Who Inherits the GOP (1 Viewer)

[Psychoclown]

OK, I'm assuming Trump loses and loses big. Yes, things can change between now and the election, especially with the debates still in play, but right now the smart money is on Hillary. And I think Trump may suffer the worse Republican defeat in my generation. But this isn't what I want to discuss. If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?

Will it be Trump or someone who picks up his "ideology"? I think Trump himself won't stick around after a loss, but someone could try to pick up the mantle and lead his followers with anti-PC, anti-trade, anti-immigrant, isolationist message. I don't see anyone the horizon though. And a good portion of Trump's supporters are not traditional Republicans. Many are typically apolitical. I think there is a good chance without Trump stiring up their passions they fade back into the background.

Will it be the establishment? Some folks have said the establishment will respond to an epic loss this year by saying to the Tea Party/hard right/extremists (their terms, not mine) "See we tried it your way and we loss massively". But Trump really isn't a hard right guy or a Tea Partier, at least in the original sense of the term. And there are still plenty of folks on the right who loath the establishment, while not being Trump backers. Many of the issues that caused people to embrace an outsider like Trump are not going away, even if Trump does.

In fact Ted Cruz was Trump's longest lasting rival and commanded a significant following of his own. He's more of the true Tea Party, fiscal conservative, anti-establishment guy. And I think after Trump goes down in flames, he's refusal to endorse Trump at the convention will be seen as a principled and correct stand. Endorsements mean little these days in terms of actual votes, so you can't really blame Cruz for a Trump loss, especially if I am correct and Trump loses big. But Cruz taking a public stand will be seen as brave and principled compared to establishment folks like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, et all who just sat things out. And much better than sell outs like Ryan who surrendered any shred of principles they may have still had when they endorsed Trump.

But Cruz has some weak points as well. He's not a very charismatic candidate to put it mildly. His likeability is low. I think Cruz will run for the nomination again in 2020 and have a very good chance, but is no lock to win. But I think the true fiscal conservatism he represents has a real chance of taking control of the party. That may or may not come tied to hardline social conservatism (which Cruz also represents quite well). Rand Paul could mount a comeback (though he has his own flaws as a candidate). Maybe someone who is not even on the radar.

In my mind, the Trump nomination has been an embarrassment and a disaster for the GOP. A low point for a party that I left 10 years ago for its continued failure to act upon the rhetoric it campaigns on. But in the wreckage, I hold out some hope that maybe something good can re-emerge. If that is the case, then maybe Trump's nomination isn't a total loss.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?

In my opinion, it's going to get worse before it gets better. Whoever wins the "I'm more conservative than the other guy" circular firing squad fustercluck will inherit the party, such as it is at that time. And they'll still claim the title of "conservative", though they are not to my mind conservative at all.

Here's why I think the GOP will continue to swing further to the right:

1 - Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

2 - Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” wherein he deliberately sought the votes of the “negrophobes” in a successful effort to swing the Deep South from the Democratic party to the Republican party. The Deep South is now the strongest base of the GOP, and the leaders of the GOP in the Deep South are the children of the very same “negrophobes” whose votes Nixon sought. This is the source of much of the racism that informs Republican policies and political philosophy even today, as is made clear in a 1981 interview with Reagan’s political adviser Lee Atwater, for those policies and political philosophies are now unquestionably part of conservative political dogma.

3 - Reagan’s repeal of the “Fairness Doctrine”that required the holders of broadcast licences both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that was—in the Commission's view—honest, equitable, and balanced.

4 - The rise of conservative pundits such as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter whose influence became such that they - along with the Religious Right - essentially began defining the modern meaning of political and social conservatism. Though the influence of the pundits has waned over the past several years, for almost two decades, they were virtual kingmakers within the GOP.

5 - The rise of the Religious Right, who were particularly strong in the Deep South - the “Bible Belt” - that had relatively recently shifted allegiance from the Democratic Party to the GOP. Their influence has been and - until the rise of Trump - continued to be such that it almost (and in some cases was literally) seen as a sin to agree with liberals on almost any political or social issue.

6 - The shift of the GOP from supporting the Voting Rights Act in 2006 almost in lockstep to opposing the Voting Rights Act - again, almost in lockstep - after the election of Barack Obama, the first black man to occupy the White House.

7 - And the single greatest factor, the one that not only enables but even magnifies the effects of all the above, is the eventual but essentially unstoppable demographic shift of the American population to majority-minority, wherein whites will only comprise a plurality of the population. In all history, I cannot think of a similar demographic shift that did not result in great violence. The more the dominant demographic’s power and influence diminishes, the more they will “circle the wagons” in order to preserve the power and influence they still have.

It is the confluence of the factors above that lead me to believe that the GOP - or at least the majority of the GOP that is so strongly supporting the current presidential nominee Donald Trump - will continue to “circle the wagons”, to become ever more strongly conservative (as they themselves define conservatism). Whether this will result in a true schism within the party or the birth of a new party, I cannot tell. But they will continue to shift further to the right for some time to come. The problem never will totally go away - racism will exist as long as there are different shades of skin - but hopefully, when the GOP suffers a resounding defeat of landslide proportions (which may not happen during this election cycle), the influence of the above factors will diminish, and so we may avoid the violence that has almost always accompanied great demographic shifts in the past.

 

[ocean515]

OK, I'm assuming Trump loses and loses big. Yes, things can change between now and the election, especially with the debates still in play, but right now the smart money is on Hillary. And I think Trump may suffer the worse Republican defeat in my generation. But this isn't what I want to discuss. If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?

Will it be Trump or someone who picks up his "ideology"? I think Trump himself won't stick around after a loss, but someone could try to pick up the mantle and lead his followers with anti-PC, anti-trade, anti-immigrant, isolationist message. I don't see anyone the horizon though. And a good portion of Trump's supporters are not traditional Republicans. Many are typically apolitical. I think there is a good chance without Trump stiring up their passions they fade back into the background.

Will it be the establishment? Some folks have said the establishment will respond to an epic loss this year by saying to the Tea Party/hard right/extremists (their terms, not mine) "See we tried it your way and we loss massively". But Trump really isn't a hard right guy or a Tea Partier, at least in the original sense of the term. And there are still plenty of folks on the right who loath the establishment, while not being Trump backers. Many of the issues that caused people to embrace an outsider like Trump are not going away, even if Trump does.

In fact Ted Cruz was Trump's longest lasting rival and commanded a significant following of his own. He's more of the true Tea Party, fiscal conservative, anti-establishment guy. And I think after Trump goes down in flames, he's refusal to endorse Trump at the convention will be seen as a principled and correct stand. Endorsements mean little these days in terms of actual votes, so you can't really blame Cruz for a Trump loss, especially if I am correct and Trump loses big. But Cruz taking a public stand will be seen as brave and principled compared to establishment folks like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, et all who just sat things out. And much better than sell outs like Ryan who surrendered any shred of principles they may have still had when they endorsed Trump.

But Cruz has some weak points as well. He's not a very charismatic candidate to put it mildly. His likeability is low. I think Cruz will run for the nomination again in 2020 and have a very good chance, but is no lock to win. But I think the true fiscal conservatism he represents has a real chance of taking control of the party. That may or may not come tied to hardline social conservatism (which Cruz also represents quite well). Rand Paul could mount a comeback (though he has his own flaws as a candidate). Maybe someone who is not even on the radar.

In my mind, the Trump nomination has been an embarrassment and a disaster for the GOP. A low point for a party that I left 10 years ago for its continued failure to act upon the rhetoric it campaigns on. But in the wreckage, I hold out some hope that maybe something good can re-emerge. If that is the case, then maybe Trump's nomination isn't a total loss.

If you left the Republican Party, why would you care?

In the end, it will be those who vote as Republicans who will decide what the GOP will be. Clearly, those voters have rejected the status quo in the GOP and are seeking a different direction. Right or wrong, that is how it should work.

On the Democratic Party side, voters weren't given much of a choice, and are required to vote for the status quo if they choose to vote for Hillary Clinton.

In the long term, it remains to be seen whether continuing on the same path that had led us to the current state of affairs is acceptable to voters, or if a different path will be pursued.

 

[Psychoclown]

If you left the Republican Party, why would you care?

I care because I would love to come back to the GOP, but only if starts to live up to the rhetoric it preaches. Right now, I see the Democrats as a lost cause. There are a few issues I agree with them on, but the overall philosophy the party has embraced is not something I can endorse. So I continue (perhaps foolishly) to hold out hope that the Republicans will get their act together.

In the end, it will be those who vote as Republicans who will decide what the GOP will be. Clearly, those voters have rejected the status quo in the GOP and are seeking a different direction. Right or wrong, that is how it should work.

Obviously Republicans will be the ones to decide the fate of the party, but what will they decide is the question. There are several factions within the party who will be vying for power. I'm curious to see who people think can emerge as the leading faction in aftermath of a major defeat.

 

[dimensionallava]

the real question is what does the republican party have to run on? It can't be the economy after the bush recession and repeated red state failures. It can't be the military after the Iraq war and after Obama killed Osama. They can still try running on sexual politics anti abortion and anti gay rights etc Which is why ted cruz had so much success he attracted a lot of religious supporters and he had a spanish last name which makes him kind of a minority.

So I predict 40 years from now the republican party will be mostly spanish speaking, strict religious catholics from mexico...... either that or its still just going to be a bunch of angry old white people yelling about the kids skateboarding on the sidewalks....

 

[ocean515]

I care because I would love to come back to the GOP, but only if starts to live up to the rhetoric it preaches. Right now, I see the Democrats as a lost cause. There are a few issues I agree with them on, but the overall philosophy the party has embraced is not something I can endorse. So I continue (perhaps foolishly) to hold out hope that the Republicans will get their act together.



Obviously Republicans will be the ones to decide the fate of the party, but what will they decide is the question. There are several factions within the party who will be vying for power. I'm curious to see who people think can emerge as the leading faction in aftermath of a major defeat.

Fair enough. I think people either forget, or don't know, that the Republican party all but didn't exist before it elected it's first President. In the cycle before, it hardly registered. So parties can and do rise from either nothing, or from the ashes of what they had become.

I have been a registered Republican for quite a long time. Call it many decades. I too am not pleased with the direction the party has taken in recent years, perhaps even a decade or so. I am not pleased with the influences that have been allowed to have greater impact than they I believe they should. However, I am a realist. I don't get everything I want all the time. Not suggesting you require that yourself.

I am heartened by the results of this election cycle in regard to the candidate for the Presidency. Not necessarily by the person selected, but by the voters who told the status quo to take a hike. That is a step in the right direction.

 

[Psychoclown]

In my opinion, it's going to get worse before it gets better. Whoever wins the "I'm more conservative than the other guy" circular firing squad fustercluck will inherit the party, such as it is at that time. And they'll still claim the title of "conservative", though they are not to my mind conservative at all.

Here's why I think the GOP will continue to swing further to the right:

1 - Goldwater’s opposition to the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

2 - Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” wherein he deliberately sought the votes of the “negrophobes” in a successful effort to swing the Deep South from the Democratic party to the Republican party. The Deep South is now the strongest base of the GOP, and the leaders of the GOP in the Deep South are the children of the very same “negrophobes” whose votes Nixon sought. This is the source of much of the racism that informs Republican policies and political philosophy even today, as is made clear in a 1981 interview with Reagan’s political adviser Lee Atwater, for those policies and political philosophies are now unquestionably part of conservative political dogma.

<snip>

7 - And the single greatest factor, the one that not only enables but even magnifies the effects of all the above, is the eventual but essentially unstoppable demographic shift of the American population to majority-minority, wherein whites will only comprise a plurality of the population. In all history, I cannot think of a similar demographic shift that did not result in great violence. The more the dominant demographic’s power and influence diminishes, the more they will “circle the wagons” in order to preserve the power and influence they still have.

It is the confluence of the factors above that lead me to believe that the GOP - or at least the majority of the GOP that is so strongly supporting the current presidential nominee Donald Trump - will continue to “circle the wagons”, to become ever more strongly conservative (as they themselves define conservatism). Whether this will result in a true schism within the party or the birth of a new party, I cannot tell. But they will continue to shift further to the right for some time to come. The problem never will totally go away - racism will exist as long as there are different shades of skin - but hopefully, when the GOP suffers a resounding defeat of landslide proportions (which may not happen during this election cycle), the influence of the above factors will diminish, and so we may avoid the violence that has almost always accompanied great demographic shifts in the past.

You seem to see most of this through a racial lens, where as I don't. I know lots of Republicans and none of them are worried about whites losing their majority. None of them are intent on maintaining some mythical white grip on power. Most of them genuinely want to see the best person for the job. They don't care about race. But they do object to diversity for its own sake, especially when it conflicts with merit. They would prefer a society where we don't walk an egg shells around anything that could be perceived as racial for fear of offending someone's delicate sensibilities. They don't think every time there are unequal results between the races that its automatically because of RACISM!

Most Republicans (and I should say, most people I know irregardless of party) I know are live and let live on race. They take people as they come. If you're a good person, black or white, they'll happily accept you into their lives. If you're a scumbag, parasite, or pain in the rump, they'll want little to do with you no matter what color your skin is.

Race plays very little into most Republican's outlook.

 

[Psychoclown]

Fair enough. I think people either forget, or don't know, that the Republican party all but didn't exist before it elected it's first President. In the cycle before, it hardly registered. So parties can and do rise from either nothing, or from the ashes of what they had become.

I have been a registered Republican for quite a long time. Call it many decades. I too am not pleased with the direction the party has taken in recent years, perhaps even a decade or so. I am not pleased with the influences that have been allowed to have greater impact than they I believe they should. However, I am a realist. I don't get everything I want all the time. Not suggesting you require that yourself.

I am heartened by the results of this election cycle in regard to the candidate for the Presidency. Not necessarily by the person selected, but by the voters who told the status quo to take a hike. That is a step in the right direction.

I'm quite willing to compromise. I don't expect a candidate or a party to align with my beliefs perfectly. I'm a libertarian who was heartily in favor of Cruz knowing full well on drugs, gay marriage, some aspects of foreign policy, and other issues he's not in alignment with me. But I felt I could trust him on fiscal issues and a desire to create a government that was less intrusive and that was enough for me to set aside my differences with him on other issues.

But I can't say that about the establishment that had been running the party for the last 15 years. They've consistently been in favor of big spending (when they control the purse strings), interventionism, and big government.

I do agree that the one possible bright side to Trump's nomination is that the electorate collectively told the GOP establishment to go to hell. I hope that opens the door for other (better) outsiders to come in lead the party. But again I think the establishment will make the case that "see we tried it your way and we got our butts kicked (by Hillary of all people!), now let us go back to the way things were".

 

[dimensionallava]

Race plays very little into most Republican's outlook.

I disagree in fact I dont know what other reason you would vote for trump other than the fact that he's racist and your racist

 

[ocean515]

I'm quite willing to compromise. I don't expect a candidate or a party to align with my beliefs perfectly. I'm a libertarian who was heartily in favor of Cruz knowing full well on drugs, gay marriage, some aspects of foreign policy, and other issues he's not in alignment with me. But I felt I could trust him on fiscal issues and a desire to create a government that was less intrusive and that was enough for me to set aside my differences with him on other issues.

But I can't say that about the establishment that had been running the party for the last 15 years. They've consistently been in favor of big spending (when they control the purse strings), interventionism, and big government.

I do agree that the one possible bright side to Trump's nomination is that the electorate collectively told the GOP establishment to go to hell. I hope that opens the door for other (better) outsiders to come in lead the party. But again I think the establishment will make the case that "see we tried it your way and we got our butts kicked (by Hillary of all people!), now let us go back to the way things were".

Well, it would appear we are on very similar ground.

We both certainly can't predict the future with any degree of accuracy, but if pressed, I would suggest the Republican establishment has been rocked on it's heals, and any effort to right itself to status quo down the road will result in being taken off their feet by the majority of Republican voters in the future.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

You seem to see most of this through a racial lens, where as I don't. I know lots of Republicans and none of them are worried about whites losing their majority. None of them are intent on maintaining some mythical white grip on power. Most of them genuinely want to see the best person for the job. They don't care about race. But they do object to diversity for its own sake, especially when it conflicts with merit. They would prefer a society where we don't walk an egg shells around anything that could be perceived as racial for fear of offending someone's delicate sensibilities. They don't think every time there are unequal results between the races that its automatically because of RACISM!

Most Republicans (and I should say, most people I know irregardless of party) I know are live and let live on race. They take people as they come. If you're a good person, black or white, they'll happily accept you into their lives. If you're a scumbag, parasite, or pain in the rump, they'll want little to do with you no matter what color your skin is.

Race plays very little into most Republican's outlook.

FYI, I was a Republican for most of my early life. I happily voted for Reagan and Bush 41. So please don't assume that I don't know what it means to be a Republican and a conservative.

NOW...I quite agree with you that most rank-and-file Republicans honestly believe that they aren't racist at all. But before we tackle what that sentence says, first, you must consider the timeline of events that I presented. Do you really, truly think that they are merely coincidence? Do you? Because most would look at that and see a pattern of conduct, of legislative decisions, all of which point to one thing: racism.

I know, I know, it's conservative dogma that the Democrats somehow convinced the minorities to desert the GOP...but look again at the timeline of events, and tell me why the heck minorities would want to stay with the political party that made all that happen! The Dems didn't lure the minorities away with "free stuff" - the GOP drove them away with racist policy decisions.

Okay, so let's go back to the Republicans-ain't-racist argument. Again, I quite agree that most Republicans do not believe themselves to be racist at all. But here's a story that I've had to tell too many times already. I used to be a racist. I and my entire family were racist, as were pretty much all the whites I knew. It was sort of part and parcel of growing up in the MS Delta. Thing is, we KNEW we weren't racist. We knew that we had no malice towards blacks, that we happily shared the food from our garden with them, we happily gave them money or clothes if they really needed them...and any of us would have risked our lives in a heartbeat to save a black man in trouble. That's how we knew we weren't racist...and we would have been very offended by anyone calling us racist.

But we were racist indeed...because as soon as the blacks were out of earshot, out would come all the n-word jokes, accusations, allegations, and assumptions. And we never realized how all those assumptions et al affected our social attitudes...and our votes. We were racist and we never knew it.

Look at the other conservatives even on DP - they'll swear up and down that they're not racist, but they'll eagerly try to show how blacks are more violent, less educated, that blacks are all about free stuff and victimhood. But they'll swear they're not racist...all the while never realizing how those allegations and assumptions affect their own attitudes, and their votes.

This, sir, is how GOP policy and politics wound up being so deeply informed by the racists. Y'all wanted the Deep South and got it through Nixon's "Southern Strategy", and now the still-quite-racist Deep South is the strongest base of the GOP. Do you really think the GOP could lay down with dogs and not get up with fleas? Do you think it was an accident that MS didn't finalize ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery until THREE YEARS AGO?

Again, I agree that most Republicans honestly do not believe themselves to be racist. But that doesn't tell the whole story, does it?

 

[Hawkeye10]

Cruz has too long a string of failure without wins(plus he has painted himself as a religious nutjob), and Ryan has not produced either, both face almost insurmountable obstacles. As much as I find this disgusting I think Kasich is in the best position.

 

[Psychoclown]

FYI, I was a Republican for most of my early life. I happily voted for Reagan and Bush 41. So please don't assume that I don't know what it means to be a Republican and a conservative.

NOW...I quite agree with you that most rank-and-file Republicans honestly believe that they aren't racist at all. But before we tackle what that sentence says, first, you must consider the timeline of events that I presented. Do you really, truly think that they are merely coincidence? Do you? Because most would look at that and see a pattern of conduct, of legislative decisions, all of which point to one thing: racism.

I know, I know, it's conservative dogma that the Democrats somehow convinced the minorities to desert the GOP...but look again at the timeline of events, and tell me why the heck minorities would want to stay with the political party that made all that happen! The Dems didn't lure the minorities away with "free stuff" - the GOP drove them away with racist policy decisions.

Okay, so let's go back to the Republicans-ain't-racist argument. Again, I quite agree that most Republicans do not believe themselves to be racist at all. But here's a story that I've had to tell too many times already. I used to be a racist. I and my entire family were racist, as were pretty much all the whites I knew. It was sort of part and parcel of growing up in the MS Delta. Thing is, we KNEW we weren't racist. We knew that we had no malice towards blacks, that we happily shared the food from our garden with them, we happily gave them money or clothes if they really needed them...and any of us would have risked our lives in a heartbeat to save a black man in trouble. That's how we knew we weren't racist...and we would have been very offended by anyone calling us racist.

But we were racist indeed...because as soon as the blacks were out of earshot, out would come all the n-word jokes, accusations, allegations, and assumptions. And we never realized how all those assumptions et al affected our social attitudes...and our votes. We were racist and we never knew it.

Look at the other conservatives even on DP - they'll swear up and down that they're not racist, but they'll eagerly try to show how blacks are more violent, less educated, that blacks are all about free stuff and victimhood. But they'll swear they're not racist...all the while never realizing how those allegations and assumptions affect their own attitudes, and their votes.

This, sir, is how GOP policy and politics wound up being so deeply informed by the racists. Y'all wanted the Deep South and got it through Nixon's "Southern Strategy", and now the still-quite-racist Deep South is the strongest base of the GOP. Do you really think the GOP could lay down with dogs and not get up with fleas? Do you think it was an accident that MS didn't finalize ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery until THREE YEARS AGO?

Again, I agree that most Republicans honestly do not believe themselves to be racist. But that doesn't tell the whole story, does it?

We're getting well off topic here, but I would love to continue this discussion. Would you be willing to copy/quote the relevant posts and start a new thread to continue this discussion?

 

[Glen Contrarian]

We're getting well off topic here, but I would love to continue this discussion. Would you be willing to copy/quote the relevant posts and start a new thread to continue this discussion?

sure - go ahead - but I won't be able to continue this afternoon - maybe later tonight.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

You see it here daily. Republicans, ALWAYS take the side of the Corps and the rich. Middle Class Republicans workers cut their own throats.

Of all the craziness of Trump I thought that his message about protecting MC jobs, and taking the Party back from the ulta-rich donors was a breath of fresh air in his message.

I keep hearing how the establishment GOP has to change, and that they have been rocked by this Trump revolution. I have my doubts. I see no change by the GOP, and quite honestly I see little change in the Republican rank and file. They are still willing to cut their own throats to protect the failed supply side policies of the establishment GOP. The policies that stagnate the MC and benefit the rich.

 

[Hawkeye10]

You see it here daily. Republicans, ALWAYS take the side of the Corps and the rich. Middle Class Republicans workers cut their own throats.

Of all the craziness of Trump I thought that his message about protecting MC jobs, and taking the Party back from the ulta-rich donors was a breath of fresh air in his message.

I keep hearing how the establishment GOP has to change, and that they have been rocked by this Trump revolution. I have my doubts. I see no change by the GOP, and quite honestly I see little change in the Republican rank and file. They are still willing to cut their own throats to protect the failed supply side policies of the establishment GOP. The policies that stagnate the MC and benefit the rich.

They think if Trump loses that they can reset the clock back 2 years, and do it right this time. These idiots have no idea yet of what Trump has unleashed by speaking up and being willing to lead the Rebellion. Which will not be going away, and believe it or not (not referencing you personally but rather USA generally) reality will not be ignored.

Fantasy never wins.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

They think if Trump loses that they can reset the clock back 2 years, and do it right this time. These idiots have no idea yet of what Trump has unleashed by speaking up and being willing to lead the Rebellion. Which will not be going away, and believe it or not (not referencing you personally but rather USA generally) reality will not be ignored.

Fantasy never wins.

Actually protecting jobs and taking the party back are the messages I 100% agree with Trump. But I don't have your optimism about what Trump unleashed not going away in 2 years.

Years ago we heard similar from Perot and Nader. In a very short period of time those messages disappeared and it was back to the same old same old. I don't know if enough of the Republican base is willing to give up on the failed Republican policies, both social and economic.

 

[Y-not]

It appears that the GOP is horribly fractured at present. There is the evangelical branch, the tea party remnants, the moderates, the hard conservatives and the Trump supporters, who IMO are mostly of a " what we have isn't working so let's try something totally different" group. (You know, like the people who mistakenly say "it can't get any worse than this".)

I think one of two things will happen. A strong, popular charismatic leader will emerge and be able to placate enough members of each of the various factions to heal the party, or the GOP will die while some third party, right now probably the Libertarian Party will assume the position formerly held by the GOP.

Both will be a long, bad time for conservatism in the US.

 

[UtahBill]

the real question is what does the republican party have to run on? It can't be the economy after the bush recession and repeated red state failures. It can't be the military after the Iraq war and after Obama killed Osama. They can still try running on sexual politics anti abortion and anti gay rights etc Which is why ted cruz had so much success he attracted a lot of religious supporters and he had a spanish last name which makes him kind of a minority.

So I predict 40 years from now the republican party will be mostly spanish speaking, strict religious catholics from mexico...... either that or its still just going to be a bunch of angry old white people yelling about the kids skateboarding on the sidewalks....

Sidewalks will be in such poor condition that only hover boards can be used...and the "kids" will be the average un-employed 40 year old...

 

[Helix]

my guess is that Paul Ryan makes a run for president pretty soon; probably 2020, if Clinton wins. if Trump wins, the GOP is in real trouble, IMO.

 

[SDET]

OK, I'm assuming Trump loses and loses big. Yes, things can change between now and the election, especially with the debates still in play, but right now the smart money is on Hillary. And I think Trump may suffer the worse Republican defeat in my generation. But this isn't what I want to discuss. If my assumption is correct, who takes over the wreckage that is the Republican party?

Will it be Trump or someone who picks up his "ideology"? I think Trump himself won't stick around after a loss, but someone could try to pick up the mantle and lead his followers with anti-PC, anti-trade, anti-immigrant, isolationist message. I don't see anyone the horizon though. And a good portion of Trump's supporters are not traditional Republicans. Many are typically apolitical. I think there is a good chance without Trump stiring up their passions they fade back into the background.

Will it be the establishment? Some folks have said the establishment will respond to an epic loss this year by saying to the Tea Party/hard right/extremists (their terms, not mine) "See we tried it your way and we loss massively". But Trump really isn't a hard right guy or a Tea Partier, at least in the original sense of the term. And there are still plenty of folks on the right who loath the establishment, while not being Trump backers. Many of the issues that caused people to embrace an outsider like Trump are not going away, even if Trump does.

In fact Ted Cruz was Trump's longest lasting rival and commanded a significant following of his own. He's more of the true Tea Party, fiscal conservative, anti-establishment guy. And I think after Trump goes down in flames, he's refusal to endorse Trump at the convention will be seen as a principled and correct stand. Endorsements mean little these days in terms of actual votes, so you can't really blame Cruz for a Trump loss, especially if I am correct and Trump loses big. But Cruz taking a public stand will be seen as brave and principled compared to establishment folks like the Bushes, McCain, Romney, et all who just sat things out. And much better than sell outs like Ryan who surrendered any shred of principles they may have still had when they endorsed Trump.

But Cruz has some weak points as well. He's not a very charismatic candidate to put it mildly. His likeability is low. I think Cruz will run for the nomination again in 2020 and have a very good chance, but is no lock to win. But I think the true fiscal conservatism he represents has a real chance of taking control of the party. That may or may not come tied to hardline social conservatism (which Cruz also represents quite well). Rand Paul could mount a comeback (though he has his own flaws as a candidate). Maybe someone who is not even on the radar.

In my mind, the Trump nomination has been an embarrassment and a disaster for the GOP. A low point for a party that I left 10 years ago for its continued failure to act upon the rhetoric it campaigns on. But in the wreckage, I hold out some hope that maybe something good can re-emerge. If that is the case, then maybe Trump's nomination isn't a total loss.

Those who had the wisdom not to kneel to the Trump cult of personality will inherit it. Whether that take on a Kasich or Cruz flavor or a blend of the two remains to be seen.

 

[MrPeanut]

It appears that the GOP is horribly fractured at present. There is the evangelical branch, the tea party remnants, the moderates, the hard conservatives and the Trump supporters, who IMO are mostly of a " what we have isn't working so let's try something totally different" group. (You know, like the people who mistakenly say "it can't get any worse than this".)

I think one of two things will happen. A strong, popular charismatic leader will emerge and be able to placate enough members of each of the various factions to heal the party, or the GOP will die while some third party, right now probably theLibertarian Party will assume the position formerly held by the GOP.

Both will be a long, bad time for conservatism in the US.

I think you're on to something with the Libertarian Party. I don't think that the party itself will necessarily replace the Republicans, but Libertarians that call themselves Republicans could very well take over the party. It is a message that resonates with young people because it is up to date on social issues while still being small government. I think that it is the best chance for the Republican party on the national level. They will continue to do well locally because of loyal voter turnout, but will be stumped nationally until they update their message.

 

[Redress]

Redress edit: Psychoclowns words deleted as I kinda went all Zyphlin in this post and exceeded the word count

If you are asking who will be the next nominee(in 2020 assuming a Trump loss), then the answer is almost certainly Ryan. He can sell his endorsement of Trump as being a "company man", doing what was right for the party over what he wanted to do(which is probably pretty close to the truth). He is liked by traditional, Reagan/Bush style republicans, respected generally by Tea Party republicans, does well with evangelicals and moderate republicans(and that is an impressive trick). If he chooses to run, I cannot think of any one likely to stop him for the nominee, and have a hard time not seeing him win in the general. If he is smart(and I as some one who disagrees with him on most anything have to admit that yes, he is smart), he should have himself well set by the time the election starts(which will probably be the day after the midterms in 2018, if not sooner).

I think a more interesting question though is where does the party go as far as message after a Trump loss. I suspect that alot in the party will point to 3 straight "not really conservative" candidates for president losing would push them to message more conservative, and look for a more, "true", conservative candidate(ie Ryan). If they go that route for message, I think it could backfire on them in terms of house and senate seats. The more right the party goes, the further away from most people they are(this is true in reverse for democrats, the more left we go, the further from most people we are). To my mind, strategically, I do not think the problem with republican candidates is that they are not conservative enough, but that they have not learned yet how to sell their version of conservatism to the current makeup of the US. Let me use an example:

Republicans tend to see their lack of support among black people and hispanics and get frustrated. The result of that frustration is talk of them wanting "free stuff", government hand outs, and so on. That is a stupid way to think of it, and further, being frustrated is a mistake. That low support should be seen as an opportunity. This is an easy area to expand your support. To do that, first you have to stop talking about them as being all welfare mothers, criminals, and having their hands out. People are funny, they tend to not vote for those who are insulting to them(and I really do not think republicans even realize they are doing this, though it is obvious when looking at it from the outside). Then you have to tailor your message to them when you talk to them. You do not change the policy, you change how you present the policy. Why are conservative principals going to make their lives better?

So in answer to the question you pose, I think the republican party will be inherited by the further right elements of the party, united by Ryan. I think in the long run it will make hard times for the party, at least until they learn to sell their message better. I do not think Trump is going to destroy the party, and in the end, the party will eventually be the stronger for the hard times it has gone through, if they can get past the Balkanization which has plagued the party in recent years.

 

[Renae]

I think the GOP Fractures into pieces after Trump loses and we get a new party. If he wins? Heaven forbid... those like myself who feel utterly betrayed find a new home. Either way, the GOP is diminished and ultimately through. Goldwater, for whom many try to claim this is an alike situation, for all of his faults he was principled. Trump IMHO, is not.

 

[SDET]

I think the GOP Fractures into pieces after Trump loses and we get a new party. If he wins? Heaven forbid... those like myself who feel utterly betrayed find a new home. Either way, the GOP is diminished and ultimately through. Goldwater, for whom many try to claim this is an alike situation, for all of his faults he was principled. Trump IMHO, is not.

If Trump wins, the conservative movement gets squeezed out of the GOP. If Trump loses, we rebuild the GOP and play this song for the Trump Humpers: