Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Todd]

Trump cruises to victory in Indiana.

Now, when the general come around, will Trump be the flip-flopper to make all other flip-floppers look steadfast?

[Brian]

Cruz drops out. Kasich is only technically a hurdle. Donald Trump is officially the Republican choice for president.

What will the Republican Party look like in 12 months? Will it find any semblance of leadership from anyone in that time?

[Parsifal]

Cruz drops out. Kasich is only technically a hurdle. Donald Trump is officially the Republican choice for president.

What will the Republican Party look like in 12 months? Will it find any semblance of leadership from anyone in that time?

Clearly too early to know how things will play out, but the Republican Party's repudiation of Trump, the clear choice of their constituency, is bizarre. If the party rejects its own constituency, what basis does the party have for existence?

[The new erato]

Clearly too early to know how things will play out, but the Republican Party's repudiation of Trump, the clear choice of their constituency, is bizarre. If the party rejects its own constituency, what basis does the party have for existence?

They just need a new people and everything is going to be fine.

[Brian]

[Brian]

Clearly too early to know how things will play out, but the Republican Party's repudiation of Trump, the clear choice of their constituency, is bizarre. If the party rejects its own constituency, what basis does the party have for existence?

The problem is that, for most of the process, Trump was the clear choice of only 30% of Republicans. That only changed once Trump's main rival was equally disgusting.

The Republican Party's main failure, to me, is courage - nobody had the balls to stand up and say that Trump was unacceptable, morally, and for most of September-February, nobody had the guts to even campaign against him. They were all afraid of his playground insults.

So let's assume 50% of Republicans are sane and 50% of Republicans are whackjobs. How do they negotiate the divorce? Will they have the courage to get one, or will the "establishment" sigh and file behind the lunatics and say "as long as it gets us more power"?

[drogulus]

     
     I quoted a Krugman piece a month ago:

"After all, what is the modern GOP? A simple model that accounts for just about everything you see is that it's an engine designed to harness white resentment on behalf of higher incomes for the donor class."


     It looks like the voters are fed up. The point is that now they accept this view. It's not just a liberal Dem saying so. If Repub voters feel betrayed, this is why.

The Republican Party's main failure, to me, is courage - nobody had the balls to stand up and say that Trump was unacceptable, morally, and for most of September-February, nobody had the guts to even campaign against him. They were all afraid of his playground insults.

     I disagree. The best arguments against Trump implicate the Repubs themselves. How are they supposed to "stand up" against themselves? How do they explain how little they care for their own constituents? They have no moral argument for the criminal negligence built into their governing philosophy. It's this amorality the voters are rebelling against. Populism is outrage, and demagogues are not typically moral paragons.

[Todd]

The problem is that, for most of the process, Trump was the clear choice of only 30% of Republicans. That only changed once Trump's main rival was equally disgusting.

I doubt Trump will ever be liked by the majority of Republicans, but many Republicans will start to rally around him to defeat the even more disgusting Democrat candidate.

A lot of Republicans didn't think he would be able to get very far, precisely because of how he campaigned and what he said, but Trump proved them wrong.  I sense that a lot of Democrats are taking a similar line.  Some may even be gleeful.  Trump is an easy target.  Just look at what he has said!  But what's to prevent someone not beholden to standard interest groups and campaigning from saying something along the lines of 'I said what I had to say to get the nomination, but here's what I really think' and then simply adopting a more palatable position?  Calling Trump out on flip-flopping won't work as well as with other candidates.  He speaks nonsense, but so does Bernie, and millions have voted for him.  Nonsense is popular right now.

I'm assuming Hillary is going to be the next President, but this general election is going to be the most bruising in a long, long time.  I look forward to it.  It may even make her a weaker President out of the gate.  That would be awesome.  It would be even more awesome if it helps limit her to one term.  We need more one term Presidents.  Maybe it's time to bring back the notion floated not so long ago that a President can only serve one, six-year term, and then change that to one four-year term.  The US needs a weaker President.

More important for Republicans is Congress.  Every effort must be made to keep the House.  It would be good to keep the Senate, but at least one house must in the hands of the opposition party at all times.  (In the unlikely event that Trump wins, the Senate must go to the Democrats.)  There are already reports in the institutional press that some big-wig Republican donors and strategists have switched focus, so that is a good sign. 

On a local level, I get to vote on the 17th. Kasich may not have worked to get in the Voter's Pamphlet, but he is on the ballot, so he gets my vote, even if he drops out.  Even more entertaining are the down-ballot races.  There are four Republicans vying to be curb stomped by Ron Wyden in the Senate race, whose biggest challenge is to see if he can win by more than thirty points.  (Wyden is so secure that he hasn't started actively campaigning yet and he brushed away challenges/gripes from various liberal groups by ignoring them.)  The governor's race is also a hoot.  Oregon's last elected governor, a big-D Democrat, resigned amid scandal, but so undemocratic is the state that the next governor will be a Democrat even with that.  To be sure, the Republican candidates are not an inspiring lot.  I won't be voting for governor.  Again.

[Brian]

Todd, will read your post momentarily, but quick update: Kasich has canceled his meetings & travel plans and scheduled a speech in Ohio this afternoon. Sounds like he gone.

[Todd]

Todd, will read your post momentarily, but quick update: Kasich has canceled his meetings & travel plans and scheduled a speech in Ohio this afternoon. Sounds like he gone.

Literally yesterday I received a call from a Columbus, OH area code and the interlocutor inquired as to whether I would be voting for Mr Kasich.  Oh well, all good things come to an end.

Now, who will Trump choose to be his running mate?

[Brian]

Now, who will Trump choose to be his running mate?

Gotta be Palin!

[Karl Henning]

Sad!

[Todd]

Gotta be Palin!

No, no, no.  Ted Nugent!

[Brian]

No, no, no.  Ted Nugent!

A lot of "credible" media sources are earnestly suggesting Newt Gingrich. That would truly be a gold mine.

[Todd]

A lot of "credible" media sources are earnestly suggesting Newt Gingrich. That would truly be a gold mine.

If that happens, Trump had better check his seat every time he sits down to make sure a dagger or poisoned pin is not in it.

[mc ukrneal]

Assuming it's Trump vs. Clinton, then it all becomes a state by state battle. At the moment, Clinton leads in many of the key states and the GOP has to make up some ground as the Dems lead in the electoral map (assuming states that have historically voted for one party or another continue to do so). There is only a much smaller subset of states in play in this regard. Clinton, in the latest polls, is significantly ahead in many of these states (polls, and it's early, but it gives an indication of just how much work Trump has to do). For example:
Florida: 49-36
Penn: 54-39
Virginia: 44-35
Those three alone give her the White House with the above caveat (and that excludes Wisconsin).

Some are closer, like Ohio (45-42), Iowa (42-42). The difficulty for Trump is that he needs to win most of these, while the Dems only need 2-4 depending on the configuration. If Trump can 'turn' states that have been traditionally favoring the Dems, that would change things, but that would require a strong organization. Does Trump have that in place? I don't know.

Newt, as VP, would certainly galvanize the voters that love him and detest him, but I think he has too much baggage frankly (and he doesn't really bring electoral votes as GOP should retain Georgia). In his shoes, I might shoot big and get someone from California - maybe a popular actor, they usually present well. Nah, that will never work!

[Spineur]

Just read that 73% of american women have a poor opinon of Donald Trump.  Women represent more than half of the population and are more disciplined voters
....

[Todd]

At last, a much needed hatchet job on Melania Trump.

My favorite quote: "Melania Trump, [Kati Marton] added, would be "the least experienced and the least prepared First Lady in history.""  (Even including Frances Cleveland?)

My favorite line follows that: "If we take the office of First Lady seriously..."

God, this is gonna be an awesome election cycle!

[(poco) Sforzando]

At last, a much needed hatchet job on Melania Trump.

Man, next thing you know they'll be doing a hatchet job on little Barron.

[knight66]

At last, a much needed hatchet job on Melania Trump.

My favorite quote: "Melania Trump, [Kati Marton] added, would be "the least experienced and the least prepared First Lady in history.""  (Even including Frances Cleveland?)

My favorite line follows that: "If we take the office of First Lady seriously..."

God, this is gonna be an awesome election cycle!

Good of them to put on this round of bread and circuses for you Todd.

Mike