By Andrew Badinelli
Thursday, June 16, 2016
Throughout his campaign, Donald Trump has bragged about
how he is beholden to no one — not interest groups, not donors, not the media.
But unfortunately, he is beholden to voters. Just a few days after the
terrorist attack in Orlando, and just over a week after his racist comments
regarding federal judge Gonzalo Curiel, Trump faces his worst polling numbers
since he entered the race.
The newest ABC News/Washington
Post poll shows Trump with an overall unfavorable rating of 70 percent,
including 77 percent among women, 69 percent among independents, and an
incredible 88 percent among non-whites. NBC News and Bloomberg Politics have
Hillary Clinton leading by seven and twelve points, respectively, with 55
percent of Bloomberg respondents saying they would “never” vote for Donald
Trump.
These numbers should come as no surprise. Throughout the
primaries, Trump’s standing in the polls seemed unaffected by the unending
torrent of controversy he produced. But as he has locked down the Republican
nomination and the general-election matchup with Clinton has started to take
shape, his campaign has faced intensifying scrutiny. And as someone with
underdeveloped policy positions and a penchant for inflammatory — and arguably
racist — campaign rhetoric, Trump has not been well-served by the attention.
Over the past month, he’s faced negative news cycle after negative news cycle,
starting with his comments about Curiel and continuing with the Orlando terror
attack and his renewed call for a ban on Muslims’ entering the United States.
A CBS poll shows that 51 percent of Americans disapprove
of Trump’s response to the attack in Orlando, versus just 25 percent who
approve. Since the beginning of his campaign, Trump has criticized President
Obama, Hillary Clinton, and at times other Republicans for being “weak,”
arguing that he was going to be the tough-guy president capable of providing
jobs and catching terrorists. Americans don’t seem to be buying it. And
considering that Trump’s initial response to the tragic shooting was to take a
victory lap, claims that he is the best person to respond to crises will likely
not be very credible.
Trump supporters have been noticeably silent on these
poll numbers, likely because they contradict the narrative he’s tried to sell
from the beginning: that he is good on immigration, good on terror, and a
uniquely strong leader. We’ve known from the very beginning that Trump is none
of these things, and now the evidence confirms it.
According to most political-science research, after a
terrorist attack, voters tend to increase their support for male Republican
politicians, whom they see as tougher, stronger members of the more hawkish
party. Pew Research reports that Americans trust Republicans more when it comes
to dealing with terrorists, and studies have shown that men seem stronger on
terror to voters than women, likely because of gender stereotypes. Many have
also argued that national-security threats or attacks between now and the election
only stand to benefit Trump against Clinton. In the wake of the deadliest mass
shooting in American history, he should, therefore, be rising in the polls, or
at least not be experiencing the spiral we’ve seen over the past couple of
days.
And if he were any other Republican, it seems likely that
he would be rising: President Obama has shown that his policy towards ISIS is
proving ineffective, and voters recognize that a Clinton presidency would
merely be a continuation of Obama’s approach. But Trump is not any other
Republican. He is brash, incendiary, and unlikable in the eyes of almost every
subset of voters. His personal shortcomings and inability to rein in his own
crazed persona are continuing proof that the Republican party is wrong to nominate
him for president. Amy Walter, national editor of the Cook Political Report, said as much in a tweet earlier on
Wednesday:
Looking at the latest
@washingtonpost poll #s, another reminder that this race was so, so winnable
for almost any R not named Trump.
“Hillary Clinton is in terrible shape,” Walter says over
the phone, speaking about the most recent “unfavorable” numbers. “And we’re at
a time where this election should be a time-for-change election, not a status
quo election. And yet, the [Republican] candidate that is coming forward is the
one person who can make people rethink that change and support a candidate that
they don’t feel good about in Hillary Clinton.”
Republicans could and should have seen this coming. In
their post-2012 autopsy, they laid out a clear description of a candidate who
could win a general election. And that description, said Walter, “looked a heck
of a lot like Marco Rubio.” If Republican voters had nominated Rubio, or maybe
John Kasich or Ted Cruz — heck, even a mannequin wearing a red tie — the GOP
candidate might be leading Hillary Clinton by several points, or at least,
according to Walter, “not seeing the horrific numbers we see now.” Instead,
they nominated an incompetent egomaniac who spent the last four days
conspiratorially implying that Obama is an ISIS sleeper agent.
Despite the desperate attempts of Trump’s handlers to get
their candidate to stick with a teleprompter, it doesn’t seem likely that his
indiscretion will stop being a liability — he has even said explicitly that he
“won’t change.” Instead, he will remain, on his face, deeply unqualified to be
president of the United States. And while he continues to double down on
identity politics, offensive comments, and inadequate policies, establishment
Republicans will be left to come to terms with the massive opportunity they’ve
squandered.
No comments:
Post a Comment