Recently, conservative writers have been arguing ferociously among themselves about how those who opposed the election of Donald Trump should write about his presidency.

The debate began Dec. 18, when National Review's Charles C.W. Cooke published a critique of the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin, in which he argues that she has become one of the "Trump-obsessed zealots" she herself often criticizes.

That being the case, Cooke continues, Rubin is doing conservatism itself a disservice by opposing Trump even when he takes a stance that she previously agreed with, as she has on several occasions.

"Conservatism in this country long predated Trump; for now, it is tied up with Trump; soon, it will have survived Trump," he writes.

The Atlantic's David Frum highlighted this comment in a piece rebutting Cooke's essay and defending Rubin.

"This is something many conservatives tell themselves, but it's not even slightly true. Trump is changing conservatism into something different," writes Frum, a onetime speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

In Frum's view, this is among the reasons that Trump's presidency is "a huge political fact." And Rubin is among the conservatives who deserve credit for "consistent anti-Trumpism," because she refuses to ignore that.

Many "Never Trump" conservatives have already weighed in on the ensuing debate, and I've been bemused watching it unfold; I was completely appalled by the idea of Trump becoming president, but what's done is done. Still, I would like to offer a few comments as well.

POLITICS: Population gains likely to make Texas a bigger player in presidential politics

The first is that from a journalistic perspective, the question at hand has a straightforward answer: People who offer commentary about American politics from a conservative perspective, or a progressive one, should do so fairly, accurately and independently. I realize many pundits don't, but still.

Conservatives who openly opposed Trump were put in an awkward situation when he won the election. Frum is correct that many have succumbed to market pressure since then and decided to focus on other fights if they can't bring themselves to do an about-face on the president.

Stoic conservatives

But "Never Trump" conservatives who have resisted the temptation to conceal their opinions about the Trump presidency don't deserve a medal, if giving opinions is nonetheless their job. Nor would it be fair to say that an anti-Trump conservative like Cooke is cynically hedging his bets, or changing his position, if he occasionally approves of something Trump does.

I've done so myself, from time to time, and I wish I had more occasion to do so, because although I was opposed to Trump from the outset of the Republican primaries, I'm nonetheless aware that he won.

That brings me to my second point, which is that my sense, from watching the debate unfold, is that the conservatives who agree with Cooke aren't less principled than the "Never Trump" hardliners; they're just more stoic.

MORE FROM GRIEDER: Could Texas turn blue in 2018? Stranger things have happened

And that makes sense, frankly, given that The National Review's editors were definitely among the conservatives who genuinely did not want Trump to become president.

"So far, conservative voters seem to like him just fine," they wrote in March 2016, when they endorsed Ted Cruz.

The editors acknowledged that many Republicans feel differently and urged everyone to focus on the big picture.

"What matters now is that Cruz is a talented and committed conservative. He is also Republicans' best chance for keeping their presidential nomination from going to someone with low character and worse principles."

Taking risks

The latter point was clearly true, at that juncture in the primary. Republicans who ignored it were the ones who were willing to take the risk. They were also, in many cases, the ones who in late February 2016 had begun using the hashtag #NeverTrump on social media, and they continued to do so after Ohio and Florida held their primaries on March 15.

So although today's "Never Trump" hardliners might be sincerely appalled by Trump's behavior as president, it's not really a surprise that they're less sanguine than the conservatives who anticipated the risk before they did.

And some of those conservatives, I think, are still underestimating the risk. Will conservatism escape Trump unscathed? Of course not. He's already changed it. But that doesn't change the fact that he won.

***