Should Paleocons Support Trump?

Trump is far from perfect on the issues and is a less than ideal vehicle for the issues where he is right, but a lot of paleos and various other outside the mainstream rightists seem to be supportive of his campaign. Is supporting Trump to whatever degree the right thing or the wrong thing to do? Let’s hash it out here. I would like to read people’s thoughts. Even the writers for this site don’t seem to agree.

12 thoughts on “Should Paleocons Support Trump?

  1. hawthornecht

    If you follow politics, tactics, and American Culture, this is way better then the Ron Paul and Buchanan campaigns. The Ron Paul 07-08 years were examples of testing angles and material out using new media (e.g. fake candidate web sites and blogs), but now, there is an actual candidate using the new media, and a team of well trained guerrillas trolling the whole show. Paleos should maintain their skepticism towards Trump–that is healthy for both camps– and instead focus on the anti-cuckservative movement, as well as trolling liberals who support the Cheap Labor Lobby–now that Sanders is working that side of the street.

    The real key for paleos is getting their people to convention–as I use to say, there were no paleos at RP conventions (and getting jobs in the Trump Administration which will take some public effort.)


  2. Kirt Higdon

    Trump may be the least evil of the Republican candidates (or not) but that sets the bar lower than it has ever been. I see no reason to support him or any other major party candidate. My vote, my money and my opinion are all meaningless in a presidential and most other elections so since all I am doing by voting is stating my own preference, I might as well vote for someone I actually prefer (i.e. think is good) even if that person is 3rd party or a write-in. I’ve done that before, most of the time. Or I could decline to vote on the presidential line. I’ve done that before too.


    1. weavercht

      I would hope you’d never give money to any political candidate.

      I’d sooner give a drunk money even if he were just buying liquor with it. The money’s better spent by the drunk.

      Perhaps time = money, but time spent on a candidate you have more control over. You don’t have control over how the money is spent.


    2. weavercht

      It’s positive to vote third party or to not vote, but it could also be positive to support a lesser evil candidate if this support gets him elected, gets him a party nomination, or influences supporters in a positive manner (or at least a less negative manner than the alternative).

      There is no clear, absolute “right” answer here.

      As with so many things, there’s no clear conservative position on elections.


  3. redphillips Post author

    Kirt, I always vote third party in the general. What about the primary? No reason not to let your voice be heard there.


    1. Kirt Higdon

      If I want to vote on the presidential line in a primary, I can always do a write-in there too if I choose. And I don’t have to vote in the Republican primary.


  4. weavercht

    There’s a limit to what a person can do in a day, in a year, in a lifetime.

    However, supporting Trump has its positives, is not a waste. Primarily for reasons Hawthorne has given, not just here.

    As an example: My relatives all vote Republican. They are not cynical enough to do as Mr. Higdon and vote third party.

    My relatives like to “think positively”. Part of their survival strategy in life is indeed “thinking positively” about society. They can agree with me, at least for a moment (our minds are fuzzy, distracted), on trade, war, immigration. However, at the same time, they can “like” Rubio, or Jeb.

    And indeed Trump’s personality does make it difficult to see him as presidential material. Though, I believe all of here would agree that he would make a better candidate than any of the others, excepting perhaps Bernie Sanders. We, however, are cynical. Most voters are not.

    If Trump wins the nomination or even simply wins a large following among “positive thinkers”, it would help shift sentiment.

    Is supporting Trump more important than, say, the work done at Rebellion blog, Faith and Heritage, Chronicles, Abbeville, etc.? No way!

    But the two areas are different. Not everyone is able to live, day-to-day, with the ideas and thoughts of someone at Faith and Heritage. Many, if not most, people want to think positively about their society and life. And this likely helps them thrive in society, at least in the near-term.

    What’s sexy about a depressed conservative paleo? The ideal thriving ubermensch is perhaps smart but only within boundaries. The paleo sees through it all, and he’s attached to things that are dying. Paleoconservatives are especially a negative lot even compared with paleolibertarians who have their happy ideology, their simple solutions.


  5. weavercht

    Most of our people are part of the mass herd in the US.

    People like Tuggle work to build an ethnicity that can fend for itself.

    However, there is some positive in either attempting to awaken the herd or at least driving it to stampede in one direction or another.

    The herd though is not “stupid”. There are exceptionally intelligent and successful Americans who sincerely believe in Jeb or Hillary. It’s simply a part of how humans interact with society, the delusions we embrace in our day-to-day in order to thrive and enjoy life.

    We on the outside of this herd have an interest in our people’s well-being, but we cannot expect them to act other than as a herd. Man has his limits, and it is not necessarily, or at least not entirely, “superior” to live outside the herd.


  6. John Rutowicz

    I thought his insult to John McCain was disgraceful for a man who took 5 deferments. I don’t like his example as a husband (3 times) or a father (his children & grandchildren became Jews). I think there will be numerous positions he will take that I will not like, and I think he is generally a braggart and an ego maniac. However, none of this ultimately matters. None of the rest of the candidates offer any better hope for a change in direction. Trump’s just released position on immigration reform is better than anything we have heard since Pat Buchanan back in the 1990’s. I realize that he almost assuredly could not get such a program through congress, and I realize he will not beat Hillary Clinton, but it is more important to blow up the Republican Party on this issue than win the election. Even more so, move the public conversation toward moratorium and an end to anchor babies. Given all this, Go Trump!


  7. redphillips Post author

    Of course you don’t have to vote in the primary, but what is the point of not voting? Not voting is likely not interpreted as a repudiation of the choices or the process. It’s generally interpreted as apathy.

    Although when I lived in TX, if you voted in a primary you couldn’t sign a petition to get an independent or third party candidate on the ballot, so it might make sense in TX. Not sure if that law has changed

    Also, you may want to check the law regarding write ins in TX. In GA a write in only counts if the person is a certified write in, and you could spoil your ballot.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s