One dissenter, sort of

One National Review writer dissents, sort of. Ian Tuttle writes,

The last eight years under Barack Obama have been nothing short of devastating. Who would contest that he achieved what he set out to do: “fundamentally transform” the country? The results, at home, include a quasi-nationalized health-care system that is accelerating an imminent budgetary crisis, Sixties-style racial tensions coupled with demoralized law enforcement, and a collapse of immigration law facilitated by executive lawlessness. Abroad, we see a Russia engaged in a slow-motion Reconquista, an Islamic State capable of carrying out devastating attacks in the heart of Europe and of inspiring apostles in America, and an Iran that will soon cast a nuclear shadow over the entire Middle East.

...If Trump is where Republican primary voters choose to go, the best thing for the country might be not to defeat him, but to push him into office and temper him there.

First, there is the possibility that Trump might — might — do one or two of the things he has discussed. If a President Trump were actually to enforce the tenets of our immigration law, or were to tear up the nuclear deal with Iran and reauthorize a sanctions regime, or were to deploy serious military force against the Islamic State, these would be positive things for the country.

I do not want Donald Trump to become president. His election would be bad for conservatism, for the Republican party, and for the country. But we do not know the contours of a Trump presidency; they may still be able to be shaped by more sober minds. We know well, though, the likely contours of a Clinton presidency — and there is reason to think that it would prove worse. Weighed against Hillary Clinton now, and against the demagogues who could arise if things continue down the current path, Republicans’ best course might be to support Donald Trump. But I hope it doesn’t come to that.

Read more here.