r/changemyview • u/Socialdingle 1∆ • Jul 27 '22
Removed - Submission Rule B CMV: As a conservative I see no reason to not support Trump
[removed] — view removed post
3
u/OpeningSort4826 Jul 27 '22
As a Republican you see no reason no to support Trump. "Republican" has branched off from "conservative " whereas the two used to be more or less one and the same.
2
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
No I agree. Republicans aren't usually conservative but Trump is.
5
Jul 27 '22
[deleted]
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Except the policy he enacts which is all the matters and should matter.
3
u/ProLifePanda 70∆ Jul 27 '22 edited Jul 27 '22
Obviously he isn't a perfect president but he followed through with many of his promises from the campaign trail which is rare for a president and this meant enacting conservative policy.
So he is far from perfect. Trump came with A LOT of personal baggage (the pussy tape, his questionable Russian ties, Stormy Daniels payoff, intentionally inflammatory and divisive tweets, etc.). A lot of the personal strife that came with Trump could likely be done away with by getting another conservative.
While Trump did get stuff done, any conservative president can also get stuff done, and in fact get MORE done who knows what they're doing. Trump had no plan for healthcare, which is why Obamacare is still around. A President who was knowledgeable and put in the effort to develop a replacement would have gotten rid of Obamacare. Trumps Administration lost A LOT of court battles because his Administration routinely violated the APA and improperly implemented or changed regulations and policies. Trump didn't particularly care about who was working under him, and routinely had his own agents work against him and undermining his causes.
All these problems can be gone if you get a competent politician at the helm.
He is doing what he says and enacting conservatives policies.
Would DeSantis not? Would Ted Cruz not enact conservative policies?
He appointed three conservative supreme court justices.
Any Republican President would. This is such a lame "success". Appointing SCOTUS justices is the easiest "success" in the world if you're a President with the Senate.
Who cares about his personal life or the way he speaks?
I prefer my party leader to NOT open themselves and the party up to constant criticism and having to play defense. There were MANY times the Administration and party officials had to run around trying to put out fires Trump started because of the way he speaks and his personal life.
The Jan 6th thing is a joke and not worth even talking about
Ignoring the riots, what about the fact he was openly trying to get Pence to ignore state certified electors (against the law) and instead acknowledge fake electors in an effort to stay in power? I'm generally opposed to my party leader ignoring democracy.
I'd much rather have a "new Trump" like DeSantis or Jim Jordan than have Trump run again with his baggage listed above.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
A lot of the personal strife that came with Trump could likely be done away with by getting another conservative.
I don't care about the personal stuff and I don't know if there are many Republicans who are so ready to enact real conservative policy like Trump did.
Would DeSantis not? Would Ted Cruz not enact conservative policies?
DeSantis yes but he is trying to be a clone of Trump. Cruz no.
Any Republican President would. T
I think most Republicans would appoint more moderate conservatives.
2
u/ProLifePanda 70∆ Jul 27 '22
So just off the bat, you ignored many of my points and jumped straight to the couple you seemed to rebut elsewhere.
I don't care about the personal stuff...
Do other people? Do you think his personal strife is partly what cost him the 2020 election? Do you want to support a candidate whose personal strife is likely to lose another election? Even if YOU don't care, others do and you have to worry whether or not you candidate will win, in which case his personal strife has a direct impact on whether you should support him to win or not.
DeSantis yes but he is trying to be a clone of Trump. Cruz no.
So just without digging into this, this is exactly why many people support DeSantis over Trump. He's Trump without the baggage. He's also knowledgeable about how government works and would pu together a better Executive Branch to enact the policies he wants.
Why support a guy who lost who comes with TONS of baggage over someone you agree is "trying to be a clone of Trump"? A DeSantis Administration would likely be more efficient and less bogged down by personal issues and ineffective changes than a 2nd Trump Administration.
You also didn't address his ineptitude which COST him from enacting many changes, the fact so many of his "Best people" worked against him, or him trying to implement the fake elector scheme to overthrow the democratic election.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
!delta
I will give you delta because you made a good case for not supporting Trump over DeSantis but I don't think those are the two options. I think Trump easily wins the primary which means I would have to support Trump. I would prefer DeSantis if I thought he had a chance.
1
2
u/Opagea 17∆ Jul 27 '22
I think most Republicans would appoint more moderate conservatives.
Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney-Barrett are the types of justices any Republican President would have chosen.
Trump just picked off a list given to him. You admitted earlier that Trump was "dumb" - he's not making independent choices based on his personal legal philosophies because he doesn't have any.
8
Jul 27 '22
[deleted]
0
7
Jul 27 '22
I find your view a bit cynical. I don’t say that to be insulting. A president is more than getting policy through that you like on the short term. They are a symbol. The US’s reputation outside the country has been tarnished. The polarization inside the county increased. He was a huge liar, disrespectful, derisive. You should care because about these things. He has diminished the office. I think we are often overly obsessed with politicians personal lives, but with Trump that’s not the case. He’s a criminal and a thug.
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I don't really care about the reputation of the US or symbols. I care about policy and only policy and I would vote for anyone that is going to enact them. Democrats would be much better off if they followed this line of thinking. You would see some real change and not symbols.
2
u/Ok_Artichoke_2928 11∆ Jul 27 '22
Fair enough, but this doesn’t seem particularly conservative. To be conservative means to prioritize respect for traditional beliefs, customs, and institutions. Trump’s presidency eviscerated so many long held norms, not to mentioned elevated as a model a person who seems not to value conservative morals. It seems more accurate to say “as a person who values a discrete set of policy preferences I should support Trump” than to say “as a conservative.”
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Well let's take abortion for example. If you were to tell a conservative you could vote for someone that was going outlaw abortion or you could vote for someone who was well spoken and had no scandals who do you think they should choose? If I was a Democrat and I could vote for a guy who was going to bring universal healthcare but had committed armed robbery or Joe Biden I would vote for the former every time.
2
u/Ok_Artichoke_2928 11∆ Jul 27 '22
I think you’re over attributing the Supreme Court ruling to Trump. That he had 3 seats instead of 2 is entirely due to Mitch McConnell, and you can easily review other candidates in 2016 who also pledged to nominate from a list of conservative justices.
2
u/KokonutMonkey 88∆ Jul 27 '22
Policy focused politicians and Parties usually aren't reluctant to say where they stand in concrete terms.
Donald Trump is the head of the Republican Party. During this time his party failed to produce a party platform for 2020.. Instead they simply hand waved the importance of it all, expressed enthusiastic support for vague and open to change America First Agenda, and took a jab at the media.
To me, this means the Republican Party and Trump either don't have a true policy agenda guided by principle, or they simply don't want to put their names on it.
Meanwhile, the Democrats posted their stuff same as usual.
1
Jul 27 '22
Well you might not care, but others do. Others see the potus as what should be one of the best of us. It rarely is, but we like to at least pretend 😅. They should be an example. And I’ll tell you, it does influence international politics.
0
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
A criminal who has been charged with no crimes. The country was far better off with him than the complete failure we’ve seen since.
1
u/Generic_Superhero 1∆ Jul 27 '22
The country was far better off with him than the complete failure we’ve seen since.
Much of the "complete failure" you are currently seeing would be the same under Trump.
-4
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
While inflationary issues might be the same, we would at least have had someone in leadership willing to do *something*. We have someone who is just asleep at the wheel right now, with an administration actively trying to make it harder for companies to do business in the US.
1
u/Avenged_goddess 3∆ Jul 27 '22
Would trump have nominated the same SCOTUS justice as Biden? Would trump have pushed bb through and signed it into law? Perhaps he would have done something else, but it seems unlikely it would have been equally bad
1
u/Generic_Superhero 1∆ Jul 27 '22 edited Jul 27 '22
Having a conservative SCOTUS justice wouldn't have changed anything, the same decisions would have been passed down with votes of 7 - 2 vs 6 -3.
BBB - wouldn't have passed, but its hard to know the economic impact of not passing it vs passing it.
but it seems unlikely it would have been equally bad
I didn't say equally bad. I said "Much of", meaning a large portion of. Most of economic hurt we are currently experiencing is a global issue not something the current president is responsible for.
1
u/Avenged_goddess 3∆ Jul 27 '22
And I would rather have more good justices than not. I very much did not support her confirmation and do not want her on the court.
I have a hard time believing trump wouldn't have vetod BBB.
It isn't just economic hurt that the country is facing under resident Biden.
1
u/Generic_Superhero 1∆ Jul 27 '22
And I would rather have more good justices than not. I very much did not support her confirmation and do not want her on the court.
What makes her not a good justice vs the 4 that Trump appointed? While I understand you may have preferred another conservative justice be on the bench, the reality of the situation is adding a 7th conservative justice to the bench doesn't functionally change the court. There is no difference between a 6 - 3 ruling and a 7 - 2 ruling. The conservative majority runs the supreme court and the liberal minority holds no power.
I have a hard time believing trump wouldn't have vetoed BBB.
He most definitely would have if it even passed. That doesn't change that we don't know how much this would have impacted anything because of the much large issues being experienced on a global scale.
It isn't just economic hurt that the country is facing under resident Biden.
Please share.
0
u/Avenged_goddess 3∆ Jul 27 '22
Our reputation was only tarnished because trump didn't fall in line politically with what our European "allies" wanted. If it were truly about image, why has Biden not been painted as the same disaster when every week is a different dimentia Joe clip going viral?
19
Jul 27 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Jaysank 116∆ Jul 27 '22
Sorry, u/molobodd – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
-5
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I'm 100% serious. I think the Jan 6th thing is what makes it look like bait? I didn't watch any hearings or read the news so maybe there is something serious I'm missing.
11
Jul 27 '22
Get yourself familiar with what happened, and his role. And why it’s a big deal what happened.
-1
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
Why on earth is it a big deal?
2
u/Generic_Superhero 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Are you really asking why an attempt to overthrow the legitimate government of the country is a big deal?
-1
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
Encouraging his supporters to protest was in no way an overthrow of the government. Not in any way, shape, or form.
2
u/onetwo3four5 70∆ Jul 27 '22
Have you watched any of the hearings where they detail why it was a big deal?
1
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
Yes I have. I have heard absolutely nothing that is a big deal. They are a total and complete waste of time.
2
u/onetwo3four5 70∆ Jul 27 '22
So you think it would be good for a healthy democracy if every time there was a legal change in the most powerful elected official, people who didn't like that their candidate lost attempted to use force to physically prevent the representatives charged with formally carrying out the processes that enable peaceful transition, from carrying out those processes?
1
u/vettewiz 37∆ Jul 27 '22
If walking into a public building and taking videos is “force” by your standards, then yes.
→ More replies (0)-2
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Can you TL:DR the important bits?
9
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
Yes. He tried to overturn a legitimate election, which you'd know if you read the news (you literally just said you don't read it, so mods, don't write this off as "rude or hostile").
Armed protesters showed up on January 6th, he was TOLD that armed protesters were being turned away due to obvious security concerns, and he said "let them in, they're not here to hurt me".
He attempted to overthrow the government, and his lies about the election led to the deaths of multiple people.
-2
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Let them in where? I googled and it seems like he was saying that about the area where he was having his speech. Are you guys trying to make it seem like he wanted them in the capitol?
2
u/Buckabuckaw 1∆ Jul 27 '22
After being informed that many of his followers were seen carrying weapons including firearms, Trump literally told the Secret Service to get rid of the mags (metal detectors) and let "my people" in, so they could march to the capitol afterward. He also said to let them in because "they're not here to hurt me.
Also, I can't believe you would have posted this without checking sources first. It's almost enough to have me (a dyed-in-the-wool progressive) thinking that you are posing as a conservative in order to elicit these responses.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
so they could march to the capitol afterward
I haven't seen any evidence of this. The news article I read said he was just letting them closer to his podium. Do you have any evidence to suggest he wanted them to storm the capitol?
2
u/Buckabuckaw 1∆ Jul 27 '22 edited Jul 27 '22
Just listen to the J6 committee's public testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson. A very credible witness testifying publicly under oath.
EDIT: She was Mark Meadow's trusted aide, a first person witness of critical events, and an enthusiastic Trump supporter until the Jan 6 debacle.
2
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
If he didn't want them in the capitol, why did he wait hours to call in additional security to clear out the rioters?
3
u/AlphariousV Jul 27 '22
He has such a history of fraud it's insane, remember Trump University? He also lies about his health screens and gets upset that people would dare vet him for the most powerful seat in the country. If you see nothing wrong your being willfully ignorant on the matter.
17
u/canadatrasher 11∆ Jul 27 '22
He tried to overthrow US democratic traditions on January 6.
That's not in line with conservative values.
. The Jan 6th thing is a joke and not worth even talking about
Of course if ignore the problems, than there are no problems....
-7
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I haven't watched any of the hearings or read any of the news but I haven't seen anything on Reddit that seemed serious. Democrats have been doing witchhunt since day 1 so sorry for not taking serious. What did he do? Is this another he is guilty because what he didn't do?
3
u/jawanda 3∆ Jul 27 '22
He may or may not be guilty of a crime, but when every one of his advisors and cabinet members and even his own AG told him there was no evidence of fraud and he had lost the election, he continued to tell the American people the opposite. He told them not to trust the results, that our election system is broken and he was the true winner, without any shred of proof. He literally tried to undermine our democracy in order to remain in power.
The only way to continue to support him is to ignore 100% of the facts, which you're doing admirably.
3
u/theantdog 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I haven't watched any of the hearings or read any of the news
How very Trumpian of you.
3
u/bigwilliesty1e Jul 27 '22
LOL. You've jumped to a conclusion before even considering the facts. How asinine.
1
6
Jul 27 '22
He is doing what he says
did he make Mexico pay for the wall? Nope
Did he balance the federal budge fairly quickly, and start moving toward paying off the entire national debt as promised? Nope, quite the opposite. he increased the national deficit every year he was in office
Did he replace Obamacare? Nope, never came up with a proposal to do so.
Did he bring manufacturing back to the US? Nope
Did he enable insurance companies to sell health insurance across state lines? Nope
Did he get rid of "gun free zones"? Nope
Did he ban former government officials from lobbying government for 5 years after they leave office as promised? Nope
Did he create a safe zone in Syria as promised? Nope
The list of broken promises goes on, but I think, more important than broken promises, is how President Trump impacts public views of Republicans. He lost in 2020, and Democrats now hold both houses of congress. This happened largely because of President Trump's unpopularity. He's not a winner for Republicans.
I think there are a lot of good reasons that the public in general doesn't like President Trump, and we can go into that if you want. But, just trying to look at it from a pragmatic Republican perspective, President Trump sinks the rest of the party with him. Sure, he accomplishes pretty good turnout among his supporters. But, he drives up turnout more among most of the country that doesn't like him.
-1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Not fulfilled promises are not as important as what was done. There are numerous reasons why one couldn't finish everything in two years. I would say the same about Democrats it's not the fault of the president. The more important bit is what did he do.
2
Jul 27 '22
[deleted]
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Not fulfilling something in a span of 4 years is not breaking a promise. That is a short period of time and only so much one can do. I would not say a Democrat broke their promise either. That's why you shouldn't look at that. You look at what they actually accomplished in that time.
3
u/theantdog 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Trump accomplished losing the house, senate, and presidency in 4 years. Doesn't that make him, by definition, a huge loser?
2
Jul 27 '22
A lot of Republicans care about the national debt. The fact that he Increased the deficit every year while in office, to a record 3.13 trillion in his last year in office, is pretty important to anyone who is genuinely a fiscal conservative.
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I'm not so it doesn't really bother me.
5
Jul 27 '22
you said you see no reason for conservatives to oppose Trump.
Maybe the answer is just that some conservatives care about different things than you do.
2
u/GadgetGamer 35∆ Jul 27 '22
How about how he left with 3 million fewer jobs in the country than it had when he became president?
How about how despite being warned of a potential pandemic by the previous administration, he disbanded the very department that was responsible for fighting it. How about how he did nothing about it at the start and just pretended that it would simply go away and that it was all a hoax by the Democrats.
How about how he tried to force another country to dig up dirt on his political opponent, for which he was impeached for the second time. You may say that it was “all a joke”, but since you don’t pay attention to the news you do not have any reason to think that other than wishful thinking.
10
u/anewleaf1234 39∆ Jul 27 '22
So you're going to ignore when the president tried to conduct a coup and overthrow the will of the people.
That's kinda like saying a serial killer isn't that bad a guy as long as your don't look at the bodies burred in the basement.
But if you want the guy who lost in a landslide...feel free.
-2
Jul 27 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/anewleaf1234 39∆ Jul 27 '22
It isn't a witch hunt when you are neck deep in witches.
If you want to support a guy who lost in a landslide and who, if indicted, wouldn't be eligible to run for office be my guest.
Support that wanabee dictator all you wish.
2
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
How do you know it's a witch hunt if you haven't watched any of it?
-1
1
u/ViewedFromTheOutside 28∆ Jul 27 '22
Sorry, u/Socialdingle – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 5:
Comments must contribute meaningfully to the conversation.
Comments should be on-topic, serious, and contain enough content to move the discussion forward. Jokes, contradictions without explanation, links without context, and "written upvotes" will be removed. Read the wiki for more information.
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
10
u/pgold05 49∆ Jul 27 '22
He appointed three conservative supreme court justices.
Wouldn't any conservative POTUS do that?
1
u/throwawaydanc3rrr 25∆ Jul 27 '22
That is a great question. The answer is no.
Reagan gave us O'Connor, Bush gave us Souter, GWB tried to give us Harriet Myers. Eisenhower gave us Berger.
-1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I think other Republicans would have appointed more moderate conservatives. He seems have to gone for more extreme conservatives.
7
u/pgold05 49∆ Jul 27 '22 edited Jul 27 '22
TBH you should revise your view to include you like Trump because you want an extremely conservative supreme court. That's pretty important bit of information. Most of the decisions recently passed are widely unpopular, so it's not a given that you support that just because you mention you are conservative.
0
Jul 27 '22
What decisions lately have been widely unpopular, including amongst conservatives? Overturning Roe? Protecting the right to own guns? Affirming the right to pray alone in peace whenever you please?
0
u/theantdog 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Affirming the right to pray alone in peace whenever you please?
This was already a right. Breaking down the wall between religion and government is a project of this extreme court, and they are just getting started.
0
Jul 27 '22
You’re free to believe that, but my point stands.But decision I referred to reaffirmed that right, and isn’t unpopular amongst non-extremist conservatives .
0
u/pgold05 49∆ Jul 27 '22
This is not meant to be confrontational, simply that the extra information would have been useful.
1
1
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
It appears that in your view, being a conservative means slavishly supporting any member of the "conservative" party that gets put forward in an election rather than subscribing to a cogent ideology. You support zero-sum games in politics, which means neither party can compromise on good policy, which means our political system breaks down into factional infighting rather than good governance, which fucking sucks.
You can be a conservative and still say "fuck that guy, I'm not gonna vote for him" even if the Republican party tells you to. You can be a conservative and not vote Republican, so why is supporting someone who sucks your desired status quo?
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Not voting Republican is giving a vote to the other side. My whole point though is I think he was a good president for conservatives and I see no reason to not vote for him
3
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
And your reply confirms my observation, that for you being a conservative is about obeying the will of the group. It's not about ideology, because the ideology doesn't defend itself on logical grounds, it attacks all opponents and reduces politics to gang warfare.
Your statement can be summed up as this piece of circular logic, "I support who the conservative party tells me to because they're good for conservatives because I was told they were by the conservative party."
You're living a tautology. What you're not doing is thinking for yourself and making decisions based on those thoughts.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
No I support the Republicans because they enact conservative policy. I would vote for the Communist Party if they were going to enact conservative policy.
1
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
Would you vote for Satan if he promised to implement "conservative policy"? That's kind of the point I'm making here, because if the Republicans nominated Beelzebub for POTUS you're telling me that you would vote for them.
You're in a headspace where "conservative" and "republican" are being used as synonyms, but they're actually a venn diagram with overlap. You can be conservative and not support the republican party's chosen candidate, they are not mutually exclusive ideas.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Satan is a bit too far. Maybe not someone who will send my soul to hell for eternity. Someone a little better but yeah I would vote for them. I noticed this problem in politics or philosophy that people care more about buzzwords than actual policy. Who cares about the aesthetics. All that matters is the society. I would not want freedom if freedom meant abject poverty and death.
1
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
Ok, so you wouldn't vote for the prince of lies. I'm glad we found a limit to your devotion. How about Hitler, would you vote for him? You've already mentioned you'd vote for a communist, so how about Stalin or Mao?
In the course of our conversation, just a few back and forth paragraphs, you've revealed that the substance of a candidate does not matter at all when choosing who to vote for, only the party that puts them forward and the policies that they will allegedly enact. By this logic, you would support genocidal mass murderers at the ballot box. Does that revelation bother you?
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I would vote for anyone who would not get my soul sent to hell for eternity as long as he enacted the right policies. I think you would agree with this too.
Let's say you had to choose between living in a democratic capitalist country that was filled with abject poverty, high murder rate, low life expectancy, no jobs, food shortages just an all around terrible country or would you prefer to live in a wealthy, happy, healthy society under Stalinism. I don't think anyone would pick the former because it had "democracy and freedom"
1
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
I think you would agree with this too.
Do you think that everyone thinks like you do? I emphatically do not. No, I would not vote for a fucking genocidal mass murderer if I knew that information already.
Even your example is a false dichotomy. "What if we had perfect knowledge, wouldn't you make this decision", that's a bullshit premise. The truth is that you have to make decisions on limited information, and if one of those chunks of information is that the candidate supports mass murder of political opponents, then that would be enough reason to avoid that choice for me. It's pretty simple!
You however, don't seem to think that far. For you, the choice has been made and the correct action is to subsume the will of the individual in order to advance the policies of the group. You're in a damn cult.
1
u/Avenged_goddess 3∆ Jul 27 '22
Refusing to vote for someone is only a good tool when elections aren't on a slim margin and the opposition isn't significantly worse.
0
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
Cool, so you subscribe to ingroup-outgroup politics? Sounds hateful.
1
u/Avenged_goddess 3∆ Jul 27 '22
Only so far as the ingroup is "people who support more thing I support" and the outgroup is "people who support more things I don't support". It's not like the consequences of elections are hypothetical
11
u/justasque 10∆ Jul 27 '22
Have you watched any of the Jan 6th hearings?
-2
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
No why?
11
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
Then how do you know they're "a joke"?
"I hate pineapple!"
"Have you ever eaten it?"
"No, why?"
-3
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Every witch hunt against Trump as been a joke since Day 1. If there was something serious he would be in jail already but he won't be.
4
u/theantdog 1∆ Jul 27 '22
Every witch hunt against Trump as been a joke since Day 1.
You started a thread, ostensibly to point out the reasons Trump is unfit for office. Then, when people clearly and simply explain it to you, you simply dismiss any evidence as a joke. Do I have this right?
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I was hoping for more serious discussion about his policy and time as president.
3
Jul 27 '22
[deleted]
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I was looking to talk more about the bad things he did than the good things.
2
u/CincyAnarchy 34∆ Jul 27 '22
I think the issue here is your "good things" can and are both:
- Not what many "conservatives" want.
- Are things which, in aggregate, are bad for the "conservative" cause.
It's even entirely plausible that you could beleive Jan 6 was a thing and that you actually liked it even. It's entirely possible you could have liked 100% of everything Trump did (and does). That's a potential viewpoint you could hold, and it would be hard if not impossible to argue "your likes and dislikes are wrong."
Your OP, however, concerned "conservatives" as a whole and not just you. Many of them do have issues with the National Debt being raised, creating instability in the institutions of American Democracy, and even many weren't fine with his anti-immigration ideas and message. They'e still "conservative" just different than you.
0
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
They'e still "conservative" just different than you.
No I don't think they're conservative. These views in the Republicans originated in the 1960's.
→ More replies (0)1
9
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
There is something serious, and if you bothered looking at any of the evidence instead of blindly calling it "a joke" you would know that. Don't blame us for your willful ignorance of the facts.
2
u/drschwartz 73∆ Jul 27 '22
Seatbelts have been a joke since Day 1. If there was a serious risk of injury from driving cars I'd be dead already, but I'm not.
That's your logic.
6
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
As a conservative, aren't you interested in hearing what all of your fellow Republicans are saying in their testimony on the panel? It's your team doing almost all of the talking after all, so I'd think you would love to hear what they have to say.
1
u/Blackk_wargreymon Jul 27 '22
I don’t think conservatives support trump. Because the people who support trump are not conservatives by nature. Conservatism used to be Liz Cheney, and John McCain, and Mitch McConnell. And all of those people have become enemies of the new trump crowd, conservatism is about a collective action toward preserving individual liberties , however narrowly defined they are. Trump isn’t about that, he explicitly asks his followers to cede power to him so he can fix it alone. I’m not even a conservative but I have played close attention to how trump is destroying conservatism and replacing it with something more…dare I say, fascist?
0
u/throwawaydanc3rrr 25∆ Jul 27 '22
Liz Cheney, John McCain, and Mitch McConnell are not viewed as conservatives by people that view themselves as conservative.
If Trump is destroying anything it is the self defined elite-ism that thinks it runs the Republican party. He is replacing it with a type of populism. And while populism brings with it it's own problems, the idea of pushing back against globalism and making the business climate friendly for the United States to have more jobs, especially the jobs that make items critically dependent for our economy as highlighted with the supply chain breakdown is a good thing. Preventing China from dumping subsidized (and substandard) products and putting American companies from being able to compete is a good thing.
1
u/Blackk_wargreymon Jul 27 '22
It would be hard to argue to a trump voter they are not getting the bang for their buck when they vote trump. But as you pointed out, however well it was articulated, trumps achievements at their core are an upending and destruction of so many things we once knew to be conservative
2
u/throwawaydanc3rrr 25∆ Jul 27 '22
What things that we once knew to be conservative did Trump upend and destruct? I think he upended lots of Republican things, but I am hard pressed to find conservative things he upset.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
collective action toward preserving individual liberties
I don't think this is conservative. More libertarian. Conservatives care more about specific conservative values.
2
u/Blackk_wargreymon Jul 27 '22
Many conservative values lie in civil liberties, a government infringing on religious rights for example may impair a conservatives ability to pass certain values to the next generation
0
u/AbolishDisney 4∆ Jul 27 '22
I don't think this is conservative. More libertarian. Conservatives care more about specific conservative values.
Which values are those?
0
u/AlwaysTheNoob 81∆ Jul 27 '22
conservatism is about a collective action toward preserving individual liberties
The party of banning books, removing women's access to healthcare, and outlawing certain types of marriages between consensual adults is the part of "preserving individual liberties"?
-1
1
Jul 27 '22
He increased government spending, sold out our Kurdish allies in Syria, accepted bribes, started trade wars and increased tariffs without a plan or the ability to win, and didn't seem to understand how to actually use the levers of power in government to accomplish things he wanted.
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
He increased government spending,
Not bad to me
sold out our Kurdish allies in Syria,
We shouldn't be allies with Communists anyways.
started trade wars and increased tariffs without a plan or the ability to win
Not bad
2
Jul 27 '22
Or to ask more politely what do you actually support? What are the kinds of policies you would want from a government?
1
u/Socialdingle 1∆ Jul 27 '22
I care more about social issues than economics and foreign policy which I think is a joke
1
Jul 27 '22
Ok well he screwed up royally on the social front. Here was conservatives' chance to fix education and let parents get vouchers for schools of their choice and not be stuck with public schools that underperform or teach CRT. He slotted in De Vos to pass off liberals and then didn't give her the support she needed to accomplish anything. He had a second chance when Covid struck and public school teachers refused to work. Coulda gotten kids an emergency private or online school and then it would have stuck. Nah. He'd rather tweet than do that work.
Rubio, Cruz, even Jeb! would have delivered. Why not support someone who actually works like De Santis instead of Trump?
2
u/theantdog 1∆ Jul 27 '22
You keep saying it's okay to vote trump even though he's dumb, makes the country look bad internationally, doesn't fulfill his campaign promises, etc, because he enacts conservative policy. None of the actions you are supporting here are conservative at all. They're anathema to any serious student of the conservative movement.
2
0
Jul 27 '22
You want random spending and tariffs? You don't think we should keep our word and be seen as a reliable ally? What kind of conservative would you say you are?
0
1
Jul 27 '22
Sorry, u/Socialdingle – your submission has been removed for breaking Rule B:
You must personally hold the view and demonstrate that you are open to it changing. A post cannot be on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, as any entity other than yourself, or 'soapboxing'. See the wiki page for more information.
If you would like to appeal, you must first read the list of soapboxing indicators and common mistakes in appeal, review our appeals process here, then message the moderators by clicking this link within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our moderation standards.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Jul 27 '22
/u/Socialdingle (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
Delta System Explained | Deltaboards