Conventional wisdom of Republican leadership is dead wrong.
As I have stated, Donald Trump would beat Hillary Clinton, but Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio likely cannot. Additional evidence supporting that view comes from the very place Republicans most need to pick up votes: Democrats.
A Sanders-Trump switch may be far-fetched, but negative views of Hillary Clinton have some voters weighing their options.
Please consider The Bernie Sanders Voters Who Would Pick Trump Over Clinton.
In this most bizarre of presidential election cycles, every day seems to bring another jaw-dropping development. Donald Trump on the size of his genitals, Ben Carson and the Egyptian pyramids, Bernie Sanders’ socialist revolution, Hillary Clinton and the cloth she used to wipe her private email server clean.
But it’s not just the candidates who have raised eyebrows in 2016. The latest startling phenomenon is the voter who is feeling the Bern, but also has eyes for the Donald.
This week the Guardian sought out Sanders fans who are contemplating switching their allegiance to Trump if Hillary Clinton secures the Democratic nomination.
Almost 700 people replied to the call-out, and some 500 of them said they were thinking the unthinkable: a Sanders-Trump switch.
The Guardian call-out was not a poll, but controlled surveys by polling companies have identified this small but not insignificant slice of the Sanders crowd who would consider backing Trump.
Almost one in 10 Sanders supporters apparently think Trump is next best thing to their candidate, and certainly better than Clinton.
A woman, 55, who described herself as a homemaker, said: “Both Trump and Sanders are non-establishment candidates who are not bought by the special interests that have control over policy and legislation because of their ‘bribes’.”
One male Sanders fan wrote: “Trump is an obnoxious vulgar blowhard who says foolish things. However, unlike Clinton – but like Sanders – at least he is an outsider who understands that the government and the economy are broken.”
They explained their unconventional position by expressing a variety of passionately held views on their shared commitment for protecting workers and against new wars, on their zeal for an alternative to the establishment, and on their desire to support anyone but Hillary Clinton.
A 29-year-old female data processor wrote: “As horrific as Donald Trump is, and he is a horrible, racist, misogynist idiot, I don’t think Hillary Clinton is any better. I feel like with Trump, he could at least inspire a revolution, even if it is against him. I prefer chaos to stagnation.”
Commonly expressed criticisms of Clinton were that she is a war-monger, that she is corrupt and “owned by Wall Street”, that her policies are Republican in all but name and that she is an establishment insider while Sanders and Trump are both outsiders.
Bernie-Trump Demographics
That percentage alone could easily tip the election. And it doesn’t stop there. There are many independents in the anti-war camp who are certain that Hillary or Cruz will lead the US into another war, but Trump might not.
As much as I despise Trump’s trade policies, I despise war-mongering more. The more you like wars the more you should vote for Cruz, Rubio, or Hillary. Those are my views. I don’t ask you to have them.
Closet Trump Voters
Also consider the Guardian article ‘Not even my wife knows’: secret Donald Trump voters speak out.
Here’s one comment from a yoga teacher:
Barack Obama talked about hope and change, but I believe he failed to deliver on his promises. His record with drone strikes and prosecutions of whistleblowers are especially troubling (not to mention he didn’t follow-through with prosecutions of those who caused the financial crisis).
As far as Obamacare goes, I’m not buying it, because it seems ignorant to throw money at a problem and hope it will get better.In a match between Bernie and Donald, I’d vote for the former. In a match between Hillary and Donald, I’d vote for the latter. It isn’t a vote for Trump, but rather a vote against the political establishment (which must be removed from office at any cost – even if it means electing a reality TV star for president). The stakes are too high. Hillary cannot win or the oligarchy will continue unabated. And please don’t publish my name, it would ruin the whole “progressive” image (and my girlfriend might kill me).
The Donald is an anti-establishment wild-card with many obvious problems. Is that better than the known cards with numerous known problems?
I side with those who say yes.
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
No one knows what a Trump presidency would bring. But Clinton would have us in WWIII in a NY minute. And the fact that Trump is willing to sit down with Putin instead of surrounding Russia with neocon aggression and war time propaganda, gives Trump my vote. No more wars for the MIC and far less bribes for the totally corrupt 535.
The choice of candidates is (as usual) pretty bad; but Hillary is the worst.
That’s like, your opinion, man
Here my call on Trump, the election, and what will follow:
If either Hillary or Sanders (or a brokered candidate such as Romney) gets in, then you get a civil war.
If Trump gets whacked or “has an accident” before the election, then you get a civil war.
If Trump gets in but then he doesn’t deliver – economy, taxes, foreign adventures, etc. – then you get a civil war.
A civil war in this instance would – broadly speaking – be between supporters of big-government Federalism/Cronyism vs. small government Constitutionalism. There would be significant sidebars on the role of “Diversity” – read Immigration ,legal or otherwise, and “Political Correctness” – as well as the role of religion in politics – read abortion, gay rights and the like. The offshoring of manufacturing jobs as an issue is a given.
The sides taken in such a conflict would be complex mish-mash of region, educational level, income, and ethnicity, not easily defined.
(Add to that the possibility that, threatened with large scale civil disruption, the powers that be might, in stupid desperation, launch yet another foreign adventure in order to “bring the country together.” Said adventure could easily result in a full scale foreign war, compounding the the violence.)
Since, as Victor Davis Hanson correctly points out, “…civil wars can prove more savage than conflicts against foreign enemies,” such a conflict would be profoundly traumatizing for the United States to say the least.
I like reading history, but I don’t want to live it. And I hope that I’m wrong.
Just a thought.
VicB3
I think you’re right but I think it’s about time for a civil war. The USSA needs to be blown to smithereens. I think voting for Trump will ensure that this is the end of the fascist USSA.
Here’s the Republican establishment plotting how to destroy Trump.
They will readily destroy the Party to ensure the continuance of the system.
“Trump is an obnoxious vulgar blowhard who says foolish things. However, unlike Clinton – but like Sanders – at least he is an outsider who understands that the government and the economy are broken.”
Some smart fella wrote that the real problem is that government does TOO much, has TOO much power and this makes it critical for each sides cronies to control it so that THEY are the ones to drive the gravy train. Our solution is not to be found in politicians (who mostly all suck) but in having government do LESS so that there is less damage it can cause no matter which bunch of clowns control it. This makes sense but you see no “traditional” candidates, especially not Clinton or Sanders, espouse it. Would Trump? I don’t know but as you say, we already know none of the others will.
I think Trump, as president, would be hamstrung by congress. Neither party, in the House or Senate, would willingly work with him. Any attempt to force an issue, ie – an Obama style Executive Order, might even get him impeached. Trump’s choice for his VP is critical. He, or she, may well be in the Oval Office by 2018. If his VP thinks Russia is the enemy, and the Saudis are our friends, we’re just delaying the inevitable.
Agreed
And it’s a point I have made
Presidents have huge ability to wage wars but need Congress for their other ideas. For example, Senate unlikely to approve a fence on border with Mexico.
Mish
The president can refuse veto the foreign aid bill if Mexico doesn’t build a wall. Mexico gets about half a billion. That’s surely more than what a wall would cost.
But just think, Mish, if Pence becomes president, then women won’t have freedom to choose. Oh, yeah, guys can’t get pregnant, so what do you or your followers care? But,if you could get pregnant, right to choose wouldn’t even be an issue in your “mans’ world”, now would it? There is a difference between “pro birth” and ‘pro life”. Do you know what it is?
I am not quite sure what is so “unthinkable” about a Trump / Sanders switch.
Hillary = Rubio = Cruz = Lawyers = (Bank + Military Complex) = (More Bailouts + More War)
Sanders = Trump = (Audit the Fed + No War)
There, that should be a simple enough set of equations that even idiots like the ones calling themselves “journalists” in the mainstream media should be able to grasp the concept… 🙂
trump equals NO WAR? what are you smokin’? the guy has said a dozen times he WANTS TO FIGHT ISIS, last time i checked that means war. It’s amazing how many trumpeteers and feel the bern types who JUST DON’T LISTEN to what their guy actually says.
Actually what The Donald said is he would just let Putin go ahead and blow ISIS to smithereens. Apparently the US military/industrial/political complex does not like that.
trump WON’T beat hillary, his job is to help her get elected ala perot in 92 helped get bill elected
Perot was a third party candidate. That was an entirely different scenario which cannot be compared to a 1 to 1 choice.
“trump WON’T beat hillary, his job is to help her get elected ala perot in 92 helped get bill elected.”
In your dreams. Trump has said Hillary belongs in prison. He has stated as president, he would prosecute her.
With all the division in the Republican party for POTUS I now think the Republican establishment would prefer Hillary over Trump – and that they are actively working for it by supporting their own candidates against Trump.
They do prefer Hillary. Then they would win more seats in Congress.
Trump will never be willing to relinquish strategic, tactical and daily operating control of his empire in order to assume the office of President.
This is a reallly fascinating situation wherein this “never never lose” alpha personality finds himself so popular that he is being compelled by his psychological makeup to rush up to a point where his only out will be acts of self sabotage, hoping to finish the primary season under 1237.
My bet is that the Republican ticket will be Kasich/Martinez, for which Trump will be an enthusiastic endorser.
Get back to me when things begin to move in that direction.
My
ESB you are probably right, the repubs will again pick the “least likely to win” ticket.
Being president of the United States hasn’t interfered much with Obama’s golfing career.
I am sure whoever is elected next will manage just fine in this new part time job economy.
“This is a reallly fascinating situation wherein this “never never lose” alpha personality finds himself so popular that he is being compelled by his psychological makeup to rush up to a point where his only out will be acts of self sabotage, hoping to finish the primary season under 1237.”
Trump is in it to win it.
The main reason the Republican establishment fears Trump is that if he is elected nobody will vote Republican in the Senate or Congress. That’s a lot of jobs for one job in the White House. Trump’s main job in the White House would be ceremonial as none of the laws he wants will ever land on his desk to sign and he clearly doesn’t oppose any government spending that he could veto.
That said given the current demographics there is almost no chance a Republican can win. 4 years ago things were not better and yet Obama won easily. And even if a republican wins they keep doing the same stuff. Anyone proposing spending cuts by default cannot get elected. So don’t expect much from this election except a bigger than usual media circus. It’s the markets that need to get people to their senses.
“Trump’s main job in the White House would be ceremonial as none of the laws he wants will ever land on his desk to sign and he clearly doesn’t oppose any government spending that he could veto.”
All Trump has to do is enforce existing law. USC15, for one, as Denninger has noted. Teddy Roosevelt went after the trusts.
I can’t stand Trump’s demeanor. I lived in NJ from the 60s through the 90s and when he first reared his head in the 80s, I got sick of hearing about him locally. I never watched his show, visited one of his projects and was generally indifferent to him.
However, I’m sick and tired of the status quo and have been for years. Do I buy everything he’s selling? Of course not. I didn’t believe Barry when he made all of his grandiose promises in 2008 either. I do not expect major changes from a potential Trump presidency. The establishment in Congress will not play ball with him and his only option, if he’s really sincere, would be executive orders, which I generally abhor.
That said, I would vote for him for no other reason that he’s not toeing the PC line and it’s downright refreshing. Being from NJ, his in your face rhetoric doesn’t faze me at all. I would not vote for Sanders. I would not vote for Hilliary if you held an AK47 to my head. Cruz is just slimy. I would vote for Sanders before Hilliary and Cruz and in my case, that’s saying something.
If you had said I would consider voting for Trump even one year ago, I would have called you crazy. Well, slap me into a straitjacket because to me, he’s the lesser of the three or four evils. 0bama and the neocons/RINOs have lowered the bar that much.
That still doesn’t make me a fan of Trump’s but we’ve literally reached the point where we’re throwing sh!t against the wall and hoping something sticks.
What a bizarre race this has become. People should realize the protest at Trump’s rally in Chicago were not all of his making. If the cake being served was made by Trump it would also be fair to say it was stirred by anti-Trump forces within and outside the Republican party. Obama even stepped into the fray icing the same cake with several over the top and unnecessary statements during the last several days.
In a country already politically polarized it is not surprising to see strong reactions from those who feel under pressure or assault and it is not unreasonable they react with annoyance or anger. The article below titled, “Presidential Election 2016, The Decent Into Political Hell” explores who is responsible.
http://brucewilds.blogspot.com/2016/03/presidential-election-2016-decent-into.html
Another question comes to mind. How many republicans would vote for the Democrat ticket if Trump wins. I think Trump could beat Hillary because people are tired of her just like Bush. The anointed one may still be indicted.
Ronald Reagan comes to mind when he ran for president and the repubs hated him and his wife. Showing my age here but if you can remember the outrage when M.s Reagan showed up in a fur coat!! Too funny listening to the animal rights groups and the Dems at the time.
Honestly we can all predict what Trump may or may not do, but none of us really know. If Trump did win and had a super majority the repubs may well get behind him. After all they hate the Reagans and he did a lot of things when in office. So we will never know.
Hillary I know what she is going to do.
“The *establishment* composed of journos, BS-Vending talking heads with well-formulated verbs, bureaucrato-cronies, lobbyists-in training, New Yorker-reading semi-intellectuals, image-conscious empty suits, Washington rent-seekers and other “well thinking” members of the vocal elites are not getting the point about what is happening and the sterility of their arguments. People are not voting for Trump (or Sanders). People are just voting, finally, to destroy the establishment.” – Facebook comment made on 7 Mar 2016 by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, scholar, statistician, risk analyst, and author of the 36 week NYT Best Seller “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable”
The foreign policy of Trump and Sanders are very mild compared to Cruz and Hillary. I would dare to say that Trump and Sanders have killed No One in their lifetimes and Hillary has 10s of thousands of deaths and millions of displaced and ruined lives(With Obama and Kerry.) So when people freak out about Trump with the suitcase, I say he doesn’t have any blood on his hands like Hillary
Nice summation
Let’s put it into a campaign slogan
“Unlike Hillary I don’t have the blood of 10s of thousands on my hands”
“Barack Obama talked about hope and change, but I believe he failed to deliver on his promises.”
Obama is fundamentally changing America, just as he said.
“Both Trump and Sanders are non-establishment candidates who are not bought by the special interests that have control over policy and legislation because of their ‘bribes’.”
I am amused by the people who think that Trump is not bought by the special interests. He is one of the special interests. There was no buying of him to do.