— Politi.us

Political Analysis of Today's Events

Archive
Tag "Republicans"

Let’s review the candidates as they stand today starting with Donald Trump. While he’s the so-called Republican front-runner, there’s very little chance he’ll win the nomination let alone the presidency. So let me be very clear about my prediction: Donald Trump will NEVER be the President of the United States. Period.

Why would I go out on a limb so early? First and foremost, you can’t be President and also a loose cannon – and Donald Trump is an unapologetically loose cannon. It makes for great political theatre as evidenced by his TV ratings, but you can’t win an election with 40% of the vote. Suppose for a moment that Trump was somehow (inexplicably) able to cinch the nomination. Now it’s just Trump and Clinton – all the other voices silenced in the primaries. How long do you think it will take Trump to say something stupid like he’s done so many times before – calling Rosie O’Donnell a pig, Carli Fiorina ugly, and Megan Kelly a bimbo. You can’t expect to get away with that stuff forever, no matter how brazenly unapologetic you are. And what works in primary season when only politicos care about the election is different from October of an election year when the rank and file voters start to get interested in the contest.

Next there’s his controversial immigration policy – if you can reasonably call it that. Threatening Gestapo-like tactics to round up and deport millions of illegals is a losing issue with the majority of the voters, let alone Latinos. You might find a few confused Mexican-Americans willing to vote for Trump, but most people are smart enough not to vote against their own interests when the consequences of an election would hit so close to home. In other words, what person would vote for a politician who advocates kicking their friends and relatives out of the country?

Trump is also weak on policy. He’s just a salesman with big, shiny ideas. But his ideas only appeal to the extreme right, and those folks don’t care about substance. It’s fine with them that Trump wants to build an expensive, impractical wall between the US and Mexico. They’d rather deport Mexican immigrants than worry about the cost or practicality of such an endeavor. But the voters at the center aren’t going to be so easily bamboozled and there’s still a year before the election where Trump is going to be forced to debate his ideas with more substantive policy positions. Telling us he’s going to have wonderful, talented people and amazing results will only take him so far and it’s only a matter of time before voters figure out he’s selling snake oil.

Moving on

Ted Cruz will never be president either. Nearly all his colleagues hates him and he’s far too extreme anyway. His tactics are slash-and-burn with a heavy dose of take-no-prisoners, and it will cost him. He’s far more knowledgeable than Trump when it comes to policy and will be a much better debater, but you can’t win from the fringe, and Cruz isn’t a pragmatist. Cruz has a shot at the nomination because he’s not stupid and he appeals to the republican base, so it’s possible he’ll the eventual nominee, but that’s as far as he’ll go.

And now for the rest: Jeb Bush never had a chance. He’s a Bush. I know it seems simplistic in the general analysis of things to say that Bush can’t win because of his family name, but there’s a lot of truth to it. Also, he’s been so underwhelming in his overall performance that it’s difficult to see him climbing out of the hole he’s in.

Kasich, Paul, and Fiorina just don’t have the star power or support to present a formidable challenge for the nomination. They might as well have been on the JV debate stage with never-were candidates like Santorum and Huckabee. Meanwhile, Carsen, it turns out, is something of a whack-o and he’s not going anywhere either.

So who does that leave? Just Marco Rubio, the only other person with a credible shot at the nomination. The problem with Rubio is that he’s no more capable of defeating Hillary Clinton than Ted Cruz. He might be smart, relatively clean, and even able to lure some Hispanics. But when compared with Clinton, he’s going to come up short. She’s got decades more experience than the young Florida Senator and he’ll be out of his league competing against her in a general election. He might not lose some debates, but he’s never going to win any.

Assuming that Marco Rubio grabs the nomination, and putting aside Hillary as a nearly unassailable challenge, Clinton still has two weapons for which the Republicans have no answer. Not one, but two former, beloved presidents. Bill Clinton is still wildly popular with many Americans, and Barack Obama gets passing marks from the majority of voters as well. Both will campaign relentlessly for Hillary and their star power will mean something when it’s time to vote.

Meanwhile who among the Republicans compares to these two men? There are none who do. Former Republican candidates are weak, fringe, or controversial. George Bush and Dick Cheney are toxic. John McCain and Mitt Romney are both blah. Palin is a joke and hardly worth mentioning, except as an example of the ineptitude of the available Republican surrogates. Simply put, the Republicans are a rudderless ship.

So it’s difficult to see how the Republicans win the Whitehouse. This will be the third presidential election in a row where they have failed to field decent candidates. When it comes time to vote, it’s hard to see how anyone but Hillary will prevail.

Extremism is a Poison Pill

It’s no secret that today’s Republicans are at war with one another. Over the last several years the right flank has grown increasingly militaristic in its rhetoric as well is in its deeds, but is it a winning strategy or path to nowhere? Common sense would dictate the latter, and yet on they soldier, increasingly isolating themselves from the mainstream as they stake out ever more hard-line positions while pulling even the moderate Republican voices to the right as they go.

It Started with RINOs

The most obvious flaw in today’s far-right militaristic ideology is the concept of a purity test. Republicans are scrutinized and graded on their voting record and rhetoric like no other party in the United States. Stray too far from the conservative line and you’re tainted a ‘RINO’ – an impostor who must be ‘purged’.

Whoever invented this gem of a moniker was either a genius yet diabolical Democratic strategist or, more likely, a myopic conservative who didn’t understand the concepts of inclusion or compromise. Simple logic dictates that you can’t expect to be the party of the big tent and yet haul your rank-and-file members before the ‘purging’ firing squad. It’s inconsistent and short sighted, yet practiced today without so much as pretext to disguise their disgust with those who fail to measure up.

It’s not surprising that die-hard conservative extremists would embrace the concept of a purity test for their party leaders. What is surprising is that use the of pejorative RINO and terms like purity test are tolerated in general within the party by the more moderate, establishment Republican leaders. These are offensive, exclusionary terms by definition and turn off those in the middle who would otherwise lean right. It begs the question: how many Republicans have left the party as the extremists attempt to hijack the organization and demonize their own more moderate members?

Grover Norquist and his Illogical Taxation Pledge

Grover Norquist’s no tax pledge is yet another example of extremist ideology run amok. Governing costs money, period. The idea that a politician must pledge to never raise taxes is like a gardener pledging to never use more water, no matter the circumstances. What about during a really hot year? The marginal income tax rate could be lowered but simple logic dictates that if you lower it too much and you run out of money for necessary items, you’re all going to have to break your famous pledge. Then what?

Pledging to NEVER do something in politics should be a red flag to the moderate and reasonable peoples of this country that something isn’t right. Politicians taking the pledge are either short sighted or pandering. Either way, it’s a fool’s errand and a silly pledge, but so far it’s tolerated and Norquist is considered important by conservatives.

Tea Party Patrons

The Tea Party claims to champion fiscal conservatism, but their approach to governing has been so extreme that many in the political center are turned off by the harsh rhetoric and political brinkmanship. The result is a tarnished brand leaving many in the political center turned-off and unwilling to identify with what they view as an extremist – and in many cases racist – organization.

Tea partiers haven’t helped themselves by embracing extremist politicians like Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz and other bomb throwers and firebrands. It’s great press, but it doesn’t lead to the majority or the presidency.

Immigration

Today’s Republicans are not shying away from the topic of immigration driven mostly by the bloviating Donald Trump. But immigration built this country, and as a great and free country, our population is liable to continue to grow as more and more people come to our shores. The xenophobic strategy of demonizing immigrants at the expense of the long term party health is just another example of short sighted extremism trumping (pun intended) political realities.

Conservativism is Doomed to Fail Anyway

Social conservatives are agog over family values, tradition, and religion. But nothing in our society ever remains the same. The most they can hope to do is slow the progress. Today’s conservatives are pulled along with social change in spite of their stalwart opposition even if they don’t realize it. Back in 2000 when then presidential candidate Bush used gay marriage as a wedge issue to win the presidency, the American electorate was so uncomfortable with the concept that it proved to be a highly effective strategy. A mere 15 years later, the country’s mood has shifted to such an extent that gay marriage is now the law of the land, and even right-wing politicians consider it a settled matter for the most part. No one expects a reversal on policy after the Supreme Court ruled on the topic, and the idea of an amendment to the constitution is a pipe dream shared by only a few.

On issue after social issue, and given enough time, the winds of political reality blow ever leftward leaving those unwilling to change in continuously shrinking minorities. Taken together, the militant and shortsighted views of the American conservative movement is deeply flawed and can’t continue to govern unless it changes course in a significant way.

You can’t exclude, demonize, bully, and insult without long term consequences. This should be simple and obvious, but to the American extreme right, it makes perfect sense.