Donald Trump receives his fair share of vitriol. Despite the outrage he generates after nearly every media appearance, Trump remains the GOP frontrunner. This is unsurprising. Republican primary voters despise political correctness, and it seems regardless of how outlandish Trump’s statements are, as long as his rationale remains “I don’t have time for political correctness,” his support holds fast. Thus regardless of the merits of my fellow columnist Nazar Aljassar’s editorial, a plurality of the GOP base seems simply not to care how abhorrent Trump’s unfiltered speech becomes. They should. Donald Trump is cancer to the conservative cause, both from an ideological standpoint and in terms of electability. For those who wish to advance conservative principles, Trump is the vessel least fit for the job.
It is folly to believe Trump stands for any principles the American right purports to represent. On trade policy, Trump’s call for increased tariffs serves as a reminder, as Kevin D. Williamson of the National Review writes, “that populist conservatives have much more in common with populist progressives such as Senator Bernie Sanders than they do with the political tendency that connects Adam Smith to F. A. Hayek and Ronald Reagan.” On taxation, Trump’s nuance-free call for “the hedge fund guys” to pay more of their fair share is closer rhetorically and ideologically to the Democratic Party than his Republican primary opponents. Elizabeth Warren and Paul Krugman, not exactly stalwarts of American conservatism, have even declared Trump “right on economics.” Moreover, Trump’s past is littered with instances in which his principles directly clash with issues the GOP electorate claims to support. On abortion, gun control and his support for a single-payer health care plan, Trump is a “liberal’s liberal.” His supporters can argue that despite his past support for leftist policies, he has since come to his senses. But given that in the formative years of the Tea Party movement Trump was still donating heavily to the Democrats, I place the odds on Trump undergoing a legitimate ideological conversion at slim to none.
Most controversial, of course, is Trump’s plan for immigration reform. One might think that on this issue at least, he must convey some conservative bona fides. Alas, that is not the case. Merely calling for border security is not the exclusive domain of conservatives; even Bernie Sanders recognizes the necessity, although he dislikes the idea of a wall or fence. Thus while conservatives agree with securing the border in principle, Trump’s proposal is anathema to the conservative ideals of limited government and fiscal restraint. Deporting all illegal immigrants merely to allow the “good” ones back in is at best illogical. It would make far more sense to decide who is worthy enough of residency before spending billions in deportation costs. More troubling, though, is the mere specter of mass deportations. Republicans cannot proclaim themselves the party of limited government while simultaneously advocating for black-booted government thugs to roam neighborhoods demanding to see if your papers are in order. Reasonable people can disagree on the best way to cope with the roughly 11 million illegal immigrants currently residing in the United States, but the imagery conveyed by Trump’s call for indiscriminate deportations belongs in Stalin’s Soviet Union, not a Republican primary.
But perhaps attacking Trump on his principles, much like attacking him on his word choice, misses the point. Many primary voters are unsatisfied with politicians who merely generate good sound bites; they crave leadership, and see Trump as a viable solution. After all, Trump is a highly successful businessman, not a Washington insider. But rallying around Trump because the current political class is dysfunctional is like starting a house fire because your heater broke. Rather than help the conservative cause, he will only alienate the moderate and undecided voters conservatives must reach to enact their agenda. Since his presidential bid began, the Republican Party’s favorability numbers have plummeted. Media attention that could otherwise highlight other candidates’ policy proposals instead lasers in on Trump’s derogatory comments about women, his birtherism and his call to repeal the 14th amendment. This shift in focus from policy to lunacy has already contributed to the demise of Gov. Rick Perry and Gov. Scott Walker’s campaigns, two of the most successful conservative governors on the debate stage. With Trump absorbing nearly all the attention each news cycle, it is likely more candidates starved for exposure will follow.
The GOP electorate, by elevating Trump to the status of front-runner, is canonizing a counterfeit conservative and significantly damaging their chances to win the White House in 2016. Conservative columnist George Will likes to ask rhetorically, “If Donald Trump were a Democratic mole placed in the Republican Party to disrupt things, how would his behavior be any different?” This question is asked tongue in cheek — despite their past friendship, not many think Trump is a legitimate Clinton plant — but it illuminates the damage Trump causes. While the GOP boasts its most demographically diverse field in its history, its front runner alienates one key demographic group after another. Rather than highlight this youth and diversity to a populace that still views the GOP as the party of old white men, Trump’s supporters squander the opportunity by creating a platform for Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric. I don’t pretend to know which candidate is best suited to take up the mantle of American conservatism. But I do know there are far more knowledgeable and ideologically consistent conservatives currently in the presidential race, none with as many defects as Trump presents for a general election. Lionizing him is little short of partisan suicide.
Matt Winesett is a Viewpoint writer.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Big donors are dominating the Board of Visitors
By Ryan Williams | 2 days agoSuch appointments being dictated by connections and donations creates a Board composed of big donors instead of members passionate about University goals.
EDITORIAL: Collectives are a misinterpretation of the mission of NIL
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoA large driver of this inequality comes in the form of collectives, the structures many schools use to organize their NIL payments.
CARTER: Data science without sustainability is insufficient
By Nathaniel Carter | November 9, 2024The University appears committed to a future defined by data, but lacks the dedication to meeting this future’s energy needs in a sustainable way.
