Election 2016 – the Elephant in the Room
Here Come the Elephants!
Why is it that people often skirt the obvious?
Do they not see it?
Do they not wish to acknowledge it?
When people refuse to discuss the most obvious dominating and overwhelming issue at hand, we say there’s an elephant in the room.
Regarding Election 2016, there is more than one elephant in the room, and the elephants will soon run away with the election, so we may as well acknowledge them and start discussing them.
Pundits agree that this 2016 election is already different, historic, perplexing and unpredictable. What they now need to acknowledge and to discuss are the dominant issues steering this election, or the elephants in the room.
We have previously discussed unexpected transformative historical events which steer the subsequent course of history, called Black Swans. Black Swans are unpredictable determinants of history which may or may not be possible to control. Black Swan theory is a serious political science theory documented in the political literature and quoted by the 9/11 Commission.
In the present 2016 election, we have seen the arrival of a bevy of Black Swans – led by the transformative and unexpected success of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign (note: Black Swan events are simply unexpected, not necessarily either bad or good).
But now we switch to the elephant analogy, because numerous Black Swans have arrived, and media and pundits seem to be in denial, refusing to discuss them. Media was slow to acknowledge the Trump phenomenon, and they have yet to acknowledge several other important determinants in this election- hence the undiscussed dominating forces become the Elephants.
So what are all these elephants?
- Donald Trump’s phenomenal success and the reasons for it.
- The reason why we had 17 (!) Republican candidates.
- The “Big Rule Switch” that occurred surreptitiously at the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa, and is now controlling and complicating this 2016 election.
- Discussion of whether Primaries and Caucuses are a transient and meaningless experiment.
- Analyzing what the Super Tuesday Primary numbers really show us.
- Determining what new elements are influencing the outcome of this 2016 election in place of Primaries and Caucuses.
So let’s look at these Elephants one-by-one.
The Reason for Donald Trump’s Phenomenal Success
The reason for Donald Trump’s phenomenal success is not anger of the American people, as pundits often postulate in exasperation, failing to find a better explanation.
The real reason for Donald Trump’s phenomenal success is the fact that the American people realize that sometimes it takes a bully to subdue a bully. But that’s not a politically correct suggestion, so nobody mentions it.
It was very amusing to watch the progressive CNN commentators looking quite panicked on Super Tuesday while discussing Donald’s proposed autocratic tactics and contrasting them with Ted Cruz’s promotion and adherence to Constitutional guidelines. Who would have thought that progressives could ever welcome the idea of Ted Cruz, even if by contrast to Donald Trump?!
In view of the Democrat party’s escalating Alinsky tactics in recent decades, our confidence in the ability of a controlled Christian gentleman diplomat like, say, Ben Carson, to win the culture war can be shaken.
Americans love the way Donald Trump takes no nonsense from the left and fights back. His counterpunches almost seem appropriate when dealing with practiced Alinskyites like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Donald Trump not only hits back, but hits back harder– as he did going after Bill Clinton’s sexual history when Hillary accused Trump of sexism. In Donald Trump’s own words, both Clintons “had a very bad weekend” after Donald was through with them on that issue.
That is not to say that Donald’s techniques are the best ones in the long run, particularly on the world stage, but we can all appreciate how satisfying it is to see a bully creamed.
Aside: we do need to ask ourselves whether we want to replace one bully with another, and whether a David could slay a Goliath more easily than a second Goliath could do the job, particularly with the assistance of a nation at prayer. We should remember that there is a contrast between the behavior of a Christian and that of a Progressive.
Why Did We Have 17 Republican Candidates?
Why 17 Candidates?
.Because there were 17 extremely talented, qualified, and patriotic men and women who were so dismayed at the destructive Progressive agenda of the Obama Administration that they were willing to run for office, to volunteer to captain a sinking ship.
Just as Americans flocked to the polls in 2014 and are flocking to the polls now in 2016 to reverse the progressive dictates of the present Obama administration, so too candidates are flocking to run for President as if to throw themselves sacrificially on the progressive hand grenade.
Note that the vast majority of these candidates are very conservative, and if one counts primary votes for conservatives versus liberals rather than counting votes for individuals, Donald Trump’s supporters are far outnumbered by Americans supporting conservative candidates.
Note also that the Rules of the Republican Party allow for such eventualities, and provide for a brokered convention when one candidate is not able to collect the support of the Party majority. The brokered convention then does the job of eliminating candidates through a series of votes until one candidate finally achieves a majority.
The “Big Rule Switch” in Rule 40(b)
Another important Elephant that never seems to be discussed by media is the “Big Rule Switch” that occurred surreptitiously at the 2012 Republican Convention in Tampa, and is now controlling and complicating this 2016 election.
This is important: so pay attention!
The Republican Party has always regarded Primaries in an advisory capacity, particularly since some states have allowed anyone, not just Republicans to vote in a Republican primary. In recent decades, there have been numerous illegitimate attempts by progressives to hijack the Republican Party via rule changes.
The most recent attempt involved Mitt Romney’s supporters in 2012 succeeding in introducing changes into the Rules of the Republican Party to exclude Ron Paul from participation in the Republican Convention and leaving Mitt Romney as the Presumptive Nominee.
Under the previous rules a candidate needed a plurality (most votes) in 5 State Primaries to go to the Convention. Two men cleared this hurdle in 2012 – Mitt Romney and Ron Paul.
Mitt Romney supporters managed in 2012 to get the bar to be set higher- suddenly, on the eve of the Republican Convention in Tampa in 2012, the rules were changed so that a candidate needed to get a majority (51% of votes) in 8 State Primaries to go on to the Convention. This “Big Rule Switch” in Rule 40(b) excluded Ron Paul from consideration, and handed the nomination to Mitt Romney.
Today, this same “Big Rule Switch” that helped liberal Mitt Romney to get nominated is getting in the way of liberal Donald Trump. Despite his obvious popularty and clear ability to get the plurality in 5 States, he has not been able to get the majority in 8 States (or in ANY State). It is looking like NO CANDIDATE will clear the new “Big Rule Switch” bar, and presumably all remaining candidates will go to the convention. Then, after the first vote, it will be possible to add additional names into the running, including those who suspended their campaigns like Scott Walker, and those who never declared candidacy, like Sarah Palin.
The “Big Rule Switch” May Lead Us Into a Brokered Convention
So Mitt Romney’s supporters in 2012 created a rule change which might force us into a “brokered convention” in 2016. This can actually be a good thing– when Republicans cannot agree on a nominee, having a run-off at the election where candidates compete again and additional candidates can be proposed is a good idea. This eliminates the danger of nominating a candidate who is backed by less than half the Party – as seems to be the case right now with Donald Trump.
Despite his obvious popularity, Donald Trump has not received a majority, over 50% in ANY state so far, and certainly not in 8 States, so he cannot be considered the Presumptive Nominee by any measure under the “Big Rule Switch” of 2012.
Confirming at the convention that a majority of Republicans are on board with nominating Donald would be a prudent precaution. Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan were products of a brokered convention, so this is not something to fear.
Could Primaries and Caucuses Be a Transient and Meaningless Experiment?
Should the approximately 2500 Republican Delegates who are elected to represent their States at the Republican Convention be bound to vote according to Primary and Caucus results obtained six months prior to the Convention?
According to Curly Haugland, National Committeeman from the North Dakota Republican State Committee, and member of the RNC Rules Committee, for the past 90 years RNC rules have prohibited the binding of Republican delegates. RNC rules continue to protect the right of each delegate to The Republican National Convention to vote their personal choice on issues coming before the convention, and for the candidate of their choice to receive the party’s nomination. Senators and Congress members have this right to use judgement, and so do Republican Party delegates.
In recent times, progressives who would like to hijack the Republican Party and the media which supports them have been pressuring Republicans to rely more and more on Primary results, rather than allowing the Convention to be the final determining factor in nomination as it has been in the past. Some States have even passed laws requiring delegates to be bound by Primary results. But the Rules of the Republican Party clearly indicate that no State can supersede the Rules of the Republican Party or the freedom of their delegates.
The media pressure and spin has been so great in recent decades that many Americans do not even realize that Primary votes are only advisory in nature, are not binding, that Democrats and Independents participate in Republican Primaries, and that Republican delegates also carry the responsibility to keep candidates accountable to the principles outlined in the Republican Party Platform.
Relying on Primary results might sound democratic, but giving undue weight to the Primaries actually permits outsiders to hijack the Party more easily and allows in candidates (like Mitt Romney) who do not support the entire Republican Party platform.
Relying heavily on Primary results for nomination also gives more power to money interests, by preserving the results obtained during the Primary season, and taking away the right of elected delegates to use their judgement at the Conventions, as our Senators and Congressmen do when they vote in Washington D.C.
The idea of “binding” delegates to the results of the Primaries also prevents delegates from considering events that occur between the Primaries to the Convention in the nomination process. What if a Republican candidate was subject to prosecution by the FBI as Democrat Hillary Clinton may be, would delegates still feel bound to vote for that candidate at the Convention?
The idea of holding Primaries and Caucuses to advise Republican delegates of their Party member’s interests was a good idea in the past. But in this progressive world which legislates allowing Democrats to vote in Republican Primaries, and in which political hijackings occur frequently, the idea of binding has become preposterous, and even the concept of holding Primaries and Caucuses should be reevaluated.
Super Tuesday Numbers – What Do They Mean?
This 2016 Super Tuesday’s Numbers show three remarkable things:
- Donald Trump did not get a majority (over 50%) in ANY State, let alone 8 States.
By the 2012 “Big Rule Switch,” he is not the Presumptive Nominee.
- Donald Trump still has only 319 delegates (if you believe in binding) of a required 1,237 to win. He has one quarter of the delegates needed to win, but he cannot even count on those in a climate in which delegates could feel more allegiance to the Party Platform than to a candidate who is not a “social conservative.”
- Republican turnout was phenomenal compared both with previous Republican turnout and compared with Democrat turnout, which was much reduced. So unless an awful lot of Democrats suddenly stayed home on Super Tuesday, this means that a large number of Democrats “turned” and voted for Republicans. American Thinker claims that we are witnessing an incredibly shrinking Democrat Party in this election.
Other conclusions can be drawn from the Super Tuesday numbers as well-
1/3 Trump versus 2/3 Social Conservatives
(AKA Serious Christians)
So here is another Elephant in the room which is never pointed out – that the other four candidates, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Carson, are all “social conservatives” (like me).
What does this mean?
Being “social conservatives” means that they uphold certain moral values – opposing abortion, preserving traditional marriage, and defending religious liberty in the United States. These are, incidentally, fundamental Christian values, or “moral” values.
This means that 65% of voters in Republican Primaries, and that includes some Independents and Democrats, vote “social conservative,” and include morality in their conservatism, not just fiscal conservatism.
It is not surprising that Republican voters and most Republican candidates support “social conservative values” since the Republican Party Platform supports “social conservative” values.
This observation should make for some interesting sorting of votes and delegates at the Republican Convention, and Donald Trump could struggle to reach his desired 51% for nomination. As candidates drop out, social conservative voters will probably go to another social conservative, and not to Donald Trump.
So if you tabulate the Super Tuesday numbers as Trump (“economy rules!”) versus Social Conservatives (“morality rules!”), we could be in for a very interesting convention. We really could end up electing a poorly known morally upstanding person like Abraham Lincoln or Ronald Reagan– not only from the original 17 candidates, but from other sources as well. Some have even suggested that Sarah Palin is not out of the question.
Last But Not Least- Elephant #6
If This Election Breaks With the Past, What Are the New Rules and the New Determinants for this Election?
The previous 5 issues affecting this 2016 Election indicate that we are breaking new ground here.
We can speculate on who may try what, and what the outcome will ultimately be.
But as mentioned initially, Black Swans are never predictable, and rarely controllable, except through prayer.
Both sides, Republican Progressives and Republican Conservatives, as well as those Democrats who are trying to hijack the Republican Party (from whose ranks Donald Trump has not been entirely out ruled!) may try many of the above approaches to steer things their own way-
- bluffing and claiming victory based on legally non-binding primaries
- threatening and coercing delegates to obtain their votes (happened in 2012, when 400 Republican delegates filed a lawsuit alleging violence and intimidation)
- trying to dominate Republican Rule Committee or Republican Platform Committee to make last minute eve-of-the election changes as was done in 2012
- introducing new candidates during the brokered convention
- trying to convince and/or intimidate delegates that they are indeed “bound”
- using media to spin numbers to their own advantage
- there are many more surprising things that are bound to happen but which are not predictable
What Should We Do?
What should we do?
I plan to sit back, watch, pray, participate in some conservative activism, and vote.
You should too.
See my election guide from 2014- the same rules still apply- vote for the most moral candidate, pro-life topping the list, and pray.
I truly believe that we are watching the moral reawakening of America, which is guided by an interaction between Church and State – from the bottom up, not religion imposed from above. I am very excited about Christians having the chance to reclaim our Judeo-Christian roots and our Constitution, and believe that we are now watching this process, emboldened by our delightful Mr. Trump. The morality that will result will be a synthesis of what we all believe and what we agree on. Like the Constitution, it will be encompassed democratically, grass roots up, in our laws.
What Should We Expect?
Should we expect more surprises along the way?
Who knows, with the surprising nature of Black Swans, Donald Trump could even be our St. Paul!
(Although I am not holding my breath.)
God Bless America, and God Bless Our Candidates!
Any one of the Republican contenders will be an improvement over the Progressive Agenda of the last eight years.
Dr. Ben Carson.
Yes, I know he just announced that he “sees no political path forward” after Super Tuesday’s results.
But re-entry through a brokered convention would not be a political path forward.
Could the good doctor be avoiding the political, high-spending, favor-exchanging world of the Primaries, and be planning to step into the Convention directly and apolitically, where the market of ideas is tested by delegates who uphold the Republican Party Platform?
Time will tell.
That would be one elegant and unexpected possible result.
When you interconnect Church and State, many new options become possible for the American people, with God in their corner.
The Biggest Issue of All
God is a best example of the elephants in the room of American politics- a very large, important and crucial issue that everyone is acutely aware of, but nobody wants to talk about.
The Freedom of Religion Foundation has tried to ensure that.
But we won’t count God as an Elephant; too disrespectful.
However, if you count God in, you will have a smoother ride.
In politics, and everywhere else.