I hope I'm better at predicting general election results than primaries.
I find it interesting that people are discussing Paul Ryan's comments on Trump as if there's no question that Ryan really doesn't like him. I think this ignores the very real possibility that he's just another politician, setting up to maximize the chances of a Republican win.
In fact, he is creating a wide-open door for all the people who blasted Trump during the primary contest to get back on board and endorse a Republican win. It goes something like this: Ryan says, "At this point, I'm just not there right now." Trump fires back. They have a publicly announced meeting and issue a boilerplate statement about progress. Later, Trump gives some speeches with words that can be interpreted as contradicting a few of his more egregious early comments. Senior Republicans (the ones who want to, anyway) gravely announce that Trump has shown a more measured side to his candidacy. When enough important people have done that, Ryan praises Trump for helping to unify the party, and calls on everyone to get together and defeat the apocalyptic threat posed by Clinton.
The result is a mess of contradictory statements from Trump; but the Democrats already have that. He'd have to "clarify" some of the things that primary voters found most attractive about him; but they've already ignored things they didn't want him to have said, and what's a few more? They've got six months to get over any cognitive dissonance.
The overall effect is a classic advertising trick - "I was skeptical of this product, but I tried it and I couldn't be happier!". Ryan can't just stand up and say everything is fine (well, not without blowing his credibility), but if there's a pretend slugging match first everyone can say it was all on the level.
This doesn't make Ryan a bad person, even if it's what he's consciously doing. He might well think that Trump can work sensibly once in power; that he can be kept in check by a responsible Congress; and most importantly that he would not be as bad as a Clinton presidency. I don't agree, but then there is no way I would ever join the Republican party. There's a little bit of smoke and mirrors required from even the most straightforward politician.
The real problem is that the US political system can't find better candidates than Clinton and Trump; but I'd much rather have the Democrat problems than the Republican ones. You can say all you like that they're both liars, but I'd rather vote for someone who's lying like Clinton than someone who's lying like Trump. Trump could do just about anything in office and say it's what he promised.
And now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go turn my TV off. The attack ads are about to get ugly.
I find it interesting that people are discussing Paul Ryan's comments on Trump as if there's no question that Ryan really doesn't like him. I think this ignores the very real possibility that he's just another politician, setting up to maximize the chances of a Republican win.
In fact, he is creating a wide-open door for all the people who blasted Trump during the primary contest to get back on board and endorse a Republican win. It goes something like this: Ryan says, "At this point, I'm just not there right now." Trump fires back. They have a publicly announced meeting and issue a boilerplate statement about progress. Later, Trump gives some speeches with words that can be interpreted as contradicting a few of his more egregious early comments. Senior Republicans (the ones who want to, anyway) gravely announce that Trump has shown a more measured side to his candidacy. When enough important people have done that, Ryan praises Trump for helping to unify the party, and calls on everyone to get together and defeat the apocalyptic threat posed by Clinton.
The result is a mess of contradictory statements from Trump; but the Democrats already have that. He'd have to "clarify" some of the things that primary voters found most attractive about him; but they've already ignored things they didn't want him to have said, and what's a few more? They've got six months to get over any cognitive dissonance.
The overall effect is a classic advertising trick - "I was skeptical of this product, but I tried it and I couldn't be happier!". Ryan can't just stand up and say everything is fine (well, not without blowing his credibility), but if there's a pretend slugging match first everyone can say it was all on the level.
This doesn't make Ryan a bad person, even if it's what he's consciously doing. He might well think that Trump can work sensibly once in power; that he can be kept in check by a responsible Congress; and most importantly that he would not be as bad as a Clinton presidency. I don't agree, but then there is no way I would ever join the Republican party. There's a little bit of smoke and mirrors required from even the most straightforward politician.
The real problem is that the US political system can't find better candidates than Clinton and Trump; but I'd much rather have the Democrat problems than the Republican ones. You can say all you like that they're both liars, but I'd rather vote for someone who's lying like Clinton than someone who's lying like Trump. Trump could do just about anything in office and say it's what he promised.
And now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go turn my TV off. The attack ads are about to get ugly.
No comments:
Post a Comment