I have already expressed my puzzlement at why people ever thought so highly of The Party Decides. The model basically says that party establishment types control the nomination process through endorsements and contributions as signals to voters, but the model hasn't had an unblemished success since 2000. So, the fact that party establishment types hate Trump shouldn't really have mattered. I take some schadenfreude in Trump's ability to outperform their model so remarkably that nobody can really rationalize his success with the underlying argument.
But that doesn't mean they won't try! Here is a fascinating new take from Dan Drezner. The gist of it is that so many people were convinced that the party establishment types always won that nobody put in the effort to make it happen. In my earlier post, I suggested that we should be on the lookout for the Bart Simpson defense. Really, the Republican muckety-mucks could have stopped Trump by rallying around an establishment choice, endorsing him, donating to him, and collectively tearing down the opposition, but they just didn't want to put in the effort because they didn't think it was necessary. The model's failure is really the model's success, see? Yes, and Bart Simpson could have contorted himself into that pose. He just didn't wanna.
The Party Decides isn't wrong. It can't be wrong. It is gospel truth.
I still can't wrap my brain around how many disciples that book has.