#NeverTrump Will Quickly Become #OKWhatTheHellGoDonald
Well, that was a quick counter-revolution. The Republican Party establishment, realizing it was teetering on the edge of a very dark abyss, tried to marshal its once-formidable forces to defeat Donald Trump. Out trotted Mitt Romney, backed by John McCain -- the party's two previous presidential candidates -- to condescendingly explain (establishment-splain?) why Trump was utterly inconceivable as their proud party's nominee. Trump was beyond the pale, absolutely unacceptable, not welcome, an interloper, and the only possible thing to do would be to shun, expel, reject, ostracize, and shame Trump into handing the Republican Party's voters back to their rightful owners. The hashtag "#NeverTrump" appeared as a rallying cry, and millions of dollars are being donated by fatcats for the purpose of (finally!) running some scathing anti-Trump ads to take the insurgent down.
That's all fine and good, as far as it goes. The problem with this nascent movement, however (only one of its problems, I should say), is that it simply doesn't go far enough. The entire premise briefly saw the light of day, and then it was immediately kneecapped by just about everyone involved in the effort. This was most evident on the last Republican debate stage, hosted by Fox News. Fox had kicked off the GOP debate season by asking how many candidates would forswear a third-party bid and support the eventual nominee, no matter whom he or she turned out to be. This was intended to "trap" Trump, and was followed by actual party loyalty oaths signed by each candidate in fealty to the Republican National Committee. Last week, Fox moderators put a bookend on this initial question by asking at the very end of the debate whether all the four remaining candidates would support the Republican nominee -- even if it was Donald Trump (for Trump, it was even if it is not you, of course). All four answered in the affirmative. Marco Rubio is promoting the whole "Never Trump" theme on his campaign site, but he stood there and admitted that "never" might not be quite as long as you'd imagine. "Never Trump," except if he wins the nomination, in other words, and then: "Reluctantly Trump, because Hillary Clinton."
Almost everyone involved in the effort to tear down Trump eventually had to admit the same thing. Here is Mitt Romney, on yesterday's Meet The Press, answering a question about a hypothetical open national convention and whether he would run if the convention begged him to:
I'm not going to be a candidate, I'm going to be endorsing one of the people who's running for president. And one of the people, I can guarantee you this, one of the people running for president, one of the four, is going to be the Republican party nominee.
Got that? "One of the four" -- in other words, Mitt made a long speech full of many detailed reasons why Donald Trump is absolutely unacceptable as a presidential candidate; but if Trump becomes the nominee, then Mitt will put party in front of country and go right ahead and support Trump anyway.
Speaker of the House Paul Ryan issued a statement of his own last week, after Trump's David Duke gaffe. Like Mitt's, it was strongly-worded. Also like Mitt, Ryan immediately backed away from it. The Washington Post put this doublethink on prominent display:
House Speaker Paul D. Ryan stepped in front of cameras Tuesday and delivered just the sort of high-minded, clear-eyed, aspirational message that has made him a Republican Party standard-bearer.
"This party does not prey on people's prejudices; we appeal to their highest ideals," he said. "We believe all people are created equal in the eyes of God and our government. This is fundamental, and if someone wants to be our nominee, they must understand this."
Moments later, asked what if that nominee were in fact Donald Trump -- who days before had balked at denouncing the Ku Klux Klan -- he was forced to retreat from the moral high ground. "I plan to support the nominee," he said.
Now, to be fair, some Republicans do mean what they say when they vow they'll never vote for Trump. They say they'll stay home, or vote for (shudder!) Hillary, or write in Condi Rice, or whatever else helps them sleep at night -- but they will not vote for Trump, even if he does become the Republican nominee. Unfortunately, though, most of the people who have publicly taken such a strong stand are relatively minor characters in the GOP. All the high-profile ones -- the Republican congressional leaders, the current candidates for president not named Trump, and the previous presidential nominees -- they all want to have it both ways. Trump is completely unacceptable -- right up until he faces off with Hillary Clinton, and then suddenly he magically becomes a lot more acceptable.
By taking this inherently contradictory stance, they have undercut the #NeverTrump movement in its infancy. If never doesn't really mean never, then why even bother? Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz spent two hours begging voters to see the light and reject Trump because he was wrong about so many issues near and dear to Republican hearts, and then they completely negated all of it with their answer to the final debate question. "OK, well I guess I'll just ignore everything else I've said tonight about how dangerous it would be to have Donald Trump as our party's nominee, and say that I'd fully support him if he beats me," was their clear message. Fox did the nation a public service by asking the question so pointedly, in fact, because it exposed the weakness of the #NeverTrump movement in unequivocal fashion.
Which is why I'm predicting that #NeverTrump is going to fade away pretty quickly, especially if Trump wins either Florida or Ohio next Tuesday. In fact, let's have a little contest in the comments section for what the hashtag should morph into. Perhaps "#Never*Trump" (so you can add a footnote to it later)? Here are a few other suggestions, to get the ball rolling:
#NeverTrumpOhWaitDidRubioJustLoseFlorida?
#NeverTrumpUntilTheConventionAtLeast
#NeverTrumpExceptNeverNeverNeverClinton
#OKWhatTheHellGoDonald
We've only got a little over a week before #NeverTrump starts its inevitable decline. So the contest will remain open until we all watch the returns come in next Tuesday. What do you think #NeverTrump should become, at that point? Let everyone know, down in the comments. [Winners will receive absolutely nothing, other than a hat tip in a future column, just to be clear.]
-- Chris Weigant
Cross-posted at The Huffington Post
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
The secret of a good hashtag is brevity. I suggest #MaybeTrump as a transitional phase, with #FineWhateverTrump as the final form.
in other words, Mitt made a long speech full of many detailed reasons why Donald Trump is absolutely unacceptable as a presidential candidate; but if Trump becomes the nominee, then Mitt will put party in front of country and go right ahead and support Trump anyway.
I don't read it that way. The context was "at a contested convention". So he's saying that if no candidate gets a majority of delegates, he'll push for Cruz or Rubio instead of putting himself forward as an alternative.
However, I basically agree with the overall thesis. As I think I've said before in these pages, I expect that some "establishment" Republicans will sit the election out if Trump is nominated, but they won't switch parties or run a Republican spoiler candidate as an independent.
For the replacement hashtag, maybe some variation on #NeverMind. It could be #NeverMindJustBeatHillary, or if they want to be more specific about the reversal they could go with #NeverMindNeverTrump. But it works best with context:
#NeverTrump
#NeverTrump
#NeverTrump
#NeverMind
Dsws (3): Perfect
#WeWereTrumped
Or just
#Trumped
matt,
i think you hit the right note, so let me just shorten your idea a little... you still get the quatloos if it wins though...
#WhateverTrump
JL
Hows about ....
#FlipFlopNeverTrump
or
#NeverTrumpFipFlop
It all depends on the overall flipity floppityness of the existing pool of candidates.
No matter what if Trump does pull the rabbit out of the hat, it will be interesting and make for some good theater to watch the ring kissing that Cruz and Rubio will have to do.
#NeverHillary
Interesting read: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/this-week-in-geopolitics
Someone at HuffPost suggested:
#ArbeitMachtFrei
Too much? Heh.
-CW
You want we should invite them ... here? Yikes. :)
I actually saw that and thought of Michale ... I mean, we could ask Michale to take care of the invite. :)
heh
I don't have a good track record on invites..
Maybe it's my breath.. :D
Michale
Interesting read: http://www.mauldineconomics.com/this-week-in-geopolitics
It IS an interesting read...
It explains how the Democrat Party ignored the middle class who were not "acceptable" to the Democrat Party.. The Dem Party chose to ignore that part of the middle class because they were not vote-laden like other demographics were... That group could not be "bought" with shiny beads and shallow flattery... That group didn't care to be part of the FREE STUFF Party, the FREE RIDE Party...
Trump speaks to that group of Americans...
But then a funny thing happened.. Those that WERE of the FREE RIDE Party heard things from Trump and his supporters and thought to themselves.. "Hay.. That sounds great!! I don't HAVE to be a slave to Party ideology!! Here's a guy who is going to show me how to live life and be PROUD of what I do rather than having to meekly go hat in one hand, my other hand out for a government dole... I LIKE this feeling!!"
As I have said....
This is an election between an Establishment Status Quo candidate and a candidate who has actually BUILT something...
Almost 80% of Americans do NOT want the status quo.. Do NOT want a third Obama term...
And THAT is why Hillary Clinton will lose...
Michale
Michale [13]
I thought you'd like the article.
The problem for Trump is that there may be enough voters in the demographic described to allow him to squeeze past the 1237 mark (which I now think he will, comfortably), but he is alienating a lot of his own party, and obviously some large voting blocks in the rest of the electorate.
The lesson I took from this article is that a segment of society that has been loyal to the Republican Party but fed crumbs in return is protesting via Trump, who, almost uniquely, is reaching out to them. This large minority (35%) of the Republican Party are so happy that they have a champion that they are the most enthusiastic voting group in this election and have taken over the mantle of passion that Obama rode in 2008.
Trump's challenge is to expand this passion to the rest of the country - but his message isn't "Hope", but "Hate". He will pivot, probably starting a week today if he wins 2 of Illinois, Ohio and Florida, but it might be too late, and he might start to lose his passionate base if he starts to sound like another bland politician.
Trump's challenge is to expand this passion to the rest of the country - but his message isn't "Hope", but "Hate".
Just as Hillary's and Bernie's message is ALSO one of Hate...
The only difference between Trump and Hillary/Bernie is the object of their Hate platform..
Hillary and Bernie are targeting fellow Americans who are doing absolutely NOTHING illegal..
Trump is targeting foreign criminals..
You can bet that Independents and NPAs are with Trump in that regard...
He will pivot, probably starting a week today if he wins 2 of Illinois, Ohio and Florida, but it might be too late, and he might start to lose his passionate base if he starts to sound like another bland politician.
That's the beauty of Trumps campaign to date..
He doesn't HAVE to "pivot"... He has been running a General Election campaign the whole time..
Why do you think that 20% (and growing) of Democrats are going Trump??
You are correct in that Trump has pissed off many conservatives with his Pro Planned-Parenthood stance, etc etc.. But he will make that up and tons more with Democrats...
Trump has been running a General Election campaign since Day One... Which is EXACTLY with the Republican Party is going bat shit hysterical crazy...
Michale
I'm dubious of labeling an entire segment of the income distribution as basing the core of their identity on bigotry (hatred of Hispanics, hatred of gays, inability to accept that there's a black president). These are people, not cartoon villains. Maybe the Mauldin thing has something worthwhile to say, but if so it should have started off with that instead of with the stereotype of poor white people as worthless bigots.
Hmm. Apparently the filter won't allow the word big_ot.
Anyway, I read a few paragraphs of the Mauldin link, just stereotyping poor white people as nothing but worthless you-know-whats who are now throwing a snit because the elites (other than Trump) aren't pandering hard enough to their you-know-whatry. I'm not interested in reading a bunch ugly stereotyping of poor white people, any more than of any other group. If it has a point to make, it should have done so sooner.
Michale[15]
This is culled from the 538 ( http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bloomberg-might-have-produced-president-trump/ ):
-------------
African-Americans (12 percent of voting population): extremely Democratic-leaning.
Hispanic, Asian, “other” and mixed races (14 percent): Also strongly Democratic leaning, especially in recent elections.
White evangelicals (23 percent): Strongly Republican.
White cosmopolitans (20 percent): These are white, non-evangelical voters who favor both gay marriage and a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who entered the country illegally. They’re a highly Democratic-leaning group, mostly concentrated in urban areas and college towns.
White “picket fence” voters (15 percent): These are whites who are neither evangelicals nor cosmopolitans, but have high socioeconomic status as indicated by income, education levels, home ownership and other factors. This is a largely suburban, center-right group who went for Mitt Romney over Barack Obama about 2 to 1 in the previous election.
White working-class voters (16 percent): Whites who are neither evangelicals nor cosmopolitans, and have lower socioeconomic status. Once a good group for Democrats, they now vote Republican about 2 to 1.
---------------
The main target for Trump are the 16% white working class voters, and if they swing from 2-1 (62% voted for Romney) to 3-1 (75% vote for Trump) Trump will win in a near landslide. The problem is holding on to the other voting groups at the same time. A swing of just a few percentage points in the rest of the white vote (Cosmopolitans and Picket Fencers) eliminates this advantage.
Interesting times.
Michale [15]: My response is trapped in the filter - maybe CW can free it.
DSWS [16]:
I don't agree that this is stereotyping poor white people as bigots. I think the point is that the attitudes that were common 25 years ago regarding gay marriage and other social issues have progressed quickly and a lot of the people who don't agree with the progression are also the people who have been on the wrong side of the economic changes as well.
Remember Obama only 'evolved' recently on gay marriage, and 43% of the population still believe abortion should be illegal most or all of the time (Pew Research, March 1, 2016).
These are also the people who feel the Republicans and Democrats have taken their votes but ignored them the rest of the time. Trump is talking to these people in the language they use to talk to each other. Michale - help me out here.
I don't see the bigotry in this - but I'm pretty insensitive.
These are also the people who feel the Republicans and Democrats have taken their votes but ignored them the rest of the time. Trump is talking to these people in the language they use to talk to each other. Michale - help me out here.
No need.. You stated the case perfectly...
The thing that the Left Wingery doesn't get is that BOTH sides use demonizing and fear mongering to try and appeal to voters...
Trump has the edge over Hillary (and to a lesser extent, Sanders) because Trump truly is an outsider completely and unequivocally untainted by the Political Establishment...
Michale
Michale:
Here is a breakdown of the voting population that was in my redacted post (c'mon CW it was completely tame :).
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bloomberg-might-have-produced-president-trump/
The big challenge for Trump is that his message resonates with the 16% working class white voters, but he alienates too many of the other 84%.
Here is a breakdown of the voting population that was in my redacted post (c'mon CW it was completely tame :).
It's not CW, it's the Wordpress AI... She's a fickle biatch... :D
The big challenge for Trump is that his message resonates with the 16% working class white voters, but he alienates too many of the other 84%.
In the here and now, General Election polls don't mean too much..
Polls that tally the mood of the electorate w/o any references to candidates or elections...
THOSE are the polls you want to pay attention to...
Michale
Donald Trump's infatuation with torture is what makes him such a dangerous demagogue.
(oops ... wrong thread!)
Michale:
The polls for congress are quite clear and support your point. But is the President facing the same disgust? CW's weekly Obama watch indicates that Obama's approval ratings are about 50-50.
Your point about the accuracy of names polls at this time is spot on - the 538 give very little credence to the November timeframe polls in March.
The polls for congress are quite clear and support your point. But is the President facing the same disgust? CW's weekly Obama watch indicates that Obama's approval ratings are about 50-50.
Irregardless of that, the simple fact is that 80% of Americans do NOT want an Obama 3rd Term...
That does not bode well for Hillary who is running on that exact platform...
Michale
80% of people may not want an Obama 3rd term, but if 84% of people don't want a Trump first term, then we have a 'hold-your-nose-off' ;)
Maybe it is time to breakout the #sackofdicks2016....
With all of the choices in the field at the current time it is kind of like reaching into a sack of ,well, dicks....there are big ones and small ones, flacid ones, and ones no one wants. No matter what you pull out it is guaranteed to make you less than happy and feeling slightly shlonged to use the term of one of them.
So reach in and grab one...theres the Smirkin Golden Mirken, Its Yuuuggge. There is the TrusTed Torpedo, must be used according to instructions choice not allowed. I hear you can get the Manos Pequenos Rubio and the Kasich Govenator at bargain basement prices, better hurry they may be out of the stores soon. If those don't fit your style try the the Chromium Clintonator guaranteed to stop working for you once you get it home (unless you are a wall street banker) and try the Sanders Socilaizer I hear the box looks great and the design is great but the use of "congress" batteries guarantees it will never work as planned.
So what are you waiting for all of the popular kids are doing it reach in and grab yours before it is too late.
This message brought to you #sackofdicks2016 industries a wholly owned subsidiary of corrupt-co working against the middle class for 50 plus years. Not affiliated with any political party but lots of Super PACS
Good one :) [26]
#TrumpWhiteHouse
or
#MakeWhiteHouseWhiteAgain
attitudes that were common 25 years ago regarding gay marriage and other social issues ...
Like whether it's ok for a black guy to be president. Yeh. There's a word for that kind of attitude.
Like whether it's ok for a black guy to be president. Yeh. There's a word for that kind of attitude.
Like it's OK for a Republican to be president??
Yea... There's a word for that kind of attitude..
It's the same word as the one you are talking about...
Bi_ot... :D
Michale