We keep losing with Trump

 

Yesterday, we lost a governor’s race in Kentucky, and both houses the Virginia legislature. For the first time since 1993, the Democrats control the Virginia Governorship and both houses of their legislature. In both races, we were slaughtered in the suburbs. One commentator has written, for the GOP, the suburbs are the new Florida. https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/06/opinions/kentucky-virginia-trump-stewart/index.html

George Will has written that the only way to teach a donkey something is with a two by four over the head. We got our first smack in November, 2017, when we went from a 2/3 margin in the Virginia House of Delegates to only a bare one vote margin. We got our second smack when a Democrat won a Senate Seat in Alabama in December 2017. We got our third smack in 2018 when Connor Lamb won in Pennsylvania. We got our fourth smack in November 2018 when the Democrats won back the House with 40 flips. (Virginia used to be 7-4 GOP in the House; it now is 7-4 Dem.) We have now gotten our fifth smack on the head with losing in Kentucky and Virginia.  [Edit.:  We also lost a bunch of local elections in Pennsylvania’s collar counties.)

Nathan Gonzales of Roll Call says that the most likely scenarios in order are:

  1. Eviction at 1600, with Trump losing, but us holding the Senate, and the Dems holding the House.
  2. Blue Washington, with Dems taking the Presidency, Senate and House.
  3. Status Quo, with Trump winning, and us holding the Senate and the Dems holding the House.
  4. Red Revival, with us taking the Presidency, Senate and House.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/a-year-out-heres-four-ways-2020-elections-could-go

But we can stick with Trump. There is a prescient article at The Bulwark, about the feeling when the GOP gets crushed at the polls and talk radio guys tell us to “Hug Trump Harder.” https://thebulwark.com/tfw-republicans-get-crushed-at-the-polls-and-talk-radio-guys-say-hug-trump-tighter/

The Emperor has no clothes. You can keep backing him, but he is a losing bet for the party.

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 234 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

     

    PHenry (View Comment):

    When Republicans lose, it is a clear referendum on Trump.

    When Democrats lose, it is reading far too much in to it to suggest a referendum .

    I see how that works.

    Gary, do you really believe that if we had just let the Democrats oust Trump we would have won majorities in VA and KY? If not, then what are you suggesting? Maybe if Hillary had won we would have taken VA and KY?

     

    1. Oust Trump
    2. ????
    3. Republican domination!

    That is what I am trying to understand. Does anyone have a plausible theory that if the Republican party nominated at this point in time a candidate other than Donald Trump for U.S. President we would end up with both a Republican President and more Republicans in office in 2021 than we are likely to have with Donald Trump as Presidential candidate?

    Given the evidence of the Quid Pro Quo, etc., I think that any Republican would perform better than Trump in 2020.  Of course, doggone any Republican would have likely won in 2016, given the history of Americans alternating between the two parties usually every 8 years.

    • #31
  2. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Take you head out of your duffle bag. Bevin lost by less than 5K votes when he had had a 28% approval rating before Trump showed up to campaign for him. Sure; Trump was a drag on Bevin’s campaign. 

    And the KY Libertarian Party is already bragging about splitting the vote and throwing the election to the idiot Democrat. Standard Disclaimer: Not all Democrats are idiots, but Beshear does a convincing impression. 

    From the LPK Facebook post after the election: 

    “In an ideal world, we elect Libertarian candidates and advance liberty. Failing that, we push mainstream candidates towards liberty to advance the cause…” “But if we can’t do those things, we are always happy to split the vote in a way that causes delicious tears. Tonight there are plenty of delicious tears from Bevin supporters.”

    • #32
  3. Sabrdance Member
    Sabrdance
    @Sabrdance

    I mean, the lesson I’m taking is that we should fire the green-eye-shades brigade.  Bevin was killed over pensions, same way Walker was killed a few years ago.  Virginia is trending left because of hostility among the NoVa bureaucracy and lobby to small government Republican policies.

    So, hey, throw money at the problems until they go away.  Then we can win.

    Though I doubt that’s actually the lesson anyone wants to take.

    • #33
  4. namlliT noD Member
    namlliT noD
    @DonTillman

    Gary Robbins:

    We keep losing with Trump

    Yesterday, we lost a governor’s race in Kentucky, and both houses the Virginia legislature.

    The reason we have Trump is because we lost terribly with McCain (lost by 192 electoral votes) and lost terribly with Romney (lost by 126 electoral votes).  Trump stepped up, and won by 77 electoral votes.

    For the losses in Kentucky and Virginia, why aren’t you blaming the actual candidates in Kentucky and Virginia?  Blaming Trump for those losses makes about as much sense as blaming, oh, say, Gary Robbins.

    • #34
  5. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    namlliT noD (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins:

    We keep losing with Trump

    Yesterday, we lost a governor’s race in Kentucky, and both houses the Virginia legislature.

    The reason we have Trump is because we lost terribly with McCain (lost by 192 electoral votes) and lost terribly with Romney (lost by 126 electoral votes). Trump stepped up, and won by 77 electoral votes.

    It is time to demolish the canard that Trump was the only Republican who could have won in 2016.  The truth of the matter is that almost any Republican would have won in 2016, and that Trump barely won.

    The 22nd Amendment was adopted in 1951, which established a two-term limit on Presidents.  The American people have gone one better.  They have practically established a two-term limit on the two political parties, a pattern which has persisted in 15 of 17 elections since 1951!

    In each election, the question is if the party in power is on their first or second term. 

    • If the party is in its first term, the American people have historically given that party another four years, with the only exception being in 1980 after Jimmy Carter had been a disaster as President.
    • But if the party in power is in its second term, the American people in their wisdom have decided to “throw the bums out”! The only time that any party has gotten a third term was in 1988 when George H.W. Bush was essentially elected to the third term of the greatest president of the Twentieth Century, Ronald Reagan.

    Here are the results since the 22nd Amendment was adopted in 1951:

    1952  Republicans

    1956  Republicans

    1960  Democrats

    1964  Democrats

    1968  Republicans

    1972  Republicans

    1976  Democrats

    1980  Republicans  (Jimmy Carter was a disaster)

    1984  Republicans

    1988  Republicans  (George H.W. Bush was elected to Reagan’s third term.)

    1992  Democrats

    1996  Democrats

    2000  Republicans

    2004  Republicans

    2008  Democrats

    2012  Democrats

    2016  Republicans

    I have read people fault McCain for losing to Obama.  Nonsense.  After two terms of a Republican President, the American People were ready to give the Democrats a chance, which had been the history other than in 1988.

    Others fault Romney for losing to Obama.  Nonsense.  Unless Obama had been a Carter-like disaster, the Democrats were going to retain the Presidency, which had been the history other than in 1980. 

    Almost any Republican was going to win in 2016.  It was our year.  Unfortunately, instead of nominating a conservative, we decided to nominate a populist.  Hopefully we can remedy that mistake in the 2020 primaries and nominate a conservative like Nikki Haley.

    For the losses in Kentucky and Virginia, why aren’t you blaming the actual candidates in Kentucky and Virginia? Blaming Trump for those losses makes about as much sense as blaming, oh, say, Gary Robbins.

    I think that there is a strong consensus that Bevin was an unpopular governor in Kentucky.  As for Virginia, I note that before the 2018 elections, the delegation was 7-4 Republican and that after the 2018 elections, it is now 7-4 Democrat.

     

    • #35
  6. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    @Gary – I’ve read most of the comments and I don’t see where anyone claims that Trump is the only R who could have won in 2016.

    With literally millions of people in this country, that would be a silly claim. I’m sure there more than a few similar types who could have, and would have, appealed to voters.

    Regardless, the fact remains that out of the candidates that did run, he is on only candidate who did win.

    • #36
  7. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Annefy (View Comment):

    @Gary – I’ve read most of the comments and I don’t see where anyone claims that Trump is the only R who could have won in 2016.

    In comment #34 Don Tillman said:

    “The reason we have Trump is because we lost terribly with McCain (lost by 192 electoral votes) and lost terribly with Romney (lost by 126 electoral votes). Trump stepped up, and won by 77 electoral votes.”

    With literally millions of people in this country, that would be a silly claim. I’m sure there more than a few similar types who could have, and would have, appealed to voters.

    Regardless, the fact remains that out of the candidates that did run, he is on only candidate who did win.

     

    • #37
  8. PHCheese Inactive
    PHCheese
    @PHCheese

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Guruforhire (View Comment):

    Posting crank disinformation from known propoganda and disinformation sites has absolutely no known good faith rational basis.

    So are CNN, The Bulwark and Roll Call all known propaganda and disinformation sites?

    Are you arguing against the five smacks to the head?

    Yes they are known disinformation sites.

    • #38
  9. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):

    Who is we? It’s in your title.

    Republicans and Conservatives.

    Serious question.

    Another question for the Never Trumpies: I guess we’d …be winning with Hillary?

    Who is we?

    Republicans and Conservatives.

    Back in 2016 I wrote: “Conservatism survives and thrives if it spends 4 years in opposition to Hillary Clinton; conservatism dies if it spends 4 years in compliance with Donald Trump.”

    Conservatism in dying in compliance with Donald Trump who brooks no dissent.

    It must be nice to feel you are in a position to “thrive” under 4 ( or likely 8) years of a Hillary Clinton administration. 
    With all the lamenting of losing a Governorship of Kentucky and some seats in Virginia which has been trending Democrat for several cycles pre-Trump.
    You claim by default that conservatives would “thrive” with a 6-3 hard left Supreme Court. Not to mention all the other horrors that would ensue…

    Either you are a pathetic conservative or a spectacularly bad strategist. Either way you aren’t on my team. 

    • #39
  10. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    We keep losing with Trump

    Where are you getting this “WE” thing.

    You and Bulwark evidently want Trump to be the cause of (R) losses, so if you desire (R) losses to prove your “Everything Trump Touches Dies” thesis, that would make you a “THEY”, not a “WE”.

    • #40
  11. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):

    We keep losing with Trump

    Where are you getting this “WE” thing.

    You and Bulwark evidently want Trump to be the cause of (R) losses, so if you desire (R) losses to prove your “Everything Trump Touches Dies” thesis, that would make you a “THEY”, not a “WE”.

    I have been a conservative and a Republican many, many years before Trump.

    • #41
  12. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    @Gary – I’ve read most of the comments and I don’t see where anyone claims that Trump is the only R who could have won in 2016.

    In comment #34 Don Tillman said:

    “The reason we have Trump is because we lost terribly with McCain (lost by 192 electoral votes) and lost terribly with Romney (lost by 126 electoral votes). Trump stepped up, and won by 77 electoral votes.”

    With literally millions of people in this country, that would be a silly claim. I’m sure there more than a few similar types who could have, and would have, appealed to voters.

    Regardless, the fact remains that out of the candidates that did run, he is on only candidate who did win.

     

    So you respond to the comment: “The reason we have Trump is because we lost terribly with McCain (lost by 192 electoral votes) and lost terribly with Romney (lost by 126 electoral votes). Trump stepped up, and won by 77 electoral votes.” 

    with

    “It is time to demolish the canard that Trump was the only Republican who could have won in 2016. The truth of the matter is that almost any Republican would have won in 2016, and that Trump barely won.”

    So … you’re saying that “any Republican” would have won in 2016. Unfortunately, that candidate would have had to win sufficient primaries to garner the nomination. Which all the R’s – save Trump – in the field failed to do.

    • #42
  13. MichaelKennedy Inactive
    MichaelKennedy
    @MichaelKennedy

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    So are CNN, The Bulwark and Roll Call all known propaganda and disinformation sites?

    Yes. Next question.  Gary this should be happy news to you.  Soon you will have Elizabeth Warren to cheer.

    • #43
  14. MichaelKennedy Inactive
    MichaelKennedy
    @MichaelKennedy

    Viator (View Comment):
    I returned to Ricochet to find tired lamestream talking points discussed earnestly.

    Not as bad as it was when I quit a year or so ago.  I came back and it’s better.

    • #44
  15. MichaelKennedy Inactive
    MichaelKennedy
    @MichaelKennedy

    Rodin (View Comment):
    I think the Virginia loss was due to larger trends that implicate GOPe more than Trump.

    My understanding is that “Green Billionaires” flooded the state with money.  There are billions and trillions being made from “Climate Change/Global Warming/AGW.  These people are not stupid. Only their voters are.  The Green energy thing has destroyed California and will destroy Virginia. It has been moving along in Colorado.

    Just remember, those billionaires all got rich from federal subsidies.  Also known as taxes.  Why do you think we still have a trillion dollar deficit in spite of an economic boom ?

    • #45
  16. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    Viator (View Comment): …I returned to Ricochet to find tired lamestream talking points discussed earnestly.

    Dutifully posted by the resident stoolie as part of the next gaslighting campaign (or at least as repetitive filler twaddle between campaigns) is not exactly what I would call “discussed earnestly.”  And it is worth noting that it was identified for what it is and reduced to a punching bag for the rest of the neighborhood by the fourth comment. I understand you being annoyed with it (most of us are) but at least it shows that this is a relatively healthy community overall.

    The more annoying thing to me is when he avoids serious engagement on his points and just starts cutting and pasting the same old bubble gum analysis about the 22nd Amendment. And just when you think it cannot get any more sophomoric he drops the line about “Given the evidence of the Quid Pro Quo, etc….” and you can no longer deny that he is not here [in] good faith and he is clearly not what he claims to be.  I think there is a word for such a provopcative fraud on forums like this but it seems to escape me at the moment…

    • #46
  17. Petty Boozswha Inactive
    Petty Boozswha
    @PettyBoozswha

    Annefy (View Comment):
    So … you’re saying that “any Republican” would have won in 2016. Unfortunately, that candidate would have had to win sufficient primaries to garner the nomination. Which all the R’s – save Trump – in the field failed to do.

    Annefy, put aside your differences with Gary and me on Trump – do you think the primary system in 2016 really “worked?” I mean, selected the best candidate for our party? Had we had leaders that rejected Trump on principle, do you think Hillary would have been more appealing to the voters that rejected her?

    • #47
  18. MichaelKennedy Inactive
    MichaelKennedy
    @MichaelKennedy

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    I have been a conservative and a Republican many, many years before Trump.

    Too bad you changed out of spite. You and Romney.

    • #48
  19. DonG Coolidge
    DonG
    @DonG

    Sabrdance (View Comment):
    Virginia is trending left because of hostility among the NoVa bureaucracy and lobby to small government Republican policies.

    Bingo, Virginia has become the commonwealth of bureaucratics and Dems the party of the big state.  That is like Texas voting for the drill baby drill candidate.  Except for more oil makes lives better and more government makes lives worse.

    • #49
  20. Columbo Inactive
    Columbo
    @Columbo

    Franco (View Comment):

    Who is we? It’s in your title.

    Serious question.

    Another question for the Never Trumpies: I guess we’d …be winning with Hillary?

    Who is we?

     

     

    “Who is we?”

    That’s the question that I had too, Kimosabe.

    • #50
  21. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    So … you’re saying that “any Republican” would have won in 2016. Unfortunately, that candidate would have had to win sufficient primaries to garner the nomination. Which all the R’s – save Trump – in the field failed to do.

    Annefy, put aside your differences with Gary and me on Trump – do you think the primary system in 2016 really “worked?” I mean, selected the best candidate for our party? Had we had leaders that rejected Trump on principle, do you think Hillary would have been more appealing to the voters that rejected her?

    So by “worked” you mean, in your opinion, the “best” candidate didn’t win the nomination?

    So, if it didn’t “work”, the voters were “wrong”? (I was not one of those voters, BTW)

    That makes as much sense as me saying that the presidential election of 2012 didn’t really “work” as Obama won.

    You need a better verb.

    • #51
  22. Hoyacon Member
    Hoyacon
    @Hoyacon

    Gary Robbins (View Comment)

     As for Virginia, I note that before the 2018 elections, the delegation was 7-4 Republican and that after the 2018 elections, it is now 7-4 Democrat.

    Proposal: I’ll stop pontificating on Arizona politics if you stop with the “analysis” of Virginia.  Of course, I don’t pontificate on Arizona because I’m a few thousand miles away, but that’s kind of the point.  

     

     

    • #52
  23. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    I was waiting for this, Gary.  I could write a computer program to create these columns.

    Realistically, we have done this a thousand times.  This changes nothing.   I know I would rather take a 2×4 to George Will than listen to more condescending garbage about how we need to run begging to Bill Kristol & co to save us

    • #53
  24. danok1 Member
    danok1
    @danok1

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    So … you’re saying that “any Republican” would have won in 2016. Unfortunately, that candidate would have had to win sufficient primaries to garner the nomination. Which all the R’s – save Trump – in the field failed to do.

    Annefy, put aside your differences with Gary and me on Trump – do you think the primary system in 2016 really “worked?” I mean, selected the best candidate for our party? Had we had leaders that rejected Trump on principle, do you think Hillary would have been more appealing to the voters that rejected her?

    Annefy answered, but I’ll chime in here as well.

    I think that almost any other candidate would have withered under the fire the Democrats were prepared to bring at any Republican nominee. I believe that none of the “major” candidates would have survived that. Not Rubio, not Christie, not Walker, not Perry, not Cruz, and certainly not Jeb!. Based on this, I do think the 2016 primary “worked.”

     

    • #54
  25. Locke On Member
    Locke On
    @LockeOn

    I was wondering how long it would be before you turned up with the DNC talking points.  Contributed to any Donk primary candidates yet?

    Meanwhile out here in suburban Idaho, our little town threw out the Democrat mayor and the D-BerneyBro council member that he had appointed, and voted in R’s to replace them.  (It’s nominally a non-partisan race, but everyone knows who the sheep and goats are…)  Trump was not even mentioned, the big issue was local growth, and the attempt of the mayor and council to create an Oregon-style Urban Growth Boundary by stealth, with overbuilt apartments in the center and overpriced developments outside town.

    • #55
  26. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    danok1 (View Comment):

    Petty Boozswha (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    So … you’re saying that “any Republican” would have won in 2016. Unfortunately, that candidate would have had to win sufficient primaries to garner the nomination. Which all the R’s – save Trump – in the field failed to do.

    Annefy, put aside your differences with Gary and me on Trump – do you think the primary system in 2016 really “worked?” I mean, selected the best candidate for our party? Had we had leaders that rejected Trump on principle, do you think Hillary would have been more appealing to the voters that rejected her?

    Annefy answered, but I’ll chime in here as well.

    I think that almost any other candidate would have withered under the fire the Democrats were prepared to bring at any Republican nominee. I believe that none of the “major” candidates would have survived that. Not Rubio, not Christie, not Walker, not Perry, not Cruz, and certainly not Jeb!. Based on this, I do think the 2016 primary “worked.”

     

    I agree with the above. While the attacks against Trump have been extraordinary, I believe it’s the new normal.

    Donald Trump has proven that he’s uniquely qualified to withstand incoming fire. In fact, he seems to thrive.

    In a perfect world, the media and the Dems will ditch the strategy. (Magic 8-Ball says “unlikely”)

    I also believe any of the other R candidates would have thrown Bret Kavannaugh overboard. For that, I will always be grateful for Donald Trump.

    • #56
  27. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    Rodin (View Comment):

    I think the Virginia loss was due to larger trends that implicate GOPe more than Trump. Trump, at least, is a fighter. If the NeverTrumpers would line up to fit with, rather than against, him then maybe you would see a resurgence in areas where GOP is losing ground. I think NeverTrumpers are too busy worrying about Trump to develop a strategy to confront the Soros funded campaigns.

    Yeah, those suburbanites Gary goes on and on about are offended by Trump but not their baby-killing, blackface wearing governor or MS-13 rapists on the lose. Way to go GOPe, you’re like those Jews that helped their Nazi oppressors.

    • #57
  28. OldPhil Coolidge
    OldPhil
    @OldPhil

    John Park (View Comment):

    Virginia is not a good argument. Northern Virginia is way overpopulated by federal employees and government hangers-on, and it has a disproportionate effect statewide. Even legislatively, given one-person one-vote districting.

    And the Northern Virginia masses are moving out to the far suburbs and even the rural areas to escape the DC madness. Of course, they bring their voting habits with them. I live in a developing community in far Northwestern Virginia, still relatively conservative. I’ve had numerous new neighbors tell me they moved to escape the Fairfax congestion and taxes, but they had signs on their lawn for the Democratic House and Senate candidates.

    The Democratic wave has engulfed Prince William and Loudon counties, and is continuing to creep westward. It has nothing to do with Trump.

    Edit: Also, 10 of the 40 Virginia Senate races had NO republican candidate, and 23 of the 100 House races had NO Republican running. I guess we can blame Trump for that.

    • #58
  29. Petty Boozswha Inactive
    Petty Boozswha
    @PettyBoozswha

    Annefy (View Comment):

    So, if it didn’t “work”, the voters were “wrong”? (I was not one of those voters, BTW)

    Democracy has to mean more than three wolves and a lamb voting on what’s for dinner.

    The Republican Party used to stand for the proposition that no amount of government subsidies and handouts could substitute for individual character and personal responsibility. That’s how Ronald Reagan turned me from a leftie to a conservative.

    I think our party did not do it’s job and that Trump was manifestly far outside the “big tent” philosophy we should have enforced. No matter how big it has to have an inside and an outside.

    I know we disagree and I won’t belabor the issue, but I think if you stand for nothing you’ll fall for anything, and that’s what happened to the party in 2016.

    Thanks for responding and being civil even though we disagree.

    • #59
  30. E. Kent Golding Moderator
    E. Kent Golding
    @EKentGolding

    Bush, Obama, and Trump are all better at inspiring  the opposition than inspiring their supports.   And none had coattails.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.