The Trump Prisoner’s Dilemma

 

Alexandra Petri at the Washington Post sums it up. “If Candidate A and Candidate B are really in it to win it,” she writes, “Congratulations, Nominee Donald!”

Screen Shot 2016-03-02 at 06.24.51

After Marco’s comparatively poor showing, it seems to me he’s the one who should drop out. This pains me, because I like him more than Cruz. Heavy stress on “like,” I don’t necessarily have exceedingly good arguments for preferring him. I just find his a much more appealing personality. But I thought he’d do better in the general, and after today, it looks as if I may have been, again, wrong. Numbers are numbers. Cruz has excelled him in delivering the delegates.

That said, Texas is his home state, leaving just enough uncertainty that Marco may be able to convince himself not to believe the numbers yet.

I reckon one of these men must drop out now, because if they wait until more data comes in, they’ll be waiting too long. I hate to say it, but looks like it should be Marco.

Anyone disagree?

 

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

There are 212 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Mike LaRoche: I’m referring to the notion that the independent/moderate swing voters are the key to winning the election. Romney won those voters in 2012 and lost resoundingly.

    Ok, I’m dubious of that claim, but if it’s true, what’s Trump’s path to victory then?  If he doesn’t win independent/swing voters, and a significant portion of conservatives carry through with our #NoTrump pledge not to vote for him, then how on Earth is he supposed to beat Hillary?

    • #211
  2. Could Be Anyone Inactive
    Could Be Anyone
    @CouldBeAnyone

    Mike LaRoche:

    Joseph Stanko:

    Mike LaRoche: 2012 called. It wants its faulty premises back.

    No idea what that means, afraid you’ll have to spell it out for me.

    I’m referring to the notion that the independent/moderate swing voters are the key to winning the election. Romney won those voters in 2012 and lost resoundingly.

    He also got out more Republicans (percentage wise) than Barack did Democrats (percentage wise) and he still lost. That’s because at the time 38% of the electorate were registered Democrats, 32% were registered Republican, and 29% were registered independent (Romney only got 50% compared to 45% from Barack; so not a resounding margin).

    Romney did not exactly mess up in any real sense but from the fact that Barack had a larger base from which to rely and his racial bone fides got the Democrat base to come out in numbers equal to that of the Republicans and defeat Romney by only 4% (about 5 million votes).

    Romney did not exactly fail to get Republicans out to vote (the base was there). What erks some is that the Democrats have a larger base. So they get more votes out for the same percentage. The only actual solution is what Stanko said and that is to get more independents (or turn independents into Republicans in a truly conservative sense, not in label only otherwise you bring in more possible moderate voters to influence our primaries).

    • #212
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.