An interesting read

[VikingsGuy]

TRIGGER ALERT:

If you have a hard time separating your feelings/emotions from a theoretical discussion on the course of political development I suggest you stop reading now. If you are sure that all conservatives and all Republicans are now evil and have always been evil then you may want to move along. If you think capitalism is just an irredeemable dressed-up version of feudalism, then this is probably not worth your time. If you think Mitch McConnel is a dirty traitor to conservatism, and Scalia is too liberal for your taste, then I suggest you find a different thread. Or if you are just bored by political discussions that don't involve namecalling and facebook memes, please pass on this.

-----

If you like political theory (especially if you like Edmond Burke), or if you wonder what options do traditional conservatives have to pivot the GOP post-Trump, this is an article worth your time. As some of us bemoan the loss of the underpinnings of the Reagan Revolution and (as some of us see) the GOP falling into random populist pandering this provides food for thought. No major answers, but begins to set a framework to rebuild conservatism, much as Goldwater and Reagan did half a century ago.

A New Conservatism

The circumstances today suggest that a realignment around a multiethnic, working-class conservatism might just have a chance.

www.foreignaffairs.com

(if this link leaves you behind a paywall, try accessing it from this one: https://americancompass.org/article...freeing-the-right-from-free-market-orthodoxy/)

 

[Europe]

I will go first, but possibly only because others are afraid that if they say what they are really thinking this thread will be shut down and they will be banned from the forum I had read the article earlier today.

If your a conservative or Republican the bottom line is "now what ? " no one can deny that Trump was a flawed candidate in 2016. I said "candidate", not individual, as it is not my place or role to judge others. But as a politician, he was a stretch, at best, based on his life up to that point, in his life, plus he had never held a public office, he was a business man .

And in my humble opinion that ( being a business man ) plus I thought Mrs Clinton was a weak candidate, is exactly why he got elected. Some of us were so tired of politicians, both the business man part of Trump and his "draining the swamp" message, resonated.

Make other countries pay their fair share of the costs to be part of the United Nations, and collect the money that is owed to us from other countries, instead of raising taxes on the citizens of this country. His determination to shut down drug trafficking, human trafficking, illegal crossings at the border was appreciated by many, for sure by some ranchers in Arizona that I know.

And although approx 75 million Americans wanted him of four more years, he didn't get re elected----so---the point of the Article is "Now What? ". In my personal opinion I dont feel Trump should run again but he could help other candidates get elected, as he still has a strong and large following.

I will admit, I like the business man approach. How many of you that own your own business, could stay in business if you ran your business the way our Govt runs our country . They mention Ronald Regan in the article. Yes, I liked him, but he also was not a true or lifelong politician.

I have more thoughts and opinions but they are the types of thoughts and opinions that need to be discussed at a dinner table or around a campfire, not here

Posted, with respect for everyones opinion on this subject even if it disagrees with mine.

I will now return to the music thread, and vikibgsguy is probably wishing I had not left that thread

 

[VikingsGuy]

I will go first, but possibly only because others are afraid that if they say what they are really thinking this thread will be shut down and they will be banned from the forum I had read the article earlier today.

If your a conservative or Republican the bottom line is "now what ? " no one can deny that Trump was a flawed candidate in 2016. I said "candidate", not individual, as it is not my place or role to judge others. But as a politician, he was a stretch, at best, based on his life up to that point, in his life, plus he had never held a public office, he was a business man .

And in my humble opinion that ( being a business man ) plus I thought Mrs Clinton was a weak candidate, is exactly why he got elected. Some of us were so tired of politicians, both the business man part of Trump and his "draining the swamp" message, resonated.

Make other countries pay their fair share of the costs to be part of the United Nations, and collect the money that is owed to us from other countries, instead of raising taxes on the citizens of this country. His determination to shut down drug trafficking, human trafficking, illegal crossings at the border was appreciated by many, for sure by some ranchers in Arizona that I know.

And although approx 75 million Americans wanted him of four more years, he didn't get re elected----so---the point of the Article is "Now What? ". In my personal opinion I dont feel Trump should run again but he could help other candidates get elected, as he still has a strong and large following.

I will admit, I like the business man approach. How many of you that own your own business, could stay in business if you ran your business the way our Govt runs our country . They mention Ronald Regan in the article. Yes, I liked him, but he also was not a true or lifelong politician.

I have more thoughts and opinions but they are the types of thoughts and opinions that need to be discussed at a dinner table or around a campfire, not here

Posted, with respect for everyones opinion on this subject even if it disagrees with mine.

I will now return to the music thread, and vikibgsguy is probably wishing I had not left that thread

Too tame

 

[BigHornRam]

I tried to read the article and found it to be painfully boring and not at all interesting. Looked into the author, a Romney guy and the boring part now makes sense. Good luck to anyone that thinks this is a winning strategy.

 

[JShane]

I dont agree with the premise of the authors opening statement that the covid virus was a public health catastrophe. It was certain state govenors response to the hysteria of talking heads.

As stayed above I researched the author and found that he worked on Romney's campaign. At that point there was nothing more I needed to read or hear from said author.

 

[jejack26]

Thanks I also thought it was an article worth reading. His thoughts on education I think hit the mark. Our process for picking our leaders appears broken.

 

[Duck-Slayer]

 

[Salmonchaser]

I read it once, certainly started slow. I need to read this again but for now might argue there are some salient observations on conservatism that are worth noting as we move forward as being conservative is more than believing in the second amendment. I’ll come back to this but for now it’s time to load the dogs and go shed hunting, except it’s snowing.
Vikings Guy historically gets conversations going that should require some consideration. Grab a cup of coffee and read it.

 

[LuketheDog]

Apparently the author only based his opinions on Trump's Twitter posts and the media...

"Indeed, he lacked any discernible ideology or capacity for governing."


And statements like this tell me the author is just a proponent of ho-hum, big government politicians that really do nothing for our country even though they tell us otherwise, and can't wrap their head around a loss when their 'message' is rejected by the voters (a la Mr. Romney):

"The problems Trump emphasized bore little resemblance to the standard stories both parties thought they should tell, yet they seemed to resonate with voters, even though he offered no solutions."

 

[Randi]

I read it once, certainly started slow. I need to read this again but for now might argue there are some salient observations on conservatism that are worth noting as we move forward as being conservative is more than believing in the second amendment. I’ll come back to this but for now it’s time to load the dogs and go shed hunting, except it’s snowing.
Vikings Guy historically gets conversations going that should require some consideration. Grab a cup of coffee and read it.

Apparently the author only based his opinions on Trump's Twitter posts and the media...

"Indeed, he lacked any discernible ideology or capacity for governing."


And statements like this tell me the author is just a proponent of ho-hum, big government politicians that really do nothing for our country even though they tell us otherwise, and can't wrap their head around a loss when their 'message' is rejected by the voters (a la Mr. Romney):

"The problems Trump emphasized bore little resemblance to the standard stories both parties thought they should tell, yet they seemed to resonate with voters, even though he offered no solutions."

I will go first, but possibly only because others are afraid that if they say what they are really thinking this thread will be shut down and they will be banned from the forum I had read the article earlier today.

If your a conservative or Republican the bottom line is "now what ? " no one can deny that Trump was a flawed candidate in 2016. I said "candidate", not individual, as it is not my place or role to judge others. But as a politician, he was a stretch, at best, based on his life up to that point, in his life, plus he had never held a public office, he was a business man .

And in my humble opinion that ( being a business man ) plus I thought Mrs Clinton was a weak candidate, is exactly why he got elected. Some of us were so tired of politicians, both the business man part of Trump and his "draining the swamp" message, resonated.

Make other countries pay their fair share of the costs to be part of the United Nations, and collect the money that is owed to us from other countries, instead of raising taxes on the citizens of this country. His determination to shut down drug trafficking, human trafficking, illegal crossings at the border was appreciated by many, for sure by some ranchers in Arizona that I know.

And although approx 75 million Americans wanted him of four more years, he didn't get re elected----so---the point of the Article is "Now What? ". In my personal opinion I dont feel Trump should run again but he could help other candidates get elected, as he still has a strong and large following.

I will admit, I like the business man approach. How many of you that own your own business, could stay in business if you ran your business the way our Govt runs our country . They mention Ronald Regan in the article. Yes, I liked him, but he also was not a true or lifelong politician.

I have more thoughts and opinions but they are the types of thoughts and opinions that need to be discussed at a dinner table or around a campfire, not here

Posted, with respect for everyones opinion on this subject even if it disagrees with mine.

I will now return to the music thread, and vikibgsguy is probably wishing I had not left that thread

All three of these posts show both a willingness and desire to look past the author and "at" the question, at hand, for many conservatives, Republicans, Independents, and even some Democrats . Many here did not grow up with everything that happened everywhere in the world known to us in one way or another within minutes. And never has the media,--- cable, internet, social---had such an influence on our lives. Banning Trump from twitter was a huge mistake in my opinion, because it will create a void that WILL be filled and those who banned him is not going got like it. Plus, those chosen few ( Facebook, twitter, google, amazon ) who made the decision will not like it when their voice is silenced. Is "free speech" only o.k. if it something you agree with ?

I am young, in my twenties, but even I see the fallacy in the news being opinion driven news and not "raw" news, letting the viewer decide for him or herself.

Also, dont assume all young people, especially young female people agree with some of the stuff that is being pushed down the throats of American's . "Everything" is not about race, gender, religion, or even "politics". Those who are supporting "cancel culture" now, might not be so happy when "it" cancels them !

Why did I say all this in regards to the article posted ? I believe it is asking a question, that those of us who are not happy with where we are now are asking, "Now What"

Will Trump run in 2024 ? Should he ? and if he dont, who should ?. With social media being so "in our face" what will resonate with the populace to allow us to take back the Senate, House, and Presidency ?

These are the thoughts of several people ( male and female ) my age, as I find many like minded individuals in the hunting, ranching, horse competing, groups.

No disrespect intended in my post, to anyone, this exact topic is presently being discussed among some groups of young people, and I bet you guys thought we were all in Florida on spring break

 

[one ate E grain]

Thanks, I enjoy reading articles that challenge things I thought I'd already made up my mind about.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I am not a big Romney guy, but I never not read an article because of who the author is. In fact, I read more articles by people I know I disagree with than those I do, as I find it a more interesting exercise than howling in the echo chamber. I am so so on this particular author's particular "solutions", but I do agree that conservatives need to start having more thoughtful discussions than, "drain the swamp" and "cold dead hands". There was a great article in the early 2000's published in the NYTimes lamenting that the GOP had done a great job in the late 70's coming out of the wilderness based on a lot of really great policy thinking while the DEMs had become nothing but an ever-increasing litmus test driven party with axes to grind but few well thought out policies to promote. It also lamented that at the time the DEMs only recent POTUS had essentially won on a GOP-light platform (Clinton). I feel similarly about the GOP. It is time for conservatives to move past the "anti-everything party" and start to articulate a positive forward-looking path for America devoid of race-baiting and nationalistic posturing. This article isn't the answer, but it is a time for a conversation.

 

[beginnerhunter]

I'll try to send you a more unfiltered PM, but the biggest takeaway I read is that the GOP needs to move on from zombie Reaganism and recognize the libertarian obsession with economic liberty is creating oligopolies that aren't playing on the same free market field as everyone else.

I think the lowering of the corporate tax rate was a mistake. It only rewarded the aforementioned oligopolies who continue to provide minimal benefit to American citizens. On the other hand, the progressives obsession with individual income tax rates is equally foolish (with very little chatter about raising corporate rates). The barrons of our era aren't scared of income tax rates or unions, it's profit margins.

Sure, we can keep handing out stimulus checks and "free" money, but that's just going to lead to inflation that destroys lower and middle class purchasing power.

I'd like to see economic policy focused on tax benefits (or penalties) based on American workforce and/or payroll. So the more Americans you employ plus higher MEDIAN incomes = lower tax rates. That's it. Make them employ Americans or GTFO. Right now there are severe incentives to NOT hire Americans (healthcare, management headaches, benefits policies). We need to make it less profitable to outsource or automate. Yeah that will probably hurt the stock market in the short term. Sorry boomers.

 

[beginnerhunter]

Also, the irony is that the article was articulating concerns that seem antithetical to Romney's preferred policies (at least the 2012 version). Basically Cass is in agreement with the 2016 Trump campaign on substance. He just believed Trump didn't accomplish what his campaign promised. And I agree.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I'll try to send you a more unfiltered PM, but the biggest takeaway I read is that the GOP needs to move on from zombie Reaganism and recognize the libertarian obsession with economic liberty is creating oligopolies that aren't playing on the same free market field as everyone else.

I think the lowering of the corporate tax rate was a mistake. It only rewarded the aforementioned oligopolies who continue to provide minimal benefit to American citizens. On the other hand, the progressives obsession with individual income tax rates is equally foolish (with very little chatter about raising corporate rates). The barrons of our era aren't scared of income tax rates or unions, it's profit margins.

Sure, we can keep handing out stimulus checks and "free" money, but that's just going to lead to inflation that destroys lower and middle class purchasing power.

I'd like to see economic policy focused on tax benefits (or penalties) based on American workforce and/or payroll. So the more Americans you employ plus higher MEDIAN incomes = lower tax rates. That's it. Make them employ Americans or GTFO. Right now there are severe incentives to NOT hire Americans (healthcare, management headaches, benefits policies). We need to make it less profitable to outsource or automate. Yeah that will probably hurt the stock market in the short term. Sorry boomers.

I am guessing we agree on some, disagree on more, but appreciate the thoughtful response.

On one point I will say the corporate tax is just a hidden tax. That same money could have gone to employees or to investors and be taxed at that point more effectively. We are the corporations, they aren't some alien being. Raising taxes on corporations is raising taxes on Americans indirectly and discouraging economic activity in the US.

My big tax gripe is that the lower rate on capital gains/dividends creates two Americas. A working America that pays the bulk of the taxes with little chance to reduce their tax footprint, and a coupon clipping class that can pick and choose when to defer income and take gains. It drives many bad things, including creating an economy that diverts its best talent towards bleeding off $$$ via non-value-added financial constructs rather than making actual goods and services.

 

[beginnerhunter]

I am guessing we agree on some, disagree on more, but appreciate the thoughtful response.

On one point I will say the corporate tax is just a hidden tax. That same money could have gone to employees or to investors and be taxed at that point more effectively. We are the corporations, they aren't some alien being. Raising taxes on corporations is raising taxes on Americans indirectly and discouraging economic activity in the US.

My big tax gripe is that the lower rate on capital gains/dividends creates two Americas. A working America that pays the bulk of the taxes with little chance to reduce their tax footprint, and a coupon clipping class that can pick and choose when to defer income and take gains. It drives many bad things, including creating an economy that diverts its best talent towards bleeding off $$$ via non-value-added financial constructs rather than making actual goods and services.

Fair enough. I guess my problem was that the corporate tax decrease was advertised in a way that emphasized increased employment and wages for middle class. But I don't think it is clear that it actually accomplished that goal. Also, if that is the goal, why not just offer direct tax incentives for hiring and wages?

Besides the economic realities, there's also a messaging problem. You can't campaign on bringing jobs back to the US, then immediately give tax breaks to companies that are outsourcing and automating everything. If your messaging is bad or suspect, you need to be able to show clear benefits of your policies to average Americans like me. I don't think the corporate tax decrease did that. I don't think Cass thinks that either.

 

[Europe]

One of you gentlemen used the words "zombie Reaganism" and then went on to explain what needed to be recognized ----

Without a doubt many conservatives over 65 are unable to move past what worked in the past and in my humble opinion that is a mistake.

Things change and we must change with them or get left behind. The "high water lifts all boats" dialog, although correct is not currently achieved in the same manner as it was during the Reagen years. Look back at Kennedy, he was a very loved president but today would be considered a Republican, at best.

My point is regardless of who "we" are or who "we" voted for, the one thing we need now is someone to find a way to bring 80% of the populace to the middle. There will always be the 10% who are far right and 10 % who are far left, but right now the nation seems to be 50/50 with no, or not much, wiggle room.

I do not have the answer, but we need to find one soon, as other countries, like China, are moving ahead, while we fight amongst ourselves.

A good start is to read and watch this thread especially the last few posts between Vikingguy and Beginnerhunter,---- good informative dialog and both gentlemen disagreeing without being disagreeable while sharing their thoughts/solutions

 

[Otto Matic]

Liberals are the first to express a desire to "cross the aisle" for compromise, but they will reach "across the aisle" ONLY when the result is to their benefit!

 

[Randi]

...and I was chastised by the "powers that be" for my political standings?

for your political beliefs or the way you presented them ?

 

[VikingsGuy]

Not sure what happened. I was about to respond to a fair list of thoughts from Otto Matic. I was even poised to give a VG thumbs up . It was nice to see the ideas and the experience behind the ideas. But then it was gone - converted into a one-sentence us/them line, bummer. For his now gone text, I agreed with some and disagreed with some but it was part of a discussion which was nice.