Posted on 02/22/2016 11:15:28 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Sounds like a Marvel Team-Up, and perhaps as unrealistic -- at least for the moment. Larry Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley and his team express their amazement over Donald Trump's sustained dominance in a crowded field, but believe that the inevitable consolidation will expose a cap for Trump's support in Republican primaries. If the GOP wants to accelerate that process, they argue, then they need to get Marco Rubio and John Kasich to partner up on a Florida-Ohio GOP ticket, starting now (via Peter Schorsch):
Now that Bush is out, Rubio might want to consider a daring gambit -- openly offering Kasich the vice presidential slot in exchange for the Ohio governor's support. (Ronald Reagan did something similar much later in his 1976 campaign, right before the Republican convention, and while it didn't work out, Reagan shook up conventional wisdom. It is a tactic worth considering.) If Rubio can somehow push Kasich out after Bush's exit, it seems reasonable to think that the lion's share of their supporters would go to him, and in a three-way race, that could be enough for Rubio to start getting the victories he has failed to secure so far. However, Kasich seems inclined to continue to run, and the Republican power brokers who favor a Rubio-Kasich ticket probably won't take the risks necessary to make this happen.
Let's make no mistake: Trump, amazingly, is in a commanding position to become the Republican presidential nominee. The fact that he won about the same share of the vote in New Hampshire and South Carolina -- two wildly different states -- shows the broad appeal of his campaign among a significant portion of the Republican electorate. As we noted in the Crystal Ball on Thursday, we're rapidly approaching a critical point in the Republican primary process: After Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio vote on March 15, nearly 60% of the Republican delegates will have been won. If someone is going to beat Trump, Rubio probably has the best shot, but the hour is growing late for all of the non-Trump candidates.
Why not Ted Cruz? After all, Cruz has actually won a state (Iowa), which Rubio has not. The Crystal Ball team see Cruz' disappointing third-place finish in South Carolina while running hard on evangelical identity as a harbinger of disappointment:
Trends from Iowa and New Hampshire manifested themselves once again in South Carolina. Trump did better among voters with lower education levels, while Rubio did better among the more educated. Cruz did well with the most conservative voters, but he doesn't show much appeal outside of the hard-liners. To have a shot, Cruz must do well in the most religious and conservative states. Unquestionably, South Carolina is one of them, yet Cruz didn't get a single delegate. Cruz is well-funded and has some theoretically promising states coming up on Super Tuesday -- like his home state of Texas -- but his hopes of winning the nomination seem to be dwindling, at least at the moment.
The only way this works is if the race has truly gotten down to either Trump or Rubio. House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy made a case for that scenario on Morning Joe earlier today:
House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Monday suggested that the Republican presidential race is now down to Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, leaving out Ted Cruz.
"I see it more as Trump-Rubio," McCarthy said during an interview on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" as the hosts discussed pundits who ruled out candidates like Ohio Gov. John Kasich.
"Cruz's whole strategy of winning - he wasn't planning on Trump - and when you look going through the evangelical vote and others, he just lost that," McCarthy added.
That argument is hard to credit, though, mainly because of the scoreboard. Rubio has 3rd, 5th, and 2nd place finishes; Cruz has a win and a pair of 3rd places; Kasich has a 2nd-place finish in New Hampshire. On a money and organization basis, Cruz and Rubio do better than Trump, while Kasich may be all but tapped out. One can make a case for a three-man race -- in fact, that's almost certainly reality now -- but not a two-man race, unless either Cruz or Rubio drop out. And since they both see each other as the obvious beneficiary of such a suspension, neither has any incentive to go first.
Would the Rubio-Kasich Marvel team-up work? Sabato's team uses Reagan's bid in 1976 as a favorable precedent, but let's not forget that it didn't work for Reagan. Still, a Florida-Ohio ticket would be a conventional-wisdom dream in the general election, especially with a young and charismatic presidential nominee at the top and a two-term governor and former budget hawk as running mate. It would make Republicans instantly more credible in two states they need to win in November, and without which Democrats maintain their White House lease. (For more on the importance of Florida and Ohio, and how Republicans can win both, watch for my book GOING RED.)
In this cycle, conventional wisdom hasn't played very well in the primaries, even if it's likely to find more connection in the general election. The Rubio-Kasich combination might consolidate the moderates and anti-Trump forces in the party behind Rubio, but it would also perhaps shift the "very conservative" vote to Cruz. Could that drain support from Trump? Possibly, but the result would be to make a brokered convention more likely -- and perhaps put that Rubio-Kasich combination on the ticket as a result. That seems to be the most optimistic outcome for those looking to preclude Trump's march to the nomination.
I will bet you 100 Trillion Dollars that neither Rubio nor Kasich nor Rubioch nor Kasio will stop a single abortion in the United States.
I'm not a single-issue voter. I look for someone who at least has an understanding of conservative philosophy. I see no evidence that Trump has any understanding of any philosophy whatsoever; the only thing he understands is promoting himself and building his personality cult. Cruz is stronger on conservative philosophy than Rubio, but I have become convinced that he cannot beat Trump (I do think he could beat the Democrat if nominated). So that leaves me with Rubio, though Rubio is flawed, to be sure.
If someone has a better way of getting Kasich out of the race, I'm all about it - I do *not* actually like the idea of having him as VP.
By the way, I will bet you 100 trillion dollars that Trump will leave you disillusioned and enraged about immigration if he's elected.
Yes, I'm aware that people who use all-caps all the time think I'm a dolt, and I'm aware that stupid people don't like being called stupid (and don't know they're stupid). I can only imagine the enraged all-caps posts I'll see here when Trump betrays you on immigration.
Oh for God's sake.
I highly suspect Rubio is even on her gaydar.
I mourn for what FR has become. Seriously, this is sad.
I do have one serious question: are you intentionally misspelling "Hillary" for some reason?
No...YOU are the IDIOT and then some.
I too mourn for the old days on FR, when posters like you remained the minority and the others posted brilliant, knowledgeable replies.
No...YOU prefer to cut off your nose to spite your face and bleed to death.
“What is it with everybody wanting VP picks after only 3 states have voted in the Primary?”
Because the handwriting is on the wall. Trump will be our next President.
Seriously, what is it with Trump supporters and the all-caps thing? Do you not know that using all-caps is the universal crazy flag?
Anyway putting something in bold and all-caps doesn't make it true. Trump said less than four days ago that he "likes" the Obamacare mandate; this is just the latest in a long string of moments of accidental honesty in which he let his inner liberal show.
The birther stuff is just plain ridiculous, as is the notion that "only Trump" can win in November - there is literally no data supporting that, and simple logic leads to the opposite conclusion.
I do wonder why you use quotes in the phrase "no matter how YOU 'feel,'" considering I did not use the word "feel" or refer to my "feelings" at any point on this thread. What are the quotation marks for?
Very convincing. Thank you for the stimulating conversation.
Like this one?:
No...YOU are the IDIOT and then some.
It’s a reply to you, using YOUR words to us. If you don’t like it, then you don’t like your own post.
That's fine, it was a serious question, and I apparently haven't seen your other explanations for it. You be you.
The word "feel" was in quotes. Please point out the post where I used that word, if it was in my words.
Oh the manatee!
Is your beeber on stun?
Did that moose bite YOU, instead of your sister?
What's the matter, diddums, have you completely forgotten the way FR was when YOU joined? It looks as though you have done just that. *snicker*
Now you put the word "idiots" in quotes, saying I called Trump supporters "idiots." Could you point me to the post where I said that?
And no, my feelings aren't hurt; I just value clear language. Language is vey hugh and series.
I do enjoy you calling me a n00b - well played :)
I don’t know why you waste your time with this poster my blood is boiling with this twit calling us stupid!!! This is what these so called conservatives result to name calling just like the DEMS !!! The elite DEMS we are fighting against!!! Ignore them they do not deserve any reply!!!!
I like FR rambunctious, boisterous, and occasionally rude. I even like it angry. I don't like it stupid.
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.