A weekend Washington Post opinion piece by E.J. Dionne got a lot of traction among certain segments of political observers. Since it was paywalled, I was unable to read it, as there's no way I'd waste good money on a subscription to that liberal propaganda publication. But the summaries of the column and the amplification it got from particular groups and individuals were enough to prove that his take is based on an obvious fallacy that has been embraced by far too many.
Basically, Dionne said that Democrats owe a big debt of gratitude to those "Never Trump" conservatives who worked hard to defeat the president's re-election bid. And that's where his argument fails.
You cannot be a conservative and oppose Trump. It's a logical fallacy. Those who claim they are a conservative yet did not support his re-election are fooling themselves.
I've frequently made the point that Trump himself may not be a conservative, but he has governed as a conservative. His accomplishments read like a wish list for the right: border security, putting American interests first, appointing constitutionalists to the Supreme Court and other judgeships, strengthening our military while reducing our involvement in places where our presence does not advance American interests, making partners in international pacts pull their fair share of the weight, withdrawing from the disastrous Iran nuclear deal and Paris climate change accord, and many more.
Why, then would a so-called conservative want Joe Biden to be president? These people would have supported whomever the Democrats nominated, even if it had been Bernie Sanders or Pete Buttigieg. The easiest and most apparent answer is that they're opposed to Trump himself. John McCain may have called himself a "maverick," but the descriptor fits Trump better. He brought a new approach to doing things, having not been contaminated by years in politics. He shot straight and didn't mince words when he said what was on his mind. For those who value style over substance, or decorum over doing, it was a drastic change from what they were used to. They couldn't abide someone who had come from outside the system and wasn't willing to do things they way they'd always been done.
They made the judgment that their own personal dislike for Trump overrode the fact that Trump's policies and theirs were on the same track. Personally, I find this incomprehensible. There have been plenty of times where I didn't like a particular Republican candidate, but I never advocated for the election of a candidate whose ideological views were totally opposite of mine. Take Mitch McConnell, for instance. He fell out of favor with me for a variety of reasons about 15 years ago, but I've never supported or voted for any of his opponents in his three elections since then. As bad and as much of a RINO as McConnell is, Amy McGrath would have been much worse. I didn't vote for McConnell, but I certainly didn't vote for or support McGrath.
So, keep in mind that these people who describe themselves as conservatives willingly threw their support to the liberal Biden, because they regard him as "decent" and "honest," over someone with whom they personally disapprove but who's on their side where policy is concerned.
But it gets worse. These same faux conservatives, most notably the traitors and turncoats who call themselves the Lincoln Project, are now openly working for Republicans to lose control of the Senate. As it stands now, the Senate is all that stands between Biden's agenda and America. And counting on a Senate controlled by McConnell and populated with squishes like Mitt Romney, Ben Sasse, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins is risky enough as it is. The outcome of the Georgia Senate runoffs could change that, and the Lincoln Project has joined other liberals in going all-in to elect the Democrat challengers.
Consider this. The so-called conservatives with the Lincoln Project are willing to give over control of this country to a Biden presidency, a House of Representatives controlled by Nancy Pelosi, and a split Senate where Kamala Harris would hold the tiebreaking vote. There's nothing conservative about that.
But the Lincoln Project turncoats aren't the only ones falsely clinging to the conservative label. The thumbnail for the social media shares on Dionne's column featured a picture of Bill Kristol, who beclowns himself every time he fires off a tweet or writes a screed for National Review. Kristol long ago forfeited any right to call himself a conservative. He doesn't even make a good establishment Republican these days. He's turned into an out-and-out liberal, just like those Lincoln Project types who abandoned principle and policy for reasons known only to them.
If anyone is owed a debt, it's Donald Trump. For all his policy accomplishments, his biggest one is political -- which is a feat unto itself considering the fact that he came from the private business sector, not the public political one. He has exposed countless RINOs and COINs (conservatives only in name) for what they are. From elected officials like Romney to activists like those in the Lincoln Project to commentators like Kristol and others (George Will, Jennifer Rubin, David Brooks, David Frum, Kathleen Parker, and the list goes on) who call themselves conservatives but have spent the last four years savaging Trump, the 45th president has revealed their true character they try to hide beneath their misapplied labels.
The "never Trump" crowd is free to act in any way it wants. That's the beauty of American free speech and political activism. They just shouldn't do it under false pretenses or with untrue self-advertising. These people are not conservatives. Don't believe them when they claim they are. Their words and actions say differently.
