To Brad Thor and the “Trump gives us a chance at liberty” folks

Brad Thor NeverTrump

From the beginning, I’ve been against Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. I knew that Trump was specifically designed as a candidate to be able to give Hillary the only chance she’d have of beating any other Republican nominee. With that said, I can appreciate the appeal of the “lesser of two evils” argument.

It is, nevertheless, flawed. It comes down to understanding our priorities as a nation and as a conservative movement.

There are three options for conservative voters. I’ll get into them in a moment, but first I want to address the flaw in Brad Thor’s argument in his post on Hot Air titled, “Rethinking the #NeverTrump position.” Basically, Thor uses very appropriate analogies to paint the grim picture that this nation faces. He says that with Hillary, we’re absolutely doomed and with Trump we’re possibly doomed but we have a chance to survive.

Here’s the thing. Hillary will be the worst President of all time if she’s elected and will do great damage for the next four years. As a nation nearly a quarter-millennia old, we’ve gone through some pretty rough times and survived. From the Civil War to the Great Depression to World War II to Barack Obama, we’ve faced and survived challenges that would have destroyed countries with less perseverance.

We will survive Hillary. It won’t be easy. Conservatives must unite like never before. We must educate. We must watch over the actions of politicians on both sides of the fence and we must call them out when they go too far. But we will survive, God willing.

With Trump, there’s a chance that he could be better than Clinton. Unfortunately, there’s also a very big chance that he could be much worse. I’m not one who thinks that he will nuke New Zealand over an accusatory Tweet, but I do know one thing for certain: from Trump Air to Trump Mortgage to the USFL to Trump University, everything that this man has attempted to lead outside of real estate, entertainment, and gaming his bankruptcies has resulted in miserable and humiliating failures. If he demonstrated an iota of a the aptitude necessary to make proper decisions in business or through his campaign, I would consider leaning my perspective in favor of him being potentially better than Hillary. At this point, I think it’s 50/50.

Hillary as President would be a disaster. Trump as President could be a bit better or could be the existential threat that so many fear. She is the epitome of the Establishment and her damage can be mitigated through the legislature as well as the states. Trump is part Establishment, part political troglodyte. His leadership and how he represents the nation has a greater chance of bringing us down further on the world stage than to bring us up or maintain the status quo. His economic prowess is overstated based upon the fact that he’s rich. Trying to fix the nation’s economy is only loosely related to how you grow your real estate business during a booming real estate era after being born into a real estate empire.

There are true supporters for both candidates. We will dismiss them as the misled, ignorant, or hypnotized masses of lost fans following one of the two worst candidates in modern American history. The rest of us fall into the aforementioned three categories:

  1. Those who support Trump out of fear of Hillary.
  2. Those who support Hillary out of fear of Trump.
  3. Those who realize that both are so bad for this nation that neither can be supported and either should be opposed regardless of which one wins the White House.

This last category is the one that, for many conservatives, doesn’t make any sense. How can picking “none of the above” or selecting a sacrificial third party candidate be considered the right approach in an election so important? To understand this, we must look beyond election day. We have to look at 2018, 2020, and beyond. Standing in opposition to either disastrous candidate gives us the principled position of being pro-America. Participating in helping either candidate destroy the country removes all credibility, even for those who do it begrudgingly as Brad Thor is apparently doing.

If you support Clinton, you are a fool. If you support Trump, you’re a sucker. Whoever wins will do terrible things to the country. Six months to a year later when the dust settles and it’s apparent that they’re as bad as we know they’ll be, their supporters will only be able to say, “Ya, it’s bad, but it would have been worse.” Sadly, that argument won’t fly when the country faces the challenges that we’re certain to see over the next four years.

The only path for true conservatives or anyone with the political discernment to see the truth is to oppose both and focus all of our efforts on building the backup plan to put the pieces back together when the next President starts breaking things. This is why we’re having so much success putting together a new conservative party more rapidly than we could ever have imagined. People are flocking in ready to grab hammers and nails to build us a ladder that can get us out of the hole we’ve been digging for a long time.

I strongly encourage Thor to contact me to discuss this further. There’s a place for him in the future to rebuild the nation regardless of which disaster sits in the Oval Office next year, but he must be willing to hear our case and take a position of leadership.

JD Rucker

JD Rucker is Editor of this site as well as Soshable, a Federalist Christian Blog. He is a Christian, a husband, a father, and co-founder of the Federalist Party. Find him on Twitter or Facebook.

  1. I read Brad Thor’s thoughts, and I come to the same conclusion that I’ve been at for a couple of months now. You have good people that are letting fear determine, guide, or influence decisions. It is this type of fear, granted to a lesser degree, that has landed us where we are today. It is applicable to so many situations. Overall, I’m in agreement with you here. I don’t necessarily thing Trump is a plant or anything of that nature to improve Clinton’s chances, but the overall message I completely agree with. As I’ve noted previously, I will not let my vote be determined because of the fear of a Clinton Presidency. At the same time, I won’t fear a Donald Trump Presidency either. I will vote based on my personal positions, morals, beliefs, and who will best represent those, along with who I feel that I can trust to carry out or act upon the commitments that he or she makes. Clinton and Trump fit neither of those criteria for me, nor are either candidate ones that I can lay out solid reasoning to compromise on.

  2. Consider this scenario? Election laws basically state: if no candidate receives 50% (+1) of the Electoral vote (Article II; Section 1) that the House of Representatives in congress shall choose the President. So, the electoral college is made up of the whole number of Representatives and Senators in each state; not the elected folks in Washington, DC. So; who would/could they choose? They are bound in some states, but not all.
    No candidate gets 50% (+1)!
    Republican majority!


  3. Sadly, what the author dismisses is the complete abrogation of the right to possess arms in any meaningful way that would allow the defense of oneself and their loved ones. That is a clear desire of Clinton and her apparatchiks.

    The data is clear that criminals have an access to guns that cannot be stopped, just as they can’t keep drugs out of prison. Also clear is that “Gun Free” zones and signs not only mean nothing to criminals, but alerts them so as to have free reign to assault the people. Chicago bans all guns. Chicago is becoming a Killing Fields.

    A right once lost is hard to regain. Brad Thor has no need to call this author. The author needs to understand that a stacked court will take away the primary thing that makes us Americans – individual responsibility for our own safety and the means to not live in fear.

    1. What makes you think that Trump will be any better? Because he says he will be? A con man selling you lies is what he is in his quest for power, nothing more. Either will be an unmitigated disaster for this country, and our freedoms. I would certainly prefer that when the country goes into the toilet (as it certainly will with either of them at the helm), that the person in the White House has no connection, however tenuous, to Conservatives so that we are are seen by Americans as the solution to, and not the perceived cause of, the downfall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

© 2017 The New Americana