Divided party, united party
The divided party is the GOP and the united party is the Democrats.
Oh, I know the Democrats aren’t really united. Not completely – just nearly completely. In recent decades and especially since Obama became president, they have purged their moderate wing and become almost wholly leftist. And the ones who aren’t leftists vote with the leftists anyway in an impressive demonstration of iron party discipline – except for, on very rare occasions, senators Manchin and Sinema.
It’s not only the huge number of leftists in the party that have allowed them to control their members so well. It’s the fact that once leftists reached critical mass they elected Congressional leaders who were determined to take the party further in that direction. And of course it helps to have the MSM, the press, and education and so many other cultural institutions on their side. There is also a Democrat voting public that accepted all of this – or was ignorant of how leftist some of their representatives were because they hid it in moderate rhetoric while voting leftist.
The GOP is very different. The party has been split for ages, and though there are more conservatives now than there were earlier, they are not a majority much less a powerful critical mass. That’s one of the reasons why someone like McConnell – not a conservative – keeps becoming Leader. No conservative challenger has a strong enough voting bloc to mount anything like enough votes against him.
Those who complain of a uniparty are not quite correct, in my opinion. The Democrats are a uniparty unto themselves. The Republicans have a GOPe wing that is large, however, that sometimes holds firm against the Democrats but too often is willing to betray the conservative GOP base and even the moderate GOP base and go along with Democrats. I’d call that wing a sometime uniparty. But there is a sizeable and stalwartly conservative wing that has not been “purged” and is not part of a uniparty. These two Republican wings have a lot of trouble working together.
Until the conservative wing of the GOP reaches its own critical mass it won’t be able to dethrone the McConnells of the political world. And if the conservative wing broke off to form a third-party at this point, it would have even less power than now because there’s just not enough of them or enough general support. That’s the dilemma.
Here’s the difference: the Democrats’ grass root, donor class, and leadership are all pulling in the same direction. There may be some minor quibbles over methods and how quickly to get there, but they’re more or less in sync.
OTOH, the GOP grass roots want one thing, the donors want something else, the best example this being the immigration issue. The GOP leadership sides mostly with the donors (!), and you can add to that a certain distaste that borders on contempt for the grassroots. In private conversations, it would not be in the least surprising if you were to hear a Mitch McConnell or Lindsay Graham disparaging their own voters in even harsher terms than a Hillary Clinton, for example.
Back to the immigration issue for a moment. Being Senate minority leader is not a powerless job. If McConnell truly object to what Biden is doing with regard to the border, McConnell has the power to use any number of parliamentary tricks at his disposal, as well as making Biden an offer he can’t refuse. For instance, he could tell Biden “I’ll give you all the money you want to build solar farms. But those panels have to be mounted on top of a fence that stretches from San Diego to Brownsville.”
A worrisome dilemma indeed! When one considers the recent Sinema/Tillis plan on “amnesty” and the push for a huge “omnibus” bill (apparently favored by “Cocaine Mitch”) in the “lame-duck session”, there is certainly much reason for concern over the unseemly machinations of GOPe, beholden not to the sensible wishes of ordinary conservative voters, but to the pecuniary interests of wealthy and far too influential donors. At least the monstrosity of JCPA (Klobuchar) seems to be DOA.
I still say instead of trashing McConnell why not put the blame where it overwhelmingly belongs – on Donald J. Trump whose judgement would have to improve in order to be labeled abysmal. As for Mitch McConnell, thanks to him we do not have Merrick Garland on the U.S. Supreme Court.
You may say that Mitch McConnell is “not a conservative”, but here is what the 100% neutral Wikipedia says:
McConnell was known as a pragmatist and a moderate Republican. Over time he shifted to the right and became more conservative. According to one of his biographers, McConnell transformed “from a moderate Republican who supported abortion rights and public employee unions to the embodiment of partisan obstructionism and conservative orthodoxy on Capitol Hill.”
They wouldn’t lie, would they?
As I see it, there is only one person who can change this: Ron DeSantis.
He is a rock-solid conservative who actually ACTS as well as talks. Most recent example is pulling Florida’s pension funds from “green” investors — something the GOPe probably hates.
Virginia Postrel has often written about the power of “glamour.” The D’s, regardless of reality or perception, usually have it and the R’s do not. Ron, along with his gorgeous wife and family certainly have it.
Ron could unite enough R’s and I’s to amass enough power to ditch Cocaine Mitch and the rest of the useless R’s. If he announces it will be incumbent on all of us to donate (directly to him, not the party) and actually get out and work for him.
Mike Smith:
I agree about DeSantis’ potential. However, there’s been a large and somewhat successful online campaign by bloggers such as sundance at Conservative Treehouse (and others) to discredit him. I’ve seen representatives in comments all over the place. Very destructive. Trump also has had a role in it.
Agree one can’t get much more glamorous than Joe Biden….
As for Sinema and Manchin—S&M(?)—where the %#$@*$^@% ARE THEY???
Also wonder where Tulsi is…. Can’t help but imagine that the bad guys are holding her and her family hostage in some tacky shack somewhere, maybe even down below Mauna Loa…(or worse, Portland).
@BrooklynBoy
I was prepared to give you the benefit of the doubt for several threads, but you have well and truly abused it. As such, it is time for some hard truths to be said.
Stop acting like an utter troll looking for its own bridge. Because at present you are acting like an utterly dishonest, utterly foolish one-note screed thrower. And how do I know you are being utterly dishonest?
Because no matter what, even in subjects that do not directly go back to him and which well pre-date him, you will blame Trump. In spite of the fact that unlike you, some of us were not born Yesterday and so witnessed the splits and divides in the GOP for years, especially with such people as John “Maverick” McCain, who I note had become well-established long before Trump’s political career truly took off.
I have had plenty of disagreements with other people who I find are too critical of Trump, such as Bauxite and even our own host, but I’ll be the first to say that their stances are not one-dimensional, and they have plenty to say both to support that and on other things (I might disagree to greater or lesser extents on much of what they have to say, but that isn’t important). You don’t seem to have ANYTHING to say beyond your one note screeds.. You don’t seem to be capable of acknowledging objective reality or history beyond 2016. You are BARELY capable of giving an obligatory criticism of Joe Biden, and even then never on any level exceeding that which you give Trump in spite of the clear and blindingly obvious differences in the damage they have done.
You are acting like the very model of a modern “Concerned Conservative’ Concern Troll, and I for one am sick of it and am no longer willing to hold my tongue or my typing fingers from pointing out your nonsense.
Now, Neo’s comments sections are open to almost all, no matter how nakedly stupid or dishonest they are – there’s a reason why Zachiel or whatever his username is periodically crawls out from the dark rock he is – and our host is quite fair and even-tempered, but there’s not much preventing the rest of us from giving you the treatment you ALMOST deserve, and I’m sure I am not the only one who is irritated at your puddle-deep, egotistical ramblings. So I’d suggest you either get on your way and stop wasting valuable time and resources, or you at least deign to up your concern trolling.
He’s also a reason why we have him as Attorney General. And you wonder why a sizable chunk of the political party you at least implicitly claim to identify with longs for Trump or at least someone else who will stand ground and be willing to fight it out?
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1171/vote_117_1_00114.htm
Zachriel, I think is the name.
No doubt named after the Angel of Sachertorte.
(Lies rather sweetly, come to think of it…)
Back around the time Obama was elected, I remember predicting that one of the political parties was due for a schism. At the time, my best guess was that it would be the Democrats, as I thought there were enough old-fashioned New Deal/labor Democrats who would be put off by the party core’s increasing radicalism.
I think I was partly right. Those old-fashioned New Deal/labor D’s simply left the party, and joined like-minded working-class Republicans to become the largest block on the right side of the aisle. Which has ended up blowing the Republican party wide open, between establishment RINOs, neo-cons, libertarians, social conservatives, and MAGA, none of whom really see eye-to-eye. Interesting times.
Barry, Tulsi is now on FOX as a contributor. She even sat in for Tucker once.
McConnell and his ilk are careerists and Chamber-of-Commerce shills. The Fredocon Donorist Party. There’s a crevasse between the base and the bulk of the congressional delegation, who hold their voters in contempt.
between establishment RINOs, neo-cons, libertarians, social conservatives, and MAGA, none of whom really see eye-to-eye. Interesting times.
“RINO” and ‘neo-con’ are nonsense terms. ‘Libertarians’ are limited to a scatter of think tank denizens and magazine journalists and have little influence. A number them also despise street-level Republicans (Scott Sumner is an example of this). Social conservatives and MAGA are content with each other but at odds with most of the congressional delegation (who take their donations and take their votes and then piss on them).
“However, there’s been a large and somewhat successful online campaign by bloggers such as sundance at Conservative Treehouse (and others) to discredit him (DeSantis). I’ve seen representatives in comments all over the place. Very destructive.” – Neo
I’ll quibble over a few of your points. I’m not sure how large or successful the campaign to discredit DeSantis has been. I would say the campaign to discredit Trump has been much larger. Hugely larger.
I wouldn’t equate comments and blog posts in persuasive power.
I don’t think DeSantis will run in 2024. Or should I say I hope he doesn’t run. Not because he may defeat Trump in a primary, but because he 1. needs more executive experience and 2. governors are going to play a larger role in the future of the country. It’s vital that Florida remain Republican.
The path to the white house for any Republican is getting harder. 2024 may be the trial election to see if the Republican party can match the left in ballot collection.
the uniparty allows garland mayorkas and austin to take power, giving their imprimatur, and that leads to the panopticon, the ministry of love and the humiliation of the bastion gate, it also allows the state to crush bible believing
churches and clergy men, the saving grace of this horrid act last night, is that we disabuse us of the notion that manchin and co, are not enemy of free people,
Well that’s a relief!
Thanks much for that piece of information…
– – – – – – – – – –
As far as the “united party” goes, well, it’s true: they DO look after one another…
(That is when they’re not too busy looking after the poor and the downtrodden…and all those needy types on the fringes of society…)
“Donor To Testify At Tuesday Hearing On FTX Implosion”—
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/sam-bankman-freed-maxine-waters-reportedly-will-not-subpoena-former-ceo-testify-tuesdays
…Though another way to look at it is that they’re carefully watching their own backs…because they know, and know well, that, as is the case in all criminal enterprises where UNITY is valued, if you stray, you pay….
Turtler, it’s possible you don’t agree with some of my recent comments about Republican politicians, but I think you were perhaps too kind to our latest troll.
The Treehouse guy has complained that DeSantis is meeting with deep pockets donors, and yet, we can all see that Democrats swamped Republicans in fundraising this election cycle. Can’t win without money.
Brian E:
I certainly wasn’t comparing the campaign to discredit Trump – by NeverTrumpers and the Democrats and the left – to the campaign to discredit DeSantis in terms of size or scope or length of time. However, the campaign to discredit DeSantis is quite successful so far nonetheless, considering how early it is in the game. I spend a lot of time looking at comments both here and at other blogs and media websites on the right, and it is amazing how quickly the anti-DeSantis message took off on the right side of the blogosphere. It utterly took over comments at Conservative Treehouse in almost no time at all – and that’s a blog with a huge following on the right, and there were well over a thousand comments on each of sundance’s posts about how awful DeSantis is. I saw a lot of it among Ace’s commenters as well – another huge conservative blog with a big following – as well as at Instapundit. It came to my blog almost instantaneously although certainly not as widespread, and many other blogs I looked at. Of course the left hates DeSantis, but what I’m talking about was and is all on the right and it followed Trump’s attack on DeSantis. I discussed some of the problem in this comment of mine. They were calling DeSantis “The New Jeb,” among other things.
It is still going on at a lot of popular blogs on the right. Just to take one small example, here’s a comment I saw at Instapundit just yesterday:
You have the same pov of the Whig Party in 1853.
The Democrats understand clearly, the distinction between the message and the method. The message serves the base ideology. The method serves the victory – hence their focus on ballots over votes, for example. In this regard, the Democrat party has always understood that winning is the primary goal, and that giving it primacy serves as a unifying function when it comes to the bum fight. That’s how their voting always stays aligned. The message, the ideology, is always argued, always factional – but the Democrats have the good sense to keep this mostly shuttered from the base, the process of sausage-making. One never sees how they arrive a crafted policies.
The Republicans forgo these strategies, by pretending to serve the base in order to get votes, while simultaneously doing the bidding of the corporate and C-O-C types that deliver the money, and the lobbyist instructions. And therefore, with this duplicity they cannot simplify their message to support win-at-all-costs methods. They’re just not going to win with this – 30 years of history is showing this as a losing strategy, up to and including this election cycle. They are the party that actually seems to disdain their base, and they seem to get really angry when confronted about it, as if it’s some kind of unnecessary nuisance.
No offense, neo and Sgt. Joe Friday, but you have it wrong. It is an example of the utter fecklessness of the GOP that the Democrats are not equally divided.
Democrats and their minions (Hollywood, MSM…) are brilliant at pounding a continual message that Republicans, Conservatives and religious Christians and Orthodox Jews are evil. It is that messaging that makes the multiple coalitions within the party vote in concert. They disagree on many, substantive issues, but they know the GOP is worse because the culture they define continually repeats that message.
Democrats are divided on major issues like abortion, especially up until birth, gun confiscation, immigration, overseas spending, funding wars, religious liberty, gay marriage … but the message is always the threat of the Republicans and what they would do if in control.
When literal Hitler is literally on the ballot people are less likely to bicker about the opposing candidate’s view on school choice or capacity of gun magazines.
they want to destroy this country, take a look at any of their policies, too many of the gop leadership, does a good impression of a basenghi, what they are concerned about lockdowns, george floyd and ukraine in that order, what do those supposedly disparate elements have in common, well it’s klaus schwabs priorities, lets not forget the gun grab that they shoved in our face, the slap against marriage they colluded with the democrats on, the unsubtle push toward amnesty,
Also, the Democrats often offer free stuff; Healthcare, Amnesty, College loan repayment, reparations, prison reform, taxing the rich and redistributing to the poor.
Some of those are smoke screens, but they are tempting smoke screens. If you care about one of those issues you may realize the Dems may not make it happen, but you KNOW the Republicans will NOT make it happen.
Rufus T. Firefly:
I don’t get your point at 7:42 PM. The on-message demonizing propaganda of the Democrats is not the fault of the GOP. The problem is that it’s much more difficult to “sell” the conservative message, which – as you yourself point out at 7:51 PM – is not as readily rewarding. Also, the Democrats have the MSM and the educational system, and that happened when very few of us were looking and is not the fault of the GOPe either.
But the divisions within the GOP are philosophical and basic.
Aggie:
You are describing the GOPe wing of the party. My point is that that is one wing of the Republican Party and there is another wing of the Republican Party, and those wings are quite opposed to each other.
“I Am Not a Member of Any Organized Party. I Am a Democrat.” — Will Rogers
Much has changed in the century since Will was around.
Is it really a question of conservatives and moderates/liberals? I see the problem more as Republicans’ failure to come together on a few key issues — trade, immigration, energy, inflation, election security, foreign policy. I would consider that a big tent that everyone ought to be able to agree on — in an ideal world where lobbyists and money didn’t call the shots. Then they can disagree on gay marriage, which isn’t going to go away anyway.
I thought Trump had more or less the right idea: get the big things right. Unfortunately half the country doesn’t agree. Trump couldn’t win without breaking away some of their votes, which he isn’t going to do next time. If it helps politicians not to call themselves conservatives, I wouldn’t mind, so long as they voted the right way on the key issues. But I suppose politicians aren’t free to pick and chose anymore. Even the Republican dissenters who don’t follow the party line walk in lockstep with each other.
neo,
My point at 8:21pm is that the Democrats are also very divided. For example, 44% of Catholics state they are Democrats as opposed to 37% who state they are Republican.
Do you think ALL of those 44% are onboard with puberty blockers for minors, abortion up until crowning or same sex marriage? No. What about Asians, or Latinos?
25% of Democrat households claim to own a gun. 30% of Lean Democrat households (accourding to Pew) claim to own a gun.
Folks who vote Democrat are no more in lockstep with their party’s positions than the GOP. Yet, as you point out, they tend to vote in lockstep. I think that is the fault of the GOP for not being as skilled as the Democrats at creating dissension within the opponent’s ranks.
As for Mitch McConnell, thanks to him we do not have Merrick Garland on the U.S. Supreme Court.
McConnell did something sensible. He declined to schedule a floor vote on Garland. That required no effort at all, and it’s something you’d expect of a floor leader.
Do you think ALL of those 44% are onboard with puberty blockers for minors, abortion up until crowning or same sex marriage?
No, not all of them. However, there’s no shortage of heritage Catholics who are hardly ever at Mass (‘no shortage’ means about 70% of them) and there’s no shortage of those at Mass whose actual viewpoint has only a vague relationship to the faith. About 20 years ago, there was a priest in Queens, one Fr. Joseph Wilson, who spent some time penning articles in various publications on the state of the Church. His description of a large swath of the clergy was thus: “Jungians, Unitarians, and goofies”. People outside the Church have no idea what a ruin it is in the occidental world.
Also, the Democrats often offer free stuff;
That’s a secondary problem. Our primary problem is cultural.
@Neo: Thank you, that is correct – I was describing the GOPe, which I see as the controlling faction of the Republican Party, and has been for at least 25 years, and quite willing to ostracize and oversee the withering and splintering of entire branches of the party network of support when they present a challenge to its agenda – rather than consolidating power and settling differences – as we have seen with its allocation of funding and support in the most recent election cycle, where populist-leaning candidates were starved out.
It is for this reason that I often hold that the GOPe would rather lose and preserve its nominal authority, than take the risk of winning. It is not possible to gain dominance in our two-party political system using this strategy. And yet, they persist, one can only conclude, because this is their preference.
There’s nothing wrong with the Republican Party that a big win in 2024 can’t fix (or at least paper over for a decade or so).
Rufus T. Firefly:
I think you are ignoring a bunch of differences between the type of people who generally vote for each party. Democrats tend to either be low information voters who will always vote for the Democrat because that’s what they, their family members, and friends have always done (conformists), or they are activists who take the long view and are not perfectionists and understand the extreme importance of unity behind anyone with a “D” beside their name, or they think Republicans are demons and must be stopped at all costs and so they always vote for the Democrat. Or some combination of the above. They yearn to dance in a ring, as Milan Kundera so aptly explained in this quote.
People on the right tend to be very different. They are more ornery and perfectionist about their candidates, taking offense at every error and every failure to do what is wanted. They are more independent and a lot of them like being outside the ring, even the ring of the right. They also – and this part surprised me when I started spending more time communicating with people on the right – are much less patient than Democrats about political work and getting results and in particular less patient than the patient leftists. It’s a different group that is much more difficult to unite.
The concerned conservative™ speaks, softly, “Lead us to another victory in 2024 McTurtle!”
I agree with neo about the size of the conservative Wing within the Republican Party. I also agree that a truly conservative third party would fail and be an exercise in frustration.
“The Republicans have a GOPe wing that is large, however, that sometimes holds firm against the Democrats but too often is willing to betray the conservative GOP base and even the moderate GOP base and go along with Democrats.”
Personal gain and retention of status are the determinate factors in when the GOPe wing is willing to betray not just the conservative GOP base and even the moderate GOP base but America itself.
Which makes them worse than the Democrats who now make no secret of their intent to either “fundamentally transform” America
or if unsuccessful, to settle for its destruction.
All I really really want is to keep the Bolsheviks out of power, but I’ll confess that I don’t know the best way to do that. My instinct is to maintain a big enough tent to keep the Bolsheviks out of power – that probably includes RINOs, neo-cons, and other undesirables. I’d give a kidney to have a senator that would vote to confirm Amy Coney Barrett as most RINOs did, but I can only yearn for such things because I live in Illinois. Please help me understand. my fellow conservatives, why I should wage war on the likes of Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, etc. I really am all ears.
Harmeet Dhillon was on Tucker tonight and was asked about her bid for the chair of the RNC. Specifically, she was asked if she was fearful because of that bid, as Lee Zeldin had expressed.
She said her effort was necessary (not exactly answering the question) because of the disfunction at the top of GOP. She itemized two points: 1) There is a political money machine that is the DC consultancy business that is broken. 2) The whole power structure/leadership is too transactional.
There is a variety of meanings one could assign to “transactional,” the most simple being pay-to-play. Not clear.
#1, the consultancy biz is interesting because it is possibly a non-obvious (semi-obvious?) mechanism that could be utilized to subvert political campaigns. I’ve said that the GOP, as an effective political force, has been hacked. The consultancy corp. is one way to pull that off.
@Kate
Indeed? I haven’t seen them. But do tell. Why so?
Indeed? Perhaps. What would you recommend?
Agreed there.
neo – It wouldn’t surprise me of some of that FTX dark money was funding Conservative Treehouse and some of the other groups going after DeSantis. It sure seems that they are doing Democrats’ bidding.
Well, we DO know that the Democrats, in the GOP primaries, were helping out those Republican candidates they thought were unelectable, e.g., Kari Lake and others.
And Kari Lake SURE PROVED TO BE unelectable!!!!
(Didn’t she!!?)
(Besides, they have SO MUCH MONEY to spread around—Soros, SBF, Zuck, and the whole contemptible canon—that, hey, what’s a few bucks here, a few bucks there…”)
Despite what they say, I think DeSantis shows promise. For example, he’s looking into ways to hold Covid vax makers accountable for vax side effects, and is outspokenly supportive of Florida’s Surgeon General in this regard. That shows true leadership.
Both Trump and DeSantis are more than capable of legitimately winning a presidential election – only to have their votes flipped and overwhelmed by the same unaddressed and uncorrected ballot shenanigans witnessed in 2020 and 2022.
Speaking of DeSantis, his position in the on-deck circle is significant as another DC tumor gradually metastasizes.
…Donald Trump is going to be indicted, and there is no chance a DC jury doesn’t convict him of whatever the DOJ puts in front of them.
I’ve said it a few times, but it bears repeating: The DC jury pool is the most malignantly vile force in the universe.
neo – It wouldn’t surprise me of some of that FTX dark money was funding Conservative Treehouse
You don’t need billionaire funding to run a bloody website. Sundance has always been a mixed bit of business.
Just ran across the quote attributed to Aristotle which seems quite appropriate these days–
“Masculine republics give way to feminine democracies, and feminine democracies give way to tyranny.”
And what, pray tell, did Aristotle say about trans democracies…?
– – – – – – – – – –
…While we’re looking that one up, here’s an “interesting” article—i.e., warning—from William Jacobson…
(Hint: Those mischievous Democrats are at it again….)
‘ The Freakout Over The Elections Clause Continues After SCOTUS Oral Argument;
‘What don’t you understand about “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof…”? ‘—
https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/12/the-freakout-over-the-elections-clause-continues-after-scotus-oral-argument/
Key words:
“…BY THE LEGISLATURE…”
But the Democrats won’t let THAT stop THEM, nosssirr!
Concluding grafs:
“…So what’s this all about?
“Democrats’ ability to have state Supreme Courts take power away from state legislatures as to the rules governing federal elections. We saw that in multiple states in 2020, particularly in Pennsylvania. So this is about power, not principle. [Emphasis mine; Barry M.]
+ Seriously fascinating Bonus:
‘ “Our Democracy,” Not Our Constitution;
‘Packing the Supreme Court and the Senate.’—
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/our-democracy-not-our-constitution/
H/T Powerline blog.
Opening sentence:
‘ Members of the Democratic Party love “our democracy”—or at least they love that phrase. …’
File under: “Ichneumon Ethics”
Democrats are united because they love government, and all factions desperately crave power and understand that a united front on all material issues maintains that power.
Conservatives don’t like government, don’t value government, and don’t lust for power. More importantly, they haven’t fully realized that they need to have the power in order to keep government at bay.
GOPe types actually like government. In many cases, they are only Republicans because they live in areas that are red. They have to pretend to believe certain principles to get elected.
Republicans also suffer from a strong desire to want to believe in civic virtues and the fairy tale they were taught about government in school. Democrats KNOW how corrupt and dishonest the fraudulent structure is. That’s why they are involved.
Well, Turtler, I am one of several who are expressing doubt about Trump’s ability to lead us to victory in 2024. You may disagree with that (I don’t know if you do), but that commenter you skewered isn’t sincere at all, in my opinion.
Banned Lizard: “I’ve said it a few times, but it bears repeating: The DC jury pool is the most malignantly vile force in the universe.” The DC jury pool is bad. The teachers’ unions are worse.
@Kate
Understandable. I’m more Trump Agnostic now, perhaps cautiously optimistic though I agree his brand is rather tainted and the Left has demonized him to hell and back and has been for years. Though I do object to those who blame him for what I believe is too much.
But civilized and reasonable people can disagree on that.
Agreed. The human brain is a pattern recognition device, and when someone obsesses with Trump to the exclusion of essentially everything else – including the actual Leftist radicals – while trying to lionize McConnel far beyond what I think can be justified, my patience and hard-wired willingness to play Devil’s Advocate breaks.
neo @ 10:17pm,
I’m not sure we disagree. I don’t disagree with what you added with that comment there.
My initial comment was regarding one of your points, that Democrats are more united than Republicans. I actually think Republicans are more united, overall. The Democrat has cobbled a lot of fringe and very fringe groups into their tent.
Is a Union member working in an auto factory in Michigan aligned in any way with an Antifa activist in Portland? How hard would it be to get those two groups politically fighting one another?
The GOP never does that. Recently it seems they have stepped up their fear mongering. The Democrats certainly do a lot of that also and it appears to me the GOP has adopted that approach also. But look how often and how well the Dems get the GOP to fight against the GOP. Forcing people to “denounce” the actions of others and distance themselves from them. The GOP is awful at that.
We saw a great, real life example with Youngkin in Virginia. How hard was it to get parents involved when they were shown what was going on in public schools? It didn’t matter what a Virginia parents’ political affiliation or leanings were, when shown the lunacy they came out and voted to clean house. McAuliffe looked like a full when forced to address the issues.
Democrats do that stuff all the time and it is very effective.
So, my point is that regarding division, the GOP is actually more in lockstep and less divided on party platform but the Democrats are much better than the Republicans at exploiting rifts and creating dissension on the other side.
Regarding the larger theme that has arisen on this post;
It’s foolish to expect any politician, Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, Whig… to vote to eliminate or diminish the system they are campaigning to join. Are there occassionally a few. Perhaps. Rand Paul? Justin Amash? Maybe Tom Cotton and/or Josh Hawley? For all his talk of draining the swamp Trump issued Executive Orders and spent like a drunken sailor.
If we want to shrink the size, scope and cost of the Federal government (and I certainly do) it requires forceful powers outside of the Federal government. States Attorney Generals and Governors. Private corporations. Lawfare. Individual citizens.
Of course the GOP is awful. They are one of two and only two major political parties in the United States that has been active for over 100 years. They were a part of all this expansion and devolution of rights.
Rufus T. Firefly:
I guess our main point of disagreement is that I don’t think the Democrats create rifts in the GOP, they merely exploit huge ones that already exist, in particular between the 2 political wings of the GOP. Another factor is that sometime – actually, quite often – members of the GOP do or say things that don’t get reported by the press because amplifying them would help unite the GOP. The press knows what divides the GOP and magnifies every statement that would tend to increase that divide and minimizes (that is, ignores) those that would unite it.
I’ve noticed this time and again – people on the right saying that GOP members of Congress haven’t done or said a certain thing when many in fact have. It’s just hard for them to get traction with it. Whereas the press does everything to help the Democrats.
And then there are those on the right who, for whatever reason (like sundance, as I explained earlier) seem intent on dividing the right.
And then there are those on the right who, for whatever reason (like sundance, as I explained earlier) seem intent on dividing the right.
I’d like to address this one.
If you believe that the GOP in it’s current carnation has no intention of being a party that will push for conservative changes, and is only in Washington for it’s own personal interests, then you can be forgiven to think like those at Sundance. Because what do they have to lose?
Maybe a third party (or the destruction of the second) may focus politicians’ attention on the actual problems, as opposed to paying them lip service, as almost all GOP politicians currently do.
Each time they had the majority, particularly during the Trump years, there was always at least 1 or 2 GOP members who were willing to break ranks and vote with the Dems to stop or block Trump. The USSC made up law out of whole cloth. Here are just a few examples:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-term-analysis/u-s-supreme-court-defied-trump-at-key-moments-in-blockbuster-term-idUSKBN24B17I
I’m not sure Sundance is trying to “divide the right” as much as divide the GOP. And in my opinion, it’s a valid endeavor.
I Callahan:
I’ve read the sort of argument you’re giving here for years, coming from others, and I think it’s destructive wishful-thinking. The real goal should be to elect enough conservatives, period. And it has to be done fairly quickly. Your plan will not accomplish that goal at all, in my opinion.
But I’m referring in particular to a message sundance has been giving out about DeSantis, who is in my opinion clearly on the conservative side. Sundance has labeled him as a RINO in disguise. I think that’s garbage and divisive. Whether sundance is doing it because he is carrying Trump’s water or whether it’s just for clicks, that’s what’s going on.
Kate: “The DC jury pool is bad. The teachers’ unions are worse.” You may have noticed an item over in the trending column at RedState:
Watch: Teacher Who Gave Sex Toys to Children Runs from Project Veritas
That makes your point quite well. There’s an abundance of villainy these days.
The teachers’ unions were directly and deliberately responsible for keeping in-person schools closed much, much longer than they reasonably should have been, for requiring children to be masked, and for requiring children to get the COVID shots. All of these actions were scaredy-cat teacher oriented, not in the best interests of the children, and there is substantial and perhaps permanent developmental damage in a whole generation of young people. That’s a lot of villainy.
I think Sundance is mostly an ardent supporter of President Trump. If it were Pence rather than DeSantis that likely be the strongest threat to Trump’s 2024 primary bid Sundance would be focusing on Pence.
He likes DeSantis— as governor of Florida (where Sundance lives) and wants to keep him there.
CTH is focused only on politics, where Neo is interested in a variety of topics, including BeeGee and ballet– how eclectic is that?
What makes Sundance an interesting read is how he sees potential traps to the conservative philosophy in what others see as unrelated politics. That does mean sometimes he’s right and sometimes not.
Politico’s recent article about Ken Griffin, CEO of investment firm Citadel had this
While he’s supporting one of this cycle’s biggest culture warriors in DeSantis, Griffin said most hot-button issues — abortion rights, battles over sex education and LGBTQ rights — don’t define his interests. He wants to improve the diversity of the GOP and blunt the vein of populism that has complicated the party’s relationship with the corporate world — two things he’s consulted with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy about.”
He’s donated $5 million to Governor DeSantis so far. I don’t think it’s conspiratorial to be concerned about whether this will affect DeSantis’s relationship with the corporate world.
Now you can dismiss this as troubling, but until DeSantis announces his candidacy and provides a platform detailing his foreign policy positions, especially trade and foreign military entanglements, we have nothing to go on but speculation.
When and if DeSantis does announce a run there will be plenty of time for the governor to assuage MAGA concerns about these issues.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/06/gop-megadonor-desantis-24-ken-griffin-00065274
Barry Meislin,
More about the “discounted” Independent legislature “theory”
Interesting that a clear reading of the text is only a “theory” and has been “discounted” and “is really radical” because it would upend the left’s lawfare to circumvent the legislature.
“This theory is really radical, and, in past years, it would have been laughed out of the courts,” said Theresa Lee, an instructor at Harvard’s Election Law Clinic and a former senior staff attorney at the ACLU’s Voting Rights Project. “As true as that is, it doesn’t change the fact that it is a question in front of the courts and there is no guarantee the Supreme Court will laugh it out of the court.”
The latest front in that war began in 2021, when the Republican-controlled legislature approved district map lines that would have overwhelmingly favored Republicans. In February 2022, the North Carolina Supreme Court — at the time controlled by Democrats — struck down those maps, which they called an “egregious and intentional partisan gerrymander.”
A new map approved by the legislature was also rejected. The state Supreme Court appointed a special master to draw congressional district lines. In the 2022 midterm elections, North Carolina voters elected seven Republicans and seven Democrats to represent the state in Washington.
At the heart of Moore’s case now before the U.S. Supreme Court is whether state justices had the authority to issue their ruling in the first place.
https://pluribusnews.com/news-and-events/high-stakes-as-scotus-weighs-independent-legislature-theory/
Here’s an article by a supporter of the case:
“Snead: This potentially affects a waterfront of election issues. One of the things that we’ve seen over the last decade is that groups on the left in particular, have developed a truly staggering operation that is devoted to using courts to change election laws, and they become more aggressive as time went on and 2020 was sort of a high watermark for that effort. before election day, we saw more than 200 cases filed by progressive groups or the Democratic Party itself, all seeking to use COVID in some way, shape or form as a justification for courts to change voting procedures in the middle of elections.
Fundamentally, they have a theory that state courts should be able to use ambiguous clauses of state constitutions to rewrite election laws. And that was what happened in North Carolina. That was what happened in Pennsylvania in 2020. When we’re talking about allowing late ballots on dated ballots to be counted.
If you get a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court that says the Elections Clause plainly says legislatures write election laws, there’s more than a century of case law that demonstrates that legislatures are in the driver’s seat and state courts cannot rewrite or invalidate election laws on a whim, then potentially that substantially reduces the amount of litigation that the left can bring.”
https://pluribusnews.com/news-and-events/qa-a-supporter-of-independent-legislature-theory-makes-his-case/
It could entirely upset the balance of election (now heavily favoring the leftist view of elections that put ease of voting/chicanery or election integrity/security)
But any ruling reining in leftist state judges would be a win.
On the NC independent legislature case: Observers at the conservative John Locke Foundation, in Raleigh, think the most likely outcome will be a compromise ruling rather than a broad one. This means the Court could disallow the egregious court-created districts without a blanket statement that the legislature always wins despite other state constitutional requirements. In this case, the courts used a vague “free and fair elections” clause to outlaw what they claimed was partisan gerrymandering. This was an extreme stretch.
Of course it’s always iffy to “read the Court” in these Supreme Court arguments.
In any case, the offending court-drawn districts were for this election only. The legislature will re-draw districts. Republicans control both houses, and the governor has no veto on this; and we won all open seats on the state Supreme Court and Appeals Courts in this election, so we won’t see these districts overturned next time.
Most stories include the justification for the court intervening was the outcome of the courts redistricting plan that resulted in an even split of 7 democrats and 7 republicans in the NC delegation, as opposed to possibly 9 republicans winning with the legislature plan. Implicit is “see how even handed we are?”
The problem with that argument is the state isn’t evenly divided. As Kate says, Republicans control the state government. That should be reflected in the congressional makeup.
I agree the SC will likely narrowly target their decision (if they vote with NC), so it leaves all the left’s misuse of the “free and fair” text to control the election process. The SC would do Americans a favor if it defined what that means.
Fair means:
Process must be neutral
Process must not be ambiguous
Process must not be dependent on blind trust of those working in the election
Process must be secure
Process must be designed to not allow any dilution of votes by eligible voters
It is not enough to win elections. One must do more than be a placeholder between them, if our rights are to be secured.
Trump was more than a placeholder, even when he had to trend Ashchol to extend respect for our rights. The Nice People™ of the GOP apparently do not see the value in that.
Who can be trusted these days to be as effective at respecting, and securing, our rights as Trump has been? DeSantis is earning our trust, but he could still go the way of Scott Walker (R – Throne of Skulls) if he starts listening to conslutants who are only focused on “winning” and not performance between elections.
Here is the risk in the knee-jerk criticisms of Trump: let Trump be trashed, and the conslutants will have the ears of DeSantis and other career politicians again – and our rights will be an afterthought to them as they chase “winning” by being Nice People™. It is the confrontational precedents Trump set, that gives a new generation of conservatives the confidence to ignore the conslutants and act to secure our rights,
Until we have a reliable and effective replacement who will ignore the conslutants – even if it means Mean Tweets – that is the risk we take by trashing Trump.
Jester Naybor:
Criticism of Trump is not “trashing” him. One of my main criticisms of him is that he can no longer appeal even to a lot of his old supporters, and he’s not gaining any new ones. I believe he would be heartily defeated if he ran again.
Meanwhile, DeSantis has given zero indication of going the way you suggest he might. So far he has earned my trust with his courage and his consistency. Trust is conditional for a politician, of course, and it can always be broken. But I see no reason to distrust him at this point. And I see his appeal as potentially broad.
Turtler
What a long winded screed you wrote! I will never forgive Donald J. Trump for injecting himself into winnable elections that the Republican Party should have won. Considering how awful the country has been in under Joe Biden we should have had a Red Wave but it turned into a de facto Democratic victory. I do not have a man crush on Trump and just about any thinking person knows that he is an anvil around the neck of the G.O.P. Nice try with the cancel culture but it will not work. I would be just as happy to ignore you as you should be in ignoring me.
Jester: “conslutants”. That’s an inspired typo. I’m using it.
I preferred bernard but it didnt matter because they stuffed the ballots for an incoherent homunculus you wanted murkowski who has sunk us
Neo, I didn’t see any reason to distrust Scott Walker, who was my first choice for President in 2016 … until he took himself out of the race by equivocating on immigration policy, likely on the advice of his conslutants.
I hope you are right about DeSantis.
Knee-jerk criticism of Trump … without the context of what he did in terms of policy as President vs. what the GOP careerists did NOT do since 1989 … is setting the stage for the careerists to return to their impotent status quo … they will point at the criticism of Trump and with a grand “harumph” will say “we told you to listen to us”.
And the Progressives will get to continue ratcheting this society Leftward, because we are unwilling to value our rights, more than “nice”.
Hubert – it’s not a typo when you intend the spelling.
Conslutants get paid by winning – not by the quality of governance between elections. And the careerists are too often willing to listen to them and settle for the placeholder of “not a Democrat”.
——–
BrooklynBoy: until the careerists answer for three decades of placeholding, your criticism of Trump will always ring hollow. Had they been doing their jobs – even it meant being Not Nice to their opponents when our rights were on the line – Trump would likely have never entered politics, much less been elected.
Jester Naybor:
Walker and DeSantis seem very different to me. Very. Walker stood firm on a couple of issues in Wisconsin, but DeSantis is far more bold and far more smart.
As I said, trust can always be betrayed. But so far DeSantis has been more impressive.
I also don’t see Trump’s critics finding fault with his policies, except for the NeverTrumpers.
neo, DeSantis also has the precedents set by Trump of ignoring the careerist status quo and the policy improvements that resulted from that, to look to and push back when the conslutants start pressuring him to Be Nice. Walker didn’t have those precedents in 2016 to look to.
If he is the nominee, DeSantis has my vote … so far.
I see too many critics treating Trump’s policy advancements as insignificant … and giving the GOP careerists a pass on their lack of performance in this regard … as they seek to distance themselves from Trump. They are throwing out the baby of liberty with the bathwater of mean Tweets, IMO … and potentially undermining the resolve of good candidates like DeSantis to prioritize our rights over “nice”.
They are focused upon winning the electoral battle, but they are losing the war for our rights … as though our institutions will still secure our rights when they are focused on every “common good” but those rights,
Jester Naybor:
I don’t see DeSantis trying to be “nice.” I see him trying – and succeeding – in being very smart about what he does and says. He manages to be hardhitting, conservative, clear, and fearless, as well as very careful not to put his foot in it. He’s also organized and politically savvy, and was very good at helping other conservative politicians in Florida.
Also young.
@BrooklynBoy
They’re something of a specialty or mine, so get used to them if you intend to hang around.
Because hang around I will, and one reason my words have weight – including with our host – is because they are rarely said in a knee jerk fashion or without consideration and research.
Except as others have correctly noted while you were spewing your screeds, Trump helped pull many candidates across the finish line. Moreover, the Red Waves have underperformed on a massive level across the spectrum, even when candidates who were not dedicated Trumpists or even anti-Trumpists ran.
But blathering about how people like Herschel Walker and Mehmet Oz were weak candidates (and I agree the latter is) is a nice, lazy, dishonest shortcut to avoid looking at things like endemic corruption in Philadelphia and Atlantic as well as how anti-Trumpists have routinely put their own petty grudges above the health of the party or America SS a whole, as shown by the last several Alaskan Goat Rodeos.
You also don’t seem to understand that Trump was a reaction to that habitual shoving in the back by some of the more radical members of the “GOPE” like McCain.
If you cannot honestly evaluate Trump’s boons – and I know you haven’t because you get a hell of a lot objectively wrong – then you cannot honestly evaluate his flaws or mistakes, or which I will happily admit there are Many.
And considering how awful Biden was back in 2016 and how ineffectual the Democrats were, we should have had a red wave. Even with Trump.
And the kicker is, the statistical evidence says we did and would have without blatantly unethical and dishonest behavior by strong Democrat political machines in bellwether urban areas.
And this is before we get into the proven corruption, malfeasance, and misconduct of the Leftists in the deep state and many high power media outlets. Which I KNOW you are aware of given the comment you made on the Twitter Files thread. Nor was this anything new.
Bill Whittle pointed out about a decade ago that some of the left wing talking heads had talked about how John Kerry benefitted from a 20-30 percent headwind from biased media coverage:
Blaming Trump of all people as being THE main factor for this is aggressively dishonest and ignorant.
So what kind of major malfunction or cognitive dissonance allows you to read and absorb the Twitter Files in one ear and have them pour out the other in favor of Blaming Trump?
The idea that we would have a glorious GOP era if only for Trump isn’t analysis. It is superstition. And it actively ignores how even Establishment GOO and Nevertrump Republicans lost out in 2020 and 2022.
Nice strawman. Unfortunately most of us defending Trump do not have a “man crush” on him.
We’re just not stupid and ignorant enough to
Blame him for the likes of Maricopa and Atlanta to the exclusion of almost everything else.
And how would you know what “any thinking person knows” when your actions and fallacies underline that you do not qualify as such?
Trump had many problems, and his brand has only gotten more toxic and polarizing after the 2022 elections, but it neither was always that, nor was it particularly the cause.
Look back at the Hunter Biden “Russian Disinformation” and get back to me.
I’m not sure what I’m more irritated about.
The fact that you conflate calling out your ignorant, dishonest bullshit and telling you to either man up or get out is “Cancel Culture”…
Or you think this is the result of me “attempting.”
There’s a reason many of my comments run into multi parts, precisely because I value precision and in depth fisking.
Firstly: you haven’t shown the slightest indication you have been happy about anything since you have come on this blog and stunk up the place. So this is unconvincing.
And secondly: dishonesty and smears irritate me.
They irritate me even when they targeted Literal Hitler (hence why I spend ages smacking people around for accusing him of the Katyn Massacre), and that doesn’t apply less to Cheeto Hitler. So “ignoring” it gives me no happiness.
You have shown yourself to be aggressively dishonest and quite inept. And as long as you continue acting such, I will call you out for it.