Republicans Suddenly Finding ‘Scheduling Conflicts’ That Preclude Showing Up In Cleveland
An increasing number of Republican politicians are finding reasons to skip the Republican National Convention.
The New York Times notes that many Republicans are rushing to announce that they won’t be attending the Republican National Convention in July, and that even some of those who will be there won’t exactly be enthusiastically supporting their party’s nominee for President:
A wave of prominent Republicans have announced their intention to skip the party’s national convention in Cleveland this summer, the latest sign that Donald J. Trump, who last week secured the delegates needed to clinch the Republican presidential nomination, continues to struggle in his effort to unite the party behind his candidacy.
The list of those who have sent regrets includes governors and United States senators — almost all facing tough re-election fights this year — and lifelong party devotees who have attended every convention for decades. Some are renouncing their seats like conscientious objectors.
“I could not in good conscience attend a coronation and celebration of Donald Trump,” wrote one Indiana delegate, Josh Claybourn, in a blog post resigning his position.
The coolness toward Mr. Trump amounts to a remarkable rebuke. A broad range of party leaders are openly rejecting the man who will be their nominee. And the July 18-21 convention, usually a moment of public catharsis for political parties after contentious primaries, is shaping up to be another reminder of the disarray and disunity that is still rocking theRepublican Party after a bitter 17-way fight for the nomination.
The coolness toward Mr. Trump amounts to a remarkable rebuke. A broad range of party leaders are openly rejecting the man who will be their nominee. And the July 18-21 convention, usually a moment of public catharsis for political parties after contentious primaries, is shaping up to be another reminder of the disarray and disunity that is still rocking the Republican Party after a bitter 17-way fight for the nomination.
Even the two highest-ranking Republicans in the convention’s host state of Ohio — Gov. John Kasich and Senator Rob Portman, who is fighting to hold onto his seat — say they do not know if they will set foot in the convention hall.
Mr. Kasich, who only four weeks ago quit the presidential campaign and has not endorsed Mr. Trump, has no idea “what role if any he will have,” a spokesman said. He will be in Cleveland that week but has no plans, as of now, to partake in any official convention activities.
Several other of Mr. Trump’s former rivals for the nomination have said they will not attend or have not committed. Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida, will not be there. Neither will Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina.
“I’m sure it will be fun, I’m sure it will be entertaining,” Mr. Graham said last week. “And I can watch it on TV.”
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who is a delegate as well as a former presidential candidate, has yet to decide. “T.B.D.,” a spokesman said. “The schedule is still being firmed up.”
At least two former competitors of Mr. Trump’s are expected to attend: Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who last week offered his services as a speaker should they be wanted.
Among those staying away include some major corporations like Coca-Cola, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard.
And some who do plan to be there might find the atmosphere somewhat uncomfortable.
Mr. Trump has still not fully reconciled with Speaker Paul D. Ryan, the convention’s chairman, who said in early May that he was not ready to support the nominee and would relinquish the role if asked.
Mr. Trump is also at odds with the head of the Republican Governors Association, Susana Martinez of New Mexico, who will lead her state’s delegation in Cleveland. Ms. Martinez has also withheld her endorsement, a slight that evidently prompted Mr. Trump to attack her performance in office last week.
Scheduling conflicts seem to be a surprisingly common excuse for missing an event that was announced a year and a half ago. Others offered mushy noncommitments.
“Just as they’re firming up the schedule, it kind of looks like there’s a lot of stuff for me to do,” said Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, explaining why he probably couldn’t make it.
Asked if Mr. Trump had anything to do with his reluctance, Mr. Johnson, who is in a heated re-election campaign, broke into a big smile and said, “Oh, of course not.”
Gov. Rick Snyder of Michigan, a state Mr. Trump has said he believes the Republicans can wrest from Democrats this year, also might have more important things to do at home. “Michigan has some pressing challenges right now,” a spokeswoman said last week, “and state issues are his foremost priority.”
Mr. Snyder is one of at least nine Republican governors who are noncommittal or skipping the convention: Mr. Kasich, Brian Sandoval of Nevada, Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, Bruce Rauner of Illinois, Larry Hogan of Maryland, Nikki R. Haley of South Carolina, Matt Mead of Wyoming and Nathan Deal of Georgia.
“I don’t even want to be involved,” Mr. Hogan said in an interview in March. “It’s a mess. I hate the whole thing.”
Obviously, the “scheduling conflict” excuse is something of a canard that candidates are delivering to reporters with a wink-and-nod attitude that acknowledges what the truth actually is in this situation. The date of the convention has been known for the better part of two years now, so the idea that there’s already something on the schedule that takes priority is the kind of white lie that politicians tell to avoid admitting the truth. If these politicians believed that attending the convention was in their interest, or that not attending would harm them politically in some way, then they’d find a way to be there. What’s obviously happening here is that a number of Republican office holders and candidates, alarmed by what has been unleashed with the triumph of Donald Trump, are choosing to put as much distance between themselves and Trump as possible. This is true not only of many of Trump’s former rivals for the Republican nomination, but also, understandably, among Senators who are up for re-election in battleground states. This is a list that includes everyone from Mark Kirk in Illinois to Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire and Rob Portman from Ohio. Even John McCain, who once again faces a challenge from the right in a primary this year in addition to what could be a tough re-election battle in the fall. In each case, the rather obvious concern is that being seen as associated too closely with Trump will do more harm to their campaigns than it will do good.
Obviously, news like this doesn’t bode well for the Trump campaign since it calls into question just how united the Republican Party will be headed into the fall. Traditionally, it’s been the case that former rivals bury the hatchet well before the convention and that everyone puts on a brave face for the convention and headed into the General Election. These are not ordinary times, though. Trump isn’t just a controversial candidate, he’s one that many Americans outside of the Republican Party rightfully find offensive and distasteful. Given that many of these public officials are up for re-election in 2016 or beyond, openly associating with someone who is so disliked is far riskier than any price they’ll pay for failing to show up for a four day party in Cleveland that is likely to become even more garish than ever thanks to the fact that someone as boorish and tasteless as Trump will be dictating much of the agenda and the entertainment. It’s not exactly a profile in courage given the fact that most of these same politicians also won’t publicly denounce Trump for fear of alienating the Republican voters they will also need to win re-election. Nonetheless, it’s also bad news for Trump since it virtually guarantees that the story out of Cleveland will be as much about the people who aren’t there and what that says about lack of unity in the Republican Party as it will be about Trump’s triumph. Those aren’t the kind of headlines you want to see heading into a General Election.
Nobody wants to party with Donald? Weird. Almost like they can’t stand him or something. Not really the cool kids table if nobody’s sitting at it, is it?
They can’t quite manage to be actively patriotic, but they can be passive-aggressively patriotic. Call it a patriotic pout.
According to all the available evidence, Hillary Clinton is just slightly ahead of Donald Trump in the polls and is despised by almost as big a majority of the public. Yet no one seems to have any trouble sidling up next to her on the campaign trail or planning to attend the Democratic convention.
Which sadly confirms what I’ve feared. People are seeing Trump as some sort of freak, unpredictable and unique act of God rather than the product of the profound, dysfunctional failure of our system and our culture.
Mike
@MBunge:
Trump is the ultimate expression of the GOP id. The only people who find him unpredictable are those who are in denial about what today’s GOP represents.
And “our culture?” You’re lumping in a whole lot of people who’ve spent their lives fighting everything Trump represents. Why do you assign blame to them?
Both conventions appear to be shaping up to be embarrassing debacles. A group called Occupy DNC Convention says it already has 20,000 Sanders supporters signed up to protest the “fraudulent nomination” of Hillary Clinton in Philadelphia.
And Donald is planning a show biz extravaganza: chorus girls, a few Vegas lounge acts, gold-painted toilet fixtures, all the cheap champagne one can guzzle…
It’s enough to make you kill yourself.
I’ve said this before on this venue…we are going to see, in the coming months, whether Republicans love their party or their country more.
This is the kind of situation that tests your mettle, your principals.
Are you going to dutifully fall in behind the party line, or are you going to be honest and acknowledge that Donald Trump is the most unfit candidate for the office of the Presidency, ever?
The party of cowards is having their courage weighed and measured. I suspect we shall find it wanting.
@Mikey: Why do you assign blame to them?
Let me give you an example.
The Huffington Post tags all their Trump stories with a postscript that Trump is a racist, sexist, lying, etc.
When they write a story about Mitch McConnell, they don’t tag it with “Mitch McConnell is an unpatriotic scoundrel who puts selfish partisan interests before the good of the country.”
They don’t tag stories about Paul Ryan with “He’s an Objectivist loon who hasn’t recovered from reading Ayn Rand when he was 16.”
I don’t believe they’ve ever tagged Dick Cheney stories with a list of his alleged war crimes.
They don’t tag Bill Clinton stories with…well, you get the idea.
The problem isn’t that Trump is terrible. The problem is how someone supposedly so terrible got to where he is, and that’s not just a problem with Republicans.
Mike
@CSK:
Color me skeptical that the 20,000 people who would sign an online pledge will also spend the money to book crazy-expensive hotel rooms, travel to Philadelphia, sit through hours or days of convention business (unless they are planning to protest right away and then go home?), all to yell “Boo” at Hillary.
Then again, this election season….
He got to where he is because mostly Republicans voted for him, certainly not Democrats or most Independents…
Meanwhile, despite the fact that the Democratic nomination process still isn’t officially over and despite whatever some far left loons may or may not do in Philadelphia, the information in this post illustrates how it is the GOP that is the political party in disarray and that can’t help Republicans’ chances in the fall…
One of the last remaining Conservatives, on Trump:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/05/the-seven-broken-guardrails-of-democracy/484829/
@CSK:
We saw the same type of claims in 2008 by the PUMAs. Busloads of them even actually protested.
And far more Sanders supporters today have stated they would vote for Clinton than Clinton supporters for Obama at the same point in the cycle.
Nothing new under the sun…
@SKI:
I was thinking more along the lines of Chicago 1968.
The issue I-I-I-I-I-is that, um, um, um, um, Trump, a-a-a-and 71% support, supositories indicted-induced-insane-um-um…………………………………Hillary and, um, okie doke Dominoke.
@CSK: Highly unlikely, IMO. NOt with 70% of Sanders supporters _already_ supporting Clinton.
’68 was really unique in ways that don’t correlate today. Bobby Kennedy had about 15% of the possible delegates when he was killed. 80% of the primary voters had cast their ballots for anti-wat candidates but the vote by delegates was 3:2 in favor of Humphrey – who hadn’t entered any of the primaries in the 13 states that actually had them.
And that last bit is a real issue. There simply weren’t a lot primaries to express the will of the Democratic base/party. It really was a backroom deal type thing.
Add in Daley’s reaction when 10,000 protesters showed up despite his refusal to permit most of them. He countered with 23,000 police and National Guard troops who were violent and used lots of tear gas.
Today, we have actual primaries those results are pretty transparent and accepted as authentic.
We have a 2 candidate race in those primaries.
We have a much more restrained/civilized approach to policing. There is no way that Jim Kenney orders out all the police and the National Guard with directives to prevent protests through violence.
2008 is a much more applicable comparison.
@Neil Hudelson:
I’m seeing something like the Occupy protests here in NYC, where angst ridden upper middle class suburban kids sat around drinking $6 a cup Starbucks & ragetwittering away on their iPads & iPhones about income & racial inequality. I couldn’t help but notice that, here in one of the most diverse cities in the world, they were a remarkably white bunch of people. It was a monumental statement about irony and protest tourism.
Let’s do the Bible challenge for those who’ve indicated pressing concerns elsewhere. Ask them to swear with their hand on a Bible that it had nothing to do with Trump.
One of Trump’s spokesmen came out a couple of weeks ago about how this convention was going to be different, that the man himself was going to use his vast reality TV experience to bring some energy to it. Two ideas he
testedspeculated upon were that Trump would speak all four nights (traditionally the nominee only speaks on the last night after officially becoming the nominee, and that Trump would hold off the announcement of the VP, so as to build tension.That last one would be a sight to see: maybe Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Paul Ryan and Sarah Palin would be trotted out on stage each night and Trump would “fire” one of them and tell them in front of all their fellow Repubs how they didn’t measure up. On the third night, after the firing, only one would remain so, of course that would be the VP. BUT NO!! On the very last night Trump fires them too! And brings out… his butler!!! The world would cheer!
@C. Clavin:
Many are already choosing party over country/personal principles by basically admitting that they will blindly support the “Republican nominee” under the guise that there must be “party unity”! We are already finding out who the empty suits are! I fully expect Paul Ryan to join the circus!
@MarkedMan: Egads. Four straight nights of Trump as the headline speaker? No wonder everyone is suddenly “busy.”
He really does love the sound of his own voice. What a nightmare for those in attendance.
On the Democratic side–in 2008, were random PUMAs calling up state party chairs issuing death threats? I think most of these callers are full of bluster (The Slot on Jezebel tracked a few of them down and asked them what they were hoping to accomplish by issuing threats and almost all of them said they got carried away), but in a group–I’m thinking a busload or two of the Occupy folks from NYC–they might be emboldened. Regardless, I think it will be a smaller crowd and protest. At least I hope so.
@Guarneri:
Does anyone have any idea what that mess means??? Even you, Guarneri?
@Guarneri:
When you get near a point, make one.
@Guarneri:
You should go with pure gibberish more often; it’s so much more compelling than your attempts at making sense.
@michael reynolds:
More genuine, anyway.
@C. Clavin:
Could be a stroke. He could be on his bathroom floor, clutching his phone in his one usable hand, desperately trying to ask us for help, but with his left brain bleeding he’s lost his language functions.
I wonder if he should try emoticons? Is there an emoticon for, “I’m not just an idiot, I’m having a stroke?”
@michael reynolds:
😛
The New York Times…really?
@MarkedMan: I was thinking that he’d do it more “Bachelor-Style”, and hand out roses to the final 4 (of 5) VP contenders. (and then 3, 2 and then just 1 as a finale).
And don’t forget the obligatory hot tub scene.
@Mike in DC:
my god, you’ve put such an awful image in my head. Trump with that orange hair plastered to his head. And you know he’d be wearing a Speedo, probably with some kind of cod piece jammed into it…
What was the typical excuse we were supposed to use while dating? “Sorry, but I have to organize my sock drawer…”
That’s a lot of people who “have to wash their hair” on date night.
@michael reynolds:
“Help, I’ve fallen and I’m entitled to have a lesser person help me to get up!”
or maybe, “Help I’ve fallen and it’s Obama’s fault!”
I had to swipe this from one of the comment threads over at the NYT:
@MarkedMan: And so close to lunchtime too.
Of course, you don’t have to imagine this picture, The Oatmeal has already done it for you. (If you’ve never heard of the oatmeal, run, don’t walk to his website. a little NSFW)
I give you, Trump in a Bernie Sanders speedo.
eta nsfw warning
@CSK:
Remember that time one million truckers shut down DC to protest tyranny? Or that time one million veterans showed up to protest Obama trampling the constitution? Neither do I, because Facebook likes do not actually equal actual protests.
As long as Sanders doesn’t decide to burn the party down, the DNC will be fine.
@C. Clavin:
Actually, I see it a bit differently. The Republican base has clearly indicated that they want Trump and his vision of what America should be. The issue here is really, does the Republican leadership fall in line with the desires of the base? IOW, do they agree with the base that Trump truly reflects what their party is? Those who fall the line with Trump will signal that they agree with the base: those who stay away would be rejecting the vision of the base.
It’s not so much party over country as what kind of party they think the Republican Party should be.
@humanoid.panda:
Q: How many veterans does it take to protest Obama’s trampling of the Constitution?
A: 999,999 to “like” it on Facebook, and one (1) to call in to Sean Hannity’s show to complain about it on the air.
@Mike in DC:
This made me chuckle, since the site’s author, Matthew Inman, is an avid long-distance runner.
They are going to occupy themselves
Some will occupy the DNC
No doubt protesters will try to occupy Cleveland
And all the while, Donald Trump will occupy the prime time of the news channels and the nightly legacy news on the broadcast channels. As well as the talk shows.
@stonetools:
For many in the current Republican party, the line is currently “Well we can’t offend the KKK and the Hail Hydra factions of our party…”
@stonetools:
You’re over-thinking it.
People like McConnell have decided it’s more important to support the party than do what’s good for the country.
Ryan will too, eventually.
This does not apply to people like JKB and Jenos….they are simply dupes.
@michael reynolds:
Or in his case…
A new trend is developing of Republican state legislators publicly announcing their switch to the Libertarian Party (Nevada in January, Nebraska this week, Utah by August).
None of these people are ashamed to be seen with Governor Gary Johnson or Governor Bill Weld. Voters expect their presidential candidates to have gravitas and demonstrated experience in the policy arena. Not being vulgar or under investigation for felony crimes is a plus, too.
(off topic) Josh Marshall has been running some editor blog posts questioning whether Trump is really worth even $1B. It seems pretty reasonable to think he isn’t (for example: on FEC filings he lists gross revenue as income. Normally income is considered gross revenue minus costs and for most businesses would be about 1/10th or less). But it has made me wonder again about a long held impression I’ve had of Trump – that he has serious cash flow problems. That whatever his worth, he doesn’t have a lot of actual income.
In support of this is the fact that his self funding of the campaign actually are loans and that it appears he’s approached the RNC about paying him back. Another: the few charitable donations he makes seem to be tax dodges for his various businesses (ex: a round of golf for at his golf course, no incremental cost to him but valued at the most expensive cost of a round). Another: the weird way he treated the whole vet thing. It was more than just trying to weasel out of the $1M he had pledged, he created the impression that he was looking to hold onto the money others had donated for himself or his campaign. And finally, all the penny ante stuff he gets involved in. Renting out his name, for one. There are all kinds of buildings that have gone up with “Trump” on them in the past couple of decades, but the common wisdom are that none are actually his deals, just him renting out his name. The Trump University scam, the water, the wine, the steaks, all of this seems like a low rent hustler, not some business magnate.
The one thing that really goes against this “near broke” theory is the air fleet. I understand running multiple airplanes and a helicopter takes a lot of cash, even if you got them on the cheap. If my impression of cash flow problems was correct then he wouldn’t be able to afford them.
I guess an alternate theory is that having barely survived multiple bankruptcies and essentially being put on an allowance by his creditors for years he may just be instinctively miserly at this point.
@C. Clavin: People like McConnell have decided it’s more important to support the party than do what’s good for the country.
Ryan will too, eventually.
Very timely post!
House Speaker Paul Ryan on Thursday gave in to political pressure to support Donald Trump, writing in an op-ed in his hometown Wisconsin newspaper that he will vote for the presumptive Republican nominee for president this fall.
Now that Trump has the Wisconsin whiz kid on his team, the others will fall in line. If Mussolini were running, they’d be on board too.
@C. Clavin: Does anyone have any idea what that mess means??? Even you, Guarneri?
I’d imagine that Guarneri is mocking the President’s stutter during his speech yesterday in Indiana:
Then again, it could just be a coincidence.
@SenyorDave: I thought Mussolini was running, only this time with orange hair.
@MarkedMan: I read Marshall’s piece earlier today, it’s interesting.
What is even more interesting to me is that Trump almost certainly got in this race to boost his brand a bit, maybe get on a speaking circuit after dropping out, to raise some cash. He wasn’t bargaining on this level of scrutiny, and it could well do damage to his brand overall. He could well come out of this in far worse shape than he went in.
What Jen said. It could all be backfiring. And he’s telling the GOP now that BTW he doesn’t really have any money to run on.
The Party of Stupid.
@MarkedMan: Trump will hang on to the airplanes and the glitz before anything else because they’re part of what he thinks “a rich man” should have and they are part of his image of himself.
This is starting to remind me of the Zen koan:
(This also reminds of the piece of advice I’ve heard from investment advisors: if the CEO of a company buys a company airplane, sell the stock.)
“Endorse” is such a weak word. “Embrace” seems better. As the Republicans embrace Donald Trump, they embrace his values (grift, pettiness and know-nothing arrogance), they embrace his rhetoric, they embrace his take-charge style (fascism, basically) and they welcome his fellow travelers (white supremacists, etc).
They make a choice to embrace Trump, and it should not be forgotten.
So what’s a quorum for a GOP convention, anyway? How many delegates would have to stay away for it to be impossible to nominate anyone?
@HarvardLaw92:
It’s laughable, watching someone like this, with a history of racist comments on this site, try to hide behind a supposed concern for diversity.
@Rafer Janders:
Perhaps you should view it through the intended frame – my sense of contempt for their disconnected paternalism & hypocrisy.
@HarvardLaw92: Comment by someone (mentioning her husband) over at Balloon-Juice in a thread with an extremely tiresome BernieBros:
I’m not sorry I voted for Bernie in the Illinois primary, but sheesh, you’d think that the man could see the writing on the wall. And his present supporters are even worse. They remind me of RonPaulites.
@Rafer Janders:
A ‘history of racist comments?’ Unless you can support that with some facts, that is way out of line. I’ve seen no evidence to suggest that HL92 is racist or makes racist remarks.
@michael reynolds:
Now you have, at the link below. I’ve excerpted some of his more, ah, choice comments on that thread here:
We have the same shiftless, lazy people (which is what they are – uncomfortable facts …) sitting around on steps that we had when I was a child.
My sympathy now is reserved for the people whose distasteful job it is to corral them and keep them under control so the rest of us can live our lives out in some semblance of order.
the hordes down in West Baltimore who’ve made a drug dealer into their latest hero du jour.
I believe they’re [the cops] being railroaded in order to placate the natives,
Just how long do you think will be required for these people to step up and take responsibility for their own lives?
These people tried to kill my nephew Monday night, so whatever sympathy or goodwill they might have had with me is gone
the life of a scum drug dealer
You become the enemy.
As far as justice, no, I am not concerned with it.
you effete bleeding-heart asshole
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/six-baltimore-police-officers-charged-in-death-of-freddie-gray/#comment-2013376
@HarvardLaw92:
No, I’ll view it through my sense of contempt for your racism, disconnected elitism and hypocrisy, thanks.
@Rafer Janders:
You can view it however you like – I get paid either way and you don’t sign my paychecks, so I’m not inclined to really GAD about your opinion.
Shouldn’t you be out saving somebody? 🙄
@Rafer Janders:
Funny, I don’t see a single mention of race in that list of comments.
I DO see several mentions of contempt for laziness, rioting, melodramatic “save the world” types and drug dealers. I’ll stand behind those comments, because all of those are things that I have a deep, profound degree of contempt for
Regardless of the color of their wrapper.
Please proceed, Governor.
@Rafer Janders: lol, blow me, Mother Teresa 🙂
@Rafer Janders: I just thought he was drunk and on a rant that night (I assumed), but as it continued, I came to see that in the dark night of his soul, he has…well, let’s just say “unresolved issues.”
@Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker:
Plus, he’s back to his old game of getting his interns to goose the up or down votes.
test