How can Trump hurt the GOP establishment?

[Bryan]

.



One of the talking points being repeated in pro-Trump circles is that Trump is going to harm, hurt or otherwise destroy the GOP establishment. For those that subscribe to this viewpoint, I ask the following.



Part 1: How will harm be done?
How can Trump harm the GOP establishment? What specifically can be done?

It may help to better define the composition of the GOP establishment, which could be argued to include people from the following groups:

• GOP party leadership – including the Republican National Committee whose power is derived from the party system, party voting and the delegate process.

• GOP elected officials – This can include almost any Republican Congressman and certainly the leadership near the top, such as Paul Ryan. Their power is derived from the voting public.

• GOP money men – Some of the big financial backers. Their power is derived from their wealth and their ability to leverage that with GOP party leaders and elected officials. This group would include people who get big government contracts, are big GOP donors and the like.

• GOP bureaucrats - Non-elected, high level government workers often in appointed positions, such as the President’s Cabinet. Power is derived from being appointed or getting hired to a job.

• GOP political consultants / intellectuals – Behind the scenes political operatives who work to advance the GOP establishment agenda, often being paid by the GOP money men and political campaigns. Their power is derived by being politically savvy. This group would include people like Karl Rove.

• ???

Obviously some of these can be easily explained, but an analysis of how harm could be done to each of these groups is worthy of consideration and discussion.



Part 2: Value of the fight?
While there is certainly some friction between Trump and the GOP establishment, why would this feud be elevated to a level that could seriously damage the GOP establishment?

Consider…

• What level of resources will it take to harm the GOP establishment?

• Trump has talked about past cases where he has had business conflicts with others, battled against them, got the issued resolved and then moved on. Why would Trump not do that in his conflict with the GOP establishment?

• Based on the principles that powerful people know how to choose their battles and that a long-term Trump vs. GOP establishment fight isn't a winning move for either of them due to the required resources, why would a truce be less likely than a more complete battle?

• Consider that Trump and the GOP establishment are vying for power right now, once this battle is resolved after the election, what would be the value for Trump to put resources into this fight? Why not just negotiate a win-win deal with the GOP establishment?

• At what point does the GOP establishment seek a deal because they have lost the fight?



Part 3: Platform considerations
To what degree does Trumps platform require harming the GOP establishment? What will he have power to do?

• Trump wants to shut down a few federal departments (Education, EPA) – great.

• Trump will put in his own Cabinet – great.

• Trumps wants to allow health insurance companies to compete across state lines – a definite free-market plus; as a result some GOP big money men will see lower profits, but how would this do major damage?

• Trump wants to build a wall – some of the GOP big money men will want some of those construction contracts.

• Trump doesn’t like the deal we got with NAFTA – great; but will Trump be able to do anything about this without Congressional approval? While this again will affect some financial elements, how would it harm the GOP establishment?

• ???

What level of political capital will Trump need to do anything that will harm the GOP establishment? Why would Trump focus his energy on changes that will have a lot of political opposition?



Part 4: Long term effect
For arguments sake, consider Trump gets elected and does some major damage to the GOP establishment. In what way would the country be changed such that new forms of the GOP establishment couldn’t quickly work its way back into power?

I understand that anyone would have this issue, even Ron Paul, but consider differences in their platforms and campaigns. Dr. Paul’s campaigns were based on education and deep rooted changes, they presented a foundation for long-term change.

Trumps platform could be argued to be based more on attacking issues from a practical viewpoint vs. driving a philosophical change which requires educating people on fundamental issues. What is Trump doing that would give any indication of a lasting change without his influence?



Part 5: Convictions
Is Trump fighting the GOP establishment because of deeply held convictions based on principles or is it more because it’s needed for practical reasons to achieve his objectives?

If these are strongly held convictions then why hasn’t Trump fought these battles in the past?

Consider, Trump is now calling on the GOP to fix its nomination system, fair enough, but the process hasn’t really changed in a long time, why the concern now? In 2008 and 2012 there were many cases of Ron Paul supporters being marginalized with rules and procedural manipulations, if Trump had strong convictions on these issues, what did he do to stand up and fight then?

Certainly Trump had to know about these issues in the past, considering he had been musing about a presidential run for a very long time.

While Trump certainly has no obligation to fight on others behalf, does this not provide an indicator of the level of fight he will maintain vs. working out a deal with the GOP establishment?

What indication is there that Trump would stand up for others in the future against the GOP establishment when it doesn’t directly benefit him? Wouldn’t this correlate with his desire to make a long term impact against the GOP establishment?



Notes
The goal of this discussion is to education those who don’t see the “Trump will take down the GOP establishment” line as valid and/or to have some Trump supporters reconsider this issue.


Important: This discussion isn’t about promoting or attacking Trump. Keep posts on-topic, anything off-topic will be flagged to be deleted. Thanks.

 

[euphemia]

In one of the very early debates, Trump mentioned that he has lines of politicians waiting for him to write a check. I don't know how many people heard that, but I think Trump understands very well how this thing works, and if he decides to funnel his money somewhere else, the RNC and the DNC will definitely know it.

Here's another thought: Trump seems to have dialed down the outrageousness in the last couple of weeks, and it is not unnoticed by the press. What this tells me is that Trump is willing to listen to sense and make a smart decision based on his market. I don't see people as set in stone. I know I have changed my thinking on a number of issues over the years. A good, intelligent person will listen and be open to change. If Trump is sending a modified message, it may be that he is convinced that he needs to change his opinion. He's new at politics. He has expanded his circle beyond his family, and I think that might be good. I can see some growth. He didn't get where he is by not finding a place among monied, polite people.

I guess we will see what happens between now and November.

 

[CPUd]

In one of the very early debates, Trump mentioned that he has lines of politicians waiting for him to write a check. I don't know how many people heard that, but I think Trump understands very well how this thing works, and if he decides to funnel his money somewhere else, the RNC and the DNC will definitely know it.

So does this belong in Part 2?

 

[euphemia]

So does this belong in Part 2?

Not necessarily. Some of it belongs in Part 1.

 

[CaptUSA]

Ok, I'll take a stab. Understanding that we are only talking about the GOP establishment and not the establishment as a whole. (Trump is just as much a part of that establishment as Hillary Clinton.)

Part 1:

There is a good possibility that Trump will severely damage down-ballot candidates with his epic defeat. In this, it is possible that some of the party loyals will get pissed at the leadership for allowing this reality TV show to play out so long.

There is also a possibility that the donors, seeing little chance of victory, start hedging their bets more and placing more on the other side of the aisle. It will be quite an uphill battle for the GOP to lure these people back. *Remember, they pay our money to get a return on their investment. If the GOP has little power, then it doesn't do them any good to waste their cash there.

Part 2:

This is interesting on how this might play out. Like watching a slow moving train wreck. What is clear to me is that it will never result in more liberty candidates gaining power. In fact, there could be a populist strain taking over which doesn't care about an issues at all much less issues concerning the liberty of individuals. Luckily, I expect this segment to fade quickly and never materialize into a real movement - they need a leader to follow and when Trump is gone, they'll go back to watching their TV's like good little subjects. In all, the value of this fight is nil. The danger, of course, is that a true "outsider anti-establishment" candidate will likely be tarred with the stench of the Donald for a decade or two.

Part 3:

Trump has no platform but what sounds good for Trump. Anything else is just wishful thinking. Moving on.

Part 4:

I expect the long-term effect to be a very progressive Supreme Court for a long time and our rights will erode at an ever quickening pace. If you want to bring about the destruction faster, I think you have your candidate. For the parties, I expect them to bounce back to even since it benefits both sides to stay about equally split. Fundraising relies on having one party with power and an opposition party within striking distance.

Part 5:

Trump is about Trump. That's his conviction. Rules don't matter. Laws don't matter. And the Constitution certainly doesn't matter. Trump wants what Trump wants and he will use the power of government to get it for him.


In summation, though, you will see nowhere in this response any sense of a possibility that Trump could actually help the liberty movement. That is just pure fantasy, but people like to believe it. You can really convince yourself of anything if you want to believe it bad enough.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

How Can Trump Hurt The GOP Establishment?

...by losing in November, as he will surely do.

This will mean the Dem establishment profiting at the expense of the GOP establishment.

Naturally, we libertarians won't benefit in any way from this.

So...act accordingly.

 

[Petar]

It's very simple.

They would not be fighting tooth and nail to sink him, if they felt that he was contributing to their end-goal...

 

[RandallFan]

What about Cruz and others being forced to take over state parties to beat Trump? What sort of things can these people do assuming Trump wins anyway (on the first ballot) but these Cruz & Rubio people are in charge of state parties?

Will these Cruzers stay there or will they be removed like the Ron Paul people in Iowa?


What about the fact that the people in charge of China and other countries seem only scared of Trump (maybe creating restless natives in their countries); not fearful of Cruz taking over country clubs in the backwaters. Is that worth anything that globalist leaders seem to fear the "trump effect"?

 

[spudea]

You've asked for a research paper I don't write those anymore. All I can offer are my thoughts.

Part 1: How will harm be done?
We've seen many establishment figures declare that if trump is the nominee, they will leave the party and maybe even vote hillary clinton. This exposes and weakens the neo-conservatives that have done unquantifiable damage to this country.

Many establishment figures use their fundraising ability to influence the candidate, as well as legislation priorities for the new administration. I don't view Trump as beholden to these figures, this weakens their overall influence.

Part 2: Value of the fight?
The scorched earth tactics of the NeverTrump movement is burning bridges. Even after Trump is the nominee, there's no way for many of these figures to save face and do a 180 turn to support Trump. They will go even further off the deep end, supporting democrats if they think it will benefit them and their influence. Many are offended that their donations won't buy them influence with Trump.

Is a truce / reconciliation possible? Sure, but once Trump has the upper hand, he will certainly use it to his advantage for his benefit, not theirs.

Part 3: Platform considerations
From a platform perspective I see three key issues: Tax reform, trade reform, immigration reform. I'm not exactly sure how progress on these issues hurt the establishment. But one thing is for sure, the status quo benefits the establishment. They don't want significant tax reform, trade reform, or immigration reform. They are happy the way things are.

Part 4: Long term effect
Neo-conservatives leaving the party is a good start. Trump's recent comments on a rigged election system is encouraging. Voter disenfranchisement is a thing. Many of us were apathetic about the system before learning about Ron Paul, and we got our hopes and dreams absolutely crushed. Educating more people about the rigged system could lead to some changes. We need a lot more participation in elections, I truly believe there are enough people to get Ron Paul elected, just apathy is too perverse because the system is viewed as too corrupt and rigged.

Part 5: Convictions
Trump has a deep conviction for RATINGS! He wants to do what is popular. Fighting the establishment is popular because it gets him a lot of voters, new voters coming in to support him. Other than that he does communicate a deep love and appreciation for this country. And he has watched as decades of bad policy has squandered the wealth and diminished the standing of the country. He lays the blame on democrats and republicans.

I don't believe he has strong convictions for fighting the establishment or helping others fight the establishment. But you got to get your punches in when you can. Who else this election has any chance of disrupting the status quo??

I'm not here to be pro-Trump, I'm not voting for trump. I offer these thoughts as an objective contribution to the discussion to help understand where the country is in this election.

 

[CPUd]

It's very simple.

They would not be fighting tooth and nail to sink him, if they felt that he was contributing to their end-goal...

This in no way addresses the OP or contributes to the thread. It is merely a repetition of the type of statement that led to the thread being created. Please expand on "they", and what groups "they" may fall in:

Part 1: How will harm be done?
How can Trump harm the GOP establishment? What specifically can be done?

It may help to better define the composition of the GOP establishment, which could be argued to include people from the following groups:

• GOP party leadership – including the Republican National Committee whose power is derived from the party system, party voting and the delegate process.

• GOP elected officials – This can include almost any Republican Congressman and certainly the leadership near the top, such as Paul Ryan. Their power is derived from the voting public.

• GOP money men – Some of the big financial backers. Their power is derived from their wealth and their ability to leverage that with GOP party leaders and elected officials. This group would include people who get big government contracts, are big GOP donors and the like.

• GOP bureaucrats - Non-elected, high level government workers often in appointed positions, such as the President’s Cabinet. Power is derived from being appointed or getting hired to a job.

• GOP political consultants / intellectuals – Behind the scenes political operatives who work to advance the GOP establishment agenda, often being paid by the GOP money men and political campaigns. Their power is derived by being politically savvy. This group would include people like Karl Rove.

• ???

Obviously some of these can be easily explained, but an analysis of how harm could be done to each of these groups is worthy of consideration and discussion.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

It's very simple.

They would not be fighting tooth and nail to sink him, if they felt that he was contributing to their end-goal...

The same could be said about Hillary Clinton.

Does that mean she's a libertarian?

 

[RonPaulMall]

Trump doesn’t like the deal we got with NAFTA – great; but will Trump be able to do anything about this without Congressional approval? While this again will affect some financial elements, how would it harm the GOP establishment?

TPP is far bigger than NAFTA. If Trump puts the kibosh on TPP it would be a devastating defeat for the Establishment. Détente with Russia and securing the border would be two more devastating blows to the aims of the powers that be.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

TPP is far bigger than NAFTA. If Trump puts the kibosh on TPP it would be a devastating defeat for the Establishment. Détente with Russia and securing the border would be two more devastating blows to the aims of the powers that be.

Are you aware of the irony in advocating higher tariffs while sporting an avatar of John Wilkes Booth?

 

[familydog]

All of these questions could apply to Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012. Just replace the word Trump with the word Paul.

Didn't Rand supporters argue that his message was more practical than Ron's? It wasn't so much about education as it was about politics.

These questions/issues don't really resonate with me considering I've seen them asked about Ron Paul.

 

[otherone]

Are you aware of the irony in advocating higher tariffs while sporting an avatar of John Wilkes Booth?

RPF is ironic these days. There are many here who advocate building a wall around the Liberty Forest.

 

[CaptUSA]

Just replace the word Trump with the word Paul.

Don't ever do that. Ever. There is no comparison. Only contrast.

Ron Paul is anti-establishment - Trump is establishment.
Ron Paul has principles - Trump does not.
Ron Paul led a principled grassroots campaign to become the GOP base - Trump has been using a corporate-media sponsored, populist air campaign to fracture the GOP base. (Hmmm, I wonder how that could benefit the establishment...)
Ron Paul meant a change in political direction - Trump means an increase in speed in the same direction.
Ron Paul meant less power for government and more for you - Trump means more power for government and less for you.

If you want to believe this fantasy, I can't stop you, but don't expect it to go unchallenged.

 

[Bryan]

Ok, I'll take a stab. Understanding that we are only talking about the GOP establishment and not the establishment as a whole. (Trump is just as much a part of that establishment as Hillary Clinton.)

Part 1:

There is a good possibility that Trump will severely damage down-ballot candidates with his epic defeat. In this, it is possible that some of the party loyals will get pissed at the leadership for allowing this reality TV show to play out so long.

There is also a possibility that the donors, seeing little chance of victory, start hedging their bets more and placing more on the other side of the aisle. It will be quite an uphill battle for the GOP to lure these people back. *Remember, they pay our money to get a return on their investment. If the GOP has little power, then it doesn't do them any good to waste their cash there.

These are excellent points; but I would counter point that in the absence of a strong third party they would be short term effects as the money would soon be back. So I disagree with it being an uphill battle to lure them back. They will be back in 4 years since there is no place else to go. One thing that would not have changed is the GOP brand equity, all the perks they get from the government, media, debate commission and more.

Thanks for the solid contribution to the discussion.

 

[Bryan]

...by losing in November, as he will surely do.

This will mean the Dem establishment profiting at the expense of the GOP establishment.

Agreed, but would you argue this is a long-term effect or a short term loss?

 

[Bryan]

It's very simple.

They would not be fighting tooth and nail to sink him, if they felt that he was contributing to their end-goal...

I think CPUd was right, "This in no way addresses the OP or contributes to the thread"

 

[Bryan]

What about Cruz and others being forced to take over state parties to beat Trump? What sort of things can these people do assuming Trump wins anyway (on the first ballot) but these Cruz & Rubio people are in charge of state parties?

Will these Cruzers stay there or will they be removed like the Ron Paul people in Iowa?

Excellent points, basically, without a GOP ground game the "GOP party leadership" group is untouchable; unless Trump takes a federal wrecking ball to the party system. Do we have any indication that will happen? What kind of fight would that be?

Thanks for the post!