Republican Civil War Part 2

In Part 1, I summarized Republican’s Leadership and Establishment’s position as well as showed the mechanism of guilty until proven innocent-guilty by association was utilized in the same manner Baltimore PD used to shutdown the neighborhood an officer was shot utilizing accusation-association to sway public opinion, and I even showed how some alleged “Limited Government” advocates narrowed due process to the point due process has been limited to sentencing not by treating the accused innocent until proven guilty.

In this part, I’ll attempt to inform the reader of the political maneuvering that largely began right after Moore’s defeat to Jones gearing towards 2018 and subsequently 2020.

Here’s an summary of an article that assesses Trump’s first year of what could have happened and didn’t. Bare in mind, Political Ideology makes up domestic balance of power politics.

In a meeting at Trump Tower, just the two of them, Chris Christie went over the transition blueprint he’d been preparing for months. He told Trump that his most important decision would be to name a chief of staff who knew how to build political coalitions and who also had the boss’s respect.

Christie, the party’s best communicator and the first of its major figures to swing behind Trump during the primaries, was himself the best fit…

First, he needed control of the whole operation, especially the hiring. He wasn’t going to have Steve Bannon hatching conspiracies down the hall and young Jared Kushner looking over his shoulder…

… Trump listened. He shocked the cynics by naming Mitt Romney his secretary of state and Lindsey Graham his attorney general. He persuaded a Democrat, Mark Warner, to come on as secretary of the treasury, which deflated both the Trumpians at Breitbart and his harshest critics on the left.

The political maneuver is for the expediency of simultaneously promoting keeping the anti-globalization, post 9/11 measures to maintain open border policies, and expansionist foreign policy from influencing policy while largely attempting lump the various anti-globalization, post 9/11 measures to maintain open border policies, and expansionist foreign policy supporters under Bannon, Breitbart, and might as well add Spencer to that.

Matt Bei’s assessment omits or ignores that Trump nominated more than a few pro-globalization, 9/11 measures to maintain open borders, and expansionist foreign policy advocates and created a symbolic position for Bannon-Brietbart failed to even through word of mouth and forum approval. The assessment is dependent on Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats to ignore or otherwise omit Trump’s voters aren’t all Republicans. Pardon the expression but it is ironic, Trump’s already pushed the envelope cratering any chance of a honeymoon he could have had while nominating Christie to Chief of Staff, Romney Secretary of State, and Graham Attorney General would have been a bridge too far pardon the expression adage.

In his moving inaugural address, written with the help of another erstwhile critic, Peggy Noonan, Trump sounded his familiar themes of national greatness and economic retrenchment, but he also spoke with humility about his own strange journey and the uncertainties that lay ahead.

But I think it’s because you’re exhausted by the state of our politics, by the hatred and pettiness, by selfishness and deflection.

And I promise that what I lack in experience I will make up for in my determination to rebuild and restore the things we’ve neglected.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

Yeah, Breitbart has tried to butter up the Inauguration speech Trump did make that on forums were less than enthused with, and this kind of inauguration speech doesn’t help matters either. This is largely the “majesty of the Presidency” both Parties complain Trump is ruining and frankly deserves to be ruined.

a. Sovereign power, dignity, or grandeur: the majesty of the royal couple.
b. Supreme authority or power: the majesty of the law.

2.a. A royal personage.

b. Majesty Used with His, Her, or Your as a title and form of address for a sovereign.
3. Magnificence or splendor: the majesty of the Rockies.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

Back to the hypothetical piece

He would go out and campaign for $1 trillion in new infrastructure spending, as long as the bill contained money for a high-tech wall along the border. Neither side could say no.

1). The high tech wall is simply additional 9/11 measures placed to track movements of people crossing an international border that is centrally about tracking and monitoring people crossing the border and across the 50 Nation-States of the United States. It’s also a component of NAFTA that is NOT under re-negotiation.

2). Infrastructure as referenced elsewhere more recently are bridges, roads, and etc not capital structure. These are considered “public works” as they are centered on “services”. Public works, digging trenches, and War according to Rand Corp and other think-tanks promoting Keynesian economics and expansionist foreign policy assess that “brush-fire” wars as Afghanistan, Iraq, and etc are too limited in scope to spur the deficit to debt spending World War II incurred advocating picking a fight with Russia and/or China who presently possess a Russo-Sino military pact.

Trump announced he had decided to renegotiate provisions of the massive Asian trade pact, rather than withdraw immediately. He remained in the Paris climate accord but delivered a stern lecture to the other industrial powers, laying down what would become known as the Trump Doctrine: America would do its part for the planet, but it would not shoulder the economic burden alone.

The ideals of TPP and Paris Accord are in NAFTA re-negotiations. Some don’t understand in treaty negotiations your position of strength is not negotiation an re-negotiation within the Treaty including Non-Binding Treaties for re-negotiation. This is how TPP being advocated as a NAFTA upgrade and Paris Accord have been brought into NAFTA re-negotiations. By negotiating from such a position of weakness, the United State’s already dependent on adjusted methodology to reduce over 93% of GDP is deficit to debt spending and credit beyond the historical point of no return mandates eliminating exits such as eliminating competition through consolidating markets.

Other foreign powers took note. Fearful that a popular and unpredictable new president might have enough capital to go to war, the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong Un, agreed to cease further missile tests in exchange for multilateral talks.

1). Trump going mainstream makes him predictable.

2). Trump going mainstream while also doubling down on an act of war requires the follow through of an declaration of war.

The issue of Russian meddling in the campaign proved more problematic and threatened to dominate Trump’s opening months. But Trump deferred to his vice president, Mike Pence, and made peace with the intelligence agencies, acknowledging publicly that their findings on Russia had to be accepted.

Trump-Russia collusion now conspiracy is an act of war, and acts of war not followed through emboldens rivals. This is a surefire way of rendering diplomatic options useless and military options inevitable.

3). Trump campaigned closer to the Monroe Doctrine not “American Indispensable” or “American Exceptional” Doctrines central to “world’s policeman” or otherwise treating nations as puppets.

Unfortunately it fails to take global shift of balance of power into account.

Trump’s final break with the reactionary forces on the right came in August, after white nationalists rallied in Charlottesville and a woman was killed. Trump and Attorney General Graham took Marine One to the scene, where Trump condemned all forms of bigotry and violent nationalism.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

In other words, the author wanted Trump to condemn both sides without specifically naming both sides, which also means that entire affair wouldn’t have changed much if at all.

The first year of the Trump presidency is generally seen now as having marked a new chapter in American politics, dividing a long era of entrenched partisan stalemate from the more dynamic, post-party moment that followed. It also gave us the term “Trump bump,” which is now synonymous with winning approval by defying convention.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

How exactly is continuing the status quo including seeking approval conducting one’s self “conventionally” gaining approval by defying convention? It’s not.

Here are some of the races coming in 2018

Republicans hold 33 governorships, to just 16 for Democrats, heading into 2018 — but that could change rapidly next November. The political environment looks bad for the GOP, and the current governors are term-limited in a number of key states, giving Democratic candidates an opportunity to run for open seats in blue states like New Mexico and Maine. The party has also been energized by the opportunity to win seats at the table in the next round of redistricting, which was controlled by Republicans in most states the last time congressional and state legislative district lines were drawn, in 2011 and 2012.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

The redistricting is the main aim as it is the main determination of how vote results are calculated due to Wards-Districts for State elected offices mainly. It gets more complex depending on the State in relation to how that State’s popular vote determines their Electoral College votes that 21 allow to vote against them.

1. Illinois — Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner is running for reelection.

2. New Mexico — Republican Gov. Susana Martinez is term-limited.

3. Maine — Republican Gov. Paul LePage is term-limited.

4. Connecticut — Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy is retiring.

5. Nevada — Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval is term-limited.

6. Florida — Republican Gov. Rick Scott is term-limited.

7. Alaska — Independent Gov. Bill Walker is running for reelection.

8. Michigan — Republican Gov. Rick Snyder is term-limited.

9. Ohio — Republican Gov. John Kasich is term-limited.

10. Maryland — Republican Gov. Larry Hogan is running for reelection.

Republicans are beginning to confront an atypical scenario in which they could hold on to what’s now a razor-thin advantage in the Senate even as they lose their more comfortable House majority in the 2018 midterm elections.

Such an outcome would be highly unusual and shatter historic precedent but nonetheless is a result gaining feasibility based on the current political headwinds and next year’s red-hued Senate map.

This the hyperlink in the article

“We could end up with very different pressures in these races,” says GOP consultant Brad Todd, who is advising Josh Hawley’s challenge to Sen. Claire McCaskill in Missouri. “The map is hardening along its November 2016 lines. Places that the president carried in November 2016 are hardening to those holding back the president’s agenda. Those states that were trying to push back the Obama years, they are hardening in their desire to do that. Places where the president underperformed for a Republican, those places are going to be tougher for us than they should be.”

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

Trump’s 2016 election:
-Sanders supporters and PACs crossed the aisle after Clinton won the DNC primary

-Trump dropped “Traditional” Republican agenda of “entitlement” reform and “social issues” to appeal to more voters including Sanders’ supporters.

-Trump garnered support from anti-globalization, anti-guilty until proven innocent measures, and expansionist foreign policies voters in various support factions as Republican rank and file asserts “silent majority of the Party”.

-Clinton was a horrid candidate who effectively took States voting Democrat no matter what as Michigan for granted, and the Rust Belt voted overwhelmingly against globalization.

his betrayal of his own populist campaign themes (with tax cuts for the rich and Medicaid spending cuts, for example)

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

That would be withdrawing the US from TPP and NAFTA and keeping his distance from both “entitlement reform” and social issues.

The backstage talks provide a window into how those closest to Trump are bracing for a possible bloodbath in the 2018 midterms, which could obliterate the Republican congressional majorities and paralyze the president’s legislative agenda.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

Ryan and McConnell are putting forth “Traditional Republican agenda” legislation. Given Trump’s actions so far in office, it’s more Trump keeps influencing legislation at a distance providing no better than a guide if that leaving Congressional Leaders as Ryan, McConnell, Pelosi, and Schumer to slug it out in the House and Senate for Trump’s signature.

Stepien pointed to positive economic numbers that could buoy the party, along with a favorable Senate map and an RNC field deployment program that has been ramping up for months. Trump is also set to sign major tax cut legislation that Republicans are betting voters will reward them for

At this rate, the Republican Party will hold their House majority and lose the Senate.

As I mentioned previously, the dynamics between Political Ideologies point towards a 2020 Republican sweep in the Presidential election cycle.

While the president’s numbers are cratering in some swing states, he’s expected to take on an expanded role on the fundraising circuit in 2018, which Republicans hope will allow them to swamp Democrats in campaign spending.

In simple terms, Trump has lost Michigan, and he’s losing Ohio and Pennsylvania. 16, 18, and 20 Electoral College votes. This means Trump would lose up to 54 Electoral Votes by losing Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania leaving 250 EC votes and would have increased Clinton’s Electoral College votes to 281, which would have made Hillary Clinton President.

On the House side, Democrats appear to be expanding their list of targets every couple of weeks. To start, they’ll need to flip a majority of the GOP-held districts carried by Clinton in the last presidential election. Seven are in California and four are clustered in the northeast corridor of Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

The Times, citing Federal Election Commission filings, reports that nearly one year out from the election, Democratic candidates have filed in all but 20 House districts currently held by Republicans. In contrast, Democrats in at least 80 districts have no Republican challenger for their seat.

(Bold Emphasis Mine)

The Democrats have an easier time taking the Senate than House, so Republicans are looking likely to have a narrow majority in the House and lose the Majority in the Senate in 2018 mid-term election.


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