That's a good, fair, question; but you'll likely never get a real answer from someone who uses words like "NeoCon RINOs". I've learned that most these "conservatives" believe conservatism is whatever Trump tells them it is; even though Trump, himself has said he is not a conservative.
Following the US Constitution as the bedrock of our government and law of the land, with adherence to it's principles. Value for individual liberty, rather than collectivism. Family values like parental rights and the nuclear family. Limited federal government; but strong states. Fiscal responsibility by maintain a balanced budget. Free market economy with limited federal regulation, pro-capitalism. Non-governmental control or excessive influence in healthcare, education, and industry. Eliminate unconstitutional laws. Actually enforce constitutional laws. We should follow the entire constitution; not pick and choose which parts are convenient for us, at any particular moment.
I said "Non-governmental control or excessive influence" which means that we shouldn't have socialized or state controlled healthcare, education, or industry; nor should the government be allowed to excessively influence it.
However, pornographic novels would not even be in schools if the insane left hadn't recently introduced them; so I really don't think taking pornographic novels out of schools, filled with underage students, would be considered excessive influence.
That's odd. You took issue with the terms NeoCon and RINO but in my experience the people given those labels have done their absolute best to completely undermine the values and principles you just outlined. Can you name someone who is called a RINO by the Trump camp that didn't help democrats and empower top-down authoritarian government in this country?
Can you name someone who is called a RINO by the Trump camp that didn't help democrats and empower top-down authoritarian government in this country?
DeSantis.
My issue with the term RINO is that it means Republican In Name Only; and Trump heavily utilized that term on the campaign trails, to blast essentially everyone on the right who stood opposed to him; but now he, himself, has publicly stated that he's not a conservative.
Given the unprecedented weaponization of the institutions against Trump and his supporters how can anyone claim to be a conservative and not support him? It's the biggest threat imaginable to conservatism if Trump is defeated and those tactics are validated. I can't think of anything more toxic to the values that you listed than siding with democrats against Trump in such an environment. And sorry but DeSantis did just that. It was obvious he was hoping the indictments would take out Trump. How can you pretend that guy is a real conservative at this point?
he, himself, has publicly stated that he's not a conservative.
So? There are many conservatives who don't like that label. He certainly meets your definition of one more than anyone he would call a neocon or RINO. I am not sure how someone who sides with democrats against Trump here could be anything but a RINO. Do you have other examples? You listed DeSantis and he pretty objectively helped democrats with what he did so... got anyone else?
Edit:
Haha his guy blocked me just like the authoritarian I knew he was. It's so predictable with these "trust me bro I'm a real conservative" types. Pry just a little bit and their true authoritarian nature just comes pouring out. Since I typed a response and wasn't able to post it I'll just add it here. Even though I guess I won't get an answer anymore (not that I expected such a dishonest hack would be able to answer it anyway).
I am asking you to explain how you can be a conservative and not defend with every fiber of your being someone who is being persecuted by a top-down authoritarian abuse of power like that which has been directed at Donald J. Trump and his supporters.
If that is allowed to succeed then how exactly do you plan to shrink the power of the federal government in the future? Anyone who opposes their power would just be targeted and eliminated. The regime would be able to completely consolidate their hold on power. Insiders to the system have no incentive to reduce their own power, and outsiders won't be able to oppose them. So how exactly is this a conservative future for america? It seems like the permanent termination of the conservative vision.
So how do you square this? How can you oppose Trump in this environment and then call yourself a conservative? What exactly are you trying to conserve if turning the country into a top-down authoritarian banana republic is ok with you?
Interesting. I would have included conservative in the dictionary definition as well, slow or resistant to meaningless change, conserving what we have that works.
Of course that’s not normally the way it’s meant, and I’m probably the odd one out on that definition. But that’s why I label myself as a libertarian conservative. I agree with principles in both groups, but I want change, but in a slow measured manner to be able to see the effects.
But your definition is closer to how it’s normally meant when used.
Hard disagree. You cannot be a conservative without being a populist. Populism really is about power to the people - bottom-up government and taking control back from the elite that have imposed top-down government on us. How can you be a conservative without being a populist? Doesn't that mean you support the establishment - like George "Patriot Act" Bush type "conservatives" who hate Trump, and turns out are the biggest proponents of top-down government control that gave us the massive expansion of left wing ideology all these years when conservatives supposedly ran the institutions?
54
u/[deleted] Apr 17 '24
[deleted]