Posted on 09/16/2015 7:47:24 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
If you imagine a scenario in which Donald Trump vanishes from the Republican presidential race, and isn’t replaced by an equally brash panderer—that is, where his supporters scatter to a variety of other second-choice candidates—then you can make the case that behind all the dirt Trump has kicked up, the Republican presidential field is basically healthy.
Conservative Bloomberg View columnist Ramesh Ponnuru flirted with that argument at the end of August, by listing all the reasons Trump is unlikely to win the primaries, including the fact that “Republican elected officials would consolidate behind a consensus choice if Trump started winning delegates.”
If the central thematic question of the first debate was whether the candidates and Fox News itself could puncture Trump’s bubble, this time it’s whether any of those potential consensus candidates can distinguish themselves and climb out of the doldrums where they’ve been stuck for weeks. Ponnuru’s remains the best argument against full-blown panic on the right, but three weeks later it’s faring worse than it was, for a number of reasons.
1) Trump’s rise has continued unabated.
2) The four candidates with the most establishment-friendly backgrounds and campaigns—Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, John Kasich, and Scott Walker—have stagnated, fallen, or, in Walker’s case, collapsed.
3) To the extent that anyone has benefitted from this poor showing, it isn’t another Republican elected official, but Dr. Ben Carson, a candidate with religious bona fides, radical politics, and an anti-elite bent.
In several recent polls Trump and Carson control more than half the vote between the two of them, while Ted Cruz, who’s fishing from the same electoral ponds, outpolls most or all of the above, putatively electable candidates.
Those four establishmentarian candidates are in the grip of a severe collective action problem. Were one of them the consensus choice of the GOP donor class, the current field would look a lot like the one in 2012, with Carson in the role of a flash in the pan candidate like Newt Gingrich or Herman Cain. Trump would be the key difference between the two fields, but with Rubio or Kasich holding steady at 20 percent, in a field clear of other establishmentarian candidates, he could safely be considered, in Ponnuru’s words, a nuisance, not a nightmare.
Mitt Romney didn’t have a particularly smooth path to the nomination in 2012, but as other candidates bowed out, his share of the vote grew and grew. He never polled nearly as poorly as any of his heirs apparent, who are doing to themselves what so often kills conservative candidates—dividing their natural supporters. This leaves those up-for-grabs Republicans no obvious place to register support, because no candidate seems to have a greater chance to win than any other.
Back in August, after Rick Perry’s floundering campaign stopped paying its staff, his national co-chairman—a prominent Iowa Republican named Sam Clovis—needed a place to go. Were Scott Walker still leading in Iowa, as he was until mid-July, or were some other viable Republican polling near 20 percent, as Walker was, Clovis could have joined another traditional Republican campaign. Instead, he landed with Trump. Perry had been Trump’s fiercest critic.
For the purposes of the debate, ameliorating the collective-action problem would entail one of the four establishmentarian candidates performing unusually well, and at the expense of the others. That could mean making the case, implicitly or explicitly, that the key to defeating Trump isn’t taking him head on, but winnowing the rest of the field to create a single power center of opposition to him. It could also mean simply putting in a memorable performance. But if the debate ends, and the same four candidates are tussling among themselves for the same small sliver of the conservative electorate, then maybe it'll be time for Republicans to panic after all.
The New Republic
is considered an authoritative source. The revolution continues.
The short-term goal of The Establishment has been for ANY Republican to take down Trump, even Cruz would be acceptable for that purpose. Needless to say, Carson and iCarla are fine also.
The next step, then, is to of course dump whoever took out Trump...and replace that person with ‘consensus pick’, which would be Jeb, Rubio, or Walker.
But from what I can tell, Carla did well in the debate tonight and Carson was a virtual no-show - so Carla gets a big piece of Carson’s support, and Trump support probably holds steady. If that’s the case, then Carla and Carson end up around 12% each, with Trump still at 30%, and Trump ends up with a bigger lead - simply because the people trying to take him out keep stepping on each other.
Says The Hard Left New Republic. Remind me again (and small words please) why I’m supposed to take what they say seriously?
Whether the GOP should even be considered a viable political party. It is absolutely a worthless party as now managed.
Out of more than 100,000 votes on Drudge when asked who won the debate 60% said Trump. Fiorina was 14% and the rest at or below 6%.
Actually, I misspoke. It was out of 225,000 who have currently voted on Drudge.
Full panic? I don’t think so. Full stupidity at New Republic. Now THAT I believe.
I suspect some of the Fiorina buzz is due to the fact that for her, this really was the “first” debate. Nobody watched the childrens debate last time...
I think she would be on Trump’s short list for VP. Pay no attention to that personal stuff, they’ve both come through the business world where you quickly learn to work for and do a good job for people you don’t like personally. Trump will want an active VP, and she’d be a good choice to head up the downsizing of the federal government. The key to this election is “outsider”, Trump would gain nothing by picking a politician.
If Trump puts Fiorino on the ticket, I won’t vote for him. I’m not listening to that hectoring hag for 4 years. No way.
No doubt. On the Drudge poll asking who won the debate Trump is now at 59%. Fiorina at 16% and Carson 6%. Add them all together and the outsiders tally 81%.
Hell Bush is at 1%.
Trump was good, Dr. Carson was ok, Ted Cruz was AWESOME, the others were terrible.
Just my opinion without taking time to think about it...
Carly did well, she had her moments. Rand, Huck, and Rubio also each had their moments in different ways for different reasons.
Walker did too, but even when he is doing well he fails to capture your attention.
They did what they could to freeze Cruz out, but when he got the chance to speak he did well. But they gave him as little time as possible. There were others who were given little time but seized it.
Carson is a nice guy but is a bit fumbly.
Kasich excites no interest. Nor does Bush.
Trump was the target for almost everyone and took a rather constant pounding. All he had to do was survive it, and I think he did. I don’t know that he had any “moments” but I don’t think he had to. Some of the others did, and they needed to just to stay in the game.
I’ll predict that the press will be pushing Rubio and Fiorina after tonight. Trump will continue to lead. Cruz will hang on because he believes.
I really like Ted Cruz, but I don’t see how anyone could say he, or anyone, was awesome. The whole debate was mediocre. Cruz’s opening was flat, and he was largely crowded out of the debate. When he had a chance, he was very good, as usual, but nothing memorable.
I was not a Cain supporter, but I firmly believe he was submarined by the GOPe Uniparty. Not sure exactly why.
The GOPe nominee is like the runner-up in the Miss America Pageant, only there in case the Rat nominee can’t fulfill their duties.
I believe they all are afraid of CRUZ including Fox. They avoid him all the time. Occasionally they throw him a bone, otherwise they act like he isn’t there.
I believe he knows what he is doing and is following a plan he has that will pay off in the future. He is building a grass roots following as he initiates his plan.
He definitely is my choice and if nominated I think he will go all the way.
Aside from Huck, very little support for Kim Davis or for traditional marriage on that stage.
Some seemed OK with the idea of a special dispensation for a clerk that doesn’t want to be associated with homosexual marriage but no one was prepared to speak out flatly against homosexual marriage. Its like they are fine with providing a bubble to protect Christians from getting their hands dirty but not much willingness to go after the actual issue of the debasement of marriage and the intrusion of the court.
Very little outrage against the butchers at Planned Parenthood except for Carly and Cruz.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.