Donald Trump’s sweep of the Indiana primary proves beyond a doubt he will be the Republican presidential candidate.
On Tuesday night in Indianapolis, Ted Cruz threw in the towel and signaled the end of a doomed effort to derail Trump.
Establishment Republicans, in particular the neocon faction, have flirted with the idea of launching a third party to oppose Trump. It’s far too late for that, however.
Advocates are up against the clock and will be hard pressed to collect millions of dollars needed to get the party rolling. Many states have complex rules and deadlines for third-party candidates. Collecting the required number of signatures to get third party candidates on general election ballots will be a herculean task.
“There is absolutely no talk or consideration of a third party candidate from any serious Republican,” Fred Malek, a veteran GOP fundraiser, told BuzzFeed. “Although a lot of us prefer a candidate other than Trump, the strong sense is that we must have a unified party post-convention to have any chance of reversing the leftward lurch of the last seven years.”
Neocons for Hillary
For many diehard Republicans, especially foreign policy “hawks,” there is only one viable alternative—vote for Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Steve Schmidt, a Republican campaign strategist, told MSNBC on the eve of the Indiana primary he believes there will be “a concerted and organized effort by the Hillary Clinton campaign to go after senior members of the Republican foreign policy establishment. Big names. I’m not trying to put a partisan imprint on David Petraeus. But names like Petraeus, retired General Odierno, Colin Powell, Brent Scowcroft. Men and women who served in senior positions, in national security positions, in Republican administrations. The Clinton campaign’s going to go after them. They’re going to go after them forcefully. And I think you look ahead now in the weeks to come… the candidate in the race most like George W. Bush and Dick Cheney from a foreign policy perspective is in fact Hillary Clinton, not the Republican nominee.”
On April 28, a Suffolk University poll found that 19% of Republicans say they will support Hillary Clinton if Donald Trump wins the Republican nomination. That number was leavened, however, by 18% that said they would stay home and not vote if Trump wins the nomination. Politico predicts disaffected Republicans who do not vote will result in the GOP losing seats in both the House and the Senate.
“Donald Trump is a weapon of mass Republican destruction. The door is open for Hillary Clinton to build a gigantic general election coalition by attracting nearly 20% of Republicans to her campaign,” writes Jason Easley.
In December, Infowars reported on disaffected Republicans hinting or outright declaring support for Clinton over Trump. A prominent neocon and senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Max Boot, wrote for The New York Times “it is clear that in administration councils she was a principled voice for a strong stand on controversial issues, whether supporting the Afghan surge or the intervention in Libya.” Boot told Vox he believes Clinton is “vastly preferable” to Trump.
Boot was joined by fellow neocon Robert Kagan, who came out in favor of Clinton. Kagan said he feels “comfortable with her on foreign policy.” Eliot Cohen, a former Bush administration official, declared Clinton “the lesser evil, by a large margin.”
In November, WND reported a lunch hosted by former US Ambassador to the European Union Rockwell Schnabel.
“In attendance in a private dining room of the Hotel Bel-Air were powerful donors said to include Ronald Spogli, the venture capitalist and former ambassador to Italy under President George W. Bush; his business partner Bradford Freeman” and former Los Angeles Mayor Dick Riordan.
The donors were reportedly asked a hypothetical question: “If it was Donald Trump running against Hillary Clinton, who would you vote for?”
“One version has it that most of the Republicans at the table put their hands up for Clinton,” The Hill reported.
It is less than certain stay home Republicans and the disaffected who have declared support for Clinton represent sufficient momentum to turn the tide against Trump in favor of Clinton.
It does, however, underscore the fact there is little difference between establishment Republicans and Democrats, particularly in regard to foreign policy.