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.
The Logic of a Primary Challenge
I just don’t see it. I know there are those who honestly think that a primary challenge to President Trump before the 2020 election could actually succeed in getting a different Republican elected, but I don’t see any way in which that makes sense.
In 2016, Donald Trump soundly defeated a solid Republican primary field. Since then, the dire predictions of a Trump presidency have failed to materialize. In fact, the most common comment made by Republicans who don’t particularly care for Trump is “he’s doing better than I expected.” Conservatives generally approve of his policies, and many of us are surprised at how well his efforts to deregulate and spur economic growth have succeeded. A large majority of Republicans continue to express their support for the President,
Now, with the completion of the Mueller investigation, the dark cloud looming over the administration has vanished. The Democrats are tripping over each other in a crazed rush to the left, even as the Trump administration has slowly racked up conservative wins — justices, taxes, jobs, wages, Israel — that seem the product of a much more traditionally conservative administration.
President Trump often speaks incautiously, exaggerates, and tends to be thin-skinned and petty. He has found himself in daily opposition to a national press that… speaks incautiously, exaggerates, and tends to be thin-skinned and petty — as well as insufferably self-righteous, arrogant, and biased. After two years, it is hard to argue that the President is taking more of a beating than the press, and this perception that one man stands against the liberal tide is not lost on many of us who were skeptical of candidate Trump but who have come to appreciate the value of his tenacity and pugilistic temperament.
Given all that, and given the absence of a new and powerful candidate on the right, one who holds the promise of being more statesmanlike than Trump while also being at least as conservative, impervious, aggressive, and steadfast as Trump — given the absence of such a figure, it seems extraordinarily unlikely that an effort to defeat President Trump in a primary has any serious chance of succeeding.
I think there’s also good reason to believe that a successful Trump challenger would lose the support of a wide swath of Trump supporters in the general, while picking up only the handful of disgruntled conservatives who, even after years of successful conservative governance, insist that they won’t vote for the man.
In short, it seems like a fantasy, a bit of wishful thinking motivated, I suspect, more by offense and outrage that this vulgar man has found success in our party than by any practical consideration of what’s best for the conservative cause over the next six years.
I think we should work together to play the hand we have, which turns out to be better than most of us expected.
Published in Elections
Limited government and maximum freedom requires the people to accept voluntary limits on their behavior.
The more people exercise moral judgement in the treatment of those around them, the less others demand government intervention, hence why it is only serviceable to a moral people.
The more rapacious the people, the more intrusive government needs to be to keep us from destroying each other.
Ergo, you want freedom? Treat each other right.
They pumped Trump’s cult of personality because it was good for ratings and it helped sow confusion in Republican ranks. The average non-political social conservative out in the country was very affected by the mob scenes and breathless waits for Trump’s plane to land.
Did you support Trump during the primaries Max?
We’ve tried for two hundred years to raise up and educate South Americans. Why do you think they call them Banana Republics? Their Constitutions sometimes are beautiful in their design, but once one clique of banditos gets in and Constitutionally impeaches the Supreme Court and shuts down the opposition the whole thing falls apart. The difference is the character of the general citizen. That’s what we’re losing.
I love this.
Fed easy money is going to fail in someone’s political cycle. That is the way to think about it.
Judge Scalia also said that anti-centralization has to live in the hearts of the citizens. If it doesn’t there isn’t much else you can do. There is no leadership in the GOP in this sense. There hasn’t been for decades. Nobody cares.
This is my view. Centralization has fed back on itself since Woodrow Wilson and now it’s dysfunctional. Therefore…
Government Is How We Steal From Each Other™
For once I agree with you.
I did back in 2016. My idea was he would at some point declare he had accomplished his goals and choose not to run. Go out on top so to speak. Like Seinfeld chose. But now, with his first term poisoned by the Russia frufraw, it’s more likely he views winning a second term as validation.
I agree there are a lot of neverTrumpers rooting for a Trump loss in 2020 and many are promoting another Republican to run against him. But none of the last primary contenders are half as appealing now as they once were. The others mentioned by Gary (Weld, Hogan) are even less interesting.
And I don’t think a primary challenge will elect a Democrat or prevent Trump from winning in 2020. The only thing that can keep Trump from being a two term President is Trump.
Introduction
This is another great post by Harry Racette. The question that it poses is not who I should vote for in the general election. This issue will not be before me for 19 months.
The issue is if I should support Trump’s renomination? I do not.
This Comment will have three parts. Part I is a history of incumbent American presidents being challenged for the nomination of their parties. Part II is why I do not support Trump. Part III is why Maryland Governor Larry Hogan would be an excellent nominee.
Part I: History of Intraparty Renomination Fights.
There is a long history of incumbent presidents being challenged for the nomination of their parties. An incumbent American President has been rejected by his own party 7 times.
In 1968 President Lyndon Johnson was challenged by Eugene McCarthy. Johnson to quit the race.
In 1952 President Harry Truman was challenged by Estes Kefauver who beat Truman in New Hampshire which convinced Truman to quit the race.
In 1884 President Chester Arthur was rejected by the Republican party and James Blaine was nominated.
In 1868 President Andrew Johnson was rejected by the Democratic Party and Horatio Seymour was nominated.
In 1856 President Franklin Pierce was rejected by the Democratic Party and James Buchanan was nominated.
In 1852 President Millard Filmore was rejected by the Whig Party and Winfield Scott was nominated.
In 1844 President John Tyler was rejected by the Whig Party and Henry Clay was nominated. (Tyler was so rejected by his party, he had five Supreme Court Nominees rejected nine different times, one of them without even getting hearings.)
In addition to the above seven examples, in 1912 Republican President William Howard Taft was challenged by former President Theodore Roosevelt. Taft beat Roosevelt at the Republican convention, but Roosevelt received more popular votes and many more electoral college votes than Taft (who won only two states).
Part II: Trump is disqualified not for reasons of policy or personality, but for reasons of character, integrity and capacity.
Trump is not disqualified for reasons of policy. I support some of his policies (judges, taxes, regulations) and oppose others (national defense, NATO, the national emergency funding of the Wall, Dreamers, Charlottesville).
Trump is not disqualified for reasons of personality. I detest Trump’s rude and intemperate behavior. But that is not sufficient, by itself, to oppose Trump.
Trump is disqualified by reasons of character, integrity and literally capacity.
I suggest that the following five examples show that Trump lacks the character, integrity and/or capacity to be president.
First, Birtherism. This was Trump’s original sin. Once Obama’s birth certificate was produced there was no reason that any thoughtful person could continue with this screed other than to punk the opposition, which I would submit is unworthy of any candidate. Either Trump was stupid or lying or didn’t care. However, he promoted himself at the great damage he did to race relations. Recently, according to Maggie Haberman and Jonathon Martin of the New York Times, Trump has promoted birtherism to a Republican Senator. Anyone who promotes birtherism is disqualified to be president.
Second, did Ted Cruz’s father, Rafael Cruz, help Lee Harvey Oswald murder JFK? Trump suggests he did. This meme was presented to “Fox and Friends” who disgraced themselves by not challenging Trump. I believe that Trump said this given Ted Cruz’s reaction when Trump attacked Ted Cruz’s wife Heidi. No one I know of can support this nonsense. Anyone who promotes the screed that Ted Cruz’s father helped kill JFK is disqualified to be president.
Third, did Trump win the popular vote? Trump lost by 2.9 million votes. There is simply no credible evidence put forward that Trump actually won the popular vote due to a net of 2.9 million votes being cast fraudulently for Hillary.
Fourth, Trump has insisted that he had a larger inauguration crowd than Obama. Who are you going to believe, Trump or your lying eyes? Not has Trump made this argument over and over again, but he has insisted that his Press Secretary promote this trope.
Fifth, did Trump actually make the statement from Access Hollywood about grabbing women by the “[redacted word for female genitalia]”? During the campaign Trump admitted making “locker room talk” statements. But recently, Trump has questioned if the voice on the recording is not really his. (This is despite a part of the recording shows Trump speaking.) Who are you going to believe, Trump, or your lying ears?
These five examples speak to Trump’s complete lack of character and integrity.
In the alternative, these five examples raise the issue of his Trump’s “capacity.” In other words, is Trump mentally retarded? Or does he suffer from a personality disorder? Or is he mentally ill and unable to discern between truth and fiction? I am not a medical doctor, but medical doctors and psychologists have questioned Trump’s capacity. See “The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump: 27 Psychiatrists and Mental Health Experts Assess a President.” https://www.amazon.com/s?k=the+dangerous+case+of+donald+trump+27+psychiatrists+and+mental&crid=1IC3NXTVOVZR8&sprefix=trump%27s+mental+%2Caps%2C174&ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_15
Part III: Larry Hogan and Bill Weld are viable alternatives.
With the passing of Senator John McCain, there are no remaining members of the Senate or House who have shown the courage and integrity to counter Trump’s nonsense. With the possible exception of Mitt Romney (and Ben Sasse), all of the remaining Senators and Representatives have been neutered. As a practical matter, that leaves current or former governors to run against Trump.
I immediately contributed to former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld when he announced that he was forming an exploratory committee. I have tried to contribute to current Maryland Governor Larry Hogan who cannot accept any campaign contributions during the 90-day Maryland legislative session.
Larry Hogan is Pro-Life; however, Democrats control the Maryland State Senate 32-15, and the Maryland State House of Delegates 99-42. Worse yet, the Maryland’s governor’s vetoes only require a 3/5’s vote to override.
A pro-choice bill was passed by the Maryland Legislature. A veto would have been completely ineffective. However, Hogan refused to sign the bill, allowing it to become law without his signature.
Larry Hogan is the second most popular Governor in America. Only one other Republican Maryland Governor has been re-elected, and that was fifty years ago. Larry Hogan was re-elected 55-43%, and he was endorsed by the Washington Post and Baltimore Sun. He looks like our strongest candidate.
Conclusion
I have a quick question to people who want to respond to this comment. Please tell me is you believe in any of following five assertions: (a) that Obama was born in Kenya, (b) that Ted Cruz’s father helped assassinate JFK, (c) that Trump “really” won the popular vote, (d) that Trump had a larger inauguration crowd than Obama, or (e) that it really wasn’t Trump’s voice on the Access Hollywood recording?
I will look forward to hearing from you.
The Bulwark has had 500 people like me contact them and contribute to them without any solicitation.
Bill Weld is a RINO libertarian. LOL
68% of Maryland’s State Senate, and 70% of Maryland’s House of Delegates are Democrats. It takes only a 60% vote to override a veto. Hogan refused to sign the recent pro-abortion law which became law without his signature.
What else could have Larry Hogan done? Light his hair on fire? (Inside joke, both Larry Hogan and I shave our heads.)
Agreed. This is why you are a Mod!
I’m not super up on this, but I think I saw a video that basically showed that Bill Weld studied libertarianism after he lost the election. LOL. I think he went to Harvard. Wacky.
Hope springs eternal that he will want to spend more time with his golf courses. Seriously, if Trump thinks he could lose, he would want to retire as being “undefeated”!
I have an idea. Why doesn’t the GOP figure out how to keep a Trump from being desirable to the electorate by doing positive things?
Gary, as one Cassandra to another, bravo.
I could add several pages to you list of Trump’s deficiencies. but I’d like to add one. I was listening to Peter Robinson’s ode to Trump earlier pooh-poohing the idea that Trump has not been peculiar in his relations with Putin. Trump to this day refuses to accept the findings of all of his intelligence agencies about Russian hacking. After their Helsinki meeting it was Trump that briefly floated the idea that Russia send over a team to go through our NSA archives with our guys to find information and try to get the real culprit. He also thought maybe we should send former ambassador McFaul back to Russia to face justice in their courts.
Right now he knows that he needs to be joined at the hip with the conservative movement, but what will happen after 2020?
I like the idea that Iran gets squeezed and Israel expands her sovereignty during Trump’s administration.
I like the idea that our domestic hydrocarbon production is leading the world and we exited the Paris Agreement during Trump’s administration.
I like the idea that Wall Street indices are at an all-time high, minority unemployment at an all-time low, and our economy is growing faster than before during Trump’s administration.
I don’t like pencil necks.
I have said I will refrain from using “Trumpkin” but in this case I was specifically referring to the zealots that will burn down the Republican Party if they don’t get their way. I thought it was an acceptable exception to the rule.
What in the hell is this all about?
I don’t think Trump would accept the result if he lost the Republican nomination to a challenger. I don’t think a substantial portion of his most zealous supporters would either.
Henry, how do you respond to Gary’s historical evidence? We’d all like to see you get up off the mat, and make a feisty counterattack.
If your thesis is correct, that no challenger to the sitting president from his own party is likely to succeed in this case, how do you account for the victories of…
…?
What do you think they will do?
At rock bottom minimum, go third party.
That would be bad.
We’d all? I would be delighted to hear Henry’s response, but as a dissenter, “all” of us don’t agree with you. (Who knows, Petty may agree with me too!)
Gary and Petty don’t respond to more than half of the questions I ask them.
Same with Valuith or however you spell it.
If Trump can call Adam Schiff “pencil neck” can we call Trump “fat *ss” or “fat butt”?