I think you're making a mistake by making "the majority of the country" the population from which you're sampling from. For one thing, Trump won in 2016 WITHOUT a majority of the country.
However the immediate relevant population here isn't the pool of registered American voters, but rather the likely 2024 GOP primary voters. The country writ large may (currently) be rejecting the return to Trumpism versus the Generic and Unspecified Democratic presidential candidate, but the state-level GOP members (who run the local elections) and current motivated GOP base still think that the election was stolen and Trump didn't lose. They're fired up, and we have yet to see ANY significant new GOP figure making a run at higher office that's running as the GOP's anti-Trump. Until we start to see Trumpism fade among the GOP voters and state-level officials (who are currently tripping over themselves to demonstrate their Trumpiness, witness the self-immolation of J.D. Vance), the 2024 match-up between Trump vs. a Democrat remains the most likely scenario at the moment.*
On the Democratic side, they aren't doing themselves any favors by shooting themselves in the foot trying to replay the New Deal and sacrificing smaller wins (such as the smaller 1.5 TRILLION DOLLAR infrastructure bill) to chase more improbable bigger wins. Where we can at least point to figures like DeSantis as likely heirs-apparent to Trump, the Democratic field to replace Biden is EVEN weaker[1], when that party should be grooming the next-generation Democrat to run in 2024. (And Kamala Harris demonstrating an active disinterest in tackling hard problems disqualifies her - even among Democrats - as being Biden's successor.)
Given the weakness of the Democratic field - especially as Biden thinks he can be a new FDR - absent one of the two men dropping dead from their advanced ages - the clearest possible scenario at this point is Old Man Bum Fight 2.0 in 2024. Of course, someone may emerge to save us from the Grumpy Old Men (and they're taking their sweet time doing so), or Events may change the equation, but I don't see any more likely plausible scenarios at this point.
In 2016, I made a similar bet that there's no way America would elect Donald Trump to the office of the Presidency, and Events made a fool of me then. I'm not willing to make a similar claim this go-around, and as we covered in prior threads, I'm very disturbed that Democrats are also discounting that likelihood again and are too busy raiding the policy liquor cabinet instead of taking the common-sense actions to codify broken norms into law to mitigate the damage of a Trump 2.0.
* The Unchewed Big Mac may ultimately be what breaks us out of this dystopian scenario.
In the interest of making this scientific, I think that there are two elections that will tell us whether Trumpism is done or not:
1. The Ohio General Senate Election between a Trumpy GOP candidate (my money's on Josh Mandel winning the GOP primary) and a (hopefully) moderate Democrat.
2. The Wyoming GOP House race. This one will be the more important as we'll be able to see if the GOP prefers a demonstrably superior conservative candidate in Liz Cheney or a political minor leaguer elevated to to the major leagues by Trump World.
Unfortunately we're going to have to wait until Wyoming's primary on August 16 to know how #2 plays out, and the general election to see how Ohio votes on #1.
Anything could happen in a state that continues to elect Sherrod Brown but I believe Ohio has become more conservative. Liz Cheney is a pretty good conservative but not much of a team player. Others have been able to criticize Trump without infuriating the entire base by resorting to exaggerated hyperbole. Liz will be in the DC swamp as a full-time resident soon and will not even have to pretend to be a daughter of Wyoming.
I've always been amazed that democrats are forgiven for being in lockstep on every issue and in defending the most awful actions by their politicians. The media and the democrat congress critters immediately pounce on any Republican action, statement or joke that can be construed or misconstrued to their advantage.
I have yet to see anything on this site about the unfolding story of the Russian collusion hoax by Hillary and her lawyers. I distinctly remember how one of the part-time writers here (Susan) enthusiastically promoted the sham on her previous website and was abusive and unpleasant and intolerant toward anyone who dared disagree.
I will say the regarding exaggerated hyperbole, that it more applies to performative members of Congress such as AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, MTG, Lauren Boebert, and Madison Cawthorn, then it does Liz Cheney. The problem is when you have a former President spouting off fiction about the 2020 election and a bunch of the GOP base deluding themselves into believing that(For the record Curtis, when I make references to MAGA sycophants or the MAGA base, I don't consider you as one. Just so we are clear. I do appreciate your perspectives on the issues, even when we disagree at times.), pushing back against the Big Lie will obviously upset the base. And given that the MAGA base is pretty invested in the narrative of the Big Lie, any pushback against it(such as what Liz Cheney is doing), will have the appearance of "exaggerated hyperbole". Especially since very few in the GOP are openly pushing back against it. Large swaths of the GOP base accept Trump's farcical electoral claims, his views on 1-6, and assessments of his presidency, with the same gumption that devout Christians accept Biblical doctrines. Anyone who pushes back directly against this narrative, is certainly odd man out(Or odd woman out.).
As for the "DC Swamp", that seems to be the catch phrase political pejorative used by populist and libertarians against those who favor policies they don't like. Since a lot of self-professed "anti-DC swamp" creatures end up embracing and advocating for many of the same policies and governing practices of the "GOP establishment" and "The Swamp". The cachet of using playing the swamp card was certainly there when tea party challengers were challenging big government Republicans during the Bush 43 era. But with the contemporary GOP making the latter era look more puritanical when it comes to government spending and restraining its size, the "I'm not the swamp, they are!" card has lost of cachet and credibility.
I'm definitely an imperfect conservative and lean toward right wing populism - strongly in favor of the military, America first and industrial employment (jobs) in the USA. I do not at all trust foreign supply chains.
Honestly, I think there is going to be some kind of a fusionism between libertarian leaning conservatives, and more populist conservatives in the GOP. Both are needed for the GOP if they are to be a majority party. As I lean more libertarian, there will be times I disagree with the more populist leaning folks on the right. But there will also be a lot of agreement on social/cultural issues(abortion, guns, etc). I'm open to voting for a new fusionist candidate, so long as they have a least a reasonably good moral character and is willing to split the difference with me on policy grounds.
It's interesting that we've previously discussed about Ron DeSantis. He's definitely not everyone's cup of tea for sure. But quite a few folks feel that he fits that kind of consensus that can attract a cross section of libertarian and populist leaners.
The problem with a purely libertarian philosophy, at least right now, is that too many people have been conditioned to rely on unions and the government for their well being. They do not adapt well to changing skill set requirements or to fending for themselves. I know that in an increasingly automated world, they have to change but there has to be a thriving industrial economy for skilled electricians, mechanics and machine operators to learn new skills. Technicians will rule the roost.
I just can't imagine a strong America with 250 million public employees, short order cooks, servers and retail clerks. A different type of education system is needed. I don't know how to get it, but I do know "woke" indoctrination won't.
My dad graduated from high school in 1931 and worked in a CCC camp to help feed the family. He grew to love FDR and thought democrats were saviors. He hated labor unions and taxes. I don't know how he reconciled all that but he became a production manager for a Fortune 500 subsidiary. By the time I was 17 years old, I had delivered newspapers, mowed lawns, worked in a meat packing plant and was working retail and delivering prescriptions for a pharmacy because I knew where nearly everyone in the county lived. Somehow that all translated into knowing what my future would be. I knew I would get a job in Atlanta and work to become an engineer. I knew I did not want to be drafted so I enrolled in advanced ROTC and was commissioned the day I graduated. I do not know how today's education and social systems can produce that type of experience. I'm pretty sure that without a political system focused on making American manufacturing the most competitive in the world, it will not happen. A libertarian government will not help unmotivated citizens.
And I respect that, Curtis. Even when our views diverge at times, you do have an intellectual sincerity and honesty to your beliefs on different policy matters, and that is praiseworthy.
You are right in that Ohio has pretty much moved away from swing state status and really isn't much of a bellweather any longer. What is interesting is that Trump got nearly the same margin of victory in 2020(8.03 % margin) as compared to 2016(8.07 %), even as Biden's national popular vote margin improved on Hillary's by 2.3 %. I think Ohio's Republicanism is somewhat more populist in nature, than a state such as Texas and Florida. Sherrod Brown has a populist bent to his left of center views, so I think that resonates well in many parts of the state. Even in a +11 GOP state, Sherrod won his re-election bid by 6.8 percent in 2018. Then again that year was not too kind to the GOP, being a midterm race with an unpopular President Trump being the titular head of the party. Sherrod is up for reelection in 2024, and if Biden continues his crap sandwich governance, I don't see him achieving that 6.8 percent margin like what he did in 2024. I think depending on who Ohio Republicans nominate, that Sherrod Brown will be in the fight of his life, should he seek re-election.
"I have yet to see anything on this site about the unfolding story of the Russian collusion hoax by Hillary and her lawyers. I distinctly remember how one of the part-time writers here (Susan) enthusiastically promoted the sham on her previous website and was abusive and unpleasant and intolerant toward anyone who dared disagree."
Sounds like we need to get you a Substack, Curtis. :-)
I enjoy our back-and-forths and this place would be poorer with you gone. What I was more gesturing toward is that you seem to have some specific thoughts on some specific subjects, and I'm intensely curious what those are and would happily be your first subscriber if you started doing your own commentary, instead of waiting for Steve and David to get around to it to give us an opportunity to discuss it.
I'm encouraging you to write more - like the old blogs of yore - and I'll be along for the ride to read and comment on it. :-)
Y’all are both welcome to write full length posts and email them to me at theracketnews@gmail.com. If they are civil, well documented and readable (and David & Jay agree too) I’ll publish them.
Have you seen any polling on the Ohio GOP Senate primary election? I wasn't able to find any. The Real Clear Politics doesn't have anything on it. Ohio has definitely turned into a red state, albeit of the more populist kind. Given that 2022 looks like it could be a rough year for Democrats(assuming if Biden doubles down on what he is doing), even a moderate Democrat would have an uphill climb. Despite J.D. Vance engaged into a populist pissing contest with Mandel, the latter makes the former look angelically sane, comparatively speaking. I think Vance would probably win a general election, since his populist posturing is more palatable to Ohio's electorate. But I think Ohio Dems would be licking their chips for a Josh Mandel. He would certainly push the limits as what Ohio voters are willing to tolerate!
The most I've seen is internal polling, so take it with a sea's worth of salt:
"Ohio state Treasurer Josh Mandel is in the lead in a crowded GOP primary to replace Ohio Sen. Rob Portman (R), according to an internal poll conducted by WPA Intelligence."
"The poll published on Saturday shows Mandel is at 37 percent, with author and venture capitalist JD Vance in second at 13 percent. Another 26 percent of voters were undecided."
"WPA Intelligence claims Mandel’s double-digit lead is due to his 'consistent and unwavering support of President Trump and the Trump America First agenda.'"[1]
I can't imagine that J.D. Vance would be torching his reputation if he were ahead or it were close, as the victor of the GOP contest will have to swing a ways back to the center for the general election (assuming that the Democrats don't nominate a fool, which isn't something we can take for granted these days).
You said it well. Pick your poison. I'm not sure that all your broken norms are valued by most voters. True, Trump broke a lot of them but democrats have also. Which ones are most important depends on which side of the fence you're on.
In theory, what you are saying makes sense. But tell me that if it comes down to an election between Trump and someone like Kamala Harris, most republicans will hold their nose and vote for Trump to keep Kamala from the White House. It’ll be another Flight 93 election.
I'm kind of in both camps when it comes to the ability of the GOP to move past Trump, as to what will happen. I think that many reluctant Trump voters have moved on from Trump and will end up supporting others in the GOP primary. I think as time goes by, the number of people in the GOP who want to move on from Trump will continue to grow. With that being said, this change in heart among GOP voters(and especially the GOP base) is happening ever so slowly. And Chris has mentioned here that Trump was able to secure the GOP nomination with only a plurality of the total vote. What is also worth noting that that prior to the 2016 election, there were many more self-professed "NeverTrump"/"Trump Skeptic" conservatives than now, even with a handful that moved on from Trump after his defeat last November and 1-6. Some of the most ardent opponents of Trump on the right have become strong supporters of the former President, and show little to no signs of letting up(J.D. Vance being a notable example of such).
Also, large swaths of the American electorate have short term political memory. When 2024 rolls around, the January 6 attempted subversion of the Constitution will be a distant memory for most voters. Most of us here at the Racket News(David, Steve, and most of regular commenters) will remember. But for the average center-right voter, there will be other fish to fry. If Biden ends up tanking, or if the Democrats nominate an odious candidate(Kamala Harris, for example), I could see GOP base going through every mental gymnastics out there to justify their vote for Trump(should he run in 2024). There will be at least a handful of post-Trump Republicans who will justify jettisoning their prior objections to Trump should the Democrats nominate a hard left candidate.
With that being said, I do think there are voters on the center-right that are civically engaged, but quiet about their political participation due to them not wanting to face ostracization and vindictiveness from the populist MAGA base. These voters are nowhere as loud and brash as the MAGA crowd, but are politically informed and regularly vote. These include many suburban/exurban center-right voters who in 2020 voted for Biden or voted 3rd party/write-in, while voting GOP for downticket congressional races. I think many of reluctant Trump voters who witnessed in disgust the former President's post-election behavior have made these voters a larger group. Many of them are very quiet about their abandonment of Trump, as they don't want to be subject to personal attacks from hard core MAGA people they know(friends, family, acquaintances). Maybe my experience is only anecdotal, but I know quite a few of my center-right friends and acquaintances who voted for Trump in 2020, shared with me privately their disgust of the former President and desire of the GOP to be post-Trump. What they confided in me, they won't share these views publicly on their social media accounts.
I think you're making a mistake by making "the majority of the country" the population from which you're sampling from. For one thing, Trump won in 2016 WITHOUT a majority of the country.
However the immediate relevant population here isn't the pool of registered American voters, but rather the likely 2024 GOP primary voters. The country writ large may (currently) be rejecting the return to Trumpism versus the Generic and Unspecified Democratic presidential candidate, but the state-level GOP members (who run the local elections) and current motivated GOP base still think that the election was stolen and Trump didn't lose. They're fired up, and we have yet to see ANY significant new GOP figure making a run at higher office that's running as the GOP's anti-Trump. Until we start to see Trumpism fade among the GOP voters and state-level officials (who are currently tripping over themselves to demonstrate their Trumpiness, witness the self-immolation of J.D. Vance), the 2024 match-up between Trump vs. a Democrat remains the most likely scenario at the moment.*
On the Democratic side, they aren't doing themselves any favors by shooting themselves in the foot trying to replay the New Deal and sacrificing smaller wins (such as the smaller 1.5 TRILLION DOLLAR infrastructure bill) to chase more improbable bigger wins. Where we can at least point to figures like DeSantis as likely heirs-apparent to Trump, the Democratic field to replace Biden is EVEN weaker[1], when that party should be grooming the next-generation Democrat to run in 2024. (And Kamala Harris demonstrating an active disinterest in tackling hard problems disqualifies her - even among Democrats - as being Biden's successor.)
Given the weakness of the Democratic field - especially as Biden thinks he can be a new FDR - absent one of the two men dropping dead from their advanced ages - the clearest possible scenario at this point is Old Man Bum Fight 2.0 in 2024. Of course, someone may emerge to save us from the Grumpy Old Men (and they're taking their sweet time doing so), or Events may change the equation, but I don't see any more likely plausible scenarios at this point.
In 2016, I made a similar bet that there's no way America would elect Donald Trump to the office of the Presidency, and Events made a fool of me then. I'm not willing to make a similar claim this go-around, and as we covered in prior threads, I'm very disturbed that Democrats are also discounting that likelihood again and are too busy raiding the policy liquor cabinet instead of taking the common-sense actions to codify broken norms into law to mitigate the damage of a Trump 2.0.
* The Unchewed Big Mac may ultimately be what breaks us out of this dystopian scenario.
[1] https://focusgroup.thebulwark.com/malaise-2-0-democrats-grade-biden-with-jonathan-v-last
In the interest of making this scientific, I think that there are two elections that will tell us whether Trumpism is done or not:
1. The Ohio General Senate Election between a Trumpy GOP candidate (my money's on Josh Mandel winning the GOP primary) and a (hopefully) moderate Democrat.
2. The Wyoming GOP House race. This one will be the more important as we'll be able to see if the GOP prefers a demonstrably superior conservative candidate in Liz Cheney or a political minor leaguer elevated to to the major leagues by Trump World.
Unfortunately we're going to have to wait until Wyoming's primary on August 16 to know how #2 plays out, and the general election to see how Ohio votes on #1.
Anything could happen in a state that continues to elect Sherrod Brown but I believe Ohio has become more conservative. Liz Cheney is a pretty good conservative but not much of a team player. Others have been able to criticize Trump without infuriating the entire base by resorting to exaggerated hyperbole. Liz will be in the DC swamp as a full-time resident soon and will not even have to pretend to be a daughter of Wyoming.
I've always been amazed that democrats are forgiven for being in lockstep on every issue and in defending the most awful actions by their politicians. The media and the democrat congress critters immediately pounce on any Republican action, statement or joke that can be construed or misconstrued to their advantage.
I have yet to see anything on this site about the unfolding story of the Russian collusion hoax by Hillary and her lawyers. I distinctly remember how one of the part-time writers here (Susan) enthusiastically promoted the sham on her previous website and was abusive and unpleasant and intolerant toward anyone who dared disagree.
I will say the regarding exaggerated hyperbole, that it more applies to performative members of Congress such as AOC, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, MTG, Lauren Boebert, and Madison Cawthorn, then it does Liz Cheney. The problem is when you have a former President spouting off fiction about the 2020 election and a bunch of the GOP base deluding themselves into believing that(For the record Curtis, when I make references to MAGA sycophants or the MAGA base, I don't consider you as one. Just so we are clear. I do appreciate your perspectives on the issues, even when we disagree at times.), pushing back against the Big Lie will obviously upset the base. And given that the MAGA base is pretty invested in the narrative of the Big Lie, any pushback against it(such as what Liz Cheney is doing), will have the appearance of "exaggerated hyperbole". Especially since very few in the GOP are openly pushing back against it. Large swaths of the GOP base accept Trump's farcical electoral claims, his views on 1-6, and assessments of his presidency, with the same gumption that devout Christians accept Biblical doctrines. Anyone who pushes back directly against this narrative, is certainly odd man out(Or odd woman out.).
As for the "DC Swamp", that seems to be the catch phrase political pejorative used by populist and libertarians against those who favor policies they don't like. Since a lot of self-professed "anti-DC swamp" creatures end up embracing and advocating for many of the same policies and governing practices of the "GOP establishment" and "The Swamp". The cachet of using playing the swamp card was certainly there when tea party challengers were challenging big government Republicans during the Bush 43 era. But with the contemporary GOP making the latter era look more puritanical when it comes to government spending and restraining its size, the "I'm not the swamp, they are!" card has lost of cachet and credibility.
I'm definitely an imperfect conservative and lean toward right wing populism - strongly in favor of the military, America first and industrial employment (jobs) in the USA. I do not at all trust foreign supply chains.
Honestly, I think there is going to be some kind of a fusionism between libertarian leaning conservatives, and more populist conservatives in the GOP. Both are needed for the GOP if they are to be a majority party. As I lean more libertarian, there will be times I disagree with the more populist leaning folks on the right. But there will also be a lot of agreement on social/cultural issues(abortion, guns, etc). I'm open to voting for a new fusionist candidate, so long as they have a least a reasonably good moral character and is willing to split the difference with me on policy grounds.
It's interesting that we've previously discussed about Ron DeSantis. He's definitely not everyone's cup of tea for sure. But quite a few folks feel that he fits that kind of consensus that can attract a cross section of libertarian and populist leaners.
The problem with a purely libertarian philosophy, at least right now, is that too many people have been conditioned to rely on unions and the government for their well being. They do not adapt well to changing skill set requirements or to fending for themselves. I know that in an increasingly automated world, they have to change but there has to be a thriving industrial economy for skilled electricians, mechanics and machine operators to learn new skills. Technicians will rule the roost.
I just can't imagine a strong America with 250 million public employees, short order cooks, servers and retail clerks. A different type of education system is needed. I don't know how to get it, but I do know "woke" indoctrination won't.
My dad graduated from high school in 1931 and worked in a CCC camp to help feed the family. He grew to love FDR and thought democrats were saviors. He hated labor unions and taxes. I don't know how he reconciled all that but he became a production manager for a Fortune 500 subsidiary. By the time I was 17 years old, I had delivered newspapers, mowed lawns, worked in a meat packing plant and was working retail and delivering prescriptions for a pharmacy because I knew where nearly everyone in the county lived. Somehow that all translated into knowing what my future would be. I knew I would get a job in Atlanta and work to become an engineer. I knew I did not want to be drafted so I enrolled in advanced ROTC and was commissioned the day I graduated. I do not know how today's education and social systems can produce that type of experience. I'm pretty sure that without a political system focused on making American manufacturing the most competitive in the world, it will not happen. A libertarian government will not help unmotivated citizens.
And I respect that, Curtis. Even when our views diverge at times, you do have an intellectual sincerity and honesty to your beliefs on different policy matters, and that is praiseworthy.
You are right in that Ohio has pretty much moved away from swing state status and really isn't much of a bellweather any longer. What is interesting is that Trump got nearly the same margin of victory in 2020(8.03 % margin) as compared to 2016(8.07 %), even as Biden's national popular vote margin improved on Hillary's by 2.3 %. I think Ohio's Republicanism is somewhat more populist in nature, than a state such as Texas and Florida. Sherrod Brown has a populist bent to his left of center views, so I think that resonates well in many parts of the state. Even in a +11 GOP state, Sherrod won his re-election bid by 6.8 percent in 2018. Then again that year was not too kind to the GOP, being a midterm race with an unpopular President Trump being the titular head of the party. Sherrod is up for reelection in 2024, and if Biden continues his crap sandwich governance, I don't see him achieving that 6.8 percent margin like what he did in 2024. I think depending on who Ohio Republicans nominate, that Sherrod Brown will be in the fight of his life, should he seek re-election.
"I have yet to see anything on this site about the unfolding story of the Russian collusion hoax by Hillary and her lawyers. I distinctly remember how one of the part-time writers here (Susan) enthusiastically promoted the sham on her previous website and was abusive and unpleasant and intolerant toward anyone who dared disagree."
Sounds like we need to get you a Substack, Curtis. :-)
I guess you're telling me to go away and write whatever I like somewhere else. I can deal with that. At least you are civil.
Yeah, that's the exact wrong reading.
I enjoy our back-and-forths and this place would be poorer with you gone. What I was more gesturing toward is that you seem to have some specific thoughts on some specific subjects, and I'm intensely curious what those are and would happily be your first subscriber if you started doing your own commentary, instead of waiting for Steve and David to get around to it to give us an opportunity to discuss it.
I'm encouraging you to write more - like the old blogs of yore - and I'll be along for the ride to read and comment on it. :-)
Y’all are both welcome to write full length posts and email them to me at theracketnews@gmail.com. If they are civil, well documented and readable (and David & Jay agree too) I’ll publish them.
Thanks
Have you seen any polling on the Ohio GOP Senate primary election? I wasn't able to find any. The Real Clear Politics doesn't have anything on it. Ohio has definitely turned into a red state, albeit of the more populist kind. Given that 2022 looks like it could be a rough year for Democrats(assuming if Biden doubles down on what he is doing), even a moderate Democrat would have an uphill climb. Despite J.D. Vance engaged into a populist pissing contest with Mandel, the latter makes the former look angelically sane, comparatively speaking. I think Vance would probably win a general election, since his populist posturing is more palatable to Ohio's electorate. But I think Ohio Dems would be licking their chips for a Josh Mandel. He would certainly push the limits as what Ohio voters are willing to tolerate!
The most I've seen is internal polling, so take it with a sea's worth of salt:
"Ohio state Treasurer Josh Mandel is in the lead in a crowded GOP primary to replace Ohio Sen. Rob Portman (R), according to an internal poll conducted by WPA Intelligence."
"The poll published on Saturday shows Mandel is at 37 percent, with author and venture capitalist JD Vance in second at 13 percent. Another 26 percent of voters were undecided."
"WPA Intelligence claims Mandel’s double-digit lead is due to his 'consistent and unwavering support of President Trump and the Trump America First agenda.'"[1]
I can't imagine that J.D. Vance would be torching his reputation if he were ahead or it were close, as the victor of the GOP contest will have to swing a ways back to the center for the general election (assuming that the Democrats don't nominate a fool, which isn't something we can take for granted these days).
[1] https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/574301-internal-poll-shows-mandel-leading-crowded-ohio-senate-gop-primary
chops, not chips...... Dang it.
You said it well. Pick your poison. I'm not sure that all your broken norms are valued by most voters. True, Trump broke a lot of them but democrats have also. Which ones are most important depends on which side of the fence you're on.
In theory, what you are saying makes sense. But tell me that if it comes down to an election between Trump and someone like Kamala Harris, most republicans will hold their nose and vote for Trump to keep Kamala from the White House. It’ll be another Flight 93 election.
I'm kind of in both camps when it comes to the ability of the GOP to move past Trump, as to what will happen. I think that many reluctant Trump voters have moved on from Trump and will end up supporting others in the GOP primary. I think as time goes by, the number of people in the GOP who want to move on from Trump will continue to grow. With that being said, this change in heart among GOP voters(and especially the GOP base) is happening ever so slowly. And Chris has mentioned here that Trump was able to secure the GOP nomination with only a plurality of the total vote. What is also worth noting that that prior to the 2016 election, there were many more self-professed "NeverTrump"/"Trump Skeptic" conservatives than now, even with a handful that moved on from Trump after his defeat last November and 1-6. Some of the most ardent opponents of Trump on the right have become strong supporters of the former President, and show little to no signs of letting up(J.D. Vance being a notable example of such).
Also, large swaths of the American electorate have short term political memory. When 2024 rolls around, the January 6 attempted subversion of the Constitution will be a distant memory for most voters. Most of us here at the Racket News(David, Steve, and most of regular commenters) will remember. But for the average center-right voter, there will be other fish to fry. If Biden ends up tanking, or if the Democrats nominate an odious candidate(Kamala Harris, for example), I could see GOP base going through every mental gymnastics out there to justify their vote for Trump(should he run in 2024). There will be at least a handful of post-Trump Republicans who will justify jettisoning their prior objections to Trump should the Democrats nominate a hard left candidate.
With that being said, I do think there are voters on the center-right that are civically engaged, but quiet about their political participation due to them not wanting to face ostracization and vindictiveness from the populist MAGA base. These voters are nowhere as loud and brash as the MAGA crowd, but are politically informed and regularly vote. These include many suburban/exurban center-right voters who in 2020 voted for Biden or voted 3rd party/write-in, while voting GOP for downticket congressional races. I think many of reluctant Trump voters who witnessed in disgust the former President's post-election behavior have made these voters a larger group. Many of them are very quiet about their abandonment of Trump, as they don't want to be subject to personal attacks from hard core MAGA people they know(friends, family, acquaintances). Maybe my experience is only anecdotal, but I know quite a few of my center-right friends and acquaintances who voted for Trump in 2020, shared with me privately their disgust of the former President and desire of the GOP to be post-Trump. What they confided in me, they won't share these views publicly on their social media accounts.
I sure hope you're right.