They’re really just a bunch of stealth liberal Hillary-lovers who have only been endorsing Republicans all this time to make us think they didn’t like Hillary.
2 Likes
Definitely some intellectual and thought-provoking points.
With that said; I tend to be a “bottom-line” kind of person; and the essence of what he is saying is Vote for Trump now…today…2016…or witness a total collapse of Conservatism and all that we will suffer as a result.
Many Conservatives are saying that to VOTE for Trump will lead to the same fate.
Maybe it’s my idealism and my faith in the Republic and Americans as a whole…but it seems like a fatalistic (some would say realistic?) view.
Thoughts?
That is interesting. Any idea what his specialization in the field was? Most I know of come from an international relations and strategic/security studies specialization.
P.S. There are also plenty of military officers that go on from a Poli-Sci PhD to staff officer positions, academia, and the private sector. I even had a professor in my undergraduate that was both a political scientist and a reserve intelligence officer assigned to JSOC.
Not sure. It was just a local university, so I don’t know how well developed their poli-sci curriculum was, or is.
He’s a very intelligent guy though and no doubt a great asset.
And there is a third view - that conservatism will not be killed by voting for Trump or not voting for Trump, but that it is already dead regardless:
(About a month old, but good.)
1 Like
I like it too. I think one of the things done right in the Dem primary is that the majority of their states are proportionally elected, so you can win votes/delegates in a state you lose if you win that district.
I do not believe they are strictly along the congressional district lines, states are split into larger pieces of 6 or so, but the idea is great.
I am a fan. The flip side is though…gerrymandering now becomes MUCH more of a concern with this model.
Pretty much. Hillary wins, we die. Trump wins, we may die. Don’t vote for Trump and there is no hope for conservatism going forward. Vote for Trump and there may be no hope for conservatism going forward. To me the Trump vote, since he won the nomination, has come down to a dice roll and the author summed it up pretty nicely with the title “Flight 93 election.”
I’m more worried about the death of ideas than losing an election. Which vote turns out better for liberty?
(I still have no idea what I’m going to do when I get in the booth in a few months aside from not voting for Hillary.)
1 Like
Ouch!
But, you know, totally biased for the pants suit.
1 Like
An informative piece but I would argue that the Conservative movement (at least in it’s ideological and pure state) has never really existed. It latched on to various populous voting blocks to garner it’s support but never properly propagated the conservative ideals and principles en masse as the liberal opposition has.
On the optimistic side I don’t believe that Conservatism will ever disappear as it’s roots are based in logic and fact. I see the inevitable demise of the Trump movement as a reevaluation of the dependency that conservatism has had and a potential rebirth of a political movement that will be dependent only on its own merits.
But he isn’t a conservative at all…
I truly do not understand the logic here. Both candidates are planning to take a dump on the Constitution. They’re just aiming for different parts of it.
My take on lifelong academics especially in soft sciences:
They never are market facing and spend their whole life living off government grants/tax payer money. What could your average bookish henpecked academic offer to the real world when they couldn’t even make it in the free market?
and
Higher education has seen a hostile takeover by the left. Walk into your average political science class and you’ll have a lefty professor spouting positions left even of the typical American pinko. Their opposition to Trump is an unintentional endorsement
Gary Johnson:
DO YOU REALLY WANT TO HAND THE NUCLEAR CODES TO A GUY WHO SAYS SOMETHING LIKE THIS?!?!?!?
Trump doesn’t know anything about Aleppo either, you could tell him it’s the name of a new hotel in Vegas or AC and he would fall for it.
3 Likes
And he’s greatly critized for it on this forum. Some of these critics are Gary Johnson supporters. Will they apply the same criticism to their preferred candidate?
I think he will get some criticism, but I would expect Johnson having been a former governor to have at least some idea of where Aleppo is and what is/has been going on there. Trump having never spent a day in politics, other than bribing those he needs for favors, has a little more of an excuse for not knowing. Then again, do people want someone who never spent a day in politics, that is yet to be seen.
For the record, Matt Lauer is a goof. He should not be holding any kind of interview involving politics.
1 Like
It isn’t indicative of having no depth on foreign policy. It’s an error, but if they asked him about the Syrian refugee crisis generally, he’d have an opinion.
He was contrite about not recognizing the city’s name, and owned it. It isn’t evidence of temperment or judgment. It’s a nothingburger.
3 Likes
Your MRA is showing, you benthic little loser.
Hell hath frozen over, we agree.
This is my take.
Trump says Obama is the founder of ISIS.
He’s give the opportunity to restate by Hugh Hewitt.
Trump doubles down and literally claims Obama is the founder of ISIS.
That gets a pass.
Gary Johnson makes a clear blunder.
Says this:
But he’s the guy that shouldn’t have access to the codes, okay…
3 Likes
Didn’t you know? The only one getting laid on t-nation is you