I was thinking this last night as well. It’s not as strong as it looked:
We won’t know the exact numbers until Wednesday, but it looks as though Trump will, by some estimates, finish with somewhere in the neighborhood of 245 delegates. A week ago, that would have been a worst-case scenario for his Super Tuesday. It gets worse: Cruz won resounding victories in Texas and Oklahoma. He trails Trump in the delegate haul for the night by only about 60 delegates. And when you put together the not-Trump share, Rubio and Cruz (and Kasich) will top out around 320 delegates to Trump’s 245 (or so). He’s still falling way short of half the delegates.
There’s more evidence of Trump weakness if you look closely: Why did he lose Oklahoma? Because it’s the only state where the vote was restricted to actual Republicans. Which further bolsters the case that Trump is not leading a revolt from within the party, but staging a hostile takeover of it.
Yes. The RNC’s primary process is idiotic, in that it’s set up to allow non-Republicans select their nominee.
The single most shocking number from Super Tuesday might have been this poll showing voter awareness about various aspects of Trump: Only 27 percent had heard about his reluctance to denounce David Duke and the KKK; 20 percent about Trump University and the fraud lawsuit; 13 percent about the failure of Trump Mortgage.
At some point, those numbers will all be at 90 percent because someone will spend a lot of money putting ads about them all over television in battleground states. The only question is whether it will be conservatives or Hillary Clinton who expose voters to this information. Either way, it suggests that Trump still has the potential for downward mobility if conservative donors are serious about stopping him.
Of course, you can spend your life flyspecking trend lines. And Trump could continue to lose momentum over the next four weeks and still grind his way to the nomination. Winning is what matters.
But if you believe that stopping Trump matters too, then Super Tuesday offered evidence this goal is achievable.
We opened with Sly Stallone but we’ll close with Arnold and a great line Predator: “If it bleeds, we can kill it.” That’s true of Trumpism. Maybe Trump will be the nominee. That’s where you’d put your money if forced to bet on it. But it’s not a foregone conclusion. And if anything, Super Tuesday proved both Trump’s strength and his vulnerability.
Yes. It isn’t too late to stop him, but it would sure help if the non-Trumpers could coalesce. Kasich almost certainly gave Virginia to Trump.
[Late-morning update]
Aaaaand Carson is out. So, is Kasich cutting a deal with Trump, or staying in under the delusion that an Ohio win will somehow propel him to ultimate victory?
[Thursday-morning update]
The Trump tipping point. What strikes me about the Trump supporters is how utterly ideologically incoherent they are. Just like him. If you could go with either Trump or Sanders, you have no political principles, other than “the guy who will give me stuff I want.”
[Update Thursday afternoon]
Trump wants to make America great again. Like Denmark.
And the GOP establishment had it coming. No question about that.
This is what needs to happen. Senator Rubio teams up with Senator Cruz to form a “unity” ticket with Cruz as the presidential candidate and Rubio as the presumptive vice presidential choice. This has to happen within the week.
Furthermore, Ted Cruz needs to start meeting with Mitch McConnell, yes, Lindsey Graham to “mend fences” . . . now.
I also think that Senator Rubio should be the junior partner in this “arrangement”, where his inspirational speaking style will serve a good cause.
The Republican primary voters and caucus participants will be offered a choice between the Trump-Christie “ticket” and the Cruz-Rubio one. If enough “Archie Bunkers” cross over to support Mr. Trump, so be it, and Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee. There will be a plain choice offered to voters with two different visions of who the Republicans want to put forward and what that party is about. If Mr. Trump wins this contest, it will be “because democracy”, not because the candidates offering an alternative could not set ego aside for the good of the party and of the country.
The Republican Party needs to broker something between Cruz and Rubio and between the Party and Senator Cruz — now, for the Senate Majority Leader should simply keep silent going forward.
“This is what needs to happen. Senator Rubio teams up with Senator Cruz to form a “unity” ticket with Cruz as the presidential candidate and Rubio as the presumptive vice presidential choice. This has to happen within the week.”
Paul,
Here’s the problem I see with that and the problem is procedural:
So Rubio has a few delegates and Cruz has a lot more. If Rubio joins Cruz I don’t believe that Rubuo’s delegates are forced to vote for Cruz. I think they become free agents. I could be wrong about that.
This is why, for example, candidates “suspend” their campaigns – that allows them to keep control of their delegates.
Now this may not matter at this point because Rubio has so few. But should he win Florida that could become important.
It’s not so much Rubio’s current delegates that a merger would be about, but the ability to get more votes that Trump in areas that are winner-take-all or winner-take-all-per-district. In proportional representation settings, a 35% plurality gets 35% or so of the seats and a 30% second place gets about 30%. However, if it’s winner-take-all, second place gets a stuffed animal and a hug.
A 35% Trump, 25% Cruz, 20% Rubio turns into 37% Trump (assuming a small drainage), 43% Cruz/Rubio (with Kasich the only one outside of that mix, I’m not sure where the other 20% is going, but I’ll keep the example). Not much of an issue in proportional states, but a big difference in winner-take-alls.
The idea of rallying behind Cruz to stop Trump is out there among the sort of people who would be needed to implement such a plan.
“Ted Cruz is not my favorite by any means, but we may be in a position where we have to rally around Ted Cruz as the only way to stop Donald Trump.” – Lindsey Graham 3/01/16 on CBS
The delegate counts at this point are not that significant — it is the primary and caucus votes going forward that I am talking about.
The Senate Majority Leader, bless him, seems to think that forcing Governor Kasich out will save his colleague Senator Rubio. If Jake Tapper is suggesting to Senator Rubio is “in denial”, he should have that talk with the Majority Leader.
If the Majority Leader is worried about becoming the Minority Leader on account of Mr. Trump wrecking the chances of Republicans “down ballot”, he needs to mend fences with the Junior Senator from Texas and do this quickly. I think he has enough political and life experience to “get over” whatever personal differences he has with Senator Cruz.
Yes, that – a Cruz-Rubio unity ticket – except as others have already pointed out, for tactical reasons it can’t be official till the convention.
I ran the vote totals early this morning, after failing to find them online. Still a few percent out in a couple of states, but these are very close to final.
Of ~8.5 million votes cast yesterday:
Trump 34.4%
Cruz 29.3%
Rubio 21.9%
(Kasich and Carson both down around 6% – Carson has now drawn the correct conclusion)
Recent non-final delegate totals from yesterday: Trump 234, Cruz 209, Rubio 94, Kasich 19, Carson 3.
The polls were WAY off yesterday. Including lots of polls that been relatively accurate up till yesterday. Something underlying has shifted.
See the rolling nationwide likely Republican primary voters poll at
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TR130/filters/LIKELY_PRIMARY15:1,PARTY_ID_:2/dates/20160201-20160301/type/day
They had Trump at 42, Cruz at 20, Rubio 19.2 yesterday. In other words, Trump underperformed by eight points, while Cruz overperformed by nine, and Rubio overperformed by two.
My read: Rubio’s attacks are working to erode Trump’s support – but most of Trump’s deserters are going to Cruz. (This is actually not surprising – attacks work, but people don’t like the attacker either. And Rubio’s smart enough to have known this going in…)
End result, Trump drew a minority of yesterday’s delegates, far enough behind Cruz + Rubio that he now has less than half the overall total.
The path to a contested convention, resolved by a Cruz/Rubio unity ticket, seems clear.
What’s really interesting is that the GOPe is starting to understand that is will for the first time have to settle for the VP spot. See Lindsey Graham’s grudging admission of essentially that at http://www.cbsnews.com/live/video/super-tuesday-sen-graham-weighs-in-on-race/
Interesting times!
Rubio’s attacks are working to erode Trump’s support – but most of Trump’s deserters are going to Cruz. (This is actually not surprising – attacks work, but people don’t like the attacker either. And Rubio’s smart enough to have known this going in…)
Yes, from the way Rubio’s been talking, he’s ultimately willing to kamikaze himself to prevent a Trump nomination.
Rubio’s what, 44? If this works – and Dem primary turnouts so far are anemic, while Reps are setting records – he’s VP at 45, and whether he keeps that job for one term or two, he has to wait till, what, age 53 for his turn and a clear shot at President?
A lot of people face tougher choices. He was doomed for the top spot this year the instant he decided to lean GOPe, and since the primaries started this has been obvious. The anti-GOPe vote (Trump+Cruz+Carson) has been two-thirds of the total or more throughout, the GOPe slice one-third or less.
Kasich and Carson are the biggest blocks to beating rump. It’s hard for me to imagine that very many Kasich voters would vote for Trump.
There’s a WaPo article that suggests a similar theory regarding open vs closed Primaries:
“But there have been four closed elections: the Iowa caucus, the Nevada caucus, and Super Tuesday’s Oklahoma primary and Alaska caucus. Ted Cruz won three of those four closed elections.
……..
First, the fact that South Carolina and most of the SEC primaries were open primaries may very well explain why those states did not turn out to be Ted Cruz’s firewall or launch states as he had predicted. Oklahoma did perform as expected, being a fairly comfortable win for Cruz.
………….
the four closed primaries and caucuses this Saturday could be very interesting to watch, particularly to see whether Trump can maintain his momentum in closed primary states where he will have to appeal to the traditional Republican base.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/03/02/so-far-trump-wins-open-primaries-and-cruz-wins-closed-and-the-calendar-is-starting-to-change-toward-more-closed-primaries/
I’ve been thinking that a lot of Trumps support comes from Democrats wanting to “flood the zone”…get him nominated because they see him as the easiest to beat.
I dunno… reports from my extended family, who have extensive contacts in every strata of society, tell me the people they talk to are genuinely gaga over Trump. Even the Mexican-American construction workers one relation works with say they don’t want illegal immigration, and they like Trump’s style. African-Americans like him, too.
And, I must say, while he worries me as being rather a loose cannon, he has the persona of a leader. I’m not voting for him in the primaries, but I’d be OK with him as the nominee. ABH.
No, the biggest obstacle right now is Marco Rubio.
Clear the decks and make this a two-candidate race, and if the people bothering to vote in the primaries and caucuses go for Mr. Trump, the people have spoken and we go forward. If Mr. Trump gets the nomination because the alternative to Mr. Trump’s vision is splintered, that will be a disaster because we will never know if Mr. Trump is who the people want, or we may find out when he gets beaten in November.
We are still up in the “flight levels”, but the altimeter is turning counter-clockwise crazy fast signaling our destiny, and Mitch McConnell wants Kasich out of the race? Get serious, Mr. Majority Leader.
Is it flood-the-zone or is it Archie Bunker-Democrats who actually like Mr. Trump?
Do we want to exclude Democrats who are tired of being told what to think by the elites in their party?
I was actually encouraged by the night’s results.
My thoughts were that Cruz would most likely win Texas but that it wasn’t impossible that Trump would.
Then, I figured the worst case was that Trump would win all the rest. This would add to the sense of “inevitability” which, I think, is a key factor right now.
Next likely scenario to me was that Cruz wins Texas and then Rubio wins Virginia. That would be better.
So when I saw that Cruz won 3 and Rubio won 1, I was very pleasantly surprised. This was better than I hoped for. Not so much for Delegate count though Cruz is now in a reasonable range. But more for breaking the myth of Trumpian inevitability plus it’s the first step to the long climb up to beat him.
It will still take a lot of work to beat Trump, and somehow Kasich and Carson have to leave the race. But I think that beating Trump came much ore feasible after yesterday’s results.
We’ll see.
Gregg,
What are your ideas on why Kasich and Carson are staying in the race?
Rubio I can see, because he’s given up his Senate seat to run.
Jon,
I really do not know. Any reason I gave would be only the merest guess.
Kasich might be delusional..thinking that if he wins Ohio he has a shot.
Carson said the other day that he’s hoping there is still time for people to change their minds and see that he offers Peace and Calm amidst the storms.
Or Carson might be pumping up his Post Campaign speech fees.
or maybe Kasich worked a deal with Trump to continue to split the vote for Trump – worked in Virginia – in return for some sort of post.
I have no idea.
They must have some amount of money to keep themselves going. Be nice to know what that amount is. I saw a lot of Kasich commercials here in Ma. prior to Tuesday. If they have only, say, $500k or so then one suspects they are in it for ulterior motives unrelated to an attempt to win the Presidency.
Or maybe the GOPe bribed them to stay in so that the convention would be brokered.
I wish they would get out of the race.
What I do know is that their cha
The safer way to have a contested convention is with a three-way race, given that upcoming primaries are a lot of winner-take-all.
That makes sense.
Which is why the Stupid Party might not reckon it that way 😉
Remember…the GOPe/Stupid Party wants to have a brokered convention (perhaps) BUT they do not want Cruz to benefit from that. So they might be trying to walk a very thin edge.
Bozos
Or have the opposition to Trump coalesce around Cruz and have Cruz win . . .
Carson has no reason to leave the race because it gives him a platform he wants. Carson will probably get a job in the Trump admin.
Ben is probably the most likable guy to ever run for president. He has served at revealing Cruz’s character (unliked for good reason.)
Trump may accidentally become president. I’m just enjoying the popcorn and exploding heads. It could turn out well. Don’t be such pessimists (sayith the ultimate negative thinker.)
“Ben is probably the most likable guy to ever run for president. ”
He seems like a very nice guy. And he’s brave: He told Obama to his face that Obamacare was F@#&^$ed.
My own [too much] experience is doctors all agree on that.
Ken, I feel your pain. My friend’s doctor blames Obamacare for the mess my friend is now in. His insurance program was eviscerated and now he is 5,000 dollars in debt.
He makes $15.00 an hour at a grocery store and lives in one of Americas most expensive cities.
“Republican elites are terrified of their own customers. That’s worth reflecting on critically, even if you happen to share their loathing of Donald J. Trump.”
About damned time. Govt., not the people, are supposed to be the ones in fear. I think I’ll audit the IRS.
Ben Carson has told supporters he sees “no path forward” in the Republican presidential…..
He will not be attending the next debate.
This is not a clear statement of his intention to suspend his campaign.
Also, Willard the Progressive is going to make a major speech at 10:30am tomorrow.
Remember the funny moment when Ben asked someone to attack him so he could talk? The debates don’t serve his purpose. The campaign trail does. He honestly feels his message is important. I could always be wrong, but think he will stay to the end even if he gets no more delegates… imagine if his few could swing an outcome? That would be delicious. More popcorn please.
Ben is out. Oh well.
My friends and I in Illinois who are Democrats are talking half-seriously about whether it is our patriotic duty in two weeks to cross-over and vote for a non-Trump Republican primary candidate. (Probably Rubio is the best bet in Illinois, but whichever non-Trump has the best chance of winning in Illinois should get our vote.)
Better to risk Clinton ultimately getting defeated by Rubio than to risk having Trump as the nominee, even if Clinton has a better chance of beating Trump.
The USA would muddle through under President Rubio or Cruz, and we love the USA too much to not try to prevent even a slight chance of an apocalyptic Trump presidency.
Your patriotic duty is to lobby your state legislature to pass a realistic budget plan . . .
I don’t want to see Trump win, but I doubt he would be any worse than say, LBJ.
He certainly would be better than Obama who has, in the past 8 years:
Doubled our national debt; made race relations worse by race baiting minorities; made a possible middle-east war inevitable by equivocating on Syria; allowed a Christian purge in the middle east; thrown the economy into a tailspin with: worthless stimulus programs and obamacare and, increased the actual unemployment rate.
Enabling the genocide of Christians was especially bad because when people said we should let in those refugees, Obama and the Democrats said it was racist and we couldn’t have religious tests.
The peace, love, and anti-racism party is remarkably unselfaware. Democrats would have lost their sh** if Obama did something to help Christians and they don’t even comprehend where their reactionary support for Muslims comes from.
Jon,
Those are my thoughts too. I’d prefer Cruz or Rubio (if I can’t get Romney!), but Trump does seem to know how to deal with the media. That’s got to be worth something.
made a possible middle-east war inevitable by equivocating on Syria
While plenty of people on the right seem to want another U.S. war in the Middle East, that doesn’t make one inevitable. Wiser heads may continue to prevail.
allowed a Christian purge in the middle east
So the U.S. president is now responsible for all the anti-Christian persecution in the world? Should we start calling him Defender of the Faith? And why stop at Christians — why not blame him for all the persecution of members of other faiths as well?
thrown the economy into a tailspin
Seventy-one straight months of private sector job growth is the opposite of a tailspin.
increased the actual unemployment rate
Only in your bizarro world, where toddlers and 90 year olds are counted as “unemployed”.
Seventy-one straight months of private sector job growth is the opposite of a tailspin.
1% growth that should be 5%. Great job!!! (Hoping you correct the numbers.)
You’re so cute when you’re angry.
The link below has nice graphs to show how those aged 25-54 are still below January 2000 levels. (note Jim, 90 is greater than 54 and not less than 25)
Core employment first surpassed the level we are at today in January of 2000, 16 years ago.
Core employment hit a peak in January 2007 at 100.716 million.
Today, core employment is 3,133,000 below January 2007.
Today, core employment is 796,000 below the level 16 years ago.
Today, core population is 5,284,000 above the level 16 years ago
http://mishtalk.com/2016/02/05/core-employment-age-25-54-still-below-january-2000-level-3-million-below-2007/
Today, core employment is 3,133,000 below January 2007.
It’s about where it was when Obama took office, and has been going up for the last five years.
you were clutching your pearls over Syrian refugees and never once thought of taking in persecuted Christians
Some Syrian refugees are Christians. I have supported taking in more refugees of any and all faiths all along. Have you?
Jim said, “Some Syrian refugees are Christians. I have supported taking in more refugees of any and all faiths all along. Have you?”
Your support for taking in rapefugees has nothing to do with “compassion.” It has everything to do with your anti-white hatred, Jim.
Your support for taking in rapefugees has nothing to do with “compassion.” It has everything to do with your anti-white hatred, Jim.
Compassion for non-white people fleeing a war is anti-white hatred? There were Americans (too few, unfortunately) who wanted to accept Jewish refugees fleeing Hitler; was that all about their anti-white hatred? We accepted thousands of Cubans and Vietnamese fleeing Communism in the 1960s and 70s; was that anti-white hatred?
So the U.S. president is now responsible for all the anti-Christian persecution in the world? Should we start calling him Defender of the Faith? And why stop at Christians — why not blame him for all the persecution of members of other faiths as well?
Yeah, you were clutching your pearls over Syrian refugees and never once thought of taking in persecuted Christians–you know the ones: girls sent into slavery at age 9 and adults crucified.
Bringing in Christian refugees to save them from slaughter would’ve been the right thing to do, but you said nothing. Obama said nothing.
Nothing.
Not content with just your own primary being rigged, you have to shenanigan others?
I don’t get the Trump fear because he is basically a moderate Democrat.
A “moderate Democrat” who calls climate change a hoax, wants a $10 trillion tax cut (mostly for the rich), targeted killings of terrorists’ families, a ban on Muslim visitors, repeal of Obamacare, an end to birthright citizenship, and to bring back waterboarding “and a hell of a lot worse”.
Name another prominent Democrat with even two or three of those positions.
We don’t know if he wants to do any of those things. It’s probably just stuff he says because he thinks it’s what the marks want to hear.
Hope you’re right Jim. That sounds like a great advertisement.
If you listen to this video prepared by a conservative group it clearly shows Trumps positions for the last two decades as clearly a North Eastern liberal/moderate.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/01/16/watch-the-damning-video-that-will-utterly-destroy-donald-trump-video/
Associates of Trumps have recently came forward and told how Trump outlined his plan of running a media funded campaign for the President. That is exactly what he has been doing. Trump recently stated he really likes uneducated people. He should he is winning them in droves. Minnesota is supposed to be one of the states with the smartest population, Trump came in third there.
From working the rating for reality TV he learned that the number one ratings grabber for the uneducated is insults, the more and harder the insults the more controvery and free publicity .. he has been playing the insult game from day one.
A lot of Democrats don’t care about global warming, waterboarding, class warfare, think Muslims or anyone else has the right to be American, or even like Obamacare. You might want to talk to more Democrats.
And Obama already kills terrorist’s families but we shouldn’t be surprised you think otherwise because your knowledge of the region and Obama’s wars is a shallow as the ocean is wide.
I am honestly afraid that Trump’s bluster and ambiguity and unpredictability and un-seriousness could end up triggering a devastating war which would involve the USA directly, one which could conceivably involve nuclear weapons before it ended. Of all the people who have been front-runners for President since the 1960s, only under President Trump could I see China attacking Taiwan, or North Korea attacking Seoul, or, admittedly this is a modern problem, Russia attacking Estonia.
Just to elaborate: I believe NATO is one of the bedrocks of US security, and every serious politician on both sides of the aisle who has had any hope of becoming President has believed in NATO. Unlike some of you, I’m convinced that President Obama, just like every modern President before him, is completely committed to the NATO alliance, including the willingness to use of nuclear weapons to stop the Russians if necessary. It is this willingness by every President, from Truman to Obama, which has maintained an effective deterrent.
Would President Trump be committed to the NATO alliance? Who knows! And how would we ever know? It certainly doesn’t matter what he says, since everything is negotiable. The Russians might decide that Trump’s lack of engagement with the rest of the world presents an opportunity, and they might completely miscalculate how Trump would react.
Lol, how is that Russian reset working out? The 1980’s called and wants their FP back…
There is a danger of NATO getting dragged into a war but not because of Trump but because of 8 years of Obama’s policies. For example, if Turkey and Russia go to war or if Russia invades a former territory thinking there would be no push back, again.
How do you get to the point that Trump wouldn’t be engaged? It looks like you are just making stuff up.
There are a lot of good criticisms of Trump but you are way off in fantasy land.
I find it absolutely hilarious that fears over Trump being authoritarian or leading us to war are not based on Trump being Trump but rather Trump acting like Obama or being unable to deal with Obama’s world war.
Its even funnier that Democrats are too dense to deconstruct their own thinking.
You realize Trump has the same position as Democrats on the Iraq war and a more moderate view than Sanders or Clinton on the future use of force?
This talk of a Cruz/Rubio unity ticket definitely has my interest. I’m a Cruz supporter. Also, my ballot for the Arizona primary (March 22nd) is sitting on my table (I do early voting, so I send in my ballot by mail).
I was pretty sure I’d be voting for Cruz. However, this Cruz/Rubio talk has put me in the undecided camp as of today. If it turns out to be real, or even likely, I’ll be voting for Trump.
Did you catch Trump’s victory press conference? He said everything is negotiable.
Yeah, but even if I read it that way, I prefer Trump to having anything to do with Rubio. Part of it is that Rubio isn’t all that old, so as VP he’s a likely future president.
Given the bad blood and public insults between Trump and Rubio, I don’t see Trump making Rubio VP. However, the current speculation here and elsewhere opened my eyes to the fact Cruz might.
So, I’m undecided, for now. The good news for me is that I don’t have to make up my mind until March 16th (the day after Florida) and IMHO the window of opportunity for a Cruz/Rubio deal will be closed by then, so at least I’ll know which way to vote.
Given eight years to grow up and learn the ropes, Rubio would probably make a halfway decent President. And after eight years of Cruz, two things: Rubio’d be able to do far less harm even were he still a GOPe squish, and if he is still GOPe at that point, he still would have to get past the 2024 primaries after Cruz has controlled the GOP for eight years. Might be tough sledding for a squish at that point.
Enabling Trump just to avoid President Cruz with a token GOPe VP strikes me as letting perfection be the enemy of the (damn good!) best we’re plausibly likely to get this year.
Remember, squish Bush followed eight years of Reagan in ’88. I don’t recall him having a particularly tough time getting the nomination.
What does that statement means? Because everything is always negotiable. It’s just not PC to say so.
It means he is honest. Abe would vote for Trump.
Lincoln wasn’t exactly a paragon of constitutional virtue.
No, some things aren’t negotiable.
Yes, some things are not negotiable. Those are called principles. But practical details are always negotiable.
I abstain from blood which puts my life in danger. I will not compromise on this. However, that doesn’t mean I’m not open to alternatives.
I’m not saying it well, but I hope I’m understood.
I don’t understand. You like Cruz, but you’d go for Trump rather than see Cruz take on a token GOPe VP?
The GOPe fobbed off conservatives with token VP slots in ’08 and ’12, and went down disastrously both times. Seems only fair to try the opposite.
And besides, think of the fun watching all the GOPe types having to be nice to Cruz at the convention, and after! Heads will be exploding left and right.
Basically, what I’m concerned about is what would Cruz need to promise to get the GOPe on board? If it’s a Cruz/Rubio ticket, I’d take that as a sign that Cruz has made the deal, because I don’t see it happening any other way.
If Cruz teams up with the GOPe (by teaming up with Rubio), he won’t be getting my vote or donations.
However, so far, it’s all just rumors, so I’m probably worried for nothing.
OK, I understand better now. I’d worked through the factors behind that a couple weeks ago, so I took it for granted. Sorry!
Cruz winning is hugely better than Hillary doing so; I expect we can agree on that? OK, where to start…
First, even if Cruz unaided roars back in coming weeks enough to gather 1271 delegates and beat Trump outright (not impossible but massively unlikely) he’d still need to cut a deal with the GOPe to have a decent chance of winning in November.
Consider: In the primaries so far, the vote has consistantly been about 2/3rds anti-GOPe (Trump, Cruz, Carson) and 1/3rd GOPe (you know the list.)
Beating Trump, whether outright or via an open convention, is going to cause some large number of Trump’s people to stay home in a huff. Say half, or 1/6th of the current potential Rep November votes.
Even with 1271 delegates, if Cruz comes into the convention all Conan-the-conqueror, exulting in the lamentations of his beaten GOPe foes, he then loses a good chunk of their votes too. Call it half, for another sixth lost come November.
So there he is come November, already giving up a third of his potential votes, likely losing to even the massively uninspiring Hillary. Very bad.
So, I guarantee you: Cruz makes insincere nice to the GOPe for the convention cameras and picks one of theirs for VP. You know the drill; you’ve seen it with McCain & Palin, and with Romney & Ryan. Doesn’t mean spit in terms of real GOPe power, any more than Palin or Ryan would have had real conservative power.
And Cruz then goes out with 5/6ths of his potential votes in line, with many of them (us) hugely energized, and quite likely beats Hillary, who’ll be lucky to turn out 2/3rds of her (larger, including all the dead/noncitizen voters) base.
Second, now. Cruz effectively has to cut that deal right now, to keep Trump from waltzing into the convention with 1271+. BUT, he’s not cutting it with GOPe. He’s cutting it with Rubio, who is the only man in a position to effectively attack-dog Trump, and the only man in a position to gather up enough delegates to (added to Cruz’s) prevent Trump winning outright.
I’m pretty sure that deal has already been made, because Rubio *must* know his attack-dog schtick will win Cruz Trump voters, not him. Rubio’s a bit of a weasel, yeah, but he’s not stupid.
The key is, GOPe currently doesn’t have any say in the matter. They can back Cruz & Rubio’s play, or go home and sulk and try to guess whether their New Overlord will be Pants-Suited or Spray-Tanned. It’s THEM with a realy nasty lesser-of-two-evils choice this time, heh.
Because, if this all works, Rubio will owe GOPe very little, and Cruz everything. And then we get to 4 or 8 years of a Cruz Administration, at the end of which Cruz & friends, if he’s as smart as I think he is, will BE the new GOPe.
The worst harm Rubio could do at that point is massively limited. And meanwhile, the country needs saving NOW.
See why I boggle at the idea of ditching Cruz for Trump over a mere VP choice?
That’s a well thought out analysis, Porkypine.
My main problem with it is the issue of Trump supporters staying home in November under your scenario. Specifically, how will they react to Cruz making Rubio his VP?
However, regarding this deal; wouldn’t it need to become public before Florida, assuming Rubio is going to get walloped by Trump there as polls indicate? I note Cruz is moving resources into the state, and my read on that is either he’s teaming up with Rubio soon to make a play to win Florida, or, he’s trying to knock Rubio out of the race. If the latter, it basically means no deal IMHO. Perhaps it’s just a negotiating position (Take the deal now, or else!) but one way or the other, wouldn’t any deal need to be public before Florida votes? If so, I don’t need to worry about it; I can hold my ballot until the 16th, no problem.
As for Rubio, I have many reasons to loathe him, but the biggest are his habit of deliberately lying to voters just to get elected. For example, he ran as an immigration hardliner, including slamming Crist for supporting the Dream act. Rubio flipped on those issues as soon as he was elected, so it was a premeditated lie to deceive voters. I won’t vote for anyone who does that, because it’s a direct threat to democracy (if candidates can do that, what’s the point of elections?).
Regarding the above, let me give you an example. Suppose one of the Republican candidates had run for office promising to implement the pro-life agenda, and once elected, promptly flipped to support the Democrat’s positions on it. I’m a libertarian on that issue, so their new position would be more in line with mine, but I’d still consider them reprehensible and never vote for them – because they deliberately deceived their voters.
A few other points on Rubio; he publicly backed the Hillary/Obama Mideast disasters, in advance, of Libya and the undermining of Mubarak. Then there’s his I-squared bill from last year, quadrupling the number of H1 visas, his taking 300k from a lobbying firm for “consulting” while majority leader of the Florida house, his interceding with the Florida Real Estate commission in his official capacity to help a convicted major drug cartel kingpin (His brother in law), etc, etc, etc. If Cruz actually did think putting somebody like that a heartbeat from the oval office is a good idea, then I’ve been very wrong about Cruz.
Time will tell.
CJ – thanks for “that’s a well thought out analysis”.
After a night’s sleep though, there’s one part of it I’m not so sure about. Namely, whether there’s an explicit Cruz-Rubio deal already in place.
I took as evidence that Rubio couldn’t possibly be so clueless about the implications of a 2/3rds insurgent, 1/3rd establishment GOP primary split as to think his attacking Trump (no matter how effectively) could lead to him getting the magic 1271 delegates.
To me, as an outsider, it seems obvious Cruz gets most Trump defectors, both because of the general tendency for attack to work but the attacker doesn’t gain, and because Cruz is an alternative insurgent – Rubio, not so much.
But people believe unlikely things when the alternative is accepting they’ve gambled everything and lost. The current situation may obviously imply a deal with Rubio taking VP, but that doesn’t mean Rubio has accepted the inevitable yet. He was dumb enough to hitch his wagon to the GOPe in the first place. He may still be trying to win it all.
Or, a Cruz-Rubio deal may have been made, but of the form “whichever one of us arrives at the convention with fewer delegates takes VP.” Which could still involve Rubio fooling himself for a while.
Or Cruz could just be smarter than Rubio, and playing the situation better. Simplest explanation…
I haven’t been sure what to think about Florida. Trump’s polls elsewhere have been inflated recently – more people willing to yank pollsters’ chains than to actually pull the lever for Trump – but, given Rubio on the wrong side of that 2/3rds – 1/3rd split, maybe Trump’s lead in Florida is real? I saw reports of big Trump margins in Georgia suburbs of a couple Florida panhandle cities, FWIW.
I think I’m gonna think a bit more before I opine on the best way to deal with Florida…
But, here’s a thought for anyone still reading. Assume for the sake of argument Cruz is smart enough to arrive at the convention with more delegates than Trump, but still without a formal deal with Rubio.
At that point, his best play may be to offer VP to Trump. Unify the insurgents and concede some loss of GOPe support; the totals for November should be the same or better, and the enthusiasm a LOT higher.
AND, think about one big reason Obama is assumed to have picked Biden: As insurance against anyone thinking they’d gain by voting the LH Oswald way. With Trump as VP, Cruz’s enemies would get *incredibly* solicitous of his continued good health, chortle.
Porkypine, thats interesting, very interesting. (I’m referring to your convention scenario post, but I’m not sure this will appear below it.)
My take; I don’t think Trump would have any interest in the VP slot, from anybody. HOWEVER, there’s something else Cruz could offer, something that might interest Trump as well as Trump supporters; US Ambassador to the United Nations. Trump lives in NY, and would probably very much enjoy being the US Ambassador to the UN; a venue where he could let his bombastic streak have free reign.
On the other hand… If Cruz arrives at the convention #2 in delegates to Trump, would Cruz like to be VP? He’s young enough to use that as a great stepping stone to a later run for the top, plus Trump could sweeten the deal – Cruz gets to pick the next Supreme Court nominee.
Cruz, IMHO, would be fooling himself to think a brokered convention would get him the nomination – the GOPe hate him. Sure, he might cut a deal with them, but would they keep it?
It’s worth noting that pledged delegates are pledged, in many cases, for the first and second ballot only. It’s also worth remembering that these delegates are usually party functionaries, and thus a high percentage are GOPe types. Cruz surely knows this.
Also, the brokered convention is the one scenario that opens the door to doomsday for the entire party; if Trump arrives at the convention with just shy of a majority, with Cruz and Rubio a distant second and 3rd, how would Trump’s base react to the nomination being given to someone else by the party establishment? (especially if that 2/3 anti-establishment result holds?) I think we’d be looking at a permanent, formal split in the party, with the Trump side storming off to form their own. That’s the one route to massive permanent damage from this election, and it looks (Based on Romney’s speech) like the GOPe has decided to try it.
Trump/Cruz 2016?
whether there’s an explicit Cruz-Rubio deal already in place.
I think it’s certain Cruz and Rubio are working together behind the scenes. Cruz says “breath, breath…”, then Rubio brings up “yoga/flexible”… that was a planned script.
Trump was baited. Kasich benefited.
Any speculation on Romney’s coming [sour grapes] speech.
My guess: Romney’s speech will be the centerpiece of the latest GOPe’s latest sure-fire can’t-possibly-fail plan to derail Trump. (And Cruz too, unless he’s sold out and cut a deal)
My hope (most highly unlikely IMHO) is that Romney will call for the party to rally behind the nominee, whoever it turns out to be.
Or, he’s entering the race himself, and the fact we’re past most state’s filing dates be damned.
About the only thing I’m willing to rule out at the moment is that Romney just wants to share a new recipe for a gin martini.
My guess? Call for the party to rally behind whoever is the nominee – with strong hints of, even if it’s Cruz.
Or, a really comprehensive dump of Trump dirt.
Actually, both: Fire all guns at Trump, and call for GOPe to admit reality and accept that they don’t get the top of the ticket this year, the insurgents (IE Cruz) do. That almost sounds plausible.
Well, Romney emptied both barrels at Trump, but didn’t provide any new ammo, just restated existing attacks. “Anyone but Trump!” Made a generic call to vote for Rubio in Florida, Kasich in Ohio, Cruz in, well, vote for whatever candidate can best beat Trump, wherever.
He made mentioning Cruz at all sound grudging. To the extent there’s a plan there, it’s “give delegates to anyone but The Donald.” Well, duh.
Romney totally failed to acknowledge that two-thirds of the Republican electorate currently is saying “Anyone but the GOP Establishment!” God bless Mitt Romney; I wish he were President now – but he isn’t, and he’s just demonstrated why. He’s still in complete denial about the underlying situation, vast numbers of angry disillusioned GOP voters and what brought it about.
I’d guess the net effect is +5 points for Trump going into this weekend’s contests. Well done, Mitt!
It might be new ammo to some voters. For instance, a lot of polling indicates that many still have never heard of Trump U. The question is whether or not learning about it will change their minds.
Well, I watched it again, the whole thing this time – I’d only caught the last 2/3rds of it earlier.
http://nalert.blogspot.com/2016/03/mitt-romneys-full-speech-against-trump.html#.Vth8QRBhip0.twitter#trump
Romney’s actually doing a Trumpian thing here: Being outrageous enough that it’s good TV, and timing this so it dominates a day of news. And as you say, Rand, he’s delivering the whole laundry list of why Trump is a bad idea. Under the circumstances, a lot of people will hear it who may not have been aware of all these issues previously.
And he did lead off by saying that the US can still have a good future, and that Trump won’t get us there but any of the other three candidates could, then listed them in order of the number of delegates they have – Cruz, Rubio, then Kasich. Fair enough.
And he’s implicitly advocating the carry-on-and-deny-Trump-1271 strategy as a leading member of the GOPe, which puts a bit more weight behind it.
Much as I’d have liked an “I have sinned against the Base! Mea culpa!” here, I’ll settle for the implicit acknowedgement that insurgent Cruz is no longer beyond the GOP pale, that the country can have a bright future with him just as well as with Rubio or Kasich.
Considerably better than with Rubio or Kasich, I say, but Romney does have a point: Any of them would be day-and-night better than Trump, or Hillary.
I wonder if Trump could bribe McCain into attacking him like Romney did? It’d be worth it, for Trump, because Romney’s attack will probably help Trump. Way to go, Mitt. And BTW, had Romney attacked Obama like this, or even close, in 2012, we’d be calling him “Mr. President” now.
More importantly though, this makes it official; the GOPe has decided on the one and only route to a scenario where the party could be permanently destroyed, via a permanent split. It’s if Trump goes to the convention with a near majority (say, 1200 of the 1237 needed) with everyone else way back, and the party bosses give the nomination to the guy who came in 3rd, or didn’t run… Result? Quite possibly Trump’s base storm off and form their own party.
“It might be new ammo to some voters.”
Romney went after Trump on tax returns and now on some of his businesses failing. The exact same attacks that were used against Romney and people on the right were fighting back against. Its hypocrisy.
I would rather see a tally of failed and successful businesses and look at the net. Not every business is a success. Romney knows this. Anyone who looks at VC knows this. Anyone who notices how many resteraunts make it past five years knows this.
Trump is still rich af so he isn’t a total failure. The “This multi-billionaire totally sucks at making money.” Is a bad attack. Maybe using failed business to attack his judgement would be more effective.
A lot of these attacks lack substance or are not put in the proper context to be rationally convincing rather than emotionally convincing. They are good attacks but Romney is the wrong person to be making them.
Porkypine wrote:
Only one thing wrong with this; the chances of Trump accepting VP are zero. He’s more likely to make a third-party run. (Yes, I know he promised not to; so what?)
Possibly. If Trump is denied the top spot after arriving at the convention with more delegates than anyone else, I would not be at all surprised to see a flamboyant walkout.
But I did say here that if, IF Cruz ended up edging him out as top delegate-getter, then Trump as VP might be an option. The dynamics are very different if he comes in as #2 rather than #1, I think.
But then, it all finally depends on what Trump is thinking. Your guess is as good as mine. On Tuesdays and Thursdays, I buy the sabotage-the-Reps-for-Hillary theory, on Mondays and Wednesdays I buy sincerely-wants-to-be-Prez, on Fridays I think it started as the one then morphed to the other when he realized he might actually win, and on Sundays I pray that he’ll decide in time that it’s been a gas running but he doesn’t actually want the responsibility.
Saturdays? Saturdays I go fishing and think about anything but all this.
Romney today: “Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud. His promises are as worthless as a degree from Trump University. He’s playing members of the American public for suckers…”
All that is true, and was just as true in 2012, when Romney was singing a different tune: “Being in Donald Trump’s magnificent hotel and having his endorsement is a delight.” “Donald Trump has shown an extraordinary ability to understand how our economy works.” “It means a great deal to me to have the endorsement of Mr. Trump.”
Romney wasn’t that thrilled at the time. Romney is a political chameleon (and he was a terrible choice as a Republican nominee).
Your link doesn’t say anything about Romney not being thrilled at the time, just that his assistant campaign manager now remembers being embarrassed for him:
Romney actively sought Trump’s endorsement. The fact that he thought he needed to embrace a birther con man in order to win speaks volumes about the GOP.
What? Romney is a standard-issue politician? I am shocked – SHOCKED, I say… Though I expect Trump will have fun with that, yeah.
I thought Romney was going to give a speech about Trump not Obama lol.
I’m always late to these form parties:-(
Anyway During the first debate I realized that this would happen. Trump has a 20-30% hardcore following and everyone else hates him. That means the 70% splits their vote amongst the 10 other people (now down to two or three) That puts Trump in the lead. Now There is no reason that the GOP can’t go to the “Alternative Vote” type of primary. It would select the person most people liked. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y3jE3B8HsE
I figure the reason they didn’t go with something like that at the beginning was because Cruz would have probably won and he is too close to the tea party. Can’t have that.
Too late to save them this cycle.
True it is too late for the GOP establishment this cycle.
I figure that if Trump gets selected then, I believe he will win. Merely due to his chaos.
With Trump nobody know what will happen, so many people project their pet issue onto him and he is only too happy to pander to them in a way that the start to think: “No one else has been able to do a thing about X for the past 50 years…. but with Trump, maybe…” That will be enough to give some hope. Say if someone thinks that Palin would be great on the SCOTUS. Under any classical political calculation that just isn’t going to happen, EVER… but if Trump really wanted it. I could actually see him pulling it off. Just because he doesn’t know that it would be political suicide to even try. First it would be “crazy” and “stupid”, but within a few week people would be talking about how hard it would be. Then within a few more weeks, they would start talking about how he can get around those road blocks and how it just might be possible. People have seen this happen with his whole campaign and they project that success onto whatever issue is important to them.
Ya, Trump has rather vague on some things and also excellent at telling people what they want to hear.
The problem is while I think Trump can’t be trusted, he says some things I like. On military issues he says that he will put the generals in charge which is awesome. He also says he will create a safe zone in Syria, which is also awesome because it removes refugees as an issue as well as terrorists using refugees to destabilize the west demographically and to sneak in terrorists.
Today, he came out with some healthcare bullet points and they all look good too. One quibble is the medicare portion, which looks a lot like medicare for all but most people are not against some form of safety net.
Other candidates need to coopt these issues and persuade voters they can do them better, just like Hillary is winning over socialists.
“With Trump nobody know what will happen”
I’ve heard this argument a lot recently. The funny thing to me, that’s how I felt about McCain in 2008. I voted for McCain, because I knew what Obama would do (and he has done it).
So… Cruz is right that to beat Trump they should back him, but the GOPe wants Rubio. Kasich may get Ohio giving him some swing power at the convention.
If Trump gets the delegates they will not be able to take it away from him as much as they’d still like. If not, that’s when things get interesting.
Could something like this happen…? They make Trump the nominee but foist their guy (who?) as VP on him. It goes forward that way until Trump announces (before general election) “I’m dumping that VP for this.”
So… Cruz is right that to beat Trump they should back him, but the GOPe wants Rubio. Kasich may get Ohio giving him some swing power at the convention.
If Trump gets the delegates they will not be able to take it away from him as much as they’d still like. If not, that’s when things get interesting.
Could something like this happen…? They make Trump the nominee but foist their guy (who?) as VP on him. It goes forward that way until Trump announces (before general election) “I’m dumping that VP for this.”