When it comes to a classic narcissist like Donald Trump, it’s hard to say when (or if) he’ll begin to find the process of running for president so humiliating that he’s tempted to just drop out. He clearly doesn’t care that “respectable” people are routinely calling him a racist and comparing him to some of the most notorious fascist dictators of the 20th-Century. He doesn’t seem to care that the intelligentsia and the media elite are condemning his character and his intelligence. But he’s also obsessed with his image and he’s financially dependent on his brand. His campaign has already cost him business relationships and partnerships, yet that hasn’t tamed or dissuaded him so far.
But, let’s remember what happened to H. Ross Perot, who you might recall dropped out of the race in July 1992 only to reenter it in early October:
Like Trump, Perot was allergic to spending money: he believed that paid advertising was unnecessary as long as he could get on TV as often as he wished. For a time, it worked: He got away with many slip-ups, gaffes and misdeeds because they reinforced his outsider persona. Perot was adept at using the public’s disdain of the news media to deflect criticism. Repeatedly deemed a nut-bag by the press, Perot adopted an appropriate campaign song: the Patsy Cline tune, “Crazy.”
But Perot came to despise the scrutiny brought on by all the free media he sought, and he never truly embraced retail politics to the degree needed to win. Just as Trump has drawn criticism for phoning in his cable-news appearances from his bedroom, Perot preferred to campaign from his Dallas office rather than make personal appearances. And ultimately, his skin proved too thin for the race: When he withdrew in mid-July, he gave various official explanations for the decision. But the one his advisers gave to the New York Times was telling: “[C]ampaign insiders described Mr. Perot as a man obsessed with his image who began to lose interest in the contest when faced with a barrage of critical news reports.” Even when Perot dove back into the race in the fall, he was a busted candidate: in the final five weeks, he left Dallas only for debates and a handful of rallies. After his 1992 loss, Perot’s image never really recovered, and after one more flailing presidential run in 1996, he disappeared from the public eye almost entirely.
Trump’s already getting a little squirrelly. He’s under pressure after his campaign manager was indicted yesterday for battering a Breitbart reporter, and now he’s reneging on his pledge to support the eventual nominee because he feels the RNC has treated him shabbily and he can sense that the party elite are plotting to deny him the nomination at the convention. There’s increasing talk that he could cost the Republicans control of the House of Representatives as well as the Senate.
Due to sore loser laws in many states that will prevent Trump from running as an independent after failing to secure the Republican nomination, he cannot run a successful third party candidacy. But he could get on the ballot in some red states, split the vote, and hand Electoral College delegates to Clinton or Sanders. I can see him doing that out of spite.
If he does secure the nomination, I could even see him losing interest like Perot did briefly if he thinks he’s just getting abused, his image is being irreparably harmed, and that he’ll go down in history as a major loser.
He’s very unpredictable. He seems to be getting enough validation at the moment to make all the hits he’s taking seem worthwhile, but this doesn’t seem to make much sense from a business or branding perspective, and he surely knows that history is written by the same intellectuals who increasingly despise him with the heat of a thousand suns.
And reading what the former Communications Director of the Make America Great Again Super PAC, Stephanie Cegielski, had to say yesterday, it seems like Trump may be like the dog who actually caught the car.
Almost a year ago, recruited for my public relations and public policy expertise, I sat in Trump Tower being told that the goal was to get The Donald to poll in double digits and come in second in delegate count. That was it.
The Trump camp would have been satisfied to see him polling at 12% and taking second place to a candidate who might hold 50%. His candidacy was a protest candidacy…
…I don’t think even Trump thought he would get this far. And I don’t even know that he wanted to, which is perhaps the scariest prospect of all.
He certainly was never prepared or equipped to go all the way to the White House, but his ego has now taken over the driver’s seat, and nothing else matters…
…What was once Trump’s desire to rank second place to send a message to America and to increase his power as a businessman has nightmarishly morphed into a charade that is poised to do irreparable damage to this country if we do not stop this campaign in its tracks.
I’ll say it again: Trump never intended to be the candidate. But his pride is too out of control to stop him now.
You can give Trump the biggest gift possible if you are a Trump supporter: stop supporting him.
He doesn’t want the White House. He just wants to be able to say that he could have run the White House. He’s achieved that already and then some. If there is any question, take it from someone who was recruited to help the candidate succeed, and initially very much wanted him to do so.
I don’t know if Ms. Cegielski is correct about what Trump originally intended or if it even matters anymore what he set out to do in the beginning. But, maybe she’s right and he’s looking for an offramp. Maybe winning the nomination and then losing to Clinton or Sanders would be his worst nightmare.
Who can say what goes on in his mind?
All I know is that this won’t end well for him and he’s got to know that.
So, does he pull the plug before Cleveland? Does he flake out after Cleveland?
Or is he in it all the way to the end?
And, if so, what terrifies him more?
The humiliation of losing?
Or the responsibility of winning?
I don’t know if Ms. Cegielski is correct about what Trump originally intended or if it even matters anymore what he set out to do in the beginning.
Sounds more and more to me as though Trump did indeed get in to troll Jeb Bush.
Jeb, more or less, said Trump’s motivation was to troll him. LOL
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/12/11/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-jeb-bush-campaign-conspiracy/
I don’t know if he did or not, but the election certainly hasn’t been as much fun since Jeb! dropped out. It was even better back when it was mostly Trump trolling him interspersed with Trump randomly taking shots at Rand Paul.
The “Little Marco”/hand-size bit was good, but Rubio was gone — what, a week later?
He has to repair the damage done to his brand.
The only way to do that is to win the Nomination, or appear to have won the nomination and have it stolen from him with GOP Convention shenanigans.
Possibly. A credible look.
AG
Yes he does. And his reneging on his promise to support the Republican nominee is his first step in the process. His whole attitude will be indignation at the Republican’s lack of respect for him. He is too good for them. ‘Listen Dad’, says Iyvanka, ‘don’t make such a fuss and get out while the getting out is good. We can always go to the White House and stay with the Clintons, you know. Hillary would love to have us, my good friend Chelsea too.’
Who gives a shit.
This is a guy who deigned to appear in public without shame after his birther period. No, in fact his birther period “qualified” him as a credible nominee for his followers. I think Trump and shame are not ever getting together.
Gets nomination. Quits. What then?
If he does secure the nomination, I could even see him losing interest like Perot did briefly if he thinks he’s just getting abused, his image is being irreparably harmed, and that he’ll go down in history as a major loser.
I think this is the most likely. If he gets the nomination, he’ll eventually quit.
.
This is an exercise in reading tea leaves. At this point, if Trump drops out he’ll look like a quitter and a loser — which are the very things a man like Trump cannot stomach. He may very well lose before getting the Republican nomination. His chances of getting to the White House are really small. But I’m guessing he’ll go down swinging (or, if we’re lucky, flailing). I think that’s the only way a guy like Trump can go out. My guess is he’ll be brash to the end, preferring to be remembered like a Goldwater than a Romney.
Also quite possible.
AG
I feel like these discussions are taking place too early in the process. It’s optimal if the Trump “experiment” explodes sometime in the fall, I think, well after the RNC can do anything about it. Whatever happens, Trump will do serious damage to Republicans on the way out the door, but we really want to see the maximum amount inflicted here. Keep going, Donald, you can do it.
He won’t just take his ball and go home. He’ll leave IEDs littered all over the place.
Being the man who blew up the rotten Republican Party would look better than being a disastrous President, or being decisively defeated by the first woman President. At least it would be a sort of positive accomplishment.
He’s making it real easy for pundits/bloggers to keep recycling whatever they said/wrote in the first month after he got in the race. (Before that, and for some years, it was all “will he or won’t he.”)
He’s ridiculous, a clown, not serious.
What does he want? (Insert answers A through Z.)
He’s crazy.
Well, that’s going to taking him down.
There goes the Latino vote.
He’s a fascist, a thug, a bully, a racist — nobody will really vote for him.
There goes the AA vote.
There goes the women’s vote.
Don’t worry, he’ll implode any day now.
His supporters are crazy, fascists, thugs, bullies, racists — they’ll make it impossible for him to win the nomination.
Why hasn’t he suspended his campaign already?
He doesn’t really want the nomination.
Why does he want to disrupt the GOP convention?
If he accidentally gets the nomination, he’ll lose the general because he doesn’t really want to be POTUS.
So, basically he’s just screwing with the right, left, and center. Except for those that have gone with “Occam’s Razor.”
Could he please take down Cruz before he leaves? I really do not want to even think he might find a way to win.
If Trump isn’t the nominee, I want it to be Cruz. I can’t see either winning whereas a Kasich or a Ryan would scare me to death, particularly against Clinton.
Jimmy Carter suggests Cruz has bad juju.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/jimmy-carter-donald-trump-ted-cruz-218707
I agree with him. Very bad juju. As in whack religious plans.
The Repubs have been playing the right-wing religion card for decades–thus candidate Ted Cruz. This article was written before Ted Cruz was elected a Senator, but it provides a thumbnail sketch of the Repub’s political strategy. I didn’t realize this relationship began around Eisenhower’s time.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/12/02/the-religious-ties-of-the-republican-party
This link is interesting too. It provides a short history of The Pledge of Allegiance and how “under God” was inserted.
http://www.kofc.org/un/en/resources/communications/pledgeAllegiance.pdf
Bit late for all concerned to mention this, I wondered as much at the time on this forum. But Ms Cegielski’s pitch seems a little too cute by half and her public doubt neatly aligns with the #nevertrump movement which seems to have captured the Beltway’s limited imagination for now.
Even if it’s true that Trump never saw this far down the road and wants out it seems that stealing the nomination from him is his best option; and the worst for the party. So naturally it’s the party’s preferred course of action at this point; go figure.
So his identity as ‘angel of destruction’ of the Republican party seems secure in any event. The question is; ‘Would running Cruz post-Trump do the party even more damage?’ Seems probable.
Shaun writes:
Thank you. I got the same feel off of it.
Ms. Cegielski is a professional political operative.
Most often that’s just another phrase used to cover for the word “whore.” (And don’t none of you so-called “progessive” leftinessess give me no PC bullshit here about the use of that word…I’d use the same one for any of the other 6 sexes as well if that was their chosen job.)
At the very least she is positioning herself as well as possible to continue her career if…as seems possible…Trump is in one way or another defeated by the forces of PermaGov fixiness. At worst, she’s being paid as part of the…now massively financed from both sides of the mythical aisle…anti-Trump movement.
AG
Has she collected six figure fees for opening her mouth for Goldman-sachs execs?
Yeah.
Well…
What if he is both a very specific kind of nutjob and very serious about “Making America Great Again?”
What then?
What if he survives all of the character attacks from the centrist media and the political attacks/chicanery of his own party?
What then?
I mean…if he loses anywhere along the way he can claim victory just for getting as far as he did against almost unimaginable opposition, right? If it’s all about ego-gratification and brand promotion he’s way, way ahead of the game already.
But…what would the be ultimate ego-gratification/brand promotion?
That’s right.
Becoming President of the United States against…again…almost unimaginable opposition.
I think he’s in it to the end, no matter which way it ends.
Watch.
AG
P.S. And there’s always another way to look at it. I initially ignored accusations that he was a Dem mole, in it to make sure the Dems win. Now? I wonder…
Who else could make HRC look good?
P.P.S. Of course there’s another possible ending that would give pause to a personality type like Trump…serious threat of ’60s-style fatality should he manage to get into a position where he could possibly win. No ego or branding left once you’re not there anymore.
It’s happened before…
The ISIS bunch would provide the perfect patsy.
Watch.
You think this hasn’t at the very least been thoroughly war-gamed by the secret room pros already?
WTFU.
What’s one more collateral damage death to the PermaGov?
AG–
“war-gamed by the secret room pros”
Please elaborate. Who, what, when, where, why/
Who?
Yer kiddin’, right?
What?
Eliminating Trump as a political force by any means necessary.
When?
Ever since he Trump seriously hit the scene as a threat to the Permanent Government’s ongoing electoral fix.
Where?
Langley and wherever else they congregate.
Why?
Again…yer kiddin’, right?
AG
You forgot to tell us what to “bet on.”
Bet on this.
I didn’t “forget.”
AG
Trump is a survivalist … he’ll weather these low areas of depression. No sweat … no one is able to attack his campaign and make ik stick. The Breitbart reporter story is so far-fetched it will most likely garner Trump more votes in coming primaries.
Reading tea leaves?
I doubt this man consumes a cup of tea and all expectations from pundits have proven worthless.
“The controversy has caused tensions within Breitbart.
On Friday afternoon, Kurt Bardella resigned from his position
handling communications for Breitbart because he felt he could
no longer serve an organization that was putting the interests
of the Trump campaign ahead of its own reporter.”
[Source: CNN/money]
○ Trump aide charged with misdemeanor battery vs. ex-Breitbart reporter | Palm Beach Post |
The Breitbart reporter story is so far-fetched it will most likely garner Trump more votes in coming primaries.
Boston Herald (assume it’s a rightwing rag, but…) – Fla Prosecutor in Trump Campaign Manager Case is Clinton Backer.
LOL
In the old days would have taken a few weeks to uncover and the public to be informed, and by then, the damage to the Trump campaign would have been done and everybody would have moved on.
Now this is just additional fodder for the rightwing anti-Clinton forces. They’ll read this as having been directed by HRC to the PB prosecutor instead of the more likely scenario that in this case he’s simply not unbiased.
Never happen…ethicless politics at work.
Why?
Ask someone who knows.
AG
You mean…someone who worked for Breitbart took a dive because of ethics? How did he possibly survive his first day there?
No…I think he was probably bribed somehow. Watch. When the smoke clears and this topic has been laid to rest…say 3 or 4 news cycles…I’ll bet money that he miraculously finds a better paying gig “handling communications”…whatever that really means…on some closer-to-the-center organizations.
Watch…
AG
I’ve thought all along that Trump was in it mainly for the ego gratification of building his brand and annoying a whole lot of people and that he never thought things would go this far. But now that things have gone this far, he’s wondering just how far things can go. Can he really make it all the way to the white House?
I don’t think he will want to be branded a sore loser, so he has no easy way out now unless the RNC provide him with an exit strategy. He’ll be 70 in June, so needn’t worry to much about damage to his commercial interests. He has a one time opportunity to make history, so why wouldn’t he grab it with both small hands?
But the problem is that he has no plan. No actual policy making staff. Nothing but a whole lot of attitude and an ability to grab free publicity. Even the US media might start to tire of this, and I can see many of his soft supporters drifting away out of sheer disinterest.
It could be that his support will already have peaked by the time he has won the nomination, and that his campaign will go into free fall soon after. He will try to play the same trick of goading the Dem nominee, and no one will pay too much attention: least of all the Dem nominee. With only 3 debates in October he won’t have the same opportunities to grab the headlines.
I can see him flailing around trying to garner attention and all he will achieve is the consolidation of Dem and Independent support around the Dem nominee, whoever that might be. Republicans, worried about their congressional seats will distance themselves, and he will end up looking like a third party candidate with only nominal Republican support.
This could end up very badly indeed for the GOP.
Interestingly, Booman give no link to the quote about Perot that starts:
I did a little digging.
It was originally published by (the oft-ridculed by God-fearing leftinesses the world over as a lump of centrist shit) Politico Magazine.
Oh. No link? Quite understandable on a blog that is labeled “A progressive site.”.
He also posted the same article to which I am replying under his own byline on his employers’ site, The Washington Monthly.
The line that the Politico quote lays down about Perot is not necessarily what really happened. The facts are true in terms of when he did what he did during that campaign, but the so-called “reasons?”
Yeah.
Right.
The same NY Times that later actively collaborated in fanning the flames of Iraq invasion by siccing spooky-spook-spook reporter Judith Miller on the whole bullshit “Iraq has WMDS!!!” scare. Unattributed “campaign insiders” doing the tattling!!!???
Give me a break!!!
Does no one remember the widely spread idea that Perot was intimidated into dropping out of the race by threats against his daughter as she was preparing to get married?
Following is the same newspaper’s labored attempt to downgrade that idea. Trust not the Good Grey Lady. She bad!!! Bet on it.
“All loony.”
Nice.
There’s that lovely phrase again.
“It’s all loony.”
I can hear the coverup discussions now. “If Perot says anything about this, we’ll just say “It’s all loony.” That’ll work!!! Dumb fucking sleeple!!!
Bet on it.
A little more from a typically long-winded NY Times bullshit/coverup article.
The Times works this way on these sorts of things-it covers both sides of a story so it cannot be accused of prejudice, but it always ends with the desired punchline.
The last pararaphs of that story?
Sure.
Nice.
Throw it in the circular file.
Job done.
AG
P.S. Perot? “All loony?”
Is the following “all loony,” or was it all quite prophetic?
You be the judge.
From a 1992 presidential debate among Ross Perot, President (and ex-CIA chief) Bush I and the initiator of the whole “Sell the U.S. economy down the river in the interest of making obscene profits from lower wages for the corporate .01% Bill (“I did not have sexual intercourse with that woman.”) Clinton.
You be the judge.
AG
AG–
Wow, I am really confused here.
(1) You seem to be insinuating that Booman has done something unethical by posting here and at The Washington Monthly, but he does that routinely. I guess he didn’t mention here that the commentary was cross posted. I’d call that an oversight, not anything shady.
(2) Yes, Judith Miller was unethical as a New York Times reporter. Owing to this fact, you accuse the entire NYT operation of being nothing but sleaze and corruption. A bit of a stretch?
(3) Thanks for the quote about the “giant suckin’ sound”. I have a memory(?) that Perot also used to use an automobile metaphor for the government, referring to how he was going to “get under the hood and fix that thang.” Or words to that effect.
1-The missing link was to the Politico story, not his own. And I don’t know how “unethical” it may or may not be. It was definitely missing though, and he is usually quite careful about linking. Why? An oversight? Slipping a little fastball by the readers? I dunno. This whole Trump kerfuffle is about politics, money and power. Where do “ethics” much enter into the practical pursuit of those aims?
2-The entire NY Times is not about “sleaze and corruption.” Only when whatever is happening is important to he PermaGov. Read up on “Opeation Mackingbird” for more on this. The major media outlets were infiltrated on numerous levels y the CIA in the ’50s. On the plentiful evidence of the way the mass media…well labelled “The Governmental Media Complex” by Ron Paul…has consistently cooperated in bamboozling the public politically over he last 50 years, there is absolutely no reason to believe that they are not still infiltrated.
3-Perot’s “giant sucking sound?” “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows” wrote Bob Dylan. Well…you don’t need a Ross Perot to tell about that sound. Just put an ear to the middle class/working class economy to hear it in all of its sucking glory.
Bet on it.
AG
I guess if Trump wanted to go down as the greatest political ratfucker in American history, he would bear down now to collect delegates, win the nomination, and then sometime around August or September announce that he was withdrawing from the race. He’d remain on ballots, of course.
He would be named the best troll in history if he endorsed Clinton right in the middle of a debate.
Honestly, part of me thinks he’ll do it.
.
If Trump were to actually win the presidency lots of people think it would be a catastrophe for America and the world… fascism, WWIII, disasters!
And if Bernie Sanders were to actually win the presidency, he’d be lucky to get his cat confirmed t the position of White House pet.
What the hell? Why are the Republicans omnipotent and the Democrats… not?
It’s a difference in powers a president can exercise.
Trump doesn’t need Congress to cause foreign policy disasters, while Bernie does need Congress to confirm appointments.
If Trump wins it’s likely he’ll bring a GOP Congress with him which as we’ve seen would just roll over for him.
If Sanders wins, he’s likely to have a GOP Congress with him which means they’re unlikely to do anything that gives him a win (much like the President). Difference being does Sanders have a plan B if he wins but not by the revolution he was hoping for when he began his run?
Having been in congress for almost 25 years,
house for 15, then senate for over 9 now;
he might know a few things we don’t.
so he can say so
What’s plan B when he can’t get stuff through Congress?
You’re asking the wrong person;
It’s Bernie’s campaign,
not mine.
you seemed to know with your previous comment, if he had one I’m sure Sanders supporters would know about it at this point in the campaign any way
My previous comment said NOTHING about a plan,
just his experience and possible knowledge learned from said experience.
You are STILL asking the wrong people;
Go Ask Bernie.
Stop being so passive-aggressive about you desire for this knowledge, you seem to need so much.
I’m not asking anyone, because ultimately it doesn’t matter.
I said in response to Neildsmith
In which case you basically said that Sanders has been in Congress for a long time and we should trust him.
The thing that started this whole discussion was why the difference between Trump and Sanders when it comes to implementing their campaign promises. Sanders hasn’t said as far as I can tell if he has any plan if his “revolution” doesn’t happen and he wins but Congress stays the same.
So my response to you telling me to trust him was that if he had a plan he should tell us especially if he’s looking to change the argument.
You said you had no idea if there was a plan, which is perfectly reasonable and it was possible I incorrectly inferred by your trust him comment that you might know something I didn’t since as a Sanders supporter I thought you might have more details than I.
It’s clear you don’t have any additional information which is fine but as this has been an argument since the beginning of the campaign I assumed if there was something, a Sanders supporter like yourself would have heard something about it by now.
So if I haven’t heard Sanders say anything and you haven’t heard anything either then it’s pretty reasonable to assume the campaign hasn’t said anything about it at this point.
So why all the wasting of time here looking for an answer the Bernie campaign could give you?
Why ask on a blog that Bernie obviously doesn’t post on.
Have YOU ask them directly?
I don’t know why, from my perspective your initial reply to me didn’t make any sense so I was trying clarify each time.
Clearly it’s not going anywhere so I’ll stop here.
My initial reply should have allowed you to think
ASK BERNIE
I know this may be hard to believe, but I don’t have his private line or any connection to any campaign. I am also not a reporter.
They don’t respond to regular people so for you to just say ask Bernie isn’t really helpful. If that was your entire point you should have said that initially instead of implying I just trust him.
Never implied anything, you just supposed I did …..
I’m not supposing anything, when you said:
It’s commonly assumed to mean you should trust him, he knows what he’s doing.
I’ve never known it to mean, hey maybe you should ask him.
Especially when there is no possible way to actually ask him.
Well we’ll have to agree to disagree about what I meant.
Cause when somebody tells me;
My first instinct is to go find out what I don’t know from the person, or group of people, who do know.
no possible way????????????????????
really, none what so ever?
He has no one who might handle any questions at all?
No one to respond to his constituents, or supporters?
Have YOU EVEN TRIED?
Yes you actually did ask someone, just not the right someone.
Hint I don’t ask YOU for Hillary”s positions, if what I want to know isn’t readily available on her website or public announcements, I EMAIL her campaign to see if they respond.
Why all the drama then?
Clinton will have the same GOP congress and yet her argument is that she can get things done. This makes no sense to me. And she is far worse than either Obama or sanders… She is going to continue to wage endless war. I guess that is what democrats stand for these days… It’s shameful.
She has plans on what she would do without the help of Congress. As of yet, I haven’t Sanders present any plans similar. All his proposals require Congress to act where some of Clinton’s do and some do not.
The Clinton plan: endless war, death, and destruction. That’s all I imagine we’ll get. Oh well. Sanders getting nothing done would be better from my perspective.
if that’s what you really think then there’s no point in us talking about this anymore
you asked a question about an argument, so I’d thought I’d clear up what people meant by it
have a good day