I like how Ed describes the kiddie table debate that CNN will be holding just prior to their big Republican debate next Wednesday:
The second-tier or Happy Hour or Kiddie Table debate, whatever you choose to call it, to be held immediately before the main event, is going to be a pretty sad affair. You’ve got Rick Perry, whose campaign cannot rub two nickels together. You’ve got Rick Santorum, who more than ever looks like he’s operating in a time warp. You’ve got Lindsey Graham, whose own South Carolina Republicans overwhelmingly want him to get out of the race, and whose mission to destroy Rand Paul seems a bit overkillish. You’ve got George Pataki, another time-warp nobody. And you’ve got Bobby Jindal, who will presumably use the debate to fire off quips about Donald Trump’s hair. It sorta looks like one of those obligatory local public television Other Voices debates at four in the morning where the Prohibition and Socialist Workers and Larouche candidates get to strut their stuff.
It almost seems pointless to hold this debate at all. I guess it’s a courtesy and there is some potential for one of these also-rans to jump start their campaign. But the real question seems to me to be whether anyone other than Trump, Carson, and Bush can do anything in the real debate to get themselves to be part of the actual horserace.
Now, now, Fiorina got her start at the “kiddie table” (along with cheating in using her SuperPac funds for her campaign).
But they’re setting a bad precedent in promoting one from the “kiddie table” without demoting one to it. So, will the third debate include the second debate “kiddie table winner plus the eleven at the second debate “adult table?”
The cutoff for the main debate would have been better with eight candidates and eight at the side debate. Looking through the national and IA, NH, and SC state polls and as of now, there are only eight candidates that are of interest to the earliest primary voters. Huckabee, Christie, and Paul should be demoted and that might enliven the sideshow. As it is, if Huck wants to move up in the polls, he should ruffle up Carson. Christie can choose to tangle with Cruz, Rubio, and/or Walker. And Paul has no choice but to spar with Trump because that’s where most of his daddy’s voters have gone.
I’m counting Christie, Paul and Walker out already. I don’t see how any of these recover and they are all sinking. Jindal, Gilmore, Santorum and Pataki are not with us for long either.
Leaving Trump, Carson, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina and Kasich. Everyone else is just window-trimming.
Interestingly, Carson may have made a mistake taking on Trump’s faith recently; for which he hastily repented. He’s the candidate for Republicans who can’t admit they’re angry.
My understanding that Gilmore didn’t even make the cut for the “kiddie table.”
Walker is actually running ahead of Rubio in the first three primary states. Fifth in IA to Rubio’s seventh and fourth in SC to Rubio’s eighth.
Agree that Christie and Paul are rapidly becoming non-entities. If someone jumps on the UAL resignations in the next debate, that could take Christie out. (Trump won’t do that b/c it opens the door to questions about R/E developments in NJ and Trump has his hand in a few of those pies with Christie.) The Paul family presidential campaign grift will probably keep him in the race longer than anyone wants.
Unless there have been improvements since the 6/30 FEC filings, Carson’s fundraising and burn rate doesn’t indicate that he’ll be able to remain in the race for long. Possibly out before the Iowa caucus.
Kasich really needs to come out of the next debate with the veneer of being the calm and measured adult in the room. Not a favorite persona with the GOP base but is worth 10-15%.
Fiorina has no authentic support. She’s just in there as the token woman and the one that can more easily attack Clinton.
Very good point about Rubio vs Walker; for some reason I’m buying into the hype about him in spite of his apparent superficiality. And that he’s levitating while Walker has peaked; one might say tanked. Also Bush’s loss may be Rubio’s gain, though I still think he’s a lightweight.
Interesting point about Carson; he’s exceeded expectations already but never seemed a serious challenger. Just an extended grift. The first debate made Kasich; he just winkled in to the top tier; debates are all he’s got. Agree about Fiorina, like Carson, wrong party. Always thought hers was a VP run.
And lets not overlook my favourite little sneak, constitutional hobgoblin Ted Cruz.
By the numbers, the impact of that first debate as I see it was:
As Fiorina’s uptick was more based on media reports that she rocked in the kiddie debate than on observations of the debate by voters, not surprising that it hasn’t held. OTOH, Kasich is struggling as much as Huck, Christie, and Paul. If he has any TV charisma, it wasn’t evident in that debate.
The Huckster has lost whatever folksy personality that was attractive to “fundie” voters in 2008. They moved on to Santorum in 2012 and are now lining up with Carson. For the most part, those “fundies” are not going to find Crazy Cruz or Huck attractive.
Beyond that and the Trump factor, I see so little difference among these clowns that I have little insight into what compels GOP voters to support one over any of the others ones, and therefore, can’t project who gains if any of the others lose.
You’ve really had your finger on the pulse of this nomination since the beginning.
Yet the pulses are all over the place and can’t project outcomes from them.
Every four years the slate of GOP candidates is so depressingly awful, that I can’t imagine that any of them could be elected President. OTOH, the candidate the a majority of DEM voters choose is more often than not weak and I can imagine them losing (Obama was an exception — for some weird reason I could only imagine him winning and not because view him as exceptionally talented or skilled at campaigning or I had a high political affinity with him.) While it was hopeless by election day, the most pleasure I ever had in casting a presidential vote was in 1972 because it was both FOR an acceptable and well qualified man and against a loathsome creature. How I’d like to experience that again but for a candidate that also wins.
Pulses are all over because there are multipl conflicting stimuli.
Nobody is excited by anyone but Trump, Carson and Cruz. Cruz? A rabid dog is exciting, but you don’t want to claim him.
No one trusts anyone except Carson and Huck … and Huck is your crazy drunk uncle who couldn’t get elected dogcatcher. Trump? No one sane would trust Trump with his/her grandmother … much less your money.
Only Carson and Pataki can generate good fellowship (“I’d have a beer with him”). Pataki is from NY and not a rich bully. ‘Nuff said. Jeb! is actually boring, Fiorina is attack dog, Trump is fellowship only if you enjoy being around Don Rickle’s mean brother, Rubio looks like a nasty drunk and Walker comes across as an already drunk frat.
Only Carson is exciting, personable, and trusted.
Carson is Black.
‘Tis a puzzlement.
Not as much of a puzzlement as their response to Obama as POTUS would suggest. People with limited cognitive skills tend to fight the last war. In this instance it would go like — an AA won twice; so, we’ll give the electorate an AA (a much better one because he’s a Republican and smarter than Obama). That will also prove that we Republicans aren’t racist and that Democrats and liberals are wrong again.
The race is going to come down to Trump, Rubio, Kasich and jeb?. Theodore Cruz is clever enough to be able to stay in the race for a good while, which is good for me as I get to write “Theodore” for months to come. And he’s in position to pick up the TP banner if/when Donald finally takes things too far.
Dr Ben will soon wilt under the increased media spotlight or from punches thrown by Donald. He seems an obvious case of someone extreme Goopers can like now during harmless polling but won’t stick with once the real voting starts. He also strikes me as someone who seems to be mildly sedated. Doesn’t go very deep on policy either.
I’ve been saying here for months that the mechanical shark in Jaws had more warmth and charmth than Bruce Walker. He’s just about ready to return to his home in the murky gray ocean. I just wish Roy Scheider was still around to deliver the final kooda grass.
Much earlier than that — it was hopeless within a few days after the Dem convo when the news about Eagleton’s electroshock treatment was reported. I was glad casting my vote too, but less about how great a candidate McG was (he was terrible) than about how I was suddenly getting to vote just after turning 18, and to vote for a decent man. And, young and stupid as I was, I actually half-believed my guy had a chance at a last-minute comeback.
It’s Rafael Edward Cruz. No more a Theodore than Ted Kennedy was.
Tend to doubt that Dr Ben wilts under increased attention. (The same may be true for Trump and Cruz.) He may in fact thrive on it. Punches from Trump may only make him stronger. His larger challenge, based on 6/30 FEC filing, may be his not so robust fundraising and heavy spending and not much of a campaign organization. He’s running a personality driven wholesale campaign, and those tend to be weak come primary election days.
Unless some of the big money and party elites shifts from Bush to Kasich, he’s not going to make it. His public persona and campaign organization isn’t strong enough.
Interesting that Walker drops as soon as he appears on the stump. Apparently doesn’t travel as well as WI cheese.
The anti-experienced politician fever seems to be particularly high among Republicans this cycle. Cruz’ mere 2+ years in public office may be what’s keeping him above the the others with 4+ years and more in office. In the past such fevers began to break after IA and NH when they got serious about the election. OTOH, those fevers weren’t nearly as widespread at the national level. Plus Ricky didn’t go down as quickly as past candidates as lame as him did and McC and Mitt have left a bitter taste for the crazy GOP natives.
You’re correct that McG became hopeless after the convention. But what if the CREEP dirty tricks had been exposed in Sept/October? What if Nixon/Kissinger’s interference in Paris Peace Talks had been exposed — almost half of those Americans that died in Vietnam did so after ’68? McG was a great candidate but an ordinary campaigner.
Yes I know, but I thought it would be amusing to play with the facts like the Goopers do. So he’s Theodore until he issues his final extremist screed and continually fails to break the top three or four and decides to cut his losses, or a DNA analysis finally exposes him as the reincarnation of Tailgunner Joe.
I think Dr Ben belongs in Donald’s “low energy” group along with jeb? and Lindsey. The remaining reasonably sober Gooper crowd, the few of them, will drift away once they realize he’s in fact just a black guy with a stethoscope and a mic, a black Dr Ben Casey only without the warmth and charmth.
With Cruz, we have to credit him with a high intellectual IQ compared to the rest (if also a very low moral IQ) plus a decent political IQ (as if he were far more experienced than his mere two years in office, as if he’d been a prominent pol in a previous lifetime…). Thus he’ll be able to impress as the debates go on, striking a blow for extremism now and then, staying viable well into the primaries.
As for 1968, LBJ had a chance to expose Nixon on two fronts — the Peace Talks sabotage and taking money from the Greek military coup govt — but sat on both, even trying to pass the buck to his VP Hubert on whether to call out Nixon on the Paris Talks treason (if memory serves).
I think a key factor was Johnson may have preferred Nixon in the WH over his own VP because Tricky, he had been personally assured, would not seek to expose and exploit Johnson’s war for political purposes or for the history books. I think LBJ saw Hubert as a cutter and runner, quick withdrawal, making Johnson’s 4-year quagmire look like the doings of a madman. Which it was of course …
Haven’t a clue what LBJ may or may not have been thinking in late 1968. (Or if his health allowed him to think clearly at all.) He was a creature of a much different time and politics played out in those years far differently. He, more than any other Democrat, untied the knots that had kept the bigots yoked to the DEM party, and to get there required support from sane Republicans.
If the conjecture that Nixon’s obsession with documents wrt Paris Peace talks interferenc that he thought were locked up in the Brookings Institute or DNC headquarters safe is correct, then at least one person feared the political ramifications of that being publicly exposed.
Not sure what aspect of his health you refer to. He might have been physically declining (multiple packs/day smoker, heavy drinker, no exercise, lousy diet). He didn’t seem particularly out of it or incoherent in those tapes we hear with him and Dirksen from late Oct 68 discussing Nixon’s treason. But earlier in his presidency 64-5, he did show clear signs of serious mental imbalance.
As to who he might have privately preferred, I’m largely reporting from memory what’s in the Dallek 2d vol bio. Again though, Dallek merely confirms what others in the Johnson circle or periphery have said, that LBJ’s actual political leanings or preferences did not reflect party loyalty and seemed more a combination of corporate Dem and moderate Repub. Recall, e.g., the speculation that earlier in 68, once he dropped out, he was said to prefer Nelson Rockerfeller.
Re Nixon, I suspect the speculative reporting by Rbt Parry is on the mark, that Tricky wanted to know what the Dems documents showed about his 1968 election treason. Disclosure of that would have been explosive, a real game changer for the fall. The Hughes angle, offered previously, would have been too murky and politically insufficient.
Cardiovascular disease also impacts cognition.
Forgot: I hear word of a new Rob Reiner movie re the first year of the LBJ presidency. Woody Harrelson (!) to star as Lyndon.
Apparently some negative stuff in the script about how LBJ treated Jackie that day in Dallas. Probably some nice things about Johnson and the CR bill for balance.
I wonder if Reiner will be covering the mental health angle of Johnson, per aides Moyers and Goodwin.
Not likely to be a radical exploration of those times and some of the controversial stories that author Wm Manchester had to excise from his book, as I don’t think Reiner is quite the bomb-thrower that a bold director like Oliver Stone is. Still, the choice of Harrelson is intriguing.
As with many WW2 vets (plus being a distinguished flying cross and multiple air medal awardee) Senator McG came back understanding that war is hell. This seemed in line with many the philosophical teachings I was reading at the time. Certainly all of my “Jesus-freak” friends were against the war and the choice seemed clear. So, I spent my summer break handing out leaflets.
How the right co-opted the religious movement in this country is beyond me…
That was back when Jesus was a hippie peacenik and before he became Rambo Son of God.
In one respect, Trump has done the GOP field a great favor. As long as he sucks up all the oxygen in the room, the rest of the pack can bide its time, carefully taking the measure of one another until the inevitable day when Trump is plainly revealed as the ego-driven burlesque that he is.
At that time, Jeb? had best catch fire immediately and consolidate all the serious money. If not, it’s anyone’s game. Every day that Trump dominates media coverage is one more day the field has to sharpen its knives and plot to take down Bush.
Nothing to reveal. Everyone already knows that Trump is an ego-driven burlesque; just like the rest of the clowns, only more honest.
I used to run marathons (many more years ago than I want to remember). The prevailing wisdom was that “sprinters” (runners who started out fast) would fade. In one sense, this was right. In another sense, if you got a mile ahead of everybody … you could coast until the end.
Carson will be in for the duration because the Fundi Xtians love him. He will quite probably end up losing because because there quite literally aren’t enough Fundi Xtians to win the nomination. His only competition is Huck whose being such a dickhead its no contest.
Fiorina ain’t got the $$$ while Jeb! is in the race. Forget about any Xtian vote for her.
Cruz, Paul, Christie, Huck … suck it up. Unless some really strange happens these guys are toast. And Trump bombing out is not that strange.
Kashich and Walker are after the same voters. Literally. Walker is dead man walking swiftly into the sunset. He’s twirling in the wind as we speak.
Jeb! has his $$$. But nothing else.
In the end: If Trump gets too far ahead … he wins.
If Trump falls on his ass its between Jeb! and Kasich, with Fiorina the favourite VP candidate for both.
Fiorina’s chances — virtually none before and now — go down the more Hillary slips in the polls. She was the GOP’s answer, probably in the VP slot, but now even that looks murky. She performed badly in her only political run, and ditto for her business record at HP. She’s on stage now mostly as a token woman for the notoriously anti-woman party.
As for the rest, given it’s a marathon interspersed by several pre-primary debate sprints, I foresee a few more major plot twists and turns before voting starts, shaking things up in the lineup.
Four and a half months to go before IA, much can and probably will happen. And, sadly, while jeb? has faded in the polls, he has not yet been put away. He’s likely to be prepping for a better, more spirited performance in this next debate. Possibly a pivot to challenge Donald directly on some policy issue he’s versed in to expose Donnie’s shallowness or extremism.
A shame there won’t be a responsible adult at the kiddie table to throw this up at Jindal for being a sleazy liar.
There are essentially ZERO women’s health care providers in Louisiana that could fill the gap left by defunding PP. Gov Piyush is importing health care standards from his ancestral home — India — b/c lots and lots of poor people is exactly what makes it so great that his family fled.
Yeah, I saw this story yesterday. Astoundingly duplicitous and hateful actions from the Jindal Administration. Good to see that they’re about to take a pounding in Federal court, blocking the Governor’s attempts to deprive Louisianans of health care and reproductive choice.
And yes, I agree that it is shameful that not one GOP POTUS candidate will criticize this. It’s as if the Parties differ on this important subject. Perhaps they do.
One Down!!
https://twitter.com/JaxAlemany/status/642445795170623489
Perry out as of now
The race begins for Perry’s SuperPac funds ($17 million as of 6/30/15).
Of the Zombie PACs. If I were drawing a tidy income from my job independently managing some crappy candidate’s millions I would drag it out until my kids all finished college. What happens to these PACs? Do they wander the electoral landscape like lost souls?
While I considered the idea that Zombie (bankrupt) candidates could exist if they had jumbo SuperPacs running the media ads, didn’t entertain the notion of Zombie SuperPacs. Allegedly there are some rules that SuperPacs are supposed to comply with, but seeing what Fiorina is now getting away with, nothing much to stop them from doing whatever they want.
Regular Pacs, such as SarahPac, can exist to cover anything for a politician, including contributions to other politicians, except salaries or non-political related expenses for the politician. Several “consultants” are on monthly retainers to SarahPac which exists to haul her ass around, provide her with speeches to completely mangle, and feed those on retainer that mostly work on getting more bucks from suckers.
The only reasons I can come up with for Perry dropping out is that he doesn’t have enough campaign funds to get him to debate events and a few other assorted “campaign” stops (the SuperPac could hire whatever staff Perry has to handle advocacy for him), his indictment is more problematical for him than reported, or he has become bored or tired with the effort to break through polling at 1%.
I would guess that the SuperPac donors (not all that many individuals are involved) would have a say at to where it goes if the candidate drops out. They could opt for a refund or try to play kingmaker by dangling the money in front to the remaining greedy little snots.
That money is slated for an addition to Perry’s ranch.
I think that Perry’s bailing is the start of the first round of thinning. Those whose messages are exactly like Trump’s are the ones who are vulnerable.
As I have been reading about the period 1815-1848, it occurred to me that it is possible to force a multi-party electoral result as long as third and fourth parties are geographically centered and split the electoral votes such that no one party has a majority. That throws the election into the House of Representatives. If the House members reflect that same split, the candidates have to form coalitions of House votes. The long-tail distribution of state populations likely prevents this from happening in practice. As does the fact that the distribution of electoral votes will not be the same as the distribution of Congressional districts. It’s not a matter of spoiler, it is a matter of negotiations having to take place in the House. It is much less likely because the experiences during that historical period caused the Congress and legislatures to pass laws that made elections less ambivalent in their first results.
Rec again for Daniel Walker Howe, What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848
Why don’t we take the much less hazardous and less difficult path of gaining more liberal/progressive control of the Democratic Party instead?
You missed my point. The key point is the precondition, which is sectional geographic divisions. Despite appearances we do not have the same sort of sectional divisions that existed during this period.
It is the very geographic distribution of party support that makes other than a two-party approach a problem. If all states had electoral votes by Congressional District, it could occur but only if there was concentration by party in enough Congressional Districts.
Which means that the negotiation of coalitions must occur within the two parties under the threat that those left out of the coalition can become spoilers.
The current alignments in both parties are in doubt. What Trump’s candidacy really says is that it is possible for 30% of the Republican base to walk away in this election if strong opposition is not on the agenda. Huckabee, Cruz, and Santorum are trying to make the same point for the religious right.
The anxiety of breaking away from the Democratic Party is best served by some attention being paid to the Democratic and progressive wings of the party. Bernie Sanders running within the party is a healthy event. Sanders cannot try to win by drifting to the center, however, because his base is as angry as Trump’s.
The fact that sound policy is being ignored and catastrophes still fail to be avoided because of the corruption of the Democratic Party and the failure of political will of Democratic elected officials has stoke serious anger among progressives.
I would agree with the conclusions of the first and last paragraphs. Thanks for the clarification, and the historical lesson/creative thinking.
Unfortunately, success in pulling off this sort of move would require both left- and right-wing political leaders and their voters agreeing to substantially split their campaigns/votes. I don’t come anywhere close to trusting the modern conservative movement and their voters to split their votes simultaneously with the Left. And in 2000, we saw what even a very minor split in votes from the Left got us. I’m sure the Right feels the same about the degree to which they split their votes in 1992 and 1996.
Re. the point of view that anger has been stoked among progressives “because of the corruption of the Democratic Party and the failure of political will of Democratic elected officials”, that is true to a degree, but let’s grapple with some questions:
The powers of organized money and the military-industrial complex, which FDR and Ike warned us of respectively, are creating intractable political problems. But an additional barrier is that our movement has not won the policy and cultural arguments that the American people are grappling with. We don’t have enough support from the electorate to force the Democratic Party to get many of our preferred policies passed into laws and placed into regulations. There is an opportunity to bring the voters to support our fuller agenda, but we have not succeeded yet.