Mitt Romney is an empty suit in some respects, but he's not stupid. When he says that “...the polls show that among the names being floated as potential contenders in 2024, if you put President Trump in there among Republicans, he wins in a landslide”, people sit up and take notice – especially when you consider that Romney was one of the more visible and active never-Trumpers all during the Trump administration (and, for that matter, in the run-up to the 2016 election). He did all he could to thwart Trump's programs and initiatives, and to encourage (or shame) other Republicans into doing likewise. In the Pantheon of RINO never-Trumpers he would be placed just below John McCain. Surely Trump running again in 2024 can't be on Romney's wish list – so why even bring it up if it encourages Trump supporters, who remain extremely loyal?
There's a strategy involved here, and I think it involves cutting to the chase and thereby scaring the crap out of not only the Democrats but also of the Republican mainstream. If anyone out there really thinks that Trump might possibly, conceivably, in their worst nightmare, run again, they will immediately start to build walls and fortifications, and make plans to pull every trick in the book to nip the idea in the bud – and this applies to both parties.
There are problems, however, with Romney's statement. For starters, it's based on a number of premises:
That there will even be a presidential election in 2024. Lest we forget, certain members of the left wing of the Democratic Party, along with left-wingers in general, have suggested that we do away with presidential elections altogether. Some will add “and the office of president”, but others will agree to keeping the office but selecting its occupant by committee – made up, of course, of members of the ruling elite, i.e. the top layer of the left-wing pecking order and its facilitators in high tech and among the globalists. (Certain, ahem, overseas entities might be involved as well, for that matter.) Admittedly, one might ask how is this significantly different from what we have now, where there are only two parties in contention (some would say just one, the “uniparty”, and that the rivalry is about as authentic as what goes on in professional wrestling) and where the candidates are selected by the ruling elite and presented to the hapless public for its approval. The difference is that it would actually be more honest in that it would eliminate the pretense of elections representing “the will of the people”. (And by the way, selection by the ruling elite is true of both parties, despite the occasional populist noises made by subgroups. Trump's problem was that he wasn't on the A list; in fact he wasn't on any list at all, and that was his major offense – the hair and the orangeness were just added to provide visuals for the media.)
That the Republican Party will still be functioning in 2024. Right now it is defeated, browbeaten, and being ground into fine powder by Democrat majorities in Congress. The party that thought it was used to standing by helplessly while the engines of government ground on didn't know what helplessness really was until now. When Trump spoke at CPAC he vowed not to start a third party – much to the relief of the Republican mainstream! – but any notion that the conservative (pro-Trump or at least not anti-Trump) minority within the Republican Party is going to somehow take over and become dominant between now and 2024 is wishful thinking at best.
That Trump's base will still be intact in 2024. This seems like a safe bet, but it's important to remember that the Trump base and the Republican base are not the same thing. There is a correlation there, certainly, but I don't think the hard-core Trump supporter feels any loyalty to the Republican Party; in fact, I suspect that they see the Republican mainstream as part of the problem if not the actual enemy. If they had their way they'd throw the establishment Republicans to the dogs and start fresh (and the establishment knows this, which is why they're wasting no time distancing themselves from the “deplorables”).
That – even assuming that elections are held in 2024, and that the Republican Party hasn't yet been declared most sincerely dead – the primary system will still be in place. Remember the good old days of brokered conventions and smoke-filled rooms? They could come back (without the smoke, I suppose). If you get rid of the primaries, then you get rid of the means by which what little is left of the voice of the people can be expressed. All that is left is wheeling and dealing. So let's say that Trump runs and comes out ahead in the primaries – big trouble for the Republican mainstream which will do anything to keep 2016 and the following four years from ever happening again. One solution is to simply ignore the primaries and hold the convention as if they didn't exist. Another solution is to simply not hold primaries. Problem solved! And don't think the Republican hierarchy hasn't been thinking along these lines ever since 2016.
That loyal Trump supporters will still be willing and able to vote for him in primaries and in the general election. Even as we speak, people who vote Republican – or at least have done so in the last two elections – are being declared enemies of the state, and are being added to the watch lists of law enforcement and intelligence agencies based on the notion that they are potential “domestic terrorists”, or actual domestic terrorists by definition. The supposed factual basis for this is as follows: (1) Capitol riots on Jan 6: Trump supporters and no one else. And directed by Trump himself, i.e. no advance planning, to say nothing of spontaneity. (2) Capitol riots were an insurrection and a case of domestic terrorism. (3) And they were also an expression of white supremacy and racism. (4) Therefore, all Trump supporters are insurrectionists, domestic terrorists, white supremacists, and racists. (5) Therefore, anyone who voted for Trump in either 2016 or 2020 is all the above. (6) Therefore, the biggest threat to our national security (and the Biden administration has as much as said this) is Trump supporters and anyone who ever voted for Trump or who would again – which, at last estimate, numbers around 74+ million people, or nearly 1/3 of the adult population of the country. Where will those people be in three years? Will they be able to vote as they like without fear of reprisal, or will a new and improved method of voter suppression have done its work?
Now, I say these are premises, and they are unspoken but may be assumed based on Mitt Romney's statement. Unless he's playing a game here, with the goal of actually rendering some or all of these premises null and void – i.e. of speeding up the process that is already underway of morphing the U.S. from a democracy to a pseudo-democracy to a “people's republic”. And of course, because he is who he is, he will expect to be thanked for this warning by both the Republican mainstream and the Democrats – as if they needed any reminding! We've already seen the Democrats up their game by a quantum leap between 2016 and 2020, and put measures in place (with more on the way -- see H.R. 1) to insure that they will enjoy a perpetual hold on the presidency and Congress. And if, by the same token, the Republicans have been relegated to perpetual irrelevancy, why does Mitt bother? Chances are he hasn't really faced the facts quite yet – and given the overwhelming nature of the facts, chances are he never will.
But there's another angle to all of this. If Trump gives it another try, and the Republicans absolutely refuse to cooperate on any level, who are they going to nominate? Certainly not any true conservative, and absolutely not anyone who supported Trump in the slightest degree during his term in office, or voted for any of his Supreme Court picks, or voted against one or both of his impeachments. No, it will be the usual shopworn loser formula – nominate a moderate... someone who can “reach across the aisle”... someone who is perfectly at home with the Democratic agenda... someone who will be happy to identify as the anti-Trump... and someone who, in case of the inevitable loss, will not be a sore loser but will be gracious in defeat. The envelope, please – Mitt Romney!
So yes, by sounding the alarm regarding Trump's possible return to the political stage, Mitt is hoping to keep that from ever happening by enlisting the cooperation of both the mainstream Republicans and the Democrats. And then, given a dizzying array of “ifs” of various probabilities (which, if multiplied together, produce a joint probability not significantly different from zero), Mitt might just squeeze his way into the White House.
Well, dream on, Mitt – you tried it once and got ground up in the Obama machine, and guess what, the Biden machine is much more powerful and invincible, and adding to its power and reach with each passing day. (I say “Biden machine” but that's just shorthand for “Biden or Harris or whoever else the Democrats nominate in 2024”.) And, you think you represent the Republican mainstream, but I don't think you do, not with your obvious and often-demonstrated RINO vibes. The real Republican mainstream consists of those gray ghosts who wander the halls of the Capitol, kowtowing to the Democrats, apologizing for not being more “compassionate”, being good (and grateful) losers, and on those rare occasions when they win, not knowing what to do next. You can become one of them, which is a certain recipe for obscurity, or you can stick with your RINO/never-Trumper minority within a minority party and be (or remain) a hero of sorts to the Democrats and the media before you are relegated to obscurity anyway. But at least you've planted the seeds of fear (as if any more were needed) in the fevered brains of both parties, and they may come around to thanking you for the favor just before they give you a gold watch (a Chinese knock-off, actually) and a bus ticket out of town.
No comments:
Post a Comment