![]() ![]() Led by Trump, the GOP walked partially away from this stance when it backed bipartisan jail-break legislation in the form of the First Step Act.īut unlike the Democrats, few Republicans have an appetite for more such “steps.” And Republicans stand against the kind of ludicrous bail reform Democrats have implemented in various cities and against Soros-backed Dem prosecutors whose sympathy for criminals overrides their willingness, if any, to prosecute many of them. Speaking of crime, the GOP stands for stiffer sentencing of criminals than the Democrats do. It views the police not as a problem, but as a key part of the solution to rampant crime in America. It’s willing to entertain police reform proposals, but opposes defunding the police, reducing funding for the police, using “violence interrupters” to replace police officers, and so forth. The GOP stands behind local police forces. It wants the defense budget to be increased significantly. The GOP stands for a stronger military (and a less woke one) than we have today. It stands, for example, for less federal regulation than exists today and for less taxation. The GOP stands for a considerably more limited government than the Democrats do. (Some conservatives are frustrated that the GOP isn’t more innovative, but standing for old stuff isn’t the same thing as standing for nothing.) What does the GOP stand for? With a few exceptions, pretty much the same things it stood for pre-Trump. And failing to stand up to a bully isn’t the same thing as failing to stand for anything substantive, especially if the bully stands (or pretends to) for many of things you stand for. But lack of courage isn’t the same thing as lack of an agenda. One can blame GOP leaders for lacking the courage to denounce Trump’s outrageous behavior - an easy enough take for pundits who don’t have to worry about running for office. ![]() And this is more than a theoretical possibility if (1) the demagogue became the party’s leader because the rank-and-file believed other leaders weren’t fighting hard and effectively enough on behalf that agenda and (2) the demagogue, despite his other failings, has not abandoned the agenda. It’s possible for a party to nominate and continue to support a narcissistic demagogue and still stand for a coherent policy agenda. Their understandable disgust with the GOP for making Trump its leader, and continuing to back him, causes them to assume that the party isn’t about anything other than serving Trump. This, I believe, is a central fallacy of the NeverTrumpers. However, it contains what I think is an obviously false claim - that the Republican Party has no cause other than consolidating power (which is no cause at all) and “defending whatever Trump’s latest boorish or corrupt thought-fart happens to be.” I’m also happy to learn that he will land on his feet at The Dispatch, an anti-Trump enterprise where he should thrive.Īllahpundit’s farewell piece is well worth reading. I’m happy to read that Allahpundit leaves Hot Air on excellent terms with his longtime colleague Ed Morrissey (a fact that Ed confirms). It amazes me that he lasted so long at a site that, as he puts it, serves a pro-Trump populist readership. He deserves great credit for hanging in there and taking so much abuse from the Trumpy internet mob. I’ve probably read more anti-Trump articles by him than by all other pundits combined. Allahpundit deserves great credit for the quality and quantity of his work.Īllahpundit is an unabashed NeverTrumper. I know from experience how hard it can be to write three posts a day. And it seems to me that there were very few short or “easy” posts among them. In his farewell post, he says he averaged six posts per day during his 16 years at Hot Air.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |