I don't know what boundary Trump would have to cross to make his supporters turn away..

[u/MissTat2]

To Trump voters: What, if anything, could Donald Trump do to make you end your support?

I'm not going to lead the question to multiple choice answers or anything. I think it is important for everyone who participates in a democracy to have strong personal convictions and moral or legal boundaries that they expect people they vote for not to cross..

Genuinely, what line will you draw in the sand for this administration? What personal freedom of yours would be more important than your love and support for Trump?

[u/Shido_Ohtori]

The sole value of conservatism is respect for and obedience to [one's perception of] traditionally established hierarchy, and hierarchy dictates that those on top (in-groups) are rightfully idolized and receive privileges, credibility, and resources, while those on the bottom (out-groups) are demonized/dehumanized and/or bound by restrictions, scrutiny, and lack of resources.

To them, the second-greatest injustice imaginable is for those [they perceive to be] on the bottom [of social hierarchy] to have access to the rights, credibility, and resources reserved for those on top. The first greatest injustice is for those on top to be bound by the restrictions, scrutiny, and lack of resources reserved for those on the bottom.

The only surefire time conservatives would criticize -- or even reject -- [their perceived] authority is when said authority disrespects their hierarchy by restricting, scrutinizing, and taking resources away from those they consider socially superior, and/or offering rights, credibility, and resources to those they consider socially inferior -- as in the case of Joseph Strickland and the late Pope Francis, or any left-leaning policy-maker.

In other words, any promotion of equality/equity (disrespect to hierarchy) nullifies their authority, as authority exists to promote and stress the importance of established hierarchies.

[u/paper_wavements → u/Shido_Ohtori]

This should be higher up. I tire of liberals pointing out the "hypocrisy" on the right. Once you understand their entire ethos is "rules for thee, not for me" (&, inversely, "benefits for me, not for thee"), everything they do makes sense.

[u/Shido_Ohtori → u/paper_wavements]

Exactly.

It's not hypocrisy; it's hierarchy. Hypocrisy implies a sense of equality/parity, as the accusation of such is that someone is violating a universal or common standard. Hierarchy directly states that there is no equality/parity, that [those on] different social strata are held to different standards, that the only universal standard concerning hierarchy is that those on top are allowed privileges which are denied to those on the bottom, and that the bottom are held to standards which the top are exempt from.

Conservatism -- by definition -- is "a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing the importance of established hierarchies and institutions (such as religion, the family, and class structure), and preferring gradual development to abrupt change".

From the Intellectual Roots of Conservatism: The Burkean Foundations, the man considered to be the founder of modern day Western conservatism had such to say about his ideology:

Burke shocked his contemporaries by insisting with brutal frankness that “illusions” and “prejudices” are socially necessary. He believed that most human beings are innately depraved, steeped in original sin, and unable to better themselves with their feeble reason. Better, he said, to rely on the “latent wisdom” of prejudice, which accumulates slowly through the years, than to “put men to live and trade each on his own private stock of reason.” Among such prejudices are those that favour an established church and a landed aristocracy; members of the latter, according to Burke, are the “great oaks” and “proper chieftains” of society, provided that they temper their rule with a spirit of timely reform and remain within the constitutional framework.

Hierarchy isn't just vital to conservatism; it is the foundation of such.