The setup:
Two dinosaurs are pitted against each other to decide, once and for all, which one will be the last of their species left standing. Republicans have to choose between Donal J. Trump and Rafael E. Cruz as the last standard bearer of a party that cannot exist in its current form after this election cycle. This is it for Republicanism as we have known it. No more Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt or Dwight Eisenhower for sure. There might still be some Nixonesque figures left by next year, but a lot of present-day Republicans will be calling themselves something else soon. It might be “Conservative” sooner than you think. The effort has long been afoot to elevate that generic term to the status of a formal political party name.
There is going to be a big realignment in American politics. Even if the formal names “Republican Party” and “Democratic Party” remain, what those labels stand for, and who will align themselves with them, is not entirely known right now. The fate of the Democratic Party hinges on whether we retain or lose the presidency, but more importantly, whether or not we succeed in regaining control of Congress and re-balancing the Supreme Court to be in favor of the general welfare as opposed to what it does now, protecting the interests of the oligarchs and abrogating the people’s basic rights. (The right to vote, marry, not be shot, or control one’s own body and what you put into it, anyone?) Let’s focus on the Republicans for now, and what they’re fighting about to define “the heart and soul of Republicanism”.
The big issue, and the crux of contention in the finale match-up for the Republican nomination appears to be, “Who is the most conservative?” This ephemeral issue takes precedence over anything substantive, like the economy, jobs, health care, education, the environment or even war and peace. There have been differences between Republican candidates this year, but their answers to questions about those differences all hinge on convincing their glassy-eyed, drooling legions of slope-browed, reactionary dupes that each of them “is the most conservative”. Have you noticed that? They never talk about anything real, or present any facts, they just say that they are “more conservative” than someone else, as if such purported “conservatism” had any bearing on the objective reality. Assess the accuracy of this idea every time you listen to any Republican flapping their lips. You know it’s true.
Conservative:
What does this conservatism thing even mean? The policies and mind set associated these days with the label "conservative" are antithetical to any historical notion of that term. The term is now an oxymoron. American "conservatives" are nothing more than cheerleaders for judicial activists (like the late Justice Scalia) who promote every misbegotten, wrong-headed idea supported by the corporate elite class of oligarchs, the top 0.01% of the wealthy. The idea of being "more conservative" is tantamount to asking, "Who is more of a heartless, malevolent sociopath?" So-called "conservative" values and policies don't conserve anything, like the land, the people's well-being, national security or any sense of human decency. Instead, they run around touting Draconian laws that produce poverty, misery, sickness and ruined lives, such as making criminals out of cannabis users and providers. Name one good thing that any Republican, let alone a self-styled conservative Republican, has done to make this nation a better place since Eisenhower’s day? You can't, can you? I can hear all the zombie teabaggers chanting, "U.S.A.! Freedom! No taxes!" But, what Republican policy furthered any of those things?
The issue:
The question at hand for Republicans has become, “Who is more conservative? Trump or Cruz?” They ask this because being “more conservative” is somehow a better discriminator for them than anything else about a candidate’s track record or intended policies. In the eye of the true believer, “conservative” is a synonym for “good”, so the more conservative, the better. It’s stunning how narrow and and intentionally ignorant this mind set is, but it’s more the rule than the exception for Republicans. They just don’t want to know about anything else.
In weighing the relative merits of candidates, pointless questions like this arise. “Is Cruz little more than a more conservative version of Trump?” Today, I answered this question on one of those “non-partisan” forums that seems to have been posed by someone completely oblivious to the irrelevance of this question. Having nearly equal disdain for both Republicans, I asked, rhetorically, “Who cares?” The reason I don’t care is that I, unlike Republicans, don’t think that one’s conservatism, whatever that means, has any bearing on what someone might do as president. It was incumbent upon me to school these cretins about reality and what really matters. I doubt if very many Republicans received any benefit from it, but I’m relaying most of my answer there to DailyKos readers to set your mind at ease about which Republican will be the sacrificial lamb on the funeral bier of the Republican Party, may it rot in Hell.
I might frame this question as, “Who is the more egregious despoiler of human decency and the more vile villain?” There's no question in my mind that their intended policies would lead to much the same result were either of them to become president. The questioner got that part right on the button.
Rafael Edward "Ted" Cruz is a lot more "conservative" than Donald J. Trump. Cruz is the lowest of the low. There is no billionaire to whom he will not pander to fill his coffers. He sweet-talks hate-filled, ant-abortion, anti-gay zealots and stands by blithely while they spew incitement to murder as long as they endorse him. He shamelessly asserts that the ACA is "terrible" in trying to convince downtrodden hillbillies that a national health care system will kill them. He lies about what the inevitable result of the policies he would enforce as president are. (You know, like, "Let's not worry at all about global climate change or fracking.") He wants to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Commerce, Department of Education and the Internal Revenue Service. Do you get it? He wants give industry free reign to poison us (no EPA), completely deregulate big business (no DoC), perpetuate institutionalized poverty and wage slavery (no DoEd) and allow a billionaire to pay a lower tax rate than than a janitor (flat tax, with loopholes, and no IRS to enforce even that). This guy is a loon and he is willing to harm everyone to direct more money to his corporate masters. If this isn't evil, I don't know what is. Yep. He's the more conservative of the two all right.
Trump is almost as bad, and his notion of the role of government is very similar, but he doesn't go into as much detail, or any detail at all, about how he would go about achieving his ends, except to assert, "It would be great!" Actually, that's pretty conservative, too. When you lie to everyone and claim that ruinous policies will bring prosperity and happiness, it's the essence of conservatism. The less detail you give about the "trickle-down" lie, the better. Just calling corporate raiders like Mitt Romney's Bain Capital "job creators" is just enough misdirection to let them get away with breaking up the means of production, selling off assets abroad where labor is cheaper, and getting tax breaks and incentives to do it. No, Trump doesn't rub our faces in the humiliation of how he would destroy our lives to satisfy his own greed. He, at least, would act surprised as it happened. So, as less of a calculating monster, he could be considered less conservative in that respect.
There is another significant difference. Trump is not totally lacking in human feeling as is Cruz. When asked about what he would do about people dying in the street after his administration succeeded in "getting rid of Obamacare," Trump, at least, said, "We don't want people dying in the street," and promised that they would get the care they needed. He didn't say how, but at least he wants to give the impression that he cares. I don't believe he does care, but at least he acts as if he does. That demonstrates a bit less Schadenfreude than Cruz, who seems to have the best poker face in politics today.
Is Cruz a sociopath? You betcha! Two of the hallmarks of sociopathy are a flattened affect (the calm, unflappable demeanor, the "poker face") and a distinct lack of empathy for suffering or misfortune. Cruz never says anything that conveys any evidence of compassion for those who would be harmed by his policies. When asked about what he would do about the gap in care that would result from dismantling the ACA, he starts talking about "freedom" and "choice" and other such meaningless drivel in the context of providing health care for those who can't afford it or are under-insured.
Does he show any more compassion for those of modest means who can no longer afford higher education, and are saddled with life-crippling debt is they try to buy it on credit? Nope. There's nothing more conservative than playing the long con out to the bitter end and telling the people that the mechanism of their destruction is really the means of their salvation.
There's one more conservative technique that Cruz has mastered, and in which Trump is just a bumbling amateur. If it's not rhetorically convenient, Ted does not address any substantive issue. He just talks about something else, and how wonderful his "conservative" values are. He doesn't even try to substantiate his claims, knowing full well that they will not stand in the face of objective scrutiny.
Cruz. What a creep. He's the quintessential neo-con snake oil salesman who doesn't believe a word he's saying about anything. All he wants is to get into power and be the mechanism for his corporate masters to turn the nation into their own, private piggy bank. In exchange, he would expect a share of the spoils and a great big church for his daddy to preach sermons casting Junior as the Messiah. It's what he believes, and it's what he's working to achieve. You can't get more conservative than that.