WSJ: The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump

[Axel]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cheap-moralizing-of-never-trump-1476745922

The Cheap Moralizing of Never Trump
Trump voters get that the elite contempt for their man is a proxy contempt for them.

 
By WILLIAM MCGURN

Three weeks out from Election Day, the Never Trump argument has been neatly summed up by Bill Maher. Not only is Donald Trump coarse and boorish, anyone who supports the man is as revolting as he is.

On his show last month, Mr. Maher put it this way to Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway: “You are enabling pure evil.” The HBO comedian went on to amuse himself by adding that “Hillary was right when she called a lot of his supporters deplorable.”

Mr. Maher might have added that it is also a well-worn Democratic trope. After all, wasn’t it Barack Obama who described small-town Americans as bitterly clinging to guns and religion and disliking anyone who is different? As for Hillary Clinton, in her deplorables crack she dismissed half of Mr. Trump’s followers as “racist, sexist, homophobic.” Less well noted (but more telling), she also declared them “irredeemable.”

This is an old argument for the left. But Republicans are now hearing it from the right as well. Which puts conservative Never Trumpers in a curious position vis-à-vis government of, by and for the people: Are the tens of millions of Americans who will pull the lever for Trump come November evil too, or just invincibly stupid?

Give the Never Trumpers their due: Most do not shy away from the implication that anyone who would vote for Mr. Trump is as low and base as he is. Their problem is that the argument doesn’t seem to be having much traction with Republican voters. A Rasmussen poll released Monday found that while Mrs. Clinton enjoys the support of 78% of Democrats, Mr. Trump is supported by 74% of Republicans. Other polls show that even after all his fumbles and embarrassments, the vast majority of Republicans do not want Mr. Trump to drop out.

One reason may be that the argument about morally corrupt GOP voters is not really an argument. More precisely, it’s an argument Republicans typically hear from the left. Instead of weighing the prosaic facts—i.e., the practical ramifications of having Mrs. Clinton sitting in the Oval Office versus Mr. Trump—how much easier it is to try to end all discussion by pronouncing the GOP nominee repellent.

Trump supporters get this. Probably few were surprised by the “Access Hollywood” tape that showed Mr. Trump in full Bill Clinton mode. They support him in spite of it.

They support him because they fear political correctness is making vital discussions about the country impossible—and conclude that any candidate who’s going to take this on is not going to be Miss Manners. They support him because they know what they will get if Mrs. Clinton wins, as now looks likely.

They support him because they get the contempt dripping from Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton whenever the subject is the things they cherish: faith, patriotism, the decency of ordinary citizens, and so on. Above all, they support him because they also get that the elite contempt for Donald Trump is a proxy contempt for them.

Still, each new day brings new accusations and analogies. Like college sophomores ransacking history for the most extreme metaphors, no pejorative is too fantastic. Trump is Hitler! Trump is Mussolini! Trump is Nietzsche! Even George Will just likened the GOP convention to a “mini-Nuremberg.”

Ironically, the cheapest moralizing has been reserved for those trying to make the best of a bad situation. Thus Trump running mate Mike Pence finds himself accused of moral turpitude for working to keep the Republican Party from coming apart and giving voters some hope for a conservative agenda if Mr. Trump were to win.

Ditto for House Speaker Paul Ryan, excoriated by the Trumpers for his efforts to preserve the GOP’s House majority and by Never Trumpers for refusing to un-endorse the Republican nominee. Mr. Ryan understands that losing the Congress would give President Hillary Clinton two years to push through the progressive wish list, not to mention putting a liberal majority on the Supreme Court, preserving ObamaCare and maintaining the travesty that is the nuclear deal with Iran. Having watched what the 2010 GOP House takeover did to the Obama agenda, she would no doubt take full advantage of the time she has to act.

In the end, the strongest argument for a Trump vote has always been this: The alternative is a president who lies, whose public life has been a series of scandals from cattle futures to the destruction of documents under subpoena, who would be a third term for disastrous Obama policies at home and abroad, and who has never taken a position that wasn’t done from naked political expediency—from supporting the Iraq war in 2002 or opposing it later to invoking Abraham Lincoln to justify saying one thing in public and another in private.

Meanwhile, the Never Trump movement’s contribution has been to give us a word for all those who have weighed this evidence and have found the argument against a Clinton presidency persuasive: evil.

[Norm Lenhart]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-cheap-moralizing-of-never-trump-1476745922

And guess what? We're still not joining you 'people' in voting for Donnie. So bitch away impotently. We simply will not be moved.

[skeeter]

Ha? I thought the WSJ itself was pretty much NeverTrump.

They're NeverAnyone who threatens to cut off their precious cheap labor supply.

[r9etb]

Three weeks out from Election Day, the Never Trump argument has been neatly summed up by Bill Maher. Not only is Donald Trump coarse and boorish, anyone who supports the man is as revolting as he is.

William McGurn demonstrating that if you start with a logical fallacy (strawman), you can prove anything.

Unfortunately for him, the Never Trump position is based on Trump's fitness for office, and Trump's ridiculous behavior has settled that particular argument.

[Frank Cannon]

In the end, the strongest argument for a Trump vote has always been this: The alternative...

After all that BS about NeverTrump bashing, all Bill can muster for an argument for his candidate is "But Hillary!".

Some of the laziest thinking comes from the Trumpettes.

[RoosGirl]

Which puts conservative Never Trumpers in a curious position vis-à-vis government of, by and for the people: Are the tens of millions of Americans who will pull the lever for Trump come November evil too, or just invincibly stupid?

I'm going with the latter.  At least there is finally an admission that we are indeed the conservative ones.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

They support him because they get the contempt dripping from Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton whenever the subject is the things they cherish: faith, patriotism, the decency of ordinary citizens, and so on. Above all, they support him because they also get that the elite contempt for Donald Trump is a proxy contempt for them.

I'm sure to get ridiculed for this by the usual suspects, but this really hit me.

I've done my share of mocking of Trump supporters, some here, mostly at TOS.  And it ashames me to admit it, but I think some of that was some latent elitism.  I'm well-educated, etc., and it is extremely seductive to slip into a tone of mocking condescension for those who aren't as educated, or aren't as good as many others in either written or verbal expression.   It's so easy to dismiss someone else's concerns just because you can make them look foolish in an argument, and it can be a bit of an ego boost as well.  "See how badly I defeated you in this discussion?  See how much better I am than you?"

I had a bit of that assholery in me when I first got commissioned.  It took spending a lot of time among enlisted Marines for me to pull my head out of my ass and realize I wasn't a better person, or a better man, simply because I was more educated or intelligent in an academic sense.  Other people can be good, decent, very capable individuals ever though politics, etc., is not their forte, and even though they haven't honed their rhetorical and linguistic skills.

I think the nomination of Trump was a terrible mistake that will cost our country dearly.  But I don't think it means that those who supported him are bad people, bad Americans, or somehow lesser for it.  Many of them are "salt of the earth" types whom we might admire and respect if politics didn't enter into it.  Rougher language, etc, may be more common, but it doesn't make them bad.  They're pissed off at some things at which they had good caused to be pissed, and just misjudged the best avenue for channeling that anger.

Anyway, I'm not participating in any more of the election stuff, but I do want to apologise here to anyone if I acted the condescending bleep.

[r9etb]

Are the tens of millions of Americans who will pull the lever for Trump come November evil too, or just invincibly stupid?

I'm going with the latter.  At least there is finally an admission that we are indeed the conservative ones.

On the contrary, I fully understand why a lot of respectable and intelligent people are going to vote for Trump.  As for McGurn... this particular offering suggests that he's not among them.

[corbe]

I'm sure to get ridiculed for this by the usual suspects, but this really hit me.

I've done my share of mocking of Trump supporters, some here, mostly at TOS.  And it ashames me to admit it, but I think some of that was some latent elitism.  I'm well-educated, etc., and it is extremely seductive to slip into a tone of mocking condescension for those who aren't as educated, or aren't as good as many others in either written or verbal expression.   It's so easy to dismiss someone else's concerns just because you can make them look foolish in an argument, and it can be a bit of an ego boost as well.  "See how badly I defeated you in this discussion?  See how much better I am than you?"

I had a bit of that assholery in me when I first got commissioned.  It took spending a lot of time among enlisted Marines for me to pull my head out of my ass and realize I wasn't a better person, or a better man, simply because I was more educated or intelligent in an academic sense.  Other people can be good, decent, very capable individuals ever though politics, etc., is not their forte, and even though they haven't honed their rhetorical and linguistic skills.

I think the nomination of Trump was a terrible mistake that will cost our country dearly.  But I don't think it means that those who supported him are bad people, bad Americans, or somehow lesser for it.  Many of them are "salt of the earth" types whom we might admire and respect if politics didn't enter into it.  Rougher language, etc, may be more common, but it doesn't make them bad.  They're pissed off at some things at which they had good caused to be pissed, and just misjudged the best avenue for channeling that anger.

Anyway, I'm not participating in any more of the election stuff, but I do want to apologise here to anyone if I acted the condescending bleep.

   confession much



    Don't Leave us Major, I, and a few others I'm sure, enjoyed your White Trailer Park Trash intellect.

[geronl]

Never heard so much whining and moaning in my life. You backed a pathetic lowlife loser, we don't. The end. Get over it.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

   confession much

Yes, it was, actually.  I don't think that this election campaign necessarily brought out the best in me personally, hence the apology.  Didn't really think it important enough to post anywhere else here, but since this article kind of triggered the thought, I figured this thread was as good a spot as any.

I don't recall conversing with you previously, so I certainly wasn't suggesting that you or anyone else in particular did anything out of bounds.

[RoosGirl]

I'm going with the latter.  At least there is finally an admission that we are indeed the conservative ones.


On the contrary, I fully understand why a lot of respectable and intelligent people are going to vote for Trump.  As for McGurn... this particular offering suggests that he's not among them.

Are you saying they're evil then?

[corbe]

I don't recall conversing with you previously, so I certainly wasn't suggesting that you or anyone else in particular did anything out of bounds.

   We haven't parlayed, Major and I didn't take any of your comment as an Insult.   

   We only got 3 weeks left, hang in there, perseverance. 

   You know it can't get no worst.

   As 'the Donald' told the Blacks, recently, 'What have you got to Lose?'

[r9etb]

Are you saying they're evil then?

I'm saying they're neither stupid nor evil.  I understand their reasons, even if I disagree with them.

As for McGurn, this is one of the most dishonest screeds I've read in some time.  It starts with a lie, and goes downhill from there. 

[geronl]

The real sermonizing and holier than thou attitudes come from Trumpers

[jmyrlefuller]

In the end, the strongest argument for a Trump vote has always been this: The alternative is a president who lies, whose public life has been a series of scandals from cattle futures to the destruction of documents under subpoena, who would be a third term for disastrous Obama policies at home and abroad, and who has never taken a position that wasn’t done from naked political expediency—from supporting the Iraq war in 2002 or opposing it later to invoking Abraham Lincoln to justify saying one thing in public and another in private.

And yet Trump is guilty of all of those things. Does he lie? Often. Has his life been a series of scandals? Absolutely-- he's been the subject of tabloid gossip and made-for-TV movies for decades. Would he continue Obama's policies? "The government's going to pay for it!" Does he take positions for naked political expediency? Of course he does; he has his base, and he is exploiting it; his position on Iraq is the same as Hillary's. Plus, I'm pretty sure Hillary never molested Chelsea, something I can't say about Donald and Ivanka. So the notion that people can use the specter of a Hillary Clinton presidency when the specter of a Donald Trump presidency is just as bad, if not worse, is not a good argument at all.

If you want people to stop Hillary Clinton, you'd better pick someone better than Hillary Clinton, which shouldn't have been that hard. In fact, technically, there's still time, since there are others on the ballot that fit the bill. Evan McMullin's eligible as a write-in in most states. Even Gary Johnson, for all his faults, would be an improvement, and he's on the ballot in all 50.

[corbe]

Evan McMullin's eligible as a write-in in most states. Even Gary Johnson, for all his faults, would be an improvement, and he's on the ballot in all 50.

@jmyrlefuller

  And to think this has become our only hope, depending on this 'shiny squirrel' electorate to Discard both the top choices and throw this election into the house, odds are somewhere between slim and nil.

    What a great chance we passed up with not nominating a Conservative.

[geronl]

[sinkspur]

A distinction must be made between those who supported some other GOP candidate and are backing Trump because he's not Hillary and those who supported Trump from the beginning.

The former are taking a bad situation and trying to make something good out of it.

The latter may be good people but have very flawed judgment.  No one who has subscribed to the conservative philosophy can, in good conscience, back Trump.  Nor can anyone who refuses to recognize that an abhorrent human being like Trump simply cannot occupy the highest office in the land.

Those who have been ardent Trump cheerleaders all along will wear that around their necks like a stinky sock.  Forever.

[Norm Lenhart]

A distinction must be made between those who supported some other GOP candidate and are backing Trump because he's not Hillary and those who supported Trump from the beginning.

Why? If you run someone over, does it matter if it was in an F350 or a Kenworth? The end result and the damage wrought is the same. There is one correct position. Not voting for Trump. Period.

You are looking to absolve a friend or relative. You are looking to split the baby. Actions have consequences. Ethics arent situational.

[libertybele]

   confession much



    Don't Leave us Major, I, and a few others I'm sure, enjoyed your White Trailer Park Trash intellect.

Wow.

[endicom]

Never heard so much whining and moaning in my life. You backed a pathetic lowlife loser, we don't. The end. Get over it.

Who do you back? Who are you voting for?

[Norm Lenhart]

Who do you back? Who are you voting for?

YOUR PAPERS!!!! GIVE ME YOUR PAPERZ!!!!!!!!

[libertybele]

@jmyrlefuller

  And to think this has become our only hope, depending on this 'shiny squirrel' electorate to Discard both the top choices and throw this election into the house, odds are somewhere between slim and nil.

    What a great chance we passed up with not nominating a Conservative.

Yes ... and so ... choices are; vote for the slim and nil chance, don't vote at all or vote for Trump.  Yes, the chance to nominate a conservative passed, and unless we maintain the majority in the Senate and the House; the chances of the GOP winning another election be it in the Senate or the House, will be slim to nil.  If Hillary gets in, we won't have to worry about the 2018 election; it will be over before they've even started.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Trump cheerleaders or NeverTrumpers... liberals have long derided conservatives as stupid. I"m beginning to see their point, frankly.