Why would Trump go?

The post-convention Dump Trump movement among Republican operatives and strategerists is growing and getting louder. Politico has the scoop:

Republican insiders in key battleground states have a message for The Donald: Get out.
That’s according to The POLITICO Caucus — a panel of activists, strategists and operatives in 11 swing states. The majority of GOP insiders, 70 percent, said they want Trump to drop out of the race and be replaced by another Republican candidate — with many citing Trump’s drag on Republicans in down-ballot races.

I have two big questions. The first is a bit of taunting —“Why the hell could you not organize an orgy at the Bunny Ranch in January?”

Secondly, why the hell would Trump agree? A Dump and Replace Trump movement has severe mechanical limitations. Ballots will start to be printed in the next couple of weeks so there is a hard time constraint on any Trump Replacement movement. More importantly, any Dump and Replace Trump action has two major players who have to agree and a hostile player who has a say. A successful Dump Trump action needs the “establishment” Republican Party to agree to the action (they’re as an institution is either there or close to it) as well as Donald J. Trump to agree to be replaced.

The Republican insider argument is that Trump will cost them the White House, will cost them the Senate and will significantly reduce (best case scenario) the current GOP majority in the House. That means Trump will cost them the Supreme Court median vote. All of those are probably true and they are high salience to Movement Conservatives.

Does Donald J. Trump and his voters care deeply about any of those items except for the White House?

No!

He does not care about the House, he does not care about the Senate. He does not care about policy outcomes. He has a very limited shadow of the future and a very narrow give a fuck space that barely intersects with Republican insider give a damn space.

What is the gain for Trump to step aside? His brand is underwater as his name is currently toxic. If he is to step aside, his brand (and his ego) won’t recover quickly. His best chance of re-establishing his brand (and his ego) is to double down and win. If he wins the White House in November even if there are 98 Democrats in the Senate and 431 Democrats in the House, he won, and the Republican establishment are full of losers. His brand would take off and he could make odd speeches at golf courses while Mike Pence attempts to govern.

If he steps aside, the party insiders are better off, but his brand is shit and his ego is bruised as he would be the loser genuflecting to the wills of the loses that he beat in the primary process.

What can the Republican Party insiders offer to Trump that is worth enough to Trump to make it worthwhile for him to step aside?

Until I see a good answer to that question, I am assuming that the Dump Trump movement is merely a stage of grief and not an actual strategy.



Don’t Try This at Home or In Public or Anywhere for That Matter!

Some knucklehead in Phoenix decided to see what would happen if he lit an entire fireworks display on fire (h/t: Sploid) inside a Wal-Mart. This is not a very good idea. Aside from starting a low explosive fire, and fortunately there weren’t any higher powered fireworks on the display or this would have been much, much worse, Arizona is a Constitutional Carry state. This means one can open carry without a permit, as well as conceal carry with or without a permit. The prankster is lucky someone didn’t hear several pops and decide there was an active threat that needed responding too!

 



Cloud Cuckoo Land

After revoking the WaPo’s press credentials for accurately reporting that he insinuated President Obama is in league with terrorists, Trump is now doubling down on that very same bat-shit insane accusation and tweet-wanking over his own alleged prescience yet again:

The embedded article from Trump propaganda outlet Breitbart is entitled “Hillary Clinton Received Secret Memo Stating Obama Admin ‘Support’ for ISIS.” Vigorously auditioning for the role of “MiniTruth” in the dystopian hellhole of a Trump administration, the Breitbartians offer proof of nothing but their own disconnection from reality and inability to comprehend an intelligence report. Hillary Clinton is not amused:

Early on in this circus, someone observed that Trump’s success in the GOP primary was based on his willingness to ratchet up the insults and accusations beyond the bounds of rational discourse but that eventually, he would run out of room to escalate without sounding like a drooling psychopath.

Fellow citizens, we’ve arrived at that moment: The primaries officially ended last night, and Trump is already accusing both his opponent and the sitting President of the United States of being traitors who conspire with ISIS. I don’t believe in Peak Trump, but I am having a hard time imagining where he goes from here. The Illuminati? Chem trails? Lizard people? Help me out here…



Trump-proofing the Republican nomination process in the future

This post is speculation. It assumes that Trump will lose and lose big in November and that the Republican establishment as defined by a variety of rules committees has the power and the will to institute changes to the Republican primary process to Trump-proof the process.

The easiest way for the Republican Party to Trump-proof itself is to stop lying to its supporters. The Republican Party elite is fundamentally not trustworthy to its base voters. The core example is the promise that a Republican House and a Republican Senate could force President Obama to unwind PPACA while he sat in the White House. That was not going to happen. Trustworthy elites won’t happen as there is too much money to be made from fleecing the rubes. Once we take policy honesty off the table, rule changes are the next step.

Trump is the delegate leader (and presumptive delegate majority holder once the process plays out) with a low proportion of the total vote.

He benefited from a split field and a rules system that allowed factional plurality leaders to amass delegate strength out of proportion to their actual vote counts. Winner take all elections with more than two candidates have this common failure. There were two sets of winner take all elections in this current Republican primary. The first was state level delegates where the winner of a state received a significant bonus number of delegates and then winner take all at the Congressional District level. The Republicans assigned three delegates to each Congressional District without regard to how many Republicans actually lived or voted in that district.

538 has a good example of how this flat allocation of winner take all delegates by district helped Trump:

If Ted Cruz wins by a huge margin in Milwaukee’s suburbs, as expected tonight, he’ll get all three delegates from Wisconsin’s 5th Congressional District, which cast 257,017 votes for Mitt Romney in the 2012 general election. But in two weeks, Donald Trump could capture just as many delegates by winning a majority of the vote in New York’s heavily Latino, Bronx-based 15th Congressional District, which cast only 5,315 votes for Romney four years ago.

Three weeks ago, Trump won three times as many delegates — nine — at the Northern Mariana Islands convention, which drew just 471 participants.

This is problem #1. The GOP primary delegation process favors plurality winners and it favors candidates who can win in very low turnout environments. There is a massive variance between the minimum number of votes needed per delegate and the maximum number of votes needed per delegate. Some districts are extremely efficient and some are extremely inefficient places to win. The Republicans treat districts like the Senate treats states. The first rule change would be to scale the delegate award to some measure of Republican vote strength.

Read more



The establishment is the kiddie table

Via Political Wire:

 

new Morning Consult poll finds Donald Trump with a huge national lead over his GOP rivals at 44%, followed by Ted Cruz at 17%, Ben Carson at 10%, Marco Rubio at 10%, Jeb Bush at 8% and John Kasich at 4%.

The consolidated establishment lane of “responsible” Republicans pull in 22%.  That is a faction less than the Cruz/Carson faction.  The Republican Establishment is the kiddie table in that party.

I am having a harder time seeing how Trump is not the nominee for the GOP as he controls the terms of debate, the media loves him, and plausible unified opponents can’t unify.  His non-Cruz/non-unadulterated grifter opponents are locked in a single shot, non-iterative game with a single winner takes all prize.  Coordinating so one of the opponents in this category is the proffered opponent leaves the withdrawing opponents only soft agreement enforcement mechanisms to get any promised goodies.  Throw in that there is personal loathing among some of the Establishment candidates , it makes a non-Cruz anti-Trump consolidation behind a single candidate improbable in the next week or two.

And even if there is a consolidation with universal support transfer, the anti-anti-Establishment non-obvious grifting wing of the GOP is a minority faction.

How does Trump not get the nomination?

 



If Not the Best, Then Certainly the Most Pleasurable Response to the November Terrorist Attacks in Paris

The Guardian has reported that when Brussels went into lockdown immediately after the Paris terrorist attacks the Belgian security response was, shall we say, innovative. A number of soldiers and police working out of a station in Ganshoren had an orgy! This gives new meaning to both the concept of a full body search and security theater, if you know what I mean… This seems to be a far superior response than to freak out on cable news 24/7, but your mileage may vary.



Flint and lead screenings

One of the things that puzzled me about the Flint lead poisoning is why the problem took so long to identify.  Medicaid gives strong incentives to managed care organizations to test their pediatric members for lead poisoning.  Michigan has their own lead policy:

All Medicaid enrolled children are considered to be at high risk for blood lead poisoning. In accordance with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines, Michigan Medicaid policy requires that all Medicaid enrolled children be blood lead tested at 12 and 24 months of age, or between 36 and 72 months of age if not previously tested.

Public Act 55 of 2004 required that by October 1, 2007, 80% of Medicaid enrolled children were to have been blood lead tested. MDCH designed a report, theMedicaid Blood Lead Testing report, to monitor compliance with this law.

The January 2013 report showed that there were 3,000+ kids in Medicaid under the age of 2  in Genesee County.  70% of those kids had a lead screening.

Someone should have been screaming that the Medicaid pediatric population was seeing a massive lead level spike.  It should have been either at the provider level, or more readily, at the insurer level as they should have been seeing the claims for follow-up visits after positive lead tests started to come back in high numbers.  And if the providers and insurers were not screaming their heads off, the Michigan medicaid administrative offices should have been as soon as they started to see the claims come across their data encounter system.

Unfortunately, it looks like the state of Michigan put their head in the sand (via the ACLU)

In a posting Monday on the website FlintWaterStudy.org, Virginia Tech professor Marc Edwards accused the state of neglecting the lead-poisoning issue even though Michigan officials knew as early as summer 2014 that there was a problem.

“They [Michigan Department of Human and Services officials] discovered scientifically conclusive evidence of an anomalous increase in childhood lead poisoning in summer 2014 immediately after the switch in water sources, but stood by silently as Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) officials repeatedly and falsely stated that no spike in blood lead levels (BLL) of children had occurred,” wrote Edwards

Lead poisoning is something that should be picked up through multiple systems.  I can’t figure out why the public health system failed so obviously.