I asked him to name the one reform that he was most proud of. Of all the policies that we discussed, one stands out in my mind - if for no other reason than because it is so thoroughly counterintuitive. We spent hours talking about Hong Kong’s 16 percent tax rate, business-friendly regulatory environment, lack of state subsidies, tariff-free trade relations with the rest of the world and other policies he promoted while Financial Secretary. In the best tradition of the British colonial service, Sir John made few public statements after his retirement, but he was eager to share his insights with the next generation of free market liberals. So, I left it that way.” Some 50 years after he first set foot in Hong Kong, Sir John was clearly enjoying seeing his policies vindicated. As he told me, “I came to Hong Kong and found the economy working just fine. Heavily influenced by Adam Smith, Sir John let the Hong Kong economy grow unhindered by bureaucratic overreach. While other colonial administrators throughout the British Empire were busy adopting statist economic policies, Sir John rejected the socialist zeitgeist. Interesting profile by Marian Tupy on John Cowpertwaite, who was Financial Secretary of Hong Kong from 1961 to 1971 and a major champion of laissez-faire policies:
Quite possibly, the president of the United States would owe you a huge debt of gratitude!Īnd even if he doesn’t win the White House, still, an eccentric billionaire would owe you a huge debt of gratitude. Many delegates would be thrilled to be part of a small group of people to put a candidate over the finish line to victory. Moreover, if Trump is, say, 12 or 30 or 50 short of a majority, nothing can stop him. Individuals rank their candidate choices in all kinds of idiosyncratic ways. Non-Trump delegates aren’t necessarily anti-Trump. Perfect unity is almost impossible to achieve in politics. The closer Trump gets to 1,237 delegates, the greater the notion that he’s entitled to the nomination, and the more perfect the unity required of all the other delegates to stop him. But I do worry about what will happen if Trump’s loss is not seen as legitimate. He did sign that pledge saying he wouldn’t run third party, but it also said something like “if they treat me fairly.”īut your point about the rules does increase my hope of a Cruz victory, since presumably most Kasich-Rubio-Bush delegates would sooner cast a vote for Cruz than Trump. He certainly has a history of being a sore loser as seen after Iowa. Of course, it also matters whether or not Trump himself accepts the outcome, which, I predict, will depend on whether doing so makes him look better or worse. If the story going in is “Trump expected to receive nomination” and he doesn’t, then it might be harder for them to accept. If the story is “outcome uncertain as GOP enters hotly contested convention” then maybe Trump voters will accept a non-Trump victory. It may depend somewhat on the media coverage leading up to the event. But the question is what his followers would perceive as “fair and square.” Arguably nothing but a Trump victory, but I think there may still be room to hand Trump an unambiguous loss. Would I accept a Cruz victory under such circumstances? Sure, I would accept a Cruz victory under any circumstances since I like his policy views a lot more than Trump’s. Now there are probably some people high up in the GOP who would genuinely prefer a Clinton victory to a Trump victory, but do they really prefer a Clinton victory to a Cruz victory? Or are they just that stupid and disorganized and narcissistic that they can’t do the one obvious thing that might stop their Trump nightmare scenario? Either way, the result is almost certain Clinton victory. Any lingering respect the GOP rank and file had for the party would be destroyed by such a move and Trump could very well run third party if he feels the nomination has been stolen from him (I don’t think he would if he lost “fair and square,” before the convention). The idea that they can wait until the convention and then sneak in Mitt Romney or Kasich or something is completely idiotic. Combined, the supporters of Rubio, Kasich, and Cruz can conceivably beat Trump. Right now it seems like the only non-stupid chance the GOP has of stopping Trump is to have everybody but Ted Cruz drop out and endorse Ted Cruz.