Shame on the Wicked NeverTrump, NeverNewt, NeverThiel

There is a cry on the right for a rapprochement, a “healing” and a “coming together”, a “moving forward” between the NeverTrump termites on one hand, and decent, upstanding conservatives on the other, although not everybody phrases it exactly so.  The usual caveats apply, and I am pretty sure you can see where I stand on the business — I’m agin’ it.  This is not mere bitterness, although I cop to that, and not mere orenreiness, which I will confess to, nor mere score-settling, although … you get the point.  Plenty of poor adjectives may be applied to my refusal to entertain this nonsense, and I have never shied away from the use of poor adjectives, except to enrich them.

There is a reason that the NeverTrump divide became so bitter, and why it deserves to remain so.  Consider the following, quote from an article in the New York Times:

The outreach signaled a change in tone one day after Mr. Trump moved to elevate hard-liners to pivotal national security positions. It was not clear whether Mr. Trump would offer the State Department post to Mr. Romney, or whether Mr. Romney, who has broken sharply with him on Russia, free trade and other issues, would accept if he did.

But some strategists argued that merely by reaching out to Mr. Romney, Mr. Trump was demonstrating an openness to new people and ideas, even from the unlikeliest of sources. It may also be intended to inject the sort of unpredictability and spectacle into the transition process that the president-elect thrives on.

Who should be so surprised by this?  Certainly nobody who has observed politics either up-close or at a distance for any measurable period of time.  Peter Thiel summed up the disconnect, quoted here in an article in the Lexington Herald-Leader stating that:

“The media always is taking Trump literally but never takes him seriously,” Thiel said. “I think a lot of the voters who vote for Trump take Trump seriously but not literally.”

“So when they hear things like the Muslim comment or the wall comment or things like that, the question is not ‘Are we going to build a wall like the Great Wall of China?’ or ‘How exactly are you going to enforce these tests?’ What they hear is we’re going to have a saner, more sensible immigration policy,” Thiel said.

So where does this willingness to see things the wrong way (see first quote if you are unclear) come from?  It was built in to the liberal elite of the GOP Establishment.  Where you sit determines where you stand.  Those who howled the loudest about their geometric logic proving that Trump could not win should have had their facts straight, no?  But they had no incentive to be correct in the abstract — only to press the “proper” answer with such vitriol as may be needed to shut down any contrary conversation.  Regardless of Trump, the NeverTrump were never going to accept anybody but the “next in line” milquetoast certified pre-owned GOP loser.  This crowd may well be called NeverBlank, as the blank will always be filled in for them by the name of the conservative alternative who bests their establishment tool.

Had Newt Gingrich emerged as the nominee in 2012, this crowd would have become NeverNewt, and if Peter Thiel should run in say 2024, they will be NeverThiel.  Most of the NeverTrump would have been NeverCruz as well.  They only friendlied up to him in contrast to Trump, which is telling.  Until Trump, Cruz was the least establishment candidate to remain on the radar, and they have never forgiven him for that.

Meanwhile, look at the commonsense measures being taken by President-Elect Trump.  He is meeting with beaten rivals and bypassed detractors, mending fences and developing options.  Despite what the media and supposedly conservative outlets would have you believe, this sort of reasonable behavior was always in evidence.  I recall criticizing several people for being “overly literal”, and accusing them of fighting mere rhetorical battles, when there was plenty of substance at stake.  Ensuing lectures about facts and numbers and definitions were all chaff; exercises in intentionally missing the point in order to keep up a steady barrage of invective.

The NeverTrump who simply declare that they will “give him a chance” do not deserve your forgiveness any more than a wolf deserves entry merely because it no longer howls.  The split in the Republican party is real, it has existed in its current form since at least 2004, and it is not going away any time soon.

It heals nothing to cozy up to the NeverTrump — they will be right back where they were at the next opportunity.  What NeverTrump has shown you is not a short-term argument over a particular candidate.  Instead, this is a long-term Alinskyite fight by the establishment to discredit and demoralize you and me, the old Tea Party types.  Search your memory.  You will find that this fight looks awfully familiar if you were in the Tea Party (and not a Ron Paul kook) in 2012.

There are, however, some people who to this day cannot really support Trump.  Yet they did not pour bitterness upon those of us who did.  Those whose unwillingness to support Trump based on sound moral principles can be distinguished by their polite (if indignant) arguments which include statements about themselves just as often as about the candidate or we who support him.  There are also those who call for this Kumbayah moment from genuine niceness, and notably, an inability to understand the fight.  Some of these people plead with sincerity and wounded emotions, and some lecture in school-marmish tones about how we should all be better than the fight.  These voices are always present, and while sincere, do not sway me.  Indeed, many a friendly issuer of sincere advice will just get us all killed, metaphorically.  Nice people are the worst to determine how to conduct a fight.

I do not equate NeverTrump with a lack of support, but with the political agitation to undercut the nominee, to discredit and demoralize those who supported him.  Those people remain NeverTrump, and are not my friends.  It is not simply that forgiveness is for suckers.  That is the criticism of forgiveness in general which is applied to the putative forgiver.  No, forgiveness must be asked for, must be earned — must be deserved.  I contend that the majority of NeverTrump, meaning the nasty ones who discredited and demoralized us, are unworthy of forgiveness, because they seek it only for tactical reasons.  They will never admit it, and therefore it is up to you, dear reader, to discern it.  You are equipped with a fine suite of emotions, which are the only reliable source of information about your fellow man.  Logic can be used to prove anything, once you are made to accept agreeable precepts.

If you find yourself still burning about the fickle NeverTrump, you are not wrong.  You see clearly that which will happen later, and you probably find it difficult to explain in terms of what people see now.  This healing and “coming together” bullshit is a trap.  Trump supporters owe nobody the time of day.  Trump himself has a cabinet to put together.  Somebody still has to keep score, or we will just take it in the neck next time.  If you cannot recognize your old enemies, then you do a disservice to your old friends.

In my mind, the term NeverTrump is one of the most helpful, as it crystallized the rotten element supposedly “on our side” who are anything but.  They supported Hillary.  Of course they’re not going to say it — that’s why it is critical for us to remember.

The fact that this NT business appears to be the only fight to engage in at this time is why it looms so large in the minds of many.  This is a an unparalleled opportunity for the NT to sneak back into bed as if they had never left our sides.  But I was watching.