In light of the Ukraine saga, another, in never-Trump circles, controversial topic, has moved away from the spotlight. Republican state parties have cancelled their primaries for 2020. While Trump is almost locked in for becoming the party’s presidential nominee, the cancellations raise questions about democracy and how influential Donald Trump has become within the Grand Old Party.

With the 2020 elections on the horizon, both parties will decide on their presidential candidate. The Democrats’ field has somehow deflated into a three-person race amongst Biden, Warren and Sanders – though the latter’s recent heart surgery may or may not impact his candidacy.

On the other side of the political aisle, the Republican nominee had been somewhat of a lock. As the incumbent and carrying an exorbitant high approval rating within the party, anything but Trump’s nomination would create an epochal precedent. Nonetheless, the recent cancellations have made Trump’s nomination even more conceivable.

By the end of September, Alaska had become the 5th state that scrapped its primary. Besides Alaska, South Carolina, Kansas, Arizona and Nevada have made the same decision.

Instead of conducting an open race for the spot, all of the above states have now pledged to assign their delegates of the 2020 Republican National Convention, where the presidential candidate will be chosen, to Donald Trump.

South Carolina’s Republican Chairman Drew McKissick explained the party’s decision by stating there was “no rationale to hold a primary with an incumbent in the White House”. Legally, it is exclusively the state’s prerogative to not only set the primary parameter but also decide whether or not they should be held.

The Palmetto State is no stranger to this rationale. The same idea was applied in 1984 when President Reagan had been in office as well as in 2004 when President Bush had been the party’s incumbent and subsequently beat John Kerry in the general election.

A staggering nine states besides South Carolina also cancelled their primaries in 2004. The recent announcements and the outcry over these cancellations are thus not as big of a landmark decision as one might think, nor a carte blanche for President Trump.

However, there are dissimilarities to previous cases. These come by the names of Bill Weld, Mark Sanford and Joe Walsh. All three Republicans have stepped forward and declared to challenge Donald Trump for the nominee. While internal challenges are not uncommon, three serious contestants are somewhat of an anomaly and can be seen as evidence for the high jacking of traditional Republican values by the president.

Considering Trump’s approval rating of between 80-90 per cent, however, none of these candidates, who are polling around 3 per cent, stands a realistic chance to beat him – not unless a new controversy forces Republicans to cease their, so far, unconditional support.

With that in mind, another aspect must not be neglected. State parties, more often than not, can be cash strapped. For a chair to explain his members to hold an expensive primary for not only an incumbent but an incumbent that is certain to win, is a big ask.

Moreover, history has shown that incumbents, who faced a primary challenge, albeit securing the nominee handily, lost in the subsequent general elections. Primaries can have the effect of exposing deep rifts within the party and portray the president as weak. In this particular case, a primary would likely turn into an outright character assassination of Trump.

Nonetheless, and Joe Walsh has eluded on this, cancelling a vote to preserve a candidate’s pedigree and his momentum as well as potentially spare the party a monetary commitment, could be considered undemocratic. No poll nor an approval rating should substitute an actual voting process. Both are far from being an exact science – as the previous presidential election displayed.

L'articolo Republicans Continue to Cancel Primaries proviene da InsideOver.

While Donald Trump’s candidacy as the Republican 2020 nominee had been a foregone conclusion, internal challengers have emerged. Even though the odds are stacked against them, the damage candidates could cause to Trump’s presidential campaign cannot be overstated. After all, primaries have been a death sentence for sitting presidents.

Last week, former White House Communications Director, Anthony Scaramucci, publicly opined his repentance for supporting the Commander in Chief. In his expostulation on National TV, Scaramucci urged Republicans to challenge Trump for the presidential nomination in a primary. This is a tall order, considering the fact that only one elected president amongst forty-four predecessors, President Pierce in 1852, was not granted his party’s nomination.

But Scaramucci’s proposition had been gaining traction amongst establishment Republicans for some time. What Scaramucci did not allude to, or perhaps was not cognizant of, is the fact that one Republican had already declared his candidacy. A second one entered the race yesterday.

Former Governor of Massachusetts, Bill Weld, initiated an exploratory committee in February, and has since officially announced his candidacy. Yesterday, former Congressmen and controversial talk show host Joe Walsh declared his desire to oust Trump. Other potential candidates such as former Ohio Governor Kasich, former Congressman Mark Sanford and even 2012 hopeful Mitt Romney are names that continue to circulate through Washington’s political grapevine.

How genuine these primary coquets are is difficult to quantify at this point. A primary provides a candidate with a national stage and thereby makes a bid particularly attractive for candidates who may be considered mid – or low – profile politicians. Hidden agendas are, therefore, not outside the realms of possibility.

Those who have either officially declared a challenge or are still contemplating a bid share one common trait: earnest resentment. Not only for Trump but for the ideological rift that the Republican Party has witnessed under his presidency. And while the GOP has had its fair share of multi-facetted fractions (e.g. Tea Party, Neoconservatives, the Christian right), the Trump presidency has transformed the GOP into a two-fraction party. On the one side, a major populist Trump wing, on the other the remains of what used to be the establishment Republicans. The latter appears to have seen enough and seeks to regain control over the party – with perhaps impeccable timing.

Meanwhile, the president continues to command an imperviously loyal base, but has nonetheless alienated many Republican voters. It resonates in current polls. These indicate mediocre approval ratings in key states such as Texas (41%), Pennsylvania (42%), Michigan (42%) and Florida (43%). Trump’s national approval rating of 44% may also lead to increased trepidation in conservative circles and raises the question of whether the 2020 election can be won with Donald Trump as the candidate.

Despite low ratings, however, the status quo implies that Trump will almost certainly obtain the nominee, as his approval rating with Republicans is at almost 90%. History has shown that a rating of 75% or less is required if a challenge is supposed to warrant any kind of feasibility. However, a successful primary is no guarantee for a general election win. Primaries for incumbents, traditionally, have correlated with the contrary.

In the past fifty years, three sitting presidents have faced a primary challenge. President Ford was challenged by then-Governor of California, Ronald Reagan, in 1976. Three years later, President Carter was challenged by Senator Ted Kennedy. The late George H.W. Bush faced Pat Buchanan in 1992. All incumbents won the primary and secured the party’s nominee. However, the internal competition yielded a rather unpleasant side-effect: all three lost the following general election.

The reason is simple. In a primary, rifts within the party are being exposed. In turn, the sitting president is portrayed as being weak, seemingly incapable of orchestrating even his party around the presidential agenda. This is never a promising sales pitch for a general election.

Thus, a plausible challenge needs to be founded on Trump’s shortcoming. A lacklustre track record could jeopardise the party’s chances in a general election. If a candidate was able to make a coherent case for this occurrence, Republican support for Trump could decrease. Ironically, Trump himself might become the prosecution’s finest witness. After all, he has been asking to be judged on the economy. Consequently, if the indications of a looming recession turn out to be accurate, the floodgates for a challenger are suddenly wide open, and a potential disaster in the general elections almost inevitable.

Nonetheless, a Trump primary win remains more probable than not. The connotations that an internal challenge carries are serious, however. Much will depend on the challenger’s pedigree and economic developments. Either way, the president’s main adversaries may no longer be Democrats, but members of his own party.

L'articolo Why Republicans Could Cost Trump the Presidency proviene da InsideOver.

With the 2020 US presidential election looming, the Republicans should be concentrating on winning. Considering that none of the Democrat candidates have emerged as a clear favourite to win their party’s nomination next year so far, and with GDP growing by 2.1 per cent in the second quarter of 2019, Trump should be confident of a second term in office. However, he faces the problem of his own party revolting against him. Former White House Communications Director, Anthony Scaramucci, recently said the President has “lost his mind” and that he is worse than a racist.

Furthermore, former one-term congressman Joe Walsh, an established Tea Party Republican, has declared that he is going to stand against the President in the 2020 primaries. He has made a promise to “get in the President’s face every day”. CNN‘s Chris Cillizza has already ruled him out as the man to beat Trump, but he has warned the GOP that the former congressman can still cause significant damage to the President’s electoral prospects. This is because even though he lacks a national donor base due to all levers of the Republican political and fundraising apparatus being controlled by the President, Walsh is likely to appear on TV a lot. He once featured on both MSNBC and CNN in one day.

Cillizza has advised Trump to ignore Walsh. But he is incapable of ignoring an attack, no matter where it comes from. When he was the frontrunner for the 2016 Republican nomination and Senator Rand Paul (Kentucky) was almost defeated, Trump failed to resist attacking the Kentucky Senator by saying “I never attacked him on his look, and believe me – there’s plenty of subject matter there.” The spotlight was then shone on Paul for a brief moment, allowing the Senator to be relevant in the race.

But Walsh is not the only Republican willing to challenge the President. USA Today reports that Trump wrote a pair of tweets on Tuesday referring to his three opponents as “the three stooges”. Rep. Mark Sanford, R-SC, was one of the stooges, as he appeared on NBC‘S Meet the Press to say that he is considering running for president. Walsh and former Massachusetts Governor Bill Weld, who is also challenging Trump in the GOP primaries, were the other two.

These candidates will fail to unseat Trump. According to USA Today, the President has the power of the incumbency, with nearly eight out of ten Republicans approving of Trump’s overall job performance. He has raised $57 million for the Republican National Committee this year alone. But by contesting the President for the 2020 nomination, the GOP risks losing next year’s election. We could be about to witness history repeat itself.

When Pat Buchanan stood against President Bush in 1992, it exposed the GOP’s ideological divisions during the New Hampshire primary, and the latter would go on to lose the general election that year. In 1976, Ronald Reagan challenged President Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination that year. Although Reagan lost, delegates replaced Vice President Nelson Rockerfeller with Kansas Senator Bob Dole as a way of appeasing the Republicans’ ultra-conservative wing. Instead of focusing on a unified campaign to win the 1976 election, Ford had to focus on bitter primary battles in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Vermont and Florida. With the Watergate scandal looming over him alongside party divisions, he lost the election that year. What happened to Bush and Ford could easily happen to Trump.

This is why Walsh, Weld and anyone else daring to oust the President for the 2020 GOP nomination must be careful. They may not like him, but he is raising money and presiding over a strong economy. Party divisions are likely to expose the Republicans’ ideological rifts and cost them a 2020 victory, like they did in the past.

L'articolo Tea Party Republican Joe Walsh Could Cost Trump 2020 proviene da InsideOver.