Where do you draw the line around what voices need to be included? Conservative politics have moved so far to the right that centric liberal politics is what old conservative politics used to be (because democrats are big tent, and the republicans have been shedding voters due to extremism).
Balance isn't positive or useful when it shifts things further one direction, especially when there's such a massive shift.
Indeed. While you might dislike Neo-liberalism, Reagan-ism, or Bush's "Compassionate Conservatism," as Walter Sobchak said: at least it's an ethos.
Trumpism believes in nothing but suborning yourself to Trump's will and needs. Sure there's some vague isolationism and xenophobia, and some pandering to Christian nationalism, but the only consistent policy position is fielty to Trump. That's why there aren't any interesting Trumpist pundits. The House is twisting itself in knots right now because they can't decide what he wants or will tolerate regarding Ukraine funding. A real party with a policy would have an articulatable agenda, probably with some dissenters on this or that, but all the current Republican party can agree on is how great dear leader is, and Democrats are bad.
Yes and: what ever their pre Trump "conservative" bonafidas, neither French or Douthat land any where near today's mainstream movement conservatives (MAGA).
They have conservative bonafides, no scare quotes necessary. The Republican party mainstream (MAGA) is not attempting conservatism, it is right wing populism. The word "conservative" does not have a new definition, the change has been that it no longer applies to the political party it once did (at least more so).
Balance isn't positive or useful when it shifts things further one direction, especially when there's such a massive shift.