Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Bad week for Trump

This is "greatness," I guess.

1) Today Donald Trump's campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, was arrested for battery, in an attack on reporter Michelle Fields.  Somehow the Lewandowski spotted a dangerous threat that was missed by both the Secret Service agent between him and Fields as well as Trump's private bodyguards.  Either that, or Lewandowski is a thug who was afraid Trump would say something stupid in response to Fields' question about Affirmative Action.

2) Better yet, only a few days earlier, Trump reneged on his pledge to impose tariffs on China, claiming it's a bluff for negotiating purposes (he's a great negotiator, really understands the "art of the deal:" always publicly state that your threats are just bluffs before negotiations begin, that's Trump Rule #1).  This was during an interview with conservative Charlie Sykes of WMTJ radio, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  Trump, who promises us that as president he'll surround himself with only "the best people," apparently can't find assistants sufficiently competent to research the interviewer they've set him up with.  (Sykes is a signatory to #Never Trump.)  (So am I.)

Most of the publicity on this failed interview for Trump has focused on other issues, but this one is really poison for Trump.  One of his "signature" positions has been his vow to "beat" China in trade deals.  Anyone who understands the basic economics of international trade knows that Trump's perspective of "winner-loser" in international trade is an old fallacy that was expose in the 18th Century, but now he's admitted -- to both the American people and to the Chinese -- that his threatened trade war is all bluster anyway.  So much for the "Trump" signature.  (Isn't the "Trump" brand the bulk of his assets?)

3) And even better, Stephanie Cegielski, communications director for the pro-Trump Make America Great Again SuperPAC, has denounced Trump as a clueless and dangerous demagogue.  Here's how she characterizes his run for office: "What was once Trump's desire to rank second place to send a message to America and to increase his power as a businessman has nightmarishly morphed into a charade that is poised to do irreparable damage to this country if we do not stop this campaign in its tracks."

And here's how she characterizes Trump, whom she knows: "The hard truth is: Trump only cares about Trump."

4) And best of all, it's becoming clear that Trump will not win the majority 1,237 delegates needed to become the Republican nominee on the first ballot at the convention, and that on a second ballot most of his delegates will defect.  If Rule 40b of the Republican National Committee's rules for the convention is not repealed, only candidates who win majorities in at least eight states can be nominated.  That means Cruz and Trump.  Cruz, and to a lesser extent Kasich, are managing to get supportive delegates onto rul-making committees, while Trump, with very poor connections in the GOP, is not.  If rules are changed, it won't be in Trump's favor.

All of this is bad news for Trump, and for that segment of his supporters who would support him even if he murdered someone on Fifth Avenue.  Of course, these are the people who, Trump warns us, will riot should he not receive the nomination (even if he doesn't win the required 1,237).  Trump supporters will riot when Trump loses?!  Like everything else he says, these are meaningless talking points, just bluster.  When Trump loses, assuming Trump supporters actually wanted to riot, what will they riot against?  Will they burn their own neighborhoods? (They can't, the "Black Lives" movement has already patented this).  Ransack McDonalds and Walmarts, perhaps?  That's almost (but not quite) as likely as Kasich supporters burning down Trump Tower when Kasich loses.  Hah!  Yes, bring on the "Trump riots!"

Trump: loser.

Trump supporters don't care if he gets to 1237. As long as he is in 1st place in delegate count by the convention, his supporters will demand he gets the nomination. If he does not, they will "riot" in the sense that they will either stay home, or vote for Trump (presuming he runs 3rd party).

Unless Cruz can pass Trump in delegate count (highly unlikely), the GOP will split and Hillary will win.
I think Trump won't get 1,237, and he'll not get the nomination. At this late date, it's obvious that diehard Trump supporters don't care about anything other than the cult of personality they've joined. But who cares? They aren't conservatives or libertarians, apparently many are typically Democrats, almost none are women. Let them stay home; again, who cares? Cruz (or Paul Ryan) can beat Clinton without them.

Or consider a third party run for Trump (or the conservative alternative should Trump be nominated) -- even I have suggested it as a possibility, but it's not reasonable. It will be impossible to get on the ballot in enough states to mount a challenge. I suppose Trump could try to become the Libertarian or Constitution Party candidate -- that would be quite the irony! -- but at best he'd split the electoral vote and no one would win.

This would leave the decision to the House of Representatives. Trump can't possibly win there. I've seen projections suggesting it is doubtful Democrats can win the House, as well as projections that say a Trump GOP candidacy hands the House to Democrats. But either way, Trump can't win in the House.

I suppose Trump can still get 1,237, but I think it is the only way he gets the nomination, and he's proved to be so crazy and disgusting that any random democrat can beat him.

Thanks for your comment.
Just heard that the Mises Institute supports Trump. Have you heard that? Fitting, disgusting, and hilarious was my immediate response.
I just looked at Commissar Rockwell's site, and yes, apparently they are at least sympathetic to Trump. And here's a piece by Joe Salerno likening Trump to John Stuart Mill. That's insane, but insanity is LvMI's specialty. They have an absolute advantage at it. But it isn't shocking by this point; remember, they were big promoters of Pat Buchanan for president. Even Rothbard prostituted himself by endorsing (and advising!) Buchanan.

Thanks for the tip -- hilarious indeed!
And Walter Block has formed "Libertarians for Trump!" Trump is the most libertarian of the candidates, according to Block (same man who four years ago declared one isn't a libertarian unless they support Ron Paul for president.) It's mostly posturing; they love signalling their alleged radicalism by expressing hatred for America and "the establishment" and acting contrarian.

Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?