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.
Can the NeverTrumps Save the Republican Party–The Math
I regard as sincere the NeverTrumps strategy to oppose Trump in order to save the Republican Party and conservatism. But will opposing Trump save the Party? What are the merits of this strategy? Here at Ricochet, the discussion of this topic is a well trodden path but rhetorical discussion is subjective and never definitive. So where has it gotten us? The mathematics of the situation may offer a better analysis.
The Republican Primary Electorate by the Numbers
Revisiting the presidential primary is insightful. Here is the confounding math: Trump won 1,441 delegates (the blue area at right) with Cruz a distant second at 551. A 2.6 to 1 preference for Trump. The Republican leadership despised both these candidates, yet together they garnered 81% of the Republican delegates. The establishment’s most favored candidate (Jeb) got 4 (not a typo, that’s four!) delegates or a startlingly mere 0.16 percent of the delegates. Even Ben Carson got more delegates (7) and three times more popular votes than Jeb. I believe the leadership’s thoughts throughout this time of opposition to Trump and Cruz were to safeguard the party, but the math reveals the result. At the end of the primaries, the leadership’s control as expressed in delegates for their candidate was 1/6 of one percent with the complete loss of control of 81+% (don’t forget Carly and Ben) of the delegates. If you pretend the leadership had no horse in the race and thus controlled all votes for all other traditional Republican candidates, then their influence could garner less than 14% of the delegates.
Cruz’s 25.1 percent of the popular primary vote added to Trump’s 44.9 percent, means 70 percent of Republican primary voters intentionally voted for candidates unacceptable to the Republican leadership. Only 26 percent of the popular vote went to other six traditional Republican candidates. These statistics should awaken the dead, but did the leadership awaken? In reviewing these statistics, the merits of the leadership’s obstructionist strategy during the primaries towards Trump and Cruz is clear. It did not save the party from Trump and Cruz, and may have had the opposite effect.
Side-note: A Quick Observation on the Origin of Electorate Numbers
Could it be that the Republican leadership nurtured and created these rebel voters in two significant ways? By the party’s own example, they trained them to not prioritize conservative values and then stoked their anger and resentment when they ignored the electorate’s clear will to fight the Left – particularly after ignoring this mandate when the electorate gave Republicans both houses in the 2014 landslide Congressional elections. If so, Trump would be the conspicuous expression and natural outcome of Republican tutelage.
The Republican Officials by the Numbers
Since the primaries, the elected Republican officials who are directly accountable to these indignant voters, have largely yielded to the voter’s choice. On the day of this writing, even Cruz has now endorsed Trump. At present Trump has 210 current US Congressional endorsements. For comparison Hillary Clinton has 225 current US Congressional endorsements. Also since the primaries, a number of conservative intellectuals have voiced strong if not dire warnings to Republican leadership and NeverTrumps to not again try to undermine the electorate’s choice. But have the leadership and party functionaries heard these voices? In reviewing these statistics, the merits of the leadership’s continued obstructionist strategy towards Trump leading up to the convention is clear. It did not save the party from Trump becoming the Republican nominee.
Successful Rebellions by the Numbers
History is replete with examples of when 10 to 20 percent of a population are committed to a goal with a mere one third of the population being sympathetic – they are able to impose revolution and successfully win civil wars against authorities (the “one third” is often attributed to John Adam’s assessment of the number of colonists in favor of the American Revolution).
Polling
by Gallup in May showed two thirds (64 percent) of “Republicans and Republican Leaners” are favorable to Trump. A confirming poll by NBC, also in May, asked Republicans “Who do you trust more to lead the Republican Party?” 58 percent of Republicans said Trump, only 39 percent said Ryan. Hillary Clinton’s favorability among Democrats is half that of Trump’s with Republicans. The Democrats and Republicans are quite different on this point.
So unique to Republicans is the pairing of broad Republican voter support of Trump with the leadership’s open disdain of Trump. And since this battle is inside the Republican party, Trump’s favorability with independents and Democrats are irrelevant (please don’t confuse the analysis and go there). The math indicates that Trump’s intra-party support is double the successful-rebellion-threshold.
What Do All the Numbers Indicate?
The Electorate
- Only 14 to 26 percent of the party electorate will vote for traditional party candidates, with the Republican leadership having effective control of only a fraction of that number.
- Based on May polling, 58 percent openly reject the party leadership in favor of Trump.
- To remove any objection to the accuracy of those numbers, let’s assume they are 25 percent off and give all the beneficial adjustments to Republican leadership. Those more favorable calculations are: only 18 to 33 percent of the party electorate will vote for traditional party candidates. 44 percent favor Trump over the party leadership.
- Even with adjustments, the pro-Trump faction still dominates and already controls the party.
The Republican Officials
- Trump has 210 current US Congressional endorsements which is nearly on par with Hillary Clinton’s 225 current US Congressional endorsements.
- Using current US Congressional endorsements as a proxy to gauge elected Republicans support for Trump – Trump has no deficit in elected Republican support
Conclusion–The Merits of the NeverTrump Strategy
The anti-Trump sentiment of the Republican party leadership is at odds with both the Republican electorate and Republican elected officials. The NeverTrumps, who are the tip of the sword for this strategy, have only fellow Republican and conservative blood on the sword.
Post-November, Scenario 1: If Trump wins, the Republican leadership will have again be shown to have pursued an ineffective strategy at odds with the electorate and their own elected officials. The party will continue likely as divided as at present.
Post-November, Scenario 2: If Trump loses, especially if by a close margin, the Republican leadership and Republican NeverTrumps will be seen as having sabotaged their own candidate and purposely enabled the Left’s win. The repercussions would likely be a intra-party war and due to the dominant Trump support within both the electorate and elected officials, the math would indicate a crippling defeat for the Republican leadership and brand. Then those of lesser foresight who concocted schemes of winning by losing, will lose not just the election, but the party they professed to protect. Rhetoric is the art of persuasion, but it cannot overcome the reality of the math. So put rhetoric aside to look at the mathematical reality, because reality always trumps rhetoric.
Postscript: There is a strategy for the party to use a Trump win to strengthen the party and conservative values by transferring Trump support back to the Party. But that is for another day.
Published in Politics
You always sound so intelligent… until we say that! Now remember that I am the one who keeps posting about the conspiracy theories that keep proving to be conspiracy fact. But I don’t think that one is going to get you anywhere my friend.
I can’t think of any better explanation for why a life-long lefty and close personal friend of the Clintons runs for the Republican nomination as a caricature of how the left views Republicans.
I see you are fitting the pieces together, but some of the pieces are not quite right. First, Trump is not a life long lefty. He has changed political parties at least five times since the 80s.
The other ill shaped piece is your perception he is projecting a false caricature. I had a nice exchange on Trump’s personality on this post here, then Mate De added this good comment, and skipsul filled some more good info. The bottom line is Trump is being his obnoxious New York self, that’s his personality. It’s not a fake persona, that’s just who he is. His character is separate. Unfortunately NeverTrumps in particular often equate the two. To make the point explicit… to them his crude language means he is dumb, and an idiot; his sometimes obnoxious words means he is an evil bigoted person. But no, he is crude and obnoxious, but he is not dumb or bigoted, one is personality, character is separate.
Prior to running for president, he supported single-payer health care, assault weapon bans, social engineering through the tax code and called the policy of self-deportation “mean-spirited”.
He is a life-long lefty until he decided to run for Republican nomination, when he suddenly became “extremely conservative.”
You only have part of the story. You need to research deeper.
All I want is for Trump to explain why he changed his mind on these important issues. If he actually changed his mind, it should be very easy.
I agree he is obnoxious, but it goes further than that, he seems to not be able to recognize social cues, He most likely has Aspergers. Does this disqualify him? no. As for his intelligence, it’s not clear to me that he is very intelligent.
A few weeks ago Andrew Klavan justified his preference for Trump over Clinton and, referring to the future of the Republican party, said “I dont care about the Republican Party, I care about my country”
To everyone who lives in a democratic system with more than two parties, that seems like a pretty common-sense position to hold. Mark Steyn has also referred to it.
In Australia I was a pretty solid Liberal Party supporter until that party did something last year that indicated they didn’t care about people like me anymore. Do I want to “save” my old party? No, I couldn’t care less. I’ve found other parties to vote for who align with my current concerns. And the Liberals can go to hell.
Stop sulking about the GOP. At the end of the day, its just a brand, like everything else in life. Think of it as like a restaurant, if the management changes and the food doesnt taste as good, why try to “save” it when theres other choices? I think a sensible response would be to avoid Hillary getting elected (because that would be the end of western civilisation), and then form a new opposition party after the election that you can identify with.
When going through comments on a thread in which I’m interested, it is distressing to find unsupported statements. Just say why this is so clear.
Has Trump ever publicly discussed funding a PAC to defeat Democrats?
Some just desire Trump not to be president others are concerned by going all in on Trump the Republican party will be lost to Conservatism and other are afraid that Trump will destroy the Conservative movement itself and so oppose him now to preserve the movement or the party from Trumpism. This is true whether Trump wins or loses in November. Most Nevertrumpers, but not all, are also Neverhillary. So they are not going to prevent Trump from winning. Also their stance won’t change based on a Trump victory or loss.
The fault for the loss in the election comes down, as always, to the Candidate and his organization.
I don’t recall saving the Republican Party ever being an overriding goal. It certainly isn’t with me. Political parties are organizations comprised of interests. The point of a political party is to win elections. Ideologies like Conservatism are about being right. Sometimes being right is more important than getting elected.
The party moved. I didn’t.
Trump is the predator attacking wounded prey. I suspect that if the situations were reversed, Trump would have run as a Democrat. He cares nothing for why the party is in disarray, he simply took advantage of it.
As for the NT’s, if they are like me, they are done with this election, done with having a larger goal. We are not voting for Trump, and that is all that unites us. Some will leave the GOP, some will stay. Some are conservative, some not. Some will vote Hillary, some will vote third party, some will stay home. I think the Trumpers have let us get too far into their heads.
And he also said he still wasn’t voting for Trump. I may have missed an episode but I don’t ever recall that changing.
Prior to, and in most cases for some time after.
@wiley I think Trump’s values are simply what is it that will benefit him. He’s been pretty straightforward about that.
He has overcome 15 other candidates and single handed taken control of a national party. Do not underestimate him. As for his obnoxiousness, here is a humorous example of New Yorkese:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbQoiQckj0w
And make sure you read this.
Exactly. And I fear some have conflated both Americanism and conservatism with the Republican party. When in fact the party does not represent either well.
I read your first comments in your previous post. Nearly all your perceptions are inverted in regard to mine. My 250 word limit does not allow me to address these, but I will deal with this:
Agreed on most points. I remember that election, and I don’t think Bush’s lose was due to how he governed, it was how he campaigned and he was up against an extra ordinarily gifted campaigner in Bill Clinton. For now Trump is a gifted campaigner.
The people do no want ideology. They want action. They want attention. They want borders, jobs, and to stop the crazy stuff the Left is doing. If he can deliver on some of these, he will get re-elected.
On a scatter plot of NeverTrumps a majority are inside the Republican establishment, but there are always outliers who have independent thoughts and reasons, as yourself. I’ve had lots of Ricochet conversations, and saving the party or saving conservatism is a very common theme for NeverTrumps.
Here you go. Jump to 15:00 so you can hear all the things you expect from Klavan, then he will tell you that he “is rooting for Trump to win.” And then at 18:33 he says “I’m not a NeverTrumper.”
Actually Bush was elected to continue the program of Reagan one of the most ideological presidents we ever had and one of the best for that very reason. Bush who had no real ideology just handled everything that came his way with a great deal of wisdom and flashes of brilliance. However he had no reason for what he was doing, unlike Reagan. His unspoken re-election slogan was “Elect me again I still do a good job.”
That was not enough. Right now Trump is a blank screen with a bunch of stuff there for anyone who wants to see it. Once he begins to govern he will move left of center on domestic policy forging a majority in congress from Republicans and Democrats. His foreign policy will be confused and driven by perception both Trump’s perception and the public’s perception. This will not lead to a good place and many people will be very disappointed in Trump.
His next campaign he will have to defend an actual record that has a bit for everyone but made no one happy. He will have a much harder time winning in that kind of environment.
I agree completely. A clear ideology is best. But times have changed and there is no Reagan around. All we have is either Trump or Hillary. And your choice is…
I take that back. We had Cruz who was as pure a conservative as you can find… and the voters rejected him… and the party rejected him. As I said, times have changed. Neither the electorate or the party is conservative.
I have no love for Republican Party. I view the destruction of the Republican Party as one of the few positive reasons to vote for Trump.
But the destruction of the Republican Party will hand total power over the government to the Democrats, maybe for a generation.
From everything I’be heard – that is exactly what the EverTrumpers want.
Hey “A.” So you think the Trump supporters are really undercover Democrats. I’m sure that felt good to type.
You got to let go of that thinking man.
I was just about to write something here but you fixed it.
No, I think Trump supporters hate the GOPe, they’ve said so explicitly many times. I think they don’t realize or care that the destruction of the GOP will hand power to be Democrats.
As was the case in 68, 72 and 76. Whoever wins now will not be a conservative. To vote for Trump is to say that I am ok with Trump’s brand of populist liberalism flavored with a light salting of Conservatism. I am not. I don’t really have a candidate in the race. To positively vote for Trump knowing who he is surrendering without a fight. Trump is bad for the country and Hillary is bad for the country and there is no better outcome from November. My only hope in the short term is that my analysis of the Obama Presidency and Hillary Clinton is correct and after four years of Hillary so many consequences of their actions will be so apparent we can win the Presidency from them and start to rebuild the country. That should have been this election but we put up Trump.
If Trump win I can only pray that some how due to God’s unmerited favor and grace Trump bumbles through without causing a major disaster, health problems bar him for a second term and we can put up a Conservative President that can start rebuilding the country. I don’t think the circumstances of the this election cycle will be repeated. However I will continue to fight for what I believe in whoever gets in office, I can do nothing else.