I see that there's still tension between Trump Republicans and non-Trump Republicans.

[INVAR]

Maybe it's more accurate to say that Donald Trump is currently the face of a schism that has been present for a while? Either way when speaking of Republican unity in 2018 I think Donald Trump is very relevant to the conversation. He's a catalyst for infighting currently.

If anything Trump is a symptom of how far Republicans have separated themselves from what they once stood for.  If that means he is now the 'face' of the schism - then so be it.  He did not start or cause it.  He is just exacerbating it.

I have no interest in being 'united' with a party that told unwavering principled Conservatives to shut up, support whom they tell us to support or get out.  I have no interest in being in a party that acts just like Democrats in voice and deed.

Trump just inspires Republicans to act like he does and to push for payback and punishment on anyone not in lockstep with them and to become Apologists for Statism as long as their guy and their party does it.

The Nevers here haven't the slightest idea of what it means to be a conservative.

You have tried your hardest to show us what it means to be a "Conservative" in the post Obama era: devote full fealty to Trump as the greatest leader ever and justify deficit spending and positions that are exactly the same as the Democrat Left in order to show yourselves pragmatic and realistic.

[Cyber Liberty]

@jpsb

Read @INVAR and my posts above.   For the 836,742 time.  The problem isn’t trump.  The problem is YOU and your ilk who keep spouting stupid shit like what you did here. We give trump credit when he does conservative things.  But that ain’t good enough for you.   We must bow down in realty to him (and to y’all) and beg for your forgiveness.  Screw that and screw you.  I give credit when conservatism is advanced and I demean when it is not. 

You are the problem here because that isn’t good enough for you.

I find that it's the Partisans on both sides of the internal conflict that push me toward the opposite camp.  I'm a "Neither."

[roamer_1]

But yall just loved that sorry POS G.W. Bush.

@jpsb
FALSE.

The Nevers here haven't the slightest idea of what
it means to be a conservative. Trump is the most conservative president since IKE. Vastly more
conservative than any Bush.

Also false. More conservative??? That is utterly laughable. According to what criteria? Defend that statement if you can. Which you can't.

[Cyber Liberty]

@jpsb
FALSE.

Also false. More conservative??? That is utterly laughable. According to what criteria? Defend that statement if you can. Which you can't.

 

[roamer_1]

If anything Trump is a symptom of how far Republicans have separated themselves from what they once stood for.  If that means he is now the 'face' of the schism - then so be it.  He did not start or cause it.  He is just exacerbating it.

I have no interest in being 'united' with a party that told unwavering principled Conservatives to shut up, support whom they tell us to support or get out.  I have no interest in being in a party that acts just like Democrats in voice and deed.

This part is exactly right, and the crux of the situation.
I have zero fealty to party.

I have zero fealty to persons (Cruz is quickly losing traction with me, as an instance).

ALL I care about politically are the principles of Conservatism. And I think I speak for my fellows in that, all of whom have been regularly assaulted as 'purists', I am sure, as I have...

That Republicans do not stand upon those principles anymore at all is the issue. Somehow they feel they have the right to Conservative votes anyway, while Conservatives, having less and less loyalty to party as they go, are finding other political bodies to support instead.

I will never be a Republican again. The betrayal is so deep and so longstanding that trust in party is forever shattered.

Defend your positions and candidates upon the principles of Conservatism, or STFU.
Fear based angles trying to make me vote against the other side will not work.
Half-baked attempts to change Conservatism by hyphenation will not work.
Asinine attempts at in-group/out-group will not work.

If it is not Conservative, you ain't gonna win me any more.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I have no interest in being 'united' with a party that told unwavering principled Conservatives to shut up

I just love how you ignore that these same "unwavering principled Conservatives" were the ones giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp by working against the Republican candidate with a voracious zeal. 

Did you really expect the actions by these few to go unchallenged in the heat of a close election??

[Absalom]

But yall just loved that sorry POS G.W. Bush. The Nevers here haven't the slightest idea of what
it means to be a conservative. Trump is the most conservative president since IKE. Vastly more
conservative than any Bush.

---------------------------
As Russell Kirk asserted for Heritage decades ago;
Principled Conservatism is a body of precepts governing conduct,
concerning attitudes and behaviors involving human nature.
It was born in the Greece of Antiquity; primarily through Plato,
and has absolutely nothing, NOTHING, to do w/politics or religion.

[roamer_1]

I just love how you ignore that these same "unwavering principled Conservatives" were the ones giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp by working against the Republican candidate with a voracious zeal. 

Did you really expect the actions by these few to go unchallenged in the heat of a close election??

@Right_in_Virginia
Rather, giving neither aid, nor comfort to either camp... Your perspective is warped by your membership in one of those camps...

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia
Rather, giving neither aid, nor comfort to either camp... Your perspective is warped by your membership in one of those camps...

Yup.  And one or the other of "those camps" is going to win this war.

We'll fill you in on the details @roamer_1 after we've won.   

[Cyber Liberty]

Yup.  And one or the other of "those camps" is going to win this war.

I wish I could agree with that....

[roamer_1]

Yup.  And one or the other of "those camps" is going to win this war.

We'll fill you in on the details @roamer_1 after we've won.   

@Right_in_Virginia

Ahh... more 'winning'.
It seems it doesn't matter what you've 'won'. 

[mountaineer]

I just love how you ignore that these same "unwavering principled Conservatives" were the ones giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp by working against the Republican candidate with a voracious zeal. 

Nonsense. I've been at TBR since day one, and never saw anyone giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp. Not being enthusiastic about the ultimate GOP candidate in 2016 is nowhere near the same as offering support to the Dem candidate. There actually is a middle ground.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia

Ahh... more 'winning'.  It seems it doesn't matter what you've 'won'.   

@roamer_1 ... relax.  You needn't still try so hard ---- I already understand you don't know what's happening; and I'm okay with that.   

Shalom.   

[Dexter]

Nonsense. I've been at TBR since day one, and never saw anyone giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp. Not being enthusiastic about the ultimate GOP candidate in 2016 is nowhere near the same as offering support to the Dem candidate. There actually is a middle ground.

It's surprising that Hillary supporters manage to find the power button and their browser icon to make their presence known online.

[Frank Cannon]

There actually is a middle ground.

Not anymore.

[mountaineer]

It's surprising that Hillary supporters manage to find the power button and their browser icon to make their presence known online.

What does that mean?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Nonsense. I've been at TBR since day one, and never saw anyone giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp.

Working for the defeat of the Republican presidential candidate DID most certainly give aid and comfort to the enemy political camp.  It gave them hope, a reason to believe in victory and it gave them energy.  Worst of all, it almost worked.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1 ... relax.  You needn't still try so hard ---- I already understand you don't know what's happening; and I'm okay with that.   

Shalom.

I understand exactly what is happening @Right_in_Virginia . An ad-hoc 'conservatism' without the principles thereof.

That is not winning.
That is capitulation.

[mountaineer]

Working for the defeat of the Republican presidential candidate DID most certainly give aid and comfort to the enemy political camp.  It gave them hope, a reason to believe in victory and it gave them energy.  Worst of all, it almost worked.

I still don't know what you mean. Some of us were less than enthused about candidate Trump, but still voted for him because we knew candidate Clinton would be a complete disaster.  (That would include me, by the way).  So our lack of enthusiasm equates to aid, comfort, hope and a reason to believe? I don't think so.

As for those who voted in 2016 for none of the above or one of the fringe candidates, it still is not fair to say they support the Hilldebeaste. They simply didn't support either of the two major party candidates.

And why are we rehashing 2016 right now anyway? Shouldn't we be focusing on the elections in a few weeks?

[Right_in_Virginia]

I understand exactly what is happening @Right_in_Virginia . An ad-hoc 'conservatism' without the principles thereof.

That is not winning.
That is capitulation.

Nah, you're confused.  But bless your wonderful heart @roamer_1   

We'll leave a light on for you.   

[Dexter]

What does that mean?

It was mean. I was implying that turning on a computer and operating it on a basic level is an impressive feat for somebody that voted for Hillary. I figured the crowd here would forgive me. 

[roamer_1]

Working for the defeat of the Republican presidential candidate DID most certainly give aid and comfort to the enemy political camp.  It gave them hope, a reason to believe in victory and it gave them energy.  Worst of all, it almost worked.

@Right_in_Virginia
Translated out of butt-hurt Republican-speak, you mean your movement is so poor in content that it was barely able to beat the most beatable candidate in decades...

The race to the bottom continues.

[roamer_1]

Nah, you're confused.  But bless your wonderful heart @roamer_1   

We'll leave a light on for you.   

You are welcome to defend it upon the principles, @Right_in_Virginia , but you won't.

 

[mystery-ak]

It was mean. I was implying that turning on a computer and operating it on a basic level is an impressive feat for somebody that voted for Hillary. I figured the crowd here would forgive me. 

WOW..spoken like a true dem..I'm not buying your epiphany btw.

[Cyber Liberty]

Working for the defeat of the Republican presidential candidate DID most certainly give aid and comfort to the enemy political camp.  It gave them hope, a reason to believe in victory and it gave them energy.  Worst of all, it almost worked.

There a lot of Bernie Socialcrats who were plenty upset Hillary rigged the Nomination, and they didn't vote for Hillary because of it.  This phenomenon exists in all parties, so it take a bit of hubris to think it only happens with Republicans.  I wouldn't go so far as to say the Socialcrats provided "aid and comfort" to us.

[Dexter]

WOW..spoken like a true dem..

Now I'm confused. I am making fun of Hillary supporters.

I'm not buying your epiphany btw.

For real?

[mystery-ak]

...for real

[mountaineer]

NYT agonizes (and I comment):

What if the Republicans Win Everything Again?
Total victory for the G.O.P. would mean Trump unleashed.

Let me pause here to say 

Continuing:

By David Leonhardt
Opinion Columnist

The end of Robert Mueller’s investigation. [OK] The loss of health insurance for several million people. [Nonsense] New laws that make it harder to vote. [Even more nonsense] More tax cuts for the rich. [Everyone gets tax cuts, doofus] More damage to the environment. [Nonsense] A Republican Party molded even more in the image of President Trump. [Not bloody likely]

These are among the plausible consequences if the Republicans sweep the midterm elections and keep control of both the House and Senate. [Uh, no] And don’t fool yourself. That outcome, although not the most likely one, [then why did you lead with that?] remains possible [and monkeys could fly out your butt]. The last couple of weeks of polling have shown how it could happen.

Voters who lean Republican — including whites across the South — could set aside their disappointment with Trump and vote for Republican congressional candidates. Voters who lean left — including Latinos and younger adults — could turn out in low numbers, as they usually do in midterm elections. The Republicans’ continuing efforts to suppress turnout ???? could also swing a few close elections.

No matter what, Democrats will probably win the popular vote in the House elections, for the first time since 2012. [Maybe] Trump, after all, remains unpopular. [With some folks] But the combination of gerrymandering and the concentration of Democratic voters in major cities means that a popular-vote win won’t automatically translate into a House majority.

In the Senate, the election already seems to be slipping away from the Democrats.  [works for me]  ...

And now the link to the rest of this sobfest: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/19/opinion/sunday/midterm-elections-republican-party-trump-senate-house.html

If only the left's tears were good for anything ...

[INVAR]

I just love how you ignore that these same "unwavering principled Conservatives" were the ones giving aid and comfort to the Hillary camp by working against the Republican candidate with a voracious zeal.

And whom would those be in particular???

The 'Establishment' leadership of the oligarchy that hands the Democrats their agenda fully-funded?

The ones who have no problem spending my great grandchildren into oblivion on their borrowed tax dime? 

Or the pissants like me that had enough of the adultery and abuse and voted third party while there is still opportunity to have a hand in shaping what remains of a dissolving civil society?

Did you really expect the actions by these few to go unchallenged in the heat of a close election??

Working for the defeat of the Republican presidential candidate DID most certainly give aid and comfort to the enemy political camp.  It gave them hope, a reason to believe in victory and it gave them energy.  Worst of all, it almost worked.

....And one or the other of "those camps" is going to win this war.

Your fellow conpatriots already promised me death for treason for being vocal about my refusal to vote for Trump and go third party during the primary and the General.  Liberty does not exist among the Left or the Trumplican 'right'.

So I can care less which mob of thugs and wannabe despots 'win' this 'war'.  I find zero difference in them and their behavior only continues to validate my assertion and both 'camps' have illustrated that they are clear and present dangers to my liberty and those of my posterity.

You may choose a Stalin over a Trotsky - but it makes no difference to liberty which of them you decide to make your ruler - liberty loses all the more under the grand lie that one is better than the other.

3 Trillion dollars plus just this year alone with absolutely no willpower or intention to slow the spending and printing money out of thin air means your future is already a barren wasteland.

You just cannot see it yet because your pantry is full, your heat and AC is still working and you have all your entertainment at your fingertips.  Once that comes to an abrupt end - it's not going to matter which camp is ruling.

[Dexter]

...for real

What exactly do you think I am claiming? I'm not a Republican; I said that in the post. There are things Bernie Sanders says that I agree with and there are things that Ron Paul, Trey Gowdy and other right wing people say that I agree with. I am and always will be a mixed bag. I openly admit I still have some large differences in world view compared to a lot of the posters here. I have absolutely zero partisan loyalty. That's how I was able to come here, make friends and learn things. If I was just another liberal I'd be calling you an idiot and a Nazi sympathizer. I hope that after on and off spending the better part of a decade as part of this community I have proven that I am different. If not, well, honestly that kinda sucks.

[Wingnut]

Not anymore.

Yep that ship has sailed.  Us against them time.  The middle ground is only for ideological burials now.   

[mystery-ak]

What exactly do you think I am claiming? I'm not a Republican; I said that in the post. There are things Bernie Sanders says that I agree with and there are things that Ron Paul, Trey Gowdy and other right wing people say that I agree with. I am and always will be a mixed bag. I openly admit I still have some large differences in world view compared to a lot of the posters here. I have absolutely zero partisan loyalty. That's how I was able to come here, make friends and learn things. If I was just another liberal I'd be calling you an idiot and a Nazi sympathizer. I hope that after on and off spending the better part of a decade as part of this community I have proven that I am different. If not, well, honestly that kinda sucks.

So what *title* do you give yourself....Lib, Indy..etc?

[Sanguine]

I still don't know what you mean. Some of us were less than enthused about candidate Trump, but still voted for him because we knew candidate Clinton would be a complete disaster.  (That would include me, by the way).  So our lack of enthusiasm equates to aid, comfort, hope and a reason to believe? I don't think so.

As for those who voted in 2016 for none of the above or one of the fringe candidates, it still is not fair to say they support the Hilldebeaste. They simply didn't support either of the two major party candidates.

And why are we rehashing 2016 right now anyway? Shouldn't we be focusing on the elections in a few weeks?

Good points all, but your last point is particularly good.  Why ARE we still rehashing what has already happened?  What's the point?  What do we have to do to get it to stop?

[Dexter]

So what *title* do you give yourself....Lib, Indy..etc?

I don't label myself. One because I don't know of a label I'd fit into and two because I think labels have a very anti-intellectual impact on politics.

[mystery-ak]

Good points all, but your last point is particularly good.  Why ARE we still rehashing what has already happened?  What's the point?  What do we have to do to get it to stop?

I'm more worried about Nov 6th right now

[mystery-ak]

I don't label myself. One because I don't know of a label I'd fit into and two because I think labels have a very anti-intellectual impact on politics.

I don't label myself anymore either...other than being a conservative

[Frank Cannon]

Why ARE we still rehashing what has already happened?  What's the point?  What do we have to do to get it to stop?

If you can answer those questions you would be up for the Nobel next go round.

[mountaineer]

Living in the past is so unproductive.

[Dexter]

I don't label myself anymore either...other than being a conservative

I do not fit that label across the board. I am conservative on some issues, like immigration and the 2nd amendment. You honestly were the last person I expected to get this kind of vibe from. I thought we've always been cool.

[Dexter]

I'm more worried about Nov 6th right now

Unity would help. I don't want to watch conservatives destroy themselves even though I am not one of them. The whole point of this thread was "You people are STILL fighting about Trump? You're STILL mad at each other? Get over it and prepare to keep pushing against the left." People can be reasoned with; I will never stop believing that.

[roamer_1]

I don't label myself. One because I don't know of a label I'd fit into and two because I think labels have a very anti-intellectual impact on politics.

I don't think that's true. Labels are nothing but shorthand, and can save a whole lot of time in description.

In a religious context, if the guy I am talking to declares himself a Missouri Synod Lutheran, and I declare myself a Two-House Messianic, that doesn't mean that either of us fit those bills perfectly, but it saves a ton of time describing where we both are coming from.

That's all labels do.

[Dexter]

I don't think that's true. Labels are nothing but shorthand, and can save a whole lot of time in description.

In a religious context, if the guy I am talking to declares himself a Missouri Synod Lutheran, and I declare myself a Two-House Messianic, that doesn't mean that either of us fit those bills perfectly, but it saves a ton of time describing where we both are coming from.

That's all labels do.

Labels are not without use. There's a reason why they exist. I just think people turn their brains off when they hear certain labels because they're so conditioned to believe nothing good can come from anybody attached to that label. Both sides are very guilty of that. We need to focus on thoughts and ideas, not labels.

[roamer_1]

Unity would help. I don't want to watch conservatives destroy themselves even though I am not one of them. The whole point of this thread was "You people are STILL fighting about Trump? You're STILL mad at each other? Get over it and prepare to keep pushing against the left." People can be reasoned with; I will never stop believing that.

Conservatives have done no such thing. To capitulate and discard Conservatism in order to placate Tumpsters and Tumpsterism would be that destruction.

You will no longer have unity. It will not happen.
Tumpsterism is based in populism and pragmatism, and holds no truth evident.
Conservatism is based in self-evident truth, and the preservation thereof.
There may be some unity where and when the two intersect by chance, but only then, by coincidence. But as a rule, the two are necessarily at crossed purposes, every bit as much as the difference between Conservatives and liberals...

[mountaineer]

I don't want to watch conservatives destroy themselves even though I am not one of them.

Your concern is touching. And interesting.

[roamer_1]

Labels are not without use. There's a reason why they exist. I just think people turn their brains off when they hear certain labels because they're so conditioned to believe nothing good can come from anybody attached to that label. Both sides are very guilty of that. We need to focus on thoughts and ideas, not labels.

Hard to do with folks who only care about popularity and winning.

[Dexter]

Your concern is touching. And interesting.

Balance is necessary. The Democrats would bleep up everything if conservatism went into hibernation.

[Cyber Liberty]

Unity would help. I don't want to watch conservatives destroy themselves even though I am not one of them. The whole point of this thread was "You people are STILL fighting about Trump? You're STILL mad at each other? Get over it and prepare to keep pushing against the left." People can be reasoned with; I will never stop believing that.

^^^^^^^^ This.  This is why I want you to stick around TBR.  That's pure optimism (meant in a good way) that I like to read on these threads.

[Dexter]

^^^^^^^^ This.  This is why I want you to stick around TBR.  That's pure optimism (meant in a good way) that I like to read on these threads.

Thank you.

Optimism tastes so much better than pessimism. It's more useful too. I think sometimes people need to be reminded that anger and negativity are poisonous. Do everything you can to keep them out of your thoughts and actions. If somebody says something cruel and unfair just remember that that is projection of what they're feeling inside at that moment. You can choose to let it inside of you too or you can refuse to be phased by it.

[INVAR]

To capitulate and discard Conservatism in order to placate Tumpsters and Tumpsterism would be that destruction.

We have both heard it stated emphatically that only through Trump can Conservatism exist and advance.  I reject the idea and the notion completley.  Conservatism is not tied down to any individual and not to party either, despite the fact so many insist that it be tied to both person and party.  Such a thing is where monarchy and dictatorship are birthed.

Conservatism is based in self-evident truth, and the preservation thereof.
There may be some unity where and when the two intersect by chance, but only then, by coincidence. But as a rule, the two are necessarily at crossed purposes, every bit as much as the difference between Conservatives and liberals...

Wisdom speaks there.

But few are listening.

[corbe]

   Count me among the few that are.