Rumors of a Trump ‘Patriot Party’ sound good at first, but that could simply lead to long-term Progressive domination

It’s understandable that many of Trump’s base would be disappointed with the Republican Party right now. Even so, the worst thing they could do would be to split it. That could wreck the country.

I can understand why some people are really frustrated with the Republican Party these days. Despite some of my own disagreements with regard to how things are being managed, I can see it from the perspective of those who are at odds with the attitude of the likes of Mitch McConnell. With those disappointments has come discussion on whether or not Donald Trump should start his own political party. The sources that have commented on this are anonymous, so they should be taken with a grain of salt, but the concept warrants discussion.

While the idea may sound good to those eager to break the two-party dominance of American politics – given the sheer number of Trump voters, it might even be possible to create a meaningful third party – it’s actually a horrible idea for those who want to achieve Trumpian goals in the foreseeable future.

As of right now, the country seems to be split down the middle politically. Though the Democrats have both houses of Congress and the executive branch, enough inroads have been made in the House of Representatives and in state governments that the tables could turn within two years. As it stands, the worst thing you could do right now is split the Republican Party in two.

There’s a reason you didn’t see the Young Turks looking at a party split circa 2016. Instead, they created a group called the Justice Democrats. That same group was responsible for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez getting elected to office. There were several other far-left politicians that made inroads within the Democratic Party too. They did this because they knew that if they split into a completely different party, there was less of a chance they would ever gain political power. The same is true here.

If we go even further back into history, the reaction to Obama’s presidency was the Tea Party. That movement brought in Senators Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul. I would say that, in this day and age, those four men speak more to the direction of where most people want the Republican Party to go. Then again, that’s probably why those senators are as popular as they are. Had the Republicans split in 2008 into the Republican Party and the Tea Party, those same inroads would not have happened.

As such, I believe that history shows that these sorts of splits don’t really work. If folks want a more populist Republican Party, it will not be that hard to obtain it. I would say that a new party is not even necessary, because all that needs doing is to hold the current Republican Party to the standards it has set for itself. That is what both of the aforementioned groups have done. If there was an actual split, most likely you’d not see a right-leaning candidate win an election anytime in the future. 

This leaves more conservative-leaning people suffering under disastrous ideas such as the Green New Deal and more international climate accords, and economic boons such as the Keystone Pipeline will continue to elude us. That’s not the future that America should be going after. Not unless you want the future to have people like AOC, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar dominating our politics.

Speaking of someone who has supported Trump in the past, I certainly wouldn’t be against him using that charisma he possesses to help a new generation of Republicans start winning primaries. That’s the way the system is supposed to work. To alter an old GK Chesterton quote, it’s a shame we don’t see more politicians primaried. The Republican Party does not need to be split. It simply needs those who are strong enough to stand up for the American people and believe that America is truly a great place.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.