I just want to highlight two tweets I saw since Cole dropped his truth bomb:
New ABC News/WaPo poll finds Cruz and Rubio beating Donald Trump in head-to-head matchups: https://t.co/so3g3neWp6 pic.twitter.com/hgpjrXRs10
— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) March 8, 2016
And a question as to why Rubio is not dropping out:
@ChuckLane1 Sort of a game theory question: in Rubio’s shoes, why not drop out before Florida humiliation, endorse Kasich and wait for 2020?
— Keith Humphreys (@KeithNHumphreys) March 6, 2016
The anti-Trump agenda is ensnared in a massive collective action problem. The anti-Trump movement is better off if Rubio drops out. However, the problem is simple for a party that really does not believe in collective action problems solved through societal actions and instead believes or at least publicly spouts off that everything can be modeled on the basis of individual rational behavior to get optimal societal results. There is a stable equilibrium that is extraordinarily negative for the anti-Trumpers where everyone is asking the other individuals to impale themselves on the barbwire so that they can use the body as a bridge to get into Trump’s trenches.
The Kasich-Rubio trading of places has happened. https://t.co/qakaEgsQ9u pic.twitter.com/WJnyHCxOZT
— David Leonhardt (@DLeonhardt) March 7, 2016
Let’s just look at Rubio for his incentive structure. Right now, he has shitty chances. The betting market has him at 8% chance of nomination and probably an implied 4% to 5% chance of the White House. Those odds suck, especially compared to his odds in December. However they are better than his 2020 odds. He has gone 1 and done in the Senate. He has indicated he actually hates the process of governing so a run for Governor in 2018 and then a summer long camp-out in South Carolina in 2019 is unlikely. If he loses now he becomes 2012 Rick Santorum without a natural base of dedicated supporters and a similar humiliating loss.
8% odds suck. They are much better than his 2020 or his 2024 odds.
So why would he get out?
Applying that same logic to all to Kasich and Cruz, and their odds suck now, but they are better than they would be in 2020.
And given that the promises that are made in March of 2016 are highly contingent promises that Trump can first be beaten and then Clinton can be beaten plus the promiser has few strong constraints in his actions after Election Day, the promises made to move someone out are not particularly valuable nor credible.
The traditional solution to a collective action problem is to have an external entity be able to move people off of stable but negative equilibriums and compensate losers from the much larger net social gains. The RNC is not a strong governing entity and Republicans don’t do collective action problems well anyways…
So pass the popcorn.
rikyrah
Those voting in Chicago/Suburban Cook County:
Here’s the pocket guide from the Chicago Bar Association about the judges running.
satby
When you see everything as IGMFY, then cooperating isn’t really possible.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch.
LAO
I have been arguing this point with Republicans for weeks. I find their lack of insight astounding and it demonstrates, as you note, the weakness of the RNC.
Chyron HR
Rubio doesn’t need to “win” Florida, or anywhere. If Cruz and Trump can remain more or less even, Rubio just needs to hold enough delegates hostage that neither of them can reach 50%, at which point the Chicago White Sox and the Hedge Fund Boys will install him as their puppet president.
This is an actual plan that real human beings (probably not on drugs) came up with.
Amir Khalid
Repost from previous thread:
Cui bono? This is bad news for Ted Cruz so it must be good news for someone else, but I can’t figure out for whom.
rikyrah
Morning Mayhew.
You are talking to folks about ‘taking one for the party.’
That implies self-sacrifice.
With this crew?
BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA H AH HA HA HA HA
And, to be blunt, I don’t believe those polls. But, let them believe it…I guess..
BillinGlendaleCA
@Chyron HR: And the Cubs will win the World Series this year.
LAO
@BillinGlendaleCA: Hey now, Cubs might actually win- it’s way more likely than a broker convention.
rikyrah
Why working-class whites can’t propel Donald Trump to ultimate victory
Paul Waldman
If there’s one thing we know for sure about Donald Trump, it’s that he’s a candidate for white people.
This would seem to be an almost insurmountable problem in an increasingly diverse America, but some are beginning to suspect — either with hope or fear, depending on whom you ask — that Trump could win a general election by pulling in large numbers of working-class white voters who are responding to his message of alienation, anger, and resentment. As The Wall Street Journal recently put it, “Trump’s success in attracting white, working-class voters is raising the prospect that the Republican Party, in an electoral gamble, could attempt to take an unexpected path to the White House that would run through the largely white and slow-to-diversify upper Midwest.”
Indeed, if Trump were to win the White House, this would seem to be the only way. But it’s not going to happen.
……………………………………………………………………
You can argue, and many people have, that the alienation of the Democratic Party from the white working class is a serious problem for them, and it’s part of what produces off-year defeats in years like 2010 and 2014. But because of the country’s changing demographics, the white working class becomes a smaller and smaller portion of the voting public with each election, particularly in presidential election years when turnout is higher across the board. That’s why Barack Obama could lose the white working class in 2012 by a staggering 26 points (62-36), and still win the election comfortably. So if you’re going to argue that Donald Trump will ride these voters to victory, you’d have to believe that he’d do not just better than Mitt Romney did with them, but hugely better, so much so that it would overcome the advantages the Democratic nominee will have with other voters.
Consider, for instance, the Latino vote. Mitt Romney won only 27 percent of Latinos in 2012, an abysmal performance that convinced many Republicans that if they didn’t “reach out” to this fast-growing segment of the electorate, they might be unable to win the White House any time soon. Latinos will be an even larger portion of the electorate this year than they were four years ago. Now think what will happen if Donald Trump, the man who made venomous antipathy toward immigrants one of the cornerstones of his campaign, becomes the GOP nominee. Not only would it be shocking if he got 20 percent of their votes, his nomination will almost certainly spur higher turnout among Latinos than we’ve ever seen before.
That’s another problem with the blue-collar whites theory of a Trump victory: It rests on the idea that he’d bring out large numbers of those voters who don’t vote often, but also requires that people opposed to Trump won’t be similarly motivated to turn out. “I find it just so implausible that we could have this massive white nativist mobilization without also provoking a big mobilization among minority voters,” political scientist Ruy Teixeira recently told The New Yorker. “It is kind of magical thinking that you could do one thing and not have the other.”
pseudonymous in nc
The GOP also needs Rubi-Rubi-Rubio needs to stick around long enough to prevent El Trumpador taking Florida, because Everybody Hates Ted Cruz Apart From Crazy Fundies and Assholes.
PaulW
If I may translate what Mayhew said:
In the GOP, it’s EVERY MAN – sorry Carly – FOR HIMSELF.
There’s little incentive for the remaining candidates to drop out: Cruz’s ambition drives him upward no matter what (and by winning Texas he solidifies his odds of running as a strong incumbent for the Senate), Rubio has burned all his bridges for elective offices, and Kasich does have other options for himself – if he performs well in Ohio this March 15th, he too can corral that into a run for the Senate in 2018 and another shot in 2020 – once his tenure as Ohio governor ends.
geg6
@pseudonymous in nc:
Kinda encompasses the entire idea of Florida, right there. I mean, other than Betty C. and family and a bunch of Jews in West Palm, isn’t everyone in Florida a crazy fundie and/or an asshole? Florida man and all that.
PaulW
@pseudonymous in nc:
At this point there’s little Rubio can do to stop Trump in Florida.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_republican_presidential_primary-3555.html
Trump is strong in most of the polls, and even in the close ones he’s still beating Rubio by at least 8 points (in the other polls it’s by 20!). Florida voters are crazy and ill-informed enough to vote for the con artist (hell, they voted for Rick MEDICARE FRAUD Scott. TWICE). And Florida is a Closed Primary, meaning the far right wingnuts have a greater say in who wins.
I am dreading next week.
MattF
Also, each of the R candidates considers himself the only plausible ‘savior’ of the country. This means cooperation is not merely forbidden, it’s treasonous.
PaulW
@geg6:
I’M FROM FLORIDA.
…
Relax, I’m crazy but I’m not stupid. :)
#ImWithHillary
LAO
@pseudonymous in nc: On that point, see David Brooks today, advocating for a brokered convention. Can’t wait too see what Charles Pierce has to say.
Eta missing word
PaulW
@Chyron HR:
Thing is, Florida is Winner-Take-All for delegates, meaning if Trump wins and does so across most of the districts, he gets ALL of them (with only 3, maybe 6 delegates left as table scraps for the Second Place guy).
So yeah, Rubio’s gotta win Florida to stay in this, and above all prevent Trump from jumping too far ahead. The numbers are like if Trump wins Florida he just needs 52 percent more of the remaining delegates, but if Rubio wins then Trump needs about 63 percent…
BGinCHI
That ABC poll is worthless. Who the fuck cares who that demographic favors?
It’s primary season, where only hardcore voters matter. Then comes the general where party-affiliated voters don’t vote alone for their candidates.
Shorter version: if actual GOP voters wanted someone besides Trump, they missed their chance.
Har har.
PaulW
@geg6:
Ahem.
I’M IN FLORIDA.
…
It’s all good though. I may be crazy but I’m not stupid.
<—ImWithHillary
PaulW
@LAO:
driftglass has got to be laughing his ass off reading the latest from Brooks.
Punchy
Somebody throw me a friggin’ bone here……just WHY is the GOP so upset with Trump? What does he say/do that’s so against modern GOP orthodoxy? Serious question! What policy(s) does he endorse (or refuse to bash) that is so anti-conservative?
I’m having a real prob understanding why there’s such vitriol for the Don amongst GOP elites….
Anya
Let’s celebrate the awesomeness that’s the Missouri state legislators fighting the good fight: Missouri Democrats Wage Wendy Davis-Style Filibuster Against Anti-Gay Religious Amendment
LAO
@PaulW: It is quite amusing in its oblique brooksonian way.
Immanentize
@PaulW:
I am not sure this is true…. There is a difference between being a hometown favorite against outsiders and being the winner between hometown candidates. Cruz is a rather weak and disliked Senator in Texas. Also, I am not sure he won’t just quit the whole scene if he doesn’t become President of Vice.
geg6
@PaulW:
You’re right. My not-quite-insane friends who live in Florida would also object vociferously to that characterization. Sadly though, it has been my own experience that the not-crazy, not-fundie Floridians are few and far between, but they do exist. Just not in numbers sufficient to stop Voldemort from being elected. Twice. Thank the FSM for all those stalwart Jews in West Palm. There’s a reason I prefer the east coast to the west coast.
Mnemosyne
@MattF:
Fix’d. One does wonder if a mischevious god (Loki? Coyote?) is alternately whispering in each Republican candidate’s ear, assuring him that, no, he’s totally the Chosen One and shouldn’t even dream of dropping out.
Corner Stone
Not sure I have laughed so hard in quite a while, thanks.
MattF
@Punchy: I think, mainly, their problems with Der Trump stem from the fact that he is an extremely loose cannon. He doesn’t do dogwhistle, he doesn’t do discipline. He doesn’t follow the party line, he puts the lie to a long list of Republican claims about various sensitive subjects, e.g., racism and fascism. He’s a walking confirmation of all the things the DFHs have always said about conservatism. It stings.
benw
@Punchy: well, they didn’t like Boener and they don’t like Trump, so all the data suggests that they really don’t like orange people. It’s that simple. Also that hair…
low-tech cyclist
What do Cruz and Kasich gain if Rubio drops out now, rather than waiting a week? Is one of them going to win Florida instead?
No, and here’s why: the new Monmouth poll says 1/5 of Florida voters had already voted by the time they were interviewed (March 3-6), and Rubio led Trump 48-23 among those voters, even though Trump leads Rubio 38-30 overall. (With Cruz and Kasich at 17 and 10, respectively.)
IOW, if Rubio dropped out today, he’d still rack up at least 10% of the vote in the Florida primary. It’s too late for those voters to switch to Cruz. And some of them would switch to Kasich anyway.
elmo
@rikyrah: This is exactly the scenario I worry about – that Archie Bunker in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania didn’t bother to vote in 2008 (Sarah Palin is stupid and John McCain is rich) or 2012 (R-money), but finally they have found their dream
Fuhrercandidate. And I don’t necessarily buy Ruy (“Permanent Democratic Majority”) Texiera’s counterargument that black and brown people will be more motivated to vote AGAINST Trump than they were to vote FOR Barack Obama.Trump doesn’t need to pull more nativist whites than Romney did nationwide – he only has to do it in a few states. If our voters’ response is to run up the score in New York, Massachusetts, Illinois and California, that won’t help.
OzarkHillbilly
@MattF: You forgot that he likes Social Security and Medicare just fine thank you very much.
Brendancalling
@LAO: David Brooks had me howling with laughter this morning. He is openly panicking.
Petorado
Why would Rubio drop out? He’ll never wield more power than he has in his current situation to affect the outcome of his party’s eventual nominee. He stays in the hunt until the grift money runs out, or a deep-pocketed party donor offers him a deal he can’t refuse, and then has his moment of glory as a power broker at the convention.
Major Major Major Major
@BillinGlendaleCA:
Cubs in Five, The Mountain Goats.
In all seriousness though, yeah, from a party whose sole purposes seem to be enclosure of the commons, a lack of belief in mutually beneficial collective action, and IGMFY, I think we’ve reached some sort of perverted Nash equilibrium here that only the GOP could cook up.
–M^4 -247
p.s. Morning Kitteh wonders why the coffee machine broke
MattF
@Brendancalling: Yeah– the notion that a brokered convention could ‘save’ the R party…
In fact, for the record, I think the Rs might survive a Trump candidacy, but a brokered convention would be the kiss of death.
JMG
Candidates are always the last to know they’re losing and it usually takes getting their noses rubbed in the loss to bring them to reality. Jeb was a joke long before South Carolina, but he didn’t see it. It’d take losing Florida to drive Rubio out.
Immanentize
@Punchy: He cannot be controlled….
Redshift
@Punchy: Because they have no influence over him and don’t think he’ll do anything for them. They’re not just about winning or losing, they’re about what they get out of winning.
Also, they have a much better idea than the GOP based about his chances in the general, but I think that’s secondary.
geg6
@elmo:
Purely anecdotal, but I live in one of those places and am surrounded on all sides by the Archie Bunker Reagan Democrats. The ones who will actually quit whining about the shitty lot in life they have due to free shit going to those people long enough to go and vote haven’t voted for an actual Democrat (except maybe on the local level) in at least 3 decades. And those who are some of the most loud and ignorant Trumpettes aren’t registered to vote, wouldn’t have the first clue as to how to register to vote and wouldn’t get off their lazy asses to actually go and vote if, by some miracle, they actually managed to get registered.
I’m not at all concerned about them. I’m more concerned about all the 30-45 year-old high school-educated, low income and low information women who are completely tied into the celebrity/Kardashian/entertainment vortex and who, for some reason, seem to find the vulgar talking yam a mesmerizing figure.
The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016
@elmo: You have to counter that with all the ‘sensible’ Voinovich-Taft-Kasich Republicans who’ll show up for Rob Portman, the other downticket races, and that’s it. There’s a reason the Ohio Tea Party is virtually non-existant.
The Sheriff Endorses Baud 2016
@elmo: You have to counter that with all the ‘sensible’ Voinovich-Taft-Kasich Republicans who’ll show up for Rob Portman, the other downticket races, and that’s it. There’s a reason the Ohio Tea Party is virtually non-existant.
Mnemosyne
@elmo:
I suspect, though, that much of the huge wave of angry white working-class voters is itself in states that are already solidly Republican. Getting massive white turnout in, say, Alabama or Texas isn’t going to change the result much.
These days, there are only a handful of states where a flip from D to R in the general election would make a huge difference.
rikyrah
We’re not the only ones who appreciate ‘No Drama Obama’.
………………….
Foreign diplomats voicing alarm to U.S. officials about Trump
Reuters By Mark Hosenball, Arshad Mohammed and Matt Spetalnick
March 7, 2016 6:09 AM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Foreign diplomats are expressing alarm to U.S. government officials about what they say are inflammatory and insulting public statements by Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump, according to senior U.S. officials.
Officials from Europe, the Middle East, Latin America and Asia have complained in recent private conversations, mostly about the xenophobic nature of Trump’s statements, said three U.S. officials, who all declined to be identified.
“As the (Trump) rhetoric has continued, and in some cases amped up, so, too, have concerns by certain leaders around the world,” said one of the officials.
Linnaeus
@elmo:
Thing is, the places where Trump would have to win more of the “Archie Bunker” voters are the places where it would actually be harder for him to do it.
Helen
@PaulW: Speaking of Driftglass; yesterday he posted the trailer for D’Souza’s “Hillary’s America.” It is laugh out loud funny. A better parody the Onion could not make.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
He’s going to fix things. He must know how because he’s a successful businessman. What Bubba said years ago about strong and wrong still holds, and nobody’s stronger and wronger than Trump.
Chris
@geg6:
I mean, that and a phenomenal number of Latin voters.
I grant that after interacting with Miami drivers long enough, you’ll be ready to put a big chunk of them in the “asshole” category as well, but that doesn’t mean they’re right wing assholes. (Even the Cuban vote gets bluer and bluer as time goes by).
Anya
I want Trump & Cruz to divide the primary wins in a way that neiither reaches the majority delegate needed for the win. These two assholes are great source of encouraging apathetic voters to get off their asses and vote.
My aunt and her husband have lived in this country for 30 years but they never bothered to apply for citizenship until Trump came on the scene. Now they will be lucky enough to vote because their application could’ve taken more than six months.
NotMax
Being naturally jargon averse, need to ask what is CAP?
/AAAA (Association Against Acronym Annoyance)
Betty Cracker
Great summary of the problem the Repubs face, which they created. I’d be really shocked if Rubio dropped out before Tuesday. Like someone mentioned up-thread, it might not change the dynamics anyway. The only thing that might drive him from the race is the fear that a humiliating defeat would dash any ambitions he has to run for governor (not that he’d win that race either, but he might be deluded enough to think so). I’ve noticed that when Rubio expresses disdain for his current no-show senate gig, he’s always careful to couch it in terms that make it clear an executive role is what he seeks, so that doesn’t exclude a run for governor, IMO.
Roger Moore
@Punchy:
It’s not what he says, it’s how he says it. The GOP has spent decades perfecting the art of advocating racist and xenophobic positions while pretending to be respectable. Trump has ripped away that respectable veneer to show the ugly core within, and that upsets a lot of people who don’t want to see themselves as racists.
Chris
@rikyrah:
I’ve always wondered if the other major powers of the world have contingency plans for what to do in the event that the United States goes completely and irrevocably batshit. You know, the kind of thing the Pentagon probably has a dozen war game scenarios for in Pakistan.
WarMunchkin
Any thoughts on the recent story regarding Theranos? I note this in particular just because of how much fluff that company has gotten, and its decision to put Henry Kissinger on the Board of Directors.
pseudonymous in nc
@geg6:
Florida’s full of crazies, but they’re Florida Crazy, which is its own species of crazy — weirdly similar in some ways to Alaska Crazy, but with heat and population density and alligators. It’s the crazy of having arrived there from somewhere else — often to escape something else — not the crazy of never having gone anywhere.
The core Cruz demographic is corn-fed fundies who smugly extend their Christian love towards you while telling you you’re going to hell.
Dr. Bloor
@rikyrah: Saw that. No ax to grind with the content, but I thought quoting Elliot Abrams without noting that he’s advising Rubio was a quality bit of journalism. I don’t even hope anymore that he will be referred to as “convicted and censured for lying about Iran-Contra Elliot Abrams.”
MattF
@WarMunchkin: I know… One can only wonder what issues they’re facing if their proposed solution is to put Kissinger on the BoD.
Betty Cracker
@Chris: Florida is actually a great microcosm for America: coastal liberal enclaves, yahooism in the interior, a growing immigrant population, crabby old farts, restive youth — hell even both sides of the Mason-Dixon line are represented within the state’s borders (i.e., “the further north you go, the further South you get”).
Linnaeus
@NotMax:
Collective Action Problem.
Major Major Major Major
@Betty Cracker: And a bunch of yahoos who think fluoridation is a Communist plot to sap and impurify our precious bodily fluids. Tampa, IIRC?
NotMax
@pseudonymous in nc
The panhandle is a canker on the body politic.
Tom Levenson
@Chris:
Hell, if driving norms were the criterion, they’d be calling citizens of the Commonwealth “Massholes.”
Ummm. Wait.
NotMax
@Linnaeous
Than you.
So a fancy-schmancy way, then, of using three words to say Unity.
sigaba
@Punchy: Chait had a long post about “Why the Republican Party TPTB hates Trump” and it basically came down to:
1) He’s made it clear that he’s not going to prioritize tax cuts over every other issue.
2) He’s shown more fealty to the social issues than the “establishment” would prefer — they’d rather people be maximally dedicated to low taxes and less regulation, and remain ambiguous/curious on social issues, and Trump is the exact opposite.
3) David Brooks-types have constructed entire careers around claiming conservatism is high-minded an intellectual, and that “rubes” and racists have never been part of the movement, and Trump’s candidacy makes this claim impossible to sustain.
Chris
@Betty Cracker:
Yep, agree completely. And with the massive and still growing Latino population, a nice glimpse of its future – probably a more realistic one than California, because I don’t see the national-level GOP ever being squashed as thoroughly as I’m told the Californian one has been, and I don’t see that happening in FL, either.
ETA: it’s also interesting in having what’s probably the only remaining minority demographic in America that votes hardcore right wing, the Cubans. Not so much anymore, I believe Obama won their vote, but that’s a very recent development, it’s still a much more divided vote than other Latin demographics, and the right wing old guard remains very well entrenched.
NotMax
In pushing the analogy to the breaking point comic book terms (Hi, Mr. Mayhew!) have reached the conclusion that Trump is the bizarro Bella Abzug.
yellowdog
@Punchy: Because (1) They think he will lose the general and a lot of down-ballot races, and/or (2) if by some miracle he wins the general, they can’t control him.
elm
@NotMax: Not really, there are a number of well-known Collective Action Problems and they are well studied by economists, mathematicians, philosophers, political scientists, and historians.
Their common feature is, as Richard described, that each individual following his or her best strategy produces an outcome that’s bad for everyone. It’s also well-known that relatively-strong governing organizations are the only known practical solution to many of those problems.
So it’s poetic that the party of “limited government” (a.k.a. IGMFY) would destroy itself through such a collective action problem, precisely because the solution is known but it’s the type of solution they reflexively reject.
Mike J
Rubio stays in, not because he’ll get anywhere this time, but because the theme of his 20 campaign will be, “I told you so.”
CONGRATULATIONS!
@Punchy: He makes them look bad. I had a long chat with my lifelong Republican dad about this last night. He’s pretty wealthy. He’s not a racist. He gives a shit about the welfare of the Republic. He’s pro-union. You’d think he’d be a Democrat. If not for the Southern Strategy, he probably would be. Worked on him. Worked on a lot of people.
But he literally has ZERO idea of what his party has actually turned into – a toxic grab bag of fundamentalist Christianity, white working class failures and dropouts, and unapologetic Confederates. Everyone on his street is Republican, and none of them are like that. So he has no idea where all these people came from.
He does know how they took over his party, though. As he said “we’ve spent the last eight years without one single idea being put forward to the American public.”
Yep, you’re the party of “no”.
Anyhow, Trump is embarrassing, that’s all. Once he wins the primary, a lot of these people whining about how uncouth he is will shut up and vote for him anyway.
MuckJagger
If I were The Donald, I’d find a way to drop a BIG pile of money on the Rubio campaign.
yellowdog
@geg6: I find it interesting that that group of women, who must be pretty racist if they are inclined towards Trump, would be involved in the life of a woman who is married to a Black man. Maybe the Dems should seek an endorsement for the Kardasians.
Roger Moore
@elmo:
Two points:
1) The electoral map is a little bit worse for Trump overall than it was for Romney because the country is a bit less white than it was in 2012. So Trump needs to do better with whites than Romney did just to keep up.
2) A number of the key swing states- notably Florida, Virginia, Nevada, and Colorado- have substantial Hispanic/Latino populations. Antagonizing them is going to hurt him and mean he needs to do even better with whites just to win those must-win swing states.
Calouste
@CONGRATULATIONS!:
Uhm, the Southern Strategy is all about racism. Wikipedia even starts the article about the Southern Strategy with: “In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to a strategy by Republican Party candidates of gaining political support in the Southern United States by appealing to racism against African Americans.”
If the Southern Strategy worked on your dad, he is by definition a racist.
Roger Moore
@Chris:
Vietnamese still lean pretty far to the right, though they’re also starting to moderate now that the original immigrant generation is getting old and dying.
Fair Economist
Rubio stays in because if he loses he’s a loser but if he quits he’s still a loser but a wimp as well because he didn’t even try. That would be death to any future political ambitions. Quitting would only be an option if he wanted to follow the path of the Quitta from Wasilla and go into grifting, but he doesn’t have anything like the fan club she did.
Tim C.
@Punchy: What everybody else said, but I’ll double down on the fact that the Establishment GOP is functionally an American aristocracy. So the fact he even talks about jobs lost other countries makes him dangerous in their eyes. But yea, turning dog whistles into train whistles basically gives away the whole con.
OzarkHillbilly
@Calouste: Your point is taken, but people can change. The most you can say from the available data is that he had some racist views back then.
raven
@NotMax: Combined Action Platoon. One of the few efforts in the Vietnam War that was successful. It was a Marine Corps program and Westmoreland derailed it.
boatboy_srq
This probably explains the anti-Trump ineptitude best. They’re so wedded to “individual” action that working together (outside small issue- or affiliation- specific groups) is virtually impossible for them either to conceptualize or execute.
It also helps explain why “Big-Tent Republicanism” fails so regularly and so spectacularly. Working as an individual with other individuals is hard enough: working with groups – which then legitimizes the groups – is philosophically near-impossible. So every single demographic smaller than Real Patriotic Ahmurrrcans™ but bigger than ME!!11!1!™ is a construct they neither accept nor understand.
Linnaeus
@raven:
Noted. You learn something new everyday.
Major Major Major Major
@Roger Moore: Only the Northern immigrants (largely concentrated in Louisiana), in my experience. The ones in San Jose tend to lean Dem.
Calouste
@Fair Economist: Half the Village is Rubio’s fan club. He can take over John McCain’s spot as the Sunday morning regular. He wouldn’t even have to grift as hard as Palin to make some decent appearance fees.
NickM
@Roger Moore: I live in a middle-to-upper-middle income town inhabited by mainly college-educated whites, many of them military or ex-military and/or working for military contractors, and most of them moderately conservative. The neighbors I know on Facebook (almost all moms) are outspoken against Trump in a way I’ve never seen — usually people avoid politics because they’re all running for Ms. Popularity. This time, however, there are a lot of people commenting on politics who never do, and all of them are denouncing Trump, and obviously think their friends are going to agree (or they wouldn’t be doing it). Last time around, according to Swing the Election, Nate Silver’s site, college-educated whites voted 56% for Romney with 77% voting. I could see the Trump vote in this segment getting closer to 50% if what I’m seeing locally (admittedly anecdotal) applies more generally.
Roger Moore
@Major Major Major Major:
The ones in Orange County- which is the largest single block of them in the US- were pretty solidly Republican.
Cermet
@<a href="#comment-5700440" rel="nocanker 'Cracker' on the body politic. Fixed for clarity and actual conditions
O. Felix Culpa
@boatboy_srq: I would also suggest that purity standards and binary thinking get in the way of collective action. My future in-laws are among the cornfed fundamentalists referred to upthread, and they spend A LOT of time thinking about whether associating, i.e. being in the same room as, certain people constitutes “approval” of those people or whatever odious thing they stand for. That mindset poses a serious barrier to even conversation, a necessary precursor to collective action.
Edited to delete excessive italics, which I can’t manage on my phone. (Hangs head in shame.)
Eric U.
I like to think that the republican “all racism, all the time” strategy has been hidden just well enough that some people that don’t like to think of themselves as racist can go along for the tax cuts. The fact that they really are racist doesn’t really get tested.
jonas
@Punchy: 1. He’s only very recently come out as a “real convservative.” Republicans like their candidates to have been born with Reagan-shaped birthmarks and who can show that they’ve been gorging on right-wing red meat since they were toddlers. Trump once claimed to be pro-choice and spent much of his career palling around with Bloomberg and the Clintons and other “New York types,” if you get our drift. 2. He’s turned all their racist/misogynist/nativist dogwhistles into foghorns. This makes it very hard to pretend you give a shit about nig**rs. 3. The GOP establishment is dominated by neocons who luuuuuuv them some bombing and invading (aka “global leadership”) and Trump has been critical of foreign adventurism and stuff like the Iraq War.
Tripod
I have no idea why they ditched proportional delegate distribution and super delegates, but maybe those aren’t such good ideas as the progressive peanut gallery seem to think. i.e. gaming the system for your preferred candidate outcome for THIS cycle might yield disastrous outcomes on down the line.
Trump is running to increase brand awareness and busting out the GOP donor class. No different than RMoney, he’s just more vulgar about it.
elm
@Eric U.: They’ve been extremely successful at fooling themselves with “I’m not racist but…” racism.
They’re also extremely opposed to being identified as bigoted, because identifying somebody’s bigoted beliefs or behavior is the real bigotry.
Joyce H
My guess is that Rubio won’t drop out because to do so would benefit Ted Cruz. Remember that we’ve been being told for months that the people who hate Cruz the most are the ones who know him best. Cruz is a Senator – Rubio is a Senator. Rubio knows Cruz, knew him before the campaign. If he’s like other senators, he hates Cruz with the white-hot heat of a thousand burning suns.
Also, what does he get out of it? How is Cruz going to repay him? Even if he wins, does Cruz ever return favors? Rubio left the Senate and is not running for reelection. He’s a career politician. What’s he going to do when he drops out? If the GOP establishment wants Rubio to drop out, somebody needs to offer him a job. A guy’s gotta eat.
Richard Mayhew
@NotMax: Collective Action Problem (CAP)
Chris
@Tim C.:
I agree, and I continue to think that, especially in a post-Reagan world where the Eisenhower Republicans have been run out on a rail, the “moderate” versus “conservative” distinction in the GOP is more about class than actual policy.
“Moderates” are the wealthy, preferably East Coast, Chamber of Commerce types with all the connections to the Village, to K Street, and elsewhere in Official Washington, who preferably went to all the right schools and are in the right country clubs and have been in that cocoon their whole life. (And, maybe, the non-trivial demographic of people who aspire to be them one day).
Those people recoil on general principle at the thought of the rabble having more than a token say in anything, even if it’s “their” rabble and no matter how many things they might agree on. Trump is running so explicitly as the candidate of the rabble sticking it to the elites that of course they’re horrified.
NR
@Roger Moore:
Actually, none of those states are must-win for Trump.
I invite you to head over to Nate Silver’s Swing-O-Matic. I ran an experiment. I increased non college-educated white turnout to 70% and gave Trump 70%. I also increased (as a backlash to Trump) Hispanic and Asian turnout by 10% and gave the Democrat 80% among Hispanics (from 71%) and 75% among Asians/others (from 67%). I kept blacks and college-educated whites the same.
So we have:
Non college-educated white: 70% R/70%
Hispanics: 80% D/58%
Asians/other: 75% D/59%
African Americans: 93% D/66%
White college-educated: 56% R/77%
The result? The Dems win the popular vote, 49.5% to 48.8%. But the kicker is, the Dems only win 274 electoral votes in that scenario, and those just barely. They hold CO (D+2), MI (D+2), VA (D+2), and FL (D+1.4), but lose IA (R+5), OH (R+5), NH (R+4), WI (R+2), and PA (R+0.1). The tipping point state for the Dems in that scenario is MN (D+0.2). Under that scenario, Trump would actively contest the state and have a good chance of winning it, and thus the presidency. Trump’s stances on trade and immigration could put the entire Midwest except Illinois in jeopardy, and Hillary is going to have a tough time there; plenty of voters in those states still remember NAFTA.
Trump is going to be making a big play for non college-educated whites, and I think there’s only about 25-30% of that group that will always vote Dem no matter what. Obama managed to win 36% of their vote in 2012, by portraying Romney (with a big assist from Romney) as being out-of-touch with them, which resulted in many of them staying home or voting for Obama. I think the key to beating Trump will be to portray him not as embarrassing or crazy, but as a Romney-style fraud. Just another rich asshole who only cares about himself and doesn’t really understand them. It remains to be seen if Hillary can do that. If she can’t, we’d better hope we can make up the difference with college-educated whites, because black turnout is not likely to hit 2012 levels since Obama won’t be on the ballot this time.
pseudonymous in nc
@NotMax: never trust a state with a panhandle.
Betty Cracker
@NR: It’ll be closer than it should be for sure. But I think folks underestimate the impact of having the first woman from a major party on the ballot (assuming Hillary wins). That’s a big fucking deal for many of us. I don’t claim she’ll get tons of Republican votes, but the historic nature of her candidacy combined with Trump’s uniquely repellent persona make me feel pretty good about our chances.
Chris
@Eric U.:
That was actually part of the point of Nixon’s Southern Strategy, IIRC. His campaign existed not only in contrast to the liberals who supported civil rights, but in contrast to the diehard unrepentant segregationist fringe represented by George Wallace. With those two factions going against each other, Nixon was free to present himself as the candidate of the Sensible White People, the “I’m not a racist, but…” voters. (The point of dogwhistling is to appeal to as many segregationists as you can, but without turning off the voters for whom overt and complete Dixiecratism might be a bridge too far).
Same basic principle as FDR running not only in contrast to Wall Street stooges, but also in contrast to Huey Long type radicals.
Jeffro
@Chyron HR:
I’m not sure about the ‘probably not on drugs’ part…
If the Establishment takes it from Trump at the convention, good-bye GOP
Jeffro
@Amir Khalid:
It’s good for everyone but Ted Cruz. They have all benefitted by being able to (accurately, as it turns out) portray Cruz as someone who can’t get along with his fellow GOP Senators…which boggles even political laymen’s minds.
Jeffro
@PaulW:
You know, if Rubio would be so kind as to say something to that effect in his post-FL concession speech, I might just send him $20 to help pay off his campaign debt.
It’s a better offer than he deserves, but it would be worth it.
Chyron HR
@Jeffro:
Okay, but just cocaine, not the “I AM A GOLDEN GOD!” stuff.
Jeffro
@LAO: Ugh…I just read Brooks piece and ugh.
This may be the biggest lie he’s told this whole election cycle (so far):
>
Yes…because when I look at the Kaisch, Rubio, and Ryan agendas, that’s the first thing that jumps out at me…”energetic use of government to expand mobility and widen openness and opportunity”
Jesus, Brooks, how do you look at yourself in the mirror every morning?
Archon
@NR:
I’d be genuinely nervous about Trump’s appeal if it weren’t for his tax plan which is basically Mitt Romney’s on steroids. It’s indefensible with anyone that even kind of cares about numbers. His magical tax plan plus the KKK stuff is going to dog him throughout the general and I suspect his support will collapse with college educated whites against Hillary Clinton.
I don’t think the election will be a wipeout but I’d be shocked if Clinton’s margin against Trump is lower then Obama’s against Romney.
Jeffro
@MattF:
Well he’s that – the pure, unadulterated racist face of all that has quietly energized the GOP for years if not decades – AND he still manages to unnerve them with his quite-possibly-not-conservative views on things like PP, not privatizing social security, etc.
He’s actually the worst of both worlds, as far as they’re concerned. He’s exposing the party for what it is, without any guarantee of a payoff in terms of advancing their agenda.
ETA to add, Roger Moore, sigaba, and others have noted this as well.
Chris
@Jeffro:
That’s actually hilarious, because it puts the GOP elites in exactly the same position that they’ve been putting their right wing base in since Nixon.
“Hey – vote for us, because while we’ll certainly make you poorer, we might ban abortion, stop the rise of gay rights, stop the increasing diversification of America, and all the other things you care about!” Trump takes that dynamic and inverts it.
NotMax
@raven
Kind of puzzling that the Hawaii state legislature last week allocated monies to “commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Vietnam war.”
tsquared2001
@NR: Minnesota hasn’t voted Republican since 1972. There is NO way our 10 electoral votes are going to Trump.
tsquared2001
I screwed up my email address – can someone fish my comment out of the moderation sea? Thanks.
Jeffro
@Chris: I just emailed my theory to my air quote “Libertarian” brother to see what he thinks…the more he protests the more I’ll know I’m right.
If you set it up as ‘bad image’/’good image’ and ‘conservative outcomes’/non-conservative’ outcomes, you get four quadrants. Trump puts the worst possible image out for the party (old, white, angry, racist, and stupid) while also managing to not guarantee conservative outcomes (legislative, policy, or SCOTUS). No wonder they are panicking.
At least with ‘bad image’ and ‘conservative outcomes’, Priebus and Luntz could get to work on the image piece. With ‘good image’ (to GOP voters and the public in general, not us) and ‘conservative outcomes’ you’d basically have W. With ‘good image’ and ‘non-conservative outcomes’, you’d basically have Colin Powell and that’s a non-starter in today’s GOP.
The Trump Quadrant – I love it. Finally it all makes sense. Good luck improving that image, or trying to pin him down on conservative outcomes, GOP!
NR
@Betty Cracker: Hillary could very well do better than Obama with college-educated white women, but that also could very well be offset by lower black turnout. Regardless, I think educated voters are our only chance to stop Trump. I sure hope the Hillary camp knows what it’s doing.
Jeffro
@NR: I think Clinton – especially with the very likely possibility that Obama will be out there campaigning hard for her, with her blessing – is going to do just fine with black, Hispanic, and other minority voters. Minimal drop off in turnout if any.
She will need to work hard to keep the margin of uneducated voters down as much as possible.
I think she’s likely to get a non-insignificant percentage of female swing voters/independents/moderate Rs tell pollsters one thing, and vote another in the voting booth. I can see that ending up being a wash both ways.
In the end, in 2012, Obama was still able to win 51-47%, 332 EVs to 206. The economy’s improved, demographics favor the Ds in many ways, the Ds are unified and will likely be running the first female candidate for president, while the Rs have a horrendous (not)-“deep bench” from which some sorry soul will emerge as their nominee, possibly even after a brokered convention (or even a party split).
I like our chances.
Just One More Canuck
@NR: Those are really aggressive assumptions you make, but is there any basis for them, particularly when you keep blacks and college educated whites static in terms of their turnout and voting intentions. If you cut your assumptions in half, the Democrats still win 308 electoral votes. In addition, if you assume that turnout will be at its highest level in history (2008 – 131 million), then the total number of votes by college educated whites and for blacks would fall by 10% each, but the total votes for the other three groups would increase by over 10%. An interesting toy, but in what world is that realistic?
chopper
@Jeffro:
i’m not sure i understand where some people’s assumptions are coming from that black voters are going to want to stay home this fall when the GOP is putting up an out-and-out racist shit on the ticket.
Steve in the ATL
@pseudonymous in nc:
QFT
Bob In Portland
Interesting idea.
NR
@Just One More Canuck: Do you really think black turnout is going to increase with Obama not running? I think it’s far more likely that it drops. Maybe not to 2004 levels, but definitely down from 2008 and 2012. It’s way down in the primaries already. Like 30-40% down. I think leaving it at 2012 levels in my calculation was, if anything, overly generous to the Dems.
Jeffro
@chopper:
I can only see those assumptions coming from GOP dreamers or Dem worrywarts. Clinton would likely bring out Obama-like numbers on her own; with Obama himself actively campaigning and helping w/ GOTV, African-American turnout is likely to be quite high.
And for NR @116: it’s down in the primaries across all Dem demographics. We have a pretty clear front runner, and the two candidates are not that far apart on the issues.
Just One More Canuck
@NR: In your scenario, what would have to happen to make turnout for college educated whites decrease by over 4 million, while turnout for non college educated whites increase by over 5 million?
@Jeffro: has a much better response than what I was going to say (Thanks Jeffro)
glory b
Rubio has to run now. He’ll be bald within the next four years. He has to do this while he still has hair.