It Isn’t Just the Presidency at Stake

 

Screen Shot 2016-02-24 at 7.57.26 AMI’ve seen it posted in various places that establishment GOP types are more afraid of Cruz than Trump. Having spent the last several days at meetings that were nothing but establishment GOP, I can report that is absolutely backwards. They don’t fear Trump because they think he will win; they fear him as the GOP nominee because they don’t see how can possibly avoid losing.

Of the remaining candidates, the establishment likes Rubio best, because they believe he has the greatest chance of winning, as he is personally likeable and has a positive message that could appeal beyond the base.  Cruz is not liked by the establishment, but all recognize that he is smart and conservative. They believe they would have a tough time winning the general election were he the nominee – they worry that his appeal is now narrowed to only the most conservative/evangelical voters and so won’t have broad enough support — but they think they could win.

Why the focus on winning? Because whichever party prevails in the presidency will likely control of the Senate and, by extension, the balance on the Supreme Court.

Thus, Trump inspires despair. At a personal level, a lot of people in that world tell me they have done business with him, know him, and don’t like or trust him. Several say they think about writing about their experiences, but expect that if they do there will immediately be a harassing letter from his attorneys initiating a lawsuit, and so stay quiet. But they are deeply concerned about what the Democrats’ attack ads will say, and worry that many of Trump’s current enthusiasts will think — too late — “Oh, I didn’t know that. I don’t like that”.

Worse, they don’t believe Trump means what he says, and believe he will say one thing one day, the opposite the next — whatever suits the moment — so they don’t trust that his conservative pronouncements will stick when no longer expedient, and worry that he may start a trade war (think Smoot-Hawley tariffs and the resulting Great Depression).

But their greatest concern is that if Trump is the GOP nominee, they don’t see how he can win; his negatives are higher even than Hillary’s. If the top of the GOP presidential ticket loses, they know that almost certainly means senators running in states the GOP nominee loses will also lose, and the Democrats will take the Senate. And if the Democrats take the Senate (and there are more than enough vulnerable GOP senators to do so), that means Obama’s disastrous and debilitating policies like Obamacare and Dodd-Frank become permanent, a culture of dependency grows, the debt continues to spiral, and we’re looking at a court that for a generation won’t follow the constitution or the law but what it “reasonably knows” ought to be the law.

So here is their calculus: If you are eager enough to kick the SOB’s out of DC that you’ll vote for Trump, then you ought to be prepared come January to live with a Democrat in the White House, Sen. Chuck Schumer as majority leader, and Scalia’s conservative seat filled with someone far to the left, tipping the Court’s balance for a generation.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 75 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    Tyler Boliver:There is little of Trump’s polices to co-op. What are we suddenly going to become anti-capitalism, anti-constitutionalism, pro Obama mandate, pro planned parenthood, pro “Bush lied people died” conspiracy, pro abortion supporting judiciary? The only positive people point to is him being strongly “anti illegal”, although I doubt that since his sons keep saying how his father is going to let them back in after they leave. So we can add support for touchback amnesty to the list of things we will not support from Trump.

    There comes a point where you need to plant your flag, and refuse to cross a line. After Trump inevitably fails (either by losing, or by winning and implementing his failing policies) it will be our job to tear him down once again. This is not a time to compromise our ideals, it’s time to go after a loud mouth demagogue.

    I don’t believe they are looking into anti-capitalists policies (they’d be with Bernie or Hilary if they were). Some are unreasonable ‘fans’ of his – unwilling to listen, others see that their big issues being scoffed at and disregarded. Think of the party as a power sharing arrangement – what are they getting out of the current arrangement? You need them, you aren’t currently getting them but you refuse to reassure/address their anxieties?

    • #61
  2. Solon Inactive
    Solon
    @Solon

    Columbo:“This GOPe talk is straight out of Rush.”

    Au contraire! That is intellectually lazy and only sounds good as an explanation if one does not wish to defend an utterly failed and unprincipled GOP leadership that has literally “rolled over” to accept not only unConstitutional unilateral Executive Action, but even the astronomical budget deficits offered by the same Executive without the merest of whimpers to challenge it.

    How did Republicans ‘roll over’?  Did they really just accept Obama’s unilateral actions?  What were they supposed to do?  What would a strong GOP congress have looked like?

    • #62
  3. Songwriter Inactive
    Songwriter
    @user_19450

    Dave_L:

    Dave L:

    Welcome, Dave L!

    I now know how to respond if Ricochet ever gets a member that goes by Song-righter.

    • #63
  4. Polyphemus Inactive
    Polyphemus
    @Polyphemus

    BrentB67:

    You are wrong.

    Unassailable logic there. I guess I stand corrected.

    POF, StandOne, and Springfield Armory.

    Someone else mentioned anarcho-capitalist. Does that fit or are you just trolling?  (Nothing wrong with a little bit of fun trolling, btw.  Just wondered)

    Cruz some times. Rubio is the logical extension of the previous three.

    Mmmm. Seems a bit cynical to me. But then, I don’t see immigration as the one and only issue ala Coulter, et al.  Rubio is tarnished a bit but is not a former blue-state Governor who invented Obomneycare or a self-proclaimed cross-aisle-reaching maverick.

    Call me naïve, but I think that there was a trend toward reforming our side and using the pendulum swing moment to roll back much of the Obama damage.

    This is horribly naïve.

    Again with the unassailable logic.

    You think I’m naïve and I think you’re cynical. C’est la vie.

    Perhaps the main difference between us is that I think that this cycle was the last chance for the party to get it right and show lessons learned. If Jeb! got the nomination somehow (or Kasich/Christie) then I would consider the matter settled as you already do. But I saw almost all of the other candidates notably different from the past two cycles and thought that we could finally get it right and start moving things in the right direction. I guess you just think that it was already too late.

    • #64
  5. Solon Inactive
    Solon
    @Solon

    It always seemed to me that the biggest issue to conservative Republicans was abortion.  Then in 2012 it was healthcare, and that was why Romney was so bad.  Now it’s immigration, and that’s why Rubio is so bad.   It seems like Republicans get totally fired up over one issue, and it’s a different one every time.  Is that because times change?  Or is there a tendency on the right to get tripped up over one issue?

    I always feel like I’m late to the party, in the sense that none of these issues are initially at the top of my list.  I listen to conservatives, they usually make a whole lot of sense, and I adjust my thinking (i.e. abortion and healthcare really are important, symbolic issues that deserve attention).  I can also now see why immigration is so important, I just get this sense of deja vu.

    • #65
  6. Dave_L Inactive
    Dave_L
    @Dave-L

    Solon:It always seemed to me that the biggest issue to conservative Republicans was abortion. Then in 2012 it was healthcare, and that was why Romney was so bad. Now it’s immigration, and that’s why Rubio is so bad. It seems like Republicans get totally fired up over one issue, and it’s a different one every time. Is that because times change? Or is there a tendency on the right to get tripped up over one issue?

    Not sure about others, but my priorities definitely change over time, usually as a result of what’s impacting me at the moment.  I agree with the primary issues you identified in 2012 and 2016, including the disconnect between the establishment candidate and those issues.  I don’t think it’s a question of the voters being contrarian to the candidate, but rather a demonstration of the establishment candidate not being responsive to the voters.

    I think your identification of abortion as a major issue is true for social conservatives, and is typically their number one, until something like traditional marriage pops up.

    • #66
  7. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Solon:

    What were they supposed to do? What would a strong GOP congress have looked like?

    At a minimum, and I do mean bare minimum, to have prioritized and fought for concession(s) – for example, at least 2 of the 10 items listed in this article regarding the $1.1 Trillion Omnibus Budget Bill – and especially refraining from including the language which “locks-in” so much of this spending.

    • #67
  8. Tyler Boliver Inactive
    Tyler Boliver
    @Marlowe

    WI Con:

    I don’t believe they are looking into anti-capitalists policies (they’d be with Bernie or Hilary if they were). Some are unreasonable ‘fans’ of his – unwilling to listen, others see that their big issues being scoffed at and disregarded. Think of the party as a power sharing arrangement – what are they getting out of the current arrangement? You need them, you aren’t currently getting them but you refuse to reassure/address their anxieties?

    IF they think putting a 35% tariff is going to solve anything, then no we don’t need them. We need to push his core supporters, who are promoting this nonsense out of the movement. Let’s call them the antithesis to us, the people who call believers in conservatism “cuckservatives”.  We need to fight and destroy them, by pushing them out of polite society once again.

    The everyday Trump voter is looking for strength and nothing more, that’s much easier to appeal to, after we’ve reclaimed the polices that actually work in the real world. Right now though we have to destroy the ideological roots of his movement. The people promoting the issues I listed above. That is what this fight is over.

    Politics is all about smaller dedicated groups getting large groups to move in their direction. The quickest away to end a challenger, is to destroy that core base. That is our goal from now until we have pushed them back out of the mainstream again.

    • #68
  9. Luke Thatcher
    Luke
    @Luke

    BrentB67:…

    If all the establishment you met with has to offer is “yeah, but the other guy is worse” be prepared for defeat.

    Is this not the “WOLF” which the party has been crying for so long?

    • #69
  10. Luke Thatcher
    Luke
    @Luke

    Solon: How did Republicans ‘roll over’? Did they really just accept Obama’s unilateral actions? What were they supposed to do? What would a strong GOP congress have looked like?

    I think a strong Congress would have shut down the government. I think also, that while they lamented the Iran deal they would have passed a resolution declaring the Senate’s purview over the deal. Maybe a strong congress would have refused to fund the unconstitutional daca, and dapa.

    A strong Congress would check an overreaching executive, instead of funding every last penny of it.

    Something like that. But, then again, I don’t understand how this actually works. I’m just one of the guys who believed that McConnell would use the power of the purse like he promised.

    My bad.

    • #70
  11. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    Tyler Boliver:IF they think putting a 35% tariff is going to solve anything, then no we don’t need them. We need to push his core supporters, who are promoting this nonsense out of the movement. Let’s call them the antithesis to us, the people who call believers in conservatism “cuckservatives”. We need to fight and destroy them, by pushing them out of polite society once again.

    The everyday Trump voter is looking for strength and nothing more, that’s much easier to appeal to, after we’ve reclaimed the polices that actually work in the real world. Right now though we have to destroy the ideological roots of his movement. The people promoting the issues I listed above. That is what this fight is over.

    Politics is all about smaller dedicated groups getting large groups to move in their direction. The quickest away to end a challenger, is to destroy that core base. That is our goal from now until we have pushed them back out of the mainstream again.

    Look, I’m not a Trump guy but they obviously  don’t see existing policies of unfettered trade and immigration working for them. You will most likely lose both the primary and the general without them. For all the talk about us Cruz fans as demanding ideological purity and being uncompromising, the party grandees refuse to share power (compromise/not demanding the entire loaf) – you are going to lose without making a pitch to them.

    • #71
  12. Solon Inactive
    Solon
    @Solon

    Luke:

    Solon: How did Republicans ‘roll over’? Did they really just accept Obama’s unilateral actions? What were they supposed to do? What would a strong GOP congress have looked like?

    I think a strong Congress would have shut down the government.

    That’s what I thought.  Interesting, maybe that would have been better.  As I saw it, that was their only card to play.

    A strong Congress would check an overreaching executive, instead of funding every last penny of it.

    Did they really fund every last penny of Obama’s programs?  That’s not what I understood.

    • #72
  13. Luke Thatcher
    Luke
    @Luke

    Solon: Did they really fund every last penny of Obama’s programs? That’s not what I understood.

    In the case of daca, My understanding is that the House passed a bill to defund daca, but it didn’t pass in the Senate.

    • #73
  14. Richard Rummelhart Inactive
    Richard Rummelhart
    @RichardRummelhart

    Excellent Column!!!!  Look on the bright side.  If Trump gets the nomination members of the party who are closer to being liberals than conservatives can change the party’s symbol to a Burro.  The Burro represents Democrat Lite and is not an editorial comment about Donald Trump.

    • #74
  15. Saint Augustine Member
    Saint Augustine
    @SaintAugustine

    Tyler Boliver:

    It’s partially all our fault, since we no longer talk about issues in a conservative way anymore. It’s mostly the fault of Trump’s supporters though, who simply want to see a strong man destroy everything. They want their Mussolini, their “Obama”, now they got him.

    Surely there’s more blame than that to spread around.  It’s also Trump‘s fault and the Democrats’ fault.

    • #75
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.