- Ed note: Being against the current GOP establishment is akin to being selectively, at least,a prodisestablishmentarian of the GOPe.
- Main question from our censorious derogator of RNC Chairman Priebus is “what the hell does Priebus mean?”
- Indeed, what the hell do we mean!
Priebus Says He Won’t Turn Over Party to Trump if He Wins
(excerpts of Newsmax article below pithy comment received)
Not a Trump supporter, but I’m not a Rancid Priebus supporter either. I think Rancid needs to tell us if Cruz wins, will he “turn over the party” to him?
If not, who exactly would Rancid “turn over the party” to?
Would it have to be the one the establishment chooses? If not, does Rancid not intend to “turn over the party” to anyone and keep it for himself and the donor class and the consultants and the establishment’s incumbent”yes-men and “yes-women”?
Nice party you got there Rancid. Now all you’ll need is voters.
(Incidentally, what’s all this b***s*** about “Party unity” and “loyalty oaths”…and, oh yeah, ‘elections’?)
Via Newsmax:
If Donald Trump wins the Republican presidential nomination this summer, Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus is vowing not to give the billionaire’s campaign control over the party leading up to the November election, according to a report in The New York Times.
The Times said Priebus “has also let it be known that he does not plan to let the Trump campaign take over the party apparatus if he captures the nomination.
“At an off-the-record happy hour with reporters last week, Mr. Priebus said clearly that, regardless of precedent, he would not be layered over by Mr. Trump’s loyalists, according to two people present.”
So what does “Rancid” Priebus’ warning mean?
If Priebus and the establishment don’t like the nominee chosen by a majority of voters (1237, unlikely in the current case but for the sake of argument) does this mean the nominee, say Cruz, will not get full support in the general?
We have resented that a presidential nominee “traditionally” gets in our judgement an inappropriate level of control of the party such that the party is essentially subsumed to the extent that even the platform is adulterated. This is in spite of the fact that thousands of loyal earnest Republicans have labored to achieve a conservative platform, indeed it is what brings and keeps conservatives in the party.
Priebus became RNC Chairman in January of 2011, on the heals of the TEA Party revolution. His ascension from General Council for the RNC was over a year before Mitt Romney became even the likely nominee. Was there such a discussion or warning to Romney . . . or just the opposite?
So it is a valid question — what does Priebus’ comment mean? Is it that all of a sudden the GOPe wants its independence when it comes to Trump or Cruz? We welcome a normative situation where the party maintains a meaningful platform to guide all Republican candidates and not wholly subject to any candidate. We think that helps maintain down-ticket enthusiasm not dependent on idiosyncrasies of the presidential campaign. So where were you in 2012 Reince?
Readers can tell we are not all supercalifragilisticexpialidocious about the situation.
