How Do Republicans ‘Distance Themselves’ From The Majority Of GOP Voters?

As the long overdue implosion of the Republican Party continued apace yesterday in light of Trump’s “Grab ’em by the pussy” statement (friendly tip: voters don’t like sexual assault. BIGLY), one phrase that was repeated over and over was something along the lines of ‘Republicans are attempting to distance themselves from Trump.’ (The constant use of that phrase yesterday strongly suggests talking points, by the way).

Well, good fucking luck with that, assholes. Because the problem isn’t Trump. Trump was not appointed by a secret cabal, nor did he claim the nomination after a military coup. No, Trump was elected by Republican primary voters, having received more votes than any other Republican primary candidate in history, and millions more than any other candidate in 2016.

Republican voters, the slavering Uruk-hai shock troops of the right, are the problem: Trump is merely the symptom. Apparently, groping white women is a step too far, while the rampant bigotry that has been on display is acceptable–or at least, an acceptable compromise in the quest for a capital gains tax cut. They liked the comparison of gay marriage to bestiality. They liked the racist and sexist dog whistles (and air raid sirens).

Twelve years ago, I noted that a key element of the Republican party is its bigoted base.

How can a political party distance itself from a key part of its coalition?

This entry was posted in Conservatives. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to How Do Republicans ‘Distance Themselves’ From The Majority Of GOP Voters?

  1. Reblogged this on Wide Awake But Dreaming and commented:
    “Republican voters, the slavering Uruk-hai shock troops of the right, are the problem: Trump is merely the symptom.”

  2. Tracy Lightcap says:

    Actually, I think it will prove fairly easy to do.

    Predictions about the demise of political parties are usually a bit over the top. The effect of Trump’s candidacy will depend on the extent of the GOP’s defeat next month. If they get killed (maybe), they’ll be forced to re-think – again – their future as a party. That could easily lead to a split in the party along existing fault lines and, potentially, to a real realignment involving the emergence of a new second party. If they lose along 2012 lines (more likely), they’ll re-trench and try to get an establishment conservative on to the hustings for 2020. That’ll give everyone who’s a Pub a chance to write Trump off as an aberration – true enough – and try to reconstitute the Reagan coalition on pragmatic grounds. That will probably succeed and, depending on how well the Dems do in the off-year, may lead to a delayed presidential victory. Political memories tend to be pretty leaky in the US and the kinds of excesses we’ve seen this year in their “base” can be covered up. Further, this really should be a Pub year; nominating Trump is why gave the Dems the chance to win without biting their nails to the quick this year. They’ll remember that after four years of Hillary Clinton.

    But you never know. If Clinton not only wins, but the Dems take the Senate and run the Pub lead in the House down enough, it could be the end for the present GOP.

Comments are closed.