I can understand why liberals have a problem with Trump, but why on earth would a "conservative"?
Being conservative does not mean one must support idiots and idiocy simply because they claim to be conservative. In fact, I believe that it is the duty of conservatives to break this stereotype by rejecting and repudiating any and all such idiocy spewed in the name of conservative ideals.
Tucker Case appears to be very confused about the concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend"_
I'm not confused by it. I realize that it's a very stupid concept to live by. Case in point:
I'm a
big proponent of dual-federalism, like that seen in Switzerland and in the pre-civil war US. My political ideology is what I call "neo-anti-federalism". The anti-federalists did a spot on job predicting the dangers of the US constitution. they have been proven correct in their reservations.
Anyway, I am probably one of the most consistent State's rights advocates around (I do not judge something based on my personal agreement with it, but base don whether or not it supports my overall goal of state's rights). For example, you of all people know my openly pro-illegal immigrant position. My personal views on illegal immigration are often described as liberal (although they have nothing to do with leftist thinking whatsoever). However, I was
very vocal in my support of Arizona's right to pass their controversial, undeniably anti-illegal immigrant, laws. I do not live in Arizona, and as such I do not oppose that law (while I would actively oppose such a law here in Illinois). Sadly, very few conservatives these days are consistent.
There is, however, one major exception to my state's rights position:
I believe in federalizing basic human rights. I believe that the federal government exists to unite the states under the banner of equal treatment and protection for all, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc. I will not support any state's rights argument to limit anyone's basic human rights on the basis of such characteristics.
Unfortunately, my political ideology of state's rights and dual federalism has been usurped by people who wish to do just that. While we both have an "enemy" in those who support increased federal authority, these people actually do more to undermine my position than those who oppose state's rights do. That makes them an even
bigger enemy than the increased federal authority enemy.
The key, however, is that both are enemies of my position. Neither of them become "friends" by virtue of their enmity for each other. They both stand in the way, and they both need to be defeated by virtue of reasoned arguments against their positions. But I am
far more voracious in my attacks on those who undermine my positions by virtue of being false allies. The false ally is always greater threat than the open enemy.
And that's why the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" is a phenomenally flawed way of interacting with the world.