While choosing not to choose is a choice, in a time like this, it's the cowards way out. Stand for your convictions in full or don't bleat at the rest of us about them
Agreed 💯. It’s an unprincipled cop out, especially if you’re in a swing state. It IS a binary choice and any other viewpoint is simply self-delusion.
I find the perspective of former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney to be the smartest *truly* conservative take on this. As she said, “We can survive bad policy. We cannot survive a president who torches the Constitution.”
The ONLY appropriate action, if you *truly* care about our nation and our national institutions, is to hold your nose if you must and vote for Harris-Walz THIS ONCE.
After all, as someone far more thoughtful than I has said: when you vote, you’re not looking for the love of your life, you’re looking to take a bus. If you can’t find one that will take you *exactly* where you want to go, you take the one that will get you closest. Period.
Sometimes, it amazes me how “political analysts” delude themselves, and Steve Hayes, sadly, appears to be one of them.
You are running the wrong candidate and wrong ticket to win in the much needed swing states! It is SO ez to see, not sure how anyone thinks VP Harris is gonna pull this thing out. I’m naturally gonna be real happy when President Trump wins but also very sad for so many, many on this site, who just can’t stomach the thought. Liberal politics, esp San Francisco liberal politics, just doesn’t play in the Midwest. It just doesn’t and the VP selection from MN doesn’t help either, she should have taken Shapiro. Just another poor decision.
I see why her handlers don’t want her speaking off the teleprompter, good grief! A fake cartoonish southern accent…. O my!
Harris is currently beating Trump in the polls. If that continues she will win. Her paths to victory are many. More than Biden had. Florida is flipping blue. It’s currently with in 5 points. That may be hard for Republicans to accept.
Did I miss Cheney's endorsement of Harris? I was out of the country, but think this would have been news. Assuming she hasn't, I have to question whether she really believes her words.
No, though I understand that Harris and Walz have put on a “full court press” to get that endorsement. Cheney, at least in that comment, is giving “permission” for true conservatives to vote THIS ONCE for a non-Republican, with the very clear indication that the Democratic ticket would be the way to go, ie the “bad policy” that we can survive…
I’m not a coward, thank you very much. My very strong conviction is that both the left and right have no idea what they’re doing. America has serious problems that can only be solved by compromise. (1) There is no one that is serious about debt and the future of the dollar. The government and American consumers are in a catastrophic amount of debt. Our financial system is a house of cards fueled by America’s insatiable appetite for consumption and throwing money at problems. (2) There is no one that is serious about freedom and opportunity. The right has good ideas about constitutional freedoms and the left has good ideas about social freedoms, but there is no effort to develop these into a unified idea of freedom that champions personal responsibility and opportunity. (3) There is no one that is serious about sustainability. The right seems to reject it altogether and the left puts all of its energy (no pun intended) into high resistance, corporate global warming solutions instead of smaller initiatives that could involve and persuade everyday Americans to reduce consumption. This is just a few examples. So ultimately, we don’t need to move right or left, we need to center ourselves. Since that is clearly not going to happen - polarization politics will not allow it - we have no choice but to go right or left and fail miserably enough that we have to rethink what we stand for and come together to rebuild. So yeah, not voting is a completely valid choice if you don’t want to support the status quo of politics.
That argument would be reasonable but for the fact that Trump presents a danger to individual liberty, the administrative state, the environment , and world order. If you want to have the intelligent debate you desire, we need to get past the point where one of the two major parties is dominated by a cult of personality. In other words, we need a coalition of the sane to have any hope of returning to normal political discourse where compromise and rational government is possible/
I just don't see that happening without America collapsing first. I can easily imagine that happening if Trump is reelected because he will actively topple the financial house of cards by foolishly bumping the table. The stock and housing markets will probably collapse, and/or the social security bottom line will evaporate, and/or savings accounts will suffer huge losses because the Chinese will no longer trade in US dollars. If Harris is elected, she will probably passively topple the financial house of cards by raising taxes to keep spending (because no one will buy US treasury bonds anymore now that we're $35T in debt) and/or manipulate markets by trying to level the playing field for low and middle income earners. It's sad to me that these are all very real financial disasters because we're fighting a stupid culture war where EVERYONE essentially wants the same thing - freedom and opportunity - but we completely disagree on what that means and how to achieve it. Neither Trump nor Harris can save us from ourselves. It's going to get much worse before it gets better and I can accept that.
It’s a binary choice. The guy who has presided over 8 years of crazy, has encouraged a violent riot to disrupt the government, has been convicted of 34 felony counts, displays a high degree of narcissism, and is an adjudicated sex offender vs a normal candidate who is reaching out beyond her base to move to the center, will do her best for America’s interests, and who might have a few policies that some people won’t be happy with, but nothing that moves the country toward authoritarianism or toward being a third world country.
It’s an easy choice for anyone who cares about this country. The End.
Thanks for sharing this conversation. I like Steven and the Dispatch (used to subscribe, don't anymore). I find many of the things he says to be complete gobbledygook. Granted, I don't think the issue is as simple as Trump bad which means Harris good - which I think is what he is saying?
We can disagree on this point - but he seems to say Trump is a threat to democracy, but I don't like Biden's policy on spending. Kind of like saying "Sure, Billy has a gun to my head and threatening to kill me, but Sally once said she didn't like my shirt so I see them both as bad people".
Sorry, I cannot condone a journalist who asserts that Biden was not a good president- full stop. What has Steve Hayes been looking at for the last 3 1/2 years?
I was going to say something mean about what Steve sees based on where his head is, but I won’t because I know Chris wants to keep the discussion civil.
Well, for a “conservative” small government writer, I suppose I can understand why Hayes has that perspective, given that the Biden-Harris administration is all about big government working for the vast majority of Americans in the middle and lower class. However, given the lack of ANY substantial legislation during Trump’s 4 years, and the quantity and caliber of legislation passed by Biden-Harris, to say he hasn’t been a good President is myopic in the least and specious at worst.
What a great post. Some very good points here. I wonder though, how it would be possible for a “Christian and pro-life” individual could possibly support Trump….the guy who thinks the 6;wk abortion ban is too short, who wants government-sponsored IVF and whose personal and professional conduct flies in the face of every single teaching of their Jesus…I think that Steve is mistaken that these folks couldn’t vote for Harris/Walz. Harris/Walz policies are closer to what their bible teaches, and their view of reproductive rights is “mind your own beeswax”….much better than the DJT cynical waffle-dance.
> I wonder though, how it would be possible for a “Christian and pro-life” individual could possibly support Trump
If that's an honest wonder (and not just a sideways attack on "deplorables"), and you actually care to know, you can find out by reading Rod Dreher: https://roddreher.substack.com
While I agree with a great deal of what Steve says, I’m not so sure that it’s a good idea to not vote or to even do a write-in. If enough people say “hell no” to Trumpism and all it stands for, the Democrats might just get a win. The Republican Party needs to get back on track and once again become the party of Lincoln. Does that make sense? I sure hope so.
Thanks. I'm in that boat. I am not in a swing state, so my vote doesn't really matter. In Louisiana, our Gov is a Trump-chaser. He was nominated by the state Republican party long before the other Republican candidates could make their case... so I don't know who's paying who. But the whole smarmy political scene has led us to this pathetic choice. Neither candidate has high ground. One is prettier than the other and one is louder than the other. I hate to say it but where is the Ross Perot third party candidate that seemed nutty back then but would be the most sane choice today?
Back when RFK was still in the race I thought that this was the worst set of presidential candidates in memory including the third party candidate in RFK. I guess now we're down to the two worst.
At this point I''m leaning towards writing someone in or just leaving the spot blank.
Yup. Since Harris is avoiding talking about how she actually intends to stand for all Americans, all I can do is read comments on why the left stands for her. Not moved by "because she's about joy and she's not Trump".
Have to *wholeheartedly* disagree with both of you, Randy and Ryan, and wonder if you missed it. The Harris-Walz campaign published their economic policies almost 3 weeks ago, and Harris pointed many of these items out in the CNN interview (which was all an attempt at “gotcha” questions from Dana Bash that I think they handled quite effectively):
*Creating a federal ban against price gouging by major corporations, especially those that own the grocery store chains.
*Public financial support for companies building new homes, along with reducing paperwork and some regulations that are affecting inventories.
*$25K subsidies for first-time home buyers to use for down payment.
*Reauthorization of the child tax credit laws of $3600 per child, and a new proposal of $6000 for families with a child under 1 year of age.
These are REAL concrete proposals. Realistically, they need the help of Congress to do these, and there’s a possibility that Dems will lose their Senate majority, so I do take this with a grain of salt. However, these ARE real-world proposals, and not just “anti-Trump”, though I would challenge you to find ANY IDEAS from the MAGA side with ANY DETAILS whatsoever! Spoiler alert: you won’t!
And the “joy” aspect is something visceral, as it contrasts beautifully against the Trump-Vance dystopian vision of a “failed national” filled with crime (even though it’s down across the country) and despicable immigrants “poisoning our blood” (though Trump continually lies about that, too).
It’s possible to be both level-headed about policy AND also understand that campaigns are built on enthusiasm. I’m very *definitely* voting FOR Harris-Walz, not just against Trump-Vance, and I hope both of you can reach the same conclusions and help us toward that goal.
I appreciate the effort, but when I say Democrats are unable to support Harrris without talking about Trump, then you reply with "the Trump-Vance dystopian vision" and " Trump continually lies about that", how do you figure that's a rebuttal?
Read any nonpartisan economic/fiscal analysis of these proposals. They are estimated to cost over $1T and the US is already $35T in debt. It sounds great. Houses for everybody! Cheaper groceries for everybody! Seriously, who is going to pay for this? I’m not saying Trump has better ideas. No taxes on your tips! Pay to play world security! No one on either side, nor American consumers, are serious about debt or consumption.
*Creating a federal ban against price gouging by major corporations, especially those that own the grocery store chains.
If actually implemented, this would do nothing but produce shortages. Any economist (left or right) can explain this for you. You can also look at actual results in countries where this has been tried.
*$25K subsidies for first-time home buyers to use for down payment.
Home sellers will simply all raise their prices by $25K, and pocket this taxpayer money. Again, ask any economist how this works.
Of course you can be both anti-Trump and anti-Harris, but that implies that either:
1. you are one of those 3rd party nutjobs that vote for Jill Stein or RFK Jr.
2. you are a GOP fossil that embodies the true values of conservatism... an anachronism that no longer is acknowledged or respected within their party.
The way the Heritage Foundation has changed reminds me a bit of the Tea Party movement, which actually began as a fiscally conservative movement critical of both GWB and Obama. It was later co-opted mostly by social conservatives.
Excellent interview. I’ll give him credit for acknowledging Trump would be a disaster administration, but given that, couldn’t he give Harris a little more support?
I am ✋🏽 as a matter of fact, I might be anti people at this point. Considering all the insults and disgusting behavior I’ve seen from people. 😒 I hope they understand that the very next day after voting they’ll be working with each other, or at the store with each other, or at the gym with each other etc. All this commotion for nothing!
While choosing not to choose is a choice, in a time like this, it's the cowards way out. Stand for your convictions in full or don't bleat at the rest of us about them
Agreed 💯. It’s an unprincipled cop out, especially if you’re in a swing state. It IS a binary choice and any other viewpoint is simply self-delusion.
I find the perspective of former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney to be the smartest *truly* conservative take on this. As she said, “We can survive bad policy. We cannot survive a president who torches the Constitution.”
The ONLY appropriate action, if you *truly* care about our nation and our national institutions, is to hold your nose if you must and vote for Harris-Walz THIS ONCE.
After all, as someone far more thoughtful than I has said: when you vote, you’re not looking for the love of your life, you’re looking to take a bus. If you can’t find one that will take you *exactly* where you want to go, you take the one that will get you closest. Period.
Sometimes, it amazes me how “political analysts” delude themselves, and Steve Hayes, sadly, appears to be one of them.
You are running the wrong candidate and wrong ticket to win in the much needed swing states! It is SO ez to see, not sure how anyone thinks VP Harris is gonna pull this thing out. I’m naturally gonna be real happy when President Trump wins but also very sad for so many, many on this site, who just can’t stomach the thought. Liberal politics, esp San Francisco liberal politics, just doesn’t play in the Midwest. It just doesn’t and the VP selection from MN doesn’t help either, she should have taken Shapiro. Just another poor decision.
I see why her handlers don’t want her speaking off the teleprompter, good grief! A fake cartoonish southern accent…. O my!
Harris is currently beating Trump in the polls. If that continues she will win. Her paths to victory are many. More than Biden had. Florida is flipping blue. It’s currently with in 5 points. That may be hard for Republicans to accept.
Did I miss Cheney's endorsement of Harris? I was out of the country, but think this would have been news. Assuming she hasn't, I have to question whether she really believes her words.
No, though I understand that Harris and Walz have put on a “full court press” to get that endorsement. Cheney, at least in that comment, is giving “permission” for true conservatives to vote THIS ONCE for a non-Republican, with the very clear indication that the Democratic ticket would be the way to go, ie the “bad policy” that we can survive…
This November presents two options:
Prosecutor or Criminal.
And you can choose ONLY one.
I don't know about you but I'll take the prosecutor over the felon ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!
I am getting LOTS of "where-did-you-get-this?" wearing this "Harris/Walz" t-shirt 👇
libtees-2.creator-spring.com/listing/hwalz
Harris -Waltz will win in a Landslide election!
Remember my prediction 😎
I’m not a coward, thank you very much. My very strong conviction is that both the left and right have no idea what they’re doing. America has serious problems that can only be solved by compromise. (1) There is no one that is serious about debt and the future of the dollar. The government and American consumers are in a catastrophic amount of debt. Our financial system is a house of cards fueled by America’s insatiable appetite for consumption and throwing money at problems. (2) There is no one that is serious about freedom and opportunity. The right has good ideas about constitutional freedoms and the left has good ideas about social freedoms, but there is no effort to develop these into a unified idea of freedom that champions personal responsibility and opportunity. (3) There is no one that is serious about sustainability. The right seems to reject it altogether and the left puts all of its energy (no pun intended) into high resistance, corporate global warming solutions instead of smaller initiatives that could involve and persuade everyday Americans to reduce consumption. This is just a few examples. So ultimately, we don’t need to move right or left, we need to center ourselves. Since that is clearly not going to happen - polarization politics will not allow it - we have no choice but to go right or left and fail miserably enough that we have to rethink what we stand for and come together to rebuild. So yeah, not voting is a completely valid choice if you don’t want to support the status quo of politics.
That argument would be reasonable but for the fact that Trump presents a danger to individual liberty, the administrative state, the environment , and world order. If you want to have the intelligent debate you desire, we need to get past the point where one of the two major parties is dominated by a cult of personality. In other words, we need a coalition of the sane to have any hope of returning to normal political discourse where compromise and rational government is possible/
I just don't see that happening without America collapsing first. I can easily imagine that happening if Trump is reelected because he will actively topple the financial house of cards by foolishly bumping the table. The stock and housing markets will probably collapse, and/or the social security bottom line will evaporate, and/or savings accounts will suffer huge losses because the Chinese will no longer trade in US dollars. If Harris is elected, she will probably passively topple the financial house of cards by raising taxes to keep spending (because no one will buy US treasury bonds anymore now that we're $35T in debt) and/or manipulate markets by trying to level the playing field for low and middle income earners. It's sad to me that these are all very real financial disasters because we're fighting a stupid culture war where EVERYONE essentially wants the same thing - freedom and opportunity - but we completely disagree on what that means and how to achieve it. Neither Trump nor Harris can save us from ourselves. It's going to get much worse before it gets better and I can accept that.
Gee, that got dark and unduly dramatic .
Not any more or less dark and dramatic than Democrats who view Trump as the end of democracy.
Yes, that’s a point. But the people who say that, including yours truly, argue for action. You’ve convinced yourself that all paths are futile .
THIS!
It’s a binary choice. The guy who has presided over 8 years of crazy, has encouraged a violent riot to disrupt the government, has been convicted of 34 felony counts, displays a high degree of narcissism, and is an adjudicated sex offender vs a normal candidate who is reaching out beyond her base to move to the center, will do her best for America’s interests, and who might have a few policies that some people won’t be happy with, but nothing that moves the country toward authoritarianism or toward being a third world country.
It’s an easy choice for anyone who cares about this country. The End.
Ignoring evil is enabling evil. Throwing a vote away therefore is enabling evil.
Thanks for sharing this conversation. I like Steven and the Dispatch (used to subscribe, don't anymore). I find many of the things he says to be complete gobbledygook. Granted, I don't think the issue is as simple as Trump bad which means Harris good - which I think is what he is saying?
We can disagree on this point - but he seems to say Trump is a threat to democracy, but I don't like Biden's policy on spending. Kind of like saying "Sure, Billy has a gun to my head and threatening to kill me, but Sally once said she didn't like my shirt so I see them both as bad people".
A lot of illogical thought on the part of Steve Hayes.
Sorry, I cannot condone a journalist who asserts that Biden was not a good president- full stop. What has Steve Hayes been looking at for the last 3 1/2 years?
I was going to say something mean about what Steve sees based on where his head is, but I won’t because I know Chris wants to keep the discussion civil.
Well, for a “conservative” small government writer, I suppose I can understand why Hayes has that perspective, given that the Biden-Harris administration is all about big government working for the vast majority of Americans in the middle and lower class. However, given the lack of ANY substantial legislation during Trump’s 4 years, and the quantity and caliber of legislation passed by Biden-Harris, to say he hasn’t been a good President is myopic in the least and specious at worst.
Agree. It goes back to my earlier, less tactful point - Steve’s myopia is a function of his head being up his…
🤣
What a great post. Some very good points here. I wonder though, how it would be possible for a “Christian and pro-life” individual could possibly support Trump….the guy who thinks the 6;wk abortion ban is too short, who wants government-sponsored IVF and whose personal and professional conduct flies in the face of every single teaching of their Jesus…I think that Steve is mistaken that these folks couldn’t vote for Harris/Walz. Harris/Walz policies are closer to what their bible teaches, and their view of reproductive rights is “mind your own beeswax”….much better than the DJT cynical waffle-dance.
> I wonder though, how it would be possible for a “Christian and pro-life” individual could possibly support Trump
If that's an honest wonder (and not just a sideways attack on "deplorables"), and you actually care to know, you can find out by reading Rod Dreher: https://roddreher.substack.com
Trump has redefined what it is to be a Christian.
Great interview. As someone that moves through life as center-left, I am always looking for rationale writing on the center-right. Thanks for posting.
I've voted third party for president before. I also live in a state where my vote doesn't matter
While I agree with a great deal of what Steve says, I’m not so sure that it’s a good idea to not vote or to even do a write-in. If enough people say “hell no” to Trumpism and all it stands for, the Democrats might just get a win. The Republican Party needs to get back on track and once again become the party of Lincoln. Does that make sense? I sure hope so.
Makes perfect sense, Judi!
Thanks. I'm in that boat. I am not in a swing state, so my vote doesn't really matter. In Louisiana, our Gov is a Trump-chaser. He was nominated by the state Republican party long before the other Republican candidates could make their case... so I don't know who's paying who. But the whole smarmy political scene has led us to this pathetic choice. Neither candidate has high ground. One is prettier than the other and one is louder than the other. I hate to say it but where is the Ross Perot third party candidate that seemed nutty back then but would be the most sane choice today?
Back when RFK was still in the race I thought that this was the worst set of presidential candidates in memory including the third party candidate in RFK. I guess now we're down to the two worst.
At this point I''m leaning towards writing someone in or just leaving the spot blank.
Former Republican Congresswomen Liz Cheney: “We can survive bad policy. We cannot survive a president who wants to torch the Constitution.”
This really points up what I think is an issue with most Democrats - they are unable to support or defend Harris without referring to Trump.
Yup. Since Harris is avoiding talking about how she actually intends to stand for all Americans, all I can do is read comments on why the left stands for her. Not moved by "because she's about joy and she's not Trump".
Have to *wholeheartedly* disagree with both of you, Randy and Ryan, and wonder if you missed it. The Harris-Walz campaign published their economic policies almost 3 weeks ago, and Harris pointed many of these items out in the CNN interview (which was all an attempt at “gotcha” questions from Dana Bash that I think they handled quite effectively):
*Creating a federal ban against price gouging by major corporations, especially those that own the grocery store chains.
*Public financial support for companies building new homes, along with reducing paperwork and some regulations that are affecting inventories.
*$25K subsidies for first-time home buyers to use for down payment.
*Reauthorization of the child tax credit laws of $3600 per child, and a new proposal of $6000 for families with a child under 1 year of age.
These are REAL concrete proposals. Realistically, they need the help of Congress to do these, and there’s a possibility that Dems will lose their Senate majority, so I do take this with a grain of salt. However, these ARE real-world proposals, and not just “anti-Trump”, though I would challenge you to find ANY IDEAS from the MAGA side with ANY DETAILS whatsoever! Spoiler alert: you won’t!
And the “joy” aspect is something visceral, as it contrasts beautifully against the Trump-Vance dystopian vision of a “failed national” filled with crime (even though it’s down across the country) and despicable immigrants “poisoning our blood” (though Trump continually lies about that, too).
It’s possible to be both level-headed about policy AND also understand that campaigns are built on enthusiasm. I’m very *definitely* voting FOR Harris-Walz, not just against Trump-Vance, and I hope both of you can reach the same conclusions and help us toward that goal.
I appreciate the effort, but when I say Democrats are unable to support Harrris without talking about Trump, then you reply with "the Trump-Vance dystopian vision" and " Trump continually lies about that", how do you figure that's a rebuttal?
Read any nonpartisan economic/fiscal analysis of these proposals. They are estimated to cost over $1T and the US is already $35T in debt. It sounds great. Houses for everybody! Cheaper groceries for everybody! Seriously, who is going to pay for this? I’m not saying Trump has better ideas. No taxes on your tips! Pay to play world security! No one on either side, nor American consumers, are serious about debt or consumption.
*Creating a federal ban against price gouging by major corporations, especially those that own the grocery store chains.
If actually implemented, this would do nothing but produce shortages. Any economist (left or right) can explain this for you. You can also look at actual results in countries where this has been tried.
*$25K subsidies for first-time home buyers to use for down payment.
Home sellers will simply all raise their prices by $25K, and pocket this taxpayer money. Again, ask any economist how this works.
Those 16 words say it all.
Same.
Did you post this just to troll Jonathan V Last?
Excellent interview Chris. More of these, please!
Of course you can be both anti-Trump and anti-Harris, but that implies that either:
1. you are one of those 3rd party nutjobs that vote for Jill Stein or RFK Jr.
2. you are a GOP fossil that embodies the true values of conservatism... an anachronism that no longer is acknowledged or respected within their party.
The way the Heritage Foundation has changed reminds me a bit of the Tea Party movement, which actually began as a fiscally conservative movement critical of both GWB and Obama. It was later co-opted mostly by social conservatives.
Excellent interview. I’ll give him credit for acknowledging Trump would be a disaster administration, but given that, couldn’t he give Harris a little more support?
I am ✋🏽 as a matter of fact, I might be anti people at this point. Considering all the insults and disgusting behavior I’ve seen from people. 😒 I hope they understand that the very next day after voting they’ll be working with each other, or at the store with each other, or at the gym with each other etc. All this commotion for nothing!