Why Didn't Kasich Endorse Trump?

[Rjjr77]

Kasich has a big ego, it's well documented. He gambled and lost, he loved the attention he got as being the pragmatic candidate in the primaries (something that he's never been seen as) and assumed he'd be the anti-Trump setting himself up for 2020. In reality his staying in after Nevada may have given trump the biggest boost in the primary.

Now he's probably angling to replace Chris Matthews on MSNBC as they seem to be trending towards a more centrist format.

[Rjjr77]

John Kasich is one of the mysteries of 2016.  He's one of the candidates who, rather conspicuously, refused to endorse Donald Trump.  Even Ted Cruz came around, and Cruz had real personal reasons to not do so.  Not so with Kasich; he didn't even give an indication that he would vote for Trump.  That, to me, is the minimum standard or party loyalty, to say you'll vote for a candidate, even if you won't campaign for them.

This is a surprise because at the beginning of the campaign, Kasich seemed to realize that Trump's supporters were a faction of their own in the party that were very much part of the Republican base, but who had been ignored.  He was the Repubican Governor of the swing state that swung the furthest in Trump's direction; he could have positioned himself to take lots of credit for that.  Now, it can be said that Trump won a big victory in Ohio in spite of it's Republican Governor, and not because of him..

Why did this happen?  Why couldn't Kasich, in the end, say he'd vote for Trump and make a token appearance?  He was, in many ways, closer to Trump on policy than, say, Ted Cruz.  I can't believe he's got a future in the GOP at this point, and while he's pushing 70, I'm sure he doesn't like the idea of that.  Why did he not come around?  It's one of the bigger mysteries, as far as I'm concerned.

That's because you, for some reason, think that Trump's nomination has shed all Chamber of Commerce/Country Club/affluent/business-minded/whatever-you-didn't-like-about-the-GOP-type Republicans from positions of prominence or influence in the GOP any more than Romney's nomination had that effect on SoCons or this "Trump group" we all seem to think exists in any sort of ideologically coherent way (rather than a mass of frustrated voters that were frustrated for different reasons and have little in common).

That's not what I think at all.  Those types you mention are still Republicans.  They have nowhere else to go, and many are attempting to make their own accommodation with Trump.

What I DO think, however, is that the worst move a politician at the level of Kasich can make is to conspicuously NOT support your party's Presidential nominee.   

Most of the folks who refused to support their party's nominee were done as being upwardly mobile in their party of choice.  What Democrat who abandoned McGovern in 1972 moved upward and improved his/her career as a Democrat after doing so?

Jimmy Carter did not openly endorse Nixon, as some Democrats of that time did, but he did refuse to endorse or campaign for McGovern. He basically had the same position as Kasich did towards Trump.

Incidentally, McGovern returned the favor to Carter four years later (and he revealed in his memoirs that he actually privately voted for Ford that year; I don't recall reading who Carter actually voted for in 1972).

Ditto similar 1984 Democrats who abandoned Mondale.  Jimmy Carter was as cool to McGovern as a lot of Democrats, but he did make it clear that he would vote for him, even if he did not campaign with/for him.  The same is true for the 1964 Republicans who declined to endorse Goldwater.  Rockefeller, Javits, Case, Scranton; all these guys were relegated to obscurity.

Your argument misses that none of these guys were punished for not backing Goldwater, or at least not immediately. Rockefeller went on to be reelected twice as Governor of New York and then became Vice President of the United States before retiring. Scranton voluntarily decided to leave politics in 1966, and then refused offers to be part of Nixon's Cabinet.

Case and Javits were both reelected two more times to the US Senate. Both were ultimately primaried from the right, but these primaries happened in 1978 and 1980, more than a decade after the Goldwater race, and had more to do with votes they had taken in the late 1970s than the ancient history of the Goldwater race.

Anyway, Rockefeller became VP and was definitely not relegated to obscurity. Scranton left the stage voluntarily. As for Case and Javits, well, neither ever ran for or ever seriously targeted the Presidency (unlike Rockefeller and Scranton); both went on to stay in the Senate for a decade and a half, but then lost elections. That's obscurity in the very long run, of course, but any sane contemporary observer would say they had pretty successful political careers.

  Rockefeller would be forced off the 1976 ticket, while Case and Javits (and Sen. Thomas Kuchel of California) would all lose primaries.  George Romney's 1968 Presidential campaign went nowhere.  These guys, all of them, conspicuously said they would not vote for Goldwater.  Nixon, on the other hand, campaigned for Goldwater, and look what happened.

Romney's campaign went nowhere because of his own gaffe, though. He started off in first place in the polls, though I guess you could argue this was an illusory phase like when Jeb led the polls in 2015.

That's where I'm going with Kasich.  The guy, I presume, has some remaining ambitions; perhaps a run against Sherrod Brown.  But he's hurt himself.  He's no longer viewed as a "loyal" Republican, just as those who jettisoned Goldwater were viewed, and in the same way that those who abandoned McGovern and Mondale were viewed by Democrats.  It's an incredibly bad move, and, truthfully, there's nothing in Kasich's career to suggest he's particularly principled.  Had he said he'd vote for Trump, even if he said nothing else, he'd have been better off than doing what he did. 

Nah, Kasich's not interested in the Senate; he was trying to convince Pat Tiberi to run in his place because he has a feud with our state Treasurer, Josh Mandel, but it looks like Tiberi may pass. Kasich just wants to run for President. I wouldn't be surprised if he tries to primary Trump, or runs as an independent, in 2020.

Anyway, again, our junior Senator, Rob Portman, was just as disloyal a Republican as Kasich and was easily reelected, by more than Trump won the state. It seems clear to me that there is a segment of voters -- a minority, to be sure, but enough to win a plurality in a primary where a majority isn't necessary in more seats than not -- that are willing to reward disloyal Republicanism; I know I am. There were 8 Republican Senators seeking reelection in 2016 who did not endorse Trump (Lisa Murkowski, John McCain, Mike Crapo, Mark Kirk, Kelly Ayotte, Rob Portman, Pat Toomey, and Mike Lee) -- 7 of them ran ahead of Trump, and the only one who did worse than him (Murkowski, ftr) was facing 3 serious opponents in a 4-candidate race. It's pretty clear the voters preferred disloyal Republicanism.

Will primary voters? It's pretty clear the answer is no. But it's also pretty clear that this isn't the kiss of death, just like it wasn't in the 1960s.

Kasich has a big ego, it's well documented. He gambled and lost, he loved the attention he got as being the pragmatic candidate in the primaries (something that he's never been seen as) and assumed he'd be the anti-Trump setting himself up for 2020. In reality his staying in after Nevada may have given trump the biggest boost in the primary.

Now he's probably angling to replace Chris Matthews on MSNBC as they seem to be trending towards a more centrist format.

You're right about his ego, but also wrong, because you're underestimating it. I don't think Kasich wants to see himself reduced to a commentator. He has some grand plan he'll attempt in 2020 in his mind; I'm sure of it. If Trump is popular, maybe he'll delay it to 2024, but we haven't seen the end of John Kasich For President. (Not that I think he's likely to do well; he pissed off too many anti-Trump people by staying in in 2016, and people will be hungry for a fresh face by then. But I do think he'll attempt it, and I do think a different candidate probably wouldn't be hobbled by an anti-Trump record).

Kasich's ego is big, but I don't think he's above being a commentator, his problem is going to be financial support, his money people in Ohio dumped him, and he knows it, he'll need a platform from which to run in 2024... Unless he runs as a democrat...