle to grave. But if you want to blame somebody, blame the leftists who seized control of our schools and our media 40 or 50 years ago. How did the “GOP Establishment” cause that?
Ann,
You pay attention to sound bits. I will refrain from speculating on why beyond your Rubio agenda. BTW, I am in Reno after 3 days campaigning for Cruz. Where are you?
Ann…Take note, Babycakes: parker is a higher form of political animal than thee(and me!!) due to his presence in Nevada selflessly and superiorly campaigning for Teddy. High Minded, I tell’ya.
ZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……
O’REILLY: Mr. Trump would look for them to get them out. Would you do that if you were President?
CRUZ: Look. Bill, of course you would. That is what ICE exists for. We have law enforcement that looks for people, who are violating the law that apprehends them and deports them.
That “Bill, of course you would” in response to O’Reilly’s “Trump would look for them to get them out. Would you do that if your were President?” is Cruz trying to appeal to the Trumpsters by making it sound as if he, too, like Trump would go looking for illegals in an aggressive way. Talk about spin.
Ann:
Did you read the transcript I already linked and told you to look at? Did you read anything I already wrote you in my earlier comment
Here it is [emphasis mine]:
He is saying anyone here who is apprehended should be deported. In other words (and I already explained this), like virtually all the other candidates, he says that if someone is picked up by the police for some sort of offense, they should be deported. He is NOT advocating a special “round em all up” program. In the context of the interview that should be clear to the listener.
And then they segue to visas.
I quoted from that transcript, Neo. I also watched the full video.
What I’m saying is that I believe Cruz deliberately tried to leave the impression he’s more like Trump than Trumpsters give him credit for — it’s that short “Bill, of course you would” that was meant to do that. I read all the rest and I really do get all the nuances in his position, but with that short bit he meant to deceive.
Ann:
Excuse me, but that seems absurd to me.
You pick one small and rather innocuous phrase out of an entire interview where he’s fairly clear about what he was saying both before and after it, and you read his mind on that?
The phrase “of course you would”? That’s supposed to mislead, when he has already said in the statement just prior to that that ” We should triple the border patrol and Federal Law requires that anyone here illegally that is apprehended should be deported”? He has made it clear what he’s talking about, and he assumes that O’Reilly is asking a follow-up question.
And then, right after the phrase “of course you would” (and by “right after,” I mean the next sentences) Cruz says, “…of course you would. That is what ICE exists for. We have law enforcement that looks for people, who are violating the law that apprehends them and deports them.”
He is again referring back to people who are already apprehended—he is describing enforcing the current system, and enforcing it on people who are apprehended.
That seems to be the meaning of the words there. I don’t see any reversal, or any intent to mislead.
Ladies….Ladies….!! Put the coffee down and step away from the mugs…There…Goooood….
Geoffrey:
“If Cruz somehow pulls off the nomination, he’ll get minimal backing from the GOP and if he somehow beats the democrat, they’ll hamstring him in Congress…”
There is plenty that a President Cruz could do to begin to right the ship that Congress would have little control over: rescinding all the Executive Orders/Memos issued by Obama, back ICE in enforcing the law, use what’s left in the already appropriated monies for the “fence” to keep building it, reverse the adversarial relationship Obama has caused between the federal agencies and the states re: immigration, voter ID, environmental regulation, education and much more, open the floodgates on the thousands of FOIAs that have been slow-walked and stonewalled by Obama, open or re-open FBI investigations into the many Obama scandals, begin weeding out the thousands of left wing radicals Obama, Holder and Obama’s agency heads have hired into all the top civil service positions throughout the federal government, re-establish friendly relationships with our allies, stop backing Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood, stop forcing lenders to make “diversity” mortgage loans again, which by the way, has been going on for some time already, have his agency heads look for ways to cut their budgets, tightening up the auditing of areas particularly rife with fraud…
This stream-of-consciousness listing is already getting overly lengthy, so I’ll end it there for now. Every item I thought of led to several more, and the eventual listing would keep President Cruz busy well into his fourth term.
With his spare time, he could be going directly to the American people,telling them what he’s doing and why, and asking them to put pressure on Congress to pass laws he needed to do even more.