Megan McArdle On #NeverTrump vs. #TrumpOn

OK, I made up that second  hashtag but I'm sure there is one out there for his supporters and I'm sure it's not #TrumpUberAlles.

Megan McArdle listened to the NeverTrump side; today she has a column about the Trump supporters. She crystallizes seven reactions by the supporters, and dismisses the first five:

1. Of course they won’t vote for him! Trump is smashing their cushy establishment control over the party!
2. Of course they won’t vote for him! Trump is going to actually force the party to do something about immigration and make them move their companies back from China!
3. Of course they won’t vote for him! Trump is going to stop their obsessive focus on tax cuts and Obamacare to focus the party on the issues that Real Americans actually care about!
4. Of course they won’t vote for him! They’re neocon hawks who would be more comfortable with a Clinton presidency!
5. Of course they won’t vote for him! They’re exactly the sort of crypto-Democrats we need to run out of the party!
6. Of course they won’t vote for him! They’re too afraid of the liberal media calling them racist, and it’s exactly this sort of craven capitulation we need to fight!
7. Actually, they will vote for him. They’re just having a bit of a tantrum now.

The first five are dead wrong, based on my (admittedly unscientific) sample.

...

Trump fans should know that the #NeverTrump Republicans who wrote to me are not rejecting you, or even your issues. They are rejecting Donald J. Trump, because they think he is a bad person, so incompetent, aggressive and shamelessly unprincipled that they do not trust him with the Oval Office, or the helm of their party.

This seems like a good moment to exhort folks to take a look at Ace's recent post explaining his ongoing support for the Trump message but rejection of the messenger.

My response to (6) - the evergreen 'racist' charge - is a bit more forceful than Megan's but ladies first (boors to follow):

The Trump fans are at least a little bit right in two of their explanations about Trump abstainers. Some who shout "#NeverTrump" today probably will vote for him, when it comes down to it in November. And some #NeverTrump Republicans are afraid to stand with him because they'll be painted with the same brush as the KKK.

Here’s the concession you really wanted to hear: The media is liberal, it does like to scrutinize conservative politicians for the slightest hint of racism and misogyny, and conservative politicians are hypersensitive to that label. Or at least, most successful ones are. Trump has gotten this far by wearing those labels proudly, and it's not a viable long-term strategy. More on that in the next column.

OK, she does say "some" don't want to wear the racist label. But as to timing, I recall #NeverTrump launching after the fiery Republican debate last Thursday (here is the earliest result for a Twitter search on "#NeverTrump trending"), well before the KKK debacle on Sunday.

As to the racist label, please - the math this campaign is simple. Democrats can't win without energized blacks and youngsters, as was soundly demonstrated in 2010 and 2014. Obama was black enough and young enough to show his smiling self and work the magic. On the campaign trail, Hillary is a not Barack - she is more of an Ambien with a scotch chaser. (Yeah, Trump is a Red Bull with a crystal meth chaser, but energy counts).

Dispatching Bernie by playing the racist/sexist card was not necessary. But even if the Republicans nominated Abraham Lincoln and Mother Teresa Hillary was going to spend six months screaming about Republican racism and sexism.

And since the wealthy, earnest liberals of Hollywood have just been told that they too need absolution, being "sorority racist", well, Hillary's reassurance that they were still better than the Republican variety of racist would be a soothing balm. Last night Hillary trotted out "Let's make America whole" as a slogan. Right - let's make it whole by tarring half the country as racist and sexist. We all know it's coming. Remember, Mitt Romney was an uncaring sexist pig because he had "binders full of women". Hillary is a rape enabler, but so what? KKK!

OK, I'm warming up here. Let me just refocus. Oh, I'll refocus after I thank Kevin Drum for this olive branch and then smack him with it:

Will Conservatives Do the Right Thing in November?

For years, liberals have been arguing that the Republican Party is built on appeals to racist sentiment. It's gotten subtler over time, but it's still there. Sometimes it's overt, other times it merely takes the form of tolerating racial animus in others. Sometimes it comes wrapped in a policy package, other times it's wrapped in dog whistles. Either way, it's all part of the GOP's electoral strategy. They know their base well.

Republicans, needless to say, don't take kindly to this. It's all phony and cynical, a way for liberals to take principled differences and turn them into racial appeals of their own. Sure, there may be racists who vote for Republicans, but there are plenty who vote for Democrats too. It's liberals who are addicted to playing the race card.

But now we're living through the era of Donald Trump.

Trump's a racist and a xenophobe. And a misogynist. We get it.

But when it comes to doing the right thing, it's conservatives who truly have the tough choice this year. Trump looks likely to win the Republican nomination, and that means the right thing for them to do is to literally hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton. Can you imagine how hard that's going to be? Hillary Clinton! And we're asking them to vote for her. Or, at the very least, to campaign against Trump and cast a protest vote. Either way, they're giving up their chance to kill Obamacare, to nominate a Supreme Court judge, to restore religious liberty as they see it, and to repeal all those executive orders they hate.

Will they do it? I don't know, but it's no joke to say that I feel their pain. All the cynicism and schadenfreude in the world can't mask how hard this is going to be. Conservatives are about to be tested as few political movements ever are.

Hmmph - one might well ask, are the Democrats going to do the right thing this spring and dump Hillary? The case can be made that her email conduct was criminal (the full Loretta Lynch cover-up and possible FBI protest resignations may be delayed until after her nomination). Her Goldman Sachs cronyism, contempt for questions from the press or her own party about the Goldman transcripts, her rape-enabling, her ongoing shakedowns through the out-of-control Clinton Foundation - why is this a hard choice for Democrats, or a choice at all? This is not "Hold your nose" and vote for Hillary; this is "put on the hip-waders". Oh, because "history" and "Scary racist sexist Republicans". And because the electorate is clearly calling out for four more years of crony capitalism and with Jeb! out who embodies that better than Hillary?

I'm a racist whoever I back, Chris Rock says Kevin Drum is a racist, Bernie Sanders and his supporters want millions of impoverished dark-skinned people to die, and away we go. Welcome to 2016.

OK, I did get sidetracked. Should have stopped at the Red Bull.

Megan offered a seventh point from Trump supporters commenting on the #NeverTrumpers:

Actually, they will vote for him. They’re just having a bit of a tantrum now.

Well... Trump gave a relatively restrained, bombast-free press conference rather than a victory speech last night. That does not rebut the criticism that he is a chameleon and a con man, but it may bring people home.

And as much as I say right now I could be OK with Hillary winning, if the inevitable email cover-up is bad enough and the prospect of her picking a Supreme Court Justice becomes even more of a "Set a thief to catch a thief" issue, well - let me be the first to claim hiding space behind Sean Connery's kilt and I'll rehearse a mumbled "Never Say Never Again".

But that is down the road. This is not that day!

 

 

 

 

Comments

[Jack is Back!]

Good Morning.

[Jeff Dobbs]

Cruz slips one in on Stephanouopoupoulous (sp?) while making his case against Trump last night:

TED CRUZ: We need to build a coalition, a team to ensure that the Republican nominee is a conservative and a candidate who will do what he says he will do.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, that is what you’re calling for. That is what you’re calling for, but Marco Rubio is staying in the race. John Kasich is staying in the race. Ben Carson is staying in the race.

CRUZ: Well, you know, George, every candidate will have to reflect on where the race is, will have to give it prayerful consideration. But what is clear is if the race remains divided, Donald Trump's path to the nomination is much more likely. Whereas if we unify, if it’s, head-to-head, our campaign beats Donald soundly. And for everyone concerned about the best interest of the Republican Party, if Donald is the nominee in all likelihood, your former boss Hillary Clinton becomes the president.

Ha! Ha ha! Ha ha ha! Take that George Stephan....wait a second...

FACT CHECK: Hillary wasn't George's boss. Bill was.

Sixty-Two Pinocchios!

[henry]

Morning JiB!

R candidate is racist? When has the media not said that?

[Jeff Dobbs]

TM:
OK, I made up that second hashtag but I'm sure there is one out there for his supporters and I'm sure it's not #TrumpUberAlles.

As heavily as you've been on twitter these last few days, I'm surprised you haven't seen #AlwaysTrump

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23alwaystrump&src=typd

Bit of a kerfuffle over the weekend as #NeverTrump had 10x the mentions that #AlwaysTrump did - but #AlwaysTrump was being listed as Trending by twitter.

[anonamom]

Speaking of Michigan parents voting, jimmyk--my mother, who I believe is a closeted D, registered I, told me yesterday she is going to be voting in the Republican primary there so she can vote against Trump.

Now I've just got to get her to vote for Cruz instead of Rubio. Though they can vote for uncommitted delegates too. I may have to go there if she's creeped out by what MM and I have been concerned about--his slicked back hair.
Really, she would never say that, but it is what makes him look scary.
Somebody tell him he's got to get a softer look.

[steve]

Sorry Tom, the anti-Trump folks ARE trashing the Trump supporters (as well as Trump himself).

The anti-Trump argument that Trump is basically evil, by definition, paints his supporters with the brush that they're too stupid to know any better than to root for the devil.

Unlike other areas (such as music, for example), in politics who one cheers for (and against) does go to the real you. One simply can't root for somebody stupid without revealing themselves as being stupid.

[henry]

Real World note from ourr Chtown Lurker8.2 quake in Indonesia, tsunami warning including Sumatra.

[clarice]

Just bashed around Ron Radosh and JPod last night for pumping that racist doodoo. C'mon--he definitely isn't and it definitely is a worn Dem trick. Actually a Rubio group was caught out making racist phone calls in which they pretended to be Trump,I think Ab got one of them in Hi IIRC.

[Miss Marple]

anonamom, I said that a couple of months ago. There is a picture of him from his college days in wire-rimmed glasses and with a much softer hair style. Made him look much more attractive.

[Miss Marple]

The #NeverTrump people have accused me personally of being stupid, not conservative, gullible, emotional, etc. etc.

That's me personally.

I have argued with Kevin Williamson, Jim Geraghty and other early on (before I made up my mind) to go easy on his supporters.

I was treated with contempt.

Now that they need Trump supporters' votes, they suddenly act like they didn't do this.

My experience is that this is simply not true.

[James D]

Wow, Kevin Drum can die in a fire. I guess I'm epistimogolically closed or whatever the phrase is, because I see no value whatsoever in reading or thinking about the lies and crap spewed by him and his ilk.

[anonamom]

Yes, MM, and I agreed then. And that picture was a great example of what he could be. Ditch the Brylcreme Ted.

After watching Chris Rock's highly entertaining performance nailing the Hollywood libs, and then having it pointed out how racist he was with his portrayal of Asian Americans, and since everybody knows Republicans are racists, I propose it's time we own it.

Hillary's catching crap from BLM for her super predator remark and locking up every black man under the age of 40 in the 90's, Republicans are all racists, all the time, just because---so let's agree we all are racists, at least all of us sighted people, and move on.

#WeAreAll RacistsNow

[James D]

Voting update - the australians are continuing to gain ground. The margin is now 41-37 (much too close!)

http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=56d261bae4b01668ec061dbf

[Theo]

It seems to me that it is not a good idea to explain that your potential supporters are stupid and gullible. But any successful political party NEEDS to get the votes of stupid and gullible people. As Adlai Stevenson famously said, a candidate needs a majority. The smart and non gullible are not enough.

What the leaders of a party have to do is harness the energy and support from the stupid and gullible that are at least willing to support their party's candidates.

What has gone so horribly wrong this year is that the rubes got tired of being played for fools by party leaders who promised but never delivered so they have become willing to be played as even bigger fools by a charlatan.

The peasants are indeed revolting.

[Miss Marple]

Madeline Albright is on Fox Business. She is all worried about how people in the Middle East think Americans have lost their minds and they are scared of Donald Trump and keep asking her how to understand what's going on.

Maria Bartolomo asks her about helping Americans understand why they are losing jobs. Heh.

[NK]

TomM says: "....ongoing support for the Trump message but rejection of the messenger."

BravoZulu TomM. This post (although it wandered a bit) is spot on. We have now seen enough voting to know what's going on. The Dem Party is full on commie, with enough old white libs for Hilligula to win a small majority of primary votes over an out of the closet commie. GOPe no longer controls the Repub Party because its voters are now solidly anti-DC conservatives.... all is proceeding as people like Glenn Reynolds, TomM and I have hoped. EXCEPT, a con man has hijacked the Repub protest votes, instead of a non-DC conservative. My hope now is that Trump plays kingmaker using his 35+/- of the repub vote to decide who gets the nomination. You KNOW it won't be Rubio, Trump treats him like a 10 yo, it will be Cruz, GOPe's bete noir. At this point I am very confident Cruz will beat Hilligula. What about RACIST!!!!, persuadeables are fed up with that. What about MISOGYNIST!!! See BJ Clinton. Cruz is the one we have been waiting for to reform GOPe. Embrace Ted.

[Miss Marple]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/republican_delegate_count.html

Updated and current.

[James D]

Here's how it looks to me. Unless the whole rest of the GOP goes totally nuclear on Trump, he's going to win the nomination.

Going totally nuclear on him will damage the party, damage whichever candndate ends up the nominee instead of him, and drive away a huge chunk of Trump's supporters.

Which will lead to Hillary in the White House.

If you're OK with that, fine.

If you're OK with Hillary picking the next 2 or 3 Supreme Court nominees, fine.

If you're OK with Heller getting reversed and the 2nd Amendment being thrown in the trash once and for all, fine.

If you're OK with Sidney Blumenthal running our foreign policy, fine.

If you're OK with Hillary having control of the IRS and the Justice Department and all the other levers of power available to use against her endless enemies list (which you're all on), fine.

If you're OK with Obamacare having 4 or 8 more years to become further entrenched so it can never, ever be repealed, fine.

If you're OK with Bill Clinton diddling interns in the Oval Office again, because that's classier and better than the vulgar, unPresidential Trump, fine.

If you're OK with amnesty and the total dissolution of any semblance of a border, fine.

But that's all on you.

[Miss Marple]

NK,

Now you are hoping Trump saves Cruz.

This is rather ironic.

[Miss Marple]

http://news.yahoo.com/allah-ordered-child-beheading-nanny-says-moscow-court-093939167.html;_ylt=AwrXoCEg7dZWwCwAZSbQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTByM3V1YTVuBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMzBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--

[Texas Liberty Gal]

MM - that link you just posted shows Cruz with 161 delegates but Jeff posted on the previous thread a NYT tracker that showed Cruz with 211. I'm confused.

[NK]

JamesD/MissM-- with affection and respect, both of your comments have it exactly backwards. I criticized Cruz's '14 filibuster antics here because at the time they hurt the cause of using the budget to push back against Obummer and set up '16, and Cruz was using the filibuster to run for POTUS. Well I was right about the POTUS run, but subsequent events proved that the Repubs had no intention to fight on the budget, they were worse in '15 than I could have imagined. Live and learn. After Walker dropped out I immediately supported Cruz because he was the next most reliable conservative, my only question was could he win? Yes he can. So my support of Cruz is bona fide, I know what he is, faults and all. Cruz/NikkiH wins. Why does JamesD have it backwards? b/c Trump is exceptional. he is the only Repub left who would lose to Hiligula, Cruz, Rubio, Carson and The Mailman's son would all win. All the horribles you list James, WILL HAPPEN, if Trump is nominated.

[Theo]

James --

It is an unbelievable nightmare to think that the choice will be Hillary or Trump. You point out the awfulness of a Hillary win. BUT it seems highly likely that a Trump nomination equals a Hillary win and even if it does not it demonstrates that the Republican Party is unserious and unconservative and controlled by stupid people capable of being bamboozlec by a transparent con man.

There are no good options here. It is one thing to say that I would vote fr the devil to stop Rodham. But it is another to allow the nomination of the devil, whose nomination almost assuredly leads to Rodham's election anyway.

No good options at all, but nominating Trump is the worst.

[NK]

Theo, hear, hear.

[Rick Ballard]

NK,

Do you think the defraud & default candidate recognizes the depth of revulsion driving the record primary turnout on the part of notTrump voters to the extent he will allow brain to supersede ego? After all, he does have a verifiable record of sticking with con jobs right into bankruptcy.

[Marlene]

Poor Bernie. He will be in Portland (Maine) today. Today's venue holds about 1,500 people,not quite the 7,000 that attended his event at another venue last July.

[James D]

NK, Theo

The problem is that none of the other candidates who would beat Hillary are, at this point, capable of beating Trump in the nomination race.

Maybe if they all drop out tomorrow and form a united anti-Trump front, but we all know that's not going to happen.

The only way someone other than Trump wins now, barring something really unforseen, is to go the nuclear route. And I think that would guarantee a defeat for that candidate in the general.

I think the only option now is to rally around Trump and use whatever leverage is gained by doing so to try and steer him in better directions.

[NK]

RickB-- with respect. IMO you have a few fundamental of thing wrong about Le Donald. The 80s=- 90s bankruptcies (USFL/casinos/TrumpAir) were egomaniacal and predatory disasters. In the 80s, he rode the junk bond wave and believed he invented business. He went bust, his dad bailed him out, and he learned lessons. Since then, he re-created his FINANCIAL business model (it's still the Trump-name con), but it's all above board, his investors know what they are getting. There have been more bankruptcies, but they are strategic, just business.

[boris]

"All the horribles you list James, WILL HAPPEN, if Trump is nominated"

After a while this "Trujmp is a #@$% !!!" starts to sound like the punch line of the old joke about the husband caught in bed with another woman. "Who are you going to believe, your loving husband or your lying eyes?"

If Trump is so bad how come only the people who despise him can see it?

[Appalled]

I don't believe Trump will leave the GOP convention without running for President. he will either be the GOP nominee, or a third party candidate. (If he loses the nomination, it will be through the sort of maneuvering that would justify to him and a lot of his supporters a third-party run)

The GOPe will cave to him. They are good at it, and I think they believe Trump can be had.

The world looks so small and beautiful from this lonely ledge. The smoke from failing campaigns is pretty and billowy, like clouds.

[Miss Marple]

I have no explanation, TLG.

I will keep an eye out for other delegate totals as they pop up.

I think that numbers get confused both by misstated totals from the states plus errors, and then garbled by media.

As we know, reporters are math challenged.

[NK]

Sorry JamesD that is backwards. We have reached maximum Trump, he leads the current plurality because the (vital) protest vote supports him, and conservatives/GOPe have split their votes but control the aggregate 60+ plurality. The smart play for ALL conservatives right now is to 'make a deal'. Le Donald is all about the deal, but what does he want? (Australia? like Lex Luthor?)

[henry]

For all those anti-Apple types, the WSJ editorial page adopted my "cactus" position today -- though wimpily so without mentioning the cactus or its proposed use.

[boris]

What ARE you smoking NK?

[Centralcal on iPad]

Theo: It is an unbelievable nightmare to think that the choice will be Hillary or Trump.

That is how I have felt from the beginning of Mr. Trump's candidacy.

[NK]

35+% of 30% of aggregate voters can't see it right now. That is about 15% of likely November voters.

[DebinNC]

Two more debates before March 15:

Thursday, March 3, 2016
Fox News Republican Debate
Aired On: Fox News Channel
Location: Fox Theatre in Detroit, Michigan
Sponsors: Fox News
Moderators: Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly and Chris Wallace

Thursday, March 10, 2016
CNN Republican Debate
Aired On: CNN
Location: University of Miami in Miami, Florida
Sponsors: CNN, The Washington Times, Salem Media Group

GOP primary/caucus schedule

[Appalled]

If Trump is so bad how come only the people who despise him can see it?

I ask that question every day...

[jimmyk]

he will either be the GOP nominee, or a third party candidate.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe late July is far too late to start a 3rd party campaign, in terms of getting on the ballot in most states. The risk of maneuvering a defeat for Trump at the convention would be that his supporters would sit out the general in a fit, or, worse, vote for the Dem.

[Porchlight]

NK and Rick,

Trump is the second choice of at least some of that 60+ and the final choice of the "I'll vote for him in the general if I have to" view of so many of us here, even our host. So characterizing the not-Trump vote now as a never-Trump vote in November is a big error.

[James D]

Trump has plenty of negatives, but I simply do not see him as "the devil" or "a threat to democracy" (as the WaPo had it today) or a possible Hitler.

And the more that people tell me he is, the more convinced I am that it's all hysteria.

[Porchlight]

Ditto James D. That kind of talk ought to embarrass those doing the talking.

[jimmyk]

henry, despite the absence of the cactus, that WSJ editorial is pretty strong. Since it's behind the paywall, here's an excerpt:

What makes the FBI’s request so extraordinary is that the iPhone encryption and security methods were legal when they were created and still are. Apple has no more connection to the data on Farook’s phone than Ford does to a bank robber who uses an F-150 as a getaway vehicle.

If the government can compel a manufacturer to invent intellectual property that does not exist in order to invade its own lawful products, then there is no limiting legal principle. Could the FBI require a tech maker, for example, to send a malware worm to a user’s device in the form of a routine update?

The other myth is that Apple is merely being asked to crack “one phone in the entire world,” as Marco Rubio puts it. This is also false. The Justice Department is beseeching Apple to provide software retrofits in at least a dozen public cases, and state and local prosecutors have stacks of backlogged iPhones they want unlocked too. In the New York case Apple won this week, prosecutors want Apple to unlock an iPhone even though the owner has pleaded guilty.

If Apple now writes the program the G-men desire, then the technique will be used in investigations that have nothing to do with terrorism as other prosecutors use the same argument. This is the back door by degrees that Apple CEO Tim Cook describes.

It goes on to say that Congress could do pass legislation requiring "back doors," though it would be a mistake. But judges can't do this. Of course we thought judges couldn't do lots of things, like mandate gay marriage, and here we are.

[Appalled]

jimmyk:

As much as we all dream of brokered conventions and smoke filled rooms -- because we watched a lot of old movies growing up -- any true maneuvering will happen well before the convention, and my guess is that Trump, who has run a very smart campaign, while appearing to be winging it, has his third party plan in operation already.

[Jeff Dobbs]

TLG:
MM - that link you just posted shows Cruz with 161 delegates but Jeff posted on the previous thread a NYT tracker that showed Cruz with 211. I'm confused.

Much of what counts like the NYT are doing now is speculation on how the district-allocated delegates are going to be awarded - before all the results at that level have been fully counted.

161 represents what we know - and 211 shows what the NYT thinks will happen once the dust settles.

It's very fluid - and can change. The NYT page shows a range of what could happen, with their number being the median estimate for that range.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/01/upshot/super-tuesday-live-republican-delegate-estimates.html?_r=0

Right now it's 241, 223, 110 for Trump, Cruz and Rubio (and even then, it's live and continuously updating - those numbers are moving around ~5 points every so often).

[DebinNC]

Nightmare-wise, it's hard to beat beat BOzo v. Romney, since imo the outcome was evident from the start.

[Miss Marple]

Trump is in Ohio, today, talking to voters in coal country about bringing the industry back.

I am not in Ohio, but maybe Captain Hate knows if Kasich has done much to help those communities. I haven't seen Kasich address this.

I think there is a great deal of speculation about whether Trump can defeat Hllary and it is based on polls which will change once he's the nominee.

You will note that I am not "ok" with Hillary winning, nor am I throwing a hissy fit and refusing to vote for the GOP nominee if it isn't Trump. If Trump wins the nomination, I expect all of those people who insisted he sign that pledge to support him.

[narciso]

The presidency is trump's latest project, in part the boycotted and the naysayers like Williamson and ramos, burned the boats and gave him 'skin in the game'

[boris]

"has his third party plan ..."

Then it's Doom Doom Doom
The Devil's in the Room

And you will have something to be Appalled about for the rest of your life.

[Theo]

Trump is not "a threat to democracy." He is what democracy looks like when the leaders fail to control those they purport to speak for.

But contra James the issue is not whether to go nuclear on Trump. Rodham will do it if we do not. If he cannot survive the #nevertrump onslaught now he will not survive it in the fall. There are no good options but taking it easy on Trump is not one of the better ones.

[Miss Marple]

I think Captain Hate has been coaching Kudlow.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/03/01/kudlow_romney_a_political_eunuch_would_have_no_impact_against_trump_why_not_use_money_against_hillary.html

[NK]

Trump is a November loser because he activates Leftwing voters and he makes a majority of conservative and GOP voters throw up in their mouths to vote for him.

[Miss Marple]

Theo,

If you think leaders should "control those they purport to speak for" your definition of democracy is not mine.

[Miss Marple]

NK,

You think CRUZ won't activate Leftwing voters?

[narciso]

And the hope pretty much neutered cruz, this is why they can't get ahead, also sasse, cotton and lee can't get together and Marshall their forces.

[boris]

"Rodham will do it if we do not"

Go ahead and push the self destruct button just don't pretend you're doing us a favor.

[James D]

Theo @ 9:35

Yes, but Hillary will go nuclear against whoever the R's nominate. That's not a question.

The question is, does our side nuke itself first, so that whoever we send out against Hillary is already blinded and flash-burned and dying of radiation poisoning before she launches her own missiles?

[boris]

"majority of conservative and GOP voters throw up in their mouths to vote for him"

Really hard to see how he wins the nomination if that's the case. Again, what ARE you smoking?

[James D]

An analogy:

You know that in a real game, the opposing defense is going to try and hit your quarterback, sack him, knock him out of the game if they can manage it.

Do you let your own defense do the same thing in practice, or do you put a red jersey on him so that he doesn't end up with a broken leg before you take the field on Sunday afternoon?

[jimmyk]

The idea that someone who has generated the enthusiastic response that Trump has would lose to a shriveled-up old hag with one foot in the slammer and the other in the grave is nuts. I'm all for trying to nominate someone else, but Trump is able to continue winning as he has, he'll get the nomination and likely the presidency.

[jimmyk]

IF Trump is able to continue...

[Jeff Dobbs]

There 5 Repub contests on Saturday. Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Maine.

3 are caucuses: Kansas, Kentucky and Maine.

Browback and Sen Pat Roberts have endorsed Rubio. Sec State Kris Kobach has endorsed Trump.

Will Rand Paul endorse before Saturday?

Jindal has endorsed Rubio.

LePage has endorsed Trump (after railing on him only days before the endoresment).

Hardly any polling available for these states. A KY poll taken on 2/22-2/26 puts it Trump 35, Rubio 22, Cruz 15. Not seeing anything for the others.

Is LA more like TX/OK or more like AL/GA? Or split the difference and make it like AR?

Does the Super Tuesday results change any momentum? Does what happens at the Thursday debate have time to make a difference in a Saturday vote?

How many early voted? Late breaking votes have consistently gone to Rubio more than anyone else, Cruz second.

[Threadkiller]

The system is broken.  We’ve given the secretary of state and attorney general and both of the state party chairs enough warning to tell them over and over again, ‘You’re violating the intent of the law,’ and the answer we get is, ‘It’s a federal issue.’  But if you file in the federal courts, it’s a local issue, depending on what is convenient,” the plaintiff told us.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2016/03/01/exclusive-new-presidential-eligibility-challenge-filed-with-supreme-court-of-texas/

The merits...

[Theo]

Jimmy --

I agree that Rodham is a weak opponent. But Trump is the one Republican that she can beat. And the Republicans that conservatives should want least. Makes no sense to submit to the worst and least electable candidate.

[clarice]

If Clinton wins her party's nomination, I expect there will be a drop in the voting by the most leftwing of her party--you know, the warren and sanders supporters.
https://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2016/03/01/the-nevertrump-crowd-should-get-a-life/
The never trump crowd is being foolish--On FB they are being referred to as Vichyidiots.

[Barry Dauphin]

Hillary: "What America needs is more love...and Republicans are racists."

[DebinNC]

Jeff or anyone, do you know which polling outfits came closest to last night's outcome?

[Threadkiller]

Does the "late breaking vote" assumption come from a comparison with pre election polling?

Or does "early voting" get counted first on election night?

In CA early voting is accomplished by mail in ballots, but those ballots are the last to be counted IIRC.

[boris]

"I'm all for trying to nominate someone else, but if Trump is able to continue winning as he has, he'll get the nomination and likely the presidency"

One problem for Trump or Cruz will be not looking mean to Hillary in debates. seriously given that she is going to babble and bluster like a drunken Biden anything they say will look like they are picking on her.

I suggest either of them should select Carly for VP then say Hillary has to beat Carly in a debate before she can debate them.

Trump could probably pull that off better than Cruz, but Cruz has the most risk looking mean if he tries to counter Hillary's hogwash with unwelcome, harsh, mean-spirited facts.

[clarice]

If the RNC didn't want him they should have talked Rubio into dropping out and thrown their support to Cruz but they hate him more than they hate Trump and can't/won't do it.
In the meantime the big R donors have thrown away millions on Jeb and Rubio and their base is asking."guess which finger we're holding up?"

[narciso]

And we were toldaverick and mittens were the only ones, accept no substitutes, how did that work out. Either Giuliani or even the late f red Thompson could have mailed in a performance better, and meet could have done the same.

[Theo]

Miss M @9:35 --

We do not disagree about what democracy means. My point was that the GOP leaders have failed to properly lead and the result is Trump.

[NK]

Cruz will be attacked as a conservative rightwinger, and leftwingers will turn out, sure. But Trump is exceptional, he'll turn out ambivalent black and young voters for Dems to a much higher degree. Primary Protest voters will also turnout for Cruz, he is anti-GOPe.

[jimmyk]

Makes no sense to submit to the worst and least electable candidate.

Voters are (largely) going to determine this. I'll vote for Cruz if I have the opportunity, but if Trump gets the votes and the nomination, what does it mean to "submit" or not?

[Jeff Dobbs]

clarice:
The never trump crowd is being foolish--On FB they are being referred to as Vichyidiots.

And here I thought it was "not a good strategy" to call people who see things differently than you by mean names and insult them.

#ButTheyStartedIt!

[NK]

Cruz wouldn't pick Carly as VP, too much over the top anti-Hilligula in that combo. It will be a 'softer' woman VP nominee. Although Carly could be used to great effect in a TV campaign against Hilligula.

[henry]

Jeff, perhaps #AllLivesAreStupidAndFoolish!

[Rick Ballard]

Rasmussen has an excellent graphic illustrating the complete stability of Trump support over five months. He has lost no ground whatsoever.

[narciso]

The dems never care about being over the top, and we discovered that concerns from the top men in 2008, were enemy action, like Rockefeller in 64.

[narciso]

Well mckisson's some lives matter movement, which has been active since 2012 as the dream defender's really need to be countered.

[rse]

More redefinition of what the GOPe believes 'conservatism' now means. I warned about the Jim DeMint letter in late January and have been writing about what the Atlas Network is really pushing. These think tanks are redefining terms like liberty, free enterprise, freedom, limited government in a progressive direction and they do not want to get caught.

I first noticed it in the Jindal Education Next report about a year ago. I have an example of the liberty aspect that I plan to write next. This just came out. http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/01/how-to-redirect-todays-socialism-and-fascism-towards-limited-government/

If you read carefully Lu is talking about what I have been warning the Atlas members like Reason and Cato are pushing-a guaranteed minimum income brought via a refundable EITC. That is also in the City docs. Every document assumes that anyone living anywhere is to have a minimum amount of income guaranteed for existing.

Notice also how Lu says Paul Ryan is the champion of this vision. Fits with his joining and helping create a think tank with Jack kemp almost as soon as he graduated from Miami with a public policy major.

This is a vision of communitarianism administered at the local level and Trump is in the way. He might not go along with this boondoggle the Uniparty and pols at all level have already baked into the plans that ESSA and wioa were downpayments for. That is why they were Bicameral and Bipartisan.

[James D]

Rick @ 10:02

And of course prominent members of his own party proclaiming they won't vote for him even if he does win the nomination (who are then quoted endlessly in the MSM) couldn't possibly have any impact on those results, right?

[Momto2]

Trump fans should know that the #NeverTrump Republicans who wrote to me are not rejecting you,

Oh really?

Exhibit A:

"controlled by stupid people capable of being bamboozlec by a transparent con man."

[Theo]

There is always an anti Washington element in the primary voting. Trump has tapped into that brilliantly of course. But he is not really in any meaningful way a Republican and certainly not in any serious way a conservative.

It is sad to think what might have been. This campaign started with a shipload of Republican governors in the race -- Jindal, Walker, Christie, Kasich, Perry, Pataki, Bush -- all of whom (well maybe not Jeb) could credibly run as the anti Washington candidate against Hillary.

But Trump sucked all the oxygen out of the air. None of the governors were able to gain traction and we are left with Trump and a couple of Senators (Kasich is still technically in the race I guess). Cruz is the most anti Washington Senator imaginable but still a Senator. Rubio is what is left for the GOPe.

I agree with Jimmy that Rodham should be easy to beat. Almost any of the governors could have done it. Trump is the one who could lose to her, because while being anti Washington is a good thing in politics it is not the only thing there is.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

--....unbelievable nightmare...--

No, having to vote for Trump over Clinton is not an unbelievable nightmare. A country no longer free because we elect two Marxists back to back is an unbelievable nightmare.
Our children having an all powerful Dem party and a rump of a GOP because the clean togas cemented an unbelievable immigration nightmare in place and allowed a fascistic SCOTUS majority to come into being because they imagined a bigmouth with not conservative enough policies to be Benito Mussolini or Ernst Rohm. Plus his fingers are short and his mouth is funny and the hair don't get me started on the hair and his language, for shame. His manners? Even worse.
You think your kids are gonna hate you for electing the vulgarian? Try electing Madame Mao by engaging in this Sherman's March to Coney Island to burn Trump down and see how they feel living through their own Cultural Revolution.

--And the Republicans that conservatives should want least. Makes no sense to submit to the worst and least electable candidate.--

I see things fermented a little further overnight. We're not approaching peak Trump. We're approaching peak TDS.
Who is "submitting"? The vast majority of people here not only do not submit to Trump he's not even their second choice.
The people not making sense are the ones who say if he is the nominee he is no choice and they'll help elect the harpy.

Moreover if it's all about our nice shiny little crystal ball that tells us who can win or we're going to decide who can win based on today's polling can we please direct the same flamethrowers at Cruz and Rubio?
Kasich is de man according to RCP by a substantial margin. So if polls now are so useful let's all get behind the mailman's twerp with the Shirley Temple bangs.

[NK]

[email protected]:11, again ....hear hear!

You must be Greek.... amirite?

[Rick Ballard]

JamesD,

I just think it's great that he has been able to retain his initial level of support after all the revelations and attacks. It's obviously a waste of time to continue with them wrt his adamantine base.

[Theo]

Ig --

I certainly agree that stopping Rodham is the highest priority. But (a) Trump is the least likely potential nominee to do so (b) even if he does, he is the least conservative potential nominee (by miles) and thus only marginal better than Herself and (c) he probably hurts the GOP most in downballot races for Congress.

My point is not that we should vote for Hillary over Trump. My point is that we should take action -- strong action if necessary -- to prevent that from being the choice. James D. thinks we should go easy on Trump because we might have to support him later. I think we should go all out to stop him now so that we do not have to support him later.

[narciso]

On paper, maybe so, but Christie was mostly a loud feckless weasel, the medici carries all the family wares, Jindal was deepsixed by a had round in the oil patch and this strange fixation to vouch for maverick, and so on.

[Theo]

NK --

No, not Greek. Not that there would be anything wrong with that.

[narciso]

Rubio wE on track, when he zeroed on zaphod m.o, instead he resorted by pie throwing, who's the champ there?

[clarice]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/02/middle-ground-how-trump-plotted-general-election-strategy-from-start.html

The back story.

[clarice]

If you are so sure Clinton would beat trump, pls show me that 7 months ago you predicted Trump would be leading the pack today.

My crystal ball may be more opaque than yours.

[NK]

Theo... heh!

[Captain Hate]

Trump is in Ohio, today, talking to voters in coal country about bringing the industry back.

I am not in Ohio, but maybe Captain Hate knows if Kasich has done much to help those communities. I haven't seen Kasich address this.

Absolutely not; that's where Twitch is from and is probably why he supported Rodham in 2008 since they've been decimated by 404's EPA and have voted accordingly. The mailman's route doesn't seem to cover that area which would make it fertile ground for anyone else.

[Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki]

Depends on the definition of "all out".

"Trump isn't predictable or reliably conservative enough and could lose to Hillary, so whatever you do, vote for da udder guy" is one thing and a reasonable one.

"#NeverTrump because he's Mussolini reanimated and he'll destroy the GOP and conservatives for ever after will be associated with the specter of our very own Hitler/Stalin/VladTheImpaler/JhengisKhan/Berea/etc and anyone who votes for or supports him is a freaking, turncoat, Quisling imbecile" is quite another.

I'm hearing a not insubstantial amount of the latter. Perhaps more than the former.

[Theo]

Narciso --

You are right that each of the Republican governors had their weaknesses. But I was wistfully imagining a primary season without Trump. The anti Washington vote would have been available for the governors. Yes, Carly and Carson, as the most extreme outsiders, would have picked up some of it, but neither are as capable at populism as Trump. I think one of the governors would have emerged.

[Captain Hate]

Article V will be our salvation no matter what happens in November.

[James D]

Well, it's 1 AM in Australia now, so the "Know Your Enemy" voters are hopefully done for a few hours.

Thanks to y'all, my lead is back up to 44-35 (with the other book at 21%). But if you have a few minutes, please hop on over and help me pad the lead:

http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=56d261bae4b01668ec061dbf

[Blue Ox]

If most of us were asked nine months ago to describe the person we'd most like to see as the nominee, I think it would have been a solid, unrepentant conservative who is not beholden to the brain trust that has overseen failure too many times. They would also need to prove themselves electable against the Pantsuit Leviathan.

Please explain how Cruz does not meet each of those requirements. But that doesn't matter because ... his haircut?

In all the criticism of Rubio, I've yet to hear that he's a Trojan horse who's real goal is to see Hillary! elected.

In the 8 months that remain before election day, which remaining candidate has the highest potential to self-destruct? Would it really surprise anyone to see it happen?

It's exciting to hold a lit firecracker in your hand, right up to the moment you lose your fingers.