Since there isn't a "Conservative" party (in the United States), only one that claims to be so, it is a bit difficult to find any consistent platform that defines conservatism. However, as Senator Hatrack previously opined, a central tenet would appear to be "conservation" - maintenance of the "status quo ante". This is where I generally part ways with conservatism, per se, and further why I don't believe that the Republican party, or friend Hatrack, really represents conservatism in the traditional sense.

The modern incarnation of the Republican party follows a path blazed by the TEA party, of destruction and (in my view) detriment. It is heartless, mean-spirited, and selfish. That is the path of the reactionary and revanchist. That is not conservatism. Conservatives, in my experience, don't "tear down". They may resist change, but they accept it when it happens, and work to improve "the system" in ways that comport with their views. At least in theory they care about institutions and the people who build (and run) them. When people claim Donald Trump isn't a conservative, they are right. He is an opportunist and a parasite. He claimed to be a Democrat when it suited his purpose, and has gone along with the Republican agenda, largely, because it was expedient. Those are not, in my view, "conservative values." He hasn't displayed any values whatever beyond "taking care of number one", and I don't mean the United States.

When I started this thread, I talked about what I considered conservatism from my personal experience. I never was a candidate, but I campaigned for them. I was an advocate. I described them as "'real' conservatives who take positions on principle, and have rational (if, I will add, misguided) bases for their views," and "don't... lump everyone left of Genghis Khan into the "progressive/socialist/communist" camp because they can't discern a difference, and complain that anyone with an ounce of compassion is weak and un-American." I gave examples of some recent politicians who seemed to hew to traditional conservative values, and "didn't assume anyone who didn't was the devil incarnate worthy of excommunication or worse. Those that think before they speak, and use measured tones." We, generally, have left that farm a long time ago (both here and nationally). Is the farm even there anymore? Was it always a mirage?

Some of the change is deliberate, I think, and some of it is the result of changes in the structure of elections and the electorate (exacerbated by a partisan Supreme Court - to whom these same observations also apply): gerrymandering and a flood of money; structural defects in the systems - some put there deliberately - like the Electoral College; voter apathy, and its sibling, vote suppression; and archaic voting methods. But it has certainly been manipulated and amplified by actors who have agendas completely separate from concern for the country, civil liberties, or humanity generally [I'm looking at you, Mitch McConnell].

I have personally or professionally known several legislators and other pols (I once worked in a Lieutenant Governor's office as an ombudsman, and was an Assistant Attorney General for 13 years). They were of various stripes, but had one thing in common - they were patriotic and wanted to do a good job for their constituents. I just don't see that in today's "conservative" politics and that distresses me.