The Absurdity of "Trump/Cruz Can't Win"

Have we not all learned that this is a terrible year for broad pronouncements? The past months are littered with the failed assertions of oh-so-smart people who just knew they had everything figured out.

Trump is a joke. No, wait, he’s inevitable. He’s out of control. No, now he’s more disciplined, He’s got this. No, he’s a loose cannon.

Cruz has no chance to be the nominee. No, wait, now he has the inside track. His campaign operation has too many flaws. No, now they are the smart ones with the best delegate roundup skills.

It’s the Year of the Governor. Nope, all the Governors are gone. Wait, there’s one. It’s John Kasich. He’s a terrible choice. No, wait, he’s great because he matches up well against Hillary. But he can’t win anything outside his own state and Manhattan.

It’s hard, especially for people in the analysis business. We are supposed to be able to read tea leaves and tell the world what to expect miles down the road. Now it’s a minefield just trying to suggest what might happen in the next few weeks. For the first time in the memories of most people, we have an election year with races not yet settled in the springtime. The usual drill is Iowa, New Hampshire, maybe another state or two, then the concrete sets and we wait six months for the predictable infomercials of the conventions.

And yet, all through the shows I host and the others I listen to, and across the television landscape, the habit persists: people shooting off at the mouth as if they know what will happen in November.

Since there are many possibilities, any one of a number of these smarty-pants folks may wind up right. But that doesn’t mean there is cause for certainty right now.

The foremost cases in point: “Trump can’t win” and “Cruz can’t win.” These sad-sack defeatist themes are everywhere, and every Republican should know they are highly flawed.

Let’s first dismiss their use by the two campaigns in question. Donald Trump and Ted Cruz will obviously cast doubts on each other’s electability. That’s campaign piffle.

The truth of the matter is that there is a plausible path forward for either man to be sworn in as the 45th President of the United States. It is important to solidify this argument now because there will be mischief afoot this summer in the form of urgent calls for some third way, some brave knight to ride in to save us from the certain failure of our actual frontrunners against Hillary Clinton. John Kasich wants to be fill that role. Paul Ryan says he does not, but I’ll believe it when I don’t see it. There are even some noble and palatable names who did offer themselves up this year who might deserve a rethink. Okay, there’s one: Scott Walker.

We begin with Trump because, well, everything begins with Trump. Are his negatives high? Sure they are, and there is nothing he can do about some of that. Some people just hate his guts, and the loudest of those seem to be Republicans terrified of having their comfort zones redrawn by a very different kind of nominee.

Most “Never Trump” tantrums will subside if he is the standard bearer. Maybe not among elites and pundits who may not recover from the vapors, but real voters will stare down the barrel of a Hillary presidency come October and get clarity in a hurry. The wild over criticism of him will subside, as will obsessions over some criticisms that may indeed hold water. The realization will dawn that even the brash, inconsistently conservative Trump presidency is infinitely preferable to the certain disaster that would accompany the election of Hillary Clinton.

Once his own party wises up and realizes this, his negatives will drop. They will drop further when they see him do something a Republican nominee has not done in a long while— go after a Democrat opponent with some energy and spine.

After watching John McCain and Mitt Romney’s soft touch against Barack Obama candidacies that swelled into the most harmful presidency in our history, this is the year for the GOP nominee to boldly identify the consequences of bringing about Obama’s third term. Does anyone doubt that Trump will do this?

Ted Cruz would as well, which is a good place to start the case for his electability. Hillary Clinton will dread debate nights with either man. My bet is she will agree to precisely one debate up against the hammer of Trump or the scalpel of Cruz.

Cruz is the embodiment of everything Republicans have sought since Reagan. His consistent conservatism has earned him scorn from Democrats, who know he is a genuine fighter, and from meek Republicans whose inadequacies are unveiled by his steadfastness.

His negatives are high as well. But it’s April. Can we remember that this is the rough and tumble primary season where Republicans in particular relish the circular firing squad? If Cruz carries the nomination out of Cleveland in July, the party will have finally offered up a candidate whom the faithful can vote for with no need to hold noses or make excuses.

The only serious Cruz concerns seem to involve those hard-to-define properties of likability, relatability and personal charm, found in abundance in candidates like Marco Rubio and Chris Christie (and Presidents like Reagan and Bill Clinton).

These are not irrelevant matters, but there is good news on that front. As someone who has known Cruz since his Texas Solicitor General Days, I can tell you he is an affable and good-humored man with connective qualities that will become more apparent when the post-convention smoke clears.

Most Americans have consumed Cruz in sharp doses— a sound bite of a contentious Senate speech, a brief segment on a cable channel— likely on the occasion of a lonely struggle against the Obama administration or a Republican party unwilling to thwart it. Given the time to offer up a positive vision for post-Obama America, Cruz will reveal the talents I have seen him deploy on numerous occasions— the gift of an inspiring and uplifting message that will explain better than most rivals why conservatism is good for rich and poor, young and old, men and women, Americans of all races. He will speak of opportunity and jobs and the rule of law and getting control of insane Washington spending.

How many millions? I wish I knew. I can’t guarantee a Cruz win any more than I can guarantee a Trump win. But the Cruz campaign will be so energizing to long-starved conservatives that many would crawl on shards of glass to make him President.

So enough laments that Cruz or Trump cannot win. When you hear them, know that it is not likely a heartfelt judgment, but a bat swung from an opposing camp. The Trump people want to win his way, the Cruz people want to win his way. It gives an extra zing to say your guy is the only path to victory, but don’t believe it.

Hillary might beat either man. But either man might beat her. Yes, she will have that infernal let’s-make-history fuel in her tank. But the first woman president thing may lose some appeal after a few months of ads reminding America of her mountain of scandal and proven mishandling of national security matters. Add her complete lack of campaign skills and her inability to count on the raw enthusiasm that propelled Obama, and maybe the prospects look a little brighter. And amid all the wailing over whether Republicans will coalesce, it may be the Democrats who face the harder problem, with millions of Bernie Sanders voters who don’t give a flip about her.

And on that electoral college map that everyone says is so hostile to any Republican, remember that Mitt Romney lost vital Ohio by less than three points and vital Florida by less than one.

This November, either Trump or Cruz will be better than Romney, and Clinton will be weaker than Obama.

So everybody buck up. Enough Republicans bellyaching about how Trump or Cruz cannot win. We’re all caught up in the dramas of today, and more are on the horizon. But the time will come when all of the preliminaries are over and the battle for our nation’s future will be at hand, from the end of July to November 8. In the hands of Donald Trump or Ted Cruz, we will mount that battle with genuinely heavy artillery.

The idea is not absurd considering that George Soros is in charge of counting the November votes in 11 states including New York and Florida and Hussein is naturalizing new voting citizen Democrats by the stadiumful just as Clinton did in 96, not to mention the ease and prospective ubiquity of hackers controlling the vote registry in voting machines all over. And no, we cannot balance the Democrat hackers with our own because almost all computer nerds are Democrats.

Electability has never been my reason for choosing a candidate. Jim Gilmore was my dream candidate for his stance on the issues and his executive ability. Just sayin'.

Nothing like not planning to have a shot at actually winning to ensure the really bad guys don't get to the WH....Just sayin'...

Hoodat wrote: “Electability has never been my reason for choosing a candidate. ... But for many, electability does play a role. For some, it is their primary reason. And for those, it should be worrisome that Trump has the highest disapproval rating of any Presidential candidate in US history.”

We can kindly disagree. To me, electability is the first criteria I look at in a candidate. It matters not what positions a candidate takes, if that candidate cannot be elected.

Trump’s electability numbers, Cruz’s electability numbers are the reason I’ve not chosen a candidate. I’ll support either but neither has shown me a reason to believe they can win.

You absolutely cannot count on Trumpto pull in Cruz voters, Between Trump’s nasty personality and flips in ideology, with more to come, Conservatives will once again stay home.

The dislike for Trump is visceral now. Stomachs churn just looking at him. People like me, who were once willing to vote for him will now sit home because we would be so moralized.

It doesn’t matter. 525, 000 is a pathetic showing in a state like New York. Trump wasn’t even competitive and he would not come close to winning Texas where people hate him.

Are you really this STUPID?, or are you just pretending to be that stupid? Or are you just a flamer? Or are you sleeping with Ted Cruz?

NY was a Primary. It was a CLOSED Republican primary, only REGISTERED Republicans could vote. Democrats outnumber Republicans in NY by 2 to 1.

Your silly ex cathedra pronouncement is not a realistic argument. Trump can very well carry New York against Hillary Clinton. He has definite advantages, there, which no other contemporary Republican would have.

I would agree that it would be virtually impossible for any other Republican to carry New York. But Trump has a very considerable advantage over other Republicans there, because of his unique position in New York; because of his celebrity status; because he is one of them--really one of them, not a corporate manager moved there--and talks to them like someone they know personally.

Hillary on the other hand is a transplant. That does not hurt her in Manhattan-home to the Corporate transplants, etc.; but she will not do as well against Trump in the other boroughs; while she will be taken down, big time, up State.

No Reagan Democrats will be voting for Trump. Trump has destroyed any feeling of common ground with anyone but his core supporters and the Libertarians. Trump comes across as hating anyone who doesn’t support him and his supporters try to double down on the hate, instead of trying to draw people in. Hatred and bully tactics are not exactly the proven method of win friends and influence people.

I don't give a ____

Duly noted.

the Republicans will vote for Trump when push comes to shove

Just like they did with John McCain and Mitt Romney, right?

You can remain in denial all you want to about Trump's sky high disapproval rating - a rate even higher than Hillary. Just don't blame Cruz when reckoning day arrives.

There aren’t enough Independents in the State of New York to out weigh the votes that Hillary and Sanders won in the election. Sanders won 200,000 more votes than Trump and Trump has just made himself unlikable. Sure, he will win a percentage of the Independents and Sanders voters but not close enough to make a difference.

Now, Trump is moving to the center, abandoning the voters who got him this far. No Trump cannot win anything for real, not in the National election. By November, Trump will have only succeeded in destroying the Republican Party. ...but that seems to be the goal of Trump’s Libertarian backers.

I wouldn’t characterize this as disagreeing. I stated my preference, and at the same time acknowledged what turns out to be yours. I like BK Whoppers because I like tomatoes on my burger. You like McD’s Big Macs because you hate tomatoes on your burger. It is a matter of preference.

Are you really this STUPID?, or are you just pretending to be that stupid?

Let me guess. You're a Trump supporter, right?

Democrats outnumber Republicans in NY by 2 to 1.

Yet we are to believe the BS from Trump supporters that Trump will win New York in November?

You do not understand. Most New York Democrats are that simply because of ethnic identification with the Democratic Party. At the grass roots level—outside Manhattan—it is not nearly as ideological as you imagine. Trump already has the emotional support of many who just voted for Hillary or Sanders in the Democratic Primary. Besides, how will Hillary answer this tactic, which explains the actual nuts & bolts of the things that she also complains about, without clear understanding:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3422096/posts

The Reagan Democrats are already in the Trump camp for the fall election. That did not stop many of them from choosing between Hillary & Sanders in their own party.

As for accusing Trump of being a "bully?" He like Reagan is truly the bully thrasher. The vitriolic attacks are always directed at those who try to sucker punch him. Treat him like a gentleman, as Cruz did in 2015, he treats you as a gentleman, back. Tag team him in an insulting manner, as Cruz & Rubio did earlier this year; and you quickly learn he punches back.

Politics is not as ideologically driven as you imagine. That large Democratic edge in registrations is largely driven by family & ethnic—not ideological—identifications. It has always been thus.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.