Austin Bay on NeverTrumpers
I’ve long respected Austin Bay, and so I found this article of his making the case for voting for Trump to be of interest, and I think it deserves an audience.
Everyone who reads this blog regularly knows I’ve struggled long and hard with the question of whether I can stomach voting for Trump, and I expect I’ll probably struggle with it right up to the moment of truth in the voting booth. But I’ve long said that I respect those who will vote for him and are convinced it is the right thing to do, although I also respect those who will not. There are arguments—good arguments—to be made on either side.
Bay comes down on the pro-Trump side, and reminds us of some of Trump’s good points:
He won the nomination by boldly and relentlessly addressing difficult political and social issues that his opponents preferred to either avoid or carefully finesse. He damned political and media hacks who run down America. When racist fanatics murdered cops Trump demanded law and order.
Bay feels that NeverTrumpers are fooling themselves as to the effects of their non-support:
NeverTrumpLand’s childish Sore Losers don’t thwart the ambitions of America’s all-too-real Captain Crook””Hillary Clinton””and her privileged Clinton Foundation cronies. Quite the opposite. In GetRealLand Sore Losers become Crooked Hillary’s political tools.
That’s why I’ve never been part of the NeverTrump movement—my reluctance to facilitate the election of Hillary Clinton. But I realize that many NeverTrumpers are propelled into that camp by their belief that Trump would not necessarily be better than Clinton—rather, that he and she would both be extremely bad, just in different ways. Weighing a future that features a known and more predictable type of badness (Clinton) with a more unknown and unpredictable type of badness (Trump) would be hard enough, but it’s compounded in this election by what Donald Rumsfeld might call the unknown unknowns of both of these candidates.
Hillary would be a disaster in things large and small. If her green energy program goes through we will see 300% increase in electricity prices like in Europe. SCOTUS is obvious.
I find myself in the position of hoping and praying that Hillary’s deleted emails get released. They will be so bad that they will not be ignored.
Trump is “not for changing” as Thatcher would phrase it.
Meaning that he is certain to govern in the manner of FDR and Andrew Jackson… probably a blend.
You’ll NEVER take the New York out of Donald.
He’s not a Conservative.
He’s got tons of populism — which I’m told by the elites a bad thing — listening to middle class voters — and protecting blue collar jobs — yeap — that can’t be ‘good.’
Current MSM dogma has America bleeding economic resources from every pore — because — in their hearts — emotionally ‘thinking’ — American resources are infinite.
This bizarre and arrogant assumption underlies Washington’s political ethos.
It explains why the Powell ‘doctrine’ ever had legs.
It’s an INSANE doctrine, of course.
It’s a patrician and arrogant world view.
In some sense, George Soros holds similar sentiments.
But, when the rubber meets the road, Soros and his ilk are financial anarchists.
If Hillary carries on the current march to hyper inflation of all Western fiat currencies — our civilization will implode.
What will that look like.
Check out the end-of-days of the Ming dynasty in China.
They pre-peated everything that’s unfolding at this time.
You might note that virtually no pundit spots the parallels.
We, the West, are still too absorbed by the Fall of the Roman Empire — which is the WRONG analogy.
The Ming are the template: as that society had no serious outside military pressure.
The Ming cancelled their version of NASA — and many another thing — and set the road to ruin.
Cornhead:
You may get your wish.
I wonder if that would be enough to dissuade her supporters—that is, the ones who consider Trump evil incarnate.
As I’ve posted elsewhere, I recognize Trump as a thin-skinned, narcissistic, vindictive, shallow, impulsive, vulgar man.
I resent having been dragged kicking and screaming to the point where I feel I must vote for him, but I will for basically 3 reasons.
1) He is less likely to be blackmailed than Hillary.
2) The deep government bureaucracy, all Dems all the time, the media and some Repubs will oppose him in ways they wouldn’t oppose HRC, who they would enable.
In short, he would be held accountable in ways HRC would not.
3) He MIGHT appoint Supreme Court justices that are more in line with my thinking than HRC would. At least there’s a chance with him.
Neo
True believers will always vote Hillary. Even if there is concrete evidence of bribery. The true believers will say the emails are fake.
Bay’s argument is the only one that matters. The Never-Trumpers in D.C. and those that are Republican politicians elsewhere aren’t the patriots they hold themselves out to be- Trump threatens their livelihoods, and that is why they oppose him versus Clinton.
It is pity that another Republican candidate with better optics couldn’t have run the race Trump ran this Winter and Spring, but I think maybe such a candidate never existed in the first place.
You will learn a lot about the state of the presidential race next week when Paul Ryan’s primary election is over. While I expect Ryan will win the primary, his defeat will signal to me that Trump is going to win going away. If Ryan squeaks by with less than a 10% win, Trump still looks good for the general.
Let me add another consideration which I seldom see noted. If we are headed for a serious economic downtown, as I suspect, and our foreign policy mistakes are going to explode in our faces in the next few years, it is important that the right people be blamed for the debacle. Not that I care much who gets embarrassed, but I care about the perception going forward.
In the world’s Great Depression of the early 30’s most countries threw out the party they thought responsible, empowering the opposition more than it deserved. It might have been better if Al Smith had been elected in 1928. Had Gore been elected in 2000, it would at least have been abundantly clear where that economic downtown and foreign policy errors originated. And, though I doubt I would have liked the military response to 9/11 of a an Al Gore, he would have had to do something, because the country was demanding it. And just maybe the political landscape would look different today.
If there is a stock market crash in (example) March 2017, the popular opinion will be that whoever is holding the reins at that moment is to blame. If the Middle East explodes further and Trump is president, he will be blamed. It would be a shame for that blame to (again) be misplaced. It’s not a true reason to vote Hillary, but it is at least a consolation prize. Especially as I trust neither candidate to be better than the other in such crises.
Yancey Ward:
It’s not necessary to demonize and belittle the motives of the NeverTrumpers, especially since you haven’t a clue what their motives are. Thing is, there are plenty of very real and obvious reasons to be a NeverTrumper, and you don’t have to invent ones that involve self-interest. Of course, you may be right for some people, but there’s no way to know it and in fact there are plenty of more noble reasons to be a NeverTrumper.
What you’re doing is a bit like people who cried “racism” at everyone who didn’t approve of Obama. No, racism may have been present for some, but it was not necessary because there were plenty of good, substantive reasons to be against him.
Assistant Village Idiot:
I’ve seen those sorts of arguments (and have seen them in past elections, too) about making the other party “own” whatever bad thing happens on their watch.
But I don’t buy it, for the simple reason that people tend to rationalize in order to keep their pre-existing beliefs. People who are pro-Hillary would manage to blame everything bad that happens on her watch on the Republicans in Congress, and would make excuses for her. Same in reverse for Trump supporters. People tend to blame whoever they are already disposed to blame.
“True believers will always vote Hillary. Even if there is concrete evidence of bribery. The true believers will say the emails are fake”
The true believers here are the press.
When Joy Reid was confronted with Hillary deleteing 30,000 emails … JOY REID on MSNBC said … YOU just made that up … that didn’t happen!
This is our national press and (to use an Obama saying) the full press is on to protect Hillary and discredit Trump. It’s fcking sickening.
This is Trumps uphill battle.
I disagree Neo- I can see which side their bread is buttered on. They benefit personally more from a Clinton win than they do with a Trump win. If Trump wins, his opponents in the Republican Party are marginalized to the point of irrelevance. If Clinton wins, they regain control of the party apparatus, but it will be a case of ruling in Hell being better than serving in Heaven. If Clinton wins, the Republican Party will become a permanent minority party- she will not only grant executive amnesty, but executive citizenship. That is the goal of the Democrats, and only Trump stands in the way.
Neo:
“their belief that Trump would not necessarily be better than Clinton–rather, that he and she would both be extremely bad, just in different ways”
I think they’ll be different in the way that a baked potato might taste different with salt vs garlic salt, margarine vs butter. … Left vs Left-mimicking alt-Right.
Which is to say, I see both paths looping around to the same place. It’s Kodos vs Kang:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM
#NeverTrump = #ForeverChump
Yancey Ward:
Of course you can see it. I can see it, too. Most people can see it. That doesn’t make it so. As I said, it’s my opinion that some are motivated by that but many are motivated by the fact that Trump is a terrible man, and not really a conservative or even a Republican, and a loose cannon who is unpredictable and perhaps even unbalanced. That is enough in and of itself to explain their extreme reluctance to back him. I would be reluctant to back him also, and there is no money or self-interest whatsoever in it for me.
If I may, let me give an example of how a “fascist” and not politically correct candidate can surprise once he is elected into office. Duterte of the Philiipiness ran an irreverent campaign against the entrenched elites in the country. During his campaign rallies, he used a lot of swear words and promised that he will end the drug problem in 6 months. Most of civil society including the powerful hierarchy of the Catholic Church were against him.To the surprise of many, he won by a large margin.
Upon taking office about a month ago, he has shown his practical, common sense and results-oriented approach to governing. He announced that the country will honor all the treaties and obligations including the financial commitments made by the previous administration. After initially refusing to include the vice-president in his cabinet because she is from the opposition, he had embraced her and given her a cabinet post. He appointed an environmental activist to the position of Environment of Natural Resources post. He, together with his team of appointees have decided to initially concentrate on “low-hanging fruit” of reforms. Things that are doable immediately that can improve government services and have positive effects, since they know their first budget won’t be enacted till next year.
My point is a Trump administration may surprise everybody. With a Clinton administration, we are likely to get, at best, sluggish economic growth of less than 2% a year.
“Trump over 13 million votes–an all-time Republican presidential primary record. The number is a hard fact” – Austin Bay
What Austin forgets to mention is that
1) there was a 66% increase in turnout in the primaries since 2012, 47% since 2008;
2) that Cruz’s votes add up to nearly as many as the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th place finishers in 2012 – only 2M votes short of the winners in 2012 and 2008.
Of course, trump won! But, the “all-time” record doesn’t mean as much as he implies, and it diverts attention from the very real differences / divergence that lay behind those numbers.
Since he is talking about a “War on Honesty”, he has already started off on the wrong foot.
.
“As a businessman he doesn’t have a record for hiring yes-men and yes-women…which tells me Trump expects and values legitimate criticism and opposition”
Well, an assertion like this, if it is priority enough to make the third paragraph (and second major point), out to have some reference to support it.
Now, is it a major point anyway? Nope.
We can accept the fact that to operate an organization successfully, he needs people that can be independent and be willing to give them the hard reality.
However, a similar point can be made about clinton to get where she is. Doesn’t mean they don’t have a** kissers that will fawn over them – no doubt they both do.
.
” In GetRealLand Sore Losers become Crooked Hillary’s political tools…. Sore Losers tell themselves otherwise… they’re waging War On Honesty.”
Proof? … ah, this…
“Bob Dole understands vulnerability. … he came to the 1988 convention after Jeb’s father, George H.W. Bush, defeated him in the presidential primaries. Even though Dole felt mistreated in 1988..”
Oh, the hypocrisy…
“It appears Bush won’t honor his pledge. Gee, Governor, if that’s so, that’s waging War On Honesty… Jeb also called for an end to crony capitalism. That’s a bit jaw-dropping, sir. How can you call for ending crony capitalism and permit Hillary Clinton’s election?”
Twenty plus paragraphs so far and nothing but strawman all the way down.
Again, just an avoidance of the real issue for remaining GOP opposition to trump – character, temperament, and principles.
.
“Viscerally despising President Trump as a personality might be justifiable, Trump’s policy inclinations might well be bull-headed if not wrong-headed, and his flamboyant rhetoric may prove to be a diplomatic problem… Trump might struggle in a crisis”
That is about as much recognition of the issue as he gives.
If he wants to argue that the #NeverTrump folks are wrong, he ought to be addressing their concerns directly rather than airily brushing past them.
His response to all that… is a long list of clinton’s faults, along with how biased the media is.
However, it is not as if any of the #NeverTrump folks from the GOP / conservative side don’t recognize any of the very real problems with clinton, the Dems, or the bias in the media.
.
“Whatever happened, Trump continued to win “the news cycles” and he did so by “being newsworthy.” … Trump succeeded in doing something Republican strategists and campaign geniuses have failed to do since 1932: smack down an ideologically hostile press”
That is his third and second last “concluding” paragraphs.
Short of this joy in a cathartic “smack down”, not one mention about what positive trump will bring instead of clinton, only the usual, not-clinton argument.
Bottom line: What this country needs in a POTUS is someone who can correct course.
Being not-clinton is not enough.
– trump needs to convincingly outline a set of policies for that, that we can believe he will follow through on.
– trump needs to demonstrate he can be levelheaded in dealing with any crisis.
– trump needs to bring the country together rather than play to people’s animus, victimhood, and identity politics.
IOW, trump has to show us that he shares and will follow through on our principles (which themselves are course correcting), and has the character and the temperament to navigate us through tough times.
At one minute to the midnight of this election, doubt he can pull this off in a believable manner.
Here is the proof that if Clinton is elected and it all falls apart, that her supporters will deny her responsibility; after 7.5 years, Bush is still being blamed.
Abetted with the meme that things were so screwed up that even the ‘lightbringer’ can’t overcome an obstructionist Congress.
So, Obama’s done nothing wrong, “Bush did it!”
” I see both paths looping around to the same place. It’s Kodos vs Kang:”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v7XXSt9XRM – Eric
Rather humorous link for a great point. They BOTH take us in essentially the same direction.
trump’s been rather consistent about NOT being beholding to the Constitution, nor to limitations on the executive branch. That can never be good – as it further centralizes power, one of the key sources of the problems we have today!
Add that Nobody knows anything for sure about what trump will deliver in office, because he is so mutable, and the combination is a risk that mitigates any not-clinton argument.
Add temperament, and we have a volatile mixture that exponentially increases the risk. It becomes one wild-a$$ gamble.
But, by the comments from many, they’d rather trade one bad for the other bad.
“That’s why I’ve never been part of the NeverTrump movement–my reluctance to facilitate the election of Hillary Clinton.” – Neo
That is looking at it the wrong way.
Be BOTH #NeverTrump AND #NeverHillary!
It is not any “better” to facilitate trump!
We cannot fight one bad by employing another bad.
We are at the beginning steps for what Pastor Martin Niemé¶ller encapsulated in his poem.
Do we decide now to draw the line, or do we accept trump and hope for the best like they did in Niemé¶ller’s time, who also ignored what they see and hoped for the best?
There are more than two choices to make.
Big Maq:
But I believe that, realistically speaking, not voting for Trump is facilitating the election of Hillary, because although I’d love a third-party candidate to win, I don’t think any of them have a chance.
I don’t know how bad Trump could or would be, but I do know how bad Hillary would be.
A riposte to Austin Bay and Trump and what he represents.
A long analysis.
http://warontherocks.com/2016/08/dark-days-trump-christianity-and-a-low-dishonest-decade/
Big Maq:
Please explain why you think the choice we face is not strictly binary?
Barring death or illness – or one of them dropping out – one of these two candidates is going to win. Not voting for Trump is like voting for Hillary (and yes, vice versa as well, if one’s a Donk).
It’s Fire or Ice, Alien vs. Predator. I’ll stipulate that the choice is not happily made, but one must choose.
I KNOW what kind of judges Clinton will appoint to the SCOTUS. With Trump there’s at least a chance that he’ll keep his word (or listen to Newt).
Some have shoved Gary Johnson at me as an alternative. Ive told those people the same thing: That a vote for a third party only ensures an Hillary election. Now Im convinced Trump will ensure Hillary’s election all by his lonesome. At least my stomach wouldnt roll over as badly voting for Johnson instead of Trump.
“I don’t think any of them have a chance.” – Neo
“Please explain why you think the choice we face is not strictly binary?” – carl in atl
For lack of a better term/phrase, I will call this the “First Mover Quagmire”.
It is where a majority are locked into two choices, even though a third choice is preferable for most of them.
That third choice is not taken because that same majority believe that all the others will stick with the two choices.
Therefore, they wait for some “signal” that won’t be the case (i.e. a “viable” alternative), so they feel free to move to their preferred choice.
It becomes a quagmire in that there is no external force that will provide that “signal”, so each individually lock out the third choice and lock in the two choices by their very behavior, in waiting for that “signal” – i.e. it becomes self-fulfilling.
This dynamic played out in the GOP primaries – everyone looking for the “viable” candidate to counter trump. It got us trump.
Now we are faced with the same dynamic.
Worse, even though it is our principles on the line, and both are extraordinarily bad choices, we still cannot move from the binary dynamic, because we are waiting for some other “viable” choice.
We have to make the move ourselves rather than keep signalling to each other that “if it is only those two, I will side with trump”. This kind of talk perpetuates the quagmire.
We are tying the knot in our own ropes, ready to / willingly fit our own head through the loop.
We don’t have the guts to break from the crowd and follow our own hearts and minds on what is right.
Big Maq:
“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best”
― Otto von Bismarck
One of the reasons I’m a NeverTrumper is I refuse to defend the actions of some moronic child who is too stupid to understand that you do NOT under ANY circumstances attack the parents of a dead war hero. Nor will I defend those attacks. Trump is a complete and total jerk, and I’ll have no part of him. I’m not responsible for him being there in the first place, and I’ll not be held accountable for the election of either. The ONLY people who are accountable for Hillary becoming president are the people who foolishly put their faith in a man who is so obviously not up to the job of POTUS.
@OM – Great link. It is a convincingly argued profile of trump, with a somewhat educated guess at what trump might actually deliver, and “America First’s” historical analog.
“With his embrace of economic protectionism, foreign policy isolationism, cultural nativism, and authoritarianism, Trump has built his campaign around the animating themes of the 1930s.” – Dark Days article at War On The Rocks
@carl – and I am arguing that if we truly find trump as unacceptable (as we do clinton), there is a path that is attainable, and which is the next best alternative to the two we seem stuck on.
If we keep on signalling each other that it is trump out of the two, then that is what it will be.
It is in our hands to stop that chatter and say enough is enough.
Big Maq:
You’re talking about a preference cascade for a third choice.
Who is the candidate you have in mind?
Rhetorical questions follow
Really. Is “attainable” intended to mean something like “electorally possible”?
I wonder if the author of this comment has actually read the Libertarian Party platform or the “On the Issues” bullets specifically on immigration, defense, or for that matter numerous other points; or Gary Johnson’s own statement of views.
Well, the calculus of getting to a Libertarian victory aside, one might be advised to look at what they are advocating before jumping on their current bandwagon.
It seems to me that there not only two stupid and dangerous choices in this election but four.
From the post: “…many NeverTrumpers are propelled into that camp by their belief that Trump would not necessarily be better than Clinton…”
I could be considered informally a NeverTrumper–I do not do hashtags etc. but have certainly agreed with the sentiment. It’s beside the point now that the convention is over, but up until the point where Trump was nominated I was NeverTrump for a different reason: because I was convinced his nomination would guarantee a Hillary win. Still think that’s the most likely outcome.
Big Maq,
It ain’t going to happen, it is binary in that either hrc or djt will win 270 electoral votes. I have stated that Iowa will have to be extremely close come November before I will vote for djt. If it comes down to that, and a miracle happens and the orange man wins; I fully expect him to nominate liberals to SCOTUS, create foreign disasters, rack up trillion dollar annual deficits, and keep the southern border wide open,
The only upside should a miracle occur in November is that a final nail will seal the lid of the coffin of the Clinton Crime Family’s political ambitions.
Sam L.:
You write that you don’t know how bad Trump would or could be, but you know how bad Hillary would be.
I’ve heard that sort of thing many times, and I pretty much agree with it. Trouble is, it can cut both ways. In other words, Trump could be better than she or worse than she. In fact, he could be much worse. That’s what I meant by the “unknown unknowns.” We simply don’t know much about what he would be, but that does not necessarily argue in favor of voting for him.
Trump supporters like Yancey Ward can’t imagine that there are people in the US who aren’t as cynical and unprincipled as they are.
If these people won’t support Trump, it must be part of a conspiracy.
This is why I keep telling you that the alt-right is the rebirth of the John Birch Society, complete with paranoia.
Matt_SE:
I remember the John Birch Society.
I think the alt-right is worse. At least the JBS was (and is???) anti-Communist and for small government. The alt-right has no such qualms.
I couldn’t read Bay’s article. I only got to the third paragraph:
“Let’s stipulate that Trump is quite a character–a startling mix of flamboyance, authenticity and audacious savvy…”
Let’s stipulate that Austin Bay is a hagiographer, and is wishcasting onto Trump everything HE HOPES he is, without any actual proof.
What are the chances that Bay knows Trump personally? Knows him better than the “close friends” who are now shocked by Trump’s behavior toward the Khans?
I would bet, “not good.”
Bay’s article is more self-serving twaddle meant to make the faithful feel good about their crusade, and the Don Quixote leading it.
The John Birch society is more alt Libertarian. As a result of hitching their horses on the Libertarians, the Left’s stalking horse, their effect has not been all that great. Because they lack a national organization dedicated to their cause, other than their own limited funding and operations budget.
The Left has hundreds of organizations with better funding, Planned Profit and Soros included.
The Alt Right was originally not a political movement. Thus people have a hard time linking them to GamerGate and RabidPuppies. They don’t consider those two incidents “political”.
The Democrat vs Republican red vs blue team is a binary solution set. That is what the Two Party system designed politics as here, winner take all.
But the third solution set opens when one side wages war, not politics. The Left has been at war for some time now, their enemies think they are winning or losing elections however. Thus the non binary solution set would be “Trum throws the election, on purpose”. Trum dies before getting to DC, not on purpose. And various other things that could happen, like Hussein not stepping down.
@carl – not so much candidate, but party – Libertarian.
They have the infrastructure in every state. They have two former GOP Governors (two terms each) at the top of their ticket.
While I cannot agree with their positions 100%, then again neither can I for trump or clinton. So, for all the criticism we can have about their policy there are three things:
1) They are in the right direction – smaller government, individual rights
2) Their experience show them to govern largely as moderate conservatives vs ideologues
3) They carry none of the baggage of trump or clinton – they are far more trustworthy, levelheaded than either
Problem is they need 15% in the polls to get on the debate stage.
Folks say “it’ll never happen”. But, precisely because of such thinking (and especially “signalling” so), it becomes self fulfilling.
If JC took that attitude, he’d have never made his way to Golgotha – the Calvary Mount.
It is in our hands.
@carl – add to that down-ticket GOP, so we at least have GOP dominating one chamber of Congress.