When she left office in January 2014, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer was decidedly unpopular, so her loss as a member of Donald Trump’s slate this Saturday at the Arizona Republican Convention came as no surprise to conservatives. Yet it is Brewer’s loss that is being used as prima facie evidence by the Trump camp that the voting process was rigged.
Brewer is making the rounds on national news outlets to decry the victimization of Trump at the hands of the Republican establishment. “I got cheated — I got cheated,” Brewer screamed to a gaggle of reporters on Saturday evening.
Unfortunately for Brewer and possibly the Trump camp, it was the feeling among conservatives, who felt cheated by Brewer when she rammed through Medicaid expansion in 2014, which was likely a determinative factor in her losses on Saturday.
Yes, losses. She lost a coin toss in her race for an alternate slot in her congressional district on Saturday as well. She lost the toss to popular Arizona State Representative Phil Lovas. Upon losing that race, the always temperamental Brewer picked up her marbles and moved on to the member at large race.
“Only 41% of voters see Brewer favorably to 47% who have an unfavorable opinion of her,” read an article on Publicpolicypolling.com in 2014. “And there’s a general feeling that the state is on the wrong track- 59% of voters express that sentiment to only 30% who think the state is headed in the right direction…”
It was in the member-at-large race that Brewer’s Medicaid expansion chickens came home to roost. She won a mere 93 votes out of the 1,106 ballots cast.
Her loss fit the Trump narrative to a tee however, and she was held up once again as the poster child for corruption. This time however, she is the icon of inequity for the grassroots.
It was the grassroots Trump supporters that “did not follow orders,” according to one Trump organizer, that led to the Donald’s loss. Because, according to sources, Trump and Cruz supporters include some of the most discontented members of the Party – when they voted either slate, they could not put their own personal hatred aside and vote for the entire slate. Instead they selected the Trump or Cruz slate buttons and then culled those delegates with whom they held a grudge.
The slate concept was supported and developed by the various campaigns in order to simplify the process. A Tally committee was then formed with one member from each campaign.
Delegates were then given the option of voting the entire slate. Once a slate was selected, the delegates could then cull the list and add other nominees to their selection. Delegates were also allowed to bypass the slate selection and choose 56 individual delegates.
According to one observer, “The Trump “Unity Slate” was a publicity stunt to make Cruz look bad. The Trump camp knew that Cruz state delegates far outnumbered Trump and they had no chance. I knew it ahead of time as well as did most everyone. The Trump camp knew they would lose, and what better way than to put Cruz and Kasick on their slate then blame Cruz camp? When I saw the Trump slate I immediately saw Cruz and Kasick delegates on there. It makes no sense unless it was Trump trying to make Cruz look bad. They then blame Cruz for lying. Yet one simple check of social media shows that these Cruz people are in your face obvious Cruz people. Everyone knew they were, yet why did the Trump camp not know? I believe they knew that is why they put the most obviously known Cruz people on.”
It is an interesting theory and it fits into the Trump narrative that 1) he is a victim of the Establishment, and 2) that when the time comes, his supporters can expect Prebius to do what the Establishment does and cheat him of his rightful spot.
Three things are clear based on the results: 1) the insiders showed up on the Kasich, Trump, and Unity slates and won the day; 2) the Trump camp has mastered Alinsky tactics, and 3) those Republicans, like Brewer, who ignored the will of the grassroots have given us the top two contenders in the Republican race today.