Your Cynicism about Politics Is Well Founded
Those of us with memories that can go back a few months will remember that during his presidential campaign, New Jersey governor Chris Christie said nominating Donald Trump "could wind up turning over the White House to Hillary Clinton for four more years," who said Trump was "acting like a child" when he skipped the Iowa debate, who said Trump's immigration plan was "just too simplistic," who said Trump's plan to ban Muslim immigration to the U.S. was "the kind of thing that people say when they have no experience and don't know what they're talking about" and who said 140 characters or less seems to be the best way for Trump to communicate. In other words, Chris Christie spent quite a bit of time saying Trump would be a disastrous nominee and president and he seemed to mean it. And then, sometime after leaving the race, he decided he didn't mean all that about Trump's being a child, simplistic, uninformed, inexperienced, incapable of articulation, and a likely loser. Never mind that Christie pitched himself as the truth-teller, the guy who tells it like it is. He also seemed to think no one would remember his criticism of Trump, or care. And maybe not many people care, but in a realm with better political discourse, they would. This morning Jonah Goldberg spotlights another figure who's made a dramatic about-face on the topic of Trump: former MSNBC host and current RT (Kremlin-funded Russia Today) host Ed Schultz: At MSNBC, there was no praise of Hillary Clinton too effusive and no slander of Republicans that was too extreme. Schultz often spent his days spewing out such statements as: "This is what the Republican party stands for, though: racism. I think Donald Trump is a racist." In 2011, when Trump was reportedly thinking of running for president (again), Schultz wrote in the Huffington Post: "When it comes down to the devil in the detail of dealing with the issues . . . and making real change, Trump, you don't have it. You've never had it. Money is not a measure of a man's character or success in the arena of public service." Schultz recently told Larry King, his RT colleague, that Trump was like Ronald Reagan (he meant it in a good way). Trump, Schultz explained, "certainly has shaken up the Republican Establishment, and I think he's done it by talking about things that people care about." Schultz now says Trump is a great and decisive decision-maker. So what explains the transformation? I don't like speculating about people's motives in part because 99 percent of the time, I find those who try to guess mine are wrong (Former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke recently attacked me on Twitter for being a Zionist stooge because I oppose Donald Trump). Still, one possibility is that Ed Schultz is simply sincere. A more obvious explanation is that he's doing it for the paycheck. Both of those things are possible. But there's a third possibility: Some people need to be on TV or in some other public arena. As with Trump himself, the money comes second to celebrity. It's just about impossible to tell people not to be cynical about politics, journalism, and punditry when prominent figures are acting like this. The irony is I've heard of public-relations employees' telling their bosses, 'I'm sorry, I can't in good conscience work on this account. What they do is contrary to my values, and I just couldn't do my best work for this client." (If an otherwise good employee does this rarely enough, the bosses usually are fine with it.) In other words, people whose job is to be mouthpieces for the client have consistent standards, while politicians and television show hosts, who are supposed to be free to speak their minds and stand for their values, will quickly reverse themselves once it's in their personal interest to do so. Trump Is Likely to Win Because There Is No Unifying Alternative Let's observe something important: the Trump forces are unified; the anti-Trump forces are not, and that is why, at this moment, the most likely outcome is the Republican party nominating Trump in Cleveland. He's either going to hit 1,237 delegates or he's going to come very close. Most of the party's high-level mucky-mucks are terrified of the Trump tantrum that would follow nominating someone else, and they want Trump's voters to turn out in the general election. (They don't believe #NeverTrump claims that they'll stay home, vote third-party or write in, or simply not vote in the presidential election if Trump is the nominee.) If those who didn't like Trump could unite around one alternative, they would. Cruz has the strongest claim to the voice of the anti-Trump forces, but the party is full of "leaders" like John Boehner, unwilling to put aside past grudges. Kasich is a tough sell to most conservatives, with his expansion of Medicaid and pitch as the Republican for people who don't like Republicans, and his stubborn insistence that he's still got a shot isn't building goodwill. Kasich is unwilling to drop out, and quite pleased with his second- and third-place finishes, garnering from the high-teen to the low-twenty-something percent time after time. He seems convinced that somehow, some way, the party will suddenly wake up and decide he's the best choice. This isn't a Disney movie; refusing to quit is not the same as winning. But some of this is on Cruz. It's been pretty obvious for a while that Trump was winning over a chunk of the GOP primary voters that Cruz had expected to secure, and the Texas senator was going to need to reach a détente with the Republican "Establishment." (His praise of McConnell on the current Supreme Court fight was a good step.) Cruz's total washout in those New England and mid-Atlantic states suggests he's got very little appeal to non-conservative Republicans. Love those GOP voters or hate them, they exist, and you have to try to win them over. I keep running into non-political junkies who seem to have this instinctive distaste for him; he strikes them as the suck-up co-worker who beats you out for the promotion. Those who know him say he's funny -- I mean, come on, the guy does Simpsons impressions and quotes The Princess Bride -- warm, a doting father, but for some reason, little of that comes across on the campaign trail or his prosecutorial performances on the debate stage. His former co-workers describe him as detail-oriented, focused, and driven, but also warm and supportive of his team. Beyond the presidential field, there are a lot of figures generally liked by Republicans -- Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Tom Cotton -- but none of them seem likely to step in, and it's not clear you could get 1,237 of the delegates to agree. Even if they did, would Republican voters accept it? Again, you can probably write off most of Trump's voters. 
The anti-Trump voices chose the latter. Republican Officials Will Fall In Line Behind Trump I'm #NeverTrump (and #NeverHillary), but my brethren must recognize that almost no Republican elected officials will follow us if Trump is the nominee. Jen Rubin assesses who in the party stood up to Trump and who acquiesced. Her list of good guys is short: Many Republicans have displayed courage, decency and solid judgment. These certainly should rise in the estimation of principled Republicans. These are figures who went the extra mile, put aside feelings about Cruz and urged the party to stand up to Trump. Fiorina obviously fits on that list. (Extra points for not conceding that at the end of the day she would vote for Trump.) Walker helped turn out the Wisconsin vote when it mattered most. Sen Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) has been a clear voice for anti-Trumpism and a reminder that party loyalty is not the highest goal. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gets kudos for showing how one can put past grievances aside to support Cruz against a much worse figure, Trump. He continues to weigh in on Trump's foreign policy lunacy. (Conservatives who dislike Graham for his views on various topics should note that while other self-proclaimed purists fell in line behind Trump, Graham fought him tooth and nail.) And despite a highly competitive race in a purple state, Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) also supported the most viable not-Trump candidate (first endorsing Sen. Marco Rubio, and after he dropped out, saying he voted for Cruz). ADDENDA: I'm scheduled to appear on CNN this morning, talking the GOP primary. On this week's pop-culture podcast: Michael Strahan and how not to leave a job; a farewell to Prince; a less dramatic NFL draft and a contemplation of the "Las Vegas Raiders"; risking the ire of the "Beyhive," the swarming fans of Beyonce on social media that makes "Hamilton" fans seem low-key and lethargic; and a gleeful examination of the perpetual disaster that the Olympics have become.  |
Comments
Post a Comment