This was Olivia Nuzzi on February 15:
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
The problem with a lot of Trump writing is it fundamentally misunderstands his supporters
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They largely do not care about his various policy positions to the degree that he even has policy positions. That's not what it's about.
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They do not care about planned parenthood or what he said last week about common core vs. what he said this week. They don't care!
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They care about him. They trust him as a leader who won't allow them to be fucked over, because he himself has never been fucked over.
This is Peggy Noonan April 29:
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
The problem with a lot of Trump writing is it fundamentally misunderstands his supporters
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They largely do not care about his various policy positions to the degree that he even has policy positions. That's not what it's about.
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They do not care about planned parenthood or what he said last week about common core vs. what he said this week. They don't care!
Olivia Nuzzi@OliviaNuzzi
They care about him. They trust him as a leader who won't allow them to be fucked over, because he himself has never been fucked over.
This is Peggy Noonan April 29:
[M]aybe Mr. Trump's appeal is simple: What Trump supporters believe, what they perceive as they watch him, is that he is on America's side.
And that comes as a great relief to them, because they believe that for 16 years Presidents Bush and Obama were largely about ideologies. They seemed not so much on America's side as on the side of abstract notions about justice and the needs of the world... [Mr. Obama] is about international climate-change agreements, and leftist views of gender, race and income equality. Mr. Bush's White House was driven by a different ideology"neoconservatism, democratizing, nation building, defeating evil in the world, privatizing Social Security.
But it was all ideology.
Then Mr. Trump comes, and his statements radiate the idea that he's not at all interested in ideology, only in making America great again"through border security and tough trade policy, etc. He's saying he's on America's side, period.
And because people are so happy to hear this after 16 years, because it seems right to them, they give him a pass on his lack of experience in elective office and the daily realities of national politics.
These two analytical, very perceptive women are saying very similar things and I think they are correct. Both of them make "constituency analysis," the focus is on the Trumpists. It is their America that Trump is on the side of. They don't care about Trump's "policy positions" or "ideology," they care that Trump will not allow them to get "fucked over," They don't care that Trump wants to fuck over other Americans and other countries. "We are voting with our middle finger," as one Trump supporter said. They only care about themselves. And who are they? In a demographic nutshell, less educated men. That is not America! That is a Cormac McCarthy novel. But that is all they see and all they care about.
It is an ugly, racist, sexist, undemocratic, violent, "moron" politics-Because that is who Trumpists are!-and it must be smashed utterly, destroyed, and the Trumpists with it. It is about one-third of the Republican Party. Which suggests that it should be easy to destroy. But I am not completely sanguine about that. One-third is still an embarrassingly huge bloc of racist, sexist, authoritarian, violent morons. That's a large base to start with to win the presidency! I am not completely sanguine for "elites analysis," the "Vichy Republicans." The Vichy Republicans could enable Trump, enable Trump to build on that large base. Already, you see them coming around, "Oh alright," a few are endorsing him. The Vichy Republicans are all about winning, "they don't care" if their vehicle to victory is a Nazi.
There is constituency analysis and elites analysis. There is also "politician analysis." And I'm wary on that metric too. Those of us who loathe Donald Trump need recognize-admit-that he is a masterful politician. He has a svengali-like hold on his supporters. As Olivia Nuzzi wrote, "They care about him." Think about that: "They care about him." It's personal! They so identify with him that it's like he's a loved one...No, it's not that, my brother and I would not support each other if we ran for office, it's not a DNA thing, it's a communication thing. It is like Trump speaks to them in a coded language that no one else understands. If any other politician had said "We're going to build a wall" it wouldn't have worked, the Trumpists would have understood, We. Are. Going. To. Build. A. Wall. and ignored him or her. When Trump said "We're going to build a wall," "They don't care!" Trumpists don't care if he is or isn't going to build a wall, they understand that at a non-literal level, it is code for them for something, maybe "He cares so much about us he would even build a wall!" Maybe something like that. They feel it, it's non-verbal communication. They feel his care for them.
No other politician has that. Hillary Clinton does not have that. Which means, in an electoral sense, that Trump's supporters are not "in play" in the general election. Clinton is not going to shake them loose from Svengali. Whereas, Clinton's support is susceptible to being shaken loose. But not by Trump. Those who are already for Clinton are not going to say, "Well let's take a look at the alternative" when the alternative is Trump.
Trump has another ability as a politician, also unique to my thinking: a sixth sense to know an opponent's weakest point and to exploit it as effectively as can be. He has not even begun to attack Hillary Clinton. The one time he took her on, over his treatment of women, he cowed Clinton into silence.
Doesn't make me sanguine.
But: Clinton maintained her lead over Trump, currently RCP's average is 7.3%, she has led him for so long I can't remember when she didn't, but I know she didn't. Clinton's lead has swung however; it has been as high, from memory, as 11% and as low as 3%.
All of which suggests that this presidential election is going to be decided by the same percentage, 5%-10%, of undecided voters that every other recent presidential election has-but not the same 5%-10%. Trump's support is not in play, that has never happened before. The #NeverTrump people, mainly Republican I think, are not in play for Trump. May they be in play for Clinton? I don't see it. May some Democrats be in play for Trump? Yes. Clinton's negatives would be the highest of any candidate who has ever run for president were not Trump running at the same time. There are lots of Democrats who don't like Hillary Clinton. May they be in play for Trump? I go with the CW here, I think among lower educated white men, yes. They have always been in play for the Republican candidate. What about Bernie Sanders supporters? Trump thinks he can appeal to them. Sanders thought he could appeal to Trump supporters earlier! Yes. So I think this time around, the 5%-10% are going to be the usual suspects of "Reagan Democrats" and the bitter hardcore anti-Clinton Sanders supporters.
The key to this election may be the one wild card, the one we've seldom had before: the #NeverTrumpers. I don't see them going for Clinton but if they go third party it's over. The Republican base is too small to withstand any defections. I don't think there is a great chance that there is going to be a third party candidate. The key to the key therefore will be that the #NeverTrump people stay home. I think most of them will in a straight up Clinton-Trump race.
I'm more sanguine now. I'm more sanguine that Clinton will win the general election by about 53%-47%.
There is constituency analysis and elites analysis. There is also "politician analysis." And I'm wary on that metric too. Those of us who loathe Donald Trump need recognize-admit-that he is a masterful politician. He has a svengali-like hold on his supporters. As Olivia Nuzzi wrote, "They care about him." Think about that: "They care about him." It's personal! They so identify with him that it's like he's a loved one...No, it's not that, my brother and I would not support each other if we ran for office, it's not a DNA thing, it's a communication thing. It is like Trump speaks to them in a coded language that no one else understands. If any other politician had said "We're going to build a wall" it wouldn't have worked, the Trumpists would have understood, We. Are. Going. To. Build. A. Wall. and ignored him or her. When Trump said "We're going to build a wall," "They don't care!" Trumpists don't care if he is or isn't going to build a wall, they understand that at a non-literal level, it is code for them for something, maybe "He cares so much about us he would even build a wall!" Maybe something like that. They feel it, it's non-verbal communication. They feel his care for them.
No other politician has that. Hillary Clinton does not have that. Which means, in an electoral sense, that Trump's supporters are not "in play" in the general election. Clinton is not going to shake them loose from Svengali. Whereas, Clinton's support is susceptible to being shaken loose. But not by Trump. Those who are already for Clinton are not going to say, "Well let's take a look at the alternative" when the alternative is Trump.
Trump has another ability as a politician, also unique to my thinking: a sixth sense to know an opponent's weakest point and to exploit it as effectively as can be. He has not even begun to attack Hillary Clinton. The one time he took her on, over his treatment of women, he cowed Clinton into silence.
Doesn't make me sanguine.
But: Clinton maintained her lead over Trump, currently RCP's average is 7.3%, she has led him for so long I can't remember when she didn't, but I know she didn't. Clinton's lead has swung however; it has been as high, from memory, as 11% and as low as 3%.
All of which suggests that this presidential election is going to be decided by the same percentage, 5%-10%, of undecided voters that every other recent presidential election has-but not the same 5%-10%. Trump's support is not in play, that has never happened before. The #NeverTrump people, mainly Republican I think, are not in play for Trump. May they be in play for Clinton? I don't see it. May some Democrats be in play for Trump? Yes. Clinton's negatives would be the highest of any candidate who has ever run for president were not Trump running at the same time. There are lots of Democrats who don't like Hillary Clinton. May they be in play for Trump? I go with the CW here, I think among lower educated white men, yes. They have always been in play for the Republican candidate. What about Bernie Sanders supporters? Trump thinks he can appeal to them. Sanders thought he could appeal to Trump supporters earlier! Yes. So I think this time around, the 5%-10% are going to be the usual suspects of "Reagan Democrats" and the bitter hardcore anti-Clinton Sanders supporters.
The key to this election may be the one wild card, the one we've seldom had before: the #NeverTrumpers. I don't see them going for Clinton but if they go third party it's over. The Republican base is too small to withstand any defections. I don't think there is a great chance that there is going to be a third party candidate. The key to the key therefore will be that the #NeverTrump people stay home. I think most of them will in a straight up Clinton-Trump race.
I'm more sanguine now. I'm more sanguine that Clinton will win the general election by about 53%-47%.
