What if he Actually Wins?

 

One of the constants of the political coverage this last year has been “Donald Trump cannot win because… ” Anyone who offered a scenario contrary to the cited “because” was self-delusional, a wishful thinker, or just plain stupid. And through it all, Trump just kept advancing, advancing, and advancing right through to the nomination. The conventional wisdom may still hold and he may yet lose in a landslide in November. But what if he does win? What if the conventional wisdom is actually a conventional delusion?

There will be plenty of theories to be sure. It was a year of historically horrible candidates. The vote was too fractured. Too many of this or that faction stayed home. Too many of this or that faction showed up. But like the financial commercials say, past results should never be seen as a guarantee of future returns.

In all honesty, I don’t think anyone knows. Circumstances constantly change. There were newspaper-only elections, radio elections, television elections and, now, internet and social media elections. In 1896, the winning candidate never left his house. In my lifetime alone, three major “that’ll never happen” presidents happened: We elected a Catholic, a divorced man, and a non-white.

The truth is that every election is unique and the circumstances that align the electorate are hard to repeat or predict. I don’t know what kind of president Donald Trump would make, I only know that if he gets a chance to show it, there’s a lot of people who make their living professing to know how to win elections are going to look unconventionally stupid.

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 168 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    TKC1101:

    Charles Mark:

    TKC1101:

    Charles Mark: Meanwhile, outside the USA, where the mere mention of the man’s name induces a mix of horror and mockery and no-one dares to speak well of him, there will be chaos: kind of like 2000 on steroids.

    And this is relevant because?

    Hey! I mightn’t have a vote but I have a perspective. And I will be driven to distraction by the undiluted hysteria all around me if Trump actually wins.

    For that, my sympathies. Would you like a T Shirt that identifies you as a Trump supporter?

    “Supporter” is pushing it. But if I was and I had the T shirt I guess I’d wear it at home only, like I do with my T with an imprint of the Israel flag! I’d say it’s a toss-up as to which would be more dangerous. Probably the flag I think.

    • #91
  2. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    What if there is a “monster vote” and he wins in a landslide?

    • #92
  3. Viator Inactive
    Viator
    @Viator

    Misthiocracy: Trump has adopted the air-game of the Left, but the ground-game of a high school student council candidate.

    “Republicans have gained ground on Democrats in registering voters in three battleground states and kept their razor-thin advantage in Iowa — encouraging news for Donald Trump eight weeks before Election Day.

    Republicans added hundreds of thousands of voters to the rolls since 2012 in states including Florida and Arizona, and narrowed the gap in North Carolina, according to data compiled by The Associated Press. In Iowa, Republicans prevented Democrats from surpassing them, aided by a court ruling upholding a ban on voting by ex-felons, who often register as Democrats.”

    http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d1c611a35aa5488789e0ad0cf4f2e818/gop-gains-ground-dems-voter-registration-key-states

    and

    “Trump’s effect down-ballot, Warner said is likely helping the GOP. According to the Ohio sec. of state’s office, more than 1 million Ohio voters have gone from unaffiliated, or Democratic, to Republican.”

    • #93
  4. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Casey:

    EJHill: What if he does win?

    To me this seems like a simple question with an obvious answer but somehow people hate obvious answers and love insane answers.

    I don’t buy the argument that he’s competent. I don’t by the argument that he’s insane and puts us in danger.

    We know he’s not conservative or even right of center. We know he’s not liberal or left of center. We know he’s not moderate on that line either.

    We know exactly what he is… a dope. Like all but about a half-dozen presidents have been. It’ll be fine.

    However, if he wins, he’s shown how to win as a Republican. That is, the battle changes from More-Government-Liberals vs Less-Government-Conservatives to Us-In-Charge vs Them-In-Charge.

    Since I’m not an us and I’m not a them, I figure I gotta get a new pair of complaining shoes.

    How is that a change?

    • #94
  5. Mister D Inactive
    Mister D
    @MisterD

    I still don’t think he will win via demographics, organization, the electoral map, and high unfavorables. But if he is President, it will most likely have more to do with Hillary losing (and the reverse is also true). Trump doesn’t seem to be persuading many people that he would be a competent let alone good president with good policies that he will implement ably. However, more and more people are becoming convinced Hillary is untrustworth and unhealthy.

    • #95
  6. Mister D Inactive
    Mister D
    @MisterD

    Viator:What if there is a “monster vote” and he wins in a landslide?

    Are monsters allowed to vote?

    • #96
  7. Mister D Inactive
    Mister D
    @MisterD

    Charles Mark:Meanwhile, outside the USA, where the mere mention of the man’s name induces a mix of horror and mockery and no-one dares to speak well of him, there will be chaos: kind of like 2000 on steroids.

    I loathe Trump but this argument does nothing for me. They swooned overseas in 2008. We need an American president who has America’s interests at heart.

    • #97
  8. Trinity Waters Member
    Trinity Waters
    @

    Misthiocracy:

    TKC1101:Hmmm. If the ‘dope’ wins, he will be the smartest ‘dope’ in the history of the republic.

    I remember Obama was the smart guy , something to do with the crease in his pants, but a very credentialed smart guy told me.

    A smart guy who had a massive campaign machine on-the-ground throughout the country.

    If Trump had any ground game at all, I might be persuaded that he has a hope in Hades of winning.

    All the “long-shots” of the past (the Catholic, the divorced man, the non-white) ended up in the winner’s circle because they were able to mobilize a surprisingly strong ground campaign. The winning candidate may not have left the house in 1896, but his large and well-paid ground campaign team sure did. Trump is not following that pattern, at all.

    His ground game is in the form of his enormous rallies.  He actually meets people.  The entire string of failed opponents of the Left have followed the Rovian rules, to no avail.

    • #98
  9. Trinity Waters Member
    Trinity Waters
    @

    James Lileks:

    Doug Kimball: While we vilify the domestic private sector and punish them with tax and regulatory burdens

    Like paid maternity leave?

    Last gasp?

    • #99
  10. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    In my taxonomy I’m genus “liberal”, species “conservative”. That’s a rarity here, so I will reveal my failings and my peculiar thought process for your amusement.  The below are only my opinions, whatever the sentence style.

    First, I am one of that band of fools being dragged in chains here behind the victors in their triumph :-) I thought that Trump could never win!  Here’s why.

    I view liberalism, or “America”, before circa 1900 as a beautiful but imperfect golden band in the otherwise wretched cloth coming off the loom.  This widening band had first appeared as a single thread millennia ago.   It’s been narrowing since then.

    That someone of Mrs. Clinton’s character and designs on our system of government could be considered for high office was for us an indication of just how far and how fast “America” had shrunk in America.  It certainly wasn’t a surprise.

    We were stunned in the case of Trump’s victory only by how rapidly this change is now occurring, how far it’s progressed without our seeing it, even though it was in plain sight.

    We know what is going to be done to us, and to our reputations, churches, families, property, and prosperity, and finally to our national security, and aren’t afraid nor ashamed.  We are afraid for our countrymen because we know the true nature of the  brutish forces which our short-lived system of self-government was holding at bay.

    • #100
  11. Kate Braestrup Member
    Kate Braestrup
    @GrannyDude

    DocJay:

    Doug Kimball:Remember when WFB supported Joe Lieberman over the disaster that was Lowell Weicker in the Connecticut Senate race back in 1988? Well, Hillary is no Lieberman and Trump is no Weicker. National Review, I hate to say this, has become insular, as confused as its NRO layout, a tabloid of its former self. It failed. It became mainstream, no longer standing athwart history, but riding in the backseat with the rest of the crowd, just squeaking feebly but politely about deficits, entitlements, yada, yada, yada.

    Trump spoke. Unchecked immigration is killing us for all the obvious reasons. Free trade has become a ticket to fleece us. While we vilify the domestic private sector and punish them with tax and regulatory burdens, other countries undercut us and production moves. We fight half-assed wars and waste lives and trillions in treasure. We tell corporations that if they move money from profitable foreign operations to the US, there will be taxes. They deploy these funds (where else?) overseas. Trump points out these things in colorful, impolite ways. We’ve been used and abused. He will stop the madness. In his own, inarticulate, colorful way, he is standing athwart history. WFB would be standing with him.

    One more reason to hide if Hillary wins. I won’t feel like chatting with those who pushed her corpse across the finish line and 90% of the staff here is rooting for her for a variety of reasons.

    DocJay—if Hillary wins, we all have to be as loudly and publicly critical of her as we can possibly be, so the IRS and all other punishment machines get overwhelmed. Fill the jails! Jam the system! Force them to play whack-a-deplorable!

    • #101
  12. Kate Braestrup Member
    Kate Braestrup
    @GrannyDude

    I’m more inclined, by the way, to try to find silver linings in either case. If Trump wins, it is my fervent hope that Democrats suddenly discover an enthusiasm for limited executive power, and reinforce the rules that should have prevented Obama (and, admittedly, before him GWB) from ruling by decree. Heck, if Trump makes noises about siccing the IRS or the Justice Department on somebody, they might just start talking about, y’know, Freedom of Speech, States Rights, etc.

    Trump seems to be a pretty zippy old guy, but he’s still an old guy, and Hillary is…well, bless her heart, I hope she’s okay in spite of appearances, but she certainly doesn’t look like a two-termer at this point. So if Hillary wins, the silver lining would be…what? That she’ll preside over an increase in crime and civil unrest at home and mean little wars and rumors of wars abroad, and she won’t be able to blame disasters on her predecessor, maybe?

    • #102
  13. Locke On Member
    Locke On
    @LockeOn

    Pseudodionysius:Orca

    Return of Orca, The Killer Fail Whale, sighted off the starboard side of the NRO Cruise.

    In Trump’s America, shark Orca jumps you.

    • #103
  14. Quake Voter Inactive
    Quake Voter
    @QuakeVoter

    I’d expect the good, the bad and the ugly.

    The good:  solid SCOTUS picks, a federal judiciary restocked by Sessions and Grassley (count on Trump laziness here), pro-growth and pro-family tax reforms (now featuring Rubio/Lee reforms) and immigration compromise which will please few but kick the Dems hoped-for vote windfall twenty years down the road.

    The bad:  The first TMZ administration, making the Obama regime look regal.  Every cultural/political controversy will feature Trump’s tough guy drama queening.  Dem deficits replaced with GOP debt.

    The ugly (but delicious):  The Corbyn-like crackup of the democrats.  How do they reform?  In 1992 and 2008 they made smart obvious plays.  In 2017 they’ll go lefter and loonier.  Triple down on BLM and their silly sexual agenda.  Sure, demographic future of the Dems after a Schumer amnesty and felon voting rights bill looks promising.  But right now a loss to Trump would be crazy making and destructive from the federal through county parties.

    • #104
  15. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Viator:What if there is a “monster vote” and he wins in a landslide?

    In that case, every politico who thinks they know anything about GOTV will have to find a new career.

    • #105
  16. Mr. Conservative Inactive
    Mr. Conservative
    @mrconservative

    I am a NEVERTRUMPER who actually thinks Trump will most likely win.   He has tapped into a populist, anti-establishment zeitgeist that won him the GOP nomination and may very well propel him to the Whitehouse.  Hillary is a terrible candidate and I could see her campaign imploding.

    I have never based my opposition to Trump on his electability.  I refuse to vote for him because I am concerned about what he will do if he wins.  I do not trust anything he says or promises, he has no respect for constitutional boundaries, and he lacks any semblance of character I want to see in a president,  so the conservative SCOTUS appointment argument carries little weight with me.  I am very uncomfortable with this anti-free trade talk and his fawning over Putin and various political “strong men.  We cannot give Putin and China a free hand, as he appears so willing to do.  (Would Putin dominating even enslaving Eastern Europe be a worse evil than liberal judicial appointments? I think it could be.) So vote for Hillary, right? Nope.  I am also concerned about what  she will do if she wins.  Binary choice?  Lesser of two evils?  Nope again.  My thinking is that  they are both evil, just in different ways that are hard to quantify and compare at this time. I refuse to vote for either of these two terrible choices and will vote for Evan McMullen.  God save the United States.  God give us a wise President.

    • #106
  17. B. Hugh Mann Inactive
    B. Hugh Mann
    @BHughMann

    Two weeks ago we meandered around two-lane roads in Vermont, New Hampshire, New York and Pennsylvania. We saw many, let’s say well over fifty, yard signs though only two of them were for “Her.”  Did we just happen to pick the ‘right’ route?  We were amazed.

    • #107
  18. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Mister D:

    Viator:What if there is a “monster vote” and he wins in a landslide?

    Are monsters allowed to vote?

    cookiemonster

    • #108
  19. Misthiocracy Member
    Misthiocracy
    @Misthiocracy

    Guruforhire:Pepes roam the streets feasting on the blood of the innocents.

    leave-pepe-alone

    • #109
  20. Guruforhire Inactive
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    Kate Braestrup:I’m more inclined, by the way, to try to find silver linings in either case. If Trump wins, it is my fervent hope that Democrats suddenly discover an enthusiasm for limited executive power, and reinforce the rules that should have prevented Obama (and, admittedly, before him GWB) from ruling by decree. Heck, if Trump makes noises about siccing the IRS or the Justice Department on somebody, they might just start talking about, y’know, Freedom of Speech, States Rights, etc.

    Trump seems to be a pretty zippy old guy, but he’s still an old guy, and Hillary is…well, bless her heart, I hope she’s okay in spite of appearances, but she certainly doesn’t look like a two-termer at this point. So if Hillary wins, the silver lining would be…what? That she’ll preside over an increase in crime and civil unrest at home and mean little wars and rumors of wars abroad, and she won’t be able to blame disasters on her predecessor, maybe?

    The game doesn’t work that way.  They will still do it to us when they are back in power.  Retaliation has to happen or its just a one way abuse system.

    Always cooperate strategies are always bad.

    • #110
  21. Paul Dougherty Member
    Paul Dougherty
    @PaulDougherty

    James Lileks:

    TKC1101: I give you two pros and two not nevers anymore. Add Allah to the list and the editorial selection at Hot Air.

    Yeah, but they’re on board; isn’t that enough? I mean, the Trump side should be happy they’re making the case for hours on end every day – in Gallagher’s instance, with great zeal.

    The radio audience exceeds HotAir, I’m sure. If Salem was virulently anti-Trump, you wouldn’t know it from their daily broadcasts, that’s all I’m saying.

    The problem with this brand of “support” is that every full throated defense of Trump is 85% disclaimer.

    “Look, NOoo one opposed Trump as much as I in the primary”[debatable]”he is clearly unqualified and dangerous and his policy proposals are fundamentally un-American and every one of the sixteen other candidates (along with ~300 million other Americans) would be far better, BUT… Hillary!!”

    It’s Comeyesque

    (making the case just before ignoring the case)

    • #111
  22. Paul Dougherty Member
    Paul Dougherty
    @PaulDougherty

    If Trump wins:

    1. Gloat confusedly
    2. Settle NRO hash.
    3. Confetti and marching bands at double time.
    4. __________
    5. Profit.
    • #112
  23. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    Mr. Conservative: God give us a wise President.

    God hasn’t been much help in this regard.

    • #113
  24. RPD Inactive
    RPD
    @RPD

    If Trump wins?

    First move into Amy Shumer’s now empty mansion. Then watch the unfolding disaster and point at the Trump supporters “You did this!  Own it”

    If he loses?

    Stay in my hovel, Then watch the unfolding disaster and point at the Trump supporters “You did this!  Own it” We had a ton of good candidates and you nominated this guy.

    I’m only voting for him because her catastrophe looks worse.

    • #114
  25. Charles Mark Member
    Charles Mark
    @CharlesMark

    Mister D:

    Charles Mark:Meanwhile, outside the USA, where the mere mention of the man’s name induces a mix of horror and mockery and no-one dares to speak well of him, there will be chaos: kind of like 2000 on steroids.

    I loathe Trump but this argument does nothing for me. They swooned overseas in 2008. We need an American president who has America’s interests at heart.

    It’s not an argument, it’s a prediction, in answer to the question posed by EJ.

    One potentially enjoyable outcome could be watching the various European leaders who have ridiculed Trump having to deal with him as POTUS. For instance, Ireland’s Taoisigh (Prime Ministers) love their meetings in the White House on St Patrick’s Day. Maybe there’ll be a boycott?

    • #115
  26. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Paul Dougherty:The problem with this brand of “support” is that every full throated defense of Trump is 85% disclaimer.

    “Look, NOoo one opposed Trump as much as I in the primary”[debatable]”he is clearly unqualified and dangerous and his policy proposals are fundamentally un-American and every one of the sixteen other candidates (along with ~300 million other Americans) would be far better, BUT… Hillary!!”

    Well, it’s honest. If a radio host spent the primary season knocking Trump for his behavior and statements and regarded him as the least conservative candidate in the race, and then decided to get on board because the alternative’s worse, of course they’re going to make disclaimers. It’s context, and it tells the listener that their name does not rhyme with Hon Schmamity or other cheerleaders.

    • #116
  27. James Lileks Contributor
    James Lileks
    @jameslileks

    Paul Dougherty:If Trump wins:

    1. Gloat confusedly
    2. Settle NRO hash.

    Haven’t we been told that Trump’s liberal instincts will be kept in check by Actual Conservatives, and he’ll be guided and nudged where needed? Or are his  critics to be sent to Hash Settling Seminars to instructed on how to behave in the future?

    • #117
  28. Austin Murrey Inactive
    Austin Murrey
    @AustinMurrey

    James Lileks:

    Paul Dougherty:The problem with this brand of “support” is that every full throated defense of Trump is 85% disclaimer.

    “Look, NOoo one opposed Trump as much as I in the primary”[debatable]”he is clearly unqualified and dangerous and his policy proposals are fundamentally un-American and every one of the sixteen other candidates (along with ~300 million other Americans) would be far better, BUT… Hillary!!”

    Well, it’s honest. If a radio host spent the primary season knocking Trump for his behavior and statements and regarded him as the least conservative candidate in the race, and then decided to get on board because the alternative’s worse, of course they’re going to make disclaimers. It’s context, and it tells the listener that their name does not rhyme with Hon Schmamity or other cheerleaders.

    That’s pretty much where I am – Trump was 17/17. So much so I paid little attention to him until he started winning primaries because Trump’s Trump.

    I’m not voting until actual Election day but when I do, barring unforeseen circumstances, I probably will vote for Trump because Hillary. I feel pretty slimy about it but I wasn’t thrilled pulling the lever for John McCain who at least was an honest-to-God war hero.

    • #118
  29. Paul Dougherty Member
    Paul Dougherty
    @PaulDougherty

    James Lileks:

    Paul Dougherty:If Trump wins:

    1. Gloat confusedly
    2. Settle NRO hash.

    Haven’t we been told that Trump’s liberal instincts will be kept in check by Actual Conservatives, and he’ll be guided and nudged where needed?

    Granted, I am unable to comprehend the complex strategery of it all, but why wait until after the election to employ such control?

    • #119
  30. The Question Inactive
    The Question
    @TheQuestion

    Doug Kimball:

    Trump spoke. Unchecked immigration is killing us for all the obvious reasons. Free trade has become a ticket to fleece us.

    AHH!  This makes sense!  I don’t agree with it, but it makes sense.  You are generally conservative, but also not a supporter of absolute free trade.  In that case it makes complete sense to be enthusiastic about Trump, who wants some kind of protectionist policies, but is also sort of maybe conservative..  It would also give a rationale for supporting Trump over Cruz, Rubio, etc., since they are for free trade, a position you oppose.  That makes far more sense than any other argument I’ve heard for enthusiastic Trump support.

    Unfortunately, for me, this is a reason to not vote for Trump.  I’ve watched Milton Friedman explain why he supports free trade and I think he makes the stronger case.    I may still vote for Trump, but there is cost to doing so, if it means surrendering on a core issue like free trade.  Given that I really don’t know what Trump is going to do, I may estimate that cost as too high.  I’ll keep assessing this until November.

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.