Here we are again, putting on the GOP hairshirt and wishing for a better candidate and an election that focuses on substance.
Would it help if Trump focused on core issues important to the electorate and put aside the glib insults? Absolutely. But he has done that more consistently than he ever has, hammering home his positions on inflation, immigration, foreign wars and crime - the very same issues that voters care most about - while his opponents talk about equity, transgender rights, and racism.
Vance has been extremely disciplined in doing this, too, since he came out of the gate.
Trump's 2024 campaign is far more professional than his previous two. We forget so quickly of the ground he's covered since January 2021, and to write off that progress entirely to Biden's decline is not objective.
The fact is that Biden's, Harris's and Trump's negatives are all high, and they bounce up and town with the so-called "vibes" in the campaign. Those vibes are not created by well-structured policy arguments, but on propaganda, taglines and lies distributed through mass and social media. Sorry, but it's true, and it's not going to change.
The choice in this election will be between two candidates with high negatives, and it will come down to a 100,000-vote margin across six states and about as many counties. That is what we should all be focused on.
Trump could give eloquent policy speeches from now til election day and it will not ensure him a win, because most voters make their decision on feelings and emotion, not reason. And many of them, on both sides, have be pushed with a cattle prod to get their ballots in.
Funny, isn't it? Democrats are able to elect "bad candidates" - even vegetables - cycle after cycle, while we republicans must have solid candidates and even then, usually lose.
Did Obama win on substance and policy? Did W? Did Clinton?
The conventional wisdom is that winning requires one side or another to persuade so-called Independents. A competing argument is that there aren't enough reliable independents to persuade and it costs too much, so you should drive your low-propensity base to submit ballots. Democrats have chosen the latter and they aren't even talking to independents in this cycle. It is possible to do both, but one has to dominate a campaign strategy, and the reality of mail-in ballot voting (and voting problems on election day) demands the latter strategy take precedence.
Trump is not running against a candidate, he is running against a political machine. For the first time, republicans do have on-the-ground ballot chasers micro-targeting the low propensity base, which includes (amazingly) evangelicals and hunters, which overlaps with the "independent" cohort. Our effort is not as developed as the democrats', but at least it exists.
Most of those we call "independents" are really just "undecideds," and they're undecided because they don't understand the issues or how they should feel about them. They are difficult to educate, and many don't really care that much to learn. These voters follow the crowd. Or they respond to fear. That's why their votes break for one candidate or another in the final days of a campaign and are highly volatile during the cycle.
And so both parties' messaging sells fear as they look to whip up enthusiasm in their base and drive them to make noise on social media and vote early. That, more than issues, will drive so-called independents. That's why neither Biden nor Harris "tacked to the center," but doubled down on base politics. The closest thing democrats have done to tack to the center is call J.D. Vance weird, but it won't stick.
If only we had Ron DeSantis, who articulates the same issues with more eloquence and specificity. That is true, but DeSantis ran a horrible campaign and if he had by some chance prevailed, the election would be about one issue: abortion. Democrats try to pin a national abortion ban on Trump, but it hasn't stuck.
To quote another old-fashioned republican, "You have to win the war with the army you have, not the army you want."
Our greatest advantage is that unlike any other election in our lifetime, here we have a classic A/B test, as we say in the tech business. Both candidates have Presidential records (yes, I mean Harris). So even a voter who doesn't understand the issues can make a simple comparison based on personal experience, as Reagan asked them to do in 1980, but here, both can be judged on what they've done, not on what they say they would do.
Trump should win that argument even if falls off the wagon now and then.
Here is the problem Bill. Even if someone like Don Jr. injects sense into him as you put it (And not very likely) I simply do not think Trump is capable of controlling himself over the next three months. And naturally that doesn't bode well for the idea of him doing so as president until he's 82 himself. In short to paraphrase the words of General LeMay to President Kennedy in 1962, we're in a pretty bad fix. I am not and have never been a Republican but I will never forgive this party for nominating Donald Trump again instead of Ron DeSantis or pretty much anyone else.
Here we are again, putting on the GOP hairshirt and wishing for a better candidate and an election that focuses on substance.
Would it help if Trump focused on core issues important to the electorate and put aside the glib insults? Absolutely. But he has done that more consistently than he ever has, hammering home his positions on inflation, immigration, foreign wars and crime - the very same issues that voters care most about - while his opponents talk about equity, transgender rights, and racism.
Vance has been extremely disciplined in doing this, too, since he came out of the gate.
Trump's 2024 campaign is far more professional than his previous two. We forget so quickly of the ground he's covered since January 2021, and to write off that progress entirely to Biden's decline is not objective.
The fact is that Biden's, Harris's and Trump's negatives are all high, and they bounce up and town with the so-called "vibes" in the campaign. Those vibes are not created by well-structured policy arguments, but on propaganda, taglines and lies distributed through mass and social media. Sorry, but it's true, and it's not going to change.
The choice in this election will be between two candidates with high negatives, and it will come down to a 100,000-vote margin across six states and about as many counties. That is what we should all be focused on.
Trump could give eloquent policy speeches from now til election day and it will not ensure him a win, because most voters make their decision on feelings and emotion, not reason. And many of them, on both sides, have be pushed with a cattle prod to get their ballots in.
Funny, isn't it? Democrats are able to elect "bad candidates" - even vegetables - cycle after cycle, while we republicans must have solid candidates and even then, usually lose.
Did Obama win on substance and policy? Did W? Did Clinton?
The conventional wisdom is that winning requires one side or another to persuade so-called Independents. A competing argument is that there aren't enough reliable independents to persuade and it costs too much, so you should drive your low-propensity base to submit ballots. Democrats have chosen the latter and they aren't even talking to independents in this cycle. It is possible to do both, but one has to dominate a campaign strategy, and the reality of mail-in ballot voting (and voting problems on election day) demands the latter strategy take precedence.
Trump is not running against a candidate, he is running against a political machine. For the first time, republicans do have on-the-ground ballot chasers micro-targeting the low propensity base, which includes (amazingly) evangelicals and hunters, which overlaps with the "independent" cohort. Our effort is not as developed as the democrats', but at least it exists.
Most of those we call "independents" are really just "undecideds," and they're undecided because they don't understand the issues or how they should feel about them. They are difficult to educate, and many don't really care that much to learn. These voters follow the crowd. Or they respond to fear. That's why their votes break for one candidate or another in the final days of a campaign and are highly volatile during the cycle.
And so both parties' messaging sells fear as they look to whip up enthusiasm in their base and drive them to make noise on social media and vote early. That, more than issues, will drive so-called independents. That's why neither Biden nor Harris "tacked to the center," but doubled down on base politics. The closest thing democrats have done to tack to the center is call J.D. Vance weird, but it won't stick.
If only we had Ron DeSantis, who articulates the same issues with more eloquence and specificity. That is true, but DeSantis ran a horrible campaign and if he had by some chance prevailed, the election would be about one issue: abortion. Democrats try to pin a national abortion ban on Trump, but it hasn't stuck.
To quote another old-fashioned republican, "You have to win the war with the army you have, not the army you want."
Our greatest advantage is that unlike any other election in our lifetime, here we have a classic A/B test, as we say in the tech business. Both candidates have Presidential records (yes, I mean Harris). So even a voter who doesn't understand the issues can make a simple comparison based on personal experience, as Reagan asked them to do in 1980, but here, both can be judged on what they've done, not on what they say they would do.
Trump should win that argument even if falls off the wagon now and then.
I think he's toast.
Here is the problem Bill. Even if someone like Don Jr. injects sense into him as you put it (And not very likely) I simply do not think Trump is capable of controlling himself over the next three months. And naturally that doesn't bode well for the idea of him doing so as president until he's 82 himself. In short to paraphrase the words of General LeMay to President Kennedy in 1962, we're in a pretty bad fix. I am not and have never been a Republican but I will never forgive this party for nominating Donald Trump again instead of Ron DeSantis or pretty much anyone else.