Over at Atlantic Norm Ornstein outlines five different possible outcomes for the Republican National Convention. The outcomes he lists are:
- Trump gets 1,237 delegates by June 8.
- Trump falls short of 1,237 in June, but gets to the majority before the convention in July.
- Trump falls short and Cruz trails—but Cruz wins on the second ballot.
- Trump and Cruz form an alliance against the chicanery and evil of an establishment bent on choosing someone else.
- The establishment has enough muscle and support to choose an outsider who does not have the negatives that are evident for Trump and Cruz.
Read it and weep.
As the late Mayor Daley once said, regardless of how it looks now someone will win the election. I’m pretty sure it won’t be the American electorate.
The fifth outcome is: “The establishment has enough muscle and support to choose an outsider who does not have the negatives that are evident for Trump and Cruz.”
Thanks. Somehow my cut and paste didn’t quite work out.
An examination of what the prediction market believe:
1. Trump gets to 1237 by June 7. 20% odds
2. Trump fails to get 1237 bound delegates but wins on the first ballot. 30%
3. Nobody wins on the first ballot and Trump is not the nominee. 50%
http://cheaptalk.org/2016/04/06/what-the-contested-convention-odds-tell-us/
IOW, the prediction markets give Trump a 50% chance to win the nomination, but only by winning the first ballot. If it goes to a second ballot, they give him 0% chance.
Presumably, they’re taking the view that most delegates are not Trump supporters and that after the first ballot he has little or no chance.
It could also be that all of the delegates that don’t vote for Trump in the first round have Trump as their least favorite nominee. He cannot gain additional votes.
If not Trump, then the prediction markets currently see:
59% Cruz
13% Kasich
8% Ryan
1% Romney
In the 1860 Republican Convention, William Seward was both the most popular candidate and the least popular. Almost all of the consolidation happened on the non-Seward side.
I don’t think much more of Ted Cruz for president than I do of Donald Trump. I won’t vote for him.
I can, however, think of one good thing about Ted Cruz’s running for president and being defeated. That should convince what passes for conservatives in today’s Republican Party that nominating a candidate who’s conservative enough is the key to winning the presidency and maybe, just maybe they’ll start thinking about how to govern the country effectively.
Having Cruz win the R nomination and then being defeated in his presidential bid, is a hard way for conservatives to learn a lesson, don’t you think? There’s always a lot at stake in these elections. But, it seems that this one, with so much economically, socially, judicially whirling around the tub drain, would simply put a seal of completion on the transformation that’s been going on for years in this country.
Obviously, if you are a social progressive, then dancing in the streets would be appropriate. But, for those of us, who don’t necessarily rally around a one-size-fits-all collective society template, such a lesson would be like a game-over scenario.
No one wins on the first or second ballot. Kasich wins on the third to fifth ballot. Kasich wins Presidency in a landslide.
jan:
As I’ve written before, that’s the party line among Republican conservatives: a conservative enough candidate will win. Their argument is mathematically correct but politically, psychologically, and sociologically wrong.
And as to hard lessons, some people can’t be convinced any other way. What I would like to happen is for the Republican conservatives to pull up their socks and start working out a way to govern. The bottom line is that they need to do what they’ve refused to do: compromise.
An example, relating to how destructively unfair an entrenchment of social progressive policies can be, is made in this American Interest article dealing with the backward thinking in San Francisco.
The same thing is happening in S. CA, where another socially progressive run city, Santa Monica, is having the same kind of government cronyism, distributing politically based favoritism in obtaining jobs, low/moderate income housing units, developer permits and so on, while giving the finger to everyone else. Most contractors hate this city, because all they get is hassled unless they capitulate and kiss the ring of it’s government elites, as well as the employees heading the various governmental departments here.
So, if Bernie or Hillary wins this election (because of a failed hail Mary by a conservative) we can look forward to an expansion of the policies now flourishing in not only Chicago, San Francisco, Santa Monica, but also Baltimore, Philly etc., being introduced and then legally enforced everywhere.
The bottom line is that they need to do what they’ve refused to do: compromise.
That advice should be heeded by both sides of the aisles.
Kasich wins on the third to fifth ballot. Kasich wins Presidency in a landslide.
That’s what Kasich is counting on, and, IMO would be the most favorable outcome in this whole idiotic election cycle.
One of the problems is that both sides are confusing changes in the Overton Window with compromise.
Jan,
It’s not in any way progressive to defend the character of where you live. That’s all SF residents are doing–using politics to keep Alamo Square and North Beach as they were.
That’s a good example of something I’ve mentioned before. The ideological positions have quietly changed sides. Today’s progressives are actually conservatives and today’s conservatives are actually radicals.
Dave–
Conservatives are quite happy to use laws to defend what they like. It’s just that nobody has ever gone by a set of bathrooms in NC and wished to be a state resident because of the lack of a third non cis-gender whatever door. Whereas many people visit SF and want to live there.
Personally, I would love to see Bauhaus/Ballard high-rise arcologies start sprouting up in Brooklyn.
More market predictions:
Probability of becoming President IF nominated:
Clinton: 75.8%
Sanders: 62.5%
Kasich: 37.6%
Ryan: 34.5%
Trump: 25.5%
Cruz: 19.4%
It’s not in any way progressive to defend the character of where you live. That’s all SF residents are doing–using politics to keep Alamo Square and North Beach as they were.
MM
I could say the same sentiments are expressed from many long term residents living in Santa Monica. Progressives came into this “sleepy” seaside community saying they were an anti-development, pro-renter advocacy. With a 70% tenant population this kind of advocacy went over well, and they have been in power for decades.
What has happened under their policies, though, has been far from what was promised. Development has become rampant, with certain developers being able to “pay off” government officials to get assists with their permits. Small apartment owners have sold out or died off yielding to huge rental owners, and impersonal tenant/landlord relationships. Rents have rocketed upwards in vacancy decontrolled units. Long term controlled units are oftentimes occupied by wealthy tenants using them as “beach homes,” or rent them out secretly for profit (whatever they can get away with). Groups have formed to stop high rise buildings from invading neighborhoods and clogging streets with traffic. It’s become impossible to traverse this town, which is why green bike paths further squeeze traffic lanes, leading to traffic slowing, which has led to sprouting green rental bikes everywhere.
Conservatives are quite happy to use laws to defend what they like.
Everybody is happy to use laws to defend what they like and “don’t” like. Interpretation of “fairness,” “morality” etc is very subjective, relating more to one’s own pocketbook needs than to a virtuous nature. For instance, if a tenant lives in a rent-controlled apt., they like rent control. However, once they invest in a multiple unit building their opinion of rent control changes at lightning fast speeds. And, these same former tenants become the ones who are most likely to try to circumvent the law or screw their own tenants. I’ve seen many examples of this kind of behavior and the hypocrisy is sickening.
Huh. I just drove through San Francisco not an hour ago and I failed to notice signs of devastation.
San Francisco has high rents because San Francisco is the only genuinely beautiful city we have in this country, the weather is mild (if too foggy), and there’s this big giant mass of young rich people a few miles south on the 101 who want to live in a place where they can get a decent meal.
Santa Monica ditto, aside from the beauty part. They have beaches and they are a couple miles from the various centers of the Hollywood industry. I was there not long ago and if development is somehow out of control I once again failed to see it. Looks kinda sleepy, really.
Great location + tons of rich people = high housing costs.
Not exactly a reassuring headline.
@Dave, I just noticed that Illinois’ 15 at-large delegates awarded to Trump are expected to be establishment Republicans like Gov. Rauner, and Sen. Kirk, and various party pols that are not Trump supporters. They will vote for him in the first round, and very likely abandon him in mass if there is a second round.
If Kirk is appointed as expected, he cannot avoid dealing with the question of who is best for him on top of the ticket. If I’m Kirk, and I think Trump is going to be the nominee, I embrace him long and hard and hope that he brings out supporters to vote that will remember me. If I think Trump is going down, I try to muscle myself into a position at the front of the line to cast him out. Trump’s supporters will stay at home, some excitable Democrats might even reward him by splitting their vote btw/ him and Clinton.
Regarding conservatives let me point out it’s not even news that Dennis Hastert–a conservative Christian–was basically a serial sex offender. Just imagine if he was a secular liberal. Conservatives freaked out about consensual blow jobs, gay marriage and Robert Mapplethorpe.
But instead it’s like the cost of doing business as a conservative. It’s purely accidental that a man who enjoyed using his position of power to assault teenage boys ended up a powerful conservative Republican politician. Just an accident and nothing more.
San Francisco has high rents because San Francisco is the only genuinely beautiful city we have in this country, the weather is mild (if too foggy), and there’s this big giant mass of young rich people a few miles south on the 101 who want to live in a place where they can get a decent meal.
I think the area from Marin up to the Mendocino/Humboldt coast is the most strangely beautiful part of America that’s within striking distance of a real city. And people have fought to keep it that way.
Nothing will be accomplished if the Elite steals the nominations from Trump and Sanders and one or both do not form resistance activist street movements to continue the struggle.
Great location + tons of rich people + foreign money launderers, er, investors = high housing costs.
Michael,
“Density fatigue” is probably more in the eye of the beholder. I was born in Santa Monica, and my childhood experiences were far different from the ones of today. Before the social progressive shift we were more of an ordinary community, popular but not bursting at the seams with over development, and all the traffic that complements it. Now residents feel like they are living in conditions reminiscent of the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe nursery rhyme. However, I can see, in comparison to San Francisco, where having a back yard is a sign of elegance, one might have a whole other POV. In fact, for the last 6 years we have even diverted our almost 500 mi commute between Southern and Northern CA residences around the Bay Area, taking 580 thru Oakland and over the San Rafael Bridge, missing the the Presideo and Golden Gate debacle entirely.
I think the area from Marin up to the Mendocino/Humboldt coast is the most strangely beautiful part of America that’s within striking distance of a real city. And people have fought to keep it that way.
MM
We are in agreement about the beauty of the North Coast. However, it has not remained that way because of people fighting to keep it that way. Rather, the beautiful and untouched isolation is because of the vehicular difficulty in getting there, as well as maintaining a living if one wishes to settle there. Between approximately Bodega Bay, winding one’s way through Jenner, Gualala, Pt. Arena, Elk, Ft. Bragg and reentry on Hwy 101 at Leggett, it is country-like, winding roads with lots of breathtaking coastal views. But, the small towns continually have revenue problems dealing with sustaining commerce and jobs that locals can survive on. Without the Emerald Triangle’s cash crop I question the viability of being able to live there, even under austere means. That’s why many of the civilized functions of that region is governed by acts of volunteers — fire departments, libraries, theater, thespian groups, art centers, feeding programs etc.
I don’t live in San Francisco, but I’ve been there a few times and enjoyed myself. As far as I’m concerned, San Franciscans (or citizens of any city I don’t live in), can figure out how to solve their own problems without my advice.
Jan:
You should use the bridge, the Presidio mess is no more. It’s all quite smooth now. Bridge to 19th, 19th to the 280, 280 to the 101. I get from Tiburon to SFO in 45 minutes, unless they’re having some event in the city.
The GG bridge is a big part of the reason I bought a convertible. I never get tired of it because it’s never the same crossing twice. I just drove it an hour ago and the fog was thick. As you drive the bridge reveals itself, massive cables arcing up to disappear in fog before they reach the invisible tower. On rainy days when I can’t use my deck to write I often drive to the Marin Headlands and park in one of the pullouts above the bridge and work there.
I wonder if you know that Santa Monica was the eternally corrupt and dangerous “Bay City” from Raymond Chandler stories?
Santa Monica isn’t expensive because of progressives, it’s expensive because property on the Pacific that happens to be within driving distance of Culver City and Burbank and Century City is a very limited resource. NIMBYism is bi-partisan. Now, Santa Monica’s homeless problem? That’s progressives at work. The city seems absolutely paralyzed and helpless to deal with the fact that the beachfront is practically a hobo jungle much of the time.
Michael,
The route you cited — 101, 280, 19th Ave — was the one we wore out sets of tires on for years. I especially liked coming in on 19th Ave during Christmas, with all the tree lights displayed in windows on either side of the 19th Ave. Of course the GG is unmistakably an awesome construct to view and drive over. The fog clinging to it’s distinctively painted copper-colored structure only adds to the mystique.
However, the more we are on the N. Coast itself, the more comfortable I am with fewer conveniences, less people, open roads, and the roar of nature versus the city. So, SF just doesn’t hold the allure it once did. And, driving over the San Rafael Bridge, past San Quentin Prison seems more direct. I’m glad to hear, though, that the drive around the Presidio area is finally less congested. Maybe we’ll give the route you take a spin sometime when we’re driving in to see friends/family or getting service for our car.
As for the homeless problems in SM — they are persistent. The remedies, however, go far beyond just providing local superficial, temporary services. The mentally ill, vets, and people with severe addiction residuals make up so much of this population. This is where the feds should get involved.
Jan:
I’ve tried to get used to more rustic life at times. Johnson City, TN. We lasted six months. Tuscany – six months.
I find SF beautiful, and I look over at it all day, but I don’t love it. I don’t know why, I cannot rationalize it, but I actually prefer crazy, ugly LA. SF people have a stick up their butts, Angelenos don’t.
But as soon as our daughter’s out of high school we’ll probably move to London.