Voting Their Conscience Means Voting Libertarian

The Trumpsters went hog wild when Cruz said GOPers should vote libertarian last night.

It's interesting the Trumpkins are so offended by the phrase "Vote your conscience." Think of what that says.

https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/756001830790844416

Why did it drive them so wild?

"Cruz’s public rebuke brought some immediate blowback."

"Doug Deason, a major Cruz donor now helping Trump, said he was “disappointed.” “He is a bigger man than that. He should have endorsed Trump, period,” Deason said, adding, “Ted didn't do himself any favors.”

"Shaun Ireland, a 33-year-old delegate from Texas, said, “There was so much good feeling and unity at this convention for three days, and Ted Cruz just came in and cravenly threw it against a brick wall just so he could set himself up for 2020.”

Martha Huckabay, a Louisiana delegate, said she burst into tears when she realized what Cruz was doing. “I haven't stopped crying,” she said, her eyes watering. “I’m devastated by what Cruz said.”

The Cruz delegates seemed enthused, and “for them voting your conscience means voting libertarian,” she said.

“I just sat down in disgust,” said Terrie Bourgeois, sitting next to Huckabay. “I felt repulsed.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/rnc-2016-donald-trump-unity-225915#ixzz4F2gzEzmU

There's are differing views on whether or not Cruz helps or hurts himself for 2020.

I agree with Brian Beutler. It was brilliant.

https://newrepublic.com/article/135366/ted-cruzs-betrayal-donald-trump-brilliant

Even Beutler only thinks it's great if Trump loses. But yesterday there was a story in Politico that Cruz intends to run in 2020 even if Trump is President.

Morning Joe insists that somehow Cruz hurt himself by doing this. He should have done what Rubio, Walker, Christie, and other GOP sad sacks did.

I don't know. Mostly I don't care. I loved this because it's mud in Trump's eyes, not because I really care what Cruz does in 2020 either way.

But I think it's plausible that in the future the question will be Where were you when Trump happened? and Cruz will have a much better answer than Little Marco, Chrisite, or Scott Walker. Or Paul Ryan for that matter.

Jeet Heer argues that the GOP is now the party of Trump and this will hurt Cruz.

"In terms of preserving his honor, Cruz did the right thing. Trump, after all, was the man who created the slur “Lyin’ Ted,” who insulted the physical appearance of Cruz’s wife, and who slyly suggested that Cruz’s father was involved in John F. Kennedy’s assassination. How could anyone keep their honor and endorse someone who had done all that?"

"But in terms of his long-term political ambitions, Cruz made a grievous mistake. Political parties are built on loyalty. You’re supposed to stick with your party-mates whether you disagree with them or not. There is some leeway in breaking ranks if a member is demonstrably corrupt, as Richard Nixon was during Watergate. Aside from such emergency exceptions, though, there’s nothing worse a party member can do than to fail to support a fellow candidate in their moment of need."

https://newrepublic.com/article/135357/ted-cruz-made-terrible-mistake

Ok. But there are normal parties and then there is the 2016 GOP. The normal rules don't apply. And Trump is more corrupt than Nixon who at least released his tax returns.

What you don't know in 2020 is where the center of gravity in the GOP. Anyway, it's not like Ted Cruz got this far by being a team player. If calling Mitch McConnell a liar on the Senate floor and backing the party into a disastrous government shutdown in 2013 didn't hurt him, it's not clear why this should either.

"Cruz’s cool rejection of Trump calls to mind the crisis that engulfed the Republican Party in 1964, when Barry Goldwater’s nomination polarized the party. Some of Goldwater’s rivals kept a distance, notably Nelson Rockefeller who was roundly booed during the 1964 convention not just for his reluctance to fall in line, but for his criticism of groups like the John Birch Society."

"Nixon took a different tack than Rockefeller. Privately, he thought that Goldwater was a disaster for the party. But in public, Nixon was a good soldier. He endorsed Goldwater, and diligently campaigned all over the country, trying to shore of down-ballot candidates threatened by the electoral tidal wave that crushed the Republican Party that year."

"Nixon’s loyalty wasn’t forgotten; party members remembered his service. He had many chits to collect when he ran again in 1968 and secured the Republican nomination. Conversely, Rockefeller never lived down his reputation as a traitor and was hated by the conservative wing of the party until the day he died. He never got further than being an unelected vice president."

"In 2016, Cruz is playing the role of Rockefeller, and Marco Rubio (among others) is playing the role of Nixon. History suggests that the Nixon gambit is the smart one, since it’s the only way to win the voters who make up the largest bloc of the GOP right now. If Trump goes down to a massive defeat in November, Cruz and other non-endorsers will be blamed for stabbing the nominee in the back. They’ll be seen by party loyalists as the cause of the defeat. And they will have no future in national politics."

Normally this would all be true. What mitigates it is twofold:

1. The 2016 GOP is not a normal party. They are in much worse health than 1964.

2. Ted Cruz's whole brand is he's never been a party man. Yet he has a niche around him. I think this only cements him.

It's tough to say anything about how 2020 looks. I think it might be a divided party with different subsets having a cage match for dominance.

P.S. Does this mean John Kasich is in trouble in 2020 too?

I doubt it. It's possible that in 2020 there will be both a Trump and anti Trump wing. Cruz sets himself up for that.