It’s hardly a state secret that the Republican Party is in the process of tearing itself apart. Things are being said that can’t be unsaid. Things are being done that can’t be undone.
There are four remaining Republican candidates for the presidency: Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and John Kasich.
Ted Cruz is the tactical candidate. Sen. Cruz and his supporters, mostly white evangelical social conservatives, believe that Sen. Cruz can win the general election based on mobilizing turnout among his base. They have less than no interest in expanding that base, indeed his candidacy is based on not expanding that base. Mathematically, they’re probably correct. Practically, I think it’s a fantasy.
Sen. Cruz is presently moving to build an organization in Florida with the express objective of preventing Marco Rubio from taking his home state, thereby forcing him out of the race. That will leave Sen. Cruz as the sole unTrump.
Marco Rubio is the strategic candidate. He’s probably the single candidate who, if he gained the full-throated support of the various factions of his party, has the best chance of winning the general election. Right now he’s hanging on by his fingernails, hoping to win his home state, that John Kasich wins Ohio, and that the four remaining candidates divide the delegates among them, denying Donald Trump an outright victory and taking the decision to the convention.
Donald Trump is the Network candidate. Not network (although probably that, too) but Network. He’s the candidate for voters who are mad as hell and won’t take it any more. He’s not an ideological candidate and it’s hard to characterize him as pragmatic. He’ll say and do whatever it takes to keep getting free publicity and remain the center of attention. His negatives are so high that if he didn’t have the prospect of facing Hillary Clinton in the general election it would be hard to see how he could win. However, he’s probably right. He’s getting support from voters who haven’t been voting Republican in the past, if only for the same reason that people go to watch buildings burning down.
Can you imaging a Trump-Cruz, Trump-Rubio, Cruz-Rubio, or Rubio-Cruz unity ticket? Me, neither.
The strongest ticket for the general election is probably Rubio-Kasich but they’re despised as Republicans in Name Only (RINOs) by a substantial chunk of the party, the Spartan faction from which Ted Cruz derives most of his support (“Never retreat! Never surrender!”).
At this juncture the most likely outcome is that Donald Trump will win outright. The second most likely is a brokered convention.
I agree with those who think that we’re seeing the death of the Republican Party as we’ve known it but I think that many of those who believe that also think it means the end of the Republican Party. That belief is founded on an immature, ill-informed understanding of U. S. politics. The Republican Party will continue, it just won’t look much like the party of the last half century (which it hasn’t much resembled for some time). It is emphatically not the party of Ronald Reagan. If you doubt that, whatever became of Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment: “Thou shalt speak no ill of thy fellow Republican”? That’s been AWOL for some time.
But our political system is oriented towards two political parties, it’s institutionalized with two political parties in mind, and those two parties have advantages that third parties can’t match. The Republican Party will stay around for the foreseeable future.
Movement conservatism is clearly dead along with the generation of those who came of age in the 1940s and 1950s who fostered it. William F. Buckley’s rule of supporting the most conservative candidate with a chance of winning in the general election has given way to supporting the most conservative (whatever that means) candidate full stop. Too many Trump supporters won’t support Rubio or Cruz; too many Cruz supporters won’t support Trump or Rubio; too many Rubio supporters won’t support Cruz or Trump.
What will the emergent Republican Party look like? I have no idea and Donald Trump doesn’t provide much of a model for making that evaluation. It won’t be movement conservatism; it will be a populist-nativist party. Beyond that I have no idea.
Don’t dismiss it as being a regional party incapable of winning general elections. It could well win the next general election.
Rubio is John Edwards w/o the substance. The only thing to see in him in 2010 was that he wasn’t Charlie Crist. I have no idea what anyone sees in him now.
I’ll give you a wild prediction: I give Julian Castro a 20% chance of being President this time next year.
“we’re seeing the death of the Republican Party as we’ve known it”
I think that will largely depend on Trump’s success. If Trump’s success is seen as helping elect Clinton, and even swinging the Senate to the Democrats, then it’s likely that the hand of the “establishment” is strengthened. Trump’s supporters describe Trump as a winner, and most likely to win against Clinton. Maybe they’re wrong.
Two other components. I agree with Dave’s analysis, but at least some good portion of the Republican contest is not about policy. This is largely true w/ Trump who barely has any policy. But it’s probably also true that if the remaining three were given one of these online ideological polls, their answers would put them pretty close together. IOW, the extent to which Cruz is supported by evangelicals is due some to policy, but mostly due to a personality that connects with them. When personality differences are the key dispute, it doesn’t tend to produce much long term policy change.
The other factor is the extent to which the other party can open itself -up to constituents of the party in crisis. Transformation/re-alignment would be aided by Republicans leaving the party for the Democrats. In theory, a Clintonian-DLC-type Democratic Party would be attractive to the business interests most alarmed by Trump, but it’s far from clear that the Democratic Party is situated to become more pro-business, the pressure is from the other direction. In theory, the Democrats could make the appeal to working-class whites, but they cannot do that so long as Trump is the center of conversation and the Democratic response is that that Trump and his supporters are racist.
In short, I wouldn’t be surprised if any changes are ultimately superficial, particularly if the most likely scenario is Trump wins the nomination and loses the election.
Dave:
Yep. There is a definite chance that Trump will win the general election.
It’s been fascinating watching a purely instinctive psychopath demolish the pretenses of the Republican Party. Trump has no interest in conservatism, and neither do his voters. The “Reagan Revolution” ends, all too fittingly, with the death of Mrs. Reagan. The disconnection from reality, the dog-whistle racism, the deliberate cultivation of ignorance, the morphing of ‘conservatism’ into nothing more than identity politics that began with Nancy Reagan’s husband, has now given us Trump.
Pure id, zero idea. Pure emotion, zero thought. It now dawns on the GOP establishment that their voters don’t give a rat’s ass about ‘conservatism.’ Duh. The Tea Party turns out to be exactly what liberals said it was: a vehicle for white resentment. And now that resentment has found its führer in a vulgar, ignorant con man with no more principle or theory or belief system than a bacterium has.
As for the GOP, what it has lost is its illusions. I imagine it will continue in some form, but maybe now at least we can dispense with the idea that they represent anything but greed and white panic.
PD:
Trump’s supporters are racist. It’s absurd to pretend otherwise. Roughing up black protesters has become a regular feature of his rallies. Scapegoating Mexicans is the core of his appeal.
But I agree with the rest of your comments on Democrats. We’ve done nothing at all to reach out to the white working class. Granted, it’s hard to reach people who have been so thoroughly brainwashed, but we haven’t really tried.
Yes, I resisted the temptation to remark on that on the grounds of de mortuis nil nisi.
PD- It is not personality, but tribalism. Cruz is one of them, a true believer evangelical. Pure identity politics.
As to the broader topic, I think the declarations about the GOP ending are a bit overwrought. If Trump wins the nomination, but loses the general, the most likely outcome I think, they will just declare again that they failed because they did not nominate a true conservative. If Trump wins the general, he will pick Bush’s former advisers and will then have trouble getting much done as the Democrats in the Senate filibuster everything. He will engage us in another war, so the neocons will be happy and that will help him get a second term.
If Cruz wins the nomination and wins the general, gag, then you will see the same as with Trump. If he loses the general they will just declare that he is an ass (true) and didn’t have the right personal skills. Don’t see Rubio winning the nomination now.
On important thing to remember is that conservatives don’t really need much policy. They just need to remind their voters to hate liberals. Trump has riled things up a bit by pointing out that GOP policy has been terrible for most people, but has largely focused that on immigration. Push comes to shove hating liberals will be more important than embracing any policy changes. Tax cuts for the wealthy will be the centerpiece of any GOP nominee, and making sure liberals are thwarted will take care of everything else.
Steve
michael Reynolds:
We’ve done nothing at all to reach out to the white working class. Granted, it’s hard to reach people who have been so thoroughly brainwashed, but we haven’t really tried.
Seriously Mike, to what tribe do you belong?
If 14 million immigrants help drive down wages, is my objection racial or economic? I’m a poor working class white, so my conclusion must be racist, even though the rest of my family is Native American. But you, You have the vantage point of egalitarianism, I’ll just work longer for less. that is reality.
Gray:
It’s not complicated. If you have trouble disavowing David Duke and the KKK, you’re either a racist or believe your supporters are. Trump clearly believes his voters are racists. I tend to agree with him.
“As for the GOP, what it has lost is its illusions. I imagine it will continue in some form, but maybe now at least we can dispense with the idea that they represent anything but greed and white panic.”
At least the Democrats are running a woman of integrity, principle and selflessness.
Thanks for the belly laugh for the day.
Guarneri:
Yeah, that bullshit doesn’t really work, Drew. Your party is busy comparing dick size on national TV. Your party’s front runner is sucking up to the KKK. Whatever you thought you had on your side of the debate is gone, baby, long gone. You’ve got nothing. Every mean thing I’ve ever said about Republicans has been absolutely validated by the crude, vulgar scumbag who is now your candidate. You know, the guy your previous candidate says is unfit to hold office.
Blah, blah, blah. Just a bunch of wild eyed accusations and projection more reflective of your personal demons and prejudices than reality, Michael. It was described here as the mad as hell vote, and it’s composed of and directed more at the political establishment, Republican and Democrat, than anything else. Just because you childishly desire to use it to score personal feel good points doesn’t mean it reflects broadly.
Dude, it’s not even fun torturing you. It forces me to consider the morality of schadenfreude, and that takes all the joy out of it.
I’ve been saying for a few years now that both political parties are incoherent and would have to change. I thought the GoP was well ahead of the Democrats on the road to implosion, but I didn’t really think it would happen so soon, but I’m glad it is. Unfortunately it’s unlikely they’ll go the way of the Whigs – it’s more likely there will be an internal rebalance of power internal to the party though it’s too early to tell which factions will be winners. I also think the establishment reaction is very telling with a non-trivial number of the GoP establishment saying they will vote for Clinton instead of Trump. At least we know where they stand!
The Democrats should not celebrate too much, they have their own host of internal contradictions and incoherence that will come to a head eventually.
Whatever the case I will almost certainly vote third party or independent this year. Steve (and many, many others) think this is throwing a vote away, but I cannot, in good conscious, bring myself to vote for any of the likely nominees at this point. And every time I’ve voted for a major party candidate I’ve come to regret it.
Yeah, that’s my take, too. I think the party organization is too embedded into the fabric of American politics for it simply to dissolve.
The Whigs collapsed because there was no significant policy differences btw/ them and the Democrats by 1850. The one difference that emerged in the North was opposition to the expansion of slavery, which brought Northern Democrats into the fold, but was eliminated by the Compromise of 1850.
That’s pretty much the opposite of the case today, where the parties have significant policy differences and are unwilling to compromise, so unwilling that they would rather have no legislation.
I think that’s what’s happening, too, but it isn’t the prevailing narrative. The prevailing narrative is that Republicans aren’t willing to compromise so there’s no legislation.
That’s precisely what’s playing out here in Illinois. The reality here is as you’ve described it. The Republican governor won’t sign an unconstitutionally unbalanced budget and is demanding concessions; the Democratic legislature won’t enact a balanced budget or enact tax increases to pay the difference. The legislature, abetted by compliant media, is getting away with their story.
The parties have ordered preferences: (1) enact own policy; (2) block other’s policy; and (3) compromise.
On Illinois, there was a poll within the last week in which only 32% of Illinois voters said they had been effected by the budget crisis. I wish cross-tabs had been offered, but I suspect that two-thirds of the pain is felt in Chicago, and one-third in downstate. The failure of compromise is based upon the incentives: (i) most of the legislators have no reason to fear not getting re-elected; (ii) the people who really need change (like relief from the budget stalemate) are a small, marginal group within each party coalition; and (iii) the partisan apparatus feeds donors and core supporters with the goods provided by solely blocking opposing policy.
Andy–Just FTR, I will probably vote for whoever the Dems nominate if Trump or Cruz are nominated. If the GOP nominates anyone else, I just won’t vote. Hillary sucks, but Trump and Cruz scare me, though of different reasons.
Steve
Well there you have it. As I’ve learned in the last 24 hours, this is proof positive that all on the left are Jew haters……..
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/08/opinion/an-anti-semitism-of-the-left.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&_r=0