Indiana vote does not change the #NeverTrump movement

Ben Howe:
After tonight’s stunning (or not so stunning) loss and Ted Cruz dropping out of the race, the question that I and others are being asked is will we unify behind the presumptive GOP nominee now that he is essentially inevitable?

The answer is, of course not.

#NeverTrump was not a fad. It was not an attempt to change a narrative. It was not a wish or a desire.

#NeverTrump is a fact.

Those who subscribe to the idea are saying that Trump is a dangerous, unpredictable man whose aspirations don’t align with conservatism. Whose morals are questionable at best. Whose relationship with the truth is not just tenuous, it’s borderline hostile.

#NeverTrump is not an endorsement of Hillary, it’s an acceptance that Hillary’s ascension is inevitable when the alternative is a wannabe despot.

#NeverTrump does not pick who would be “better” or “worse” in regards to policy positions of the democrat vs Mr. Trump. Rather, it recognizes that Trump’s complete absence of a moral center or ideological commitment means he would likely spend more time cutting deals with Democrats for the appearance of “winning” than you can shake a stick at. In fact, Hillary would be more likely to face gridlock on liberal policies than Mr. Trump would.
There is a belief that Trump would be a disaster for Republicans and conservatives whether he wins or loses in the general election and that it is better to not be tied to his disaster however the votes turn out.   It is important to deny both the Democrat nominee and Trump a mandate for their unintelligent policies.

Erick Erickson sums it up:
I Oppose Hillary Clinton and Her Donor, Donald Trump


Popular posts from this blog

Democrats worried about 2018 elections

Illinois in worst financial shape, Texas in best shape

Obama's hidden corruption that enriched his friends