Author Topic: "In Case of Trump Nomination, Break Glass"  (Read 450 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline EasyAce

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,385
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Blue, 2012-2020---my big, gentle friend.
"In Case of Trump Nomination, Break Glass"
« on: May 01, 2016, 01:00:00 am »
By George F. Will
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/434768/donald-trump-republican-nomination-victory-would-cause-tremendous-damage

Quote
Donald Trump’s damage to the Republican party, although already extensive, has barely
begun. Republican quislings will multiply, slinking into support of the most anti-conservative
presidential aspirant in their party’s history. These collaborationists will render themselves ineligible
to participate in the party’s reconstruction.

Ted Cruz’s announcement of his preferred running mate has enhanced the nomination process
by giving voters pertinent information. They already know the only important thing about Trump’s
choice: His running mate will be unqualified for high office because he or she will think Trump is
qualified.

Hillary Clinton’s optimal running mate might be Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, a pro-labor
populist whose selection would be balm for the bruised feelings of Bernie Sanders’s legions.
Running mates rarely matter as electoral factors: In 2000, Al Gore got 43.2 percent of the North
Carolina vote. In 2004, John Kerry, trying to improve upon Gore’s total there, ran with North
Carolina senator John Edwards but received 43.6 percent. If, however, Brown were to help
deliver Ohio for Clinton, the Republican path to 270 electoral votes would be narrower than
a needle’s eye.

Republican voters, particularly in Indiana and California, can, by supporting Cruz, make the
Republican convention a deliberative body rather than one that merely ratifies decisions made
elsewhere, some of them six months earlier. A convention’s sovereign duty is to choose a
plausible nominee who has a reasonable chance to win, not to passively affirm the will of a
mere plurality of voters recorded episodically in a protracted process.

Trump would be the most unpopular nominee ever, unable to even come close to Mitt Romney’s
insufficient support among women, minorities, and young people. In losing disastrously,
Trump probably would create down-ballot carnage sufficient to end even Republican control
of the House. Ticket splitting is becoming rare in polarized America: In 2012, only 5.7 percent
of voters supported a presidential candidate and a congressional candidate of opposite parties.

At least half a dozen Republican senators seeking reelection and Senate aspirants can hope
to win if the person at the top of the Republican ticket loses their state by, say, only four
points, but not if he loses by ten. A Democratic Senate probably would guarantee a Supreme
Court with a liberal cast for a generation. If Clinton is inaugurated next January 20, Merrick
Garland probably will already be on the Court — confirmed in a lame duck Senate session —
and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, and Stephen Breyer will be 83, 80,
and 78, respectively.

The minority of people who pay close attention to politics includes those who define an
ideal political outcome and pursue it, and those who focus on the worst possible outcome
and strive to avoid it. The former experience the excitements of utopianism, the latter settle
for prudence’s mild pleasure of avoiding disappointed dreams. Both sensibilities have their
uses, but this is a time for prudence, which demands the prevention of a Trump presidency.

Were he to be nominated, conservatives would have two tasks. One would be to help him
lose 50 states — condign punishment for his comprehensive disdain for conservative
essentials, including the manners and grace that should lubricate the nation’s civic life.
Second, conservatives can try to save from the anti-Trump undertow as many senators,
representatives, governors, and state legislators as possible.

It was 32 years after Jimmy Carter won 50.1 percent in 1976 that a Democrat won half
the popular vote. Barack Obama won only 52.9 percent and then 51.1 percent, but only
three Democrats — Andrew Jackson (twice), Franklin Roosevelt (four times), and Lyndon
Johnson — have won more than 53 percent. Trump probably would make Clinton the
fourth, and he would be a tonic for her party, undoing the extraordinary damage (13
Senate seats, 69 House seats, eleven governorships, 913 state-legislative seats) Obama
has done.

If Trump is nominated, Republicans working to purge him and his manner from public
life will reap the considerable satisfaction of preserving the identity of their 162-year-old
party while working to see that they forgo only four years of the enjoyment of executive
power. Six times since 1945 a party has tried, and five times failed, to secure a third
consecutive presidential term. The one success — the Republicans’ 1988 election of
George H.W. Bush — produced a one-term president. If Clinton gives her party its first
twelve consecutive White House years since 1945, Republicans can help Nebraska
senator Ben Sasse, or someone else who has honorably recoiled from Trump, confine
 her to a single term.


"The question of who is right is a small one, indeed, beside the question of what is right."---Albert Jay Nock.

Fake news---news you don't like or don't want to hear.

Online Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,869
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: "In Case of Trump Nomination, Break Glass"
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2016, 01:04:03 am »
Life does have it's ironies!

"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien