Skip to content

“Repudiate”? R U Kidding Me?

August 3, 2016

Republicans know very well that elections are not about morality. Elections are not about morality. Morality is nice for people like the Khans, because that’s what they’ve got. Republicans have wealth (personal and corporate) and power, and that’s what elections are about.

(Let’s be morally clear about that.)

Anything else is relevant only as a means, including morality and voters.

“Welcome to today’s Republican Party. No (sic) your place.”

I’m still thinking that the Big Game is about who will own the Party after its presidential candidate loses. As usual, the Big Game is being played in the back room.

The Party, as a tool for winning elections, will repudiate its presidential candidate if/when the most powerful of its owners decide (1) that they will be better positioned within the Party ownership, and (2) that they will win more of the elections that they most want to win, as a means to wealth and power, if they dump Trump.

Nothing else matters. Nothing.

But they don’t necessarily need to repudiate or replace.

Some important owners have already separated themselves from Trump, within the Party. The Koch Bros (NLC) have turned their attention, i.e. their money, to maintaining their hold on state and local governments—which is also a means to ownership. Will their money be more effectively spent if “Trump” is not at the top of the ballot? Do they want to carry his brand?

The House of Bush (and likely the House of Saud), who play mainly at the national and international tables, have separated themselves from their Party’s candidate by not attending the nominating convention. Will they be better positioned within the Party ownership, with a Trump loss that opens space that they can fill, or with a loss by, for instance, Pence?

At this table today, the joker’s wild. Although the power of the House of Trump, the torrefazione (tower party, or roasted voters), resides not in its current wealth but in its monopoly on the most irrational fraction of American voters (a disproportionately large fraction within a shrinking, dependably Republican pool of voters), its end is the same and the Party is a tool. Trump does not need the current managerial personnel. He just needs the voters.

Trump voters understand power and wealth: they’ll never have wealth, but they want financial security and fairness; and they want the superior social power that they so righteously deserve. “Trump” represents their desires, within the nation and within the Party. Nothing else matters. Nothing.

The hired managers of the Party, such as Priebus, will do what their most powerful owners tell them to do. When that becomes clear.

Elected managers such as McConnell and Ryan will do the same, with the additional considerations that in order to remain in managerial positions they must win local elections (M is safe this year, R is not), and they must determine, to some extent, which of the competing owners of the Party they must ally themselves with, in order to win re-election and remain managers after the election. How important, therefore, are Trump’s voters? How much power does he actually have?

We’ll see how this hand is played. At any rate, ownership is my story, and at this point I see no reason not to stick with it.

It’s time to attend to chaos and evil.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: