Will Trumpism die as quickly as it rose assuming Trump loses in 2020?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 03:04:15 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  Will Trumpism die as quickly as it rose assuming Trump loses in 2020?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: Will Trumpism die as quickly as it rose assuming Trump loses in 2020?  (Read 3849 times)
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: June 04, 2020, 02:16:57 PM »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trumpism is merely the term applied to what was already starting in the Republican party because he was it's first president--he's merely the current face of it and once he's out they'll know what to do and not do in the future so it doesn't look quite as bad as it is, and if anything will try broadening it's appeal since Trump himself is no longer attached to it.

Yep. You can see it bubble up through various Presidential and (one VP candidate) over the years. Pat Buchanan, Morry Taylor, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum. Heck, there are even parallels with Nixon and Agnew's outreach to blue-collar White voters in 1968 and 1972. Trump built on this mounting legacy of populism in the GOP, which some like Kevin Phillips suggested decades ago, coming in at the right time and meeting powerful demographic trends.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: June 04, 2020, 02:55:24 PM »

Really depends on what you mean by "Trumpism", "dying", and maybe even "quickly".

Bush was a transnational candidate between Reagan and Trump and yet Trumpism was a reaction to Bush. So Bush started this transition to populism but Trump took it in the complete opposite direction.
Logged
progressive85
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,312
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: June 04, 2020, 04:58:44 PM »

You can't kill an idea.  Right-wing conservatism and populism does not go away just as left-wing liberalism and socialism never really went away.  Ideas can rise and fall and rise up again.
Logged
Mr. Morden
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,073
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: June 04, 2020, 09:27:42 PM »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trumpism is merely the term applied to what was already starting in the Republican party because he was it's first president--he's merely the current face of it and once he's out they'll know what to do and not do in the future so it doesn't look quite as bad as it is, and if anything will try broadening it's appeal since Trump himself is no longer attached to it.

Yep. You can see it bubble up through various Presidential and (one VP candidate) over the years. Pat Buchanan, Morry Taylor, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum.

Huckabee, Santorum, etc. were something different though: The culture war they were fighting in was centered around religion.  Trumpism is part of a secular culture war, centered more on ethnic and national identity than religious adherence.  In the 2016 primaries, for example, Trump did best with Evangelicals who don't actually go to church.  From Peter Beinart's 2017 column on this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/breaking-faith/517785/

Quote
But non-churchgoing conservatives didn’t flock to Trump only because he articulated their despair. He also articulated their resentments. For decades, liberals have called the Christian right intolerant. When conservatives disengage from organized religion, however, they don’t become more tolerant. They become intolerant in different ways. Research shows that evangelicals who don’t regularly attend church are less hostile to gay people than those who do. But they’re more hostile to African Americans, Latinos, and Muslims. In 2008, the University of Iowa’s Benjamin Knoll noted that among Catholics, mainline Protestants, and born-again Protestants, the less you attended church, the more anti-immigration you were. (This may be true in Europe as well. A recent thesis at Sweden’s Uppsala University, by an undergraduate named Ludvig Broomé, compared supporters of the far-right Swedish Democrats with people who voted for mainstream candidates. The former were less likely to attend church, or belong to any other community organization.)

How might religious nonattendance lead to intolerance? Although American churches are heavily segregated, it’s possible that the modest level of integration they provide promotes cross-racial bonds. In their book, Religion and Politics in the United States, Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown reference a different theory: that the most-committed members of a church are more likely than those who are casually involved to let its message of universal love erode their prejudices.

Whatever the reason, when cultural conservatives disengage from organized religion, they tend to redraw the boundaries of identity, de-emphasizing morality and religion and emphasizing race and nation. Trump is both a beneficiary and a driver of that shift.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: June 04, 2020, 10:08:38 PM »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trumpism is merely the term applied to what was already starting in the Republican party because he was it's first president--he's merely the current face of it and once he's out they'll know what to do and not do in the future so it doesn't look quite as bad as it is, and if anything will try broadening it's appeal since Trump himself is no longer attached to it.

Yep. You can see it bubble up through various Presidential and (one VP candidate) over the years. Pat Buchanan, Morry Taylor, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum.

Huckabee, Santorum, etc. were something different though: The culture war they were fighting in was centered around religion.  Trumpism is part of a secular culture war, centered more on ethnic and national identity than religious adherence.  In the 2016 primaries, for example, Trump did best with Evangelicals who don't actually go to church.  From Peter Beinart's 2017 column on this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/breaking-faith/517785/

Quote
But non-churchgoing conservatives didn’t flock to Trump only because he articulated their despair. He also articulated their resentments. For decades, liberals have called the Christian right intolerant. When conservatives disengage from organized religion, however, they don’t become more tolerant. They become intolerant in different ways. Research shows that evangelicals who don’t regularly attend church are less hostile to gay people than those who do. But they’re more hostile to African Americans, Latinos, and Muslims. In 2008, the University of Iowa’s Benjamin Knoll noted that among Catholics, mainline Protestants, and born-again Protestants, the less you attended church, the more anti-immigration you were. (This may be true in Europe as well. A recent thesis at Sweden’s Uppsala University, by an undergraduate named Ludvig Broomé, compared supporters of the far-right Swedish Democrats with people who voted for mainstream candidates. The former were less likely to attend church, or belong to any other community organization.)

How might religious nonattendance lead to intolerance? Although American churches are heavily segregated, it’s possible that the modest level of integration they provide promotes cross-racial bonds. In their book, Religion and Politics in the United States, Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown reference a different theory: that the most-committed members of a church are more likely than those who are casually involved to let its message of universal love erode their prejudices.

Whatever the reason, when cultural conservatives disengage from organized religion, they tend to redraw the boundaries of identity, de-emphasizing morality and religion and emphasizing race and nation. Trump is both a beneficiary and a driver of that shift.

You're right, hence why I said "bubble up". Santorum cast himself as a blue-collar guy and wrote a book that helped convince Trump to run the strategy he did. He tried to recast the GOP in a sort of "forgotten man" lens. Huckabee in 2008 talked about issues like inequality that other GOPers usually didn't go near. Of that list though, Buchanan or Duncan Hunter (the elder) are probably the best antecedents. Buchanan of course was deeply religious, but he was as America First as it came in the 1990s and challenged the GOP from the directions Trump would later channel. Hunter shared many positions on trade and border security that were central to Trump later on. Tancredo had the hardline migration viewpoints. Palin the angry folksy style. Taylor the brash-and-tacky businessman outsider (not that I think he influenced Trump but the similarities are there).

On the note of disengagement with religion, Tim Carney does a deep dive on the relationship between Trump primary support and low social capital in "Alienated America". One of the best explanations of 2016 that I've read and it jives with the global trend.
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: June 04, 2020, 11:09:33 PM »
« Edited: June 05, 2020, 01:03:24 AM by darklordoftech »

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Trumpism is merely the term applied to what was already starting in the Republican party because he was it's first president--he's merely the current face of it and once he's out they'll know what to do and not do in the future so it doesn't look quite as bad as it is, and if anything will try broadening it's appeal since Trump himself is no longer attached to it.

Yep. You can see it bubble up through various Presidential and (one VP candidate) over the years. Pat Buchanan, Morry Taylor, Tom Tancredo, Duncan Hunter, Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum.

Huckabee, Santorum, etc. were something different though: The culture war they were fighting in was centered around religion.  Trumpism is part of a secular culture war, centered more on ethnic and national identity than religious adherence.  In the 2016 primaries, for example, Trump did best with Evangelicals who don't actually go to church.  From Peter Beinart's 2017 column on this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/04/breaking-faith/517785/

Quote
But non-churchgoing conservatives didn’t flock to Trump only because he articulated their despair. He also articulated their resentments. For decades, liberals have called the Christian right intolerant. When conservatives disengage from organized religion, however, they don’t become more tolerant. They become intolerant in different ways. Research shows that evangelicals who don’t regularly attend church are less hostile to gay people than those who do. But they’re more hostile to African Americans, Latinos, and Muslims. In 2008, the University of Iowa’s Benjamin Knoll noted that among Catholics, mainline Protestants, and born-again Protestants, the less you attended church, the more anti-immigration you were. (This may be true in Europe as well. A recent thesis at Sweden’s Uppsala University, by an undergraduate named Ludvig Broomé, compared supporters of the far-right Swedish Democrats with people who voted for mainstream candidates. The former were less likely to attend church, or belong to any other community organization.)

How might religious nonattendance lead to intolerance? Although American churches are heavily segregated, it’s possible that the modest level of integration they provide promotes cross-racial bonds. In their book, Religion and Politics in the United States, Kenneth D. Wald and Allison Calhoun-Brown reference a different theory: that the most-committed members of a church are more likely than those who are casually involved to let its message of universal love erode their prejudices.

Whatever the reason, when cultural conservatives disengage from organized religion, they tend to redraw the boundaries of identity, de-emphasizing morality and religion and emphasizing race and nation. Trump is both a beneficiary and a driver of that shift.

I think Trump did well with voters driven more by identity than anything else. They see themselves as “evangelicals” and see immigrants as “not American”. Cruz did better with people who are actually religious and are driven by morality more than anything else.

Pro-Life Single Issue Voter’s post in this thread talks about it: https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=342545.0
Logged
We Live in Black and White
SvenTC
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,697
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.81, S: -6.82

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: June 05, 2020, 11:58:06 AM »

No. The GOP is now the American Nazi Party and to pretend that's ever going to change is naivety and imbecility.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,843
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: June 07, 2020, 05:46:18 AM »

My serious answer is that "Trumpism" will evolve and morph into a winning strategy for the GOP.  Hardcore "populists" (i.e., those who specifically support Trump because of some perceived "populism" he embodies) will maintain that Trump permanently changed a "Romney GOP," and we are now seeing the evidence.  Less populist conservatives will point to Trump's likely-less-volatile-and-more-intellectually-impressive successor as a "return to the norm."

Trump will be exposed as the political disgrace that he is. Republicans will be running away from him as fast as they can. They may even change their method of nominating someone for President so that winner-take-all does not stick them with someone who get less than 30% in a six-way race in a critical state for the nomination.

The Republican Party still lists sharply to the Right, serving what are best described as mirror-image Marxists, people who believe that no human suffering can ever be excessive so long as it serves the Power, Indulgence, and Greed (get it-- PIG) of economic elites. I expect the Republicans to nominate someone of undeniable right-wing authoritarian values on economics and foreign policy while amenable to the sensibilities of the fundamentalist-evangelical wing of American Christianity.

Quote
What it will actually be is what has been happening since Abraham Lincoln - when the GOP loses an election (as I predict they will in 2020), they will reevaluate where the votes are.  Richard Nixon clearly targeted Southern voters, for example, but he did it wisely; he did not alienate his Northern suburban base, and he famously remarked in his memoirs that he knew he'd never reach "the Wallace voter," and that this person wasn't his target (not saying he didn't win any Wallace voters, but that wasn't the strategy).  Provided Trump loses in 2020, and the GOP is challenging Biden (or more likely his handpicked replacement) in 2024, I think the Republican nominee will try to "have it both ways."  He will try to maintain gains among "White Working Class" voters, but he will also see the need to rebound in suburban areas a bit and get some outreach going to minority and younger voters.

Republicans will need to open to people whose affiliation to the Democratic Party is shaky: what used to be the "Eisenhower" or "Rockefeller" Republicans who were solidly with the GOP through the Reagan era but were incompatible with the racist, anti-intellectual, demagogue-supporting types that came to the GOP through Nixon's "Southern Strategy".  Those "Eisenhower" and "Rockefeller" Republicans recognize that their well-being relies heavily upon formal education and that they have much in common with the black bourgeoisie, middle-class Hispanics, and practically all Asian-Americans. These people are conservative in style, as one would expect of people with much formal education, and they have little tolerance for irrationality.

Note well that in 2008 Obama did extremely well with well-educated voters. So did Eisenhower. Obama support was positively correlated with formal education and income, which is usually how Republicans win. Electoral overlays for Obama and Eisenhower show Eisenhower winning much the same states, and the match between Obama and any other President in the last century is closer to those of Eisenhower than to anyone else. Political cultures have changed little in most states unless as demographic change, so figure that Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island (usually tough states for a Republican to win) were much the same for Eisenhower, who won all three twice as for Obama. (No I am not going to compare Adlai Stevenson to Donald Trump). Ike did worst in the Mountain and Deep South, also a weak area for Obama.

Quote
Thus, I think you will see a "populist" GOP in the sense that the party knows its economic policies must have broader appeal than to the donor base.  However, I think you will see less "culturally populist" appeals, hoping those people are already in the bag and feeling the current need is to reach out to perceivingly "flimsy" Democratic voters (i.e., people who might have voted for Romney).  In other words, I predict an opposite of Karl Rove's 2004 strategy of targeting rural voters since he viewed the suburban areas as so rock solid that they didn't need to cater to them.

The "low-information voters" for whom Donald Trump expressed love during the campaign know exactly what the economic agenda is from the GOP. Those people want politicians to punish what they alike see as exploiters and abusers -- like well-educated people such as the school teacher who corrects the grammar of their kids, intellectuals who ridicule young-earth creationism, wayward Hollywood actors, 'model minorities' seeming to have everything unfairly made in their favor, and in general people who recognize country music as deficient in intellectual appeal. Such people are incompatible with well-educated people in political life. The GOP cannot break up inter-ethnic coalitions that may involve people extremely different in culture (let us say Korean-Americans and Iranian-Americans).

Unlike some hard-core right-winger who pushes the Hard Right culture upon people to whom it is completely alien, Donald Trump let people believe that he was more mainstream. He may be a bigot, but he is no Bible-thumper. He denied science only at the behest of Corporate America which has its own agenda (Use more oil!), which is easy to get away with in a near-plutocracy. He has had two foreign-born wives, so he must be more cosmopolitan and intelligent than someone who takes pride in some all-American heritage. Trump seemed more mainstream than most GOP pols, so he might be less threatening than someone who would push fundamentalist Christianity as a solution to all problems. He had no record of votes in public office, so he could define himself.

Guess what -- Republicans will most likely end up with someone from a core area of the GOP -- the High Plains, Mormon Country, the Mountain South, or the Deep South. Republicans stand to lose a raft of Senate seats in states not rock-solid GOP in 2020... and it is not going to get better for them in 2022. (Here's looking at you, Pat Toomey!) The GOP must arrest its authoritarian-right death spiral so that it can connect to the political mainstream again.     

Logged
pppolitics
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,852


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: June 07, 2020, 01:53:04 PM »

Trump is the symptom, not the cause.
Logged
Gracile
gracile
Moderators
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,047


Political Matrix
E: -8.00, S: -7.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: June 07, 2020, 03:03:37 PM »

"Trumpism" (to the extent that it's even a thing) was not something that just started with Trump. The GOP base had been moving in the direction of right-wing populism since the Tea Party and there were several high-profile primary elections that set the tone for Trump's primary victory in 2016 (most notably VA-07 in 2014). Because of that, I expect the future GOP to be closer to this mold even if Trump himself loses decisively and gets abandoned by the party. It's also helpful to that wing of the party that much of the Republicans have shed a good chunk of their anti-Trump faction to the Democrats (specifically socially liberal voters in urban/suburban areas) who seem unlikely to come back given their poor fit/trajectory of the contemporary party.
Logged
jaymichaud
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,356
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 3.10, S: -7.83

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: June 07, 2020, 05:43:38 PM »

No, the GOP are a National Conservative party now.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,801
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: June 13, 2020, 04:46:40 AM »
« Edited: June 13, 2020, 05:08:51 AM by Cory Booker »

Let's face it, the R party after Speaker Paul Ryan left, whom was the last enforser of the R party, doesnt have a dominant leader after McConnell loses the Senate in 2020. Kevin McCarthy isnt dominant like Gingrich, Army, Delay, Boehner and Paul Ryan and is a lightweight.  That's why so many Rs didnt give him a chance to be elected as Speaker in 2018 or 2020, due to retirements. Once Trump is prosecuted,  and jailed and loses his assets like Trump Towers as restitution,  Trumpism will end.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: June 13, 2020, 10:43:39 AM »

I think at this point Trump will be like W. His image will be rehabilitated once the party finds a new way forward. Basically the fact that the nation didn't fall apart will make Trump proof that anyone can be president. Thats what he will be remembered for.
Logged
VPH
vivaportugalhabs
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,682
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.13, S: -0.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: June 13, 2020, 12:36:53 PM »

Trump is the symptom, not and the cause.
Logged
2016
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: June 13, 2020, 02:02:31 PM »

Let's face it, the R party after Speaker Paul Ryan left, whom was the last enforser of the R party, doesnt have a dominant leader after McConnell loses the Senate in 2020. Kevin McCarthy isnt dominant like Gingrich, Army, Delay, Boehner and Paul Ryan and is a lightweight.  That's why so many Rs didnt give him a chance to be elected as Speaker in 2018 or 2020, due to retirements. Once Trump is prosecuted,  and jailed and loses his assets like Trump Towers as restitution,  Trumpism will end.
# 1 Trump will never be prosecuted (Remember Trump wanted Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted and she is still standing)
# 2 Trump will never get jailed.
# 3 Trump will never lose assets like Trump Tower & and all the properties he is having because even if he isn't President anymore his children Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump and Lara Trump will carry the torch forward doing the Family's Business.

So while Trumpism will die from a Political Perspective once he loses and is out of Office (No more tandtrums, hatred, bigotry, etc.) the Trump Family will still excist and his Daughter Ivanka actually could still hold a Political Office down the Road.
Logged
Anna Komnene
Siren
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,654


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: June 13, 2020, 02:08:22 PM »

It'd be nice to imagine a world where Trump loses and he just kind of disappears on a golf course (or in jail). But let's face it, this guy is addicted to public life and will probably continue his days on twitter as a keyboard warrior celebrity until the bitter end. I'm not convinced that people will ignore him. He might lose some clout among people who blame him for the loss, but a lot of his supporters will probably still like him whether or not they believe whatever conspiracy he concocts about why the democrats stole the election. If enough people still listen to him, the media circus will follow suit and so will politicians.
Logged
Yellowhammer
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,683
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: June 13, 2020, 10:10:12 PM »

No. The GOP base, if not the party leaders, will double down on the more attractive elements of it, and it will evolve into a more disciplined and palatable message.
The GOP "brass" thinks they'll be going back to business as usual and nominate someone like Haley or Rubio after Trump is gone -- that's just not going to happen. Zombie Reaganism is never again going to be a winning message.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,801
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: June 13, 2020, 11:39:24 PM »

Let's face it, the R party after Speaker Paul Ryan left, whom was the last enforser of the R party, doesnt have a dominant leader after McConnell loses the Senate in 2020. Kevin McCarthy isnt dominant like Gingrich, Army, Delay, Boehner and Paul Ryan and is a lightweight.  That's why so many Rs didnt give him a chance to be elected as Speaker in 2018 or 2020, due to retirements. Once Trump is prosecuted,  and jailed and loses his assets like Trump Towers as restitution,  Trumpism will end.
# 1 Trump will never be prosecuted (Remember Trump wanted Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted and she is still standing)
# 2 Trump will never get jailed.
# 3 Trump will never lose assets like Trump Tower & and all the properties he is having because even if he isn't President anymore his children Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump and Lara Trump will carry the torch forward doing the Family's Business.

So while Trumpism will die from a Political Perspective once he loses and is out of Office (No more tandtrums, hatred, bigotry, etc.) the Trump Family will still excist and his Daughter Ivanka actually could still hold a Political Office down the Road.

Comey cleared Hilary after the election, that's why she wasnt prosecuted and Trump has 3 lawyers in prison Stone, Manafort and Cohen. There was no one other than Hilary prosecuted but not indicted for Benghazi. Biden will answer that question when the debates come if he will prosecute Trump.


If Rs are in the minority,  I dont see Rubio as a productive leader and Haley is another Joni Ernst that will rise and fall.
Logged
Brother Jonathan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,011


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2020, 12:57:25 AM »

If we understand "Trumpism" to mean economic populism/social conservatism (esp. on issues of culture) coupled with nationalism, then no. There is a natural resonance for much of these positions in the GOP base, and Trump's defeat won't break some magic spell and suddenly reset the discourse. At the risk of regurgitating the old line, "Trumpism" is more of a symptom than a problem and so it will have a resonance in the party moving forward. Most likely, though, it will decline in influence. The GOP currently is towing the "Trumpism" line so closely largely because Trump is President, and so he sets the agenda, but in opposition the GOP would probably fracture a fair deal. There is going to be a lot of tension between the economic populists and conservatives in the party, which I think may prove to be the defining fault line in the party moving forward.

Electorally, it will be damaging unless the messaging can be made to resonate either with minority communities or suburbanites (or both). If suburban voters continue to drift away from the GOP and minority communities remain unreached, then the party will be forced to abandon "Trumpism" or face electoral oblivion. If in 2024, however, Josh Hawley or Tom Cotton or Someone  manages to break 25% of the black vote and carries Orange County handily, then "Trumpism" will be here for a while.

In any event, the national dialogue and the Republican party especially have been changed by "Trumpism" and its legacy will linger for quite some time even if specific aspects of it change over the coming years.
Logged
Epaminondas
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,742


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: June 14, 2020, 03:25:58 AM »

My serious answer is that "Trumpism" will evolve and morph into a winning strategy for the GOP.  Hardcore "populists" (i.e., those who specifically support Trump because of some perceived "populism" he embodies) will maintain that Trump permanently changed a "Romney GOP," and we are now seeing the evidence.  Less populist conservatives will point to Trump's likely-less-volatile-and-more-intellectually-impressive successor as a "return to the norm."

Trump will be exposed as the political disgrace that he is. Republicans will be running away from him as fast as they can. They may even change their method of nominating someone for President so that winner-take-all does not stick them with someone who get less than 30% in a six-way race in a critical state for the nomination.

The Republican Party still lists sharply to the Right, serving what are best described as mirror-image Marxists, people who believe that no human suffering can ever be excessive so long as it serves the Power, Indulgence, and Greed (get it-- PIG) of economic elites. I expect the Republicans to nominate someone of undeniable right-wing authoritarian values on economics and foreign policy while amenable to the sensibilities of the fundamentalist-evangelical wing of American Christianity.

Quote
What it will actually be is what has been happening since Abraham Lincoln - when the GOP loses an election (as I predict they will in 2020), they will reevaluate where the votes are.  Richard Nixon clearly targeted Southern voters, for example, but he did it wisely; he did not alienate his Northern suburban base, and he famously remarked in his memoirs that he knew he'd never reach "the Wallace voter," and that this person wasn't his target (not saying he didn't win any Wallace voters, but that wasn't the strategy).  Provided Trump loses in 2020, and the GOP is challenging Biden (or more likely his handpicked replacement) in 2024, I think the Republican nominee will try to "have it both ways."  He will try to maintain gains among "White Working Class" voters, but he will also see the need to rebound in suburban areas a bit and get some outreach going to minority and younger voters.

Republicans will need to open to people whose affiliation to the Democratic Party is shaky: what used to be the "Eisenhower" or "Rockefeller" Republicans who were solidly with the GOP through the Reagan era but were incompatible with the racist, anti-intellectual, demagogue-supporting types that came to the GOP through Nixon's "Southern Strategy".  Those "Eisenhower" and "Rockefeller" Republicans recognize that their well-being relies heavily upon formal education and that they have much in common with the black bourgeoisie, middle-class Hispanics, and practically all Asian-Americans. These people are conservative in style, as one would expect of people with much formal education, and they have little tolerance for irrationality.

Note well that in 2008 Obama did extremely well with well-educated voters. So did Eisenhower. Obama support was positively correlated with formal education and income, which is usually how Republicans win. Electoral overlays for Obama and Eisenhower show Eisenhower winning much the same states, and the match between Obama and any other President in the last century is closer to those of Eisenhower than to anyone else. Political cultures have changed little in most states unless as demographic change, so figure that Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Rhode Island (usually tough states for a Republican to win) were much the same for Eisenhower, who won all three twice as for Obama. (No I am not going to compare Adlai Stevenson to Donald Trump). Ike did worst in the Mountain and Deep South, also a weak area for Obama.

Quote
Thus, I think you will see a "populist" GOP in the sense that the party knows its economic policies must have broader appeal than to the donor base.  However, I think you will see less "culturally populist" appeals, hoping those people are already in the bag and feeling the current need is to reach out to perceivingly "flimsy" Democratic voters (i.e., people who might have voted for Romney).  In other words, I predict an opposite of Karl Rove's 2004 strategy of targeting rural voters since he viewed the suburban areas as so rock solid that they didn't need to cater to them.

The "low-information voters" for whom Donald Trump expressed love during the campaign know exactly what the economic agenda is from the GOP. Those people want politicians to punish what they alike see as exploiters and abusers -- like well-educated people such as the school teacher who corrects the grammar of their kids, intellectuals who ridicule young-earth creationism, wayward Hollywood actors, 'model minorities' seeming to have everything unfairly made in their favor, and in general people who recognize country music as deficient in intellectual appeal. Such people are incompatible with well-educated people in political life. The GOP cannot break up inter-ethnic coalitions that may involve people extremely different in culture (let us say Korean-Americans and Iranian-Americans).

Unlike some hard-core right-winger who pushes the Hard Right culture upon people to whom it is completely alien, Donald Trump let people believe that he was more mainstream. He may be a bigot, but he is no Bible-thumper. He denied science only at the behest of Corporate America which has its own agenda (Use more oil!), which is easy to get away with in a near-plutocracy. He has had two foreign-born wives, so he must be more cosmopolitan and intelligent than someone who takes pride in some all-American heritage. Trump seemed more mainstream than most GOP pols, so he might be less threatening than someone who would push fundamentalist Christianity as a solution to all problems. He had no record of votes in public office, so he could define himself.

Guess what -- Republicans will most likely end up with someone from a core area of the GOP -- the High Plains, Mormon Country, the Mountain South, or the Deep South. Republicans stand to lose a raft of Senate seats in states not rock-solid GOP in 2020... and it is not going to get better for them in 2022. (Here's looking at you, Pat Toomey!) The GOP must arrest its authoritarian-right death spiral so that it can connect to the political mainstream again.     

Good effortpost.
Logged
Flyersfan232
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,794


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: June 15, 2020, 03:24:47 PM »

The GOP and its politicians will do whatever is politically advantageous. So, if Trump gets curb-stomped by Biden, the answer to your question is 'yes'. If it's a closer race, it's a 'no'. Principle in the Republican Party is long-dead, cauterized by Trump and his lackeys.
I mean if we had a President Kasich or President Rubio instead of Trump Arizona, Georgia and Texas wouldn't be competitive this year.

So, it's not so much about Demographics in those States. Instead it's about Trump and Trumpism.

Kasich or Rubio would have beaten Clinton in an Obama-2008 like landslide in 2016 and they both would have done the same in 2020.

Democrats are incredibly lucky that they could & can run against Trump for 3 Election Cycles in a row.

I doubt that they will have this much luck in the Future.
Rubio and kaisch wouldn’t have changed a thing
Logged
Flyersfan232
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,794


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: June 15, 2020, 03:28:04 PM »

Let's face it, the R party after Speaker Paul Ryan left, whom was the last enforser of the R party, doesnt have a dominant leader after McConnell loses the Senate in 2020. Kevin McCarthy isnt dominant like Gingrich, Army, Delay, Boehner and Paul Ryan and is a lightweight.  That's why so many Rs didnt give him a chance to be elected as Speaker in 2018 or 2020, due to retirements. Once Trump is prosecuted,  and jailed and loses his assets like Trump Towers as restitution,  Trumpism will end.
# 1 Trump will never be prosecuted (Remember Trump wanted Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted and she is still standing)
# 2 Trump will never get jailed.
# 3 Trump will never lose assets like Trump Tower & and all the properties he is having because even if he isn't President anymore his children Donald Trump Jr, Eric Trump, Ivanka Trump and Lara Trump will carry the torch forward doing the Family's Business.

So while Trumpism will die from a Political Perspective once he loses and is out of Office (No more tandtrums, hatred, bigotry, etc.) the Trump Family will still excist and his Daughter Ivanka actually could still hold a Political Office down the Road.
Don Jr is the one I feel that will be the politican
Logged
darklordoftech
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,391
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: June 19, 2020, 02:37:42 PM »

If both parties stop pushing trade deals like the TPP and TTIP, it would go a long way towards preventing “Trumpism” and “Sandersism” in the future.
Logged
Beefalow and the Consumer
Beef
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,123
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.77, S: -8.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: June 19, 2020, 03:05:40 PM »

For the next 20 years we're going to see GOP candidates attempting to copy the Trump formula and failing miserably.

I don't think a Pat Buchanan type who talks in calm, even tones about anchor babies and chain migration is going to do very well. You need to rile people up and get them really spitting mad, and say so many outrageous thing that the stone-cold racism just slips in among all the noise.

Trump is unique. No one else is going to be able to do what he did.
Logged
Obama-Biden Democrat
Zyzz
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,828


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: June 19, 2020, 04:24:31 PM »

For the next 20 years we're going to see GOP candidates attempting to copy the Trump formula and failing miserably.

I don't think a Pat Buchanan type who talks in calm, even tones about anchor babies and chain migration is going to do very well. You need to rile people up and get them really spitting mad, and say so many outrageous thing that the stone-cold racism just slips in among all the noise.

Trump is unique. No one else is going to be able to do what he did.

Yea, like fascism in Italy with Mussolini after he died. Fascism and Trumpism are dead in the water without their cult leader to whip the masses into a frenzy.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.069 seconds with 12 queries.