Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Conrad Black Exactly Right: Trump the GOP Nominee
Conrad Black is a bit of a curmudgeon and definitely a contrarian but his analysis this morning of the March 15 primaries is very accurate in all regards and I endorse what he is saying in this NRO article. Here’s a sample:
Those who initially saw the Trump candidacy as an exercise in buffoonery and exhibitionism, and gradually accepted it as an insurgency, now see it as an attempt to hijack and ravish the Republican party and even to hoodwink the entire electorate. The alternative interpretation has been that Donald Trump, though a billionaire, had the genius of expressing public grievances in an Archie Bunker style that mocked political correctness and was popularly seen as plain talk from the only candidate not in any way complicit in the terrible blunders of America’s political class since the end of the Cold War.
And all he did was address the 900-pound gorilla that everyone else studiously avoids (except for Cruz, of course):
Trump alone recognized the significance of a few basic numbers, such as the percentage of Americans who think government officials are largely crooked – which increased between 2000 and 2015 from 30-something percent to 50 to 60 per cent, depending on whether they are Democrats, independents, or Republicans. In the same period, the percentage of Americans who thought the federal government was run by a few big interests increased from about 50 percent to about 70 percent.
And here’s the money quote:
Those collectively responsible for governing the country through the last 20 years, as these ominous levels of public discontent accumulated, showed no apparent recognition of the gathering storm. Marco Rubio, as he graciously departed the race, called it a “tsunami none of us saw coming.” Future historians of American politics will probably be astounded that the political system ignored the 900-pound gorilla of illegal migrants in the country and imagined that such an immense number of unskilled entrants could be tacitly accepted.
And Trump is simply doing an Archie Bunker routine. It’s really that simple:
One of Trump’s talents is to harness the rage and fear of the low-income and marginal groups by his Archie Bunker routine, while maintaining contact with the party’s moderates and the vast center of American politics by having relatively uncontroversial views of most issues except illegal and Muslim immigration.
And here’s how he will clinch the deal:
There is no reason to doubt that Trump can get 54 percent of the remaining delegates now that he has been polling over 40 percent regularly before it even became a three-candidate race. If Cruz withdrew in favor of Kasich, it would, as I wrote last week, be possible to give Trump a run for it, but even that would not work, and none of it will happen. If he runs into problems, Trump can trade the vice-presidential nomination for a final push of delegates.
And here’s the finale:
He’s not complicit in the failures of the last 20 years and he is new to politics, yet has huger name recognition. There is no more mud to throw at Trump and Clinton has not begun to answer for her long record of untruthfulness, evasion, cynical speech-making for exorbitant fees, and influence-peddling through the Clinton Foundation while she was secretary of state, even if she avoids indictment on Emailgate.
It is a bizarre turn and a startling gamble, but the great office is seeking Donald J. Trump, and will probably find him; he’s hard to miss.
It’s over: Trump has the nomination. I’m for Cruz but I’m ready to face the fact that Trump has it in the bag.
Published in Politics
The article is nonsensical. How can Conrad Black say that Trump is so great because he taps into what people want – and then he says that on all the issues, Trump will, of course, become reasonable.
What data does he have to support the notion that Trump tends toward reasonableness?
And his assumptions that Trump has seen the negative press is also nonsense. The media gave us Donald Trump, just a they gave us John McCain and Mitt Romney. And for one simple reason: they know the Democrat should be able to win.
I think you’re probably right, Larry, barring a miracle. Black makes good arguments, especially that Trump is not complicit in the failures of the last 20 years. Many of us are just refusing to see the writing on the wall, because it seems like such a betrayal of our values. And indeed it is.
Archie Bunker was the cantankerous racist that was always shown the error of his ways. I’ll accept the cantankerous racist part, but Trump has never seen the error of his ways. Trump is above error and never admits any. He’s the Eric Cartman of politics – a thoroughly self centered and potentially evil person.
This sentence proves that Lord Black is not writing from a position that even approximates reality.
He’s not the nominee.
He may be the most likely nominee, but that’s not the same.
While there’s hope of stopping him, everyone who cares about the civil society and limited government should resist him with everything in his or her power.
And that includes rejecting fatalism.
It ain’t over till the fat lady sings, and she has not yet sounded a note. Trump may well get the nomination, but Cruz still has a host — now that Rubio is out.
If Trump is the nominee, we are apt to get annihilated in November, to lose the Senate, and perhaps even the House. I do not deny the man’s skills, and I would assert that the leadership of the Republican party — in the House, the Senate, and the states — is largely responsible for this mess. But we need to face the fact that it is a godawful mess. Maybe Cruz can save us from the worst.
I came to the conclusion that Trump was expressing real concerns about two months ago. Look, he vanquished the supposed superstar Republican primary field. There is clearly something we are not doing to address the electorate’s concerns. Now we either try to figure out the phenomena and address it or we stay locked in our ideological boxes. Do we want a majority party – something we haven’t had since Reagan when the last time Republicans were able to draw conservative Democrats – or do we wallow in our ideological purity as Hillary wins the presidency?
Larry, it’s just coincidence that the photo illustrating this post makes Trump look like he’s wearing an American flag dunce cap?
Though I don’t doubt Clinton has a few accusations to make that Republicans did not, I agree that Trump’s negatives are already out in the open. The notion that Clinton is sitting on opposition research that will destroy Trump is laughable. If anything can make more voters dislike Trump, it is well-told stories rather than facts.
And Trump is unlikely to sit meekly and accept the blows while pointing to fiscal strategies like a typical Republican. He will make counter-accusations. He will lie boldly making people doubt their own memories. He will distract with theatrics. In short, he has all the unethical advantages of a Democrat, including a leftwing media that hates Clinton.
He could win. Whether or not that’s good news is another debate.
Speaking for myself, I want to win a majority back to our founding principles and values. It’s going to be a long hard slog, but we have to try.
If we cede our party to Trump and his ilk, we’re looking at the complete dissolution of the American experiment.
Trump gave heavily to the Democrats, so yes, he’s complicit in the failures of the past 20 years.
Not that such details matter to anyone anymore.
Donald Trump may end up being the Republican nominee but he will never be the choice of conservatives because he simply isn’t one and – pace his fans on the right – no amount of head-tilting and squinting will ever make him one.
I stick by a thought I’ve posted in the past: If Trump is the Republican candidate for POTUS it’s Hillary in a landslide she doesn’t deserve.
Conrad Black is 100% correct about this. The reality-challenged in this election have been consistently shown to be the conservatives who think a conservative candidate can win this year. The defections from the Democratic Party are the most under-discussed story of this cycle. The Republican electorate is much bigger than ever before and therefore much less conservative.
It’s not an indictment of conservatism. It’s just reality. Those Republicans voting for Kasich don’t move to Cruz when Kasich leaves, they move to Trump. Those conservatives voting for Cruz would back Kasich if Cruz left.
I have become a bit dismayed over the course of this election watching conservatives who are desperate for their own candidate fail to acknowledge some simple facts about where this electorate is.
It’s not that Trump isn’t ideologically pure enough; rather, it’s that he shares absolutely none of our values or principles. We might as well nominate Hillary or any other Democrat as the Republican candidate.
All of the available evidence from polling shows Cruz and Kasich able to beat Hilary in a general. Trump loses in an epic landslide.
Yeah, but she’s warming up.
Also, Cruz picked a bad time for his first grievous tactical blunder: moving resources into Florida and Ohio after Super Tuesday to try to push Rubio and Kasich out. He should’ve focused on the states he clearly could’ve won: Missouri and North Carolina.
That’s exactly right. We sit here and complain “How can Americans vote for Trump – it’s really a sign of how their values have sunk so low.”
But then we analyze the general election by saying “Trump cannot win because his values are so out of line with the American public.”
News flash – the American public elected Bill Clinton twice and Barrack Obama twice. Conservative values are not really all that important to them.
Trump can win big time in 2016 America precisely because we have been right for years – the values of the country have moved significantly away from conservative values.
I guess you prefer to lose with your ideological purity. Losing gets nothing. In fact letting Hillary win gets you less than nothing, since her policies, her executive orders, and her SCOTUS appointments will work contrary to your ideology.
Frankly that’s Trump derangement syndrome. As I asked in Claire’s post – which people should read through – do you believe in the constitution? I went on to say:
Ah, got it. So the argument is, Republicans should not nominate a conservative this year.
OK.
I was simply talking about the Republican primary. Right now, Cruz has 406 delegates and has won 9 states. Kasich has 142 delegates and has won 1 state (his home state that gave him nearly half his delegates). It simply a fact that Cruz has a slim mathematical chance to win the nomination, Kasich doesn’t. If my math is correct, Kasich would have to win EVERY SINGLE remaining delegate to get to 1236, which simply is not possible.
Cruz and Trump are the two anti-establishment candidates in this election. If Cruz drops out, a majority of his votes go to Trump, not Kasich. Kasich is more establishment than Rubio. If Rubio was still in the race, the vast majority of Kasich supporters would go to Rubio, but since he is out they would mostly go to Cruz.
You have to divorce yourself greatly from reality to say the way to stop Trump from getting the Republican nomination is for Cruz to drop out and back Kasich.
Manny, we see how well that paper barrier has constrained the current occupant of the oval office. Those power mad sycophants we’ve been grumbling about for years will give him everything he wants. When he issues his first illegal and immoral order to our troops and there is no resistance except from the troops themselves we’ll know our great experiment in self government is coming to violent conclusion.
He’s gone on record to stop illegal immigration, end sanctuary cities, appoint a Scalia duplicate, be forceful in our foreign policy interactions without getting our military hung up, be roughly pro-life, be strong on the second amendment, be strongly anti crime, and has a Larry Kudlow approved tax plan, the best of all the conservative candidates.
That’s pretty conservative. Trump doesn’t repeat policy frequently on the stump, either because he’s not a politician or sees that sort of stuff as going over people’s heads, but he has clearly staked conservative positions.
Mark Steyn predicted this scenario years ago. He pointed out that in Europe the “Right” party is actually Left but not quite so far Left; that even the supposed right-wing parties support the nanny state and subscribe to many modern, politically correct philosophies. Steyn then pointed out that the Republican party increasingly performs a similar role, representing only a watered-down version of Democrats’ priorities.
Remember when Newt Gingrich, the GOP’s legislative powerhouse, sat with Nancy Pelosi in a commercial to pitch global warming policies? Noticed how many Republican voters now reject traditional Christian ideas about sexuality, family roles, social responsibilities, and the meaning of individual liberty? How many have surrendered to the seeming inevitability of big central government and only seek to lower taxes slightly, soften regulations slightly, and basically hold the reins loose until the next Democratic administration tightens government’s influence while adding another layer of tyranny?
This is how history unfolds. Like tectonic plates in anticipation of an earthquake, the stress of competing forces builds gradually until some violent shock moves the foundations.
Which he as flip flopped on.
And elsewhere indicated otherwise.
And target women and children. Bomb the oil and take the oil. And last week discussed the need to send in ground troops.
And for much longer was pro-abortion, even partial birth abortion.
Um, is there a candidate who isn’t anti-crime?
That would explode the deficit and tilt the tax code in an even more progressive direction.
No, its not.
He has demonstrated multiple times that he doesn’t even know the contents of his own policies – perhaps that’s why he avoids it.
Absolute nonsense. For once lets not clever ourselves into a defeat. Get behind Cruz and stick to it, and if necessary nominate him in the convention. If all else fails, get a court nominee in blood. The rest we can live with.
Yes, but he’s a proven liar. So his promises don’t mean much.
I trust him to act in his own perception of self-interest. If Republican leaders are wise, they will play to his ego by finding where their interests connect and providing opportunities for flattering press.
But that assumes they can overcome the quandary of how to support Trump during the main election without abandoning all the Republican voters who rejected Trump.
Snake oil. He believes none of it.
A. It’s not about “ideological purity” it’s about fundamental principles and values.
B. I think those principles and values the only real hope for saving the republic. So, I mean to stand for them and fight for them, come what may.
C. As many others have pointed out, all indications are that Trump will lose to Hillary.
D. There’s nothing deranged about refusing to support Trump, who represents the practical repudiation of everything I think worth cherishing about America.
Correct, because a conservative cannot win. Again, its not a judgment on conservatism. It’s a view of the electorate who will vote this year. Nominate the most conservative candidate who can win. Guess what, we are. With heavy emphasis on the “can win” side and just a very small taste of the “conservative” side of that equation.
Fair point. My general point stands though, even if the math is off – Kasich voters are more likely potential Trump voters. Cruz voters are more likely potential Kasich voters.
Cruz is only anti-establishment if you already like Ted Cruz and are a conservative. If not, then he is the establishment. You would have to look at Cruz with an ideological lens and care about his stance in a budget deal in Congress to think he is anti-establishment. If you do see the world that way, you already like Cruz. For the hard-core anti-establishment voter (and there are more of them this cycle), a sitting Senator who built a career in government who is an ideological conservative is the establishment. They don’t care about who is fighting whom in Washington.
We’re really down to the Hail Mary play on this.
I suspect trump will get to the convention with less than the 1273 required delegates……then who the heck knows what happens. I never thought we would have a real convention in the modern era, but of course who knew that the 2000 election would come down to 1000 votes in florida.