Now what?
[NOTE: By the way, I’m still having slow website issues. I’m working on the problem, and it could be fixed very soon or it may take a couple of days. Thanks for your patience.]
I guess Cruz won the game of chicken, because Rubio finally swerved. Way too late for my tastes, and way too late to have helped Cruz win more delegates yesterday.
I predicted four years ago that if Romney lost, the Republican Party would tear itself apart. That appears to have happened. No matter who is nominated, I don’t see a path to victory for anyone but Hillary Clinton, which is mindboggling because she is one of the weakest and most vulnerable candidates I’ve seen in my lifetime.
Now that Rubio has dropped out, it’s possible that the race will change and Cruz will start winning, but it’s probably too late for it to lead to anything but a contested convention. This is the intent of the party when no one has a majority; it’s not just something invented to stymie Trump. If Trump is the clear leader but lacks a majority of delegates on the first ballot there is nothing to stop Rubio from suggesting his delegates vote for Cruz, which could give Cruz the majority. That’s just one scenario, and although Trump supporters will rage and call it “stealing,” it is clearly the sort of possibility that was envisioned when the rules were set up (and it’s the party that makes the rules for its own nominee).
If Cruz is the leader (less likely, but possible), the same would be true for Trump. That is, if he can get other candidates’ delegates to come over to him, he could get the nomination.
So let’s review. Here are the possibilities as I see them:
(1) Trump gets a majority and is the nominee.
(2) Cruz wins in a contested convention.
(3) Trump wins in a contested convention.
And here are the probable results as I see them:
(1) If Trump is the nominee, Hillary beats Trump. I’ve explained many times why I say that, but the summary version is that Trump’s negatives are too high, and there are too many people who say they would never vote for him. For example, a great many conservatives and Republicans say they would stay home. Plus, there is the possibility of someone else running third party or as an Independent, thus splitting the GOP vote still further.
(2) If Cruz is the nominee, Hillary beats Cruz. I say that despite the fact that I think that Cruz probably has a good chance of beating her in a 2-way race, but I think that if Trump is not the nominee a lot of people will vote for him anyway, or stay home, thus splitting the GOP vote or reducing the GOP vote.
In other words, the Republicans are deeply divided, and a house divided against itself cannot stand. I see the left as the beneficiaries.
Obviously, I could be wrong. I hope I’m wrong. I hope the prospects are better than that. But I have to call them like I see them, and at the moment that’s what I see.
[NOTE: I just saw this report:
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump warned Wednesday that his supporters might riot if the GOP tried to steal the nomination away from him at the Republican National Convention in July…
“I think we’ll win before getting to the convention, but I can tell you, if we didn’t and if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re, you know, 100 short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400, because we’re way ahead of everybody, I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically. I think you would have riots,” Trump said. “I think you would have riots.”
You could call that a warning. You could also call it a threat. Or you could call it an observation; a statement of fact. Maybe all three.]
[ADDENDUM: Ace comments on those same remarks of Trump’s:
If Obama said something like this — if he said, “If my Supreme Court nominee isn’t given an up or down vote, I think we’d have riots; I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen; that would disenfranchise my voters” — what would you say about that?
Would you nod along and say “You tell ’em, Obama. You rattle that saber about the mob uprisings you could stir.”
Or would you say: “Why does this shady interloper believe he has the right to threaten me?”
Well, I guess having one standard is a pussy thing now.]
‘(2) Cruz wins in a contested convention.’
I suppose if he got a plurality or was very close (say within 5%) a Trump supporter exodus might be avoided; however, I am not certain.
By the way Neo, after dozens of posts about Donald Trump how many of your readers do you think you’ve convinced to change their position?
If Trump misses the majority by a small amount, he offers the VP slot to Cruz and if Cruz accepts, they win in a landslide.
Have to agree, it is Hillary.
.
If Trump wins, the choice for conservatives is between chaos vs corruption (or is that chaos & corruption vs corruption).
.
If Kasich leaves, Cruz may still have a chance at majority delegates. Kasich’s campaign is nothing but a spoiler one, but his ego won’t let him see that.
.
No matter what, the GOP vote will be split. Too many people, conservatives (and libertarian leaning ones), with good conscience cannot compromise their principles to the extent needed to support Trump.
.
In the lesser of two evils argument, to many, Trump looks like the “eviler” one, as he is the one openly talking about going well beyond Obama’s use of executive power, and is openly hostile to dissenting views in a way that invites / incites violence, let alone abuse of power.
.
Trump supporters would claim it was “stolen” no matter the scenario that someone else gets the nomination, so their vote would be lost.
.
Trump might appeal to some disaffected Dems, but his (more than) hints at authoritarianism will be its own driving force to stop him.
Watching some trump supporters in Florida on fox It was clear that they had probably voted democrat in the past. Their big concerns could have been written by LBJ
The Obama crowd turned too lefty and race conscious for them. You are right that most of these people would not vote for Cruz (or for the real crazy trump either)
We’ll have to let this crowd burn themselves out in the next four years
RE: Cruz accepting a VP slot with Trump.
That would be seen as a worse compromise than Christie’s, and by convention time it would seem traitorous, if not now.
That might be more in line with Kasich, who seems much more flexible on conservative principles.
I’m assuming when you use the term “stay home”, you mean that they will still go and vote; just vote for a 3rd party candidate, or leave the president slot blank. I won’t vote for Trump, even if he makes Cruz his VP. I will show up on election day and vote in state, local and congressional/senate races. I’ll either leave the president slot blank, or vote Libertarian. It’s been a very long time since a political party has died, and been replaced by a new one. Is that happening now? Is it possible that a viable Libertarian party could arise from the ashes?
One other comment, I won’t be part of a party of which Trump is the leader. The minute he is declared the nominee, I will change my affiliation.
By the way, a “contested” convention is a real convention. That’s the way conventions are supposed to be. It was only with the rise of TV that conventions were turned into four or five day celebrations of the nominee. Prior to TV, it was expected that the nominee would be chosen at the convention. That’s what the convention is for. Hopefully, the GOP will have a real convention and Trump will not be the nominee. If not, I’m with Tom.
By the way, there is precedent for all of this, and it directly precedes the Democratic party’s rise to prominence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_Democratic_National_Convention
Tom:
The trouble with the GOP dying is that takes the country down with it. You’ll have the Imperial presidency PLUS a doctrinaire ardent Leftist Supreme Court.
The Death of America.
We may as well start returning to Europe, which is beginning the very slow shift rightward.
Trump does not speak for me. The only “conservative” principles he knows are ones that Democrats project on us (xenophobia and thinking he somehow has worth because he has money). If he ends up a GOP nominee, I will gladly join a third party made up of what used to be conservatives because a Trump GOP represents me no more than does the Democrat party.
Stupid, shortsighted people let a big government leftist Democrat hijack our party because he waved his fists and said stuff about immigration (which has been walked back, but who cares). Or you supported him because you wanted a reset. Well, you might get your reset, good and hard. Perhaps the GOP was fatally wounded anyway, but this probably is the beginning of the end of it and without it, our country is in serious trouble.
You expected our GOP legislators to work miracles, in many cases, accomplish things that were practically and politically impossible, but by at least hampering the leftist beast, something was accomplished. Trump will play ball with his lefty friends and it will be full speed ahead for them. And what are you going to do, sue him for breach of contract for not building that wall he promised you back during the campaign? Silly kids, the system is for the elite, not for you.
Neo:
a great many conservatives and Republicans say they would stay home.
That happen before that “stay home” brought Obama to White House.
Federal Reserve Funds Hillary and Cruz, but Not Trump
Fed gives over $18,000 to Clinton, $2,000 to Cruz, and $0 to Trump
Donald Trump, who called for an audit of the Federal Reserve, has gotten zero donations from the Fed unlike Hillary Clinton and Ted Cruz, the latter of whom skipped a recent audit vote.
Federal Election Commission data reveals that Fed employees have donated over $18,000 to Clinton, $2,000 to Cruz, $750 to Rubio and $0 to Trump.
Trump previously said it was important to audit the Fed and even called out Cruz for skipping a vote on Sen. Rand Paul’s “Audit the Fed” proposal back in Jan.
“He’s not a big fan of the Fed,” Trump insider Roger Stone pointed out. “He is scaring the central bankers; he is scaring the Washington/Wall Street/D.C. consultant/lobbyist class.”
“He’s deeply suspicious of the Fed and I think he is open-minded about the Fed… I’d suspect you’d get an audit of the Fed [with Trump].”
It’s no coincidence that the national debt began to accelerate when the Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913, which practically gave the government unlimited funding at the expense of the American public who are unaware they are paying for it through a hidden tax called inflation.
“Over the century that followed, the U.S. has gone from being the biggest creditor in the world to its biggest debtor,” financial analyst Simon Black wrote. “Decades of expanding government programs, waste, endless and costly wars, etc. have racked up such an enormous pile of debt that it has become almost impossible to pay it down.”
But due to the nature of the U.S. fiat monetary system spearheaded by the Fed, if everyone paid back all debt in existence, there wouldn’t be any money left because money is only created the instant it’s borrowed and it vanishes when the debt is paid.
“Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash, or credit,” financial expert G. Edward Griffin wrote in The Creature From Jekyll Island. “If the banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve.”
“We are absolutely without a permanent money system.”
I’ve never supported Trump as the Republican nominee, not last time, and not this time. This time around has only added to the reasons for thinking it was outlandish that anyone would consider him conservative the first time. However, anyone that is throwing in the towel, should he end up the nominee (including all the folks at NRO, people I stopped reading a LONG time ago) and thereby ends up seeing to a sure Hillary win is complicit in all that happens under her Presidency which will be a continuation toward the descent off the cliff for which we are headed. If necessary, I would vote, YES I WROTE VOTE, for Trump on the pure speculation and hope that our other 2 branches of government would reawaken to their historical purpose and thwart anything that man would devise that is unconstitutional. That would be an entirely different scenario than I can reasonably expect should Hillary be elected. We will MOST ASSUREDLY see the same acquiescence that has marked the Obama presidency from its inception. So, if my fellow conservatives can’t understand that Hillary is a PROVEN LIAR,UNINDICTED-FELON,CRONY-CAPITALIST, AND SOROS-SUPPORTED AUTHORITARIAN, then…oh well! Sorry for my children and grandchildren who will continue to be buried under the debt of these usurpers of constitutional protections, only made possible by at least 2 branches of government actually acting in accordance with the law of the land.
Hillary will be the next POTUS. Trump can’t win in a general election.
As to why Hillary? People who support her want it for several reasons.
First, she’s a Clinton – the familiar name, the brand – and a familiar face. Trump is a brand but he isn’t nearly well-liked as Clinton; sorta choose your poison in this case.
Second they want to “make history” again as they did with Obama, but not to say “we aren’t racists” but to fulfill the “a woman’s place is in the Oval office.” The so-called patriarchy must be ended. People see the presidency as an all-male club and they want to make it co-ed for the sake of equality. Justin Trudeau would approve. The irony to this is that she’s white and, despite her being a female, very much part of the old-boy’s club. But hey, she’s a Clinton AND she’s a woman! Let’s make history!
As for the third, they say she’s the most qualified. Not really. How about governing or even managing? Kasich is more experienced than Hillary on every level and in almost every issue, but he is neither a woman, nor a Clinton, or has has held a bonafide position like Secretary of State.
Neo:
“You could call that a warning. You could also call it a threat. Or you could call it an observation; a statement of fact. Maybe all three.”
It’s called mimicking the Left with a classic Left-activist play.
I commented here last month:
This election season, confronted by the Trump-front alt-Right activist insurgency, has been a fitness test for conservatives.
If conservatives can’t even overcome Left-mimicking “jayvee” alt-Right activists that redefine, chip away, and rearrange groups traditionally aligned with the Right, then how did you reasonably expect that conservatives (and by dependent extension the GOP) would compete against varsity Left activists?
Cruz’s once-vaunted “data-based ground game”? Rubio’s once-vaunted polling on comparative “negatives”? Those things might have been enough for traditional electoral politics, but competing in the activist game takes more than that.
After so many decades facing the Left, that conservatives can hardly conceive, let alone formulate and prescribe effective counter-activist treatment when challenged by “jayvee” alt-Right activists merely the mimicking the Left is an evolutionary judgement on the Right.
Neo:
“In other words, the Republicans are deeply divided, and a house divided against itself cannot stand. I see the left as the beneficiaries.”
Your framing points to the fundamental cause for the current state of affairs.
It’s never been for Republicans to counter the Left. It’s always been for Republicans to counter Democrats in the electoral political lane.
It’s always been the duty for conservatives, not the GOP, to effectuate the power of the people with a viable Marxist-method social activist movement to compete sufficiently versus the marching Left-activist social movement with head-on competition throughout the social spectrum.
Inasmuch Democrat-front Left activists have increasingly engaged in electoral politics in pace with their taking over the Democrats – thus establishing the precedent picked up by the Trump-front alt-Right activist insurgency – it’s the GOP-front Right’s duty to lead counter-activist action versus the Democrat-front Left (and Trump-front alt-Right). Not the GOP.
Just trying to go out of his lane to cover the gap of activism left by conservative negligence torpedoed Rubio’s campaign.
Conservatives who have eschewed Marxist-method activism, and insisted on passing the buck for the Right’s duty of activism to the GOP, are chiefly responsible for the current political state of affairs – including the fundamental vulnerability that has long been exploited by Left activists and picked up by the Left-mimicking “jayvee” Trump-front alt-Right activist insurgency.
Dirtyjobsguy:
“We’ll have to let this crowd burn themselves out in the next four years”
That’s not much of a counter-activist strategy. Fire doesn’t burn out on its own if it’s tended to. Activist skillset includes the tending of fires.
Sharon W:
“If necessary, I would vote, YES I WROTE VOTE, for Trump on the pure speculation and hope that our other 2 branches of government would reawaken to their historical purpose and thwart anything that man would devise that is unconstitutional.”
Regarding your “hope”, that’s why you look at the movement, not just the man (or woman).
Participatory politics subsume electoral politics and, by the same token, constitutional government.
As Neo and commenters have noted, when viewed in isolation, President Obama has consistently underwhelmed his hagiographic advertisement. Obama is neither master nor center of gravity for the activist movement in which he has ably served as avatar and sales rep.
Yet under his administration, plenty of fundamental change to the nation and the world has come about, beyond the reach of his personal abilities.
How? Look at the movement, not just the man.
Government doesn’t operate isolated from society. The activist movement that claims Obama has influenced “our other 2 branches of government” in ways other than voting.
So, based on the campaign so far, what kind of activist movement would accompany Trump to the White House? What kind of influence would they bring to bear on the people of the other 2 branches, as needed, to advance their agenda, strengthen their position, and displace their rivals?
The Constitutional republic idealized by the activists who founded our nation constantly requires the Founding Fathers’ caliber of activism to keep it.
Now what?
It is obvious. Trump only needs a little more than 50% of the remaining delegates to win. Cruz needs around 80%. Who do you think has a better chance to pull it off?
Trump.
I know you don’t want to hear that, but this is where we are. With states remaining like NY, PA and NJ, Trump is likely to win those states. I think he has a very good shot at AZ. Why would you encourage Cruz to keep running at this point?
I don’t understand. We need to start grouping together as ONE party. Cruz should see that and end his campaign.
I know that is hard to hear, but the math is looking so unlikely for Cruz, why would he want to tear apart of the GOP for a long shot? What a big mistake.
We need to start thinking about the fall…and not this talk of a contested convention. Such a bad idea. I hope Cruz can see that.
How many more states does he need to lose (by any percentage, really) to see that he is only making a messy convention more likely?
I really don’t want to see that happen. When will you all finally decide Cruz is nearing an impossibility at this stage?
I suppose you really want Rubio to give his delegates to Cruz and Kasich and then still go with the idea he can pull this off. But why go to that length? It makes me sad to think some of you would rather have a messy convention where Trump gets booted than join together and stop the Democrats in the fall.
That is where our minds should be at this point.
Dear K-E: I know you don’t want to hear it, and I know that it’s hard to hear, but a lot of conservative Republicans won’t vote for Trump. Period.
I have said this repeatedly, but will do so again.
The Republican Party needed to broaden its base to win the White House. Trump is doing exactly that, and there was no other way to do it! It still competes with the Democrat Party at legislative level because Democrats are packed into the cities while the Senate is biased towards more rural states by design. Here is a writer who gets it:
Hello again, Reagan Democrats
If the election were held the week after the GOP convention I would agree with most of Neo’s conclusions. Except that the disaffected Bern demo along with angry Trumpers are likely to not vote their party.
But in the general campaign much can change. With plenty of facetime Cruz may come off well as authentic and optimistic versus the Clinton weasel aura. If Trump is denied, he may still support Cruz to remain a future player in the GOP. Does anyone think he could not fire up his die-hards against Hillary?
And least likely, an indictment would mean all bets are off.
P. S. Essay and comment are not synonyms. Anyone else irked by the same few repeat offenders using this section as their personal blog?
GRA Says: Hillary will be the next POTUS. Trump can’t win in a general election.
Why do people say this? can we do a bit of a analysis here? forget the polls, the polls are mostly crap.. and if you havent noticed that in this election cycle with their monthls long prediction of Trimp disappearing, well..
and most would say that no one that disliked by the dems, the communists, the socialists, the academics, the news people, the wealthy, moveon, soros, the general press, and a huge list more… would last a second.
but i remember the elections and how frustrated the conservatives were when their guy or gal would not attack and bring up the inconvenient things that they thought would garner a win.
now you have someone that WILL open their mouth, and say things and for whom, there is no lower to go in the press, which is why its not effective..
they killed that horse 20 years ago, and been beating it to death for decades… its not moving… which is why nothing is working.. and then there are the people who remember how hated reagan was before and after, but how much better their lives got… especially the black community, whose economics improved more than the welfare state ever did.
then there is the point that the conservatives are demonstrating NO loyalty to the founders who created a system that confounded an outright communist, would somehow give free reign to Trump.. thats so freaking silly its not funny… it can stop people or slow down and foil people who want a full communist state, but cant stop trump from making an error (as no one is saying he wants a full communist state, in fact, no one is sure what he will do)
What would hllary say that she isnt saying now about trump?
What can Trump say that the dems and their fear machine know can cow anyone else from saying?
his record in business with women is better than hillary who had a scandal over pay, and who trumps women are all crowing how he made their lives possible, put so many in top positions and payed them well… in many cases lifting up women who had no degrees or professional level experience or guidance into some really tough places
thats a fail for hillary
then hillary may bring up his bankruptcies… but thats nothing, given that he currently employs over 30,000 people… in over a dozen countries… so the idea he has no idea of the world is false… absence of evidence otherwise is not proof of anything, but for trump it is. (you let me know if you can navigate the rules of big business construction in other countries and not know the game in each of them in a more intimate level than a politician who has no companies, and no such concerns in other places and knows those countries by hanging out and chatting with the leaders)
[edited for length by n-n]
After last night’s loss in Ohio, it is more likely than it was that Trump will fall short of a majority of delegates, but he almost 100% certain to have over 1100 by the end of the primary season. Cruz is 100% sure to finish second, but is unlikely to even close the gap that exists today (around 250), and is more likely to finish around 400 short of Trump.
If Kasich dropped out today, Cruz would still come up short, and Trump would almost surely win an outright majority. In that case, if you really do want Cruz to be the nominee, you need Kasich to stay in race- and please, don’t quote polls to me about Cruz vs Trump- polls don’t change the past and they don’t change the nature of the contests that are left, most of which are in states where Trump has a natural advantage, even in a “closed” primary. One additional factor adds to his edge- the Democrat’s race is completely finished now- turnout in the Democratic primaries will now finish falling off the cliff as Shelob sucks the blood out of the Bern.
The most likely course? Trump and Cruz make a deal after the last primary with Cruz taking the VP slot. Trump will make a deal with the biggest Republican donors at the same time and the convention will be a healing one and uncontested. Why would Cruz take this deal? Because he won’t be allowed to win a true contested convention. If the Party elite will deny Trump, they will do so in favor of anyone other than Cruz.
Uffdaphil, agreed on the comment vs. essay comment.
I was going to post a dark scenario but it jogged my memory of one of my favorite Calvin Coolidge aphorisms:
“If you see 10 troubles coming down the road, you can be sure that 9 will run into the ditch before they reach you.”
That being said, I will do what I can to affect the outcome. For me, I will send Ted Cruz a donation and vote for him in the Republican primary here in CA regardless of what has happened in the contest.
Obama is reading the polls. He sees Hillary’s weakness.
HRC gets indicted. Biden jumps in. Biden beats Trump. Obama’s third term.
Neo, I agree with Uff and Tom– your letting Art–whatever’s bloviations continue without snipping them is making your blog comment sections unreadable. My mouse arm is getting RSI from scrolling past them 😉
This particular subset are those non-ideological semi-welfare state supporting Dems who are now astonished that their party, and country, has been wrested away from them by leftist radicals who talked their way into power by mouthing platitudes about equality for all, but now are revealed as pursuing a population replacement agenda that sees “whiteness” and freedom per se, as something to be abolished.
The monster they created with their bitter cynicism, their convenient disrespect for the rule of law, and their contempt for the right of others to property, has now turned on them, and they can’t believe it.
Too bad there is no way to lock the gates against them and enjoy the sight as they are devoured by the very Children of Marcuse whom they nursed along.
The pool of Trump supporters is larger than just that subset of course, but it is those in particular whose participation is most galling.
hillary crime and scandal list is so long its gonna get me killed…
anyway
Eric Says: Yet under his administration, plenty of fundamental change to the nation and the world has come about, beyond the reach of his personal abilities. // How? Look at the movement, not just the man.
Beautiful point… The source of how’s come from history. When Lenin took Russia (talk about a synopsis in tiny form), he appointed Stalin to general secretary. Every one saw that as a losers post, a minor place, and that was that. But Stalin realized that the general secretary makes appointments to committees (soviets), and in that there is great power (and why I said the power of the CFR, Bilderberg, and others is not that they actually conspire overtly, but they put the movers in a room with very convincing others that they then walk away naturally doing what they were convinced of surreptitiously. The beauty is that without understanding the power of associations and conversations and trust, one can’t see the conspiracy, as their fantasy of it is always some overt force, not something so akin to passive aggressive).
Stalin used this post to stack the various halls of power with people on his side, who then owed him their future. Over time, this gave him a strong hold on the nation. How strong? Well when Lenin died of a brain hemorrhage (?), he conveniently destroyed Trotsky by telling him the wrong day of the funeral processions, and so, Stalin was there to give the eulogy that made him the replacement, and Trotsky absence doomed him.
Trump has no such establishment cadres all over the government as either dems or republicans do. His power will come from that, and that he will be feared. Not for the things people here have talked about, but for the tactical situation in which a person not part of the deals and back room agreements will step on them, and not meet their agreements, unless by accident or manipulation. This is ALWAYS the fear of the unwashed in a situation of others who are part of a network of quid pro quo deals, and all that… (which is why a man who should be in jail for a decade or more for opposing the US policy and president illegally, is free to be on Cruz team and why Cruz would have him in the room at all, its about the deals and influence)
They have no leverage on him, if they did, it would be the killer thing that takes him out of the election, but it cant. He is not a philanderer and his ex-wives and kids like him. His daughter is now Jewish, he pays on job and task, not sex… and while he did say that a man is better than a woman, he said a good woman is worth 10 men… so that’s a wash… even more so with Hillary underpaying and taking advantage of women, and taking 250k salary from the election campaign.
The truth is that anyone can beat a dem that bad if they are willing or uncaring enough to risk death, imprisonment, national hate, destruction of the future, and more… you only have to keep opening your mouth as to the things that they have already done, and then ask, if that is what they do as less than president, what will that crazy lady do behind the doors with the leaders of Russia and China, etc?
“Dear K-E: I know you don’t want to hear it, and I know that it’s hard to hear, but a lot of conservative Republicans won’t vote for Trump. Period.”
That’s nice, but newest poll shows 75% of the Republican voters WOULD vote Trump. That is a big majority.
I just think it is very childish to refuse to vote for Trump if he is the nominee. And destructive for no purpose that I can see except your own personal distaste to vote for him.
I think by April 5th, we will see the writing on the wall and Cruz will have to make a calculated move. AZ and WI are winner-take-all. I think AZ is a pretty good shot for Trump as is WI (since Trump did well in IL and MI). Utah will be some kind of proportional thing. If Trump wins AZ on the 22nd and WI on the 5th, the math will even be more impossible for Cruz.
Cruz would make an excellent VP choice or Supreme Court nominee. This should be where things settle.
Don’t give the GOP the chance to screw us all at the convention.
A criminal vs. an asshole. This is what our country has become. It’s time for everybody to reread Hayek’s essay “Why the Worst Get on Top.” http://www.savageleft.com/poli/rts-ten.html — Except now it applies to what used to be democratic societies, like ours.
Cornhead — do you think it’s possible that Trump could moderate his behavior enough to beat Good Old Uncle Joe?
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE stop saying this:
The most likely course? Trump and Cruz make a deal after the last primary with Cruz taking the VP slot.
it keeps coming up, but its a violation of election law
and now it may be Trump that finally did something with Carson that is of substance… (the substance i asked for in knocking him!!!)
18 U.S. Code § 599 – Promise of appointment by candidate
Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both;and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/599
there is a lot more than that, and i am not faulting anyone for their desire, or idea, but that they are suggesting and thinking of things that are off the table due to election law…
i know, cruz not filing FEC papers is also election law and you dont care, but this is also election law, and it matters… especially if your going to be constituational about it. no?
there are a lot of ways to play with the law above, which is what i think is going on with carson (asking advise is not an appointment – however, the other parts of that law i cant put up for being too large of course, would probably cover that too)
a newbie to the game like Trump gets only a minor excuse, as i feel that if your going to do the job, you can at least beat me in knowing the law and such as i am not running for any office and i DO know and i am not a lawyer, or have others to do that and give me a summary as he does.
Substance people… thats what i am looking for..
what holds up in court is a good rule of thumb…
most of what is on trumps side is opinion and personal not objective
not following campaign law is objective. for both trump and cruz
if this is the rule of the game, then that is the rule of the game
if you dont like it, then go through the process to change it
if its inconvenient, then go boo hoo, i dont care – its what it is.
this is ultimately why i dont like Cruz team… too many who were unwilling to do that and were not punished or would be if they did it again.. and some of them did their thing outside the president and congress, meaning that it wouldnt matter if cruz was president and said no, they may still act… as they did in the past…
Bob_CA the reason its long is cause its a list of hillaries crimes and scandals… if she was not so criminal, it would be short.
Threat.
My response is the same as with the threats of race riots and wars; “let’s get it done and over with”.
I fear the worst. On the other hand, I really feel that the radical fringe on both the left and the right are just that, a vocal, activist,minority. If the great peaceful, passive middle ever gets stirred to action, it (we) could become a force. Big if, but they keep pushing us.
Perhaps we should take heart in the observations of Otto Von Bismarck: “There is a Providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children and the United States of America.”
Even better, if those who would rip the party asunder would take heed of his admonishment: “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best” Even more applicable to democratic (small d) politics than the despotic state of Bismarck’s experience.
@ Richard: People will ignore that H. Clinton is a criminal. As for Trump being an asshole. Meh. To bring in race/ethnicity I’m not white and for whatever reason I’m not as remotely offended by his comments as, say, the BLM movement.
Full disclosure: A few weeks ago I bought an official “Make American Great Again” hat, not because I necessarily support the man, but the slogan touches me. I think it’s a great slogan unlike “Change” or the creepy “Yes We Can.” I live in Chicago and given what happened on March 11th, I’m somewhat compelled to wear it out in public. I’d probably be chastised, spit on and cursed at. If so I’ll probably say, “It’s a GREAT hat!”
Another question: Is it possible the Democrats will be dumb enough and/or loyal enough to leave Hillary in?
GRA — I wasn’t speaking about electability, I was speaking about character. As to electability, see Cornhead and me, above.
K-E, you’re defending a guy who basically just said, “Nice convention you have there … would be a shame if anything happened to it.” I cannot and will not support him, and I’m not the only one who feels that way. The more offensive he becomes – and he has become more offensive day to day, as he gains confidence – the more of us will say the same.
I don’t think there is anyone on this forum who preached harder about the necessity of voting non-D than I have. That was based on the classic strategy that, if A is bad, any non-A must be better. Back when it was refusing to vote for Romney, because he wasn’t “— enough” for the party purists, it was a valid point. But now we have finally encountered something that is likely to be worse than more simple Democrats in power. Trump is not just a Democrat in disguise, he’s a big-government authoritarian that is just a little more confidence away from becoming a despot. You can have him. I want no part of him.
Let me see if I have this right. If there’s a brokered convention and Trump is denied the nomination in spite of being the clear front leader and in reaction, his supporters refuse to vote for the Republican nominee, that’s spiteful and, they would be responsible for throwing the election to Hillary.
But if Trump is the nominee and those opposed to Trump refuse to vote for him, that’s principled and, they are not responsible for a resultant democrat victory?…
GRA, if you read Ace’s piece on Reagan’s optimism, you’ll find Trump stole that slogan! Hahahahahaha, just another reason not to vote for this assclown!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._presidential_campaign_slogans#1980
Would not vote for a Trump/Cruz ticket.
Would not vote for a Trump/Kaisch ticket.
Not in a boat.
Not with a goat.
Not on a train.
Not in the rain.
Not on a Tuesday,
Not on a….oh, h#ll, look at how that d@mn book ends…:(
Unpalatable choices:
Hillary – known evil, slow slide into oblivion for the Republic continues. Small chance the “loyal opposition” can muster enough will power to oppose.
Trump – unknown wild card, could be anything from at best, Hillary-lite to at worst….way worst. Authoritarian for certain. Tyrant? Possible. May slightly slow the slide but may also accelerate it dramatically. Probability of actually reversing the slide…nil.
I’ve lost my appetite.
Kyndall G,
What leads you to imagine that the federal government would be more compliant with a Trump despot, than they would with a democrat despot?
Bob_CA, et. al.:
Right now I’m somewhat slower on my usual monitoring of the comments (and deleting or shortening very long and/or off-topic and/or abusive ones in general) because of this problem with the slowdown of the blog. Please be patient and it will be fixed and back to business as usual, sooner rather than later I hope.
“P. S. Essay and comment are not synonyms. Anyone else irked by the same few repeat offenders using this section as their personal blog?”
Yes, and I’ve said so before. They should get their own damn blogs instead of hijacking this one. But they don’t listen; they’re deafened by the voices in their heads.
‘In the lesser of two evils argument, to many, Trump looks like the “eviler” one, as he is the one openly talking about going well beyond Obama’s use of executive power, and is openly hostile to dissenting views in a way that invites / incites violence, let alone abuse of power.’
I filter everything by the level which my individual rights and freedoms will be affected by each candidate. Trump’s highly visible authoritarianism is his key disqualifier. A candidate who hides and dilutes her authoritarianism (like Hillary) is a better bet precisely because as president she would be to some degree limited by the need to maintain a non-authoritarian (or less authoritarian) public persona. As far as her criminal conduct is concerned, that’s the typical accusation (usually true but irrelevant) thrown out by authoritarians and would be dictators from Caesar to the present day. Public corruption costs us a lot less than the loss of our freedom.
‘A few weeks ago I bought an official “Make American Great Again” hat, not because I necessarily support the man, but the slogan touches me. I think it’s a great slogan.’
This is a perfect example of mixing up cause and effect. America became great precisely because America was free, something Donald Trump does not (and cannot) understand. Therefore it doesn’t matter how much he means the slogan, since he has no clue about how to make it come true. I’ll wait for a hat with the slogan; ‘Make America Free Again’ and a candidate capable of saying it, thank you. Now that slogan would touch me.
LJB,
Your confidence that under Hillary, our republic will continue to only experience a “slow slide” into oblivion is unsupported by the facts. We are at a ‘tipping point’ and very close to the cliff’s edge. Under Hillary, the resultant drop into outright tyranny will be sudden and precipitous. As she will have the backing of many of the major players and the collaboration of the GOPe.
As for tyranny under Trump, other than speculative fears, what leads you to imagine that both parties and every branch (including the military) of the federal government would roll over in the face of Trumpian bombast?
@ Tom: Maybe there’s a little Reagan in Trump? One can only hope! Good taste anyways.
@ Richard: Yea, I was aware of that.
K-E,
It isn’t childish to not vote for Trump.
It’s the best thing conservatives could do.
Trump hasn’t advanced an articulate conservative idea once.
We already have the media, academia and celebrities misdefining conservatism. Now we’ll have Trump setting back conservatism for the next generation?
No.
I’m not for that. Conservatism is about equal opportunity, less government and national security and free market economics.
Trump is about himself and cannot advance ONE conservative argument. He’s inarticulate, making people believe conservatives are racist, anti-everythings. BECAUSE of his inarticulate nature he has HIGH NEGATIVES and CAN’T beat Hillary or Bernie. All other repubican candidates could’ve beaten Hillary but this one!!!
You Trumpers can see that right? You can see the high negatives??? Are you this DENSE? Back Cruz now.
Back Cruz now.
Back Cruz now.
Back Cruz now.
Back Cruz now.
Steve D,
Personally, I fear the enemy who conceals their true feelings far more than the openly hostile. That you imagine that as President, Hillary would be restrained even in the slightest, in her actions is IMO utterly mistaken. She would however, in her words, mislead and deflect, assisted in full by the MSM, democrat party, leftist activist orgs and a collaborative GOPe, as she led America down her ‘garden path’ to its destruction.
On the other hand, any tyrannical actions by Trump are highly likely to be open and straightforward.
If so, your freedom criteria, which I share fully is arguably much more likely to survive Trumpian bombast, than it will Hillarian duplicity.
Now what?
With little fanfare and almost no news media attention, some of the same radical groups involved in shutting down Donald Trump’s Chicago rally last week are plotting a mass civil disobedience movement to begin next month.
They intend to march across the East Coast in order to spark a “fire that transforms the political climate in America.”
The operation, calling itself Democracy Spring, is threatening “drama in Washington” with the “largest civil disobedience action of the century.” The radicals believe this will result in the arrest of thousands of their own activists.
“We will demand that Congress listen to the People and take immediate action to save our democracy. And we won’t leave until they do – or until they send thousands of us to jail,” the website for Democracy Spring declares, channeling rhetoric from the Occupy movement.
The group is backed by numerous organizations, including the George Soros-funded groups MoveOn.org, the Institute for Policy Studies, and Demos.
Art,
It is because Trump is so inarticulate.
Identify politics is not mine.
I look to advance ideas. Conservatism is not advanced by Trump. It’s a circus.
(3) Trump wins in a contested convention.
If Trump wins a plurality, Cruz will support Trump (he says he will) so Kasich has no chance unless either he or Cruz gets a plurality.
Since Trump dropped out of the next Fox debate and Kasich followed, we should all contact Fox and tell them they should give Cruz a half or full hour interview. Then Cruz could quietly tell the people why following the constitution actually empowers the people. It is easier to make their voices heard in local and state matters instead of the monster federal legislative laws that have been passed in the past. Cruz could promise that as president he will veto any law that cannot be read and understood by normal people–no more “You have to pass the law to find out what’s in it.” He could say that locals understand their own problems and resources better than a bunch of pencil pushers inside the beltway. I imagine that Cruz would love to talk without having half the screen show Trump’s ridiculous expressions.
As we’ve been trying to trace out who supports Trump, it seems to me that he is drawing some Democrat support, and I think a good portion of his base may also be cynics who dropped out of the system a long time ago.
In light of that, a Trump boycott may not do as much damage as advertised. I don’t like the threats of riots though. I want to assure Trump supporters that us law-and-order types won’t hesitate to turn the riot police on them if they test us.
It’s not like they’ve built up any goodwill to prevent it.
If that happens, it really will be a replay of 1968 but on the Republican side.
Yancey Ward,
Calling Trump’s supporters “Reagan Democrats” is glib and untrue. Those Democrats came to Reagan. This time, Trump is moving to them.
If I wanted a Democrat in office, I’d vote for Hillary.
K-E said:
“That’s nice, but newest poll shows 75% of the Republican voters WOULD vote Trump. That is a big majority.”
Are those the same polls that show Trump losing to Hillary? Because there are a lot of them, according to RCP.
Geoffrey Britain Says:
“But if Trump is the nominee and those opposed to Trump refuse to vote for him, that’s principled and, they are not responsible for a resultant democrat victory?…”
There’s no rationale behind it, GB. Trump supporters are angry? So what…that doesn’t impress me. We’re angry too.
We’re gonna burn it down because we can, and then we’ll laugh that the Trumpkins ever thought they could DEMAND our loyalty.
Matt_SE,
I’m not suggesting that Trump’s supporters have a rationale, I’m suggesting that the only difference between each sides sitting out the election are semantics. Each side adamantly believes it would be justified but the result would be exactly the same.
Trump, if not at 1237, will need only 200 more at the most to reach 1237+. Then Kasich and/or Rubio will ask their delegates to vote for Trump on the 2nd or 3rd round. Both will probably be promised the VP slot. Kasich is a natural choice for the donald as the man is a total squish. Rubio is too photogenic for Trump to allow “Little Marco” to share the stage.
parker:
About Rubio as Trump’s VP — it would be mighty difficult for Rubio to walk this back:
Ann, that’s exactly how Hitler took over Germany and brought on the 3rd Reich. (I’m not comparing Trump to Hitler, I’d hate to offend Hitler), I’m just noting that the same set of circumstances brought Hitler to power. Something I want to say to all of the people who think that if Trump wins the nomination, I owe him my vote. I don’t owe Donald Trump a motherf*cking thing. I don’t owe a vote to the Republican party, or to anyone. It’s my vote, and I will cast it as I see fit. So those of you that make the argument that once Drumpf gains the nomination I MUST vote for him, go pound sand. Give me a reason to vote for him. Show me an issue that he’s been consistent on. Explain to me how you’re so sure that all of his talk is just rhetoric, and that once in office, he won’t use the power of the presidency to go after people with whom he disagrees. All evidence to this stage proves him to be a thin skinned, small man, with an outsized ego, and an even more outsized mouth. His foreign policy proposals are non existent as are his domestic proposals. He says he’ll deport every illegal immigrant, but hasn’t said how he’ll get past the immigration courts. He’s said he’ll make Mexico pay for a wall, but I haven’t seen a plan that looks like it would be successful. He’s a bully, and I’m sorry but everything I’ve ever learned in my life, going all the way back to my Catholic grade school education has taught me to stand up to bullies, and to protect others from them.
Ann,
Not a fan of Rubio since the Gang of 8, but he is a sharp fellow. He knows Trump can not win in the general election. The last thing he needs is to sign onto a failure ticket. Plus, although he should have bowed out when it first became obvious he could not win FLA, he is not without a degree of integrity. I can’t see him allowing the donald to order him around. But, he is a politician, so I could be very wrong. I can see him ready to be VP if Cruz can secure 1237.
I see Kasich as the one willing to sell his delegates to Trump in a brokered convention. That is the sole reason he will continue to campaign as long as he has the cash.
A well written, well thought out, very compelling piece about the decisions we’re actually faced with.
http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/16/steal-this-nomination/
Tom,
I too will not vote for Trump. Trump, as the nominee, will have coattails shorter than his fingers and is likely to flip the senate to the dems. The gop hold on the senate faces enough gop senators in blue/purple states to lose the majority if the donald is at the top of the ticket.
I will step out on a limb and predict that in a Trump-Shrew Queen race the donald garners no more than 25% and less than 50 electoral votes. ALL HAIL THE SHREW QUEEN!
I now think of the donald supporters and will hold the nose and vote the donald people as the donald kamikaze crowd. They believe they are brave Eric style activists or resigned weary warriors. Instead they are suicidal. The kamikaze did not turn the tide, they simply died for an emperor who did not give blow fish toxin for their sacrifice.
Some of the anti-Trump sentiments here have gradually gone from reasoned to hysterical, almost suicidal “I won’t vote for Trump, no matter what.”
These anti-Trumps are so agitated they will concede the Presidency to an unindicted felon and traitor, the most corrupt candidate in American history. They wouldn’t do CPR on the Donald if he collapsed at their feet.
We’re talking about saving what remains of the American Constitutional Republic, not flushing it into the Democratic toilet. All of the fine words here about Cloward-Piven, the Imperial Presidency, the Gramscian march through the institutions, the Alinskyites, and we are NOT GOING TO VOTE AGAINST HILLARY?
Are we mad? Insane, not angry?
Trump has identified issues in clear language.
The talking heads of the MSM have seriously distorted some of his remarks (e.g., he never called all Mexicans rapists and murderers; he said some of them were, some are fine people, right?). He called for a Wall (everyone opposed takes this as an absurdity, a literal wall, not a symbolic one) which Mexico will pay for. I don’t have a problem with his anti-migrant language.
The anti-Trumps are playing into the hands of Uncle George Soros and his dictatorial running dogs. Trump caused the Chicago commotion with his prior language? That is nutty, I must say; or holier-than-the-Donald. Violence is excused because free speech incited it? Are you kidding?
Trump is accused of being a bully. By people who apparently want the anti-Democrats to bring knives to the gun fight. Do you want to stop the Dems? By being nice? You think that mobilizing oppo to Hillary is done by being nice?
Finally, I am amazed at all the people ever so seriously citing polls in March that are taken as valid predictors of the election in November. Hell’s Bells!
Too much over the top bullshit by Trump and his supporters. I’m not in the mood to reward their antics, and if that means burning it all down, so be it.
Live by the tantrum, die by the tantrum.
Frog, I’m sorry, I was a Boy Scout, an altar boy, and went to Catholic School, and Catholic camp. I was a Military Policeman. I was taught that right thinking people in high positions don’t act the way Trump does. They don’t pick on girls, they don’t pick on people who are smaller and weaker than they are, they don’t pick on people who are crippled, and they act with a certain amount of civility. I was taught that when you encounter such individuals, you should stand up to them, and not allow them to treat people that way. We’re talking about electing someone to the highest office in the land. If that person wants my vote, I expect them to act with a certain amount of dignity and class, not like some angry school yard bully. I also expect them to hold the same values and principles as I do. Any claim to conservative values and principles that Trump has, he came by fairly recently (in other words, I believe more about what his history of supporting liberals, and liberal causes says about him than his recent conversion). I’m going to remind you again, that I don’t owe you, or Donald Trump my vote. It has to be earned, and Trump simply hasn’t earned it. His attacks on Megyn Kelly last night are more evidence of what a douche bag he is. I’ve never seen Obama act like this, or Biden, and even Hillary. I’ve seen snot nose students at Harvard behave that way, and I’ve seen professors at Missouri call for some muscle. I wouldn’t vote for them either. I will not follow a leader who acts like Donald Trump. He will not be the leader of anything that I am a part of.
Frog,
I am not hysterical. At my age hysterical takes up too much energy best reserved for time with rowdy grandchildren. I will not vote for the donald or hrc as a matter of personal ethics. 95% of registered republicans could vote for Trump and he still could not win.
So why should I vote for Trump and betray what my gut, my mind, my experience of 70 years, and the donald’s character (and his past escapades) tell me is the wrong thing to do? I would not vote for Al Capone or Bugsy Siegel if those were my choices. However, its a moot discussion. Trump can not win the general, its as simple as that. You may not like reality, but reality does not care what you like or do not like.
Frog’s post makes me think of my conversation with my brother last night, which lasted over an hour. I had been avoiding calling said sibling because I had heard (via the family grapevine) that he was strongly pro-Trump and I didn’t want to get into a verbal tussle that was detrimental to family harmony (lots of strong opinions in my clan; sometimes, least said is best said, IYKWIM).
The good news is that our conversation was passionate and civil. Both agreed we didn’t want to destroy the Republic, but save it.
We disagreed on how to do that.
He believes Trump.
I don’t.
Neither convinced the other, but his points were remarkably similar to Frog’s points. And I still do not find them persuasive today.
I pointed out that my opposition to Trump not only had little to do with the (similar) examples he was quoting, but that in fact, it solidified long before those events. I was #neverTrump before it was a “thing”, in large part because of his overt authoritarian instincts and my concern regarding where those instincts would take him (and by default, the country).
Because, as Big Maq said at the beginning of this thread…I don’t particularly consider Trump to be the lesser of two evils. I am very concerned that he will, in fact, be the greater of two evils.
Geoffrey Britain asks:
“LJB,
Your confidence that under Hillary, our republic will continue to only experience a “slow slide” into oblivion is unsupported by the facts. We are at a ‘tipping point’ and very close to the cliff’s edge. Under Hillary, the resultant drop into outright tyranny will be sudden and precipitous. As she will have the backing of many of the major players and the collaboration of the GOPe.
As for tyranny under Trump, other than speculative fears, what leads you to imagine that both parties and every branch (including the military) of the federal government would roll over in the face of Trumpian bombast?”
I am struck by what appears to be an unconscious bias in the wording here. Concerns regarding Hillary are credited as “factual”, while concerns regarding Trump are regarded as “speculative”.
I live in the very blue state of WA, and there are any number of Hillary supporters with whom I work and live. In like manner, they would dismiss any concerns regarding Hillary’s criminality and/or likely tyrannical leanings as “speculative fears”…at best. And as lies at worst.
And in an interesting way, both they and Geoffrey are correct…we haven’t “proven” either Hillary’s criminality or Trump’s dangerous authoritarian bend…yet!…but we have been given a long history of warning signs pointing to these attributes from the respective candidate.
Hillary supporters could (and do) dismiss negative interpretations of her history as “speculative” and Trump supporters could (and do) dismiss negative interpretations of his history as “speculative”.
Geoffrey seems confident that Hillary will (against the available historical evidence) suddenly shift from covert corruption to overt tyranny, which seems a bit speculative to me.
I think Steve D said it best:
“A candidate who hides and dilutes her authoritarianism (like Hillary) is a better bet precisely because as president she would be to some degree limited by the need to maintain a non-authoritarian (or less authoritarian) public persona. ….
…Public corruption costs us a lot less than the loss of our freedom.”
And if Geoffrey is correct that we are at a tipping point…..then I don’t see much difference in voting for “Tilt Option A” as in voting for “Tilt Option B”, except that the potential downside of Trump looks worse (to me) than the potential downside of Hillary.
And I never believed we could come to a place where I’d say that. 🙁
Trump did not say that if he doesn’t have the nomination his supporters will riot. Neocon, you need to hear the exact quote from Trump, himself. I believe it was on one of the three phone-in morning shows today. They are all conveniently linked at The Last Refuge. I bring this up since you make it a big part of this post. AA
“Nana i ke kuna” Go directly to the source.
The closest thing to Trump was Arnold in California. Ego driven and bombastic, successfull, but no government or executive experience.
The result was….nothing. Remember he was also compared to a certain Austrian born dictator by wild eyed leftists and the GOPe. During his term little got little done and the constitutional changes he did promote were shot dead by government unions. The result was a lot of government non action, paralysis and eventually some solidly left of center social moves as he left office.
So did I like him? No. Was he a “republican”? No. Was he better than the “Hillary” at the time? Absolutely.
Governor Brown has been a left wing disaster since he got in. Leftist and socialistic with absolutely no opposition he makes Hillary look right wing. There are ever higher taxes, and when there was an economic reprieve, he spent that into oblivion. Social hatred is notched to ever higher levels, open borders are official California policy, and as a result we have the highest welfare cases in the country, businesses are leaving in droves, and all population growth through illegal immigration since the middle class is leaving.
And he and his mind will keep getting reelected forever now in California since the population has permanently shifted.
So when I see wild eye paranoia of fascist comparisons and other nonsense about Trump I see crazy people. Yeah he’s a clown – but these “never vote for Trump” people are pathetic purists who are as much an enemy to America as the leftists. Hillary would mean a permanent democratic hold on the presidency since illegal immigration and mass resettlement of third world immigrants will increase ever more.
America has never been the utopia the conservative purists who comment here think it was, and they are the reason I am really really am starting to hate “conservatives” although I consider myself a constitutional purist who agrees with Cruz the most on theory. But their stance is a suicide pact.
Right now the Number One enemy of the Republic is Kasich.
He has NO path to the nomination.
If nominated, he’d have no path to the White House.
His sole function at this point is to throw winner-takes-all states to Donald Trump.
His policy suite is so alien to Trump’s that there is not a hope in creation that Donald will select him as his #2…
Ohio is actually probably a cinch for Trump — just on his trade stance.
The ONE guy the MSM loathes the most is Ted Cruz.
Their oppo research is so thin on Cruz — that they hit the panic button after Iowa.
BTW, the alt-Right crowd absolutely loathes Kasich.
It’s looking like the best we can obtain is a Trump/ Cruz ticket.
I know a lot of Democrats unhappy with Hillary.
Trump would have to bring in astounding amounts from the Opposition — to make up for the dignified and upset Republicans that Donald Trump has already lost.
I don’t trust the public polling numbers on this tabulation.
Most are laced with die hard Democrat Activists.
Rubio needs to toss his delegates to Cruz — SOONER rather than later.
It’s the only way to pressure Kasich to drop out — or for his crowd to shift their vote to a fellow that’s not-Trump and able to attain the nomination — straight up.
Rubio has to put the Republic FIRST.
On policy, and personality, Rubio has no shot at being Trump’s side kick — and would probably shun that role.
A Cruz//Rubio ticket figures to poll VERY well.
But it can’t happen unless Rubio gives Cruz some ‘rocket fuel’ — delegate momentum.
LJB Says:
March 17th, 2016 at 1:08 am
Get realistic.
Hillary Rodham-Clinton-Goldman-Sachs ( married to the money )
is a female clone of Joseph Stalin.
That’s her record, that’s her personality profile.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IOpbj8ajZs
That ninety-minutes barely scratches the surface of HRCGS.
&&&&&&
Somehow folks are taking counsel of their fears.
Trump doesn’t profile AT ALL like the great tyrants of history.
He profiles like a wheeler dealer salesman and promoter.
He has ALWAYS left the details to his staffers.
His style is that of Andrew Jackson.
And if he wore a military uniform — he’d profile like George Patton.
With such a personality you get results — great results — positive results — even if one can seriously question the man’s judgment.
Read any in-depth bio on George Patton — and you’ll realize just how close Trump is to Patton.
Patton, BTW, was a millionaire officer.
Like Trump he grew up in a very, very, wealthy household.
Patton’s men were fanatically loyal to him.
My Father served in the 3rd Army. Patton was noted even at the time for having LOW casualties.
The American general that bleed troops like mad was Bradley.
In the film “Patton” ( with Bradley as the uncredited technical adviser — note how many scenes include him ) Bradley worked it so that this reality was reversed for the film.
{ Bradley’s role in Sicily was MINOR. His corps baby sat Montgomery’s left flank — which was never really at hazard — as the Germans were — from the start — campaigning to slowly retreat out and back. Yet the film makes it look like II Corps was the center of action. }
Trump would be a fine president.
He’s just a terrible candidate.
Like neo, I just can’t imagine him shedding so many GOP voters and then besting Romney’s losing campaign.
A LOT of folks are PUT OFF by the salesman type personality.
Note in the film “Patton” how many times the military-politician, Bradley, is upset with Patton’s oral gaffs.
Patton was forever politically incorrect.
He also spun on a dime when it came to field orders.
The thrust into Brittany was flipped around in 48 hours into the attempt to bag three western Nazi armies.
It nearly worked.
Montgomery and Bradley were so concerned that they stopped Patton from closing the pocket. He was SHAMING them both — and very badly, too.
If Trump is the nominee it is virtually treason to not support him.
For the alternative — Mrs. Stalin — with Bill as First Cad — selling America out to the Chinese — all over again — knowing their track record — would be a shameful madness.
The rule is:
Support Ted Cruz all the way to the Convention.
Support the GOP nominee all the way in the Fall.
As for corruption — look at the Democrat machine corruption in play RIGHT NOW.
They are robbing Bernie of delegates at every turn.
Trump is not evil — he’s just a terrible candidate.
AbigailAdams:
You write:
I did not say that Trump said if he doesn’t have the nomination his supporters will riot. I gave a link and quoted from the link, which said “Donald Trump warned Wednesday that his supporters might riot,” and then it offered a quotation from Trump. At the link, there are rather extensive quotations from Trump in addition to that.
You also write: “you need to hear the exact quote from Trump.” But those are exact quotes from the Washington Examiner article. If you’re suggesting the Washington Examiner is misquoting Trump, please provide a link so I can see what you might be referring to. Thanks.
So now the reason I should vote for Trump is that he’s like Patton? My god you people are delusional!
Actually, Blert, I would have to respectfully disagree.
The primary task of being a candidate is to sell yourself and your candidacy. Trump is an exceptional salesman and is being called by some (non-supporters) as the second most talented “politician” of our lifetime (second to Bill Clinton). So I would say he is a great at being a candidate.
But the primary task of being a President is more to be a manager and a commander-in-chief. In the area of management, Trump’s record as a CEO is terrible. This is different from making money by selling your brand or name to an already established management group, which is competent – we’re talking actual hands on managing yourself. If some reports are to be believed, he was the only the CEO during the same (highly profitable) time period which managed to bankrupt his casinos.
Leaving things to subordinates depends on choosing qualify subordinates to begin with plus the tone and leeway established by the “boss”. Trump himself continues to proclaim that he “does it himself”…the latest example being his response to whom he listens to on Foreign Policy.
And his “wing and fling it” style campaign is very nimble in one way, especially media massaging, but the evidence of a lack of a solid ground game isn’t showing much sense of a candidate who is surrounding himself with quality subordinates, either.
As to how he would be as a commander in chief…well, now we are back to the original concerns regarding his authoritarian instincts. There is a reason Patton was a great general and not a great president. A President is the leader of both the military and the civilian side of society.
So I remain unconvinced that Trump would be a fine President, once the head-rush of being a candidate was gone.
P.S. You think it is realistic to compare Hillary Clinton to Joseph Stalin? Corrupt, I don’t dispute (although I strongly suspect GS is way down the list of those who have “influence” hooks in her) but if she is a female authoritarian style Stalin type, she appears to be a remarkably unsuccessful one.
Tom Says:
March 17th, 2016 at 10:01 am
So now the reason I should vote for Trump is that he’s like Patton? My god you people are delusional!
&&&
Bradley really WAS reluctant about Patton for 3rd Army.
General Marshall — not Ike — picked him. He knew him from WWI.
Look at the crap that Patton pulled that cost him 7th Army.
Patton actually struck enlisted men in a hospital setting. !!!
Trump openly talks about getting in a tumble with edgy protesters.
Get a load of Patton’s personal uniform — and Ivory Handled pistols. They were useless to him – – other than as props.
The parallels go on forever.
You might benefit by reading some of John Wareham’s extremely insightful texts on how to select Top Management.
Donald Trump is an out and out “Emperor.”
Basic Type: Founder and creative force behind a business empire. ( 22,000 + employees = empire )
Role model: Own Father, …
Facade: Charming, no-nosense, realistic, pragmatic…
Favorite saying: “Let’s DO it.”
Real objectives: To compensate for a sense of inferiority relative to forces outside his family.
{ That’s Trump in a nutshell, BTW }
Underlying emotions: Aggressive, steely, guilt-free, untroubled by self-doubt, but still driven to “prove himself.”
{ Again, that’s Trump’s core. }
Management style: Benevolent autocrat
All from Wareham’s Basic Business Types.
ISBN 0-689-11756-6
Go to Amazon books and page through his other more recent tomes.
The predictive power of Wareham’s profiling is nothing short of astounding.
I’ve seen the results over a forty year span.
It is you who is mistaken.
You CAN predict Trump’s presidency.
PROFILE HIM.
Our current President is an out and out Gonnabee.
Also detailed in the book.
Once read, it will literally change the way you look at executives — and people generally.
Yes, you really can categorize most of humanity — if you’re skilled in the art.
By her profile, HRCGS is Stalin revisited.
Yes, an insider’s policy wonk.
Trump is a SAINT in comparison.
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
*walking away shaking my head and laughing*
First of all, Trump is nothing like Patton. Patton inspired great loyalty from his men because first, he was a winner, second, he didn’t do stupid things (see Fredendall), and third, he “treated his men as his own beloved sons,” to quote Sun Tzu. Trump treats people like dirt, has no scruples about swindling them, has a well-established record of failure along with his successes, and is little more than a petulant, thin-skinned schoolyard bully.
That being said, what is terrifying about him is that he would win against Hillary, because he’s not afraid of her. I really don’t understand how “I know you’re corrupt because I paid you off” reflects any more positively on Trump than it does negatively on Hillary, but apparently millions of Americans disagree with me.
I think she won’t bring up the “War on Women” either, because he’s already made it clear he’ll demolish her. “Okay, I’m crude, but I pay the women who work for me the same as men, and I don’t defend serial sexual harrassers.”
So what else has she got? Her record as Secretary of State? Puh-leeze! Trump will make mincemeat out of her.
Trump will beat Her Evilness handily (he’ll even get some Bernie voters), which is why, IMHO, she won’t be the Dem candidate.
I’m of the “hold my nose and vote for Trump” school — as bad as I know he will be as President, he wouldn’t hold a candle to the evil, mega-corrupt, anti-American HRC.
One other question — if Trump does get to be President, when he doesn’t do any of the things he promised, because he got better deals elsewhere, will you guys come back here and admit you were wrong?
LJB Says:
March 17th, 2016 at 12:22 pm
Actually, Blert, I would have to respectfully disagree.
The primary task of being a candidate is to sell yourself and your candidacy. Trump is an exceptional salesman and is being called by some (non-supporters) as the second most talented “politician” of our lifetime (second to Bill Clinton). So I would say he is a great at being a candidate.
&&&&
But NOT great at being the nominee.
Trump’s difficulties lie with the folks that he REPELS.
While the Press and the buzz is all about the few that are new-wave ardent supporters.
The MSM is suppressing any meme plunging towards the reality that Trump’s negatives are in ORBIT.
Look at this thread right here.
Lots of folks think that every salesman is weird — perhaps Willy Loman.
They are not schooled in profiling executive types.
*******
Some idea of Trump’s merits — Dr. Carson’s ‘conversion’ from rival to supporter.
Ditto for Christie.
This blog is totally dominated by thinkers.
The general populace makes up its vote based upon feelings — emotion.
I must say, left out of the equation, Hillary’s negatives are ALSO in orbit.
So the Fall figures to be a low road campaign rarely seen in American politics.
So far, I will grant you that Donald counter-punches — at the EMOTIONAL level — better than Ted Cruz.
Ironically, Ted’s too smart, too formally educated.
He simply does not get exposed to how stupid, stupid can get.
As a hotelier, Donald sees hyper stupidity all the time.
I figure it’s going to turn into an ‘identity vote’ in November.
Scott Adams is right: HRCGS is going to lose the men’s vote — and perhaps rather substantially.
Trump could actually pull it off.
He’s just not where I’d place my bets.
Cruz also repels a lot of voters.
Just too much ‘evangelical’ in his campaign.
I know of no Democrat willing to even HEAR his positions.
He’s been demonized, too.
A blended ticket maybe the surprise winner.
You may not always get what you want…
But you might be getting what you need.
IMHO, the primary reason Dr. Carson swung to Trump was because Cruz was his intellectual rival// superior.
To back Cruz would be so damaging to his ego — it could not be contemplated.
Ego: EMOTION made the decision for him.
You will see many emotional screeds in this thread.
&&&&&&&
It’s far more important to stop HRCGS than to stop Trump.
Maintain perspective.
No-one has ever accused Trump of murder, felonies without end.
Whereas…
Need I say more ?
If Trump was such a vicious man — his employees and divorced wives would NOT be praising him to the rafters.
Tyrants ALWAYS have screwy private lives.
Trump’s private life — the kids — their up bringing — their happiness and pride — all portray a gentling father — out of view of the public.
Again, referenced by Dr. Carson.
Art posted election law that prohibits candidates from scratching backs.
He’s dreaming if he thinks that such a statute would EVER be applied.
The way it works is that the pols let the delegates vote, per the rules, and THEN — when they’re ‘released’ they are pushed to support a brokered nominee.
No doubt Kasich figures that he can squeeze through that back door … Harding style.
&&&
Yet Kasich is making Trump’s run to a clean nomination pretty much a sure thing.
Hence, still no way to the nomination for Kasich.
The man is unstable.
Tom Says:
March 17th, 2016 at 2:29 pm
You are emoting.
You are not persuading.
blert, I can’t even take you people (Trump supporters) seriously anymore, and I don’t.
I’m a Ted Cruz supporter.
Then I’m the supporter of the nominee.
Just a heads-up.
You ARE proving how emotions override logic.
You are not providing a serious counter argument.
You are in the vast, vast, majority — then.
blert, my “logical counter arguments…”
Give me a single reason, a logical, thoughtful reason, to vote for this guy. Not, “he’s not Hillary”. A real reason. Go back and look at the 2012 election and Neo’s blog. She actually gave reasons why Romney signed Romneycare. She gave reasons why Romney was more conservative than people than people thought. She persuaded me with FACTS, not what she read into things. Give me facts, not just some pretzel ass argument about Trump being like Patton. Show me where he’s ever held a conservative value. Tell me how he’s been faithful to his wife, how he’s acted like a gentleman, and not some cocksman calling people and saying things like “I get more pussy than you do”. Tell me how he’s opposed abortion, or government sponsored healthcare. How he’s contributed to conservative candidates, and causes. Tell me how he’s not spent money to ruin and destroy little people in Ireland. Show me how he’s not been a part of the corruption in Washington, but fought it. Give me a single reason to vote for him that is not “he’s not Hillary”. Maybe I’ll think about it, until then, you’re a fucking joke.
I’m sorry, I was a Boy Scout, an altar boy, and went to Catholic School, and Catholic camp. I was a Military Policeman. I was taught that right thinking people in high positions don’t act the way Trump does. They don’t pick on girls, they don’t pick on people who are smaller and weaker than they are, they don’t pick on people who are crippled, and they act with a certain amount of civility. I was taught that when you encounter such individuals, you should stand up to them, and not allow them to treat people that way. We’re talking about electing someone to the highest office in the land. If that person wants my vote, I expect them to act with a certain amount of dignity and class, not like some angry school yard bully. I also expect them to hold the same values and principles as I do. Any claim to conservative values and principles that Trump has, he came by fairly recently (in other words, I believe more about what his history of supporting liberals, and liberal causes says about him than his recent conversion). I’m going to remind you again, that I don’t owe you, or Donald Trump my vote. It has to be earned, and Trump simply hasn’t earned it. His attacks on Megyn Kelly last night are more evidence of what a douche bag he is. I’ve never seen Obama act like this, or Biden, and even Hillary. I’ve seen snot nose students at Harvard behave that way, and I’ve seen professors at Missouri call for some muscle. I wouldn’t vote for them either. I will not follow a leader who acts like Donald Trump. He will not be the leader of anything that I am a part of.
Something I want to say to all of the people who think that if Trump wins the nomination, I owe him my vote. I don’t owe Donald Trump a motherf*cking thing. I don’t owe a vote to the Republican party, or to anyone. It’s my vote, and I will cast it as I see fit. So those of you that make the argument that once Drumpf gains the nomination I MUST vote for him, go pound sand. Give me a reason to vote for him. Show me an issue that he’s been consistent on. Explain to me how you’re so sure that all of his talk is just rhetoric, and that once in office, he won’t use the power of the presidency to go after people with whom he disagrees. All evidence to this stage proves him to be a thin skinned, small man, with an outsized ego, and an even more outsized mouth. His foreign policy proposals are non existent as are his domestic proposals. He says he’ll deport every illegal immigrant, but hasn’t said how he’ll get past the immigration courts. He’s said he’ll make Mexico pay for a wall, but I haven’t seen a plan that looks like it would be successful. He’s a bully, and I’m sorry but everything I’ve ever learned in my life, going all the way back to my Catholic grade school education has taught me to stand up to bullies, and to protect others from them.
The REAL reason actually is his executive profile, John Wareham style.
Cited above, in this thread.
Wareham’s model of prediction of executive behavior and tendencies is nothing short of astounding.
In my own personal life I have found it to be 90% dead on — countless times.
Its fundamental is that we are driven by our subconscious towards magical role models — ones adopted when we were seven years old — the magic year of male development.
( Also noted by Loyola. )
Trump’s life script — which he has persistently followed — is that of Waredam’s “Emperor.”
Of ALL the personality types it’s the single most awesome.
The famous folks that have followed Trump’s script are the who’s who of America.
Lee Iacocca
John D Rockefeller
Steve Jobs
Henry Ford
Henry Kaiser
Andrew Carnegie
Alfred P Sloan
They all share the same storey arc — as laid out by John Wareham.
Wareham is patronized by Rupert Murdoch — as his executive head hunter.
Rupert Murdock is a CLASSIC “emperor.”
Trump’s profile is so overwhelming that it’s virtually automatic that he’ll be a clone of Andrew Jackson… that fellow on the twenty-dollar bill — founder of the Democrat party — and splitist of the Democrat-Republican party — itself founded by another controversial redhead, Thomas Jefferson.
Jackson’s life has so many parallels to Trump it’s amazing.
Both were wildly disdained as boors, cultural hicks utterly lacking in class.
Their marriages were the stuff of the tabloids// rumor circuit LONG before they aimed at the presidency.
Both were enemies of the established order — as full on panic swept elite America in the era of Jackson.
That crazy man extended the vote to the non-landed adult white male.
Heavens !
Both advocated a highly nationalist — yet quasi isolationist national defense policy.
Jackson is most famous for the trail of tears.
Look at Trump’s wall, today.
It’s virtually inevitable that Trump — in the astounding event he is elected — will be consumed with following Jackson’s crusade against the corruption and decay of the national central bank.
Yes, way back then Wall Street and Big Banking had ‘bought’ Congress. That’s one reason why Jackson needed to expand suffrage.
Jackson radically empowered poor White settlers.
It is with irony that Arkansas was largely settled during his terms.
He also mucked up the economy – by starving it of liquidity.
His was the era of the wooden nickel.
His political heir, Polk, aka “Young Hickory” established the lower 48 states (mostly) as we know them today — following in his nationalist crusade.
Jackson was widely parodied in sketch and oils WRT his raging red hair — and his bombastic temper.
Trump is positively mellow by comparison.
HRCGS is an out and out felon — living the life royal courtesy of our tyrant with the pen and a phone.
Don’t let a conjured daemon spook you more than the real deal.
Hillary’s profile is Hitlerist//Stalinist awful… will to power and all that stuff … with a brutally crude temper towards those close and dear.
She was a ‘Goldwater girl’ and a Watergate trooper — discharged for personal mis-conduct — acting as a rep for the Democrat party.
Hence, ideologically the ONLY compass point of her direction is towards her mirrored reflection.
Trump would never make it as an alter boy… something that the Falcon and the Snowman were able to achieve.
For his trade sector, Donald Trump comes off as a SAINT.
I largely agree with neo: he’s pure establishment.
It’s a hoot to see folks call Cruz establishment — and Trump anti-establishment.
Cruz has been so daemonized by the MSM that most of the population won’t even listen to his arguments.
Even Scott Adams ‘whites him out.’ He’s the #2 candidate and yet could not be discussed. He’d been non-personed by the Left.
&&&&&&
I’m a Ted Cruz supporter to the Convention.
I’m a supporter of the nominee in the Fall.
At this time I have every reason to believe that a vote for Kasich is a vote for Trump; every vote for Trump is a vote for Hillary.
Hillary will take Barry’s soft despotism to a 12 on a scale of 1 to 10.
White males will be her universal out-grouped Class Enemy.
With the very likely prospect that the race is locking up towards Trump — I don’t wish to see my fall-back choice damaged even further for the Final Tally — by hit pieces placed by the MSM.
Yes, it’s not a perfect world.
We have to soldier on to Mordor — come what may.
As I suspected, without twisting yourself into a pretzel, and projecting imaginary traits onto Trump that you wish were there, you can’t give me a good reason to vote for him except, “he’s not Hillary”. That’s not good enough, so hopefully Cruz wins. If not, then hopefully there will be a viable 3rd party option.
You don’t know profiling.
&&&&
The OSS profiled Adolf Hitler for FDR and when the result was given to the Pentagon — all of the generals scoffed — even more than Tom does here, above.
Hitler was profiled as being suicidal in defeat — all the experts figured him so.
The Pentagon thought that notion the most absurd of all.
As the war progressed, EVERY element of the 1942 profile ran true.
It was this profile that led Eisenhower to INSTANTLY respond to the news he got on the afternoon of 12-16-44 — the day he received his fifth star.
He put the data and the profile together — and in seconds realized that the Germans// Adolf were launching an ALL OUT offensive in the West — exactly contrary to ALL of the intelligence he’d been receiving till then.
The power of profiling is so great it is now universally used by all major governments — and the FBI.
YOU are plainly unaware of the method.
Purchase Wareham’s “The Anatomy of a Great Executive.”
You will come to an entirely new method of figuring people out.
&&&
Profiling sometimes makes it into film.
In the Wrath of Khan, Spock informs Kirk that Khan is a ultra-smart thinker — who is yet two-dimensional.
&&&&
The method is reproduceable.
But it takes brains and effort.
Wareham made millions using it as a headhunter.
The top staff of Dow Jones, WSJ, Fox — are all selected by Rupert Murdoch… using Wareham’s profiling.
And Murdoch always hires Wareham’s firm to find them.
And, it’s fair to say that Trump has been using profiling — Wareham’s method – to select many of his top players.
Hence the abundance of women with insufficient academic credentials or other traditional markers — elevated to very high rank.
Their profiles were overwhelming, that’s why.
&&&&&
In the list — of American greats — you might note that MOST were deems A@@holes by many, many, people in their day.
This is but part of the profile. It is to be EXPECTED of an “Emperor.”
Indeed, it’s a ‘tell.’
Ford II was so pissed at Iacocca that he FIRED him.
So Iococca promptly saved Chrysler — by taking the top 100 Ford executives with him.
He promptly turned around Chrysler with the K car — you do remember ?
Iacocca got the last laugh.
Like Trump he just HAD to make his mark outside his industry.
So he rescued the Statue of Liberty from its fiasco.
Ditto for Romney and the Olympics…
And Trump for NYC’s skating rink…
Trump tried to rescue the UN building, too.
He HAD to give up. Those clowns didn’t even get up to wrong.
Trump’s an Emperor — alright.
Others in the mold:
Larry Ellison — a total all around jerk.
BTW, the jerkiness of Ted Cruz is a POSITIVE indicator that he’s got a LOT of Emperor in him.
Nice guys don’t even finish in American politics.
Kasich is mentally ill, delusional.
He lives in a fantasy mental space.
With video footage to prove it from time to time.