How Trump Turned Cruz into the Establishment Candidate

 

Donald Trump NYDonald Trump’s landslide victory in the New York GOP primary was a game-changer. It ended his Wisconsin slump and set the stage for an across-the-board sweep next Tuesday in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut, and Rhode Island.

Trump’s vote count exceeded his pre-primary polling average by nearly 10 percentage points. Perhaps most important, the win gave him 89 more delegates for the RNC July convention.

So Trump is now the prohibitive favorite to win the GOP nomination — although there is still much dispute about this. But I believe, even if he comes up short of a majority 1,237 delegates, he will still get a first-ballot victory. There will be roughly 190 uncommitted delegates at the Cleveland convention. And Trump, with his art of the deal, can be very persuasive.

But what hasn’t gotten enough attention following New York is how Trump did it, and how it will enhance his position in the rest of the primaries. My theory is this: Trump cleverly turned the tables against Ted Cruz in regard to the nationwide delegate fight, especially in Colorado. Trump outflanked Cruz.

By calling the delegate-selection process “rigged,” and arguing that Colorado had an election without voters, Trump turned a loss into a victory. Why? Because he put Cruz in the unenviable position of defending the status quo delegate-selection process.

Now, Cruz played by the rules in Colorado and elsewhere. And Trump was caught flat-footed, and to some extent was embarrassed by his own weak delegate-gathering team.

However, and this is the key point, Cruz argued time and again that the rules were the rules and that he simply played by them. And as Trump continuously attacked the RNC rules as being undemocratic, disenfranchising to voters, and creatures of out-of-touch Republican-party regulars, he put Cruz in the position of backing the establishment. A bad place for Cruz.

Moreover, in attacking the delegate process, Trump was able to restore and even enhance his position as the anti-establishment outsider. The agent of change. That’s precisely what GOP voters favor.

Now, Colorado was a bad delegate story to begin with. A planned direct primary vote was cancelled. But a friend relates the disturbing story of his moderate Republican brother who owns a small railroad and who caucused for Trump. Trump won that local caucus by 60 percent. But as the process moved up to the county level, then the congressional district level, and finally the state level, Trump got zero delegates.

At a minimum, this process was wacky, convoluted, and opaque. At its worst, it was rigged against GOP voters.

Other states have produced similar horror stories. And Pennsylvania may be positioned to deliver the most ridiculous. Whoever wins the direct Pennsylvania primary next Tuesday gets only 17 out of 71 delegates. So no matter who wins, 50-something delegates will still be uncommitted. That’s crazy.

Actually, I think the whole GOP selection process is crazy. Why not a simple, direct, winner-take-all primary election? The person with the most votes gets all the delegates. Nice and simple.

RNC chair Reince Priebus might want to think about this progressive democratic reform. After 100 years or so, it’s time for a change.

But back to the Trump New York win. Trump trashed the current delegate system while Cruz defended it. It was bad politics for Mr. Cruz.

And Trump expanded his critique into a full-blown issues platform. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, five days before the New York primary, Trump argued that the old order, the governing elite, the establishment, and the special-interest donors, consultants, pollsters, and pundits are the same people “who were wrong on taxes, on the size of government, on trade, on immigration, on foreign policy.”

In very clear terms Trump connected Cruz with exactly those establishmentarian elites who have bred so much anger and resentment in Republicans everywhere.

Trump completely outflanked Cruz while turning a process issue into a policy issue. The more Cruz defended the delegate process, the more Trump hammered away at his new theme that Cruz is defending the elite old order. In that Journal op-ed, Trump charged that Cruz is actually a member of the very “Washington cartel” that Cruz criticizes.

And like other state primaries, the New York exit polls showed that 88 percent of voters were either dissatisfied or angry at government, while 64 percent wanted a president who was outside the political establishment.

Much of this may be unfair to Cruz’s issue positions and beliefs. But the distinguished senator, in his defense of the status quo delegate process, made a serious strategic error. Heading into yet another Super Tuesday, Trump is making sure that the Cruz error is compounded and magnified.

By turning delegate caucus defeats into an overall message victory, Trump has given himself a yuge leg up for the GOP nomination.

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 37 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Martel Inactive
    Martel
    @Martel

    Paul A. Rahe:Technically, you are correct. But Kudlow’s enthusiasm for Trump is pretty obvious, and the post begs a question. If unadulterated democracy produces a Trump, is unadulterated democracy a good thing? The logic of Kudlow’s argument would suggest that — given the results of the first 1932 Reichstag election in Germany — no one should have scrambled to prevent him from becoming Chancellor.

    I’ve no idea Kudlow’s overall Trump proclivities, but this article is a relatively straightforward analysis of a political maneuver.

    I sympathize with wondering if unadulterated democracy is wise, but again, this article was a mere description of whether Trump’s successfully navigating the system we have, not whether its the best system or not.

    I do not mean to deny that popular support is an argument. I do mean to suggest that it is not the only argument. If Kudlow were to set aside his enthusiasm for the man (which I consider ill-placed), he would, I suspect, grant my point. Then he would have to make the argument that Trump is not only popular but genuinely choiceworthy.

    I agree that popularity is merely one factor, but I don’t see Kudlow making the case that it’s all that matters (at least not in this article).

    • #31
  2. Martel Inactive
    Martel
    @Martel

    Josh Farnsworth:The stakes are a little high to give Trump credit for anything, don’t you think? I think another comment pointed out, correctly, that the right railed against Clinton’s ability to spin the truth rather than praising it. And rightly so. Likewise, I don’t find Trump’s obfuscation, dodging, and ability to delude the uninformed as admirable in any way. And neither should Mr. Kudlow, if he is a conservative.

    The stakes were pretty high in the Lewinsky mess, but recognizing (and even admitting out loud) how masterfully Clinton and his operatives handled it might have been a good idea.

    When faced with a political technique we don’t like, we tend to spend too much time emphasizing its legitimacy or morality and not enough recognizing that however awful it might be, it’s being used and used effectively.  “He shouldn’t do that” has its place, but so does “even though he shouldn’t do it, he is, so how are we doing to counter it?”

    The “ability to delude the uninformed” may not be “admirable”, but it works, and perfectly valid complaints about how it shouldn’t be this way don’t change that.  But we seem to prefer lashing out against reality more than recognizing and adapting to it.

    The only way we’ll ever get things to be how we want is to first see how they truly are.  Less focus on should or shouldn’t, a bit more on what is.

    • #32
  3. TKC1101 Member
    TKC1101
    @

    A-Squared: Can we call him “Lying Donald” now?

    Good idea. Call Fox and see if you can get some airtime with that.

    • #33
  4. TKC1101 Member
    TKC1101
    @

    The Question: Also, it must be noted, Trump will never win New York in the general election. Hillary got more than twice as many votes as Trump. Bernie, although beat by Hillary comfortably, also beat Trump comfortably. The idea that the New York primary establishes that Trump should be our nominee is baseless.

    That is the conventional wisdom. Do remember that independents were not allowed to vote, and the upstate polling places only opened from noon to six to choke down Bernie’s numbers. New York is winnable unless Hillary suddenly becomes a much better candidate.

    • #34
  5. A-Squared Inactive
    A-Squared
    @ASquared

    TKC1101:

    Good idea. Call Fox and see if you can get some airtime with that.

    Meh.  Fox is all in on the Trump train, just like you.

    • #35
  6. FX Meaney Inactive
    FX Meaney
    @FXMeaney

    Shameful that Larry Kudlow is expressing glee that Trump was able with his friendly media help to make a perfectly legitimate Cruz victory by working hard something sleazy and seemingly illegal.  I thought better of Kudlow before this, but his embrace of the low tactics of the unprincipled Trump is too much.

    • #36
  7. Larry3435 Inactive
    Larry3435
    @Larry3435

    A-Squared:

    Larry Kudlow: However, and this is the key point, Cruz argued time and again that the rules were the rules and that he simply played by them. And as Trump continuously attacked the RNC rules as being undemocratic, disenfranchising to voters, and creatures of out-of-touch Republican-party regulars, he put Cruz in the position of backing the establishment.

    In other words, Trump lied.

    Got it.

    Can we call him “Lying Donald” now?

    I like “Duplicitous Donald” or “Double-dealing Donald” or “Dishonest Donald.”

    • #37
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.