ShareThis Page
Elections

Trump the end of conservatism, professor tells St. Vincent College audience

Joe Napsha
| Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016, 10:42 p.m.
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, talks to the Tribune-Review before presenting a lecture entitled “Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism” at the Fred Rogers Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, talks to the Tribune-Review before presenting a lecture entitled “Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism” at the Fred Rogers Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, poses for a portrait be presenting a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, poses for a portrait be presenting a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, presents a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, presents a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, presents a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Samuel Goldman, assistant professor of political science at George Washington University, presents a lecture entitled 'Lessons of Trump, and the Future of Conservatism' at the Fred Roger Center at St. Vincent College in Unity Township, on Tuesday, Nov. 1, 2016.

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump “represents the end of the conservative movement as we know it,” the death knell of a political movement that goes as far back as Barry Goldwater's ill-fated 1964 presidential run, a George Washington University professor said at St. Vincent College Tuesday.

If Trump were to win on Nov. 8, which Samuel Goldman — an assistant professor of political science at George Washington — virtually guaranteed will not happen, it will mean replacing the conservative movement with something much more similar to European nationalism.

But Goldman told more than 110 people who gathered to hear his speech on the “Lessons of Trump and the Future of Conservatism,” that there may be very little immediate change for the conservative movement after a Trump defeat.

There could a movement similar to Great Britain's exit from the European Union, which would focus on white Americans, but that won't succeed, Goldman said.

“Many white people don't want to be in the white people's party,” Goldman said.

What Goldman said he hopes to result from the election, but is not that optimistic will occur, is a reconfiguration of conservatism in less dogmatic terms.

“I think people aren't buying the standard package (conservatism) anymore,” Goldman said. Whether a restructured conservatism “could be sold to voters is unknown,” he added.

Trump's success has shown that the GOP's conservative base is smaller and less conservative than many had thought, Goldman said.

What would likely bring heartache to the GOP faithful is Goldman's observation that Hillary Clinton not only will win this year, but “Hillary will be a strong candidate for re-election.”

The GOP finds itself in this position because Trump appealed to the Republican electorate in ways that traditional conservatives like former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush or Texas Sen. Ted Cruz were unable to do. Trump captured the nomination by beating a field of 16 candidates that Goldman referred to as an “uninspired assortment of hacks and buffoons” who were not so special, and especially not the heirs to President Ronald Reagan's brand of conservatism.

Trump won despite being “demagogic, crass and offensive,” Goldman said.

While a Trump victory would spark “a battle over what conservatism means,” a Trump loss would keep Republicans doing what they have been doing since Obama was elected in 2008 – “going back to opposition mode and allowing them to avoid a conflict in conservatism,” John Hanley, an associate professor at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, said in an interview Tuesday.

Trump's anti-Obama and anti-Clinton approach has been very effective in Western Pennsylvania and Ohio but has hurt the party in more diverse states such as Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina, Hanley said. That can have a long-term negative effect on the party, he noted.

Goldman observed that on his drive from the Pittsburgh International Airport to St. Vincent College near Latrobe, “I saw more Trump signs than I have seen in the last two years.”

Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-836-5252 or jnapsha@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me