Considerations: The selfishness of #NeverTrump

[Pogo]

Refusing to comment on what I said, and telling me to go back to whatever I was doing before?

Sounds like a blow off to me.

No. I am not telling people who to vote for. I wrote that disclaimer for a reason. Take it for what its worth Doc. If people are ashamed so be it. They don't need to be, they are simply expressing their rights as Americans to voice their grievances. That doesn't necessarily mean I have to agree with them. It also doesn't stop me from letting them know that I do. In so issuing my opinion, I also wanted to encourage people to think. If that sounds like "shaming" to you, so be it.

"encourage people to think" --- as long as you don't have to join them?

Now that's lame.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Telling people to "think" isn't shaming them - telling them that they're "selfish" for not agreeing with you, that kinda is.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. It is my opinion that they are being selfish, am I trying to shame them for disagreeing with me? No. As Ed Koch put it "if you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist."

I understand likewise that they don't have to care about me or my opinion. I'm not trying to force myself on anyone. I'm genuinely sorry if it came over that way. Wasn't my intent, to be honest.

 

[sonic]

First off I'm going to start with this disclaimer: let it be clear that I'm not telling anyone who to vote for, or demanding that anyone vote at all. This thread is intended to compel the reader to consider the ramifications of their decision to stay home or vote third party, whichever it may be. Once again, do whatever the hell you want, I'm just stating my personal opinion on the subject. Sure, it will sound condescending to some of you, but don't take it personally. I'm not angry with you. If you think it's funny, feel free to press the funny button.

But I want you NeverTrumpers to think about something. Before Hillary ever came along, most of you were preaching of the horrors of what would come to pass if she became president. Then, out of nowhere, Donald Trump began his rapid rise to the top of the GOP presidential field. And then, in a sudden reversal, you began preaching the horrors of what would come to pass if he became the nominee. You wrote him off repeatedly, as a flash in the pan or the like. You kept reassuring yourselves that he would never, ever succeed in his campaign. Suddenly, it became a campaign against Trump, not a unified campaign against Hillary as it should have been.

As the inevitability of Trump's victory began to strike home, more and more of you vowed never to vote for Donald Trump, be it a conflict of values or matters of conscience, out of a fit of anger, or perhaps no matter what. For that, I think you're being selfish, and I'll tell you why. Consider what the future of America would be like if Hillary Clinton were elected president, also consider the possibility that your abstinence could put her there. Is selfishness moral? Is it a virtue, a value you hold dear to your heart? No? Then why? Why would you be so righteously indignant that you're willing to risk the future of America to preserve your own values or conscience? This isn't a noble act, this isn't sending a message, it's downright selfish.

You are all no doubt aware of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's untimely demise earlier this year, as a result, that leaves his seat vacant, ripe for the picking for the next president to fill. You also have four other aging Justices on the bench right now. Over the next decade, there is a likelihood that those four other seats could become vacant. In addition to appointing a successor for Scalia, a president Hillary Clinton could appoint five liberal justices to the bench. Think about that. There could be seven liberal justices on the bench, redefining the conscience of America, and changing her identity.

From then on, on issues of gun rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, or abortion, the rulings could be 7-2 against the conservative arguments. Seven to two. Consider this: In an effort to preserve your values and conscience, by voting third party, or staying home out of a sense of righteous indignance, you're willing to risk a future where a majority liberal Supreme Court would be allowed to redefine your values for you. The would be given free reign to twist the Constitution to liberal ideals, essentially erasing the conservative brand from the face of America. You must realize that under a Supreme Court with seven liberal justices,there would never be another conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for at least a generation to come. You would be ensuring in your selfishness, an end to your values amid an ill advised attempt to preserve them.

Now, you all also value individual rights. In one case, Hillary made herself clear that she will use the Supreme Court as a weapon to radically alter Americans rights to bear arms. In essence, using our highest court as a weapon against religious freedom or freedom of speech and every other conservative value we all hold dear. You want to help America, yet you are willing to go about precipitating her destruction. You may hate Trump's guts, and I do understand where you're coming from. But Hillary wouldn't give a damn about you or your beliefs, your faith, or your vaunted values and conscience. Because in her presidency, you may not have the right to any of those things again. Do you want that on your conscience? So if Hillary ultimately wins, don't complain. You put her there.

In sum, and in my own personal opinion, you #NeverTrumpers are being selfish, and you need to grow up and consider the wider ramifications of a Hillary Clinton presidency. If you truly love America, you would do whatever it took to preserve as much of the country you love as you possibly could, to ensure that you maintain an atmosphere that is tolerant of your beliefs, values or conscience, even if that meant holding back a gag reflex in order to vote for Donald Trump in the general election. The ball's in your court. Don't screw this up for the rest of us.

What's selfish, is suggesting a person sacrifice their integrity to vote for a man who has been the epitome of low moral character for most of his life. To lower themselves to vote for a man who lies about his own businesses, and puts his ego ahead of everything else. A man who is morally and intellectually unfit for office. A man who is willing to use any piece of information no matter how vile or suspect because "all I know is what's on the Internet"
No, it's *you* who is selfish and immoral for even suggesting that people trade their integrity and core beliefs to vote for a con man.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Telling you that you think they're "selfish" for not agreeing with you is shaming them.

Of course I do. But that doesn't mean they have to care in the slightest. I'm not one of those spoiled ninnies who can't tolerate disagreement on a college campus. I welcome it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No, it's *you* who is selfish and immoral for even suggesting that people trade their integrity and core beliefs to vote for a con man.

So be it.

 

[Pogo]

First off I'm going to start with this disclaimer: let it be clear that I'm not telling anyone who to vote for, or demanding that anyone vote at all. This thread is intended to compel the reader to consider the ramifications of their decision to stay home or vote third party, whichever it may be. Once again, do whatever the hell you want, I'm just stating my personal opinion on the subject. Sure, it will sound condescending to some of you, but don't take it personally. I'm not angry with you. If you think it's funny, feel free to press the funny button.

But I want you NeverTrumpers to think about something. Before Hillary ever came along, most of you were preaching of the horrors of what would come to pass if she became president. Then, out of nowhere, Donald Trump began his rapid rise to the top of the GOP presidential field. And then, in a sudden reversal, you began preaching the horrors of what would come to pass if he became the nominee. You wrote him off repeatedly, as a flash in the pan or the like. You kept reassuring yourselves that he would never, ever succeed in his campaign. Suddenly, it became a campaign against Trump, not a unified campaign against Hillary as it should have been.

As the inevitability of Trump's victory began to strike home, more and more of you vowed never to vote for Donald Trump, be it a conflict of values or matters of conscience, out of a fit of anger, or perhaps no matter what. For that, I think you're being selfish, and I'll tell you why. Consider what the future of America would be like if Hillary Clinton were elected president, also consider the possibility that your abstinence could put her there. Is selfishness moral? Is it a virtue, a value you hold dear to your heart? No? Then why? Why would you be so righteously indignant that you're willing to risk the future of America to preserve your own values or conscience? This isn't a noble act, this isn't sending a message, it's downright selfish.

You are all no doubt aware of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's untimely demise earlier this year, as a result, that leaves his seat vacant, ripe for the picking for the next president to fill. You also have four other aging Justices on the bench right now. Over the next decade, there is a likelihood that those four other seats could become vacant. In addition to appointing a successor for Scalia, a president Hillary Clinton could appoint five liberal justices to the bench. Think about that. There could be seven liberal justices on the bench, redefining the conscience of America, and changing her identity.

From then on, on issues of gun rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, or abortion, the rulings could be 7-2 against the conservative arguments. Seven to two. Consider this: In an effort to preserve your values and conscience, by voting third party, or staying home out of a sense of righteous indignance, you're willing to risk a future where a majority liberal Supreme Court would be allowed to redefine your values for you. The would be given free reign to twist the Constitution to liberal ideals, essentially erasing the conservative brand from the face of America. You must realize that under a Supreme Court with seven liberal justices,there would never be another conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for at least a generation to come. You would be ensuring in your selfishness, an end to your values amid an ill advised attempt to preserve them.

Now, you all also value individual rights. In one case, Hillary made herself clear that she will use the Supreme Court as a weapon to radically alter Americans rights to bear arms. In essence, using our highest court as a weapon against religious freedom or freedom of speech and every other conservative value we all hold dear. You want to help America, yet you are willing to go about precipitating her destruction. You may hate Trump's guts, and I do understand where you're coming from. But Hillary wouldn't give a damn about you or your beliefs, your faith, or your vaunted values and conscience. Because in her presidency, you may not have the right to any of those things again. Do you want that on your conscience? So if Hillary ultimately wins, don't complain. You put her there.

In sum, and in my own personal opinion, you #NeverTrumpers are being selfish, and you need to grow up and consider the wider ramifications of a Hillary Clinton presidency. If you truly love America, you would do whatever it took to preserve as much of the country you love as you possibly could, to ensure that you maintain an atmosphere that is tolerant of your beliefs, values or conscience, even if that meant holding back a gag reflex in order to vote for Donald Trump in the general election. The ball's in your court. Don't screw this up for the rest of us.

What's selfish, is suggesting a person sacrifice their integrity to vote for a man who has been the epitome of low moral character for most of his life. To lower themselves to vote for a man who lies about his own businesses, and puts his ego ahead of everything else. A man who is morally and intellectually unfit for office. A man who is willing to use any piece of information no matter how vile or suspect because "all I know is what's on the Internet"
No, it's *you* who is selfish and immoral for even suggesting that people trade their integrity and core beliefs to vote for a con man.

And you left out, a man who has never in his life held a job or any position of responsibility.

I kinda like that one in the state-the-obvious hit parade.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Telling people to "think" isn't shaming them - telling them that they're "selfish" for not agreeing with you, that kinda is.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. It is my opinion that they are being selfish, am I trying to shame them for disagreeing with me? No. As Ed Koch put it "if you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist."

I understand likewise that they don't have to care about me or my opinion. I'm not trying to force myself on anyone. I'm genuinely sorry if it came over that way. Wasn't my intent, to be honest.

I'm starting to find this conversation a little surreal, and I'm thinking that we must be talking past each other. Let me see if we can get back on the same page.

Your OP was not just idle speculation, or giving voice to aimless thoughts. You're making an argument. That's what this board is for.

From my perspective, I'm trying to challenge your argument, but rather than defend it, you keep saying that it's just your opinion. I know it's your opinion, man - I'm asking you to defend to me why you have that opinion.

If someone dislikes Trump enough to believe that he'd make a worse President than Clinton, why do you think refusing to vote for Trump is "selfish"?

 

[TemplarKormac]

What's selfish, is suggesting a person sacrifice their integrity to vote for a man who has been the epitome of low moral character for most of his life.

Okay. This is the basis of my opinion. You're so willing to preserve your own integrity, that you're willing to compromise the integrity of everyone else in the process. Sitting at home or voting third party will ensure that integrity as you see it will be a thing of the past. I view that as selfishness. But actions have consequences. And if you are prepared for those consequences, then by all means, do what you will. I'm not stopping you.

 

[Pogo]

Telling people to "think" isn't shaming them - telling them that they're "selfish" for not agreeing with you, that kinda is.

Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. It is my opinion that they are being selfish, am I trying to shame them for disagreeing with me? No. As Ed Koch put it "if you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist."

I understand likewise that they don't have to care about me or my opinion. I'm not trying to force myself on anyone. I'm genuinely sorry if it came over that way. Wasn't my intent, to be honest.

Then why did you post, right in your OP:

Sure, it will sound condescending to some of you

and follow that up with "you need to grow up"?

You don't think that's shaming, even after you pre-characterize your own rant as "condescending"?

What is it, you want to fling poo without the responsibility that comes with said poo-flinging?

 

[Pogo]

Okay. This is the basis of my opinion. You're so willing to preserve your own integrity, that you're willing to compromise the integrity of everyone else in the process. Sitting at home or voting third party will ensure that integrity as you see it will be a thing of the past.

Says who?

Again, you're assuming your own premise without making a case for it. In this case "to compromise the integrity of everyone else".

But congratulations on finally dipping a toe into the water of several posts that challenged the OP. It's a start.

 

[Alex.]

I do not see it as shaming tactic in as much as a challenge to the reader's thoughts and ideas. Good post.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Here's a explanation of at least one persons reasoning behind "NeverTrump" - by noted libetarian/conservative writer PJ O'Rourke, who is at least in my opinion, one of the few truly funny right-wing authors in the world:

"I am endorsing Hillary, and all her lies and all her empty promises," O'Rourke continued. "It's the second-worst thing that can happen to this country, but she's way behind in second place. She's wrong about absolutely everything, but she's wrong within normal parameters."

Conservative Author P.J. O'Rourke Reluctantly Backs Clinton

 

[cereal_killer]

TK let me give you some perspective. The #nevertrumpers are a very small piece of the pie in the grand scheme of things. They consist of between 20-40 politicians and pundits. And lets just say 20,000 Republican voters (likely WAY less)

There are no where near enough of them to impact an election. Trump has expanded the tent by bringing in millions of new voters and the tent will grow even larger in the GE. You get the picture yet? The #nevertrump movement is irrelevant. They do not matter. They are nothing more than a headline who flail around on the cable/major news networks. Once the Convention rolls around they'll be nothing but an after thought. The news cycle will eventually move on to more important things as everyone gets bored with them. They'll be like the crew on Gilligans Island

 

[TemplarKormac]

Your OP was not just idle speculation, or giving voice to aimless thoughts. You're making an argument. That's what this board is for.

Agreed. It would be kinda creepy to post coagulate all my aimless thoughts into a thread. Know what I mean?

From my perspective, I'm trying to challenge your argument, but rather than defend it, you keep saying that it's just your opinion. I know it's your opinion, man - I'm asking you to defend to me why you have that opinion.

Why is it my opinion? Is that all? Alright, I'll do my best.

From my perspective, I'm watching this country fall apart. In the limited time I've been a conservative of any kind, I've heard many others preaching about the ills Democrats bring upon America. They hearken back to the glory days of America, to her birth, on how we should "take our country back." How we should preserve and protect the Constitution, to ensure individual freedom to religion, speech, or whatnot. Suddenly, when Donald Trump becomes the nominee, none of that seems no longer to be the case.

I was taught that sometimes sacrifices have to be made if you want to live in a world that tolerates your way of life. And I find it unfathomable that there are those who would be more willing to preserve their own integrity, rather than that of the country they live in. Perhaps I'm old school in my way of thought. But I think it is selfish to go about touting and bandying about your (not you specifically) so called dedication to integrity or values, all for potentially risking an atmosphere that would be more than willing to erase that kind of conviction from American society. I simply view such an attitude to be self serving/self centered/selfish.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Your OP was not just idle speculation, or giving voice to aimless thoughts. You're making an argument. That's what this board is for.

Agreed. It would be kinda creepy to post coagulate all my aimless thoughts into a thread. Know what I mean?

From my perspective, I'm trying to challenge your argument, but rather than defend it, you keep saying that it's just your opinion. I know it's your opinion, man - I'm asking you to defend to me why you have that opinion.

Why is it my opinion? Is that all? Alright, I'll do my best.

From my perspective, I'm watching this country fall apart. In the limited time I've been a conservative of any kind, I've heard many others preaching about the ills Democrats bring upon America. They hearken back to the glory days of America, to her birth, on how we should "take our country back." How we should preserve and protect the Constitution, to ensure individual freedom to religion, speech, or whatnot. Suddenly, when Donald Trump becomes the nominee, none of that seems no longer to be the case.

I was taught that sometimes sacrifices have to be made if you want to live in a world that tolerates your way of life. And I find it unfathomable that there are those who would be more willing to preserve their own integrity, rather than that of the country they live in. Perhaps I'm old school in my way of thought. But I think it is selfish to go about touting and bandying about your (not you specifically) your so called dedication to integrity or values, all for potentially risking an atmosphere that would be more than willing to erase that kind of conviction from American society. I believe such an attitude is self serving and self centered/selfish.

How is this country "falling apart"?

Are you saying that conservatives should support Trump because he's echoing the populist rhetoric that they've been shouting about for years?

If so, is rhetoric really that important?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

TK let me give you some perspective. The #nevertrumpers are a very small piece of the pie in the grand scheme of things. They consist of between 20-40 politicians and pundits. And lets just say 20,000 Republican voters (likely WAY less)

There are no where near enough of them to impact an election. Trump has expanded the tent by bringing in millions of new voters and the tent will grow even larger in the GE. You get the picture yet? The #nevertrump movement is irrelevant. They do not matter. They are nothing more than a headline who flail around on the cable/major news networks. Once the Convention rolls around they'll be nothing but an after thought. The news cycle will eventually move on to more important things as everyone gets bored with them. They'll be like the crew on Gilligans Island

Well, we'll just have to agree to disagree about this one, boss.

 

[Pogo]

I do not see it as shaming tactic in as much as a challenge to the reader's thoughts and ideas. Good post.

You find "you're selfish" and "you need to grow up" to be invitations to thought?

Actually I find it deliciously ironic that a poster who wants to fling "selfish" around is the same guy who doesn't want to interact about the ideas behind it.

 

[Alex.]

I do not see it as shaming tactic in as much as a challenge to the reader's thoughts and ideas. Good post.

You find "you're selfish" and "you need to grow up" to be invitations to thought?

Actually I find it deliciously ironic that a poster who wants to fling "selfish" around is the same guy who doesn't want to interact about the ideas behind it.

Sure, what is posted on a forum is not the same as someone saying that to my face. I take the time to think about it.

 

[Pogo]

I think it is selfish to go about touting and bandying about your (not you specifically) so called dedication to integrity or values, all for potentially risking an atmosphere that would be more than willing to erase that kind of conviction from American society. I simply view such an attitude to be self serving/self centered/selfish.

The bold part is (again) where you're assuming a conclusion not in evidence as a premise. "Because I say so". IOW you've declared what the outcome of Option B is, and there's simply no discussion on that, it's set in stone. And that's the premise on which you build -- your own ipse dixit.

You don't find that to be self-serving/self-centred/selfish??

 

[Flopper]

First off I'm going to start with this disclaimer: let it be clear that I'm not telling anyone who to vote for, or demanding that anyone vote at all. This thread is intended to compel the reader to consider the ramifications of their decision to stay home or vote third party, whichever it may be. Once again, do whatever the hell you want, I'm just stating my personal opinion on the subject. Sure, it will sound condescending to some of you, but don't take it personally. I'm not angry with you. If you think it's funny, feel free to press the funny button.

But I want you NeverTrumpers to think about something. Before Hillary ever came along, most of you were preaching of the horrors of what would come to pass if she became president. Then, out of nowhere, Donald Trump began his rapid rise to the top of the GOP presidential field. And then, in a sudden reversal, you began preaching the horrors of what would come to pass if he became the nominee. You wrote him off repeatedly, as a flash in the pan or the like. You kept reassuring yourselves that he would never, ever succeed in his campaign. Suddenly, it became a campaign against Trump, not a unified campaign against Hillary as it should have been.

As the inevitability of Trump's victory began to strike home, more and more of you vowed never to vote for Donald Trump, be it a conflict of values or matters of conscience, out of a fit of anger, or perhaps no matter what. For that, I think you're being selfish, and I'll tell you why. Consider what the future of America would be like if Hillary Clinton were elected president, also consider the possibility that your abstinence could put her there. Is selfishness moral? Is it a virtue, a value you hold dear to your heart? No? Then why? Why would you be so righteously indignant that you're willing to risk the future of America to preserve your own values or conscience? This isn't a noble act, this isn't sending a message, it's downright selfish.

You are all no doubt aware of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's untimely demise earlier this year, as a result, that leaves his seat vacant, ripe for the picking for the next president to fill. You also have four other aging Justices on the bench right now. Over the next decade, there is a likelihood that those four other seats could become vacant. In addition to appointing a successor for Scalia, a president Hillary Clinton could appoint five liberal justices to the bench. Think about that. There could be seven liberal justices on the bench, redefining the conscience of America, and changing her identity.

From then on, on issues of gun rights, religious freedom, freedom of speech, or abortion, the rulings could be 7-2 against the conservative arguments. Seven to two. Consider this: In an effort to preserve your values and conscience, by voting third party, or staying home out of a sense of righteous indignance, you're willing to risk a future where a majority liberal Supreme Court would be allowed to redefine your values for you. The would be given free reign to twist the Constitution to liberal ideals, essentially erasing the conservative brand from the face of America. You must realize that under a Supreme Court with seven liberal justices,there would never be another conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for at least a generation to come. You would be ensuring in your selfishness, an end to your values amid an ill advised attempt to preserve them.

Now, you all also value individual rights. In one case, Hillary made herself clear that she will use the Supreme Court as a weapon to radically alter Americans rights to bear arms. In essence, using our highest court as a weapon against religious freedom or freedom of speech and every other conservative value we all hold dear. You want to help America, yet you are willing to go about precipitating her destruction. You may hate Trump's guts, and I do understand where you're coming from. But Hillary wouldn't give a damn about you or your beliefs, your faith, or your vaunted values and conscience. Because in her presidency, you may not have the right to any of those things again. Do you want that on your conscience? So if Hillary ultimately wins, don't complain. You put her there.

In sum, and in my own personal opinion, you #NeverTrumpers are being selfish, and you need to grow up and consider the wider ramifications of a Hillary Clinton presidency. If you truly love America, you would do whatever it took to preserve as much of the country you love as you possibly could, to ensure that you maintain an atmosphere that is tolerant of your beliefs, values or conscience, even if that meant holding back a gag reflex in order to vote for Donald Trump in the general election. The ball's in your court. Don't screw this up for the rest of us.

From what I have seen of the Trump campaign, his supporters are voting against the status quo, the party, and the establishment. They are not voting for anything, just against most everything. Trump is a symbol of their discontent.