By David Harsanyi
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Last night, Donald Trump booster and radio talk show host
Laura Ingraham urged the GOP’s remaining candidates to avoid a “bloodbath” at
the convention. “I don’t see what the point of all this is,” she explained.
Well, there is a great
point, actually: taking the nomination away from Trump.
Ted Cruz could still conceivably win. But there’s no soft
landing in this scenario. No rapprochement. No team building exercise is going
to fix the 2016 iteration of the Republican Party. There is only going to be a
crack-up, no matter who captures the nomination. If that’s true, and if it
means one side has to prevail, why not save your party from a hostile takeover
that could potentially cost a party both the Senate and the House?
The key would be denying Trump the 1,237 delegates
necessary to secure the nomination. Cruz (maybe with John Kasich) could still
pull together the requisite number of delegates to block Trump from winning
before the convention.
Voters don’t decide the nominations; delegates do and
preferably in smoke-filled rooms where rational decisions about the future of a
party can be hashed out. The Republican Party is not a direct democracy. It
crafts its own rules, and it can change them. And Republicans would have to ask
themselves: “Is it worth upsetting a bunch of angry, marginally conservative
voters who often have a minor fidelity to the doctrines of your party, or are
you prepared to put your political infrastructure and full weight behind a
cartoonish, George Wallace-like character who’ll probably inflict more damage
than you could ever hope to repair?”
RNC Chairman Reince Priebus says that he expects every
GOP presidential candidate to maintain his pledge to support the eventual
nominee. Considering what we heard in Marco Rubio’s concession speech, I find
this difficult to believe. At best, Priebus is going to have a bunch
politicians tiptoeing around Trump in tacit non-support. And if enough big-name
Republicans end up supporting Trump, it only accentuates the need for a new
party.
An ABC exit poll — with all the usual caveats about the
unreliability of exit polls — said that six in 10 non-Trump supporters say they
would “seriously consider a third party if he became the GOP’s nominee.” The
more disgust about his big government positioning and ugly rhetoric generate,
the higher that number rises. And there is a number of rational reasons to
support such a run.
For starters, Trump supporters are already super angry
about everything. It’s not like they could be any angrier with the establishment.
Once Trump is gone, and he’ll leave behind no coherent movement, these voters
will have to come back and look for alternate candidates with compelling
messages or leave the party altogether.
In the short run, a third-party candidate may insulate
down-ballot candidates from Trumpism. You do remember Todd Akin, I’m sure?
Imagine a candidate being ceaselessly asked to comment on the various impulsive
and unsavory positions the presidential nominee has taken. Do you agree with the GOP nominee that children of terrorists should be
executed? Offering a conservative alternative — whether it be Cruz, Rubio,
Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska, or whoever — would allow candidates to
endorse an alternative that jibed more faithfully with their beliefs. This
could shield them somewhat from this dynamic.
A third party would also help sink Trump and elect
Hillary Clinton. A weakened and corrupt Democrat that Republicans would unite
against in Congress is a far better reality than allowing a charlatan to hollow
out a party from within.
It is an utter disaster, not only for Republicans but the
nation, to have one functioning political party. Despite some wishful thinking
on the Left, conservatives have often held their own in Congress these past
eight years. Supporting gridlock is a conservative position, even if it’s not
ideal. In fact, GOP voters would be better off thinking about Washington as a
collection of institutions, with the legislative branch being the more
realistic center of conservative power.
Earlier this week, Rubio (the most hated man from the
establishment since Jeb Bush helmed the ship) argued that conservatives who
back Trump will one day ask themselves: “My God, what have we done?” This gives
politicians like Chris Christie far too much credit for introspection. But for
those who still care about the underlying principles of their party, it
probably still matters. And it’s important to remember that the primary process
rules were not chiseled into stone on Mount Sinai or part of the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment