ChrisWeigant.com

Rubio Or Cruz Dropping Out Is The Only Way Trump Could Lose

[ Posted Monday, February 22nd, 2016 – 18:07 UTC ]

There are two obvious conclusions to draw from the current state of the Republican presidential race right now -- in fact, they're so incredibly obvious that (of course) they're being almost completely ignored by the punditocracy comfortably ensconced within the Washington Beltway. The first is that the only scheme for successfully derailing Donald Trump's march to the Republican nomination would be for either Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio to almost immediately drop out of the race. The second conclusion is the obvious corollary to the first -- that this is simply not going to happen. Meaning Trump is getting very close to being undeniably the presumptive GOP nominee.

Saturday's primary results in South Carolina killed off most of the nonsensical "magical thinking" about Trump that's been rampant within both conservative media circles and within the establishment of the Republican Party. Up until this weekend, many have convinced themselves (and others) that Trump would inevitably crash and burn at some point, after which we would see the real race for the nomination begin. There was never anything to base this belief upon, of course, since Trump has proved over and over again -- for the past eight months -- that nothing he ever said or did would cause a loss of voter support. Nothing. The list of statements (any one of which would have completely killed any other candidate's chances) Trump has made to prove this point grows longer by the day -- and none of them have mattered one tiny bit. Each time the pundits and party insiders proclaimed "he's simply gone too far this time," Trump actually rose in the polls. He is Reaganesque in one crucial way -- he is the ultimate "Teflon" candidate, because nothing sticks to him, at all.

Throughout this entire period, pundits and establishmentarians alike convinced themselves, over and over again, that since they personally could not conceive of Trump becoming the GOP nominee, such a thing was almost by definition inconceivable. This is a logical fallacy -- "because I believe a thing to be true, it must be true." All along, it wasn't true, and it is still not true now.

There are still some clinging to such magical thinking even now, after they've been proven wrong for eight solid months. The current theme of this magical thinking is that Trump "has a ceiling" of only about a third of the Republican electorate, and thus he remains eminently beatable. This is the nonsense that prompted me to write this article today.

Both Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz have entered into an almost surreal conceptual space, following Trump's big South Carolina win. They've apparently convinced themselves that "it's really a two-man race," consisting of them and Trump. Cruz and Rubio think that by ignoring each other, somehow (magically) this will become true and they will be in a head-to-head contest with Trump. Of course, to be charitable, perhaps it is no more than campaign spin, meant to convince reporters to write stories about this mythical two-man race. In other words, perhaps Cruz and Rubio don't really believe it themselves. One would like to hope this is true, since it in no way reflects reality. Whether the Cruz or Rubio campaigns admit it or not, it is now a three-man race.

But this wishful thinking is precisely why Trump is now positioned to run the tables and wrap up the nomination by the end of March (unless he does so earlier, in mid-March). Because the only possible way for him to lose is if the race did turn into a two-man contest. Which just isn't going to happen, or at least not soon enough to make enough difference.

Both Rubio and Cruz not only have Trump to contend with and each other to beat, they're also being dogged from behind by candidates who are no more than spoilers in the race, at this point. Marco Rubio got pretty excited by the news that Jeb Bush was ending his campaign, for obvious reasons. But the second campaign suspension announcement that Rubio truly needed did not actually materialize Saturday night. John Kasich is staying in, and will likely stay in at least until his home state of Ohio votes. Kasich's continued campaign hurts Rubio because it gives all those Bush voters someplace else to go (that is not extremist or looney). Even if Kasich continues to pull only single digits in primaries, that may be enough to deny Rubio the chance of ever catching up to Trump. Even without Kasich, Rubio would have to struggle mightily to do so, but with Kasich still in, it may be impossible.

Ted Cruz also has a spoiler, one with a very personal vendetta against him. Ben Carson has convinced himself that the reason he lost Iowa was because Cruz campaigners told his voters that he was dropping out of the race. Carson even got Cruz to apologize to him in the middle of a televised debate, which is pretty stunning (apologies of this sort are as rare as hen's teeth). Carson draws from pretty much the same demographic groups as Cruz, meaning that he siphons off a small portion of voters who would otherwise likely back Cruz. Like Kasich, this is a small percentage overall, but it might be enough that Cruz can never again catch Trump in a primary (except perhaps in his home state of Texas).

That's all bad enough news for Cruz and Rubio. But the worst news is that both of these candidates have so far had their own ceilings of support, and excepting the Cruz victory in Iowa, they have been far below the level of support Trump has gotten. Bluntly, the two are running hard against each other for second place -- and that's not the way to win the nomination. They are both currently touting their magical math (in their "two-man race" myth) -- that "70 percent" of Republicans won't vote for Trump, therefore he is still eminently beatable. By them, of course. But in the first place that 70 percent number is a bit high (65 percent would be more accurate), and in the second place it is still being split between four candidates. Cruz and Rubio would sincerely like to just award themselves all of the non-Trump vote, but that's not exactly the way elections work.

The only way to test the theory is exactly what is not going to happen, in fact. Because it would require either Cruz or Rubio to stand up tomorrow -- after they lose Nevada to Trump -- and announce that for the good of the party they were ending their campaign. If you believe this is going to happen, then I have some land in Nevada to sell you with the promise that it'll soon become beachfront property -- right after California slides off into the sea.

Ted Cruz is not going to drop out for the good of the party. Ted Cruz cares not a whit for the good of the Republican Party, in fact. His entire Senate career proves this beyond any shadow of a doubt. He will stay in the race until at least mid-March, and probably far beyond. He is on a personal crusade against what he calls the "Washington Cartel," and crusaders aren't known for loyalty to anything other than their own windmill-tilting.

Marco Rubio is also not going to drop out for the good of the party, because by conventional Washington wisdom "the good of the party" is now defined as Rubio's own candidacy. With Rubio out of the race, it truly would be a Cruz-versus-Trump contest, where the good of the Republican Party loses no matter who emerges on top. So quitting isn't even a conceivable option for Rubio -- because if he quits, it'll harm the party one way or another. John Kasich is just not a viable alternative, it goes without saying.

Let's engage in our own magical thinking, just for fun. Let's say that after coming in third in Nevada, Ted Cruz announces he's ending his run. Would that be enough for Rubio to have a solid chance? Cruz voters might flock to Ben Carson (who has zero chance of winning anything), but a portion of them would indeed back Rubio in their hatred of Trump. Rubio would be the only one left standing with any chance of defeating Trump, and many voters base their decision on who has an real shot at victory. By attrition, Rubio will be the only one left for voters who will never vote for Trump but still want a chance of their candidate winning the nomination. This would have to happen either before Super Tuesday or perhaps immediately afterwards to have any chance of success, though. Rubio will soon have a lot of money (as Bush donors migrate towards his campaign), and in a two-man race perhaps Trump will indeed hit his ceiling. Rubio could start edging Trump out (perhaps by margins of something like 48 percent to 42 percent) and start amassing the delegates he'll need to win the nomination. Stranger things have happened, but for this to work it'd have to take place before Trump piles up such a commanding delegate lead that he'd be uncatchable. In other words, before the end of March (and even that may be too late).

In our second magical-thinking scenario, it is Marco Rubio who announces he's throwing in the towel after placing third in Nevada. This opens up the race for Cruz, who would take on Trump head-to-head. Many of Rubio's voters could migrate to John Kasich, but again some of them care more about winning than voting for a candidate whose views align with theirs perfectly. Some just want to see Trump defeated. These voters would all (reluctantly) decide to back Cruz. Again, if Trump truly does have a ceiling (in a two-man race), then Cruz has the chance of edging him out. Rubio dropping out before Super Tuesday would be the best (and perhaps only) chance of this working, though. Already being called "SEC Tuesday" for the number of Southern states voting, Cruz could win big in the South with the evangelical vote added to the "anybody but Trump" vote. If Cruz won enough states outright, it could put Trump and Cruz roughly even in the delegate race, which would then give Cruz an excellent chance of actually winning the nomination.

You'll notice, however, that those two previous paragraphs are pretty fantastical in their assumptions. Can anyone picture either Rubio or Cruz dropping out any time soon? Even a crushing defeat on Super Tuesday is not going to give either man doubts, because they'll still be trying to convince the media that second place (or third place) is still somehow a "victory." It takes an enormous amount of ego to run for the highest office in the land, and neither Rubio nor Cruz seems to be lacking in the high estimation they hold of themselves. They're not going to quit the race until it becomes painfully obvious that they have zero chance of winning. In fact, the three-man nature of the race gives both Cruz and Rubio a straw to grasp at throughout the entire primary calendar -- because the other bit of magical thinking coming out of Washington these days is that the GOP might have an open convention, where no candidate piles up an outright majority of candidates beforehand. This means anyone could be nominated, even the third-place finisher in the delegate race. It's obvious that this possibility -- far-fetched though it may be -- is likely enough of a reason for both Cruz and Rubio to hang on until the bitter end.

Which brings us back to where we started. The facts are simple, barring Trump crashing and burning on his own (which has yet to happen, of course). Rubio's only chance is Cruz dropping out. Cruz's only chance is Rubio dropping out. Neither man, though, is about to drop out -- and by the time one of them does, it will likely be too late to stop the Trump juggernaut. For those not inclined to believe in magic, this is the hard, cold reality. Donald Trump is within sight of becoming the presumptive Republican nominee, and the window for that to change in any dramatic way is shutting fast.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Cross-posted at The Huffington Post

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

19 Comments on “Rubio Or Cruz Dropping Out Is The Only Way Trump Could Lose”

  1. [1] 
    Speak2 wrote:

    Nice read, CW.

    A quibble with one of the fantasy scenarios. If Cruz does drop out, then based on your argument, Carson has less reason to stay in. Assuming he does worse than Cruz, he could drop out shortly after Cruz, so Cruz voters don't necessarily go to Carson.

    So, when a candidate drops out of the GOP race, what happens to the delegates that were pledged to them? Do they have to follow their candidate's endorsement on the first ballot, are they "free," or must they vote for their pledged candidate on the first ballot even though that person has dropped out? Each party has their own rules, what are the GOP's?

  2. [2] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Speak2 -

    Interesting point, but keep in mind that I don't believe any GOP candidate has "dropped out." Instead they've "suspended their campaign." I always thought they did this so that they could pay off the campaign debts later on, but it also may be to retain their delegates for the first ballot at the convention.

    But that's sheer speculation, I don't really know the answer.

    -CW

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Saturday's primary results in South Carolina killed off most of the nonsensical "magical thinking" about Trump that's been rampant within both conservative media circles and within the establishment of the Republican Party.

    AND the totality of the Left Wingery... Don't forget them... :D

    Admit it.. Ya'all have been wrong about Trump since he started his campaign.. :D

    And, since ya'all have been wrong about Trump from the get-go, isn't it possible that ya'all could be wrong about President Trump??

    Hmmmmmm??? :D

    Michale

  4. [4] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    I really enjoyed yesterday's silly drama regarding the Canadian's latest dirty trick. Does the Big Book of Multiple Choice have all the answers in it or not many? Both, of course. Neither answer will put a dent in Trump's lead. They'd better start hating on muslims and Mexicans a little harder. Weak!

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump just got my vote!! :D

    Trump: As president, I would prosecute Clinton
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-as-president-i-would-prosecute-clinton/article/2583925

    heh :D

    Michale

  6. [6] 
    TheStig wrote:

    "the only scheme for successfully derailing Donald Trump's march to the Republican nomination would be for either Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio to almost immediately drop out of the race."

    A few thoughts of mine on the above.

    Trump has essentially eaten Cruz's lunch, lunch being in this instance the Tea Party wing of the Republican base. Cruz is Blue Light Covenant Tea Party and Trump is not, but the TP base just likes Trump better, and this includes the evangelicals. Cruz doesn't have to drop out, the base can just drop him - and there are signs this is happening. It may not matter much if Cruz chooses to throw his support to Rubio or Trump, or just sulk and spoil a bit.

    The interesting question (to me at least) is whether Trump can capture enough of the Republican Primary electorate to get 50% of the vote and win enough delegates to take the nomination on the first round. This depends in some part on whether Trump or Rubio is the more attractive second choice among the Republican primary voters (many of these will be first time primary voters). There is some pollster evidence to suggest that Rubio is the stronger second choice, but this sort of polling is expensive and rare. The Prediction Markets seem to "think" that Rubio is the stronger second choice, which is probably one factor in why Rubio is almost tied with Trump in the Republican Nomination category and actually somewhat ahead of Trump in the next President market.

    Now, the pollsters may be using old data or flawed data, and the Markets may be simply Cuckoo-Bananas. The markets have done pretty well so far, but that's no guarantee they are right now. Primary prognostication is a lot harder than presidential progging (new word), due to both the larger number of candidates involved and the need to understand the arcane rules of both the National Republican Party and the 60 or so local GOP chapters in States and Territories.

    If the Trump doesn't get a clean win on the first ballot, The Republican Establishment may have a lot more muscle than it seems to have now. I can't bring myself to entirely discount Trump losing a first round opportunity in a three candidate field, if the 2nd and 3rd place candidates can each win enough all/or nothing races to deny Trump a first ballot win. Trump has done well in the opening races, but of these are small and quirky. A lot of mid and large quirky races remain.

    I tend to weigh market logic heavilly, and right now the market is saying Trump is a coin toss to win the nomination, and a dice roll of "one" to win the Presidency. Granted, that's better than I expected him to do, but he hasn't closed this deal yet.

  7. [7] 
    TheStig wrote:

    What is TheStig reading right now? The Wars of the Roses: the Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise the of the Tudors.

    An agreeably concise and engaging account of what can happen when government becomes dysfunctional and fails to meet expectations of the governed, both mighty and ordinary. Sound familiar?

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    An agreeably concise and engaging account of what can happen when government becomes dysfunctional and fails to meet expectations of the governed, both mighty and ordinary. Sound familiar?

    Yep...

    It's why Donald Trump is doing so well..

    The Democrats have frak'ed up the country... :D

    YMMV :D

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Bleyd wrote:

    The premise of this entire article seems flawed to me in the first place. Even if Rubio or Cruz did drop out, it seems unlikely that all (or even a large majority) of their support would flow to the other.

    Trump has already shown that he's eating into the evangelical part of Cruz's base, and has long since been a competitor for the angry TP portion of Cruz's base. Rather than Cruz's supporters flocking to Rubio, it seems more likely that they'd flock to Trump, as he more closely embodies the anti-establishment sentiment that Cruz is trying to promote. Sure, there are bound to be anti-trump voters, but Rubio's establishment credentials would seem to be a liability for many of Cruz's voters.

    There have already been articles here pointing out that the establishment republicans detest Cruz, and that should Rubio drop out of the race, Trump might actually be the preferable alternative to Cruz for the establishment. Rather than all of Rubio's support going to Cruz, it seems more likely that it would at worst split between him and Trump, and possibly just depress the number of voters who show up, as they wouldn't want to vote for either, which would still benefit Trump. After all, Trump may be winning around 40 out of 100 voters now, but if 20 of those who don't vote for trump simply don't vote at all, Trump would rise to 50% of the vote instead of 40%.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump has already shown that he's eating into the evangelical part of Cruz's base, and has long since been a competitor for the angry TP portion of Cruz's base. Rather than Cruz's supporters flocking to Rubio, it seems more likely that they'd flock to Trump, as he more closely embodies the anti-establishment sentiment that Cruz is trying to promote. Sure, there are bound to be anti-trump voters, but Rubio's establishment credentials would seem to be a liability for many of Cruz's voters.

    Logical...

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @CW,

    Throughout this entire period, pundits and establishmentarians alike convinced themselves, over and over again, that since they personally could not conceive of Trump becoming the GOP nominee, such a thing was almost by definition inconceivable.

    you keep using that word. i don't think it means what you think it means.
    ~mandy patenkin (inigo montoya), the princess bride

    and yet, here we are, on the cliffs of insanity.

    JL

  12. [12] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    New column up

    Just to let everyone know, I posted today's column a bit early, so it would appear before the caucuses end in Nevada.

    -CW

  13. [13] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    TheStig [6] -

    Good point about the voters being able to dump Cruz.

    Here's an interesting back-of-the-envelope guess about Trump's delegate haul. Either way, it could be very close.

    As for "progging," well, that just sounds dirty. Heh.

    I spent a few weeks a while back binge-watching "Borgia" (note: singluar -- not "The Borgias"), which had all of that as well as a political/theological dynasty family...

    Bleyd [9] -

    All good points. But this article was an exploration of "could anyone else actually beat Trump" without addressing the probability of any of it actually happening. I agree that Trump could reap enough voters from either Cruz or Rubio dropping out, and even that that is the more-likely outcome. But I really wanted to entertain the idea that perhaps Trump doesn't have it all wrapped up yet, so I kind of ignored that aspect.

    -CW

  14. [14] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Funny sidenote:

    I think I already said this in a previous comment, but for anyone who enjoys the prequel series "Gotham," the big "Godfather" mobster character in the show is played by the same actor as Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI) in "Borgia." What is hilarious is that it he's actually playing the SAME BASIC character! The only real difference is his hair's shorter in the Batman series, and he wears modern clothes. The attitudes and the power-mongering are exactly the same, though...

    :-)

    -CW

  15. [15] 
    Bleyd wrote:

    CW [13]

    I understand that these were not necessarily your personal opinions on how things would go, I merely wanted address the unlikelihood of these scenarios working out as some people seem to think they might.

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think I already said this in a previous comment, but for anyone who enjoys the prequel series "Gotham," the big "Godfather" mobster character in the show is played by the same actor as Rodrigo Borgia (Pope Alexander VI) in "Borgia." What is hilarious is that it he's actually playing the SAME BASIC character! The only real difference is his hair's shorter in the Batman series, and he wears modern clothes. The attitudes and the power-mongering are exactly the same, though...

    :-)

    Not a big fan of pre-quel TV series.. Tried to get into CAPRICA (pre-quel to BATTLESTAR GALACTICA) but bailed after 10 mins...

    But, speaking of series... CW, have you seen the two hour premiere of 11.22.63??

    It's based on the Stephen King novel that is completely and utterly MIND-BLOWING...

    And the series is off to a good start in that department...

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump is not only a candidate. He is a messenger from Middle America. And the message he is delivering to the establishment is: We want an end to your policies and we want an end to you.
    -Pat Buchanan

    Truer words were never spoken...

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    Michale [16] -

    Ah, but did it have cool 50s cars, like in the book? Inquiring minds want to know...

    Heh.

    -CW

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ah, but did it have cool 50s cars, like in the book? Inquiring minds want to know...

    It actually did.. I commented to my lovely wife that the work and effort going into making the period look perfect was AMAZING!!

    She looked at me confused and said, "Why not? It's a TV show.."

    And I told her, "Yea.. But it's HULU!!!" :D

    You'll be amazed...

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.