The New York Times reported last Friday that McMullin -- a former GOP staffer and independent candidate running as the only "true conservative" in the presidential race -- is quickly gaining in the polls in Utah. McMullin began his campaign as essentially a protest candidate, someone able to give Republican voters a candidate they can vote for without feeling like they have to take a shower immediately afterward. However, McMullin has focussed his efforts almost entirely on winning Utah in the hopes of throwing the election to the House by depriving both Trump and Clinton of 270 electoral votes; this is an unlikely but plausible scenario if Trump wins enough swing states (see attached map for one scenario). The fact that his team does have a strategy for winning the White House would suggest McMullin's candidacy is more than just protest or blackmail.
In my view, how McMullin fits into Downs' party categories depends not on if he wins the White House (he won't--Clinton is poised to win in a blowout), but on what path the GOP takes after the election. Contra Trump, McMullin is a typical Republican in that he's an advocate of free trade and the TPP, and a staunch critic of Trump's isolationism and Muslim ban. If after November 8th the GOP reverts back to its traditional positions of free trade and interventionism, McMullin will forever be known as a protest candidate--i.e. one who springs into action only if his party drifts too far from its original ideological position. However, if the GOP embraces Trumpism and becomes an Americanized version of France's National Front, I think McMullin and his backers will see no choice but to officially start a new party committed to the GOP's former principles. The first option seems more likely, but the second is more fun to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment