Friday, January 22, 2016

WaPo: GOP Establishment Warms to Trump

Writes WaPo:
The Republican establishment — once seen as the force that would destroy Donald Trump’s outsider candidacy — is now learning to live with it, with some elected and unelected leaders saying they see an upside to Trump as the nominee.

In the past few days, Trump has received unlikely public praise from GOP luminaries who said they would prefer him to his main rival, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.

In private, some veteran conservative Republicans have been reaching out to Trump. And Trump himself called the ultimate establishment figure in Washington, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, for a talk late last year.

“If it came down to Trump or Cruz, there is no question I’d vote for Trump,” said former New York mayor and 2008 presidential candidate Rudolph W. Giuliani, who has not endorsed a candidate. “As a party, we’d have a better chance of winning with him, and I think a lot of Republicans look at it that way.”
Trump's positions are really not that much different than the Establishment and if they think they can "live with him," it means they can control him on issues that are important to them. And they have never really gone after Trump.

As Nate Silver notes:

   [S]o far, the party isn’t doing much to stop Trump. Instead, it’s making such an effort against Cruz. Consider:
  • The governor of Iowa, Terry Branstad, said he wanted Cruz defeated.
  • Bob Dole warned of “cataclysmic” losses if Cruz was the nominee, and said Trump would fare better.
  • Mitch McConnell and other Republicans senators have been decidedly unhelpful to Cruz when discussing his constitutional eligibility to be president.
  • An anti-Cruz PAC has formed, with plans to run advertisements in Iowa. (By contrast, no PAC advertising has run against Trump so far in January.)
You can find lots of other examples like these. It’s the type of coordinated, multifront action that seems right out of the “The Party Decides.” If, like me, you expected something like this to happen to Trump instead of Cruz, you have to revisit your assumptions. Thus, I’m now much less skeptical of Trump’s chances of becoming the nominee.


  1. the problem was nobody new what to make of Trumpismo in June. The big money people suspected he would shut them out the treasury fountain and the apparatchiks were terrified he would have no need for them. now in January presumably there been a deal done since the base is entertained by Trump the BMP will continue to have easy access and the apparatchiks ......will come around.

  2. Whatever Trump is, he is intelligent, competent, capable, tenacious, doesn't have a panic button, has supreme confidence and you can never count him out. As a private citizen these qualities are admirable. As a politician they can be good or bad for the cause of liberty. On a positive note I will say that he doesn't appear to be a psychopath (maybe a touch of narcissism) which would be a nice change. In a 2006 interview he showed what appeared to be genuine compassion for the people, ON BOTH SIDES, who were involved in the Iraq war. He doesn't seem to be an ideologue though. He might be just as comfortable in the democratic party. He wouldn't pass the Libertarian sniff test from the likes of the Bionic Mosquito, Lew Rockwell, or Walter (Moderate) Block but some of the libertarians I talk to seem to have a soft spot for him. I think he appeals to their antiestablishmentarianism. Bob, Id be interested to hear whether you think Clinton or Trump would be better for liberty in the long run.