One theory of Trump’s popularity on the right is that he has a hard ceiling somewhere short of 40% and certainly far short of fifty percent, so, the idea goes, he will fade once the field gets winnowed down. In any one-on-one contest, he would fare badly. Public Policy Polling tested this idea in the very important state of New Hampshire, and what they found should trouble anyone who thinks Trump is only benefitting from being the most popular candidate in a huge field.
Trump’s advantage over the Republican field is thorough. He leads with Tea Party voters (44%), men (39%), independents (36%), conservatives (36%), voters who are most concerned about electability (35%), both younger voters and seniors (at 34% with each), evangelicals (32%), women (30%), and moderates (29%). Trump has a 56/32 favorability rating and he also leads when you match him with the other Republican hopefuls head to head- it’s 47/39 over Ben Carson, 53/35 over Scott Walker, 53/34 over Marco Rubio, and 56/33 over Jeb Bush.
Two big things jump out from those numbers. The first is that Trump is appealing to a broad swath of Republican voters, from Tea Partiers on the far right to “independents” in the middle. Independents can vote in the Republican primary in New Hampshire if they register on or before election day, so this matters. The second thing is that he’s winning comfortably even when you whittle down the field to one-on-one contests, and he’s beating Jeb worst of all.
New Hampshire has never been overly friendly to the Bush family, but New England Republicans are precisely the kind of voters who are likely to favor an economic elitist over a culture warrior. They’re also about as far from the Mexican border as it is possible to be and still reside in the continental USA. Bush should be winning here as the most electable and least southern-fried of the alternatives. Instead, he’s looking like the last choice.
So, these numbers are not good for the Republican Establishment, unless they want to go to war with Donald Trump or Ben Carson as their standard bearer. And we know that they’d rather chew broken glass or endure a Maoist reeducation camp than do that.
Now, legendary Republican pollster Frank Luntz just conducted a focus group of Trump supporters in the northern Virginia suburbs, and he walked away with what he described as “shaky legs.”
“The Republican leadership needs to wake up and see that the grass roots has abandoned them,” said Luntz, the head of Luntz Global, a top GOP polling and messaging consultancy.
“This is a different cat,” Luntz added. “It’s not like Ross Perot in 1992, where people were simply unhappy with the two major parties; they’re choosing Trump affirmatively. Honestly, my legs are shaking looking at these numbers. All those people who think he’s going to implode are wrong. He’s not going away.”
I’ve mentioned this before, but this is a problem of the right’s own making. Luntz peppered this group with examples of Trump flip-flopping or saying things that no self-respecting Republican would ever say, and it had no effect on them.
It is Trump’s ability to reflect back to voters their most fervent wishes for the nation, Luntz said, that makes the political outsider so dangerous to the rest of the 16 other GOP 2016 hopefuls. The main reason for this, Luntz found, was what he termed a willingness of Trump supporters to live in “an alternative universe” in which any attempt by the media to point out inconsistencies in Trump’s record or position was seen as a politically motivated conspiracy.
“When the media challenges the veracity of his statements, you take his side,” Luntz asked of his focus group. Only one person sat quietly, her hands in her lap, as 28 other arms shot up in agreement.
They’ve been conditioned to not believe independent sources or expert advice. And, eventually, they came to include Fox News, right-wing radio, and other parts of the Mighty Wurlitzer in the suspect camp.
And this is the result:
The group was similarly unfazed by Trump’s reversals of opinion or lack of ideological purity that so often defines primary election contests.
Luntz said this shows “nothing disqualifies Trump” in the eyes of his supporters: “If you wanted to take him down, I would not know how to do it.”
Luntz is an expert in crafting messages and phraseologly that make people like or dislike things more than they otherwise would. A great example is calling the Inheritance Tax a “Death Tax.” But he’s coming up empty with Trump. People don’t care that Trump once supported single-payer health care because he recently called Obamacare “catastrophic.” They don’t care that he once said that the economy does better under Democratic administrations because he recently said that he’d do something about our trade deficits with the Far East. They probably don’t care about his personal life either, and they don’t care about the absurdity of Birtherism because who can say where the president was born? They’re not believing anyone.
But, probably the most important insight that Luntz gained was this one:
Most notably, the intensity of the group’s support for Trump was matched only by their dislike of establishment GOP candidates and politics as usual. At one point, a woman named Rhiannon explained her support of Trump by lamenting that “it appears that there’s only one party.” A whopping 25 of 29 participants in the focus group immediately and heartily agreed with her.
“Nobody is listening to us,” echoed another supporter identified only as ‘Suzanne.’ “(But) he’s listening to us, he knows what we think and he’s successful just like we want to be.”
Or, as Luntz put it, “The Republican leadership needs to wake up and see that the grass roots has abandoned them.”
This is another theme that I’ve been hitting for a long time.
It was always going to be hard to predict when a collective light-bulb would go on on the right and they’d realize that the plutocrats who run the GOP don’t want to fly their daughters to Europe for an abortion and don’t want a wall to close the border with Mexico and don’t have a problem with gay marriage and don’t believe there’s a War on Christmas and don’t want to do a thing about job loss resulting from globalization and free trade and, ultimately, don’t even have a big problem with the policies of the Democratic Party so long as the party is restrained a bit by a Republican Congress. What these plutocrats mainly affirmatively want is to reduce the scraps that are going to their most ardent supporters in terms of retirement security, access to affordable health care, and support with education and housing.
What was easier to predict was that when the light-bulb did go on, the long-duped rightwing base would not so much turn on the plutocrats and the politicians they dole out as options, as they would look to take over the apparatus of power for themselves. They don’t like John Boehner and Mitch McConnell and Jeb Bush, but they aren’t going to reject rightwing politics. They’re going to try to force the party to live up to the promises they made. It’s supposed to be a Conservative Movement party, and the fact that that has always been a facade just means that the facade must now be removed so that everyone can see what’s really on the menu.
Donald Trump is the best-selling entree. No one orders Jeb!.
What could change that?
Us Dems have been railing for years about white, working class voters going against their own interests at the polls. When are Democrats going to affirmatively fight for workers rights, etc., and win back these voters?
What is hard for Democrats to accept is that these voters are, at heart, white supremacists. They will never support the Democratic party as long as the Democratic party includes blacks in its coalition. Tack on that Democrats are not morally rigid (better condoms than teen pregnancy), look to science for truth (evolution), and value education over “heartland values” and religion, and you have a party that has a real problem with a voter whom it refuses to acknowledge exists.
Trump is the strongest evidence of that. Given the choice of a party that would raise the minimum wage & give them health care, they choose a guy who kick Mexicans. Stop trying to appeal to these brown shirts with blue collar solidarity. It’s not going to work.
It’s one thing to attempt to cater to them like the Clintons, and the DLC in general, did. It’s another thing to try and like Sanders could. Look at West Virginia as one example. Democrats there are in total hock to King Coal, even though King Coal is very right-wing. And since Democrats there aren’t doing anything about providing good jobs to former coal miners and their families, what are they going to do? Not saying it’s right. Only saying why people are susceptible to racist messages.
Short of a national public works projects and graft, political parties can’t offer anyone jobs, especially not good ones. What is Bernie Sanders offering specifically that would appeal and would be actually effective? Basic minimum wage? (I haven’t been keeping up — it’s an honest question).
I see a future where good jobs and jobs themselves become more and more scarce, where more people are chasing thinner slices of a smaller pie. If you see things in that light, Trump is the only one offering anything — an emotional salve, a sense of superiority, vengeance and belonging to a Great White Nation. It’s ephemeral but real. It’s why he doesn’t need policy positions — his appeal is inchoate emotion.
Yes, I understand why there is an opening for people to think this way, but it doesn’t change what that thinking is.
You are not going to win them back by labeling them as white supremacists. Instead you are going to lose more of them, like me.
Ok. What would work?
#Onlyblacklivesmatter tagline. To me that makes you a poster child for white privilege because you are mocking a movement that involves black people fighting for their lives. Not to mention a movement that has also stood up for white people who were victims of police brutality.
Let me ask you this. What did you do when white Virginia teenager Zachary Hammond was shot by police? I can tell you what some people involved in Black Lives Matter did. They organized a march/rally. They tweeted about it far more than the #alllivesmattercrowd.
Do those actions not count as much as the admittedly wrong tactics, by the two protesters in Seattle? If not, why not? Why are you holding onto your outrage over what two women did rather than joining in with those BLM protesters who are on the frontlines in protesting all police violence?
It’s really simple to understand this:
One-step:
1. Blacks lives matter means white lives don’t.
Two-steps:
If you can’t past one step, then you come off looking like an intolerant bigot, or at least an oversensitive jackass.
Can you see my middle finger sticking up? Try to visualize it.
Spoken like a natural member of the Trump coalition, no facts and all hurt fee fees.
Then you really weren’t with us to begin with, were you? Go read the letters MLK got from would be “white allies”. They sound exactly like you.
Your hashtag isn’t exactly useful for coalition building, either.
#justsayin
It’s actually a little disturbing — how would Trump fare in a general election?
I don’t doubt that the Democratic base would rally to oppose him, but that’ll get 45% of the national vote — how many in the squishy, uninformed independents will show up to vote for the first time for him? And how would someone attack him if nothing seems to stick (for those who aren’t already predisposed to disliking him)?
I’m not much of a Sanders fan, because I’m not sure he has what it takes to go all the way, but he seems to at least have a chance at taking on Trump.
He will drive Hispanic turnout, no doubt.
And not in his favor.
It may well be that Sanders would do better against Trump than Hillary would. We are in a new political universe.
A recent CNN poll seems to support this.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/30/politics/bernie-sanders-donald-trump-poll/
Similarly, Ann Coulter pleads with the RW noise machine to go easy on Hillary, because Trump has a much better chance against her than against Sanders.
http://downtrend.com/brian-carey/ann-coulter-i-want-donald-trump-running-against-hillary-clinton
Also, the argument about Hillary’s coattails may have a big hole in it: A lot of (old-style) conservative Republicans in Vermont vote for Sanders, why not elsewhere? These will have to come out of the 50% Republicans that do NOT support Trump.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/23/1395700/-Republicans-for-Bernie-Sanders
As the esteemed Mr. Gilroy is so fond of saying (though not necessarily on this point), Wake the fuck up, Democrats. And smell the coffee.
saw one Trump bumper sticker that used the b word for Hillary. lots of intensity there
Minor point: old-style conservative Republicans like those in Vermont who’ve voted for Sanders don’t, for the most part, exist outside of New England.
Sure they do, you just don’t hear about them. They’re the ones that keep the Walkers, the Kasiches, the Snyders and the McCains in office.
Since when does Ann Coulter know shit from shinola about politics?
Only time I can recall, in 2012 she said “If we (Repubs) nominate Romney, we’ll lose.” They did and they did.
Dunno what she predicted in the2008 cycle. Too lazy and/or depressed to look it up …
In 2006, Glenzilla stated that Conservative and Liberal were NOT static definitions. This was during the period that Republicans started turning on King George, saying the KING was NOT a true conservative.
As Greenwald pointed out, these definitions were fluid;
ever changing by events.
Trump scares the SHIT out of me; pandering to the lowest common denominator, and being a Pathological Lying Showman, instead of being a Pathological LYING Republican Politician.
Trump IS Conservatism TODAY, and that is very scary!
No question this appears to put the Republican establishment up Shit’s Creek without a paddle — but the Trump effect still amounts to a little less than half of Republican voters.
My question is, what percentage of the remaining half would switch parties and vote for the generic Democratic nominee? Or specifically, for each of the Democratic hopefuls?
Good question.
Look at it another way.
There has historically…at least through the last three presidents…been a tendency for presidential approval ratings to bottom out somewhere just south of 30% when presidents were in trouble. And…they have all been in trouble, each in a different manner.
So one way to look at this fact is that there is…or at least there was…a rock-solid 30-ish% of the electoral nation that is going to vote straight Republican or straight Democrat. Has that percentage eroded? Maybe, but by how much?
Let us say that it has eroded down to 25% each. More? I doubt it, but I would love to see a real poll…as opposed to the bought and sold pollsters that serve each segment of the PermaGov UniParty…that told the whole story.
Whatever…let’s go with my seat-of-the-pants 25% solid for each party in a national election. That leaves 50% of the electorate up for grabs.
You say Trump has half of the Republican voters, and many people are saying that it is the disaffected half? Great…for Trump. This means that if he is nominated he will be in possession of a rock-solid Republican vote. Somewhere well in excess of the 30% total non-disapproval rating people. Can any Dem lay claim to an equal hold on their party? I think not. Maybe Biden, maybe not. Especially among the old Dem stalwart labor/working class coalition vote, which is largely white and thoroughly pissed off. More folks for Trump. Lots more.
What does that leave the Dem candidate? Concerned middle class Dems, a good chunk of the youth vote, the non-Republican female vote if it’s Hillary and whole bunch of people of all colors other than white who are reading Trump loud and clear as running on a racist platform.
Would that be enough to win?
And would it be enough to govern?
Hmmmm…
No prognostications, just musings. Anybody can fall off of a lead. Look at the “shoo-ins” HRC and Bush III for all you need to know on that account. Trump can fall too. He’s got to be dirty somewhere. The casino business is dirty just for starters, and so is the construction business. Palms get greased and not just by lobbyists. Bet on it.
We shall see…
AG
If 50% of the electorate is “up for grabs”, then why has the Democratic candidate received between 48% and 53% of the popular vote in each of the past five presidential elections? (In the past four presidential elections, the Republican candidate has received between 46% and 51% of the popular vote.)
Why>?
Because the sleeple American sheeple segment of the electorate…a good 20% or 30% of the country if not more as far as I have seen in my many travels across all segments of the country…has finally awakened to the fact that they have been had by both parties for 50+ years, but they are still too goddamned dumb not to be had by another hustle.
That’s why.
AG
Thanks for the response. “A good 20% or 30% of the country…” is still a long way from 50%, but regardless of that, what’s your evidence (beyond your own travels) that 1) “20% or 30%…has finally awakened”, and 2) “they are still too goddamned dumb not to be had by another hustle”?
And if they’re too dumb, then what leads you to the conclusion that the Democratic presidential candidate won’t receive, say 48%-53% of the popular vote next November?
Just guessing, massappeal. Just guessing. Like I said, if I was an investigative journalist I would have more evidence one way or the other but since I’m not, it’s seat-of-the-pants flying.
However…I probably spend a greater amount of time in different segments of the society and areas of the country than do most people because of my work…lots of travel, lots of contact with all levels of the society on a quite personal level…and I go out of my way to talk to people. All kinds of people. I trust the seat of my pants.
You don’t?
OK by me.
We shall all see what happens eventually, won’t we?
Later…
AG
At this point I doubt that even if Trump were to stand in front of a crowd and state the obvious, “I’m in this for myself, I’ve lied to you and I will always lie because you’re scum” the crowd would cheer him on.
Jeb is starting to fight back but he doesn’t have anything to fight a distinctly led Trump movement now. Not the charisma, the policies, the strength, the intellect or a common touch. Jeb is empty. He just is talking from 30,000 feet above the planet.
Beyond the irony of watching this Luntz created monster morph beyond the control of his wordsmithing, I keep thinking Luntz has taught these people to think and now they’re applying that process to everyday life.
Trump is the only one smart enough to employ Luntz-think which is nothing but how best to con the rubes.
Yes. But he also has taken Luntz one further and he uses personal attacks to highlight what he wants to say. He effectively ties a person to whatever ‘stupid idea’ remark he wants to drive and so lowers credibility of his target while using the twofer of destroying their argument.
Jeb can’t play in this league. In fact I doubt any of the Rep’s can. A race to see who can tell the biggest lie.
This says it all:
What does she mean by “Nobody is listening to us,”? That the adults in the political arena don’t pay attention to toddleresk tantrums? Or would that be enough attention b/c sure seems to outside observers that most of the GOP POTUS candidates are not only listening but engage in similar tantrums. Wherever did she get the notion that others should listen to incoherent babbling?
Only a fool or a naif believes that Trump is listening to this rabble.
No, Trump doesn’t know what you think b/c you mistake inchoate rage for thinking.
The revealing part is this: he’s successful just like we want to be.” Ah yes. Identification with the aggressor. Support Trump and you too could become a billionaire.
The GOP base has been buying this crap for thirty-five years. And while they aren’t quite insane enough not to notice that they aren’t millionaires, they have yet to figure out that it’s a GOP long-con.
A possible difference between Trumpalooza and Palinmania is that so far Trump’s getting fewer evangelicals (they seem to be hanging more with Dr. Ben), but he’s picking up more of those that view themselves as educated.
Will interesting to see who among the other candidates will remain standing after Trump completes his next two months of slashing and burning his competition.
When I hear them say “No one is listening to us”, I hear that cry as synonymous with “We need to TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY”!!! It is the cry of a frustrated white person who sees a scary and unrecognizable landscape when they stand on the corner of Main and Broadway in their personal little pocket of Americana. Even if they don’t recognize or realize what they are expressing, that rumble of fear at “The Other” is just unmistakable. And they also believe they are falling behind because of “the poors” and all their “freebies”. It is the cry of a foot soldier primed for a race and class war. But they have been convinced that they need to fight the very people with whom they should be allied. They have swallowed the lie. And there is no reeling them back in.
Being convinced to fight allies has been going on since the 1600s. And it was always and ever about racial others.
I want Trump’s mailing list so I can push phony investment schemes and real estate seminars.
So it turns out that Republicans believe in nothing, expect nothing, and just want to vote for the spirit of “Fuck You” in vaguely humanoid form? Ya don’t say.
I’m not impressed. At least, not impressed by the implications of “Trumpism”. This shit is the same stuff that’s been going around for 30 years. Trump no more believes what he’s saying than the Koch Bros/Boehner/McConnell triumvirate.
Everyone is worried about “what if the radicals get into power?????!!!!??”. What if they do? Are they going to repeal the ACA? Are they going to deport more Hispanics (more than the 500K in 2013)? Are they going to send letters to Iran saying not to believe the President? Are they going to defund Family Planning? Are they going to try to pass laws allowing discrimination of LGBT individuals? Are they going to attempt to make abortion illegal everywhere in the US? . Just what are these SO SCARY people going to do … that isn’t already being tried?
These people are ignorant and proud of their ignorance. These guys firmly believe that ALL WHITE PEOPLE really DO think the way they do and that all the Right has to do is BE MORE RIGHT to win it all!!! How’d that work out for Todd Akin in Missouri?
Assume that these guys ARE right. In what universe will the people THEY elect be able to turn everything around like they want? Got news for ya people, NO COMPROMISE means that you get diddly / squat (see health care reform, 1994).
Bring Trump on. He’s an empty windbag that couldn’t get elected to office anywhere. His followers will get a crash course in “unelectable” anywhere people like Tom Cotton are NOT already elected … and maybe in some places where they ARE already elected.
If they win they get the Supreme Court. How has that turned out lately vis a vis money in politics?
If they win who cares? Its like saying I’d rather have Hurricane Camille than Hurricane Katrina.
Any universe where Trump wins will be no worse than any universe where Jeb wins.
I think that you are wrong there. Jeb would just sit on things. Survival would be possible. Trump? A potential destroyer.
AG
You’re probably right, AG, but then again, without the active interference of a non-RightWingNutJob in the whitehouse ….
what difference would THAT make?
I dunno, DF.
Do you want to live through another version of Kristallnacht?
I don’t.
Do you want a president who says:
I don’t.
Do you want a president who says…(Matt Taibbi, Donald Trump Just Stopped Being Funny)…when informed that two of his followers beat a Mexican with a metal pole in the streets of South Boston:
I don’t. I can see these guys in “Trump Guard” uniforms. Wearing a military version of his baseball cap.
I’m already hearing echoes of the Nuremberg rallies in his “pep rallies.”
A big, American, reality TV-driven version of the recent Ukraine-style fascist takeover.
WTFU.
AG
Look, AG, just because your boy rand is getting his ass kicked doesn’t mean that Trump is next coming of Ronald Reagan.
And last but most certainly not least:
He will probably be running against HILLARY CLINTON. Personally, I think I’d rather run against Richard Nixon.
Rand Paul is not “my boy,” fool.
WTFU.
I must have posted about 20+ times that I did not think he had more than about a 10% chance of winning the nomination. He was just the only candidate on either side who was making even a little sense.
And Trump is a real threat to the survival of this society, whatever that may be.
Bet on that as well.
You don’t see that?
No surprise.
AG
Do we want to change that? These people are waking up and demanding that their party listen to them, just as the Bernie supporters are doing on the left. I may not approve of what the Trump supporters want from the government, but I would rather have a populace that is being honest and working for it’s goals rather than being zombies. Maybe it’s time that we face the reality of our country’s conflicting desires.
I think we need to realize that Sanders does not appeal only to the left.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/23/1395700/-Republicans-for-Bernie-Sanders
Whereas Trump’s appeal is limited to the RWNJ 27%.
I’m jealous. I wish Dems could kick their establishment to the curb. But Dems still think experts are worth listening to, and mostly that’s true except the Dem establishment are in no way experts, or at least, not experts in the path for a more just world.
Today on CNBC, if anyone watches that, Wilbur Ross (a billionaire investor) was asked: “You’re a friend of Donald Trump, right?” To which he replied “yes.” He was non-committal on who he would support as the field is now. But asked “If Trump is the nominee, would you vote for him.” His reply was something like “of course.” What are they thinking, these people?
Trump is Romney II hammer him on his record and he just lies. No matter if it is recorded or a standing policy he just lies. Romney and fox spews made the world save for Trump.
I think Trump is a closet drunk. His nighttime tweets are suspicious. His bloated features and baggy eyes are not from too much reading that is for sure.
interesting
Ever hear the term “Angry old drunk.”?
especially after the bizarre Jorge Ramos incident which makes no sense to me at all otherwise. I guess that was daytime, but I expect the drunken temperament is not just from nighttime drinking
Here’s the difference. Romney flip-flopped and lied and then acted all defensive when challenged about the flip-flopping or lies. Trump sasy, “That was then and this is now and only the now is important,” and btw “thank you for asking and now ‘fuck off.” (His current supporters would probably be satisfied with just the “fuck off,” but the undecideds appreciate that he boldly supports whatever he currently supports.)
The GOP inside movers and shakers made a serious mistake in assuming that Clinton in the race would make a Bush electable in the GE and that the “electable” meme would carry Jeb(?) to the nomination. What they overlooked is that the GOP base was never fond of the wimpy talking Poppy and they see Jeb(?) as a combination of Poppy and Romney, IOW another establishment chosen loser.
The GOP base is also not as fond of name legacy candidates as the DEM base is. They also appreciate that GWB set up conditions that allowed Obama to win; so, the Bush name retains some toxicity for them.
The problem for them was that they had no one else that could attract enough of the fundies and nutters with winks and nods that also retained enough of a non-crazy persona that he could be seen as electable in the GE. Christie came close before his implosion. Walker and Rubio are skilled enough not to appear dumb on too many occasions. For now — they don’t have much choice but to let the Trump fever run its course for the next couple of months and then figure out if there is a path forward for any candidate that would be acceptable to them. (That would exclude Cruz, Paul, Carson, and Huckabee.)
I remember a bumper sticker in 2004 in New Hampshire: Dated Dean married Kerry. Political junkies has trouble understanding that asking the question this far out gives you answers set in quicksand.
Here are the August numbers of the last 4 winners in Iowa:
Kerry: 8% (got 36%)
Huckabee: 8% (got 35%)
Obama: 19% (got 38%)
Santorum 3 (got 25%)
I will believe that Trump matters when he is above 20 with 10 days left in Iowa.
Trump as the Republican nominee literally kills the GOP dead as a national party.
I’m OK with that.
The only real difference between Trump and any other GOP candidate is that the other GOP candidates can’t say the stupid shit Trump says without having to walk it back a few hours/days later.
That is literally the only difference.
The whole Trump phenomenon is simply the marriage of the US being a RealityTV-based electorate and a failure of either political party to work on the behalf of anyone who isn’t already rich and powerful.
Trump is basically saying I’m the rich and powerful already, I’ll give y’all what you want. And he’s having a good time saying it.
The Society of the Spectacle is real and Trump is just the latest personification of the commodification of everyday life.