Why I Will Never Vote for Donald Trump

[Jazzhead]

A conservative speaks his mind:    LINK

For Republicans, there is an additional reason not to vote for Mr. Trump. His nomination would pose a profound threat to the Republican Party and conservatism, in ways that Hillary Clinton never could. For while Mrs. Clinton could inflict a defeat on the Republican Party, she could not redefine it. But Mr. Trump, if he were the Republican nominee, would.

Mr. Trump’s presence in the 2016 race has already had pernicious effects, but they’re nothing compared with what would happen if he were the Republican standard-bearer. The nominee, after all, is the leader of the party; he gives it shape and definition. If Mr. Trump heads the Republican Party, it will no longer be a conservative party; it will be an angry, bigoted, populist one. Mr. Trump would represent a dramatic break with and a fundamental assault on the party’s best traditions.

No votes have yet been cast, primary elections are fluid, and sobriety often prevails, so Mr. Trump is hardly the inevitable Republican nominee. But, stunningly, that is now something that is quite conceivable. If this scenario comes to pass, many Republicans will find themselves in a situation they once thought unimaginable: refusing to support the nominee of their party because it is the best thing that they can do for their party and their country.

Trump can still be defeated,  but this writer speaks well of the moral dilemma faced by many of us if Trump is the nominee.     

[GAJohnnie]

Because your emotions trump your reason like most Left of Center people.

[EdinVA]

to quickly and “humanely” expel 11 million illegal immigrants, to force Mexico to pay for the wall he will build on our southern border, to defeat the Islamic State “very quickly” while as a bonus taking its oil, to bar Muslims from immigrating to the United States

So, it is ok for the president not to enforce the laws passed by congress?
How do we know Mexico won't pay for the wall?
It is ok to have another 80 Year's War?  I really don't think we have that long to defeat ISIS..
We should import another million Syrian refugees that we have no way of vetting, tracking or controlling?

Just another liberal hit piece with no real thought given to the piece itself, just a collection of liberal sound bites.

[aligncare]

 

[Longiron]

Because your emotions trump your reason like most Left of Center people.

The poster really wanted to say it was his hair not his positions for not being an conservative but that would be challenged and that is called Anger to the RINOGOPe folks.

[Jazzhead]

Because your emotions trump your reason like most Left of Center people.

There's no argument based on "reason" for supporting Trump.  He's all about waving the bloody shirt. 

If Trump's the nominee,  the answer is a responsible third party candidate.  Millions of conservatives, and other Americans, will abandon the GOP because of a surfeit of reason.   

[Jazzhead]

Trumpism is the philosophy of the weak-minded. 

[Jazzhead]

Just another liberal hit piece with no real thought given to the piece itself, just a collection of liberal sound bites.

That the best you can do?  The author formerly worked for Reagan and both Bushes.   I'd say his conservative cred is a helluva lot better than yours.   

[GAJohnnie]

Yes, truth is frequently painful to hear

[240B]

His nomination would pose a profound threat to the Republican Party and conservatism, in ways that Hillary Clinton never could.

Here the author said openly and clearly that Hillary world be better for the Republican Party than Trump. So essentially, the supposed 'Republican' is saying vote for Hillary if Trump gets the nomination. He can do that if he wants, but that is not how I feel.

For while Mrs. Clinton could inflict a defeat on the Republican Party, she could not redefine it. But Mr. Trump, if he were the Republican nominee, would.

Here the author betrays his ignorance and lack of understanding about what is happening nationally with Trump. He seem unable to comprehend that the very reason that Trump is miles and miles ahead of every other Republican, is specifically because the Republican base want the Republican Party to be redefined. That is the whole point.

Then he goes into the whole "racist/bigot" thing which is already overplayed. I don't think Trump is racist or bigoted. I think he is simply more than fed-up with PC bullshit. Just like the rest of us are.

All in all, it is just standard anti-Trump boilerplate. Nothing new. Nothing thought provoking. Nothing original. It is a waste of bandwidth by yet another anti-Trump fanatic.

Hey Jazzy Jeff, you should do a search and look up another poster here named Sinkspur. You could be his twin brother.

[aligncare]

His nomination would pose a profound threat to the Republican Party and conservatism, in ways that Hillary Clinton never could.

Here the author said openly and clearly that Hillary world be better for the Republican Party than Trump. So essentially, the supposed 'Republican' is saying vote for Hillary if Trump gets the nomination. He can do that if he wants, but that is not how I feel.

For while Mrs. Clinton could inflict a defeat on the Republican Party, she could not redefine it. But Mr. Trump, if he were the Republican nominee, would.

Here the author betrays his ignorance and lack of understanding about what is happening nationally with Trump. He seem unable to comprehend that the very reason that Trump is miles and miles ahead of every other Republican, is specifically because the Republican base want the Republican Party to be redefined. That is the whole point.

Then he goes into the whole "racist/bigot" thing which is already overplayed. I don't think Trump is racist or bigoted. I think he is simply more than fed-up with PC bullshit. Just like the rest of us are.

All in all, it is just standard anti-Trump boilerplate. Nothing new. Nothing thought provoking. Nothing original. It is a waste of bandwidth by yet another anti-Trump fanatic.

Hey Jazzy Jeff, you should do a search and look up another poster here named Sinkspur. You could be his twin brother.

Since he's new here, I would love to help Jazz use our data base, but I'm just too weak-minded to know how. Duh.

[andy58-in-nh]

Although this piece appears in the risible New York Times, its author, Peter Wehner is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination, nor is he in the habit of making arguments from a left-of-center perspective.

If you don't believe me, look here for just one piece of evidence.

Mr. Wehner's concerns are shared by many of us on the Right, who are uncomfortable with Donald Trump's proud lack of knowledge, political or military experience, and with his astonishingly poor character and manners. All of these things are demonstrably true, even if his proponents pretend otherwise and denounce in cult-like fashion even those hard-core, lifetime conservatives who dare point out that their hero is a loudmouthed, bloviating self-promoter, who by the way is not a conservative, but rather a populist.

Quoting him here:

"Mr. Trump is precisely the kind of man our system of government was designed to avoid, the type of leader our founders feared — a demagogic figure who does not view himself as part of our constitutional system but rather as an alternative to it."

I think that is correct, and moreover, I believe it equally applies to the man who has held the office of the Presidency for the past seven long years: Barack Hussein Obama.

I understand the anger, frustration and bitterness that drives Mr. Trump's candidacy and has obviously augmented his support. I have shared those feelings and expressed them here, on occasion.

But I will not allow anger to drive my decision-making when choosing who I'd like to see as our next President. Unlike Mr. Wehner, I will vote for Donald Trump if he is the GOP nominee, because my state is a "swing state" and every vote will count. But I will not for a moment pretend that I am doing my country any greater service than trying to prevent the hideous nightmare known as Hillary! from destroying what is left of America.

[mountaineer]

I understand the anger, frustration and bitterness that drives Mr. Trump's candidacy and has obviously augmented his support. I have shared those feelings and expressed them here, on occasion. But I will not allow anger to drive my decision-making when choosing who I'd like to see as our next President. Unlike Mr. Wehner, I will vote for Donald Trump if he is the GOP nominee, because my state is a "swing state" and every vote will count. But I will not for a moment pretend that I am doing my country any greater service than trying to prevent the hideous nightmare known as Hillary! from destroying what is left of America.

Amen, and I truly believe going the third-party route only ensures a Clinton or Sanders presidency. I do not believe Trump is even close to being the best choice, but do know that any of the Democrats would be much worse for this country. It's another lousy election, let's face it.

[aligncare]

Knowledge: Donald Trump is highly intelligent and a remarkably fast learner. His friends, associates and acquaintances can testify to that. He is a proven high achiever who sets out to master whatever challenges he faces, from golf to business and everything in between.

Political experience: as head of a private company, Donald Trump has had to personally negotiate with local, state, federal and national governments, and quasi-government civic and environmental groups in cities across America and the globe. He knows more about government bureaucracies than the bureaucrats do.

Military experience: Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have never served in the military. Neither have Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum or Bobby Jindal.

Furthermore, Donald Trump in his youth spent five years in a military Academy.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/few-2016-presidential-candidates-have-military-experience-does-that-matter/#ixzz3xEHJ20wE

Some of you may not like his personality, but his business skills, his decades of winning negotiations, his status as a high achiever, his America-First patriotism, cannot be easily dismissed.

[EdinVA]

That the best you can do?  The author formerly worked for Reagan and both Bushes.   I'd say his conservative cred is a helluva lot better than yours.

He has always been a writer.
Never had to develop, implement, enforce or monitor policy.
He put words in people mouths.
That hardly qualifies him as conservative, just a good writer.

[Bigun]

The ONLY way I ever vote for Trump will be if the choice is Trump or Hillary or any other Democrat and even then my vote will be against the democrat and NOT for him!

[libertybele]

Jazz, as you probably gathered I am a HUGE CRUZ supporter.  In a nutshell, I don't trust Trump and I am not so sure that at this point he is not simply a siphon for the DEMS; meaning taking votes away from a true conservative.  Certainly I will not vote for him in the primary election.  I understand your frustration and I firmly believe that we should always vote our conscious.  It is a difficult position to find yourself in having to vote for someone whom you don't believe in.  A third party WIN is nearly impossible because of our electoral process.  At best, all three candidates would have to NOT get the majority of delegates (high unlikely) and then the HOUSE would select their candidate. Keep in mind that the HOUSE can elect who they want, they don't have to elect Trump or Cruz, they can select Hillary (that is in the scope of reality seeing how much a threat a Cruz or Trump presidency would bring).  Secondly, at this point in time and so close to the primaries, I think it would be next to impossible now for a 3rd party candidate to get on the ballot in all 50 states; thus reducing their chances even further of winning. I don't know if any of the existing candidates would be able to switch at this point in time from the Republican party and run as an independent. I don't know what rules would apply, whether they would have to reapply to qualify in all 50 states or if they would be prohibited from running third party because they have already campaigned for a different party this election cycle.

With all that being said (and sorry for the length of the post), I will vote for the GOP nominee over Hillary or Sanders.  It has taken me a very long time to be able to state that, because at one point in time, I swore I would never vote for Jeb; but even he would be better than Hillary or Sanders.  I don't think he can beat them, but at least I would know I consciously did everything I could NOT to hand Hillary or Bernie the nomination.

[HAPPY2BME]

Military experience: Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have never served in the military. Neither have Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum or Bobby Jindal.

=================================

Facts are 'so confusing.'

[katzenjammer]

His nomination would pose a profound threat to the Republican Party and conservatism, in ways that Hillary Clinton never could.

Here the author said openly and clearly that Hillary world be better for the Republican Party than Trump. So essentially, the supposed 'Republican' is saying vote for Hillary if Trump gets the nomination. He can do that if he wants, but that is not how I feel.

For while Mrs. Clinton could inflict a defeat on the Republican Party, she could not redefine it. But Mr. Trump, if he were the Republican nominee, would.

Here the author betrays his ignorance and lack of understanding about what is happening nationally with Trump. He seem unable to comprehend that the very reason that Trump is miles and miles ahead of every other Republican, is specifically because the Republican base want the Republican Party to be redefined. That is the whole point.

Then he goes into the whole "racist/bigot" thing which is already overplayed. I don't think Trump is racist or bigoted. I think he is simply more than fed-up with PC bullshit. Just like the rest of us are.

All in all, it is just standard anti-Trump boilerplate. Nothing new. Nothing thought provoking. Nothing original. It is a waste of bandwidth by yet another anti-Trump fanatic.

Hey Jazzy Jeff, you should do a search and look up another poster here named Sinkspur. You could be his twin brother.

Since this article is nothing but pure establishment trash that isn't worth commenting on, I will shamelessly attack the messenger: Pete Wehner is also nothing but absolute DC establishment trash.  He is as much of a "Reaganite" as Bill Clinton would be.  Anyone that looks to his commentary as representing "conservatism" is either ignorant and/or a complete fool!

He remains a part of the Bush hit squad in the media (e.g., Fox News) that is constantly striking out against conservatism.

Don't believe me, check out these, especially the second article that exposes this human waste, in-depth:

Peter Wehner: The Bush Machine’s Progressive Hitman


Peter Wehner’s Greatest Hit Jobs

[alicewonders]

That the best you can do?  The author formerly worked for Reagan and both Bushes.   I'd say his conservative cred is a helluva lot better than yours.

I don't think you are in any position to be judging anyone's "conservative cred" on this forum.  You don't know who we are. 

[Jazzhead]

I don't think you are in any position to be judging anyone's "conservative cred" on this forum.  You don't know who we are.

Likewise - but that hasn't stopped some folks from making assumptions about who I am.  Name-calling and labelling is no way to win a debate, btw.   Am I supposed to be impressed that Katzenjammer childishly labels the author of the article posted in this thread as "human waste"?   But Katzie is a Trumpista, and we all know that malicious name-calling in place of substance is Trump's stock in trade.

[katzenjammer]

Likewise - but that hasn't stopped some folks from making assumptions about who I am.  Name-calling and labelling is no way to win a debate, btw.   Am I supposed to be impressed that Katzenjammer childishly labels the author of the article posted in this thread as "human waste"?   But Katzie is a Trumpista, and we all know that malicious name-calling in place of substance is Trump's stock in trade.

Like alicewonders said, you have no idea who or what any of us are.  You are continually going to get a 'wake-up call' if you think you can post trash from human waste like Peter Wehner here and not be called out on it.  That may have worked for you (or not) at some of the other forums you have been banned from, but it doesn't cut it here.  I call a spade a spade, always have, and always will.  Deal with it.

[libertybele]

Some of you may not like his personality, but his business skills, his decades of winning negotiations, his status as a high achiever, his America-First patriotism, cannot be easily dismissed.
[/quote]

I will speak for myself.  I am not dismissing his business skills, nor his decades of winning negotiations.  He is obviously an achiever.  Yes, his personality is a bit crass, but even that I could deal with.  Further than that, Trump can talk America-First patriotism all he wants -- there is absolutely no voting record; all we can go by is his words.  We can take what he says as the gospel truth or doubt him.  Running a business is different than running our country including knowing protocol and the 'ins and outs' of government.  He can say what he's going to do; but keep in mind that takes (or should take) the consent of BOTH houses of Congress -- not just because that's what Donald wants.  Secondly, even based on what he states, I still don't see him as a conservative for other reasons (links below).  Perhaps most importantly, yes he has a crass personality, but to continuously 'bash' fellow candidates while going softly on the opposition creates some doubt.  His past ties with the DEMS sheds some doubt.  His stating several times that he was thinking of running 3rd party sheds doubt. For me, I try to imagine a Trump presidency and questions, would he indeed listen to advice from those he has surrounded himself with?  Will he do right by country or right by Donald?  My answer to both of these leans towards 'no'.

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/01/trumps-questionable-political-history
https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates/candidates/donald-trump

[musiclady]

Because your emotions trump your reason like most Left of Center people.

You know, Johnnie, you repeatedly accuse people who don't support Trump as being liberal, but you never seem to be able to address those of us who DON'T support Trump because HE is liberal.

The two main reasons I don't support Trump are his lack of integrity and his lack of conservatism.

They are two of the qualities I look for first in a candidate, and Trump supporters here on this forum have argued that neither of those qualities matter.

Except, of course, that they DO.

[katzenjammer]

Knowledge: Donald Trump is highly intelligent and a remarkably fast learner. His friends, associates and acquaintances can testify to that. He is a proven high achiever who sets out to master whatever challenges he faces, from golf to business and everything in between.

Political experience: as head of a private company, Donald Trump has had to personally negotiate with local, state, federal and national governments, and quasi-government civic and environmental groups in cities across America and the globe. He knows more about government bureaucracies than the bureaucrats do.

Military experience: Ted Cruz and Rand Paul have never served in the military. Neither have Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Chris Christie, Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum or Bobby Jindal.

Furthermore, Donald Trump in his youth spent five years in a military Academy.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/04/few-2016-presidential-candidates-have-military-experience-does-that-matter/#ixzz3xEHJ20wE

Some of you may not like his personality, but his business skills, his decades of winning negotiations, his status as a high achiever, his America-First patriotism, cannot be easily dismissed.

All true, but not relevant to some...  Because he was on reality TeeVee, calls people mean names at times, and has been divorced twice!  Those facts obviate all else!!