Jeb Bush's comment that he thought Trump was unqualified to be Commander in Chief. He also said he would support Trump if he were the GOP nominee.
This comment has stimulated a flurry of articles on Republican donors and elected officials regarding whether they would support Trump. Some Hispanic GOP leaders were uncertain. Some donors were as well, one saying he might drift off to a desert island for the election duration.
The issue is a high stakes one. Trump might win the nomination, which gives the risk of dividing the party. Or Trump might lose amid prestigious GOP elites leading an anyone but Trump effort, in which case notoriously thin-skinned Trump might claim--with good evidence--that he was "kicked out" of the Republican party, and therefore he owes it no loyalty.
He would not need to get onto the ballot everywhere, although he might do so. All he would need to do is get onto the ballot in Florida, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Colorado.
Having watched nearly all the Republican candidates up close my own conclusion is that the policy differences between Trump and all the other candidates are tiny. They are all saying the same thing.
--Support symbols of traditional America, including saying "Merry Christmas", promoting English-only, validating Christianity as our culture's primary religion, and traditional marriage arrangements
--Tighten or close the border to immigration, both from Latin America and the Middle East
--Cancel the Iran nuclear deal immediately
--Adopt a more bellicose tone in foreign policy
--Support Israel's foreign and domestic policy with little or no reservation
--Reverse the Affordable Care Act and return to the pre-ACA situation
--Increase American military size and involvement in the Middle East, Russian border, and East Asia
--Re-negotiate trade deals with the world so that America becomes more protectionist
--De-fund Planned Parenthood and make abortion near-impossible
--Lower taxes on everyone, especially businesses.
--Reduce regulations on all businesses, especially financial ones
There is a little bit of ultra-fine point disagreement among the candidates as they attempt a differentiation big enough to run a contrast-advertisement. Cruz says Rubio briefly considered a compromise acceptable to some Democrats on immigration, shame on him, the RINO. Graham says we need 20,000 American ground troops in Syria, while Trump only commits to "bombing the shit out of them". Yes, there is a difference, but does anyone really notice? All the candidates say they hate Planned Parenthood but some candidates would accept abortion if it would save the mother's life while others would not. It is a big point if one is the unlucky woman with a 16 week ectopic pregnancy, but it is a small distinction in the context of general campaign speech pledging support for "life."
Bottom line: Trump shaped the debate and everyone is Trump. Or Trumpish.
The only difference is in tone and language. Trump is blunt. He uses short sentences. (From Trump website: "If you give American workers a level playing field, they will win. The results will be huge for American businesses and workers. Jobs and factories will stop moving offshore and instead stay here at home. The economy will boom. The steps outlined in this plan will make that a reality.")
Bush, the archetypal Establishment candidate has a gradualist, incrementalist tone: (From Bush website: "The president should be able to eliminate wasteful spending through a constitutionally sound line-item veto--such as the version that Congressman Paul Ryan has proposed. From the very outset as president, I would signal a new direction by supporting fundamental reforms that go to the heart of the problem."
Look at the difference. Trump says things "will" happen, done deal. Bush says what "should" happen, he cites a constitutional constraint, then not an actual proposal but one "such as" a mere "proposal" of Paul Ryan. And then he "signals" a new direction of un-described reforms that do not solve a problem but merely "go to the heart of" them, whatever that means.
The difference isn't policy, it's tone. And tone does matter, indeed enough to make elites uncomfortable with the fact they cannot control his language or the pace of change he promotes. Powerful GOP interests like Bush more than Trump because Bush is "signaling", with signals he won't actually disturb the status quo very quickly, while Trump is communicating that he won't dither around. Trump means change, while Bush trends toward it.
Will the GOP establishment support Trump? They have no choice because Trump has made every candidate Trump-ish. The only issue is the speed in which Trump-isms are implemented and how much influence they think they will have on the process in which they are implemented. The establishment candidates will let Trump-ish reforms get massaged by K Street, and Trump may not.
But since anyone-but-Trump will be essentially personal and anti-Trump, not based on policy, everything Trump has done as a candidate indicates that he will be furious at the personal snub. When attacked personally he hits back, harder. That is is brand. That is Trump. If he is snubbed, I expect he will hit and hit back, harder, and the way to do that is to run as a Reform candidate, a pox on both corrupt parties. Trump would believe he was snubbed by Republicans because Republicans, like Hillary, are indebted to their donors. Rubio, Cruz, Bush or whoever the Republican candidate that replaced him would be, Trump would believe, illegitimate as a phony, and would be a mere puppet on the strings of unseen puppet-masters. I would expect him to dislike that Republican interloper at least as much as he would dislike Hillary.
The Republican party, Fox News, and talk radio created and nurtured Trump, and they have created someone very dangerous for them. In a three way election I would expect him to do at least as well as Perot. Maybe much, much better than Perot. He would not have support of Fox, but I expect he would have a lot of support on talk radio. And of people who want the real thing, someone who will demand change, not someone who will signal a desire to move toward it.
This comment has stimulated a flurry of articles on Republican donors and elected officials regarding whether they would support Trump. Some Hispanic GOP leaders were uncertain. Some donors were as well, one saying he might drift off to a desert island for the election duration.
The issue is a high stakes one. Trump might win the nomination, which gives the risk of dividing the party. Or Trump might lose amid prestigious GOP elites leading an anyone but Trump effort, in which case notoriously thin-skinned Trump might claim--with good evidence--that he was "kicked out" of the Republican party, and therefore he owes it no loyalty.
He would not need to get onto the ballot everywhere, although he might do so. All he would need to do is get onto the ballot in Florida, Virginia, Ohio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Colorado.
Having watched nearly all the Republican candidates up close my own conclusion is that the policy differences between Trump and all the other candidates are tiny. They are all saying the same thing.
--Support symbols of traditional America, including saying "Merry Christmas", promoting English-only, validating Christianity as our culture's primary religion, and traditional marriage arrangements
--Tighten or close the border to immigration, both from Latin America and the Middle East
--Cancel the Iran nuclear deal immediately
--Adopt a more bellicose tone in foreign policy
--Support Israel's foreign and domestic policy with little or no reservation
--Reverse the Affordable Care Act and return to the pre-ACA situation
--Increase American military size and involvement in the Middle East, Russian border, and East Asia
--Re-negotiate trade deals with the world so that America becomes more protectionist
--De-fund Planned Parenthood and make abortion near-impossible
--Lower taxes on everyone, especially businesses.
--Reduce regulations on all businesses, especially financial ones
There is a little bit of ultra-fine point disagreement among the candidates as they attempt a differentiation big enough to run a contrast-advertisement. Cruz says Rubio briefly considered a compromise acceptable to some Democrats on immigration, shame on him, the RINO. Graham says we need 20,000 American ground troops in Syria, while Trump only commits to "bombing the shit out of them". Yes, there is a difference, but does anyone really notice? All the candidates say they hate Planned Parenthood but some candidates would accept abortion if it would save the mother's life while others would not. It is a big point if one is the unlucky woman with a 16 week ectopic pregnancy, but it is a small distinction in the context of general campaign speech pledging support for "life."
Bottom line: Trump shaped the debate and everyone is Trump. Or Trumpish.
The only difference is in tone and language. Trump is blunt. He uses short sentences. (From Trump website: "If you give American workers a level playing field, they will win. The results will be huge for American businesses and workers. Jobs and factories will stop moving offshore and instead stay here at home. The economy will boom. The steps outlined in this plan will make that a reality.")
Bush, the archetypal Establishment candidate has a gradualist, incrementalist tone: (From Bush website: "The president should be able to eliminate wasteful spending through a constitutionally sound line-item veto--such as the version that Congressman Paul Ryan has proposed. From the very outset as president, I would signal a new direction by supporting fundamental reforms that go to the heart of the problem."
Look at the difference. Trump says things "will" happen, done deal. Bush says what "should" happen, he cites a constitutional constraint, then not an actual proposal but one "such as" a mere "proposal" of Paul Ryan. And then he "signals" a new direction of un-described reforms that do not solve a problem but merely "go to the heart of" them, whatever that means.
The difference isn't policy, it's tone. And tone does matter, indeed enough to make elites uncomfortable with the fact they cannot control his language or the pace of change he promotes. Powerful GOP interests like Bush more than Trump because Bush is "signaling", with signals he won't actually disturb the status quo very quickly, while Trump is communicating that he won't dither around. Trump means change, while Bush trends toward it.
Will the GOP establishment support Trump? They have no choice because Trump has made every candidate Trump-ish. The only issue is the speed in which Trump-isms are implemented and how much influence they think they will have on the process in which they are implemented. The establishment candidates will let Trump-ish reforms get massaged by K Street, and Trump may not.
But since anyone-but-Trump will be essentially personal and anti-Trump, not based on policy, everything Trump has done as a candidate indicates that he will be furious at the personal snub. When attacked personally he hits back, harder. That is is brand. That is Trump. If he is snubbed, I expect he will hit and hit back, harder, and the way to do that is to run as a Reform candidate, a pox on both corrupt parties. Trump would believe he was snubbed by Republicans because Republicans, like Hillary, are indebted to their donors. Rubio, Cruz, Bush or whoever the Republican candidate that replaced him would be, Trump would believe, illegitimate as a phony, and would be a mere puppet on the strings of unseen puppet-masters. I would expect him to dislike that Republican interloper at least as much as he would dislike Hillary.
The Republican party, Fox News, and talk radio created and nurtured Trump, and they have created someone very dangerous for them. In a three way election I would expect him to do at least as well as Perot. Maybe much, much better than Perot. He would not have support of Fox, but I expect he would have a lot of support on talk radio. And of people who want the real thing, someone who will demand change, not someone who will signal a desire to move toward it.
No comments:
Post a Comment