Election 2016: I. The Case for Donald Trump

This is the first part of a five-part series I will do this week making the case for and against each of the major candidates, with a wrap-up on Friday. I did this in 2012 and I will observe the same ground rule I did then: making the case for a candidate means making the case for a candidate, not a case against the opponent. That’s the subject of later posts. So “he’s not Hillary” is not a reason I will list for voting for Trump and “she’s not Trump” is not a reason I will list for voting for Clinton. Each one of them will get their own special post all to themselves about they don’t deserve our votes.

I’ll swallow the bitterest pill first: making the case to vote for Donald Trump.

Making the case for Donald Trump is exceedingly difficult because it’s not really clear what Trump stands for. He was for a wall, but now it may be more a virtual wall. He was going to deport illegals, but now he’s not sure, but maybe he still will. He’s outlined policies on his website but most of them are GOP boilerplate and are often contradicted by things he says in speeches or debates. He says he wants a moratorium on new regulation, which sounds good. But I have no idea if he’ll actually do it.

So the absence of ironclad policy, we’re left with a few things:

Trump may, in the end, just be a rubber stamp for the GOP: There have been a lot rumblings that Trump is not terribly interested in governing. His son reportedly conveyed an offer to Kasich to let the latter become the most powerful Vice-President in American history. His positions and his list of Supreme Court nominees are mostly copied from the Republican mainstream. If that is so, then Trump’s talk about policy is kind of irrelevant. Trump would become mostly a figurehead with Congress having the real power which is a bit closer to what the founders intended. A vote for Trump would be a proxy for President Paul Ryan.

A Trump election might end parts of the Culture War: Trump has evinced little to no interest in the Culture War. He bungled the abortion question because he doesn’t care. He’s been fairly friendly to gays and his election would probably put the last nail in the coffin of the anti-gay conservative faction (a nail many Republicans would love to see driven). Trump is less moderate on issues of policing, immigration and race. But this would be progress. Of a sort.

The GOP may have earned a second chance to govern: I have been reluctant in the past to give the GOP full control of the government again. The last time, they blew spending out the window, wrecked the economy and bungled a war. As a general rule, I favor divided government and the divide I favor is the one where the GOP controls the purse strings.

But Ryan has laid out a conservative agenda and shown the ability to get it through Congress. It’s been ten years. Maybe they deserve another chance.

The Supreme Court: This, even to the biggest skeptics of Trump, is the main reason to support him. I do this every election, but here is the age of the Supreme Court justices:

Liberal: Ginsberg (83), Breyer (78), Sotomayor (62), Kagan (56)
Moderate: Kennedy (80)
Conservative: Thomas (68), Roberts (61), Alito (66)

With the passing of Scalia, the Court will shift Left if Clinton is elected. She could also replace Ginsberg, Breyer and Kennedy on the Court, cementing a liberal majority for the next twenty years. You can, if you want, find many gleeful articles on liberal websites about what they hope a liberal court could do — overturn Heller, stomp out Citizens United, dash what is left of federalism, produce an unfettered regulatory state.

Now this is a bit of wish-casting by the Left. The Court tends not to overturn precedent so lightly. But some of the most important SCOTUS decisions in recent years have been 5-4. If Clinton is elected, those decisions will not be resolved in our favor.

That’s pretty much it. There are a few other reasons people have touted but none of them cross me as likely or even desirable. For example, Trump isn’t going to “smash the establishment”; he is the establishment. Of the reasons given above, the one that really resonates is SCOTUS. Assuming that Trump goes with conservative justices, the fate of the Court hangs in the balance.

Is that reason enough to vote for him? Stay tuned.

Comments are closed.

  1. AlexInCT

    And he is not a contemptible, lying corrupt monster like the Clintons, the Obamas, the Pelosis, the Reids, and a whole other list of despicable entities that have neither shame nor morals and have enriched themselves selling lies to people that are envious of what others have or have achieved and want to tear it all down.

    Other than that the guy is a buffoon. But I would much rather have one of those in charge than someone that gives us more of what we got from Obama. The world can’t take anymore of this shit.

    Thumb up 0

  2. CM

    How do you know that he’s healthy. And yeah his history does suggest that he’s contemptible, lying and corrupt (Trump University and not paying his contractors being but two examples).

    I love how Hal went to extremes to point out that this is about making the case for Trump, and not against Hillary and yet both comments are exactly that. Brilliant.

    Thumb up 3

  3. Hal_10000 *

    I love how Hal went to extremes to point out that this is about making the case for Trump, and not against Hillary and yet both comments are exactly that. Brilliant.

    As I said, it’s hard to make the case for Trump without saying, “he’s not Clinton”.  And it’s hard to make the case for Clinton without saying, “she’s not Trump.”

    Thumb up 2

  4. Iconoclast

    In the long run, it doesn’t matter — Clinton is the next POTUS.  It was pretty much decided about 20 seconds after Obama’s nomination in 2008.  And I’ve been saying she’s next in line ever since his re-election. Trump’s nomination pretty much seals it.

    What the Founders created will be no more.  We’re becoming USSR-lite.  The COTUS no longer applies.   I hope everyone can live with that.  I’m sure some will be thrilled.

    Thumb up 0

  5. AlexInCT

    And it’s hard to make the case for Clinton without saying, “she’s not Trump.”

    It is hard to make the case for Clinton period. She is a despicable, corrupt, entitled, criminal. And that’s me being generous and not saying what she really is.

    Thumb up 0

  6. AlexInCT

    What the Founders created will be no more.  We’re becoming USSR-lite

    Lets hope it is just that. I suspect we will be giving North Korea or Venezuela a run for their money when these elitist globalist crooks finally get what they really want in place.

    Thumb up 0

  7. AlexInCT

    Please Alex, tell us what Secretary Clinton “really is”.  Don’t mince your words, and don’t be vague.

    I don’t have to tell you shit idiot. If you bothered to do the research yourself, you could find all of it like I did, because it is all out there. Just because the democrat operatives with bylines that have finally dropped all pretense of not being partisan hacks have not only ignored damaging stories about her, but helped her lie, doesn’t change the facts.

    She is a criminal. Multiple times over. From the illegal server that should have denied her the ability for any security clearance ever again and a minimum of 20 years behind bar,s to the fact she used her government office to sell favors to foreign powers (like Kerry which just got caught doing the same), this woman has a trail of crimes that give even Obama a run for the money. She can’t tell the truth even when it would help her. And the most dangerous thing is that she feels she is owed the presidency because she thinks she is special. The democrat party is the US’ greatest crime syndicate. And the two capo families are the Obamas and the Clintons.

    But yeah, pretend I am the one with a problem because I point out that she is treated differently because she is a democrat. If anything this country needs a president that is not a democrat for the sole reason that it is the only time that office’s powers might be checked.

    Nixon called. He wants the office back, because he rightly claims he was run out of town for far less.

    Thumb up 0

  8. ilovecress

    As I said, it’s hard to make the case for Trump without saying, “he’s not Clinton”.  And it’s hard to make the case for Clinton without saying, “she’s not Trump.”

    Here’s the weird thing. It’s hard for you to make a case for Hillary because you’re conservative, and she’s liberal (I guess). By definition, a site called ‘right-thinking’ should have a hard time making a case for Hillary without saying she’s not trump. Democrats can absolutely make a case for Hillary without mentioning Trump. Republicans don’t seem to be able to do the same.

    A site called ‘right-thinking’ should absolutely be able to make an argument for Trump based on his conservative ideals. The fact that the Republican nominee is running on a platform of not being a liberal should scare the shit out of you. Because your party is no longer running on the basis that conservative ideas (smaller govt, lower taxes for growth etc etc) are actually better for the country. Your side just runs on the platform of not being the other side. So what happens if he wins? Him being ‘not Hillary’ goes away, and you’re left being Governed by…… what?


    Thumb up 1

  9. Iconoclast

    cress, you’re simply repeating what many of us have been saying for months on end.  About the only reason there is for leaning toward Trump is Supreme Court appointments.  Yeah, it’s a big deal, something that will have impact for decades.  And even if it’s only this one thing, it’s enough to offset the otherwise near-perfect balance of contempt I have for both candidates.

    Thumb up 0

View Mobile Site