At The Federalist, David Harsanyi reflects on the Georgia special election and teases the question:

What if Republican voters who don’t particularly like Donald Trump are also able to compartmentalize their votes? What if they dislike Democrats more than they do the president? What if, rather than being punished for Trump’s unpopularity, local candidates are rewarded for their moderation? This, of course, would be a disaster for Democrats. And Tuesday’s run-off election in Georgia’s sixth district shows that it might be possible.

Whether or not this played a factor in the not-too-surprising outcome of that election (the Czar doubts anyone in our Castle thought Jon Ossoff might win), Mr. Harsanyi pokes at a topic dear to the Czar’s bloated, blood-blackened mass of tissue he charitably calls his heart: the inability of most liberals to anticipate conservatives’ self-reliance.

Here’s what the Czar is talking about: most conservatives have no trouble doing things for themselves, by themselves, and without mewling. Whether it’s Boy Scouts, NASCAR, football, or the military or whatever, conservatives generally look at a problem, roll up their collective sleeves, and get to work on it. No one has to tell them what to do, how to do it, or why: if there’s a problem, and it needs fixing.

This translates to politics. A “typical” conservative does not exist: almost by nature, conservatives figure out what’s in their own best interest and get to the task at hand. This guarantees a wide disparity of thought and opinion, which may be why a handful of liberal pundits who attempt to pinpoint a conservative stereotype are so-often stymied. Few people are more genuinely anarchist than libertarian-minded conservatives.

Sure, this translates to politics: a conservative is far more likely to cast a libertarian vote than, we see, a liberal will cast a Green Party vote. Of course, liberals do vote for parties other than the Democratic party, but not in significant numbers.

One of the first things liberal commentators do is try to identify who the conservative leader is. Obviously, this year, it’s Donald Trump: and every goofy thing or nutty comment that flies out of his mouth is, ipso facto believed by all conservatives everywhere, universally. Ask any liberal talking-head: Trump comments on terror? All conservatives are islamophobic. Trump makes a junior-high quip about women? All conservatives are women-haters. Trump garbles a fact about the physical world? All conservatives hate science. By now, you’ve thought up even more examples than these three.

However, the point seems to escape these same commentators that, possibly, conservatives have different opinions. Some of them may think for themselves. Actually, how shocking is it that perhaps most conservatives have a completely different world view than their president? Perhaps some don’t even agree with each other!

In 2012, you can recall, there was a crazy-mad belief rampant among most liberals that—ready?—Rush Limbaugh was the de facto head of the Republican party. Why? Because…well, because he had giant ratings and therefore had to be the one in charge of Republican GroupThink. Weeks of attacks on Limbaugh followed.

In 2008, however, it was Sarah Palin who was in charge. You know how they treated her, as well as how she—unfortunately—responded. The Czar brings this up because it is the only explanation why liberals connected a strategy-based image on her website to the 2011 shooting of Gabby Giffords—as she was viewed as the Overlord of the GOP HiveMind, for sure Jared Loughner was following her instructions. Although it was patently obvious that the graphic—which used crosshairs on Dem-held strongholds—had nothing to do with the politics-free insanity of Loughner (who, though, voted Democratic at one point well-before he snapped), the “Palin encouraged Loughner” anecdotes came pouring out last week when a Bernie Sanders supporter did attempt to assassinate Republican lawmakers because of what Sanders stated on his website.

Okay, so, here we are: liberal democrats are shocked that conservatives in Georgia would vote for a candidate that distanced herself from Trump. Likewise, they’re confused as to why non-Trump supporters wouldn’t vote for their guy. Probably, most Republican voters felt their candidate was likely to win; most Democrats in the area remain shell-shocked that they just can’t win an election when it’s so obvious that Democrats hate Trump.

“Maybe we should consider the possibility that conservatives vote for the candidate who better represents them, instead of mindlessly voting for the candidate we think they should vote for,” said no Democratic-leaning pundit on earth. “Yes,” agreed his equally non-existent colleague, “it’s possible we understand nothing about their psychology.”

Because we do it, they must do it, is a too-common liberal approach. Liberals have suppressed inner-racism dating back centuries; therefore, Republicans must be racist. Liberals have done a bad job representing women; therefore, Republicans hate women, too. Liberals are terrified of Islam, and so Republicans must be islamophobes.

And liberal democrats tend to lockstep-follow anyone yelling into a microphone—therefore, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, no, Donald Trump must be the GOP thought-leader of the day. And it just isn’t that simple.

The Czar of Muscovy

Божію Поспѣшествующею Милостію Мы, Дима Грозный Императоръ и Самодержецъ Всероссiйскiй, цѣсарь Московскiй. The Czar was born in the steppes of Russia in 1267, and was cheated out of total control of all Russia upon the death of Boris Mikhailovich, who replaced Alexander Yaroslav Nevsky in 1263. However, in 1283, our Czar was passed over due to a clerical error and the rule of all Russia went to his second cousin Daniil (Даниил Александрович), whom Czar still resents. As a half-hearted apology, the Czar was awarded control over Muscovy, inconveniently located 5,000 miles away just outside Chicago. He now spends his time seething about this and writing about other stuff that bothers him.