Sunday, May 8, 2016

Why Paul Ryan isn't on the Trump bandwagon

What a dilemma Donald Trump has become for the Republicans -- especially those who care about the future of their party or about their own political careers.  At this point, Paul Ryan -- essentially the political head of the party until a presidential nominee is chosen -- seems to be taking the most principled stance.

Unlike his counterpart, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who quickly jumped on the Trump bandwagon, Ryan has not said yes or no.   He simply said "Not yet."   First we have to unite the party.   Think of it as a showdown for control of the Republican party -- between the most powerful man in Congress and the presumptive presidential nominee.

The Washington Post's Chris Cillizza has some good insights about the "why" of Ryan's decision to not simply get in line behind Trump.

*   *   *
"The answer is important and telling about where Ryan sees both himself and the party not just in this election but in 2020 and beyond. He is not [now] running for president. Instead he's working like hell to preserve a Republican Party that can be viable in future national elections.  If you scan back a few months, you will see a series of speeches . . . in which Ryan is presenting his own alternative vision of what the GOP is and can be. . . ."

Many assumed that Ryan was positioning himself to be the White Knight to save the party from a Trump nomination.   Then Ryan announced, in no uncertain terms, that he would not accept the nomination, even if it were offered to him.   Cillizza concludes:

"That's when I realized what Ryan was doing. . . .  What Ryan wants is for there to be a party for people to rally to if/when Trump . . . loses. . . . Seen through that lens, Ryan's unwillingness to simply throw his support behind Trump makes perfect sense. Ryan knows the numbers. He gets that Trump is an underdog against Hillary Clinton in the fall. And what he wants to avoid is sacrificing . . . the core principles of the Republican Party for the easy expediency of backing the party's nominee.

"Not all of this is altruistic by Ryan. Yes, it's possible his work could provide some cover for House members . . . . [and] help Republicans keep the House and lessen their losses in the Senate amid a possible Democratic wave occasioned by Trump's ongoing divisiveness.

"But Ryan also wants to run for national office at some point. And probably within four or eight years. The only way to ensure that possibility is to refuse to reflexively bend the knee to Trumpism.

"This is a long-game play by Ryan in a political world that favors quick-fire tweets and strategies that last for a day or a week, at most. . . . But, the speaker deserves credit for making the effort. His reward may be front-runner status in the 2020 Republican primary race."
*   *   * 
In essence, this theory -- which others have also expressed -- is to accept the loss of the White House in 2016 and concentrate on holding their majorities in the House and the Senate.   And to preserve the integrity of the party for the post-Trump regeneration.

Of course, Trump has a very different idea.   His claim is that he represents what the people want the party to be and that it should be changed to reflect what primary voters are saying.

But here's the irony in that.   Trump will go to the convention with enough delegates obligated to vote for him on the first ballot.   But Cruz people actually grabbed a lot of those Trump delegate spots, expecting that they would get a second ballot where they could vote their real preference.

So, abiding by the rules, it now seems that Trump may actually be nominated by delegates who really don't want him -- and, the way things are going, they may want him even less by the time of the convention.   So is there anything they can do about it now?   There's some talk of some delegates not going to the convention and allowing an alternate to take their place.   The problem with that is that most of the alternates were also filled by other-than-Trump delegates.

What a mess.   And ain't it grand?  That's  Schadenfreude.

Ralph

No comments:

Post a Comment