Comments on: Whatever happened to Tucker Carlson?: Part III

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Mon, 17 Nov 2025 15:51:45 +0000

And, in case anyone is unclear, both 40 and 45% is a minority.
==
And, in case anyone is unclear, a 45% plurality is unremarkable in a four-candidate race. You want a runoff between the top two contenders, Mr. Cruz would have had to collar 85% of the votes which went initially to other candidates. You want a run off between Trump and John Kasich, Gov. Bad Attitude would have had to collar nearly 90% of the other candidates’ votes. Neither scenario is plausible and the first of them would have left Glitch McConnell even more dissatisfied than he was with DJT.
==
NeverTrump is a Capitol Hill / K Street / Acela corridor phenomenon. It hardly exists at street level.

By: om

om — Mon, 17 Nov 2025 14:21:35 +0000

Is CC barmy or balmy? Just asking.

By: om

om — Mon, 17 Nov 2025 14:16:46 +0000

And yet to CC's eternal angst and anger The Great Orange Whale is the 47th president. Cosmic injustice.

By: Bauxite

Bauxite — Mon, 17 Nov 2025 13:27:48 +0000

Trump won 45% of the primary vote, including a bunch of garbage time primaries after he clinched the nomination. At the time that Cruz and Kasich dropped out, he was much closer to 40%.

And, in case anyone is unclear, both 40 and 45% is a minority.

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 16:57:55 +0000

Finally, Trump showed in 2016 that a determined minority can win a major party nomination if the majority is fractured.
==
Trump won 45% of the primary and caucus vote, about what John McCain did four years earlier. There were four competitive candidates each time. Aside from Trump, Ted Cruz won 25%. Those were the two candidates the Capitol Hill / K Street nexus abhorred. Small totals went to Dr. Carson, Rand Paul, Mike Huckabee, Carly Fiorina, &c, none of them Republican inner ringers Jeb Bush took his donors’ money and made a bonfire with it; others the donor crew might have preferred included John Kasich (NeverTrump diehard), Marco Rubio, and Chris Christie. These corralled about 25% of the Republican electorate. You lot had no majority to fracture.
==
What was novel about 2016 was not that ‘a determined minority’ carried the day, but that the perennial winner of Republican contests – The-Guy-Whose-Turn-It-Is – wasn’t running and the donors’ preferred candidate evaporated.

By: Bauxite

Bauxite — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 16:38:34 +0000

That’s why I think that Vance needs to make a hard, public break with Carlson and the anti-Semite wing of the GOP now. He’s the candidate most likely to win the GOP nomination with a Tucker Carlson-shaped ball-and-chain fastened to his ankle.

Don’t count on Nick Fuentes’ professed hatred of Vance to save him.

By: Bauxite

Bauxite — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 16:26:55 +0000

AesopFan – If ~30% of the GOP primary electorate is Groyper or sympathetic to Gropyers, then there will likely be a Gropyer candidate or a “Groyper lane” candidate on the stage at the GOP primaries. At a minimum, every candidate will be prompted in every interview to disown the Groyper contingent of the primary electorate. And politicians being politicians, at least some of them will try to soft-pedal the questions to win Groyper-sympathetic votes (30% of the primary electorate and all). And so mainstream media coverage of the GOP primaries will be all Nick Fuentes, all the time.

Then, even after the nomination is decided, more than 50% of the mainstream media coverage (i.e., the only coverage that the median voter sees) will be about Gropyers and Nick Fuentes, including a video montage of Fuentes’ greatest hits. There will be Gropyer questions in the fall debates. The nominee will have to fight that momentum to get his or her actual message out. And if the eventual nominee is one of the candidates who tried to play footsie with Gropyers in the primaries, look out.

Finally, Trump showed in 2016 that a determined minority can win a major party nomination if the majority is fractured. So don’t rule out the possibility of a Gropyer GOP nominee in 2028. Further, as Trump shows, the party tends to conform to the nominee.

In short, it will be a disaster if 30% of the GOP primary electorate is Gropyer or Gropyer-sympathetic, even if a thorough-going Gropyer candidate is not likely to win the nomination.

And if you don’t believe that, take the above and substitute “Tucker Carlson” for “Gropyer.” It doesn’t get much better.

By: Nate Winchester

Nate Winchester — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 15:25:16 +0000

Perhaps I’m being alarmist. But for many years I’ve been spending an awful lot of time looking around online at political sites, and I’ve seen this movement grow and grow and take over a lot of places. It’s creepy in every sense of the word: offensive, and spreading like a weed.

There may be some hope. See this clip from Tim Pool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=Jp0iLnx1jEk

Around the 15 min mark he points out that a lot of the younger generation are getting burned out on the Israel topic.

Though of course I don’t think it helps to be importing a bunch of people who hate Jews (or are ambivalent at best) and then not make any efforts as assimilation.

By: Barry Meislin

Barry Meislin — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 14:12:11 +0000

Cf: “…No barm in Gilead…”

(Methinks the ~~problem~~ issue might be that in an English, or perhaps Boston(?), etc., accent, “barmy” and “balmy” are homophones**.
Meanwhile, enjoy the barmy weather down south, in Hawaii or wherever you might happen to be…)

** If yer Japanese, jus’ ferget about it…

https://www.oed.com/dictionary/balmy_adj

By: Art Deco

Art Deco — Sun, 16 Nov 2025 13:55:02 +0000

Buchanan challenged both Bush and Dole and won the same share of Republican primary and caucus voters each time. Those years were his moment, like 2012 was Rick Santorum’s moment. Ron Paul attempted to rally isolationist sentiment and was left with 4% of the ballots.
==