We have some more primaries/caucuses today
[BUMPED UP. See UPDATE below.]
In Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, and Louisiana. All but Louisiana are caucuses.
This is all unraveling awfully quickly, isn’t it? I know that was the design and intent, but of course when the RNC devised the schedule they never quite envisioned the situation they (and we) are facing now. You can think many things about the RNC, but “nimble” is probably not one of them.
UPDATE 8:30 PM
Well, well, well.
Cruz is projected to win both the Kansas and Maine caucuses, and both with 40+ percent of the vote. In Kansas, his total with all precincts reporting is 48.2%, awfully close to 50%, which is very impressive in a 4-person race where all three other opponents are in double figures. It also exceeds Trump’s totals in any other primary or caucus, and is over double what Trump got in Kansas, a state where on the eve of the caucuses Trump was said to have a 6-point lead over Cruz in the polls among likely caucus-goers.
That’s quite a polling error. Caucuses are not easy to predict, but that’s about a 31% difference between prediction and reality, and in a recent poll at that. However, “recent” in this case means that the poll was taken the day before the debate and the day of the debate, so it’s likely that the gap may reflect what happened during the debate rather than any polling error.
The Kansas results are consistent with Cruz’s tendency to do well in caucuses and closed primaries. That, in turn, indicates to me that a significant amount of Donald Trump’s support comes from people who are not party members, although it’s not clear who they are. Perhaps they are people who don’t ordinarily vote, but I’m not at all certain of that, either. Turnout was very high, but this obviously didn’t benefit Trump, although common “wisdom” often argues that it would.
Cruz won in Maine, too, and his win was decisive with 45.9 to Trump’s 32.6. It’s also a caucus state. Kentucky is still another caucus state, and Trump is ahead right now 43.1 over Cruz’s 30.2, with about a third of the vote counted.
A good night for Cruz, a bad night for Rubio. Rubio is only slightly edging out Kasich, below 20% in each state and in Maine he is below Kasich at 8%. My sense is that Rubio going on the attack diminished Rubio’s support and helped Cruz, although perhaps it’s just an artifact of which states happened to be voting or caucusing today. At any rate, it seems to be shaping up as a Trump vs. Cruz battle. I doubt Rubio will drop out, because Florida looms ahead. But if during the next week he doesn’t poll well there, he might.
Fascinating evening. Results are just coming in from Louisiana, but Trump was way ahead there in the polls. Louisiana’s primary is a closed one, as is Kentucky’s.
UPDATE 12:50 AM March 6:
Trump won Louisiana and Kentucky narrowly, Cruz won Kansas and Maine with larger margins. In every single one of those states, Cruz did better than expected and much better than polls had predicted. Late breaking voters seem to have gone strongly for Cruz.
Rubio and Kasich now form a second tier with a large canyon between them and the leaders, Trump and Cruz. I can only hope that Cruz’s upward momentum continues, and Trump’s downward momentum continues.
I was an observer at one in NE. Chaos. Seven hundred plus in a room for 300.
Results trickling in. Bernie doing very well. Won the one I was at.
Cruz has won Kansas.
KLSmith:
I saw that he’s ahead with about a quarter reporting. I don’t see anyone projecting that he won, although he’s doing very well at the moment. Do you have a link?
Looks like Cruz will easily win Maine also.
Could he sweep all today?
jack:
A consummation devoutly to be wished.
Both caucus states with closed primaries.
Neo:
“[The RNC] never quite envisioned the situation they (and we) are facing now. You can think many things about the RNC, but “nimble” is probably not one of them.”
“Activist” is not one of them, which is a problem in an activist game. “Nimble” comes with activism.
Commentators are scrambling to characterize the social trend of the Trump phenomenon and diagnose why the GOP “base” is defecting from their traditional center of gravity with the conservative Right to the Trump alternative orbit.
The why is simple: activism, which is sociology weaponized or industrialized. It’s not an overlooked spontaneously brewing combination of factors. The Trump phenomenon has been a calculated manufacture of the redefinition, chipping (tearing) away, and rearrangement of groups from the traditional center of gravity on the Right into the Trump alternative orbit using a proven method for a known market. People is people, left or right. Activism works for anyone for any cause, or against anyone for any cause.
That being said, the GOP (RNC) is not the 1st to blame. Their critical shortfall of activism is primarily the fault of conservatives, not the GOP, which depends on the Right to supply necessary activism just as the Democrats rely on the Left for their activism. The dearth of activism on the Right is highlighted by the Trump campaign’s choice to draw from the alt-Right for its activism.
The RNC didn’t envision the situation because they can hardly conceive the activist paradigm let adapt the method. But you envisioned the situation in the immediate wake of the 2012. You recognized the portent for 2016 and cast about for a solution. I gave it:
Of course, the context of my advice was competing against the Democrat-front Left activists for the 2016 general election. At the time, I didn’t predict the Left-mimicking Trump-front alt-Right activist insurgency. But the principle is the same because the activist game is the same. It’s the only social cultural/political game there is.
Conservatives really need to adapt activism ASAP. Keep in mind that the alt-Right isn’t trying to destroy the GOP. They’re trying to take over the GOP. However, they do mean to displace and marginalize conservatives. At this point, conservatives need to collectively go all in with Marxist-method activism in order to hold position in the American political landscape, let alone compete for a presidential election.
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com
Ace’s Brandon Finnigan site, and Drudge
This is what I’m looking at. No idea how accurate it is though.
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/march-5th-gop/
Eric:
I don’t think I’ve ever disagreed with you on the need for more activism. But activism for conservatism is NOT what we’re seeing in the Trump phenomenon; it’s activism for something quite different (populism, nativism, big government strongman).
I disagree however, with this that you wrote: “the GOP ‘base’ is defecting from their traditional center of gravity with the conservative Right to the Trump alternative orbit.” I do read that, and not just from you, but although I think that some Trump-supporter activists are the “base,” many many are not, and much (maybe most) of the conservative “base” is not deflecting.
The Trump activists are (as I think you’ve written in other posts) a combination of things, including leftists, neo-Nazis and other white supremicists, some disaffected Democrats, and a crew of other disaffected people who don’t ordinarily even vote. Some are also the frustrated “base.” I don’t think we have a clue what the proportions are, but I think that latter group is maybe 25% to 50% of the whole of Trump’s support. And also, only maybe 25% t0 50% of the conservative base is for Trump. It’s hard to say, but there are plenty of people in the base who are, for example, for Cruz.
neo: do you want to bump up the post, maybe it will bring good luck.
KLSmith; jack:
Thanks. Ace’s site’s projections are usually pretty accurate, I think.
KLSmith:
Done.
jack: they’ve been very accurate so far
Cruz takes CPAC straw poll. I know, I know this has nothing to do with delegates but has to be taken as a positive for Cruz.
“and much (maybe most) of the conservative “base” is not deflecting.”
Perhaps is should do more deflection.
“The deflection distance of a member under a load is directly related to the slope of the deflected shape of the member under that load and can be calculated by integrating the function that mathematically describes the slope of the member under that load.”
1. I was at the Westbrook High School this morning, which was the caucus center for Cumberland County (the most populated one in Maine). I got there early, and was able to get in and out quickly. The school gymnasium was soon filling up with people waiting to check in, and the parking lot looked full as well.
2. The caucus workers were a mix of neatly dressed middle-aged guys, some enthusiastic young people including several cute girls, and even one well-groomed black guy (not only a black Republican, but in Maine as well!).
3. Inside the gym: a table for Trump supporters at the far end, with lots of lawn signs being handed out. I saw another table there for Cruz, and one senior lady handed me a brochure for Rubio, telling me she had gone down to New Hampshire to hear him speak, and was impressed with his foreign policy. There were at least two other tables for the Republican nominees who will end up challenging Chellie Pingree in November (the Democrat incumbent for Maine’s first district).
4. You had to check in, as this caucus was for registered Republicans, but you could also make a same day switch and re-register. A number of people were doing that. (Both Trump and Bernie are popular here, so I think it’s more likely that any new people are sincere voters for their candidate.)
5. And while you could wait around, and hear various presentations for the respective candidates, you could also go to the end of the hall, vote early, and drop off your ballot. The ballot had not only the four current candidates on it, but a total of nine names and a write-in option. The others were Bush, Carson, Fiorina, Huckabee, and Rand Paul.
6. In 2012, Romney narrowly beat Ron Paul, by about 38% to 36%. The results took a couple weeks to come in, due to rescheduling the caucus in some areas due to heavy snow. All in all, about 6,260 people voted in the Maine Republican caucus in 2012 (I had to work that day, so I did not vote). Maine has a total population of 1.3 million.
7. So I don’t know how things will work out, but it might be a close one, with Trump and Cruz occupying the top two spots. But I was very upset and very unhappy about one thing: there were no free donuts. WTF! There were free donuts from Dunkin’s when I was at the caucus in 2008, but no sign of any free donuts today. Now, I did leave early, but I still hold Chris Christie responsible for this.
Kansas has been called by CNN (also) for Ted Cruz!
Yea1
To clarify, in Maine, unenrolled voters can enroll in the Republican party the day of the caucus. If you are already a Democrat and want to switch to Republican, you have to do it by February 19th at your town office. To the extent that Trump picks up more voters, he might be doing it by bringing in the unenrolled and new voters, who may not normally participate. (Can a bigger tent not be a good thing?) And then the Democratic caucus in Maine is on Sunday, March 6th. Hopefully, Bernie will do well, following his success in NH, VT, and MA.
Cruz is projected to win Kansas with 51% and things are so far looking good in Maine (WaPo report). These are said to be the states where he gave the most effort. Anything that takes the inevitable mantle away from Trump looks good to me. Maybe Trump’s head will explode if he is shown to be a loser. That would make the rest of the year a lot nicer for all of us.
If Cruz gets more than 50% of the votes in Maine he gets all the delegates.
If Cruz wins with decisive margins in the closed primaries/caucuses, the donald’s bombast will turn into a full blown temper tantrum of rage and profanity. Oh, how I want to see the donald foaming at the mouth and barking at the microphones.
It will be interesting to see how media coverage changes if Donald has several big losses. Rubio said something to Dana Bash today about why two of her three questions had been about Trump. That’s a good line to force the media to allow candidates to talk about their own policies and plans. Donald may have to spend some of his own money to be heard in the future.
parker,
It would be nice if the MSM turned the mikes off.
GOP Conservative activism is almot an oxymoron. We have been told by “wise” people that if you are young you are Liberal. Could probably extended to cover the unemployed. By the time you become a Conservative, you spend a lot of your time at work–or napping in later years.
That, and the fact that Conservatives don’t believe in giving away what other people earn, helps
explain why successful GOP candidates must run to the center to at least some extent despite the roaring of Limbaugh, Levin, and others who talk for a living. Then, of course, the ordinary ideologues get on the train.
Ace has called Maine for Cruz. We will see if that sticks.
Did the contest for the nomination just start? It feels like it just did.
expat,
I long to hear the rabid barks and growls, and see the saliva flung at the msm. Leave the microphones on and the cameras running. The donald is a creature of the msm, let him shrink like a wicked witch in the spotlight. If the donald is vanquished, next comes hrc thrown under the bus by bho. Then it is Cruz debating Biden, and hopefully Fiorina debating Warren. Oh, what fun!
Maine should hold – the Cruz has been increasing the vote margin even if his % falls over Trump
Cruz got more than twice the votes that Trump did in Kansas. In both Kansas and Maine, Cruz cleared that 40% hurdle that Trump has had such problems with.
If Trump does flip out at this (and I wouldn’t bet on it; I think there’s a lot more conscious artifice underlying his “shoots off his mouth” persona) don’t expect the mainstream media to make a big thing of it.
Remember, they want Trump to get the nomination because they know he’s good for ratings and because they think Hillary can beat him. I don’t know if that’s true, but it’s an article of faith among liberals.
Trump will break that in Ky it looks like, but a 2 – 2 tonight will not slow the Trump express – Cruz needs to get La also.
Cruz wins Maine, Rubio less than 10% (no delegates).
Trump wins Louisiana (ACE)
http://www.decisiondeskhq.com/march-5th-gop/
Nobody is noticing how undemocratic the primary election process is becoming. As more states go for caucus voting, fewer and fewer people are making the decision. The total Republican caucus vote in Kansas today is less than 75,000, with Cruz getting a mere 35,000. In 2012 almost 690,000 people voted for Romney in Kansas in the general. Where are those 615,000 people and why didn’t they vote? The party apparatchik’s are making it a very exclusive little club.
Well under 50,000 people voted in the NE Dem caucus. The Cornhusker football stadium seats 90,000. The total population is 1.8 million.
The caucus system is horrible. It is a pain. It is undemocratic. And I’m a Republican.
Cornhead,
Do not give into grief… the beauty of the caucus procedures is that the voter has to be motivated (although we may not approve of their motivation) to vote on caucus night; at least that is the case in Iowa. BTW, we grow far more corn in Iowa so how do you sod house dwellars have the audacity to claim title to corn huskers? 😉
Parker
You are correct re corn production. Southwest is wheat. And half the state is ranch land. Herbie Husker wears a cowboy hat.
It was a football thing and it stuck. Rough and early farmers were proficient at shucking corn by hand. A tough group, for sure. I am a city boy but very familar with the whole state. Probably been to all 93 counties.
Classic . . . one for the ages . . .
Judge Jeanine Pirro tells off Mitt Romney . . .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VMZSXzy7O0
(around 8 + 1/2 minutes)
“There’s an insurrection coming.”
Eric:
I have never heard of activism and find the concept very interesting, as it seems, to some degree, to be applicable to Trump’s method, wherein the narrative is we don’t win anymore, in the context of bad deals that have been made, the history is that they have been getting progressively worse, Trump, in this narrative is of course the good guy who will, through his exceptional deal making and by force of his will, save us from the bad guys, who are the politician’s. Trump’s main skill is his ability to market, and activism may be an innate talent of his; at least that was my initial impression upon reading this.
Neo:
I feel like you are spot on with both your analysis of what the activism is for (though I would add nationalism) and who the activists are. I canvassed for Cruz, and found it quite illuminating speaking directly with voters one on one. Although it is only anecdotal, in speaking with Trump supporters I would rate the groups in this ascending order: I found very few that would be considered the base (all older, mostly elderly that have voted republican for many years) a slightly higher percentage that I suspected of racism, some leftists, quite a few disaffected democrats, and a plurality that have never voted before (mostly limited education). My impression was that the vast majority were just fed up with the entire situation as it is today, and were extremely tired of hearing how it was all there fault because they were racist white people. In short, Trump definitely tapped into years of built up frustration with the anti PC language, and as a consequence, hardened their attitudes and made them fervent believers in all things Donald. With the supporters of all the other candidates there was at least a cordial exchange of ideas, a willingness for give and take, not one of his could I persuade in any way to even listen to any other viewpoint; their minds were made up, almost like they were victims of Trauma. Those that would speak to me at length would only reiterate the false talking points of Trump in an uninterrupted diatribe, quite a few slammed doors in my face. It was like Breibart’s comments section in the real world. The experience demonstrated quite clearly how a populist demagogue, like Mussolini who Trump reminds me of, could secure a loyal and dedicated following.
I’ve not read the 30-some comments, but what mattered yesterday was not wins but delegates, and Cruz ran neck-and-neck with Trump.
This is true. They are working class white people who are not very religious. They are the people who might probably end up pulling the lever for the Democratic candidate in the general election otherwise. My own mother is the poster child for this faction.
To clarify- that class of people are probably more likely to be Republicans than Democrats overall (but not Mom), but Trump draws from both subdivisions in a significant manner. This is one reason turnout is significantly lower in the Democratic primaries.
There is a conspiracy theory that such voters will abandon Trump in the general if he is the Republican nominee- they won’t- such an argument is almost total nonsense. The more rational worry is that normal Republican voters will sit on their hands in November- possible- but I think the idea of letting Shelob in the White House might provide significant motivation not to sit it out.
And, for the record, I am not a Trump supporter- my positions most, and quite, closely align with Cruz among those left standing. However, I will definitely support Trump if he is the choice for November.
As for the results yesterday- I think Rubio is now on the ropes. Cruz has a chance, after Tuesday, to get it down to basically mano a mano. Cruz’s main problem, now, is that that the rest of the slate is likely to more favor Trump than what has come before. I still think Trump is close to locking it up.
Frog – In terms of delegates, Trump versus Cruz:
KS +15 Cruz
KY +2 Trump
LA tie
ME +3 Cruz
I’m sure that Trump didn’t actually slide, though. Probably Cruz texted something about Carson. Trump should have won. Did you know that Cruz is a liar?
Hello, Neo-neocon!
I’ve enjoyed reading your blog for many years. Thank you for all your thoughtful posts over the years. This is the first time I’ve posted to your comments section. Normally, I’m content to read what you and others are thinking, but feel compelled to share my thoughts today.
I think that whereas Cruz lacks charisma, he more than makes up for it in his intelligence and resolve to defend, explain and promote conservative/constitutional principles; I think he’s far and away better than anyone since Regan in his desire and ability to do this.
As the nomination comes down to Cruz and Trump, Cruz’s intellect, considerable abilities and honorable character will be made evident to more and more voters just as Trump’s weaknesses and disingenuous character become better understood by more and more primary voters.
Secondly, in my mind, no question that Cruz has made all the right enemies to be taken very seriously – he’s despised by the Republican party elites, hated and ridiculed by the media and is manifestly feared by the Left. The Republican Party elites despise him because they know he truly means to stop both parties’ long-standing practice of divying up the spoils after an election and the subsequent looting of the Federal treasury (my belief is that they only care which side wins in the hopes that it’s “their people” whom get to loot the treasury vs. the other side getting to do it). The media hate and ridicule him because he does not share their cultural Marxist outlook or abject nihilism and the Left fear him because they realize he’s unafraid of them and their SJW army of useful idiots. The Left full well understands that Cruz would utterly wipe the floor with them when debating the moral primacy of free market capitalism vs. their Socialist claptrap talking points. Should Cruz gain the bully pulpit of the presidency, I truly think the Left is terrified that he may well be able to sour permenantly, or set back severely the West’s burgeoning/resurgent appetite for their Socialist/Marxist ideology.
IMHO, Cruz represents the best opportunity to restore the country its constitution. We’ve only had two presidents who were truly conservatives in principle and belief in over a hundred years, Coolidge and Reagan. Both were outstandingly successful. I think Cruz will be too. Therefore, I pray we choose Cruz. At 45 years old, I think Cruz could well be my, indeed our, only opportunity for a President whom really does believe in the Constitution and ALL that it says. Should we lose now, it’s a given the Republican Party will not allow a true blue conservative to be nominated again. or, as the song goes “we may never pass this way again.”
Don’t miss understand – if Trump wins nomination, I will certainly vote for Trump because something simply must be done to stop the elitist of both parties willful and ongoing destruction of our culture, our constitution, our treasury, our country.
Take care,
Perhaps. That definitely shone through during the recent debate, and the result is probably why Rubio had such a horrid time last night. I do think Cruz is, by a wide margin, the smartest of the candidates left, though I cannot really decide on character at times. Knowing a person to that depth is never easy, even if you lived with him/her. One can hope, however.
Nick Says:
“I’m sure that Trump didn’t actually slide, though. Probably Cruz texted something about Carson. Trump should have won. Did you know that Cruz is a liar?”
And an ineligible Canuck anchor baby. Did I tell you Trump is a winner? And Cruz’ wife is an evil NWO supporter. And a member of the CFR, and somethingsomething about the Biggerbergins or somethingsomething! Cruz is a traitor in the pocket of Goldman Sax. They made him a loan too! He even wants open borders! Cruz is nasty and everyone hates him. Trump never loses, because they all love him. He can make lots of deals.
Did you know that Cruz is a liar?
For those down in the dumps about the state of the election, here is an optimistic take from Paul Mirengoff at Powerline
“In a sense, Florida could be a win-win for the anti-Trump forces. If Rubio loses, maybe he drops out, which probably helps Cruz for the reasons stated above. If Rubio wins, Trump is deprived of around 100 delegates, thus promoting the “block Trump” strategy, and the “Trump is stalled” narrative takes hold.”
Also there is a lot of chatter about the voters on election day breaking strongly for Cruz as opposed to the early voters before the debate on Thursday.
Also, I don’t know that much about Maine but it does not seem to fit the “Cruz can only win with a strong evangelical contingent” meme that is being promoted by some.
OK,
This is the point where Cruz begins explaining how his commitment to the rule of law, to Constitutional principles, and to an end of self-exempting privileges for the political elite, will help those non-Republican voters whose disenfranchisement and looming economic dispossession have led to their infiltrating the Republican primaries in the first place. Doing so in what they obviously view as a last ditch effort to preserve their way of life – something their occasional support of Republicans has not done in the past.
I think that since the first primary exit polls were taken, it has become pretty clear, and is now the consensus, that these are in fact a large portion of Trump’s supporters.
It’s not only the speculation or the inferences drawn of commentators here, but rapidly becoming the current conventional wisdom.
It is up to Cruz now, to fold as many of these persons into his camp as he can, by showing them the feature-benefit relationship between accountable, neutral, constitutional government, and their economic and life-ways interests.
These people have been sold out by the Republican party (at least insofar as Republicans made noises about fighting for them) and now need to be made to believe not only that Cruz means what he says about law, but why it is important to them personally, and how it will benefit them by ending cronyism and double dealing, and the sale of their liberties and future by their elected “representatives” in return for special privileges.
Cruz must now make the case that shows how the spiking of political cronyism benefits the harried citizen, in their daily and economic lives.
What to look for on this Tuesday:
I think Cruz must win Hawaii, Idaho, and Mississippi. I think Trump will win Michigan, and if he adds one or two of the other states- it is likely over. If Cruz can win those three, he will be in a stronger position on the 15th, but will have to win Florida that day if Rubio isn’t competitive (and he likely won’t be). It would help Cruz’s lot very much if he could also win NC and/or MO that day (NC is definitely possible, but I think MO is a steeper climb for him).
DNW:
Did you watch Cruz’ CPAC speech? He made a broad case for that, and it’s basically what he’s been saying since he’s been in the Senate, and his entire life since he memorized the Constitution in High School. Intellectually, he can do it as well and maybe better than Reagan, but RR had more charm due I think to his acting chops, aw-shucks folksiness and down home delivery.
You have to remember, until this race, the national media had reduced him to negative soundbites, and Trump and his alt-right supporters had focused all their venom on assassinating his character. People had to search for his longer speeches until now.
If this can somehow get down to a two-man race, the media will be forced give him substantially more opportunities to speak directly to the country.
BTW, I recognize your handle from somewhere else – Volokh Conspiracy maybe? It’s so much nicer here.
A graphic representation of last night’s events compared with prior projections.
Wow! Maybe they should rename Puerto Rico, Rubioland!
I’m proud to say that Ted Cuz and I are on the same page:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/271975-cruz-media-is-sitting-on-bombshells-about-donald-trump
“Republican presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (Texas) said on Sunday that the media is sitting on explosive negative information about front-runner Donald Trump with plans to run it later in the year to tear the candidate apart.
“I think an awful lot of reporters – I can’t tell you how many media outlets I hear, you know, have this great exposé on Donald, on different aspects of his business dealings or his past, but they said, ‘You know what? We’re going to hold it to June or July,'” Cruz said on CBS’s “Face The Nation” Sunday.
“We’re not going to run it now.”
Cruz said the media has given the front-runner “hundreds of millions of dollars of free advertising.” Every press conference Trump has is shown on every television station, he said, noting the media helped create this “phenomenon.”
“And all of the attacks on Donald that the media is not talking about now, you’d better believe come September, October, November – if he were the nominee – every day on the nightly news would be taking Donald apart,” he said.
Cruz called out the media, saying one of the reasons they want Trump to be the eventual nominee is because they know he can’t beat Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton.
“Hillary would wallop him,” Cruz said.
“Donald may be the only person on the face of the planet that Hillary Clinton can beat.”
Cruz addressed the fact that people haven’t brought up the issue of Trump’s tax returns recently, questioning why it wasn’t mentioned during the recent Republican debate.
“As Mitt Romney rightly observed, the fact that Donald won’t hand over his tax returns suggests there’s a bombshell in there,” Cruz said.
He also called out journalists for not talking more about what Trump may have told The New York Times editorial board in an off-the-record portion of an interview. The Times recently refused to release an audio recording from an off-the-record meeting with Trump in which some speculated the front-runner talked about immigration.
When the general election comes, Cruz said Trump will be the “singular focus of the media.”
“And I think Republicans, we’ve been burned by that before,” Cruz said.
“We’re not interested in losing again, particularly when the stakes, I think, are catastrophic.”
Cruz loses to Hillary – he hits all the buttons that bring out blacks, women, and youts’ in droves.
Trump beats Hillary – hits her with e-mails, Bill, immigration, Benghazi, Libya, Iran. None of that motivates the Dem base to come out.
Trump loses to Joe Biden — all of his insults increase Joe’s sympathy vote.
Cruz MIGHT beat Good Old Uncle Joe, if he played his cards EXACTLY right — never personal, never condescending.
The problem is, we can’t wait for the convention to decide: if Trump has it locked, they pull Hillary before the convention; if Cruz breaks ahead they don’t pull her. So which way do we go?
Richard…
I can’t imagine Cruz losing to Hillary.
The polling all goes the other way.
Hillary, the MSM, the Left ALL are boosting Trump as he is dead meat.
He’s guaranteed to TURN OFF the GOP base.
&&&&&&&&&
Your ‘logic’ was the logic of Jimmy Carter.
Look how that panned out.
The candidate that would turn out the Democrat base is Bernie Sanders.
No question about it.
So Hillary has kicked him to the curb.
Cruz, a Cuban-American by blood, will have quite a bit of Latino appeal.
Whereas Trump is CERTAIN to have Mexico City and the profession invasion class all out against him.
They’re spitting blood WRT Trump — already.
Hillary is not drawing heavy.
She’s a weak and dull speaker — nothing at all like Bill.
Richard, what about the fact that the polls show Trump losing to Hillary, and Cruz beating Hillary? I mean, I don’t trust that kind of poll, but for you to pick the against both, you have to give at least some explanation. Second: why would you think that Hillary would do well among youth? And why would you think that Cruz wouldn’t hit Hillary about emails et cetera? Thirdly, what about Trump being hit by things? Surely you can admit that he has some vulnerabilities that Cruz might not?
Let me elaborate on that last point. Four years ago, the American center-left wouldn’t vote for a rich white guy, and the center-right wasn’t too crazy about a candidate who was weak on abortion and health care. Trump is a rich white guy who’s weak on abortion and health care. Cruz isn’t rich, or a white guy, or weak on abortion or health care.
Richard Saunders:
You really think Cruz doesn’t know how to hit Hillary “with e-mails, Bill, immigration, Benghazi, Libya, Iran”?
And Cruz doesn’t have many skeletons in his past. he actually has honor, character and principles, unlike Trump.
You can bet the left has enough on Trump to employ a scorched earth media blitzkrieg and activists with 50 years of Alinsky training that will bury the alt-right’s amateur hour novices.
Geokstr – True. Young people may not be smart, but they have no patience once they figure out someone’s lying to them. I’d love to see Cruz debate Hillary. We’ve seen what happens when he debates liars – he’s as polite as he can be, as long as he can be, then he just goes all Rambo, killing everything that moves. It’ll be a blast, watching a sincere man debate Clinton.
Oops – I meant to add that nobody thinks Sanders would make a good president, but young people are responding to his honest idealism. Those same young people could be supporting Cruz in November, as odd as that sounds.
If Cruz runs against Hillary, the Dems will dust off their tactics from 1964. They, and the MSM will make the issues be abortion, welfare, immigration, and foreign adventurism. “Stand up against Russia? China? Iran? Why, that could lead to nuclear war!” The Demo base comes out of the woodwork. We lose. Our only hope is to keep them at home. I don’t think the polling reflects that. I fear that in that scenario we go down to a Goldwater-sized defeat.
And what about Good Old Uncle Joe? If he comes in, as I think he will (no way will The Onederboy allow his legacy to be besmirched by having half the FBI and the IC resign! – Barry certainly will have no qualms about sacrificing Hillary to prevent that!) we will need somebody who can really play it perfectly — not too tough, not to sweet. And don’t see Trump or Cruz being that person — I don’t know who is.
Hillary will not allow anyone to get between her and the nomination because it gives her the best chance of staying out of prison. I’m dead serious about that.
Cruz doesn’t spark nearly the passion in the left that you claim. They think he’s bland.
All I can say is, I hope you guys are right and I’m wrong.
Nick Says:
“Young people may not be smart, but they have no patience once they figure out someone’s lying to them.
I can’t find it now, but I saw an exit poll analysis of the first 4 primaries that showed Cruz with a big lead with the young, and Trump sewing up the geezer vote. More pent up anger in the older folks over the GOPe betrayals, perhaps, vs more worry about their own future for the young?
“I’d love to see Cruz debate Hillary. We’ve seen what happens when he debates liars — he’s as polite as he can be, as long as he can be, then he just goes all Rambo, killing everything that moves. It’ll be a blast, watching a sincere man debate Clinton.
“It’ll be a blast, watching a sincere, brilliant Constitutional expert national debate champion debate Clinton.”
His biggest challenge will be to not make her cry, possibly engendering a big sympathy vote for the helpless female being badgered by that nasty man, but instead seeing if he can coax her into the kind of screeching temper tantrum she’s famous for.
She’s probably working on the crying part with someone who can tear up on cue, say, her HINO (Husband in Name Only), and will have a tiny onion juice spritzer with her to help get a real gusher going.
Richard Saunders Says:
“All I can say is, I hope you guys are right and I’m wrong.”
I pray to God we’re right as well, and I’m an atheist.
The left knows, especially if Cruz gets in, that amnesty is dead, those 20 million new reliable Democrat votes gone, that they may be wandering in the political wilderness for a long while, and watching Obama’s fundamental transformation being undone.
We’ve seen only half the depth they’ll sink to to win so far, but this November, they will pull out all the stops. Vote fraud, dirty tricks, racial violence, student protests, more manipulated stats (watch for <3% unemployment rate by August) and unabashed advocacy by the media.
It's possible Jesus Christ might not win against that onslaught.
We're living in interesting times…unfortunately.
http://streetwiseprofessor.com/?p=9860
February 27, 2016
The Last Shriek in the Retreat: Neocons Threaten to Leave the Republican Party
Arch neoconservative Robert Kagan looks upon the Trump phenomenon with horror, and has declared his intention to leave the party and vote for Hillary Clinton. He has much company among fellow-neocons, and #NeverTrump has become a thing on Twitter.
I guess Thomas Wolfe was wrong: you really can go home again. The neoconservative movement was begun by an assortment of leftists whose political home was the Democratic Party. They ranged from dyed-in-the-wool Trostskyists (or is it Trotskyites?) to New Deal Democrats. The rise of the New Left in the 1960s and 1970s left the soon-to-be-neocons marginalized within the Democratic Party, and they decamped to the Republican Party. Now that they are being marginalized in the Republican Party (such as it is) by a populist uprising, so they are looking to return to their old political home. Not that they will fit in comfortably there, either.
Kagan calls Trump a Frankenstein’s monster. This is rich with irony, because if that’s true, he, and his fellow neocons are Dr. Frankenstein, or at least Igor. The George W. Bush administration represented the neocon ascendency, especially in foreign policy. From that catastrophe was born Obama, and now Trump. The brutal repudiation of Jeb Bush, and the lack of widespread outrage among the hoi polloi at Trump’s borderline-Truther attack on George W., demonstrates how totally the Bushes, and their neocon advisors, have been rejected.
If Kagan et al want to go back to the Democrats, and embrace the Hildabeast, I reply as my grandfather would have: “Here’s your hat. What’s your hurry?” Or, more crudely: “Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on your way out. I wouldn’t want you to damage the door.”
Why? Well, precisely because neoconservatives are antithetical to the classical liberal, small government, and libertarian types who are also called “conservative” in the American political lexicon.
There are two big points of contrast between neoconservatives and small government conservatives, Jacksonian populists, and other non-neoconservative elements on the right.
Neoconservatives are anti-individualist, and statist. Neoconservatives owe a considerable part of their philosophical foundation to Leo Strauss. Following Strauss, neoconservatives are hostile to individualism, and the natural rights of individuals. Individuals pursuing happiness are merely egotists, and lack virtue. Achieving virtue requires collective projects, carried out through the state, and guided by an elite.
These projects should be pharaonic in scope. In the 2000s, neoconservatives were pushing the “national greatness conservatism” agenda. The goal of policy should not be to promote the betterment of individuals’ lives, but to pursue great projects worthy of a great nation and a great people. New space programs. Massive infrastructure investments. Such projects can only be executed by the Federal government.
Neocon political heroes were men like Teddy Roosevelt—a progressive, remember.
For the neoconservatives, foreign affairs present the greatest opportunity for the pursuit of endeavors worthy of a great nation. Spreading democracy, through regime change and war if necessary, is such an endeavor.
To some, the phrase “war is the health of the state” is a damning criticism. To many neocons, it is anything but. Wars fought in a virtuous cause are a good thing, and require a strong and healthy state.
This, of course, is what impelled Bush foreign policy, and led to its ignominious repudiation among a large majority of Americans. Obama, remember, won primarily by running as the anti-Bush. It would be fair to say that he won by running as the anti-neocon.
In the current campaign, Rubio is the standard bearer for the neocon cause. Trump, and to some degree Cruz, are prospering in large part because of their opposition to that cause.
Neocons are elitist and anti-populist. Again reflecting their Straussian roots, neocons believe that a robust state pursuing grandiose national projects can only be led by an elite. The people are too fickle, too ignorant, and too self-regarding to be trusted to carry out great schemes. But to implement their agenda in a democratic system, neocons have to manipulate public opinion, in part by telling different “truths” to different groups.
One remarkable tell of this elitism is immigration policy. Kagan and other major neoconservatives (e.g., Jon Podhoretz) adamantly support open borders. (Keep that in mind when you parse what Rubio has to say on immigration.) Opposition to unlimited immigration has been the singlemost important issue in galvanizing Trump’s support.
Robert Kagan and his cabal find themselves in their current straits because of the disastrous effects of big government elitism. Again, the catastrophe of the Bush years, which began with a disastrous intervention in Iraq and ended with a financial crisis, utterly discredited the self-anointed elite. Interventions during the Obama years—notably in Libya—that neoconservatives strongly supported only cemented the popular revulsion.
And said people are rising up, pitchfork and torches in hand, with Trump at their head, to storm the neocon castle. Further evidence of the cluelessness of Kagan and his ilk, they don’t understand that in the popular mind they are Dr. Frankenstein. If the neoconservatives don’t like the current political environment, they have primarily themselves to blame. It is in large part a reaction to them, and what they wrought.
In some respects, it is remarkable that neoconservatives (whom Reagan did not like) and small/smallish-government types were able to coexist in the same party for so long. But the stresses that have accumulated in fifteen years of foreign policy failure and economic malaise are too much for whatever bonds held these disparate groups together to hold. So Kagan and his fellow neocons will go their own way, and will not be missed. If they are perceived as being instrumental in putting Hillary in the White House, they will be the target of even more enmity by those they left behind.
The fundamental fact is this. In the Republican Party or out of it, neoconservatives are not friends of individual liberty and a modest, constrained state. To the contrary, they are its enemies. Whatever else the Trump movement accomplishes, it has already succeeded in forcing the neoconservatives to drop their Straussian deceptions and reveal their true beliefs: a big state and an interventionist foreign policy that is more than comfortable with using war to achieve their messianic purpose.
Charlie Adams, professor Craig Pirrong’s article that you quoted and linked above makes assumptions about a large group of people by reference to one person, Robert Kagan, who is by means representative of the rest. Many people who post at this site, Neoneocon, hello? are not in agreement with Kagan and will certainly not vote for Hillary. Pirrong comes across as a paleoconservative/libertarian like Justin Raimondo with his endless screeds at antiwar.com, although he, Pirrong, calls himself a classical liberal. Whatever. You dig deep enough into these people and you usually end up with a Ron Paul like aversion to supporting Israel combined with a subtle anti-Semitism.
There are many reasons to not support Trump, foreign policy being just one of them.
should read above, by NO means representative of the rest.
Smearing Leo Strauss has now been a decades long industry on the political left. Perhaps for good reason from the leftists’ point of view, we should note, since engaging with him is next to impossible for them. Still, when nominal conservatives start in on that business one ought to pause to reflect what the hell is going on. Substance, for instance, it ain’t.
For all the decades since Reagan, conservatives have been heavily pushing the idea that Republicans need to run a real conservative. Well that’s undeniably Cruz. So let’s hope he can pull this off.
If it turns out that Trump wins, let’s hope that he picks Cruz as his VP. That ticket would completely unhinge the GOPe, the MSM and Democrats.
That ticket would completely unhinge the GOPe, the MSM and Democrats.
It’d be a yuuugely beautiful thing to watch.
I am sure this is going to be buried under a ton of comments, but would like to share anyway. 20% of democrats are saying in a recent survey that they would vote for Trump over the Democrat. This is what I’m talking about that many did not want to believe:
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-01-08/new-poll-shows-donald-trump-is-a-real-threat-to-hillary-clinton
K-E – That was an online poll, which aren’t worth much. It also shows 14% of Republicans voting for Clinton, which you didn’t mention. Additionally, I can’t find any comparable poll with Clinton versus Cruz.
Charlie Adams — Find one sentence in the writings of Kagan, Podhoretz, Kristol, Wolfowitz, or Neo, for that matter, which endorses statism, big government, or anti-individualism.
You certainly don’t know what a classical liberal is, because basing one’s foreign policy on Jack Kennedy’s statement, “Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we will pay any price, meet any hardship, bear any burden, support any friend, oppose any foe, to ensure the survival and success,” is about as liberty-loving as it is possible to get.
I plan to hold my nose and vote for Trump, in full knowledge that he is 1) not a conservative, and 2) an asshole. That doesn’t mean I don’t understand people who can’t bring themselves to do that.
But, I understand why you really hate neocons — they’re JOOOOOS!!!!!
…nobody thinks Sanders would make a good president, but young people are responding to his honest idealism. Those same young people could be supporting Cruz in November, as odd as that sounds.
Hard to imagine those particular young people would support someone who’s on record as being in favor of carpet bombing.
Ann:
Cruz defines his use of the term “carpet bombing” here.
Okay, Nick, if you didn’t like that, what about the news from Ohio:
“We are seeing something this election cycle I’ve never seen before to this degree,” said board Chairman Mark Munroe, who’s also the county Republican chairman. “Every day I take phone calls or get voice messages from people saying they’ve been Democrats all their life and they’ve had it. They want to vote for Donald Trump. I’m surprised at the volume of inquiries we’re getting. It’s remarkable.”
A number of Democrats taking a Republican ballot when voting early at the board “say they want to vote for Trump,” said Joyce Kale-Pesta, Mahoning County Board of Elections director.
About 7,000 Mahoning County voters have cast early votes. Early voting started Feb. 17 and ends March 14, the day before the primary.
Of those 7,000, about 14 percent were Democrats who voted Republican, Kale-Pesta said. That’s about 1,000 so far.
The percentage of Democrats switching parties will grow even more, said board Vice Chairman David Betras, who also is the county Democratic chairman.
Charlie Adams is just parroting the usual propaganda about what neocons are, which is a bunch of absurd generalizations based on very little. I’ve written many many posts about neocons and the different ways to define them and the differences among them, which can be found in the “neocon” category of this blog.
Neo:
I know he later defined his use of the term, but he’s on video saying it without that definition. That’s what’s going to appear in ads.
K-E:
That “recent survey” you link to is two months old. I wrote a post about it at the time, and not only is the poll now 2 months old but even at the time it was done it did NOT say what you think it said. See this, which I wrote when the poll came out:
More here about how polls do not support the idea of Democrats for Trump.
As for people calling in and saying they want to change their registration in Ohio, that could just as easily mean that some Democrats want to crossover and vote for Trump in order to harm the GOP, in classic open primary fashion. In other words, we have no idea whatsoever what their motivation is. It certainly does NOT seem to translate into Democratic support for Trump in the general against Hillary.
Quick, someone tell me how Cruz wins Pennsylvania?
It doesn’t matter. At least we can lose with Cruz vs. losing with Trump (or winning with Trump which may be worse.) We’ll give it the ol’ college try and the True Cons will go back to their Levin and Malkin books complaining that the system is rigged and we need to burn it down. Then we’ll run Rubio in 2020 after everyone has sobered up and win.
K-E – From the article you cited:
“I knew Donald Trump’s message would resonate with blue-collar Democrats,” he said. “But once they learn about his record — besides him being anti-trade — they will change their minds in the general election. I assure you that come the general election, voters will vote our way once we tell the story of Donald Trump. The more chaos created in the Republican primary, the better Democrats will do in the general election.”
Betras, who backs Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, said it “would make me happy for Donald Trump to beat John Kasich,” the Ohio governor running for president as a Republican.
Ann,
If you are still paying attention to this thread… your adoration for Rubio has gone into the fanatical abyss by virtue of your inexplicable hatred of Cruz. I just don’t get your die hard devotion and run it into the dust wrecklessness to think lying about Cruz will turn around the fortunes of your chosen one. Rubio is toast. If you are hoping for a brokered convention, I have bad news for you, the gope will not select Rubio.
Give it a break, have glass of dry red, turn off the TV and computer, and resign yourself to voting for hrc if Cruz is the nominee.
I wasn’t lying about Cruz. He said what he said. Am I not allowed to point out some problems that will arise in the November campaign if he’s the nominee? Sheesh.
Sheesh back at you Ann. If you can not admit that you have a visceral hatred of Cruz simply because he has eclipsed Rubio, you have a problem rooted in your desire to cling to Rubio. Rubio threw away any ambition to win a gop nomination for POTUS when he joined the Gang of 8. The base has rejected him, even his home state.
I have no hatred of Rubio, I simply think when he decided to be joined at the shoulder with Schumer Gang of 8 fiasco he poisoned any attempt he had to run for POTUS. Yes, you will bring up Cruz’s poison pill amendment as not a poison pill, but you are simply wrong, and your ability to accept that is rather pathetic. Sheesh.