Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegas Vic
Trump needs a large field in the GOP primary race. His die-hard fanatics account for almost half of the republican base, but only about 35% of the national electorate. With a large field, he can eliminate the other challengers by attrition over time. Of course, in the general election, he doesn't really have much of a chance with independents (who he needs to win), as they would vote for a mannequin over Trump.
So for the democrats, Trump is the gift that keeps giving, and it's in their best interest to have Trump as the republican nominee again.
|
The last part, absolutely. One of the big stories of 2024 will be the numbers of Democrats who will step in if polling indicates Trump is in any danger of losing the nomination.
That won't be necessary with a large field. One thing that struck me in 2016 was the inability of any of the establishment candidates to define themselves.
At the start of the cycle, Trump was a side-show. He had no chance. He ended an early debate by accusing Megyn Kelly of having "blood coming from her eyes," which the media took as some sort of menstruation analogy, but I seriously doubt Trump is capable of or interested in that type of subtlety.
What he was after was getting his candidacy talked about. Over time, he became the story. Not how he'd govern, but his personality.
On the other end were the usual suspects. Every campaign has them. Senators and sometimes governors of large states who have made the right connections and risen through the ranks. Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio on one side, Ted Cruz playing the role of the leader of the conservative right - which does have its dedicated following, but a ceiling within the party that prevents nomination.
What Trump did was create his own following. I don't know what avid Trumpers have in common other than an attraction to his personality. They'll "build a wall," but that means different things to different people. Certainly a physical wall, which Trump often talked about, is meaningless without an immigration strategy behind it - rules, infrastructure, definitions, enforcement. All very important but never articulated. We can't have a country like the US without immigration - everyone knows this, I think. Trump even knows this. Rhetoric is not a policy and policy doesn't interest Trump.
There was a moment I've referred to earlier here - when Christie took down Rubio in a debate. It was a strange moment. Rubio was doing the classic pivot line thing where you take a question, restate it, then gracefully segue into a planned piece where you end with a tested, trusted line. That's how "debate" works in the modern era. You win by never answering the question that's asked. Christie pointed out the segue. Rubio responded by repeating it. Christie pointed that out. And Rubio, earnestly and confidently, because he knew, absolutely knew, that it was a good segue and a tested line, repeated it a second time. Christie leaned in and that was that. The moment.
And there's Jeb on the side, royalty in having two presidents in the immediate family, governor of an important state, a genuinely nice guy - many considered him the one who actually would govern with heart, despite complete deference to the Republican establishment.
Jeb's there rolling his eyes. He saw it happening. He knew Trump was going to win and what that meant and he did not have the energy or the ammunition to fight it. Trump, of course, picked up on that immediately. We think of Trump as clueless. He isn't. He just has no interest (or ability, really) in the actual governing thing.
Rooting for the establishment over Trump in 2024 would be like rooting for the Storm Troopers in Star Wars (the original one). They arrive in masses, they shoot their weapons. Badly, without aim, but they usually win because few people possess the magic to unerringly avoid poorly-aimed trooper guns. Mitt Romney and the doddering version of John McCain were Storm Troopers.
I don't think the Republican party can be fixed right now. What they need is a Reagan, someone who understands personality and can connect it to policy. They have policy people in the race (Haley and others), they have establishment people - the next generation of Rubio/Bush (Pence, Scott, DeSantis to a certain extent). Someone will play the role of Ted Cruz, not sure where that will come from since people seem to have assumed Cruz would run again and it's starting to look like he won't. But I don't see the personality, other than Trump and Ramaswamy, who would be an improvement over Trump because he isn't Trump, but probably not much functional difference.
So we'll get Trump, and I think we'll get Biden again - Kennedy's vaccination thing will come up if he starts to gain traction and Biden will not debate him. Only even older and I'm sure various health issues affect both of them at this point. It's really a depressing thought, thinking of Biden/Trump 2. No boogaloo, not even a bit of electricity.
But it doesn't matter how many die-hard fanatics Trump has. I think it's a small number, but for someone to take the nomination from him, he or she needs to create his or her own die-hard fanatics. And that will attract people who need to be die-hard about something.