Lion of the Blogosphere

Bush et al. help Trump win

According to the NY Times, the Republican Party leaders are seriously mad at the establishment candidates (Rubio, Bush, Christie and Kasich) for attacking each other instead of going after Trump and Cruz. Bush is especially guilty for using his massive super PAC money to run anti-Rubio ads.

My analysis: these establishment candidates are behaving this way because they continue to cling to the belief (which until this month was the mainstream belief) that Trump will magically go away and Cruz is just a far-right guy like Huckabee or Santorum who only wins in Iowa and a handful of southern Bible-belt states, and thus the real race is between Rubio, Bush, Christie and Kasich.

I predict that they will hang on to this blue-pill belief until the bitter end. And then, finally, they will capitulate to the liberal MSM viewpoint that Republicans (other Republicans) were responsible for making the voters “angry” and in the future they need to cooperate more with the liberals.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

January 26, 2016 at 11:05 am

Posted in Politics

16 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. It’s pitiful to watch Jeb blame super pac chair Mike Murphy as well as Marco Rubio for his own poor showing. Jeb Bush is the most lame and utterly contemptible candidate to ever run for President. His campaign, and its sneering entitlement, is an absolute joke.

    B.T.D.T.

    January 26, 2016 at 11:37 am

    • His father blamed Pat Buchanan’s convention speech, a populist speech, as the cause of his defeat to Bill Clinton. This is the kind of crazy shit the establishment tell themselves. Kind of like their assessment that Romney lost because he wasn’t as multicultural as Obama.

      They view any route to victory preferable to the populist route.

      BTW – anyone notice that you never hear the media refer to Trump in the same ‘puppet on a string’ manner when describing electoral strategies as was the norm with the Bushes? No references to Trump’s Brain in the way you heard people refer to either Lee Atwater or Karl Rove in the context of the Bushes. In fact, Atwater would be loving this race. He totally understood the populist voting bloc.

      Curle

      January 27, 2016 at 12:56 am

  2. “I predict that they will hang on to this blue-pill belief until the bitter end.”

    Interesting, as these are the same guys who have taken the blue pill with regards to Islam, immigration, and a whole bunch of other stuff. Is there a common factor here?

    Hepp

    January 26, 2016 at 12:05 pm

  3. I don’t think the NY Times, or ‘Republican Party Leaders,’ or apparently anyone else really gets it, then.

    I’m reasonably politically aware (though I don’t watch tv) and I can’t name a particular view of any of the Republican candidates other than Trump. Are Bush, Christie, Rubio, and Kasich attacking each other? Do they have political views that are different enough to even conduct an attack (what do Rubio and Kasich differ on that would make a difference to your average voter)? I would guess that most of my friends and family (who are upper middle class, well educated) couldn’t even name most of the candidates, and their knowledge would come down to: ‘Bush-the Bush from Florida, Christie-the fat guy from New Jersey, the other names sound vaguely familiar…but who is Kasich? Where is he from?’

    I suppose people who watch alot of tv have seen tv ads by these guys, attacking other of the guys, so maybe they have more name recognition than I give them credit for. But name recognition would be it. Knowing that one is attacking the other because of maximum tax rate, or policy difference in the Middle East, or views on education policy, or whatever the seven dwarves believe, is way beyond what the average American is keeping track of.

    anonymousse

    anonymousse

    January 26, 2016 at 12:10 pm

  4. The Stupid Party indeed

    McFly

    January 26, 2016 at 12:42 pm

  5. If you combined the money and support behind both Bush and Rubio, you would have had a formidable non-populist, pro-immigration candidate from Florida. .

    It’s kind of like if Andrew Cuomo ran against Hillary Clinton on the Democratic side, it would have created more of an opening for an anti-establishment candidate.

    The Bush-Rubio split is what doomed the establishment.

    McFly

    January 26, 2016 at 12:50 pm

  6. This sounds like a basic collective action problem. The establishment simply wants to avoid a non-establishment candidate, while each individual pro-establishment candidate wants to win the nomination for him/herself, probably figuring that their real competition for votes comes from others willing to suck up to party elites. From the perspective of rational self-interest, it makes sense Bush would go after Rubio etc. since he has no chance of winning over Trump voters.

    Except hasn’t Bush recently increased his attacks on Trump?

    Anyway, the editorials in National Review were pretty much correct. Trump’s a vulgar demagogue who shares more in common with Latin American strongmen. Someone the other day said liberals are afraid of him because he’ll single-handedly dismantle the welfare state. If that were possible, then conservatives should be afraid of him. The man who can easily abolish social programs can just as easily do nasty things to his political opponents.

    Vince

    January 26, 2016 at 1:13 pm

    • Trump’s a vulgar demagogue who shares more in common with Latin American strongmen.

      Yeah, I’m totally more afraid of him and his potential for imaginary future excess than I am of the Harvard-Yale-Princeton demagogues who have spent the last decade actually trampling on my rights and freedoms.

      /sarc

      The main difference between Obama and Fidel Castro is the latter prefers fatigues and actually has personal, manly physical courage.

      The man who can easily abolish social programs can just as easily do nasty things to his political opponents.

      If the choice is:
      (a) Establishment candidate who will – Democrat or Republican – unquestionably increase the power of the state, the amount of spending, and the number of social programs, or
      (b) Non-establishment candidate who may be able to constrain the power of the government and may use his power against political opponents,

      Then “conservatives” would have to be truly stupid not to prefer (b) every single time.

      Tarl

      January 26, 2016 at 5:56 pm

  7. And then, finally, they will capitulate to the liberal MSM viewpoint that Republicans (other Republicans) were responsible for making the voters “angry” and in the future they need to cooperate more with the liberals.

    I don’t know whether to laugh, or cry…or commit suicide.

    dsgntd_plyr

    January 26, 2016 at 1:23 pm

  8. It is totally rational for the Establishment minions to squabble for the number two spot. If they can’t knock out number one (and they can’t) then it is a waste of money and effort to try. If they can eliminate their competitors for number two, then they can dream of becoming number one when either (a) a miracle happens and Trump goes away, or (b) Trump gets elected but has to resign due to some (possibly manufactured) scandal, or (c) Trump is in office for two terms and then his VP inherits the mantle of Next-In-Line Party Candidate.

    Tarl

    January 26, 2016 at 3:24 pm

  9. Couldn’t their sponsors just call these wayward contenders instead of going through the NYT? Maybe it’s Hillary’s sponsors who are getting antsy.

    Glengarry

    January 26, 2016 at 3:45 pm

  10. “Trump’s a vulgar demagogue who shares more in common with Latin American strongmen.”

    I don’t necessarily think it would be a bad thing if Trump drew some inspiration from Augusto Pinochet, Rios Montt, and Roberto D”Aubuisson.

    Lewis Medlock

    January 26, 2016 at 4:25 pm

  11. Rubio, Bush, Christie and Kasich et al. help Trump by running at all. They all are “the establishment candidate” splitting the cautious vote among each other. When the race began, it seemed like a giant clown car, with an endless supply of middling GOP politicians climbing out. And then there was Trump, totally different from all the rest. If the establishment wanted to have a guy, they could have done Romney v. Trump and not the 15 or so others. Its not called the stupid party for nothing.

    Dan

    January 26, 2016 at 5:44 pm

  12. Lion, you should post on Trump getting evangelical support. Jerry Falwell Jr.,president of Liberty University, son of Jerry Falwell, and an influential evangelical leader endorsed Trump.

    Tom

    January 26, 2016 at 7:02 pm

  13. Last year at this time, the establishment strategy was to have Jeb! Run against the base and have the 14 other smurfs split the vote.

    With the smurfs splitting the vote, the base support that the party could turnout plus the superdelagates, if necessary, carry the day. That way you have a candidate who wins the nomination without having to take conservative positions that would hurt him in the general.

    Worst case scenerio, you get somebody like Walker who is fully on board with your agenda or Cruz who is begging to take your money and do you favors.

    Even last year, there were whispers that Jeb wasn’t ready. But, absent Trump, I don’t think he would have been exposed this early. The respectful tone of traditional Republican debate would have hidden Jeb!’s flaws of having weak character.

    Rotten

    January 27, 2016 at 12:08 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: