Apparently, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina had a conversation with Ted Cruz on Thursday. It occurred shortly after Graham said the party might need to unite behind Cruz in order to stop Trump from winning the Republican presidential nomination. This is how a party comes together at the end of bruising primary season.
Consider what Lindsey Graham said on January 21st about choosing between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump: “It’s like being shot or poisoned. What does it really matter?”
Consider that less than two weeks ago, Lindsey Graham made an appearance at the Washington Press Club Foundation’s annual dinner and joked that his party has gone “batshit crazy” and that if someone killed Ted Cruz in the Senate and the Senate held the trial, the murderer would be acquitted. In other words, Ted Cruz is so hated by his fellow Republicans in the Senate that they’d like to see him dead, and they would rather die themselves than see him become the party’s leader.
Last night, Cruz and Trump split the winnings, with Cruz doing better than expectations. Trump had narrower than expected victories in the racially enlightened Kentucky and Louisiana, while Cruz had a thumping win in Kansas and an upset victory in Maine.
Despite new signs of flagging momentum, Trump won 49 of the 134 assigned delegates and maintains a healthy 378-296 advantage over Cruz. Marco Rubio only earned 13 delegates and Kasich took home nine.
Ordinarily, we’d consider Trump to have had a so-so night that did little to stop his progress. Even though he didn’t get the most delegates, he won the two biggest states and the establishment’s favorite, Marco Rubio, was humiliated with three third-place finishes and a weak fourth-place finish in Maine.
But these aren’t ordinary times, and Trump is going to have to live up to a higher-than-usual standard. His opponents aren’t very optimistic about winning the majority of the delegates and getting the nomination outright in Cleveland this summer. Their goal is to hold Trump under fifty percent of the delegates and force a second ballot where they hope to be the compromise choice. By that standard, Trump only earned 36.5% of the delegates that were awarded yesterday. His chances seemingly got worse.
Looks can be deceiving, though. The Republican nomination process is complex and what’s bad in the short-term can be good in the long-term. If Rubio’s weakness last night is an indicator of how he’ll do in his home state of Florida, it’s more likely than ever that Rubio won’t be able to claim the winner-take-all delegates there. If Trump wins them instead, and last night contributes to his victory, then things may work out for the best for The Donald despite appearances.
Meanwhile, Kasich keeps hanging around, picking up small handfuls of delegates. His hope is to win Michigan and then his home state of Ohio. If he’s successful, he’ll make a major contribution to denying Trump an outright majority of the delegates. And, since the Republican establishment doesn’t feel like him winning the nomination would be the equivalent of being shot or poisoned, he figures he’ll be the most attractive compromise second-ballot choice.
He also benefits from Rubio’s weakness, especially because it reduces the cacophony of cries for him to get out of the race and stop hurting Rubio’s chances.
Finally, Cruz had the best night but may now have to take responsibility for beating Trump in Florida. There are two main reasons why Cruz can’t allow Trump to carry all the delegates from the Sunshine State. First, it would boost Trump closer to an outright majority. Second, it would give Trump a powerful moral argument in Cleveland if he has a big delegate lead even if he doesn’t have an outright majority. Trump could, after all, win on the second ballot even after failing to win on the first. That gets less likely the closer Cruz is to him in the final count.
The delegates will be bound to vote for the candidate they represent on the first ballot, but they can choose someone different on subsequent ballots. They’ll have to accept or reform Rule 40(b) which (as currently written) says that no candidate can win the nomination unless they’ve won a majority of the delegates in an at least eight states. This rule can be redrawn by the Rules Committee, so there will be opportunities for shenanigans and rewards for superior organizing at the convention. Kasich seems unlikely to win a majority (or even a plurality) of delegates in eight states, so he’ll need find a way to stack some votes on the committee. Rubio would face the same problem, but doesn’t have the advantage of being the governor of the hosting state.
Trump’s ace in the hole is ironically a moral argument that it would be wrong to change the rules to deny him the nomination if he has a clear lead in the delegate count. His delegate lead would also make it difficult to get the votes to change the rules in a way that disfavors him. And, despite sore-loser laws in some states that would make it impossible for Trump to run as an independent there, he could run in enough states to sink the Republican nominee. Finally, the delegates may make a pragmatic evaluation of the situation and determine that denying Trump would cause such a shitstorm at the convention and on national television that, combined with alienating Trump’s supporters, it would doom the party’s chances in November and cause all kinds of down-ticket blood-letting.
For now, at least, only Ted Cruz is in a position to conceivably overcome all these obstacles in Cleveland. But, to do so, he’ll have to mend a lot of fences with the Republican establishment. Making nice with Lindsey Graham is a good place to start.
Ted Cruz, a lower low.
Terrifying. No bounds on that boy.
Thanks for the commentary & explanation, Booman. If you have a chance, perhaps you could write a few words about whether there is precedent for rule-rewriting shenanigans at GOP conventions.
They did it in 2012 to shaft Ron Paul delegates and they did it in 1968, I believe, to get Nixon over the top.
In 1972, at the Democratic convention, McGovern had to fight off a rule change that would have converted California’s delegates from winner-take-all to proportional. If McGovern had lost that fight, Humphrey would have been the nominee (eventually) again.
There was a test vote at the ’76 Convention IIRC correctly. There was also a test vote in ’80 to “free the delegates”
Chicago and Suburban Cook County Folks:
GET THOSE SOULS TO THE POLLS!!
YOU CAN VOTE TODAY!
Here is the link to the Chicago Board of Elections Early Voting Page.
Look for the sites highlighted in red – those are the permanent Early Voting Sites – meaning that they are open TODAY – SUNDAY!!!
Here is the link to the Suburban Cook County Early Voting Sites
They have 14 sites open today.
GET.OUT.AND.VOTE!!!
I’m fairly certain that the best possible outcome for the country would be Trump winning roughly 49.9% of the delegates, with Rule 40(b) being re-written so that Kasich, or even better, Jeb(!) gets the nomination.
I mean, how fucking awesome would that be, as we just sit back and elect the Democratic tomato can President (I know, I know, HRC is worse than B̶u̶s̶h̶ Trump or Cruz, but besides that).
A very apt metaphor. Moar of same or worse; maybe less affection, imo.
I would be surprised if Kasich wins Michigan, regardless of the most recent polling.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/271935-poll-kasich-pulls-ahead-of-trump-in-michigan
Michigan looks more like Trump country.
Recent (3/1-3/4) CBS/…and NBC/… (both have been fairly good in this election cycle) suggests that your interpretation is correct. Rubio would have to totally collapse and all his support move to Kasich (a highly improbable scenario) for Kasich to come in second.
OTOH with the TV blaring that Cruz crushed Trump yesterday (he won two caucus states, he may be given a second look by MI voters before they go to the polls. (I’m quite thankful that I don’t have to choose among these four unacceptable persons).
Looks as if Kasich is struggling even to win Ohio.
We can talk about how open v. closed primaries change the dynamics, but pollsters know that and report their results based on eligible and likely voters. An IND in a closed primary state doesn’t get included in Trump’s or any of the other candidates numbers.
Interesting background on the MI primary
On the GOP side from historical results, there appears to be a preference for an “insider” or party choice. However, the “hometown boy” (Mitt) won in 2008 and 2012; so, those aren’t decent baseline years.
On the DEM side, it was Clinton country in 1992 and 2008. The latter was messed up because Obama wasn’t on the ballot, but exit polls suggest that she still would have won if he had been on the ballot. OTOH, that doesn’t take into account of the fact that when Obama was on ballots, turnout increased and favored him.
A poll was just out today that gave Trump a huge lead in Michigan.
I wrote about that poll, too: Most recently conducted poll shows Kasich ahead of Trump in Michigan. I also summarized Nate Silver’s argument that it should be taken with a big grain of salt. After adjusting for that poll’s house effect and averaging all the most recent polls, it looks more like a Trump lead with Kasich and Cruz fighting for second. Cruz might be able to pull off wins in all the congressional districts that Santorum won in 2012, which would still leave Trump with a narrow statewide win.
I don’t believe any of these establishment figures who say they won’t vote for Cruz. The “establishment” will make their excuses to stop Trump. Nor do I buy the moral argument: every one at the convention will know it is brokered because the Party wanted to stop Trump.
I worked with Decision Desk last night – and it forced me to look at the counties in three states: KY, OH and Maine.
3 facts from that:
1. Trump wins in KY and LA were due to early voting.
The data was clear that the debate hurt Trump, and both Kasich and Cruz benefited.
2. There were clear signs in Maine and in KY that Cruz has broken through with middle class professionals. Maine was amazing – he carried the old Yankee blue blood towns in the south. He beat Trump in the suburbs in Louisville – and Trump’s percentages in the suburbs both there and in Lexington are the first sign he in real trouble. He struggled to break 30 in many of them: and Kasich turned many of these counties into a 3 way race.
If the KY pattern holds Trump will not win the nomination.
I don’t buy the moral argument in general. If Cruz or Rubio or Kasich win the states on 6/7 (CA, NJ, NM) they will go into the convention with enough of an argument to win.
What is curious about the schedule is this:
Total delegates selected, 3/15: 1327
Total delegates selected, 5/1: 1966
Total delegates selected, 6/1: 2118
The establishment has been in a race against time. If they can stop Trump on 3/15, the race turns to their benefit in three ways:
507K cast already in FL. Even assuming bigger turnout than the ’12 1.66 million, those represent a big Trump lead. http://tinyurl.com/glcb5cx
Cruz vs. HRC!!!???
It only gets worse!!!
AG
A whole year of this show and we’ve only moved from HRC vs. Jeb? to maybe HRC vs. Cruz.
Yeah. I was wrong when I called it HRC v JEB! back in 2011, albeit not for lack of trying & lot$a money from the Bush Crime Syndicate.
It’s a tough battle to say who’s worse: Cruz or JEB!
I mean, seriously. That’s a whole lotta ICK factor there. Almost makes Trump look better. I did say almost.
Those that had never seen Jeb? on the campaign trail and in a debate had to rely on the word that he was the smart one and his record of winning the FL gubernatorial race twice. So, we can be forgiven for making a bad early call (and a lesson in checking out a candidate before drawing conclusions and making predictions). Once seen, easy enough to recognize that a Jeb! didn’t exist.
Do you think that there is any possibility of Trump winning the nomination, and then someone else (Romney, Ryan??) being put forward by the establishment as the “true” republican?
I don’t know my history (1860, 1912) well enough to know the mechanics of party splits. It seems to me that there are at least two ways to split the wishbone.
also, OT, but has anyone noticed that Obama’s approval rating has been rising quite a bit recently? This seems important and I haven’t seen anyone comment on it.
Once primaries/caucuses were formally adopted nationally (particularly in the minds of the electorate) as to how the GOP and DEM nominees are selected, which was only subsequent to 1968, there hasn’t been a single split/brokered convention. If there were to be one, structurally it’s more feasible for the Democratic Party due to the SuperDelegates (a sleazy “fix” for elites to push their weight around but so far not exercised).
Odd that so many political junkies long to see a brokered convention. Might be because they’ve never seen/experienced one. It also betrays their lack of commitment to a more objectively democratic process. Not that it really is because the elites in both parties far more often then not have chosen the nominees since 1968. Exceptions — DEM 1972 and 1977. GOP — none, although their was an elite split in 1980 similar to the DEM elite split in 2008.
1977
1977?
1976 — Carter was definitely an outsider, but the insiders didn’t exactly get around to choosing one of their own.
I thought it was a typo but wanted to make sure what date you meant.
OT
http://www.tmz.com/2016/03/06/nancy-reagan-dead/
Watch out for the stampede of politicians that will use her funeral for their own public relations.
it will be a fascinating social-political event as they disrupt the primary schedule to head for California weeks early and all try to claim to be the truest conservative and give themselves Saint Ronnie’s endorsement.
Totally.
Happening in 5… 4… 3….
40(b) is ridiculously strict for a contested convention and they won’t take much flack for throwing it out. Keep in mind a lot of delegates for Cruz and Trump are Republican party officials with no loyalty to the candidate, just an obligation to vote for them on the first ballot. If we have a contested convention, we’ll have had at least 3 more months of this ridiculous campaign and piles and piles of negative info about all the candidate blasted over the airwaves. That creates a strong incentive to pick a non-candidate compromise just because he’s not carrying all the baggage.
This is gonna be fun. Cruz pivots from his carefully orchestrated outside position to that of an outside/insider. And Trump won’t say a word about Cruz’s pivot. Yeah, like when pigs fly.
If the #1 goal is Stop Trump from carrying 50%+1 of the delegates into their Convention, the best way is to form cooperative efforts to help Kasich win Ohio and Rubio win Florida. They’re both winner-take-all-Delegates states, correct? If Trump wins either or both, it sharply improves his odds of holding the Delegate majority at convention time.
What we’ve learned in recent days is that Cruz is ramping up his campaign operations at the last minute in Florida (a dozen new field offices, etc.) Cruz’ campaign gambit in Florida might tell us:
My Asshole Unification Theory, if you please.
Teddy may be starting to strategically make nice with some Party leaders so he has some flexibility, some options, to getting the nomination. But then there will be the bad feelings engendered from dragging a rusty knife blade through the not-quite-dead body of the Rubio campaign, and Ted’s years of shoving his middle fingers in the faces of his colleagues and, (OK, this one is particularly offensive), hogging the mic and taking media time away from other Senators. Oh, yeah, and then there’s that usurping-the-power-of-House-leadership thing he’s done repea*ted*ly.
I see Cruz doing some things that might get him there. But, oh my God, it’ll take a bloody fight. He can’t get a Delegate majority.
Off subject but really right on it: Bernie Sanders says he will still be standing when the convention begins! No getting out of the campaign before then for him.
If all he manages is to get out and educate voters in how their commons is being stolen and given to corporate rent seekers, it will be better than any other Dem leader has done in the last 30 yrs.
No matter what anyone might think of his politics or whatever, I don’t see how anyone can honestly deny that he’s a unique, positive phenomenon in our present political and social landscape.
I love his politics, but all he is doing for the electorate is proving “you can’t fight city hall” and the ultimate futility of citizen involvement. The Clinton’s/Bush’s/Rove’s and DWS’s rule.
Wait, whut?
Isn’t that some sort of oxymoron, at least when “powerful moral argument” is attributed to Trump? Is that even possible, much less plausible?
And look, there it is again!
Well, ok, you did specify “ironically”, so there’s that.
Miss Lindsay was forced to stop clutching her pearls on the fainting couch and make nice to the Cruzer. I’m sure Miss Lindsay always needs to take a good long shower after any meetings with Cruz to wash off the cooties. Almost makes me feel sorry for Miss Lindsay. Almost… but not quite.
Lay down with dogs, Miss Lindsay, and you done do get up with fleas.
The punditry at 538 is useless, but their numbers-based stuff is still pretty good.
Here’s their “target to nomination” projections, based on a mixture of polls and special sauce (demographics, economy, etc.)
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/delegate-targets/
If the Republicans are going to stop Trump, they have to stop him in Florida/Ohio.
Interesting. Trump and Clinton are both running above target; Cruz and Sanders are both running below. March 15 should be illuminating.
Thank you.