Election 2016: what might have been
It’s often an empty exercise to mourn what might have been.
One reason is that one can never know, because the road not taken is just that: not taken. We are free to imagine any “if only” that suits our fancy, and no one can disprove it wouldn’t have happened that way any more than we can prove it would have happened that way.
So it’s an empty exercise, but a tempting one. And with that caveat, I have to ask your indulgence while I’ll go down that speculative road not taken, just for a moment.
I spent most of the 2016 primary season worrying that Trump might be the Republican nominee. Far from laughing at him, I took his candidacy very seriously nearly from the very start, and opposed it with all my might. I was against that prospect for two rather simple reasons, ones which more fervent Trump supporters would strongly disagree with: the first was the character and history of the man himself (and since I’ve written so many posts on both subjects, I see no need to recap now), and the second was that I was strongly convinced that Trump was the weakest of all the possible candidates against Hillary Clinton.
That was my reasoning. It was somewhat analogous to the old joke, “The food is bad, and such small portions!” He’s terrible, and I don’t think he’ll win, which is an awful prospect because I suspect she’ll be even worse. That was it in a nutshell.
Why am I going into all of this again? One reason is that the convention is coming up, and it’s not over until the chorus of fat ladies has belted out that Trump is the 2016 Republican nominee. The other reason is that I’ve been reminded of it many times recently when people who had told me months ago that they were thinking of voting for a Republican for the first time in their lives—usually their choice was Rubio, whom they seemed to like—have now been very clear that they will vote for Hillary although they don’t like her at all, for the simple reason that Trump is completely unacceptable to them and however much they detest her they will never, never ever, vote for him.
These people are very reluctant Hillary voters who were looking to vote for a halfway decent GOP candidate after a lifetime of voting Democratic, and Trump lost them. What their numbers actually are I don’t know; this is the most anecdotal of anecdotal evidence I’m presenting. And whether they will ultimately be offset by those mythical Democratic voters who are said to be about to defect to Trump I don’t know, either. But the people I hear from are the opposite: possible GOP voters who are turned off by Trump.
[NOTE: The title of this post is a quote from the third-to-last verse of this John Greeleaf Whittier poem.]
I hear the same things. Trump is not serious and that matters. He is not putting in the time and effort which says to many that he belives in nothing. Better fighting hillary
On the bright side, there was just recently a Virginia court ruling stating that their law about binding delegates to candidates was too broad and it therefore violated the delegates’ 1st amendment rights.
In other words, all VA delegates are now unbound. If this is duplicated in other states, I can’t see how that will help Trump.
Neo:
“I was against that prospect for two rather simple reasons, ones which more fervent Trump supporters would strongly disagree with: the first was the character and history of the man himself (and since I’ve written so many posts on both subjects, I see no need to recap now), and the second was that I was strongly convinced that Trump was the weakest of all the possible candidates against Hillary Clinton.”
And the third: http://neoneocon.com/2016/04/14/who-are-the-alt-right-and-what-do-they-want/
“That’s a huge part of what this election has become. A vote for Trump is a vote for the alt-right, whether Trump knows it or not.”
As with Obama, it’s an error to fixate on the front-man, avatar, company rep, and lose focus on the paradigm-shifting social activist movement.
The Trump phenomenon is not because of Trump and a Trump presidency will not only be President Trump.
An experienced, knowledgeable candidate with good communication skills had an excellent chance of defeating hrc. Walker lacked ‘charisma’ and a top notch ground game. Rubio, who does have a certain type of charisma had a poor ground game. Cruz was the most knowledgeable candidate running, had a great ground game, and was the most reliably conservative of the group, but was judged to lack charisma because many people decided his facial features were not presidential. Fiorina had it all but lacked name recognition and cash.
So djt, who has no civic knowledge, and possesses no conservative principles, but knew how to game the msm, came out on top thanks to people who have no business voting. The donald knows absolutely nothing about the Constitution. He can not tell you the number of Articles, which is why he blathered about supporting about Article 12, and promised to nominate judges who would sign the right bills. This why I say those people have no business voting.
Their emotive ignorance effects everyone else, including generations not yet born. A common sense civics test should be required, just as it is for those who seek citizenship.
Matt_SE,
The SCOTUS ruled twice in the 20th century that state party sanctions on how delegates must vote does not apply to the national conventions which are private entities. The delegates are not bound despite the dictates imposed by state party rules. The Ford team in 1976 did change the national party rules to force delegates to vote for the candidate that won their state’s primary. That rule was vacated in 1980.
The nominee is a reflection of the state of mind of the electorate. We have a balkanized electorate that exagerates the normal differences of opinion that human nature ensures, in turn greatly exacerbated by the machination’s of the Left.
Had Cruz or Rubio called for; a wall on the border with expulsion of all illegals, a temporary ban on Muslim migration and railed against the dysfunctional trade agreements that have been an undeniable factor in the decline of America’s manufacturing sector, those attracted to Trump would have had an alternative. Instead, Rubio cast himself as an advocate for amnesty and Cruz based his candidacy on the premise that as President, he could convince Congress to support positions that he had utterly failed to do as a Congressman.
That Trump is highly unlikely to deliver his promises constitutionally is less important to the average voter, than in voting into office a captain who acknowledges that icebergs lie ahead.
My point being that Trump, when criticizing the democrats, pulled his punches the least and, in a nation balkanized into disparate groups, that approach resonated the most. Given these balkanized dynamics, the other candidates failure to read the public mood ensured that they never had a chance.
The Republican side of things is going to be hurting this year.
It’s already been mentioned in various places that Trump essentially has no ground game, and unlike most presidential candidates is relying entirely on the RNC to provide his ground game. This places additional strain on the RNC, as it means that resources that would be allocated to down-ballot candidates must instead be allocated to support the guy at the top.
Additionally, I spotted an article earlier today that indicated that the RNC has significantly lower than expected levels of paid staffers. Ohio, for instance, only has about one-third the number of paid staffers that had been projected earlier in the year.
So not only is the RNC expected to carry most of the load for Trump, and thereby spending less time on the down-ballot races, but it’s also short-handed.
junior,
If the rnc is serious about holding the house majority, and especially the senate majority, they will tell djt to cash in one of his YUGE billions and fund his own damn campaign. If djt is nominated there is a very good chance hrc will have a senate majority to approve all her court appointments. All vulnerable gop senators will have to disavow the head of the ticket.
Geoffrey Britain:
To refresh your memory: this, this, this, this, this, and this.
When the RNC/Make America Great Again survey arrived in the mail over the weekend I took the time to open and read it. I know you all are shocked.
I noticed it was in much larger font size than usual (micro targeting for older eyes)? But even larger type could not gloss over the shallow Trumpisms. It’s en route to the local SWDF (landfill).
The ‘Captain’ wouldn’t know an iceberg if it…..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/1/14/PeterPeachfuzz.jpg/220px-PeterPeachfuzz.jpg
I was a never Trumper until the disposition of Cheryl Mills and realized the fix was in and a President HRC would be as unchecked as Obama. With Trump the separation of powers will for sure magically reappear and the Press while challenged will actually do investigative reporting. I wanted Cruz, but he is even more hated than Trump.
It is an illusion that other candidates will fare better as they would all be set up for msm attacks they would be unable to counter. Remember Romney with the 47%, dead wife of cancer, Mrs Romney polo horse and expensive blouse, and dog on top of the car. Imagine the difference with Trump and Candy Crowley.
As for House and Senate – stop campaigning on things you won’t or can’t carry out.
neo,
That’s persuasive evidence that Cruz did indeed speak out comprehensively on those issues and well before Trump.
Which raises the question; why was the impact so attenuated? I’m embarrassed to make the admission that I too failed to appreciate Cruz’s efforts and can only surmise that the most likely reason is that the MSM buried it by ignoring it.
They didn’t do that with Trump quite probably because they never dreamed he’d get the amount of support he did, compounded by his notoriety.
I’d like to think that a Pres. Cruz could have been effective and to some degree I’m confident he would have been but I also can’t help but imagine that his efforts would have been sabotaged by all of the forces that oppose him. I think it likely that just when he was must politically vulnerable, the GOPe would have slipped the knife in his back. I suspect they hate him far more than they do Obama.
All of this leads me to conclude that, at this point, the Left can only be stopped by someone willing to trash the Constitution, which is of course, just another form of societal suicide. I judge that recovering from Caesar may be possible but not from Lenin.
IMO, it’s gone too far and the Left too entrenched, too ruthless and too unethical for ‘playing by the rules’ to work.
That analysis and conclusions is what has led me to label the choice before us as one of Caesar or Lenin…
But whether correct or mistaken, one thing is certain, a very rough road lies ahead.
Jim,
What about the msm attacks that will begin if/when djt is the nominee? You may think djt has fewer ‘skeletons’ but perhaps you should think again. IMO the msm’s attacks on djt will make their attacks on Romney sound like they were praising Mitt as a saintly republican.
I hated him attacking Cruz, and he may wimp out. But he will attack the attackers and Hilliary while a Romney will not.
It is up to us not to join in silly attacks like an Instragram star.
Yes our ideal candidate will apologize, but that hasn’t worked lately.
GB,
I agree the gope fear Cruz because he is likely to break their rice bowls should he be POTUS. What I find puzzling is that you think the donald will rule differently than hrc should against all odds, he wins in November. Trump is just as authoritarian as bho and hrc. You may wish and hope otherwise, but I think your thinking is wishful thinking. I think you and Jim are wrong in imagining the other two branches of federal government will grow a spine and suddenly check executive overreach under hrc or djt. Under Cruz yes, under the two presumptive democrat nominees, no.
Wishing and hoping reminds me of Dusty Springfield.
Jim,
What makes you think Cruz, Fiorina, or Rubio as nominee would apologize? Same goes for Walker, Jindal, and perhaps Perry. Talk about backtracking and reversing course? The donald be thy name. BTW, none of the above mentioned candidates are named Romney.
Cruz isn’t the nominee. I also disqualified Trump because he has no concept of the Constitution. But we know for sure HRC gets a pass and will tilt the Supreme Court.
Someone, maybe George Will, said about Bill Clinton, he may not be the worst President but he was the worst man to ever be President.
Looks like we are on track one way or another to beat that.
Parker,
i don’t know but it has been the pattern.
I used Romney as a default because he is the most recent example.
I think Cruz has a spine but also has knives pointed from left and right.
Jim,
I get it that you are holding onto a slippery straw that wishes and hopes djt that will not tilt SCOTUS. But based upon what evidence of his past and present ever changing, second by second writters, do you believe he will be different than hrc? Need I elaborate on the differences of mammals and reptiles? 😉
PARKER
Final post on this. I agree with your suspicions. What then is our best chance of preserving liberty at this point?
Shelob would likely poll just as well against any of the other candidates that ran for the nomination at this point, and if she actually were running well behind, let’s say Rubio, she wouldn’t be the nominee.
I think the status quo gave the Democrats a possible permanent edge at the national level. The Republicans needed a candidate that is capable of upsetting that status quo, and like it or not, only Trump offered that.
It’s just a tragedy. Among my many lefty-left friends, none like Clinton. Most were Bernie-or-Bust-ers that are furious at what they perceive to be evil-establishment machinations of the Democrat party and are so let down by Bernie supporting Clinton that they are all but speechless (for the first time in the lives of most of these people). They absolutely don’t want to vote for Clinton and are in the right frame of mind to turn their back on the Democrat party.
And all we have to offer to them for an alternative is Trump, who as Neo said for months is among the least appealing of all of the candidates that once set out down the road on the GOP side. In the end, the disgruntled Bernie-backers and susceptible Dems who feel betrayed by Clinton’s outright awfulness and the party’s pushing of her nonetheless are going to hold their nose and vote for Clinton, in the same we we’re all going to hold our nose and for not-Clinton. It just didn’t have to be this way.
And that’s why some of us continue to suspect there’s something more sinister to Trump than just an offensive, self-centered, completely unqualified egotist who wants to be president. Notice, coincidentally, how all those loud, obnoxious Trump-backers (aside from regular contributor Artful) have disappeared from the forum?
Kyndyll G:
Oh yes, I noticed it, all right. They disappeared within days of his clinching the nomination, their task complete.
And not to say that Artful is loud and obnoxious – that didn’t quite come out as I had intended. The point was, of the vigorous, outspoken Trumpers that were frequenting the forum while there was still a contested race, except a couple of longtime regulars like Artful, the rest have disappeared as magically as they had originally arrived.
Creepy.
Have you considered also the number of longtime conservative who would no longer vote for the likes of Romney or an amnesty pusher like Rubio? Forever, the GOP establishment kept conservatives in line with fear of the fear of the democrats. Since 1980 the GOP never delivered a single conservative accomplishment and conservatives were growing weary of voting out of fear. Sure, Trump is not a real conservative, and some of his evangelical outreaches were obviously fake, but his single position on immigration addressed what was currently their biggest issue. The Republican party offered no alternative because it was too in love with immigration (legal and illegal) and thought they could use the tried and true “you’re a racist” technique to shame conservatives back into the fold. They should have known better because every time the brought up amnesty the conservative base rose up. When Trump came out against illegal immigration and offshoring I knew that he would win the nomination unless the establishment adopted the position as well, but the only attempts were late and half-hearted because deep down they are open-borders.
Rubio may have been able to bring in votes from upper class democrats, but no Reagan democrats and also not from conservatives working class republicans. Rubio was always going to be a loser. I suspect that candidate who would be OK with the democrats you mention would have had Rubio’s problem.