Should Ryan and McConnell go to each member of the congress and ask them this specific question:
“Are you a Republican or are you aligned to the new Trumpist Party?”
Make it clear that this is the time for a choice. They can continue to be a Republican, be in the Republican caucus, and be a member of the party, OR, they can align themselves with Mr. Trump, and join with him fully and completely.
A binary choice. One or the other. Choose now.
I know it will never happen, but if they don’t, I think the party will suffer the death of a thousand cuts, and be dead within 5 years.
The crisis of choice is there whether anyone makes any such gesture or not. The Pubbies painted themselves into this corner long ago, when they built a coalition of corporate interests and troglodytes. The Pubbies candidates need them both to win, even to squeek a fifty percent plus one. And the way things are shaping up, they can’t have both.
Anybody who can say things that keep them both happy for the next month would be a political genius. See any?
This is the hell the Pubbies built for themselves when they decided to embrace any lie, no matter how self-destructive, as long as it kept their troglodyte mob, angry. They thought they could control the mob and that the anger would only be expressed via voting. They’ve spent twenty years telling the troglodytes that the truth doesn’t matter as much as their angry emotions.
It was inevitable that the angry mob would turn on themselves.
So is war receding? Some of those Republican officials who denounced him are falling back in line or at least softening their stances. You have this article about them running scared from their own base, and I think it might well be correct. At least through November. What they’ll do after, I have no idea. Just back to status quo while they try to sweep this under the rug for a few more years? Can they do that even if they want to?
Still, if they make nice, that improves their chances of Trump’s base still voting R down-ballot.
The behavior of many republicans here is the main reason why it is a big lie to expect that they would keep an eye on Trump if he misbehaves.
It is more likely that Republicans will just follow the most reprehensible ideas of El Trompo. So, it is way past the time to vote all the Republican rascals out.
I disagree with the entire comment - it’s entirely appropriate for a politician to engage a politician she disagrees with in whatever medium seems most effective. An NYRB essay is not really necessary when attacking Trump.
But I especially object to “financial guru” - I think the usual connotation of that expression is someone like Suze Orman or Dave Ramsey or the Rich Dad guy. Someone who’s at best walking the line that borders investment flim-flammery.
So more like a Trump U professor, not a Harvard U professor.
Fair enough.
However, in an all text medium where no one can see the expression one uses when speaking a word, inflammatory words are better set off with quotation marks, the phrase “so called,” and similar methods to ensure that the audience recognizes that the word or phrase does not express a belief held by the author.
In evenly remotely contested districts this will increase the chances of independents rejecting them.
My prediction: Come January, 95% of Republican officeholders will claim they were against Trump all the time. Kind of like how 95% of the French were in the Resistance,
Republicans in Congress,
High-minded statesmen all,
Singing “I was not a Trump supporter!”
“How I laughed at all that nonsense
About a border wall—
Singing, I was not a Trump supporter!”
*
Just because you associate “financial guru” with loudmouth bullshit artists doesn’t mean I don’t get to use the phrase properly. She’s incredibly knowledgeable of the underpinnings and workings of the financial system. So if you need to replace the word “wizard”, “nerd”, “genius” or whatever in your head then go right ahead.
And I stand by what I said. Her twitter comments sounded like a girl in sixth grade. It’s beneath her.
So, civil war more or less likely than a month ago? Things seemed to have calmed down a little. Or else the media is paying less attention. I’m not seeing as many headlines about other Republican officials (non-retired ones) saying bad things about Trump. Now, I know the Trump was winning the popularity war against Ryan among GOP voters, leading to some officials falling back in line.
If Trump was winning, there’d be clear winner among factions. As it is, do you think spectacular implosion/meltdown chances have declined in favor of more status quo? I mean, there is a difference in what the base and the Establishment want and that’s going to continue to be the case. But will it be a slower, less dramatic event? Less destructive to the party? I mean, before you had some people talking about full-on schism/new-party existing by 2018. Was that ever likely and is it now?
Do you think any immediate post-election activity will effect this? Is there any hope of a 2016 autopsy doing any more good than the 2012 one?
Also, is Preibus has the RNC call today, right? Any idea what to expect from that? Just more generic “save yourselves” because Trump isn’t winning or something else?
Trump has stopped fund-raising activities and no longer communicates or works with the RNC. But it’s not at the top that the civil war is being fought, it’s in the electorate…if it is occurring, as you said. Election night will be quite interesting in regards to how to chart a way forward for the GOP - if Ryan gets his ass handed to him along with Trump, what the hell does that even mean?
I would guess it would be interpreted as the party being rejected because of its lack of unity, and that there’d be a push for pure conservatism.
Which really is the wrong idea. One thing that Trump did right was saying he wouldn’t touch Social Security or Medicare, and would make them stronger. And a lot of where Trump went wrong was in overly embracing conservative positions to the point that the middle of the electorate found it untenable.
But it is what I predict: Clinton’s challenger will be a pure conservative.