And After Trump...?

Unlike some, I object to Trump on a personal level -- he is in fact a conman, and his lifelong liberal orientation guarantees he will always bow to liberal pressure and take the liberal path of least resistance -- but I do not object to aspects of Trumpism, and in fact support some of them.

Whoever wins this nomination -- and it will likely be Trump -- it seems probable that other candidates for all levels of office will realize I can do that too and run on a platform that promises the eternal establishment class less and promises the working class -- apparently 53% of the GOP, I think I just read -- a great deal more.

Reihan Salem has good piece about what the GOP can do if it actually intends to learn something for once. I still object to his plan of Welfare for Working People -- and let's face it, that's what it is -- not because I object to his goals, but because Welfare for Working People is the nose inside the tent. Once you've conceded this basic notion, that just about everyone is entitled to some government Welfare, how do you ever make some kind of general objection to more Welfare, or a Nixonian Minimum Basic (Government-Paid) Salary?

Still, most ideas here are worth looking into. I wouldn't say that the GOP should abandon all tax-cutting for upper-income workers. Rather, I'd say this should move to the end of the batting order. This class has had enough favors done for it by the GOP; it can wait while favors are done for other groups. In addition, the "back of the line" idea should incentivize them to get workin' on initiatives that other classes seek, so that their at-bat in the line-up will arrive more expeditiously.

He has a line here, "the delusions of the donor class," which I like a lot. Here he explains how we got to this place:

More than anything else, Trump has demonstrated that white working-class voters have minds of their own. They will not simply line up behind the candidates selected for them by hedge-funders and industrialists during the "invisible primary." If we define working-class voters as those without a college degree, Ronald Brownstein of the Atlantic estimates that this bloc represents 53 percent of Republicans, split almost evenly between those who are conservative Christians and those who are not. The Pew Research Center reports that in 2012, 53 percent of Republicans were part of families that earned less than $75,000 a year. These groups, which tend to overlap, are Donald Trump's base. Ever since the Nixon era, Republicans have relied on the white working class to achieve political victories. Now, it has revolted against the GOP elite.

Why wouldn't they be furious? The Republican failure to defend the interests of working-class voters, and to speak to their hopes and fears, has made Trump's authoritarianism dangerously alluring. Trump recognized that elite Republicans--a group rooted in affluent coastal metropolises and dominated by members of the credentialed upper middle class, which has shielded itself from the social and economic devastation that has wreaked such havoc in less-privileged corners of the country--often fall prey to wishful thinking about the rank-and-file voters who actually elect GOP candidates. They imagine that working- and middle-class conservatives are passionately devoted to the things they care about--tax cuts and entitlement reform--when these voters are far more passionate about other issues: economic nationalism, limits on less-skilled immigration, and minimum-wage hikes.

Having recognized this chasm separating the Republican donor class from the grassroots, Trump has exploited it brilliantly. He has defended entitlement programs, and he has bashed bankers. He has defied the elite consensus on trade and immigration. He is channeling the Republican id, and in doing so he may have already dashed conservative hopes of winning the White House. Why can't his GOP opponents convince Republican voters that they would do a far better job than Trump of defending middle-class economic interests? The answer is that they are trapped by the delusions of the donor class, and they can't break free.

I mentioned in an earlier post that there are two sorts of ruling classes:

1. Ruling classes which are adroit at repositioning themselves and co-opting new political movements which might be threatening to them, but which could be made allies with the right level of compromise and negotiation,

and:

2. Former ruling classes which have been deposed completely.

The delusion of the donor class is that there is a third type or ruling class:

3. A Ruling Class which gives the finger to new political movements which are a threat to it, does not attempt to co-opt them through compromise and give-and-take, but simply Wins over them because they're so obviously Fabulous, Rich, Smart, and Appealing.

That sort of ruling class does not exist, except in the imaginations of the ruling class itself. In fact, that sort of thinking, this belief in a Type 3 ruling class, is an accelerant for the fire that will consume a ruling class and turn it into a Type 2 Former Ruling Class.

The GOP ruling class has had years and years to slowly accommodate itself with actual reality, and has skillfully avoided every opportunity to do so. There were a series of revolts starting from 2006 over the issue of amnesty. The ruling class studiously learned nothing.

Like liberals -- whom they closely resemble, because they are, culturally and spiritually, liberals -- each of their defeats and disasters is excused away.

In fact, they praise themselves for each defeat and disaster. Each of their defeats is a moral victory, each of their disasters is just an opportunity for enlightened renewal.

For years, blogs and talk radio have been absolutely on fire with anger about the betrayals and deceptions of the current bunch in Congress. The ruling class elegantly learned nothing.

David Brat deposed the House Majority Leader, Eric Cantor. If the warning lights in the GOP cockpit weren't already blinking like a short-circuiting Christmas tree, this certainly should have told them that something was amiss.

But the ruling class, gracefully, learned nothing at all.

A presidential election is a bad time for trying to teach lessons to such brilliantly impervious students as these. Nevertheless, many feel as if they have no other option remaining to them.

They have chosen the form of their destructor, and that form is Marco Rubio.

The Suicide of the GOP Establishment

Despite the Trump juggernaut, they refuse to rethink Bushism in their support for Rubio

by Laura Ingraham

Here is something to think about as we approach Super Tuesday.

If Marco Rubio becomes president, we can expect:

1.) That he will work with Democrats and the GOP leadership in Congress to pass something that looks like the Gang of Eight amnesty bill.

2.) That he will urge Congress to pass any trade agreements that Obama has signed.

3.) That he will send significant numbers of U.S. troops to the Middle East.

4.) That his foreign policy will be developed by many of the same people who advised George W. Bush.

5.) That his economic policy will reflect the views of those who were in power when the United States was hit by the economic crisis of 2008.

Now, I don't think any of these points are truly controversial. Somewhere, there may be naive people who actually believe that Rubio will put border enforcement first. But all sophisticated analysts of politics -- including the folks at National Review -- certainly expect that a President Rubio will support the same type of amnesty that was supported by Sen. Rubio. And on the other issues, Rubio has not even pretended that he will break with the Obama/Bush trade policy, the Bush foreign policy, or the Bush economic policy.

For almost eight years, it has been increasingly clear that many, many Republicans -- probably a majority of the party -- do not agree with any of the five principles outlined above. Time and time again, grassroots and movement conservatives have expressed their opposition to all five of the key planks in Rubio's platform. These Republicans do not support the Gang of Eight bill. They do not support Obama’s trade deals. They do not want to spend huge amounts of blood and treasure again in the Middle East. And they most certainly do not want the economy to look like it did in the fall of 2008.

Some of Marco's latest endorsements are bound to help Trump more than him
These voters have tried, through every means available, to make their opposition felt. They are the reason that Eric Cantor is no longer in the House. They are the reason that the Gang of Eight bill didn't pass. They are the reason that John Boehner is no longer speaker. And they are the reason that Donald Trump and Ted Cruz have dominated the polls for months.

Many people have urged the Rubio donor network, think-tank fellows and media supporters to back off on their policy demands -- to do more than simply acknowledge "the voters are right to be angry."

...

Nevertheless, even today, the Rubio supporters refuse to budge. They could have supported Govs. Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, or Christie, or Carly Fiorina. Even today they could support Gov. John Kasich or Sen. Ted Cruz. But from the beginning, most of the Rubio supporters have made it clear that they are only willing to support two people: Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio. They have shot down every other candidate who has been offered. And many have publicly and privately threatened to bolt the party and support Hillary Clinton if they don't get their way.

Furthermore, the Rubio supporters have, for the most part, flatly refused even to debate the policy issues at stake here. They will not even discuss changing our trade policy. They make some noises about immigration enforcement, but this is not done in a spirit of compromise, but with the arrogance of those who know that no one really expects them to change their views if they win. For all the complaints about Trump's policy generalities, Establishment GOP types have not even pretended to engage in a serious debate. Their offer is simple: You do as we say, or we will throw the election to Hillary.

I've described this as a political revolution, in that it seems necessary to sweep the old order -- the old personnel out -- so that new people can be swept in.

Given that the old people simply refuse to budge a single inch when half of the party is demanding change -- note, they only get really tough and take an absolutely-no-compromise attitude with other Republicans, especially those they consider to be of a lower class -- I don't know what other option remains. You could keep the same personnel if they were willing to change, or even just debate, the agenda they're pushing. But that they will not do.

Like all highly educated and open-minded people, they absolutely refuse to even consider opposing viewpoints.

There is going to be a major change here. The ruling class could have actually detected this, and attempted to manage the change, to create some kind of hybrid that would satisfy both the old guard and the new upstarts. Instead, they have consistently doubled-down on failure.

Again, like college-educated people do.

So an actual destruction of the old guard it will have to be.

I had hoped, and still hope, that this destruction will be conducted with a guy who is himself smart and adroit, Ted Cruz.

But the old guard has dug its heels in for its Amnesty Fiend Marco Rubio, so that appears less and less likely an outcome.

Vote Rubio, get Trump. And then get Hillary.

That's what they're going to do.

Because they're the #Smart ones, you know.

posted by Ace at 03:40 PM

| Access Comments