In my pursuit of understanding the inexplicable, I finally stumbled across a conspiracy theory posted at The Last Refuge detailing the RNC’s plan to nominate Jeb Bush. Before I begin quoting this theory for you, please understand that I am in no way endorsing this theory, nor am I even remotely bothered by its assertions. My hope is that you too will read this, understand what it is being used for, and then have a cup of herbal tea. Fearmongering gives the theorist power over your decision making abilities and robs you of your rational thought. It’s why conspiracy theories are so popular and effective and almost never true. I’ll explain the theory and quickly debunk it.
The theory begins….
In a very general sense the broad construct begins around a very specific premise: The GOPe knew they would need to devise a strategy to elect Jeb Bush with around 15 – 25% of the primary vote, depending on the state – through the first nine calendar primary races. [Dixie states at the low end, and New England states at higher thresholds.]
The idea here is to ensure that in more liberal states, the winner of the primary gets 100% of the delegates and in conservative states, the delegates are split.
Each voting sub-set or ideology within the Republican base, within a specific state, would need multiple options in order for the ‘Not-Jeb’ vote to be kept in check below the “risk margin” allowing Jeb’s small vote count to be victorious. We called this “fracturing the block“.
If a single part of Not-Jeb (remember he/she’s a group) began polling higher than Jeb, then add another similar candidate and split Not-Jeb again. Scott Walker, Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Marco Rubio and Rand Paul seemed to be the biggest risk to Jeb.
[Example: Tea Party conservative type voters would need multiple candidate options to fracture their voting block: (Walker, Cruz, Jindal, Rubio etc.)]
Obviously with 17 candidates, it goes without saying the key and essential tripwire was easily triggered. However, if it had not been – we would have stopped tracking.
This part of the theory details how the RNC would choose multiple candidates to split various subsets of the Republican Party. Obviously, this prediction has already faulted with Rick Perry dropping out of the race, leaving Ted Cruz a wider opening in Texas. If someone really is pulling the strings at the RNC, they forgot to fund the Perry campaign. Oopsy Daisy.
Again, the goal is to keep Jeb afloat by introducing a candidate into the larger “Not-Jeb” group who can remove support from any other larger growing bit of the “non-Jeb” candidate. Hence, South Carolina (Graham), Ohio (Kasich), Texas (Perry), and Florida (Rubio) – with further insurance policies in Virginia (Gilmore) and New York (Pataki).
Sticking with their theory that this is all about math and not ideology (because, of course, the voters are really machines programed and predictable?) it is obvious that the RNC is pushing candidates in important states to steal votes away from Conservatives. Except that Pataki in New York isn’t a conservative and is more likely to draw votes away from Bush and not away from the grassroots. Lyndsey Graham in South Carolina is a hardliner for the GOP Establishment. Again, not that anyone in SC will vote for him, he’d draw votes away from Bush, not Cruz or Paul. Kasich in Ohio is running as the fair left compassionate conservative and the only people that like him are also Bush supporters. No one is supporting Kasich instead of Cruz or Paul in Ohio. Perry likely would have split votes with Cruz and Paul in Texas, but the masterminds at the RNC forgot to fund his campaign and Perry is out. So, oops. Rubio in Florida could still be a problem for Cruz and Paul, however, it is important to remember that all three have been considered TEA Party candidates. Also, unless Rubio really does get his fundraising together, he might not be in the race come the Florida Primary.
If this is the establishment’s strategy to defeat conservatives, its horribly conceived and poorly executed.
This GOPe Jeb Bush roadmap also explains the timing of Kasich (Ohio), Pataki (New York) and Gilmore (Virginia) – although Fiorina is also registered homestead in VA.
These candidates are like Pac-Man gobbling up delegate votes from more conservative candidates, and planning to drop them back off in the bucket of Jeb Bush after endorsement at specific dates.
Gilmore? Really? If the RNC is so smart, why are they choosing fake candidates to derail conservative candidates who can’t poll double digits in their own States? And why isn’t the RNC choosing conservative candidates in Virginia, South Carolina, New York, and Ohio?
All you really need to know is how this conspiracy theory ends.
So worried about the success of conservative candidates like Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul are these theorists, that they conclude with a picture showing Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul as FOR SALE.
Only Trump isn’t for sale?
The message is clear, only Donald Trump can defeat the evil RNC plot to anoint another Bush.
If this really was what the RNC was looking for, then they are much less intelligent than I give them credit for. But alas, this is the conspiracy theory causing Ted Cruz and Rand Paul supporters to get behind Donald Trump.
This is absolutely ridiculous.
Now, having demonstrated how ridiculous this conspiracy theory is, I am hoping that those conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists that have jumped ship will be able to reevaluate this campaign. Luckily it’s still early and no one has voted on the basis of a lie; and even more fortunately, it is such an awful theory that it is easily debunked and set aside.
It is also important to understand that I do not believe for a second that Trump’s people are behind this. While I am not a Donald Trump supporter, I do understand that there are plenty of folks who really like his politics, his success, and his campaign platform. These are the true Trump supporters and this article is not designed to sway a single one of those. This article is only meant to debunk a theory that has affected the thinking of some conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists.
Article written by: Steven Brodie Tucker