Conservatives find the choice appalling:
Or Donald Trump, her donor?
Both are monstrously immoral. Both are pathological liars. Both embrace ideas inimical to the American Constitution and to Christianity. Both demonstrate gross incompetence matched only by their naked lust for power and their willingness to slander every enemy in their path.
As Max Lucado lamented: Decency for President!
That is not to be.
Conservatives face a dilemma: vote for Trump, or wait for another option (a write-in, a convention shake-up, or even a Libertarian, if that party can put forward a pro-life candidate).
These desperate options all have this in common: None is likely to change the outcome. As far as can be predicted, it seems the outcome must either be Hillary or Donald. In the face of this horrible choice, shouldn’t we at least be willing to hold our noses and vote for the candidate that seems the least threatening to Western Civilization?
I have yet to hear a compelling case for Donald being superior to Hillary in this regard. Both seem set only on reducing individual freedom, amassing their own power, and dictating their respective views for the future of America—views I want no part in.
I have landed firmly on the #NeverTrump side. Many seem surprised that the #NeverTrump movement persists. “Are you still #NeverTrump?” I hear. Well, yes. That is what “never” means.
Yes, those of us who declared “never,” meant it. We made the choice, and we made our intentions plain. We did so before Donald was the presumptive nominee. Undecided voters knew ahead of time that we would not follow this man. The GOP is not our highest value. I promise you, I will never vote for Donald Trump.
Other conservatives (good people) have landed on the side of “Better him than her.” They argue: “The next president is going to be one or the other. Why are you refusing to help the side that is less evil?”
Frankly, I am not convinced that Trump is less evil. Or that his presidency would be less damaging to our national conscience, health, and security. But say we granted that Trump were less evil than Clinton—would that be proof that we have a responsibility to vote for him? I want to challenge the premise that at each election we should commit to supporting the “lesser of two evils.”
We have reason to believe the two candidates are overwhelmingly corrupt and deceitful. Both have crossed one hundred moral lines that should never have been crossed. Neither is a decent human being, and neither has a grasp of America’s founding principles. This being the case, I ask, What is the long-term effect of my vote upon the ideological movement of conservatism? Conservatism is dying because we, those who believe in it, are made again and again to vote for the lesser of two evils.
What happens when we repeatedly show our willingness to select liberals to represent us? Bob Dole happens. John McCain happens. Mitt Romney happens. And then, eventually something else happens, and its name is Donald Trump.
Ask yourself whether you have a line. If not, then why not? Can you think of any long-term reason it might be a practical, tangible benefit to have a line that you will not cross?
Let me tell you why I have a line: I believe liberals in disguise have taken over the Republican Party and they are playing chicken with conservatives. Donald Trump is only the latest and most grievously barbaric liberal in a long line of softer, gentler ones. How liberal can they become before we snap? When two cars speed toward one other, if one driver doesn’t give way, destruction is certain. Who wins a game of chicken? The one who cares less about living.
The liberals in the Republican Party know this. They know we love our party. They know we see the Republican Party as the best defense against the onslaught of statist tyranny. We love the party too much to let it die. But they do not.
So they do what they want. They expect us to surrender. To let them have their way. These liberals in the party have every reason to think we will follow. We always have. But we don’t need to. It is only by our numbers and by our compromise that they have their continuing source of power.
When good compromises with evil, the evil profits. The evil can always compromise. The good cannot. There is a line I refuse to cross. Donald Trump has far exceeded it.
If you judge differently, I do not reject you or your motives. But I ask that you not reject me or mine. Donald Trump and his allies call for the party to unite around him. I plead for a different kind of unity. Not the unity that says “I judge you if you don’t vote a certain way.” I beg you, my conservative friends, for the unity that says,
“We both love our country. We both are conservative. I respect you, no matter what you do with your vote. And I will not shut you out. I will not reject your voice.”
— Cody Libolt (@CodyLibolt) May 23, 2016
I wish I could believe Donald Trump would appoint a conservative justice to the Supreme Court. I wish I could believe that, for once, a politician would be better at fulfilling promises than he is at making them. But that is not the way of politics. We all know it. And we all know Donald Trump is not a man of his word.
Why support this farce? Why not register your dissent and show both parties that your future voting power is on the line? They can have your vote, if—and only if—they will put forward something resembling a candidate.
Some call me proud. Some say I fail to see reality. But I say the policy of compromise brought us to our present point of crisis. It is only the policy of principle that can change our course.
No, I don’t believe my choice will pay dividends this year, nor even in 2020 or 2024. But this I do know: If the change will ever come, it will come by means of men and women rising with straight backs, willing rather to fight and to lose than to surrender their virtue.
That day when enough people think in principle and in the long term, and are willing to hold a line—that will be the day when the parties realize they cannot foist trash upon the American voters.
Brothers, sisters, for the sake of the long term, be principled. Only in principles we will find any kind of unity worth having.