# Impact of Republicans Repudiating Trump **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [May 10, 2016, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488 "2016-05-10T15:06:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2016, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/41 "2016-06-27T15:23:16Z")
I don’t think this could hep him. Those who would be turned on by this further proof that he is an outsider are already firmly in his camp. As far as it allowing him to tack to the middle, given that the choice is him versus Clinton, I doubt that any of the red dog Conservatives will actually turn against him. Those who do turn against him are really turning because of his lack of conservatism it’s that they realize that if he were elected he would be a disaster for the country, and their party would get the blame. Now in order to oppose him they have to mouth the words that he’s not conservative enough, but that’s just to maintain their more conservative than thou credentials, while opposing him. But in the end enough red dogs will support him that it won’t look like a moderate. In particular since moderation in anything is the antithesis of his campaign. ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/42 "2016-06-28T03:06:29Z")
Two of the four Republican candidates for Missouri governor seem to be hiding the fact they’re actually Republicans. [https://www.ericgreitens.com/](https://www.ericgreitens.com/) > **[Home - John Brunner - Stand With Liberty](https://johnbrunner.com/)** > > Sign Up for Updates from John. Our Vision for America   Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Taking A Stand Read More More from John Brunner TAKE A STAND Committed to winning hearts and minds in pursuit of the cause of Liberty. TAKE A STAND A new... The other two do mention it on their website’s home pages, but they certainly don’t highlight their party affiliation. How will your basic, ordinary voter know which ballot to ask for at the primary election in August? ---
**Author:** ![FlikTheBlue](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fliktheblue/32/10972_2.png) [@FlikTheBlue](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FlikTheBlue)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/43 "2016-06-28T12:19:17Z")
I think being repudiated by George Will or other Republican pundits won’t make a difference. Being repudiated by Republicans in office like McConnell or Ryan would have a much greater impact, but that’s not going to happen. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 12:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/44 "2016-06-28T12:24:36Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Also, because many of these issues in polls are presented in isolation. > > Meaning, for example, that many people are in theory in favor of public option healthcare, but not necessarily in favor of a public option along with tax raises to pay for it, and so on. So when you present it as just “public option” in some opinion poll, then it can get support, but when it comes to an actual proposed public option along with taxes to pay for it (and other trade-offs) then it becomes a lot less popular. > > And so on for any number of other issues. Yes, Vermont showed the limits of that support. Single payer means higher taxes or less health care and the stakeholders who already have health care they like(Which in Vermont was something like 90% already) aren’t going to be having it. Now a public option, that was always possible, so long as it was a public option that competed on a level playing field with the private companies. If it was subsidized by tax dollars and had an implicit bailout guarantee, that’s just doing single payer by deceit. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/45 "2016-06-28T12:57:24Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > IMHO the biggest impact will come from the usually Republican right wing media that is not going for Trump. In my years at looking at politics I can not remember a time when a Republican candidate (or presumed one) is not getting the usual echo chamber of support. It looks that there are more than a few cave-ins in that chamber. I cannot in my lifetime remember a PResidential candidate who did not get at least nominal public support from their entire party. Of course Republican repudiations are a terrible disaster for Trump. Sure, sure, he’s an outsider. _Those people are already voting for him._ They’re already being counted in the polls. Every GOP member who says “can’t get behind this guy” is taking votes from registered Republicans away from Trump, but represents another part of the party machine that will not be working for Trump in fundraising, events, awareness, GOTV, and ground game in general. I agree that as Republicans go the likes of George Will don’t mean much. Will is long past the peak of his fame and appeals largely to Republicans who were already unlikely to support Trump. A repudiation from a Republican in office would be crushing, proportional to the importance of the office and its officeholder. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/46 "2016-06-28T13:00:11Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Not that my measly vote will matter. Trump will win Texas no matter what I do. Well… probably. I wouldn’t bet anything on that I couldn’t afford to lose, though. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/47 "2016-06-28T13:01:51Z")
The only states I’d call safe for Trump at this point are the reliably Republican Western states. But by the same token, there are some states that should be safe for Clinton that aren’t, such as PA, WI, and MI. THose union and former union voters are quite winnable for Trump. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/48 "2016-06-28T14:01:03Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The only states I’d call safe for Trump at this point are the reliably Republican Western states. But by the same token, there are some states that should be safe for Clinton that aren’t, such as PA, WI, and MI. THose union and former union voters are quite winnable for Trump. Maybe not even some of those; apparently Trump’s support in Utah, which IIRC was the reddest state in the Union in 2012, is terrible. Mormons dislike him, and Utah’s mostly Mormon, so he could lose it. It’s not a huge loss (6 EVs) but it’s indicative of Trump’s problem, which is demographic groups with an unyielding hatred of him, whose support doesn’t rise or fall with the general trend the way it usually would. I think you are correct in that his only hope is to flip rust belt states where white men can swing the vote, while simultaneously not losing disastrously elsewhere - he could lose Florida and make most of it up with Pennsylvania, for instance, but if he loses Florida AND Georgia AND Arizona AND Utah, he won’t be winning Pennsylvania or much at all. Exchanging Florida for PA and WI is possible only in a situation where he is not substantially behind in overall, nationwide polls. I’d disagree that Michigan is in play, but that’s just a feeling. We don’t yet had any sort of substantive polling data from most states, of course. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/49 "2016-06-28T16:45:16Z")
It might not even be a hope. Trump is just a different kind of Republican so the states might not fall in as predictably as they normally do. I can see a map where Trump wins most of the Deep South, some western states, and nearly sweeps the Industrial Midwest except for Illinois and still loses. He’s particularly weak in Florida, where Clinton is quite popular, so Florida might not even be a swing state this year, while PA and MI are. But guess what else are looking like swing states? Georgia, and maybe even Texas. Trump’s up by an average of 5, pulling only 40%. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/50 "2016-06-28T19:16:50Z")
> [@FlikTheBlue](#): > > I think being repudiated by George Will or other Republican pundits won’t make a difference. Being repudiated by Republicans in office like McConnell or Ryan would have a much greater impact, but that’s not going to happen. [Mark Kirk has repudiated him.](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/mark-kirk-anti-trump-ad/) ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/51 "2016-06-28T19:18:49Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The only states I’d call safe for Trump at this point are the reliably Republican Western states. But by the same token, there are some states that should be safe for Clinton that aren’t, such as PA, WI, and MI. THose union and former union voters are quite winnable for Trump. The latest polls show Hillary leading in Arizona and Utah. Arizona - [http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/284634-poll-clinton-leads-trump-in-deep-red-arizona](http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/284634-poll-clinton-leads-trump-in-deep-red-arizona) Utah - [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/13/this-new-poll-utah-poll-is-amazingly-bad-for-donald-trump/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/13/this-new-poll-utah-poll-is-amazingly-bad-for-donald-trump/) ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/52 "2016-06-28T19:22:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > The only states I’d call safe for Trump at this point are the reliably Republican Western states. But by the same token, there are some states that should be safe for Clinton that aren’t, such as PA, WI, and MI. THose union and former union voters are quite winnable for Trump. I’m not so sure. “Union” doesn’t mean stupid or crazy. Yes, he’ll win some voters obviously, but Clinton is not going to lose PA, WI, or MI to Trump. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/53 "2016-06-28T19:24:17Z")
No, but union does mean “hostile to trade deals and in many cases, mass immigration”. I don’t think a single union voter believes Clinton is actually opposed to TPP or NAFTA. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/54 "2016-06-28T19:42:38Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > I’m not so sure. “Union” doesn’t mean stupid or crazy. Yes, he’ll win some voters obviously, but Clinton is not going to lose PA, WI, or MI to Trump. As it stands, no, but those are the states that he could win if his overall poll numbers improve. Angry white men represent a lot of votes, and that’s Trump’s wheelhouse. As we saw in the Brexit vote, the angry working class vote can be tapped to vote against the establishment, even if they’re being sold a lemon. If in fact the most recent poll is true, and Clinton leads by 12 points, of course Trump cannot win any battleground state at all, and would lose states like Arizona and Georgia in the bargain. But if he were to start winning the campaign, and could pull even or ahead of Clinton, the final map could look much different from the one we’ve seen since 1996; you could see Arizona go Democratic, while Pennsylvania - which Obama won by just 5.4 percent in 2012 - goes Republican. The battle lines aren’t drawn in the same places they were before. ---
**Author:** ![Nonsuch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nonsuch/32/2922_2.png) [@Nonsuch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nonsuch)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/55 "2016-06-28T20:12:19Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > No, but union does mean “hostile to trade deals and in many cases, mass immigration”. I don’t think a single union voter believes Clinton is actually opposed to TPP or NAFTA. And yet Clinton has earned endorsements from [dozens of unions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016#Labor_unions), including the AFL-CIO. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2016, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/56 "2016-06-28T20:41:46Z")
> [@DigitalC](#): > > At this point I don’t think that’s guaranteed. Trump’s people are talking about not letting Republicans who have not endorsed him - like Cruz - speak at the convention. However Cruz has won enough states to be able to speak based on the rules. I wonder what happens to Texas if Trump gets the rules changed to block “Lyin’ Ted” from giving a speech. Could be interesting. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2016, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/57 "2016-06-29T02:54:44Z")
> [@Nonsuch](#): > > And yet Clinton has earned endorsements from [dozens of unions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016#Labor_unions), including the AFL-CIO. Who are worried about widespread defections from their membership: > [@](#): > > Richard Trumka, the president of the AFL-CIO, thought he’d have a pretty simple job in 2016: turn out his 12.7 million union members to support the Democratic presidential nominee. > > But it turns out Trumka’s task may be very different and perhaps more difficult: preventing a significant share of union households — which typically favor Democrats in elections — from defecting to Donald Trump if he’s the GOP standard-bearer. > > “If left unattended, the anger and the frustration [Trump has] tapped into will carry the day,” Trumka warned Monday in an interview with the Washington Post. “But when you give working-class people the facts, I think he falls apart. He’s a house of cards.” [https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/03/10/this-is-labors-plan-to-try-and-derail-donald-trump/?wpisrc=nl\_politics&wpmm=1](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/03/10/this-is-labors-plan-to-try-and-derail-donald-trump/?wpisrc=nl_politics&wpmm=1) Of course, that was said about Reagan too. One thing about Trump that is not a house of cards is that his stance on trade is more in lockstep with the unions than Clinton’s. That’s going to be decisive to a lot of union households. And Clinton can just forget about the coal miners and probably oil workers as well. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2016, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488/58 "2016-06-29T04:55:04Z")
Could also just be the thoughts of a man eager to emphasize his own importance. Be that as it may, should dreadful problems arise for the Dems this election, they won’t be able to say you didn’t warn them. You’ve warned about every _possible_ problem, and several other problems as well. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impact-of-republicans-repudiating-trump/754488.md?page=2)