Your Blogmeister’s Desk
Because you’ll have to, because I never wrote it in this space, only in other comment sections and I said it to a small number of people, way back when.
In the time period of about the end of 2013 to early 2014, I predicted that the Republican nominee in 2016 could only possibly be one of two people: It would either be someone who, while running as a Republican, ran a triangulatory campaign of outside populist militancy against both the Democrats and incumbent constituencies within the Republican Party. If it was not going to be such a person, it would be Jeb Bush.
Of course I believed that, (my only mistake was thinking that Jeff Sessions would be the former), but I also had an ulterior motive for writing and saying this. I don’t know if I actually wrote and said this when I made this prediction, but I remember at the very least writing and thinking it with the mindset that ideologically based prospective candidates being speculated at the time, such as Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, shouldn’t have bothered running, because neither one represented a constituency that could gather enough populist wind behind his back in order to beat the party establishment slash Jeb. Cruz’s mistake, I thought, was relying on increasingly obsolete lamestream conservative purity, and Paul’s I thought was trying to triangulate between his father and the party establishment at a point between them where the soil was not fertile. Though even if Rand Paul would have been nothing more than his father’s son, we know how his father’s campaigns turned out. Same problem: Too much ideological purism.
My only mistake, like I said, was the exact identity of the quasi-outsider militant populist. Other than that, I nailed it, hard and deep.