GOP Civil War Will End in 2016 With Destruction of Party or Its Conquest

Are you surprised by Trump and the GOP split? Well, if you're a long-time reader you'll be as surprised about that as you are the yuan devaluation because it's been a topic here since at least 2012. Back then it looked as though a GOP civil war would break out between the Ron Paul faction and the establishment, but the battle was delayed due to Paul's low support within the party. It resumed full bore in 2013 though. Back then I wrote GOP Establishment Loses Control of the Message; Third Party Emerging; Christie Victory Means Nothing.
The key place to watch moving forward is how the Chamber of Commerce and business groups fare with the Tea Party. When a third party emerges, it will be anti-Wall Street, anti-bank and very populist on the issue of jobs. The GOP has always been seen as the party of the rich, but the Tea Party is quite anti-Federal Reserve (though that is not a universal position) and anti-bailout, while the Obama administration is a subsidiary of Wall Street, more so even than George Bush the Younger.

The tough thing for a populist in the GOP was always the free-market orientation of the base. Pat Buchanan, for example, would have been far more popular had his economics been more libertarian. Five years into a depression, that may no longer hold. A relatively pro-business (in general) candidate from the Tea Party who unleashes fiery rhetoric at business groups will be greeted with roaring cheers from the crowd. The GOP risks splitting the party into two smaller parties, but more likely a GOP "spin-off" would quickly subsume the GOP because the remaining party would have almost no constituency. Wall Street likes the Democrats as much as the Republicans, but the bulk of business groups know which way taxes are headed if they supported the Democrats over the GOP. Thus, if the GOP split in two and the bulk of votes go with the Tea Party, the business groups would likely follow.
Sounds like Trump, no? The GOP establishment (GOPe) has a shrinking constituency and some insiders are already talking about supporting Clinton over Trump.

The final piece of the puzzle will be national security. The Tea Party already leans towards peace, but still has a lot of hawks. However, they also tend to be Constitutionalists. Were the GOP establishment to support an Obama led military action against the Tea Party's objections, then the Tea Party will have placed itself in the catbird seat of American politics. It will be at the center of anti-finance, anti-war and anti-government sentiment. I've said before, it's not yet clear whether the Tea Party will be the third party, but if there is a third party, it will be all three of those things. If there is no third party, one of the two parties will adopt the bulk of these positions. Since Clinton is as establishment as they come, the Democrats are unlikely to see any reform until at least the 2018 election cycle.
Trump's campaign has fused the elements I was discussing 2 years ago, which is why he's dominating the polls and could be headed for a landslide win in November 2016 if nothing changes. Voters want change and an overthrow of the GOPe will portend the overthrow of the rest of the establishment in Washington. Voters will go with the new in 2016. If the election is split three ways, Trump might even win a larger victory because he might make it a legitimate 3-way race, in which case the Republican Senate and House candidates may benefit from increased support.

Great changes occur when social mood is negative and that explains why this change is happening now. It also explains why it will be messy and could require a brokered convention.

WaPo: GOP preparing for contested convention
Because of the sensitivity of the topic — and because they are wary of saying something that, if leaked, would provoke Trump to bolt the party and mount an independent bid — Priebus and McConnell were mostly quiet during the back-and-forth. They did not signal support for an overt anti-Trump effort.

But near the end, McConnell and Priebus acknowledged to the group that a deadlocked convention is something the party should prepare for, both institutionally within the RNC and politically at all levels in the coming months.
Trump is the consummate deal maker. He would immediately look to Cruz for support. The next likely candidate, if he stays in the race and the votes are needed, is Paul. I believe he would shift for a tougher non-interventionist foreign policy and an agreement on reforming the monetary system; the GOPe opposes his position on monetary policy more than anything else. The GOPe will need to defeat the vote totals of these three candidates to be assured of a win. Carson is a wild card; the rest of the field would not support Trump. If Trump+Cruz+Paul have more than 50% of the delegates, I expect they would coalesce and overthrow the GOPe, completing the conservative/libertarian insurgency that began in 1964 with Goldwater. If these three are under 50%, Trump would have no way of getting enough floor votes. He would lose and thenlaunch a 3rd party campaign unless he was brought in to unify. It wouldn't be so much Trump breaking away, as the base would be so disgusted they would likely abandon the party even if Trump didn't run.

By the end of 2016, either the GOPe will have destroyed the party by pushing conservatives out of the party, or the conservatives will have won. As in Europe, there will be a rightward move in the electorate and it will express itself first within the GOP. Win or lose in the 2016 general, the GOP will make a "permanent" rightward shift in 2016.


On the Democratic side, things are starting to heat up as well. If there is breakup in the Democratic party, it will not be due to ideology, as in the GOP, instead race and ethnicity. The Democrats are a coalition of smaller identity-driven groups and in several cases there are minority candidates from differing factions going up against one another. In the past, there was usually a dominant group, but due to demographic shifts and turbo charged racial politics, there could be a battle for control in some districts and states between minority groups with roughly equivalent strength.

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, President Obama's former Chief of Staff, is down to 18% support in Chicago due to the movement Barack Obama helped create: Black Lives Matter. Black voters gave Emanuel victory over his Latino challenger earlier this year: Black vote proves key in Chicago mayoral race
Four years ago, Emanuel won most of the votes in black wards. On Tuesday, he repeated that performance in a runoff by receiving on average 57 percent of the vote in those South and West side wards.

To be sure, Emanuel also fared well with white voters, especially in affluent wards. Yet both Emanuel and challenger Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia jockeyed for the black vote. The candidates tailored their messages to the black voting bloc on schools and public safety. Emanuel even made an appearance on Nation of Islam-affiliated Munir Muhammad’s show on public access television. Garcia had Jesse Jackson Sr. in his camp. Emanuel had Cong. Bobby Rush.
It's pretty obvious that Emanuel suppressed video of the police shooting, which would have led to explosive protests given the riots in Ferguson and Baltimore, plus major protests in New York and other cities. Whether he stays in office remains to be seen.

Moving forward, the Democrats should have a smooth nomination battle. Then it will be on to the convention. That is where various factions could clash and Black Lives Matter will be on a big win streak if they add Emanuel's scalp. IF the group pushes for too much at the convention, it could lead to friction. The fuel is there for conflicts due to negative social mood, the issue is what's dominating the agenda heading into the convention. The Democrats could be unified, or there could be a police shooting that sparks riots that drown out issues such as the economy, forcing Clinton to risk alienating some supporters if she chooses to elevate an issue, or not.

The Democrats split may not come in 2016 though, and maybe not even in 2020, but within the next decade, the demographics will create a power vacuum. A perfect example is California's senate race. Barbara Boxer is retiring, and Loretta Sanchez and Kamala Harris will battle for her seat in the Democratic primary, which will effectively be the election in Democrat California (unless the GOP surprises with a candidate out of left field).

The Root: Kamala Harris: Are We Looking at the Next US Senator From Calif.?
You might be dreading 2016 because it will be the last year of the first black president.

But all is not lost, fam. Chances are you’ll get your first African-American female senator in over 15 years.

...President Barack Obama’s got an interest in the race. It’s no secret that Harris is an Obama favorite—he even weathered public shade for calling her “the best-looking attorney general” back in 2013. But the president has long had a close political relationship with Harris as one of his superstar protégées. He put resources behind her 2010 and 2014 runs, and it’s expected he’ll do it again in 2016. Hence, a Harris win would not only make history but would also reflect just how much political clout the president has in his final two years.

...She’ll have black votes locked. Don’t count out rather influential blocs of California’s minority voters. While the state’s voters are disproportionately white, 11 percent are Asian (with Harris expected to get a nice cut of that) and 6 percent are African American. The question mark is Latino voters, who represent 17 percent of the state’s vote. Harris should get the black vote hands down, especially if the state’s powerful black political class stands behind her, including senior black female members of Congress from Northern Cali, such as Rep. Karen Bass (D-Calif.) and Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.).

Fox: Loretta Sanchez banking on Latino support to win California Senate race
But Sanchez was the clear favorite among Latinos in the poll. Among Hispanics, she’s preferred over Harris 34 percent to 18 percent. More than half of the people who took the survey in Spanish support the congresswoman.

"It’s very important for young people to get involved in politics, to see somebody that looks more like them,” said Sanchez, highlighting the fact that almost 50 percent of the population in California is Latino.

“Latinos should understand the importance of sending the first Latina to the United States Senate,” she added.
Within the Democratic party, the battle will increasingly be based on identity. In the general, it is the Republicans who may become the swing voters between the rival Democrat factions.

La Times: Democrat Loretta Sanchez may need an assist from GOP voters in Senate race
Republican consultant Mike Madrid said that's because Latinos running statewide have traditionally had difficulty attracting broad support from "white, old, rich Bernie Sanders progressives" living along California's coast, where much of the population is.

"For the past 20 years, she, along with other Latino politicians, have been beating on Republicans like a piñata. Now she needs their votes," Madrid said. "It will be fascinating to watch."

...California's top-two primary system adds to the unpredictability. Although the election is still more than eight months away, Republicans have yet to coalesce behind one GOP candidate; Republican votes could splinter enough for Democrats to capture the gold and the silver in June.
Sanchez is clearly going to go after Republican voters.

Politics365: 3 Reasons Sanchez doesn't have a lock on Latino voters in CA Senate
3. Loretta Sanchez has been instrumental in ramping up the militarization of the border. For years, Congresswoman Sanchez has been on the House Homeland Security Committee. Back in 2010, she touted passage of the 2010 Emergency Border Security Supplemental Appropriations Bill. That bill added 1,000 new border patrol agents, funded unmanned aircraft systems for surveillance at ports of entry, and provided $7 million to expand ICE jail programs. Is this kind of militarism something that Latino voters in California want?
And just this week: Democratic Senate hopeful: Up to 20 percent of Muslims want caliphate
Rep. Loretta Sanchez said Muslims seeking a caliphate are willing to use terrorism and violence to impose their views on the Western world.
Story Continued Below“We know that there is a small group, and we don’t know how big that is — it can be anywhere between 5 and 20 percent, from the people that I speak to — that Islam is their religion and who have a desire for a caliphate and to institute that in any way possible," Sanchez said on "PoliticKING with Larry King."

“They are not content enough to have their way of looking at the world, they want to put their way on everybody in the world,” she said. “And again, I don’t know how big that is, and depending on who you talk to, but they are certainly — they are willing to go to extremes. They are willing to use and they do use terrorism.”
2016 will be a very interesting year. The Republican reformation will climax and the Democratic reformation will begin.

No comments:

Post a Comment