2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[Thomkal]

Voters For Trump Ad - SNL - YouTube

[flere-imsaho]

Oof: Some supporters of Rubio say bad strategy, poorly run campaign killing his chances - The Washington Post

One of the more important things about being President is being able to appoint and delegate to good people who can get things done and are good at their jobs. One of the few things a Presidential campaign tells us about a candidate that's applicable to the Presidency is this.

Warning, partisan comment inbound:

So, just in case there was any doubt, Rubio is a completely, utterly, empty suit. The average manager at McDonald's is more qualified to hold an executive position like President than Rubio.

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Interesting opinion piece from Bob Bennett. Trump is pretty out there on some of his comments, but at the core, this is a pretty good summation of the concern behind the scenes in the Republican (and Democrat) party.

What I See Happening In a Trump Presidency
By Bill Bennett

"They will kill him before they let him be president. It could be a Republican or a Democrat that instigates the shutting up of Trump.

Don’t be surprised if Trump has an accident. Some people are getting very nervous: Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton and Jon Corzine, to name just a few.

It's about the unholy dynamics between big government, big business, and big media. They all benefit by the billions of dollars from this partnership, and it's in all of their interests to protect one another. It's one for all and all for one. It’s a heck of a filthy relationship that makes everyone filthy rich, everyone except the American people. We get ripped off. We’re the patsies. But for once, the powerful socialist cabal and the corrupt crony capitalists are scared. The over-the-top reaction to Trump by politicians of both parties, the media, and the biggest corporations of America has been so swift and insanely angry that it suggests they are all threatened and frightened.

Donald Trump can self-fund. No matter how much they say to the contrary, the media, business, and political elite understand that Trump is no joke. He could actually win and upset their nice cozy apple cart.

It's no coincidence that everyone has gotten together to destroy The Donald. It's because most of the other politicians are part of the a good old boys club. They talk big, but they won’t change a thing. They are all beholden to big-money donors. They are all owned by lobbyists, unions, lawyers, gigantic environmental organizations, and multinational corporations – like Big Pharmacy or Big Oil. Or they are owned lock, stock, and barrel by foreigners like George Soros owns Obama or foreign governments own Hillary and their Clinton Foundation donations.

These run-of-the-mill establishment politicians are all puppets owned by big money. But there's one man who isn't beholden to anyone. There's one man who doesn't need foreigners, or foreign governments, or George Soros, or the United Auto Workers, or the teacher's union, or the Service Employees International Union, or the Bar Association to fund his campaign.

Billionaire tycoon and maverick Donald Trump doesn’t need anyone’s help. That means he doesn’t care what the media says. He doesn’t care what the corporate elites think. That makes him very dangerous to the entrenched interests. That makes Trump a huge threat to those people. Trump can ruin everything for the bribed politicians and their spoiled slave masters.

Don’t you ever wonder why the GOP has never tried to impeach Obama? Don’t you wonder why John Boehner and Mitch McConnell talk a big game, but never actually try to stop Obama? Don’t you wonder why Congress holds the purse strings, yet has never tried to de-fund Obamacare or Obama’s clearly illegal executive action on amnesty for illegal aliens? Bizarre, right? It defies logic, right?

First, I'd guess many key Republicans are being bribed. Secondly, I believe many key Republicans are being blackmailed. Whether they are having affairs, or secretly gay, or stealing taxpayer money, the National Security Agency knows everything.

Ask former House Speaker Dennis Hastert about that. The government even knew he was withdrawing large sums of his own money from his own bank account. The NSA, the SEC, the IRS, and all the other three-letter government agencies are watching every Republican political leader. They surveil everything. Thirdly, many Republicans are petrified of being called racists, so they are scared to ever criticize Obama or call out his crimes, let alone demand his impeachment. Fourth , why rock the boat? After defeat or retirement, if you’re a good old boy, you’ve got a $5 million-per-year lobbying job waiting. The big-money interests have the system gamed. Win or lose, they win.

But Trump doesn’t play by any of these rules. Trump breaks up this nice, cozy relationship between big government, big media, and big business. All the rules are out the window if Trump wins the Presidency. The other politicians will protect Obama and his aides but not Trump. Remember: Trump is the guy who publicly questioned Obama's birth certificate. He questioned Obama's college records and how a mediocre student got into an Ivy League university. Now, he's doing something no Republican has the chutzpah to do. He's questioning our relationship with Mexico; he's questioning why the border is wide open; he's questioning why no wall has been built across the border; he's questioning if allowing millions of illegal aliens into America is in our best interests; he's questioning why so many illegal aliens commit violent crimes, yet are not deported; and he's questioning why our trade deals with Mexico, Russia and China are so bad.

Trump has the audacity to ask out loud why American workers always get the short end of the stick. Good question! I'm certain Trump will question what happened to the almost billion dollars given in a rigged no-bid contract to college friends of Michelle Obama at foreign companies to build the defective Obamacare website. By the way, that tab is now up to $5 billion. Trump will ask if Obamacare's architects can be charged with fraud for selling it by lying. Trump will investigate Obama's widespread IRS conspiracy, not to mention Obama's college records. Trump will prosecute Clinton and Obama for fraud committed to cover up Benghazi before the election. How about the fraud committed by employees of the Labor Department when they made up dramatic job numbers in the last jobs report before the 2012 election?

Obama, the multinational corporations and the media need to stop Trump. They recognize this could get out of control. If left unchecked, telling the raw truth and asking questions everyone else is afraid to ask, Trump could wake a sleeping giant. Trump's election would be a nightmare. Obama has committed many crimes. No one else but Trump would dare to prosecute. He will not hesitate. Once Trump gets in and gets a look at the cooked books and Obama's records, the game is over. The goose is cooked. Holder could wind up in prison. Jarrett could wind up in prison. Obama bundler Corzine could wind up in prison for losing $1.5 billion of customer money. Clinton could wind up in jail for deleting 32,000 emails or for accepting bribes from foreign governments while Secretary of State, or for misplacing $6 billion as the head of the State Department, or for lying about Benghazi. The entire upper level management of the IRS could wind up in prison.

Obamacare will be de-funded and dismantled. Obama himself could wind up ruined, his legacy in tatters. Trump will investigate. Trump will prosecute. Trump will go after everyone involved. That’s why the dogs of hell have been unleashed on Donald Trump.

Yes, it's become open season on Donald Trump. The left and the right are determined to attack his policies, harm his businesses, and, if possible, even keep him out of the coming debates. But they can't silence him. And they sure can't intimidate him. The more they try, the more the public will realize that he's the one telling the truth".

[ISiddiqui]

Uh... that more seems like the paranoid rantings of a lunatic rather than what is really going on behind the scenes.

[cartman]

Yeah, that has proven to be complete and utter bullshit. Please try again, MBBF.

An Interesting Take on Trump : snopes.com

[wustin]

ACA getting the boot (rightfully so) would not tarnish Obama's legacy lol

[bhlloy]

You know who will really put the fear into big business? One of the wealthiest business owners in the country who has been playing by those rules his entire life.

[PilotMan]

I think it was written by a Texan. My father, generally level headed, smart, but now 68 and twenty years in Texas believes this with his whole heart. I just don't get it.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by cartman

Yeah, that has proven to be complete and utter bullshit. Please try again, MBBF.

An Interesting Take on Trump : snopes.com

[nol]

The "People who forward articles that do not pass the Snopes test" and Trump voters Venn diagram is pretty damn close to one circle.

[Solecismic]

Polls show Ohio and Florida are very close. It's important to remember that Florida is a closed primary, so Trump won't draw in many of his voters.

If Trump doesn't win both, his path to 50% is very, very difficult. The system was designed to bump the party favorite from 40 to 50 in a rousing coronation-type convention.

But what if it's a 45-30-20-5 situation and the party doesn't want the 45? The system makes it very difficult for the leader.

[RainMaker]

FiveThirtyEight has trump as a heavy favorite in Florida. But sounds like Ohio could be the real problem state.

Have to imagine Rubio drops out after Florida. Not sure who his votes move to though.

[tarcone]

Just saw a commercial for Rubio. He told me to send the esablishment a message, a conservative message.

So no Rubio is trying to distance himself from the establishment. Or they told him they are jumping on the Kasich bandwagon.

What an idiot.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

FiveThirtyEight has trump as a heavy favorite in Florida. But sounds like Ohio could be the real problem state.

Have to imagine Rubio drops out after Florida. Not sure who his votes move to though.

Not sure why anybody drops out of this race. If he does, Kasich is the beneficiary.

[JPhillips]

Yeah, Cruz, Rubio and Kasich seem to all have decent arguments in a contested convention. At this point why not hold on to your ticket and see if it's a winner?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Just saw a commercial for Rubio. He told me to send the esablishment a message, a conservative message.

So no Rubio is trying to distance himself from the establishment. Or they told him they are jumping on the Kasich bandwagon.

What an idiot.

Go Trump!!!!

[RainMaker]

What is Rubio's argument in a contested convention? I won Minnesota and Puerto Rico but came in 3rd in most other states? At least Kasich can say he won a battleground state.

With the states going winner take all, there isn't much of a benefit to having a full field of candidates if the goal is making it hard for Trump to win.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What is Rubio's argument in a contested convention? .

"I am polling the best against Hillary Clinton." (At least he has been. Not sure if Kasich has overtaken him in the last week or two.)

[Dutch]

Oh God...we are a step closer to Hillary or Trump. Gag...

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

That and "Party leaders, you know you'd rather work with me than Trump or Ted."

[RainMaker]

But no one in the Republican Party is voting for him so that would seem to be a rather huge slap in the face to all the people who actually voted in your primaries.

[Solecismic]

What the Republican Party needs to avoid blowing up is to get a binary choice between Mr. Trump and someone else. I think the evidence that we're approaching that is the fact that Ted Cruz announced late last week that he's going to open ten offices in the state of Florida. He's probably not doing that to win Florida. He's probably doing that to prevent Marco Rubio from winning it. If that happens, indeed, you've got your binary choice and you’ve got the best chance of not settling this in Cleveland...

George Will

As we head toward WTA states, this is true. Though the Republicans can't seem to resist selfishness here. Cruz's best bet is if Rubio wins Florida but does not gain momentum from it. But if Rubio does gain momentum, he becomes viable again.

I still wonder about the end game. You stop Trump, then what? This plan seems as reckless as Bush 43 going after Saddam Hussein. Romney as a "compromise candidate" will feel about as good as 2008 would have felt to Democrats had superdelegates stayed with Hillary and reversed Obama's lead.

When you see new people enthusiastically flocking toward your party, do you psychoanalyze them and kick them in the proverbial balls, or do you happily make room for them?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

But no one in the Republican Party is voting for him so that would seem to be a rather huge slap in the face to all the people who actually voted in your primaries.

I don't disagree with that. You asked me what his argument will be. I gave you his argument.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

"I am polling the best against Hillary Clinton." (At least he has been. Not sure if Kasich has overtaken him in the last week or two.)

The problem is Kasich isn't included in many of the matchup polls. The last one I see him involved in was on Feb 29 New Hampshire poll where he was the only candidate to defeat Clinton there and he did so by 10 points. There were Ohio polls on Feb 24 and Kasich of course polls best there by a large margin. There were three nationwide matchup polls on Feb 17 and 18 and Kasich performed best in two of them and was only 1 pt worse than Rubio in the other.

I think Kasich (assuming the conservatives don't revolt) definitely has the best general election argument of the remaining candidates.

[Ben E Lou]

It seems fairly clear that the "establishment" either needs to accept and anoint Cruz so that he can out-delegate Trump, or just go form a new party. We need to dispel with this fiction that Rubio still has a chance. Rubio had his chance and he screwed it up. Rubio had his chance and he screwed it up. Rubio had his chance and he screwed it up.

Let Trump win the nomination, and the party is toast. Let Trump get to the convention with the most delegates and nominate someone else, and the party is toast. Get behind Cruz. Talk Rubio into quitting and endorsing Cruz. Let him get to the convention with the most delegates, then let him demonstrate that with the country's current makeup, a far-right candidate can't even beat a D that a large number of Ds dislike. Then run a more moderate candidate in 2020. Any other path, and it sure looks like the party is toast.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

The problem is Kasich isn't included in many of the matchup polls. The last one I see him involved in was on Feb 29 New Hampshire poll where he was the only candidate to defeat Clinton there and he did so by 10 points. There were Ohio polls on Feb 24 and Kasich of course polls best there by a large margin. There were three nationwide matchup polls on Feb 17 and 18 and Kasich performed best in two of them and was only 1 pt worse than Rubio in the other.

I think Kasich (assuming the conservatives don't revolt) definitely has the best general election argument of the remaining candidates.

As someone who doesn't like Trump, I think Kasich is the only viable candidate for a contested convention. But he needs to win Ohio. We'll know more tomorrow (Michigan), but whatever Kasich has didn't even cross the border to Kentucky. Cruz is accumulating delegates, but he's too divisive to lead that type of contested situation.

But I worry about the millions of voters Trump is inspiring. Dismissing them as racists who shouldn't even have a vote is a mistake. If the Republicans continue to make this mistake, they will find it more and more difficult to win major offices.

As an aside about Kasich in Michigan. He had a rally scheduled at the JFK Peace Corps site (steps of the Student Union in Ann Arbor) last week. He had to cancel because of plane issues and wound up speaking by Skype or something (I don't know the details, I wasn't there). There were about 40 people there. He has been in Michigan a lot lately, though, and it's not even in the press. There's no buzz whatsoever. He might finish second here, but I kinda think Cruz will because the pinky and the outside part of the palm are extremely right-wing and they vote.

[JPhillips]

In the general, Rubio's biggest weakness, immigration, becomes his biggest strength.

Cruz is the true conservative option that beat everyone but Trump.

Kasich is the most appealing to moderates.

[Solecismic]

The March 8 Contests:

Hawaii (19 delegates): No polling has been done in Hawaii. This is a caucus, and turnout is usually low. I think this favors Cruz, so I'll go ahead and predict he wins easily.

Idaho (32): There was one recent poll showing Trump ahead, but it was extremely small and there were a lot of undecideds for this late in the race. Idaho has the highest threshold to gain delegates and only two districts, meaning there's a chance to accumulate a little. Cruz has spent some time in Idaho, and I think for good reason. Even though Trump led in that one poll, I predict that Cruz will win easily - maybe even in the 40s.

Michigan (59): The big prize today, and the only March 8 state with a lot of polling. This shows Trump with a significant lead, and the other candidates bunched as high as the low 20s. This is an open primary, but party registration is required 30 days earlier. I feel there's some excitement here, but not unusual excitement. I think Trump will win, but more like 35-36% of the vote. I'll pick Cruz for second around 25%, Kasich third around 18-20% and Rubio in high single digits. With a threshold at 15%, this will hurt Rubio.

Mississippi (40): Almost no polling here, with Trump showing a big lead. This is the most open primary of the day and he should take about 40% of the vote. Cruz will take second in the mid 20s, Rubio third in the high teens and Kasich a very distant fourth.

Overall, 150 delegates are at stake, and I can't see Trump scoring more than about 55-60. Cruz might well win more. But then we head into the portion of the primary where Cruz won't do well and most states have some form of winner-take-all.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

In the general, Rubio's biggest weakness, immigration, becomes his biggest strength.

Cruz is the true conservative option that beat everyone but Trump.

Kasich is the most appealing to moderates.

Kasich is arguably less moderate than Trump. He just hides it well.

[Dutch]

Trump is very moderate he just hides it well.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

The March 8 Contests:

Hawaii (19 delegates): No polling has been done in Hawaii. This is a caucus, and turnout is usually low. I think this favors Cruz, so I'll go ahead and predict he wins easily.

The betting markets show Rubio as a fairly big favorite in Hawaii for whatever reason, and Cruz as the third pick.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

In the general, Rubio's biggest weakness, immigration, becomes his biggest strength.

.

I think I'd argue that Rubio's biggest weakness is his lack of a biggest strength. He's just come across as pretty weak.

Kind of odd, too, given that he was really successful as a legislator in Florida. He's probably an election cycle or two too soon. Assuming he's done (and I'm a believer that he is), it will be interesting to see if and how he comes back from this.

[Dutch]

He's young...he's a good dude though. Maybe some other time...the experience of all this will make him better.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by digamma

I think I'd argue that Rubio's biggest weakness is his lack of a biggest strength. He's just come across as pretty weak.

Kind of odd, too, given that he was really successful as a legislator in Florida. He's probably an election cycle or two too soon. Assuming he's done (and I'm a believer that he is), it will be interesting to see if and how he comes back from this.

To be clear, these aren't my arguments, as I'm clearly voting for someone else. These are just the arguments I think they can make at a contested convention. I'd expect one of Kasich/Rubio to bow out, but they both have a decent argument. I'd be shocked if a contested convention didn't feature at least three of the four current candidates.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Let Trump win the nomination, and the party is toast.

IMO, only if he wins the general, too, and then it's a different kind of toast.

If Trump wins the nomination and there aren't shenanigans (like a bitter contested convention and a subsequent high-profile GOP split), and then loses the general election, the party's basically back where it was. Which is a party with a strong hold on offices from municipalities to state legislatures to the U.S. Congress with a pretty strong bench. Yes, it still has the issue of another potential clown car in 2020, but theoretically it can solve a lot of that by overhauling its nomination process.

If Trump wins the nomination and the general, however, it's much worse for the GOP. First, Trump becomes the de facto leader of the party, because the President always is. Second, if the GOP in Congress can't work well with him, then we get another 4 years of lack of governance & civil war, which really hurts the brand. Which leads me to this point:

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What is Rubio's argument in a contested convention?

Originally Posted by Solecismic

As someone who doesn't like Trump, I think Kasich is the only viable candidate for a contested convention.

But I worry about the millions of voters Trump is inspiring.

I was listening to NPR this morning and they had Austin Barbour on (Haley Barbour's son, ran Rick Perry's campaign), and one thing he said is that a problem the GOP have is that they need to show they can actually govern. When I think about that statement, and Trump's support, and this piece by 538 (Republican Voters Kind Of Hate All Their Choices | FiveThirtyEight) it helps explain a lot:

The GOP Senators in this race have had a problem in that they are a high profile part of this inability to govern. Sure, they have support from true believers (Cruz) or the Establishment (Rubio, more on that below), but you can tell there's an undercurrent that would like someone who's actually governed, which is what Kasich is still living on. Of course, you could ask why then Bush, Walker, Jindal, Christie and Perry didn't catch on, and my answer would be that no one's really thinking of "governance" before things get real. And things don't get real until people start voting. And there's no better example of people being interested in ideology before things "get real", than Trump's ascendance and consistency since last July.

We've long been wondering where all the GOP voters went who voted for Romney last time around. I think it's quite possible that there's a big chunk of the GOP (those that we might call "moderate") who simply can't see any of these candidates as people who can actually govern, and they're staying home.

And then there are some who believe the image Trump projects as someone who can "get things done".

And some are voting for Kasich.

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Kasich is the most appealing to moderates.

GOP moderates, maybe. Given his clear ultra conservative record, other moderates will steer clear when/if he gets scrutiny.

Originally Posted by digamma

I think I'd argue that Rubio's biggest weakness is his lack of a biggest strength. He's just come across as pretty weak.

Kind of odd, too, given that he was really successful as a legislator in Florida. He's probably an election cycle or two too soon.

Originally Posted by Dutch

He's young...he's a good dude though. Maybe some other time...the experience of all this will make him better.

The knock on Rubio is that he's done exactly jack and shit since he became a U.S. Senator. He doesn't appear to have any desire whatsoever to actually do anything, even to raise money (which everyone must do these days). As I've said before, he's the very example of an empty suit.

I firmly believe that the lift Rubio has gotten from the Establishment is, as Trump points out, that those moneyed/powerful interests view him as someone easily influenced to do their bidding. A Rubio Presidency would be like George W. Bush's Presidency before he finally recognized Cheney & Rumsfeld for who they were, in the sense that Rubio would be surrounded by highly-seasoned GOP regulars all of whom would be advancing the interests that put him, and them, there.

Yes, to an extent every Presidency is like this. I'm saying the extent of it would be complete. And honestly I think some voters can see it.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

IMO, only if he wins the general, too, and then it's a different kind of toast.

If Trump wins the nomination and there aren't shenanigans (like a bitter contested convention and a subsequent high-profile GOP split), and then loses the general election, the party's basically back where it was. Which is a party with a strong hold on offices from municipalities to state legislatures to the U.S. Congress with a pretty strong bench. Yes, it still has the issue of another potential clown car in 2020, but theoretically it can solve a lot of that by overhauling its nomination process.

I think you just skipped over the 3.5-month circus of the campaign.

Let me flesh out my comment there. Pretty much every...single....Republican who holds national office will be badgered by the press to go on the record as for or against Trump. Some have already gone on the record as being against, and unquestionably a significant number will. And if Trump loses, on the morning of November 9th, the narrative from the Trump supporters will be that the only reason he lost is because for the first time in history, the party sabotaged its own nominee, over the will of the people.

Let's also not forget that Trump isn't just the most popular candidate among Republicans. He's also the most disliked candidate among Republicans. Sure, some percentage of those who dislike him would vote "Anyone But Hillary," but some percentage will not. Yes, Trump supporters are angry, but the anger is also starting to rise in anti-Trump Republicans--a group that also *hates* HRC. If Trump is the nominee and loses to HRC, there's going to be hell to pay for every Republican who said "we need to rally around our nominee." As much as Trump supporters would blame a Trump loss on the establishment not rallying around him, the anti-Trump crowd would blame the Trump supporters and the politicians who did rally around him for not forcing him out of the nomination in the first place.

In either case, we're talking about at minimum a de facto party split, if not an actual one. It seems to me that the perfect storm is brewing here for the party, and the only way to head it off is to go to the convention with someone else having more delegates than Trump.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Let me flesh out my comment there. Pretty much every...single....Republican who holds national office will be badgered by the press to go on the record as for or against Trump.

This is already aflame here in Maryland. Our current Governor (R) won in a blue state by sticking to a narrow range of issues -- taxes and pro-businesses. He deliberately stayed away from social issues, etc (those are not winners for him here).

It's a big wave right now... Dems pressuring him to take a formal stand on Trump. That's become a stand-alone issue. (Our Gov became very chummy with C Christie during his campaign, and that link has accelerated these flames)

[flere-imsaho]

I honestly hadn't thought of that, Ben & QS. Good points.

As a Democrat, of course, I think that's awesome.

[albionmoonlight]

So, let's say it does go to a contested convention. And let's also say that for various game theory reasons none of the four currently running will be able to broker a majority.

Who are some names that could be possible as compromise candidates out of the blue?

Romney
Ryan
Eric Cantor
Chris Christie
Nikki Haley

Those are the names that come to mind right off. Who else might we be missing? I know that this is really speculative stuff, but who thought that in mid-March I could post something like this semi-seriously.

(Relatedly, I heard that there may be some real logistical issues with a contested convention that goes on beyond the budgeted time. Because the conventions have become made-for-TV coronations, the parties reserve meeting space/hotel rooms/flights/etc. accordingly. Extending the convention even one day to accommodate non-symbolic voting and negotiation will mean that a lot of the delegates may not have places to stay, etc. because the hotels will be ready for the next events. At a minimum, there will be non-insignificant expenses related to change fees and the like for extending the convention. So, even if the convention is contested, there will be real world pressures to try and keep things done by the prior deadlines).

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I honestly hadn't thought of that, Ben & QS. Good points.

As a Democrat, of course, I think that's awesome.

It's good for the Republicans as well. This party has been a clusterfu%# over the last 8-10 years. I'm a Republican who harbors a great amount of disdain for the current party leadership. Let the religious right jump off the ship and form their own party. I'm tired of them forcing their beliefs into the political process. They look as stupid as the preachers in Salem a few hundred years ago right now. Cruz looks and acts like Jimmy Swaggart in a politician's suit. Antiquated belief systems that don't match the clear laws that are being rightly formed by our courts. No thanks.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

It's good for the Republicans as well. This party has been a clusterfu%# over the last 8-10 years. I'm a Republican who harbors a great amount of disdain for the current party leadership. Let the religious right jump off the ship and form their own party. I'm tired of them forcing their beliefs into the political process. They look as stupid as the preachers in Salem a few hundred years ago right now. Cruz looks and acts like Jimmy Swaggart in a politician's suit. Antiquated belief systems that don't match the clear laws that are being rightly formed by our courts. No thanks.

This. If you are a current GOP leader/media member, you care about the health of the party over the next 10 years. You worked really hard to get to that point, and this is the decade where you are supposed to be reaping the rewards of being a major player in a major party. Spending that decade in the wilderness is not appealing. Hence the panic.

But if you are a conservative American who cares more about having a viable intellectual conservative party in America for the benefit of your kids and grandkids, then you might be very willing to sacrifice the next ten years if it means that a better, stronger, awesomer party rises from the ashes. You can afford to take a long view in the way that, say, a conservative columnist might be too selfish to take.

[JPhillips]

The problem for the GOP is that my wealthy friend here in Newburgh that's an old-school rock-ribbed Republican and my high school friends that are angry conservatives(they'd never self identify as GOP) don't belong in the same party. Since Reagan they've been lucky to make it work, but eventually the ideological and temperament differences are too much to keep things together.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

The problem for the GOP is that my wealthy friend here in Newburgh that's an old-school rock-ribbed Republican and my high school friends that are angry conservatives(they'd never self identify as GOP) don't belong in the same party. Since Reagan they've been lucky to make it work, but eventually the ideological and temperament differences are too much to keep things together.

You know, now that I think about it my political affiliations have been partially about beliefs, but maybe just as much if not more about who I want to avoid associating with.

When I was younger I would see Sharpton and Farrakhan, hippies and potheads, over-the-top pride parades, and inner-city and union corruption and think yeah - it's possible Democrats aren't my kind of people (despite my parents both voting D).

More recently I've been realizing that I have some "ideological and temperament differences" with the other side too. That, or the differences are just becoming harder to ignore.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Then run a more moderate candidate in 2020. Any other path, and it sure looks like the party is toast.

If it's going the route you suggest, it should be toast, as it serves no meaningful purpose. Choosing between liberal & a little less liberal isn't worth a damn.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

More recently I've been realizing that I have some "ideological and temperament differences" with the other side too. That, or the differences are just becoming harder to ignore.

Or it could just be that you're re-thinking things now that you're get-off-my-lawn-you-whippersnappers old.

Young, excited people just make me tired. And make me want to slap them/tell them to shut the fuck up and go to sleep.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I honestly hadn't thought of that, Ben & QS. Good points.

As a Democrat, of course, I think that's awesome.

I would pull a Ben Carson..."I'm for the same thing as the people and will endorse our parties nominee."

Basically, plead the 5th...

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

If it's going the route you suggest, it should be toast, as it serves no meaningful purpose. Choosing between liberal & a little less liberal isn't worth a damn.

We are teetering on the verge of a single party for the executive branch as is. I dont see a scenario where any party can beat, "I stand for (name your demographic) and to prove it we will give (said demographic) free shit."

The two-party system is about to be relegated to minor political status....until (name your demographic) has a choice in politics.

[revrew]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

So, let's say it does go to a contested convention. And let's also say that for various game theory reasons none of the four currently running will be able to broker a majority.

Who are some names that could be possible as compromise candidates out of the blue?

Romney
Ryan
Eric Cantor
Chris Christie
Nikki Haley

I'm not sure any of this is possible. I've been hearing that the GOP established rules recently that you can't win the nomination at convention unless you've also won 8 states minimum. That means no "surprise" candidate. (It may also mean no Rubio, no Kasich).

Am I misunderstanding? Is anyone else seeing this?

[digamma]

My understanding is that there are only rules around the first ballot. After that it can become a free for all.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

So, let's say it does go to a contested convention. And let's also say that for various game theory reasons none of the four currently running will be able to broker a majority.

Who are some names that could be possible as compromise candidates out of the blue?

Romney
Ryan
Eric Cantor
Chris Christie
Nikki Haley

Those are the names that come to mind right off. Who else might we be missing? I know that this is really speculative stuff, but who thought that in mid-March I could post something like this semi-seriously.

(Relatedly, I heard that there may be some real logistical issues with a contested convention that goes on beyond the budgeted time. Because the conventions have become made-for-TV coronations, the parties reserve meeting space/hotel rooms/flights/etc. accordingly. Extending the convention even one day to accommodate non-symbolic voting and negotiation will mean that a lot of the delegates may not have places to stay, etc. because the hotels will be ready for the next events. At a minimum, there will be non-insignificant expenses related to change fees and the like for extending the convention. So, even if the convention is contested, there will be real world pressures to try and keep things done by the prior deadlines).

The Tea Party wing of the GOP doesn't drink compromise. Hijack the party from their choice and it'll mean President Clinton for eight years. It's pretty much Trump or bust in terms of knocking her off.

Kasich is too milquetoast and Cruz is too prone to bombast to be effective in mobilizing an army of folks to support either of them.