What Should Be Worrying Republicans

Today I had the occasion to be speaking with a representative of the non-profit that manages the scholarship that I endowed in honor of my late parents.  Not surprisingly, we talked about LGBT rights issues and from there it progressed to talking about politics that ranged from putting up campaign staffers to what I perceive to be the shortsightedness and seeming suicide wish of the Republican Party.  Which brings me to a column by former Republican Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post that looks at what ought to be terrifying the Republican Party leadership as we move towards the 2020 elections.   A second column in the Post by another former Republican, Michael Gerson adds to the theme.  First, highlights from Rubin's column:

Republicans likely won’t have Robert S. Mueller III to rescue them from their approaching train wreck. And they should be honest with themselves (if not the rest of us): They are heading for a political derailment if things go on as they have been.

What’s the jam? Republicans have a presidential incumbent whose most recent polls put him in the mid-30s. Even worse, the intensity of the opposition to him is off the charts. The Post-ABC poll tells us:

A 56 percent majority of all Americans say they would “definitely not vote for him” should Trump become the Republican nominee, while 14 percent say they would consider voting for him and 28 percent would definitely vote for him. Majorities of independents (59 percent), women (64 percent) and suburbanites (56 percent) rule out supporting Trump for a second term.

The depth and breadth of animosity are unlikely to dissipate even in the best of economic times. Should the economy stall out, as many economists expect will happen by 2020, even those Republicans in the “But taxes . . .” or “But Gorsuch . . ." camp may see the handwriting on the wall.

Moreover, it’s not like Republicans are all that jazzed about him. Sure, when a pollster asks Republicans if they approve of Trump’s performance, a strong majority say they do, but that doesn’t mean they won’t recognize his unelectability in a year. To the contrary, in the Post-ABC poll already 32 percent of Republicans/Lean Republicans would like the party to nominate someone else next year.

But Republicans' prospects for an alternate nominee are sparse. And that’s where we come back to Mueller. Regardless of the inappropriate comments of acting attorney general Matthew G. Whitaker (whose meandering, nervous remarks at a Monday news conference suggested Mueller was nearing the end of his investigation), we have no idea how far along Mueller really is. We don’t know if Whitaker (drenched in sweat and looking entirely uncomfortable in his role) was telling the truth . . . . Unless Mueller has Trump dead to rights on collusion (or the Southern District of New York has him on conspiracy to commit fraud and/or violate campaign finance laws), a jaw-dropping obstruction case would be needed for Republican senators to abandon Trump. They may do so (in part because Trump is a weight around the necks of Senate incumbents), but no one — especially not GOP primary voters — should count on a knockout blow that would absolve them of the choice in the primary between a wounded Trump and some as-yet-unknown challenger. Flash forward to the primaries. On one side, in a wide open race with no obvious front-runner, 20 Democrats will be electrifying Democrats, boosting turnout and creating a tough, moving target for the Republican opposition machine. . . . On the other side, in all likelihood you have a wounded president, growing unease among the base, a less-than-ideal economic record and — if Republicans are lucky — a decent challenger or two who will pound away at Trump’s faults.

This sure doesn’t look like 1984 or 1996 or even 2004 when an incumbent president had a clear advantage. No, 2020 may look a lot like 1976 — or, worse for the GOP, 1976 with Nixon still in the White House. As I said, Republicans should be very, very nervous.

As noted, Michael Gerson column continues the theme Jennifer Rubin wrote about.  Here are excerpts:

The news that President Trump’s approval rating is near historical lows brings some relief that the laws of political gravity still apply. When the president is doing a spectacularly bad job, a majority of our fellow citizens — or at least a clear majority of people contacted for the Post-ABC News poll — think Trump is doing badly. . . . . perceptions of the president’s performance have plummeted on the federal budget deficit, on improving the health-care system and on the economy.

Perhaps the greatest danger to Trump’s political future is the cost of these negative perceptions to his brand. [Trump] The president was elected, in part, by giving his supporters an impression of business acumen. This was, in fact, the image carefully cultivated by book publishers and TV producers. . . . . .These claims can now be believed only by the ideologically addled.

The problem for Trump is not only that he lost the most visible and important confrontation of his presidency — in negotiating with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) over the government shutdown.

If, in the next stage, the loser acts unilaterally under the pretense of a border security crisis, it will merely prove that Trump is a dangerously sore loser. For the MBAs taking notes, this complex negotiating strategy is known as: Throwing the game off the table if you can’t win. The other branding claims made by Trump have become equally incredible. His reputation as a self-made billionaire lies in ruins. An extensive New York Times article on Trump’s wealth found a bassinet millionaire, consistently bailed out of bad bets, who dodged gift taxes, milked his empire for cash and cultivated a deceptive image of business brilliance. And special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation may reveal serious corruption and perjury in cataloguing Trump’s 30-year panting desire to sell his brand in Russia.

And who can take Trump seriously as a manager? He has a talent for weeding out the talented and responsible. He is a world-class nepotist. He is incapable of delegation or of taking conflicting advice.

Those 37 percent who approve of Trump’s performance may point to the state of the economy or the composition of the Supreme Court. They may be impressed by his destruction of norms or enthused by his promotion of exclusion. They may want a president who speaks his mind, even when it is hateful gibberish. They may want a president who is an institutional arsonist, even if the result is mere destruction.

But no one can reasonably claim to believe in Trump’s brand as it was sold in 2016. We have plumbed the shallows of his boasts. They are refuted lies. And whatever else [Trump] the president may be, he is a fraud.