• entries
    210
  • comments
    2,859
  • views
    28,785

Trump Challenges Poll: 150 days of excitement

Trump campaign challenges: choose one, many, all items  

7 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of these listed challenges for the Trump campaign do you consider important?

    • "Unfavorable" opinion / Demographic change since 2012
    • Hostile/adversarial media environment
    • Wavering support from GOP / Unity at the Cleveland Convention
    • Electoral College arithmetic / Swing-state uncertainties
    • "Incoherent:" policy proposals
    • Bias, prejudice, "political correctness,: conventional wisdom
    • Raising and spending money
    • National campaign strategy and tactics
    • 'Lack' of conventional campaign superstructure
    • Coordination with GOP campaign
  2. 2. Will you vote for Trump in November?

    • Yes, no doubt
    • Yes, some doubt
      0
    • On the fence
    • No, some doubt
    • Never, under no circumstances
    • Not eligible / don't vote

At this point in the American presidential election cycle, Trump supporters should be excited -- not despite the challenges, but because of the challenges.  Their candidate is an assertive, even aggressive personality, a fighter.  What does a fighter relish if not challenging, high risk/high reward situations? 

Imagine you have been summoned to Trump Tower. Can you make 'contact' and a persuasive argument that some of these challenges are central, some peripheral, some not even challenges at all? 

  1. Electoral College arithmetic / Swing-state uncertainties
  2. Raising and spending money
  3. Hostile and adversarial media environment
  4. National campaign strategy and tactics
  5. "Unfavorable" opinion / Demographic change since 2012
  6. 'Lack' of conventional campaign superstructure
  7. Coordination with GOP campaign
  8. Wavering support from GOP / Unity at the Cleveland Convention
  9. "Incoherent:" policy proposals
  10. Bias, prejudice, "political correctness,: conventional wisdom

I will flesh the list out in separate comments.  What have I missed, what have I  split, what else do you think are the top challenges for the Trump campaign?

(I have re-ranked the Top Ten list, in light of feedback from members. We now have one Trump supporter in the mix!)



18 Comments


Recommended Comments

Trump, is slowly imploding because he's almost a complete fraud; a stalking horse for Hillary and the Dems generally. He doesn't have ten billion bucks, not even a billion; what he does have is mostly not liquid.

--Brant

I like his airplane

Share this comment


Link to comment
6 hours ago, Brant Gaede said:

Trump, is slowly imploding because he's almost a complete fraud [...] He doesn't have ten billion bucks, not even a billion; what he does have is mostly not liquid.

Not much meat on them bones, Brant. If he had to liquidate his empire, he could come away with the ten billion he claims as wealth. Who knows?  He won't release his tax returns, which could mean he actually reports a smaller income -- or declares large overhangs of debt to lighten his bottom-line.

I would never sum up  Trump as but a fraud.  He is a TV personality, a game-show host, and a successful entrepreneur -- on top of a large real-estate portfolio of luxury 'branded' properties. If it has "Trump" on it, he gets a cut -- whether or not he 'owns' the real estate or not. For example, there are now two large towers of suites and rooms in the Ultra-Luxury class in Vancouver. One is the the Trump Tower (and suites and hotel and what have you) and the other is the Shangri-La.  No Trump company owns either of them.

It may be that some Trump companies/products have been marketed in a shady way (Trump UNIVERSITY, perhaps) -- and that Trump brand shows some failures here and there (CASINO), but as a 'producer' of goods and services, and as the  Chief Executive, he is just a businessman to me, all things considered. Some of his schtick is on the margins of show business, okay, and there one can expect fiction and glitz and gilt and hummers, not fraud in the economic sense.  Without such things as tax records, nobody will know how much Trump wealth is liquid, how much income is declared from his revenue stream, how much debt is on the books.  Perhaps his debt is so magnificently accounted for that he pays a pittance in taxes.

But, on the money subject, we can use this to segue into one of the challenges you IDed as important above.

  1. Raising and spending money

I'll return to this later today, but briefly, I break this out into three money raising and three spending areas. With spending, the three are

-what the official Trump campaign spends
-what the RNC spends
-what the allied-but-separate PACs/SuperPACs spend.  

On the raising money side, the three areas are

-what Trump raises for himself
-what Trump raises for the RNC
-what the RNC raises

If I were Trump, I would follow my instincts:  don't overspend time raising money that I do not intend to spend, or would not spend if it were up to me. And for the spending, I would be a bit cheap, and a bit aggressive in demanding that the Party take the lead in fundraising. 

I don't see Trump wasting a lot of his time doing fund-raisers where he isn't convinced it benefits his campaign, or where it conflicts with his strategy.  So far, I don't see him following RNC 'suggestions' he go flog himself on the phone and in person to the proverbial money-bags, at least not to the degree other candidates have done at this point in earlier presidential races.  

To illustrate, I believe Trump will generally prefer public rallies every day of the week, and avoid budgeting his time directly in fund-raising appeals.   We will have to wait and see which way he goes, and when.

(Conventional wisdom suggests the Clinton campaign, tightly-coupled to the DNC, will  raise one billion dollars and more. Hoopla?)

Edited by william.scherk

Share this comment


Link to comment

I will quickly restate one of my operating  assumptions, as detailed elsewhere: Polling results at this time -- especially "If the election was held today" national-sample soundings -- are not going to tell us who will win how many electoral votes where.  At best they can offer comparisons to preceding elections at this point in the cycle: 150 days out.  In-state polling can offer a comparison -- but at this point almost all the 'swing-state' polling is shitty, either non-existent or months-old.

With my Trump-Supporter red hat on, I can say I expect Mr Trump is a smart enough executive to be aware of his challenges, and to manage the multiple levels of a national campaign.  With the red hat on, I would pass some suggestions 'up the lines' to the candidates inner circle or kitchen cabinet.  For example, I would cite the most interesting analytical opinion -- opinion that could help simplify and focus the response to the challenges.

Here's a teaser from The Hill website: "5 things Trump needs to do to turn his campaign around\."  It has useful targets which can serve as benchmarks:

  1. Pick a good VP 
  2. Expand your base
  3. Focus on winnable states
  4. Cut out the conspiracy theories 
  5. Focus on jobs and the economy

Some excerpts:

Trump crushed his opponents in the GOP presidential primary, where he was competing with other Republicans for a slice of the vote.

Winning a general election is tougher.

Polls over the last few weeks have shown Trump hovering around 40 percent in general election match-ups against Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, with high disapproval numbers among Hispanics, African-Americans and women.

He's unlikely to win just by appealing to white men and so needs to expand his appeal.

[...] 

Trump surprised political observers — and worried Republican strategists — by spending time after his primary win in California and New York, two states he bragged he would bring into the GOP fold.

Such an outcome seems unlikely, according to polls.

Trump is being advised to quit fighting for California and New York and head to states such as Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Wisconsin, where the race will actually be decided.

“I think he will end up focusing on the targeted states,” said veteran Republican strategist Charlie Black, who is a longtime friend of Trump’s campaign chair, Paul Manafort.

[...]

When Trump flirted with conspiracy theories about President Obama being a secret Muslim in alliance with terrorist organizations, it horrified many in the GOP and gave ammunition to Democrats.

The timing of Trump’s comments were especially hard to understand, coming a little more than 24 hours after 49 people were killed in an Orlando nightclub by a man pledging allegiance to terrorist groups. At a time when Americans generally rally around one another, Trump went on the attack with lowest-common-denominator arguments.

Days later, Republicans were still being asked about the statements.

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 6/18/2016 at 2:25 PM, william.scherk said:
  1. Raising and spending money

I'll return to this later today, but briefly, I break this out into three money raising and three spending areas. With spending, the three are

-what the official Trump campaign spends
-what the RNC spends
-what the allied-but-separate PACs/SuperPACs spend.  

On the raising money side, the three areas are

-what Trump raises for himself
-what Trump raises for the RNC
-what the RNC raises

Here, from life:

 

Share this comment


Link to comment

Corey Lewandowski parts ways with the Trump campaign; this is a very important move that impacts several of the listed campaign challenges:

 

  1. National campaign strategy and tactics
  2. 'Lack' of conventional campaign superstructure
  3. Coordination with GOP campaign
  4. Wavering support from GOP / Unity at the Cleveland Convention

Here's some detail on present spending hoopla between the Clinton and Trump campaigns (from  NBCnews ):

Quote

 

Trump and GOP groups haven't spent a dime on battleground-state ads

As Republicans -- once again -- plot to "stop Trump," it's worth pointing out that Hillary Clinton and Democrats are dominating the battleground-state airwaves. So far in June, Clinton and the outside groups backing her have spent a total of $23.4 million on ads in the battleground states of Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia, according to ad-spending data from SMG Delta. By contrast, Republicans have spent $0 in these same eight states. That's a 100 percent-to-0 percent advantage for Clinton and the Democrats in these battlegrounds. Here are the numbers in the battleground states for this month:

Priorities USA and Priorities USA Action (pro-Clinton outside groups): $15.9 million

Hillary for America: $7.5 million

All Trump/GOP presidential spending: $0

 

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
41 minutes ago, william.scherk said:
  1. National campaign strategy and tactics
  2. 'Lack' of conventional campaign superstructure
  3. Coordination with GOP campaign

-- lots of hoopla this week involving these three challenges for the Trump campaign. Here are some excerpts from a detailed article that examines the campaign with a critical lens (from Trump does not have a campaign):

Quote

 

Veteran operatives are shocked by the campaign’s failure to fill key roles. There is no communications team to deal with the hundreds of media outlets covering the race, no rapid response director to quickly rebut attacks and launch new ones, and a limited cast of surrogates who lack a cohesive message.

“They don’t or can’t cover it all, and there are things that happen that need to be addressed immediately and don’t get addressed at all, and that hurts the candidate,” a source within the campaign groused last month. 

The campaign is bringing on a new senior staffer Jim Murphy, as first reported by The New York Times, and a source said more communications hires are expected to follow. But they lag far behind the Clinton campaign, which has over a dozen senior staff dedicated to communications as well as teams devoted to modern data and analytics, an area where Trump is publicly skeptical of hiring. In addition, Clinton enjoys support from established super PACs like Correct The Record and American Bridge that respond to attacks and promote opposition research. 

[...]

Making things difficult is the ongoing rivalry between Trump’s top adviser Paul Manafort, who was brought in to professionalize the campaign in March, and longtime staff like campaign manager Corey Lewandowski and press secretary Hope Hicks, who is essentially the lone media contact for reporters. 

While Manafort handles every aspect of the campaign outside of travel and communications, per the source, Lewandowski and Hicks actually join Trump on the road and have his ear on a moment-to-moment basis. The source described the two as determined to block Trump from voices that might undermine their control, which has made hiring new senior staffers difficult despite the obvious need. 
The conflict came to a head in California last week, where Manafort had lined up a raft of endorsements from local supporters ahead of Trump’s tour of the state – but no press releases went out announcing the news. Lewandowski and Hicks, the source said, vetoed draft after draft. 

Despite the campaign’s sluggish start, Trump supporters stressed that his unique gifts, especially his ability to command media attention via Twitter and cable news, give him some leeway to bypass ordinary campaign methods. They also are encouraged by polls that show Trump competitive with likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton and Republican voters largely united despite the bruising primary.

[...]

What struck Republican strategist Ryan Williams, who served as deputy national press secretary on Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, is that Trump seemed aware of his staffing problem even if he couldn’t locate the cause.

“Do you ever notice that @CNN gives me very little proper representation on my policies,” Trump tweeted ahead of the speech. “Just watched - nobody knew anything about my foreign P.”

In a normal campaign, Williams said, Trump’s staff would have addressed this complaint long before their candidate was left to gripe on social media.

 

Considering that Mr Trump has said that his campaign will get started after the convention ... much of the pundit class is in a frenzy this week feeding on signs of disarray -- and blowing up small news into Grand Hoopla.   De-cluttering reveals a simple decision: Manafort has more experience, Lewandowski was too 'uncooperative' with Manafort, Lewandowski get a pink slip. 

Share this comment


Link to comment

Breitbart claims   'exclusive details' of today's surprise Trump pink slip  ... claiming Corey Lewandowski was fired during a meeting and then hustled out of Trump Tower by a security escort.  Some of this must be made up or gloss-spin (emphases added):

Quote

 

Exclusive: Corey Lewandowski Escorted Out of Trump Tower, Out of Trump Campaign

Donald J. Trump fired his wunderkind campaign manager Corey LewandowskiMonday at the campaign’s regular Trump Tower meeting.

“Corey was escorted out of the building,” a source close to the campaign told Breitbart News.

Lewandowski came to the meeting unaware that he had lost the support of the GOP presumptive nominee, the source said. At the meeting, attended by both senior campaign staff and members of the family, Trump reviewed different campaign metrics that were all faltering: cooperation with party leaders, fundraising, surrogate operations and most importantly the polls.

The campaign manager seemed to have run out of ideas. When the New York City developer asked Lewandowski what he would do to turn things around, the only thing he could come up with was for Trump to announce his pick for vice-president.

Pitching that as the solution sealed his fate, the source said. “The VP pick was the one piece of suspense that would make people tune into the convention—Corey wanted to give that away now? There was no way.”

When the time came for Trump to lower the axe, no one spoke up to defend Lewandowski.

 

It will be very interesting to see how the newly-lighter campaign deals with the Grand Hoopla fallout over the firing.  So far, the Trump campaign is saying f*ck all (except by leaks from presumed insiders, under cloak of anonymity).

Share this comment


Link to comment

GOP Candidate is smart enough to make himself available to answer "Questions of the day."  Regular OL readers will not be shocked that it seems his campaign has been reading this blog.  In other words, Trump speaks to several of the challenges highlighted in our Challenges Poll.

Listen for Mr Trump's responses to the gist of the reporter's inquiry:  what are you doing about Challenge 4? -  National campaign strategy and tactics. This clip is the source of several lines of hoopla (don't need money, I'm raising lotsa money, I don't need the GOP elites like Ryan,  or dirty money, my campaign really gets into gear after the convention). The hoopla is a thing to behold, verily..  

Because of today's surprise takedown of Corey Lewandowski, I guess the questions will be sharper in the next week.  It is a whole freaking month before the convention is over.  My Red Hat hope is that the hubbub overt the fired honcho dies down quickly. It is both 'good news' that the Ivanka wing of Trump HQ is ascendant, and 'bad news' because of the distraction index.

The combined distraction potential of Clinton ad buys and the dull trope thump of 'disarray in Trump camp' -- and wailing Oh Noes, He Fired Somebody. What Does It Mean ..  lets focus shift  from HQ's messaging.  Mr Trump's pivot on the body of Lewandowski is normally, in a normal election, minor housekeeping news.  Instead, Hoopla and drift.  

Thanks, Michael, for adding your percentages to the voting up above. The poll is helping me assess the bogosity of my assumptions.

Edited by william.scherk

Share this comment


Link to comment

Intense hoopla on the campaign trail  today, with many strands of  hooey, fudge, spin, pearl-clutching and partisan self-pleasuring. And that is just in text-based media. The topic strands cover our Challenges list above. 

I poke in a few examples of media bingo today. Under the C, Competence:

  1. Raising and spending money
  2. Hostile and adversarial media environment

Money -- who is zooming who?  Who is spending and gaining, who is able to persuade donors small and large and super? Who has cash on hand?  How do the two campaigns account in yesterday's requisite Federal Election Commission financial filings?

First, raw numbers:

Quote

The May fundraising reports

Here's a breakdown of the latest fundraising reports filed with the FEC last night:

Amount raised in May

  • Clinton: $28.2 million ($27.5 in primary money, $782K in general)
  • Sanders: $16.4 million
  • Trump: $5.6 million

Cash on hand (as of May 31)

  • Clinton: $42.5 million
  • Sanders: $9.2 million
  • Trump: $1.3 million

 

Another twist of fly-catcher, a line of inquiry into 'scandalous' details in the Trump campaign filing.  Blew Up Good today.  "He Pays Himself First, Always." Boom.  "And He Hasn't (Yet) Forgiven His Loans."  Cue the happy sounds of hyenas at breakfast.

What's at issue is how much the official campaign reimbursed, paid rent to, or otherwise  paid 'in kind' / salaried / expensed -- to wings of the Trump business empire.

For example, the Trump campaign paid expense cash out to hosts. Eg, left hand collects campaign contributions. Right hand adjusts back-siphon to Trump, via  Trump's company for Mar-a-Lago. Nearly half a million dollars.  

Wait. What?

Did TrumpCampaign really pay TrumpHimself a small 'salary' for his in-kind work?  Did campaign pay bills to such as Trump Airlines, Trump Sandwiches, and Trump Red Hats? Of course.  Why not? What is the problem here?  Did you expect him to not pay himself and his companies first?  Why should rallies or meetings on his properties not pay him a cut? Red Hat says, this is so not a problem, get out the media team to crush this meme to dust. Now.

The fun for the vampire media cohort is in the details of the financials. Emphasis added.

Quote

As for Trump's campaign? It raised just $3.2 million to finish the month with $1.3 million cash on hand. Trump also charged his campaign for use of his properties, airline, and food and beverages at Trump-owned hotels and golf courses.

That is the plain dry-goods from the hateful NBC.  Here an example of  volatile acid memes put in play today, set to run all week, in various outlets. Further down the page continue echoes from the past couple of bad weeks.  From Memeorandum.

moneyMoneyMemes.jpg

From a couple of professional Not-Trumpers leading the #scampaign hashtag hoohaw.  

 

 

 

And, finally in this update, a more sober reckoning, with less apparent  bloodlust:

Quote

 

The FEC filings released Monday show that last month he loaned his campaign another $2.2 million — which means he's now transferred the campaign about $46 million over the past year.

But where is the money going? Not a dollar was spent on TV ads — despite an on-air blitz from the Clinton campaign in battleground states.

Much of it went back into Trump corporate products and services, according to The Associated Press. It reported that a review of Federal Election Commission filings shows $6.2 million — or about 10 percent of total campaign expenditures — had been disbursed to the candidate's corporate products and services through the end of May.[...]

Even $4.7 million spent on campaign swag has a tie to Trump: The provider, Ace Specialties, is owned by a board member of son Eric Trump's charitable foundation.

 

Nobody in the TrumpCampaign is pushing back on the misleading spin fueled by the acid meme. At least not yet. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
10 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

Nobody in the TrumpCampaign is pushing back on the misleading spin fueled by the acid meme. At least not yet. 

Yeah, yet. It's an invitation, though, to delve into Hillary's finances, which is going to be fun. Pot calling kettle black.

J

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 6/21/2016 at 11:25 AM, william.scherk said:

Cash on hand (as of May 31)

  • Clinton: $42.5 million
  • Sanders: $9.2 million
  • Trump: $1.3 million

Before anyone like me gets ahead of himself -- here is evidence that Wall Street-ish big-money warbucks are available, to add to recent evidence that there is money-hunting activities starring Mr Trump. But this is bigger total, and more exclusive.  I mean, the price of a seat is minimum fifty grand ...

If Mr Trump continues and follows through, getting in dollars necessary for database/get-out-the-vote/volunteer-leaders and expenses, it will be strong evidence that He Understands Price Tags, and will ultimately make sure GOTV action is fully-staffed, fully-funded, fully data-intelligent, fully-effective in the task.

My Red Hat on, I says "Great! Keep It Up, Sir."   Keep on getting creamy warbucks from hedge-fund honchos and assorted super-rich-and-connected.  It is a far sight more effective than nickel-and-diming (the 'small donors') via social media and (free) email appeals. That said, Mr Trump has signed his name to two urgent appeals, one asking for an "emergency" hundred grand, the other telling email-receivers that their ten bucks or 2700 bucks would be matched by the candidate himself (as a loan to his campaign) to a maximum target of 2 million smackeroos.

All in all, this is an open file, that can be examined month-to-month over the 145ish Days of Excitement!

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 6/19/2016 at 9:58 AM, william.scherk said:

I will quickly restate one of my operating  assumptions, as detailed elsewhere: Polling results at this time -- especially "If the election was held today" national-sample soundings -- are not going to tell us who will win how many electoral votes where.  At best they can offer comparisons to preceding elections at this point in the cycle: 150 days out.  In-state polling can offer a comparison -- but at this point almost all the 'swing-state' polling is shitty, either non-existent or months-old.

Headlines in media both corrupt and pure  toy with two recent national polls that show Mrs Clinton up over Mr Trump in oh my gosh double digits. What does that tell me about North Carolina, Virginia, Florida, Pennsylvania, Utah, Ohio, Arizona? Not too much. 

With my red hat on, I can claim that this drift of polling is tainted  -- biased in a meaningful way, and in a way that can be demonstrated. The strongest argument here is that the ABC and Reuters polling over-weights Democratic numbers, over-estimates the actual number of Democratic voters versus Republican voters.  This is arguable, yet I think arguing about the polling corruption is a waste of time for the actual campaign.  Since Mr Trump does not employ his own pollsters, he cannot come back with an 'accurate' or unbiased sample to tout.  

Time not wasted can be spent on assessing challenges;  it is wise to consider  'worst case' scenarios and to observe closely the bottom lines in polls. I am sure the campaign puts calculating wonks to work extracting important information from the polls as they come in.  A red hat is perfectly placed to deny the relevance and accuracy of the polls in public, while putting the campaign on work alert to address deficiencies and soft spots in support.

Consider the Clinton camp. Polls out of Pennsylvania showed a soft spot.  Presto change-o, millions of dollars are deployed in TV advertising in the state markets.  Tactical, perhaps doomed to fail to budge anybody.

Now the Trump camp. Polls out of Utah and Arizona showed soft spots.  No visits or rallies, no added human resources, little integration with local GOP, no GOTV operation, no ad buys, no surrogates on the ground.  

But. It is 134 days to November. Mr Trump has not really started yet. The Red Hats can move mountains of doubt, wariness, skepticism, distaste and/or fear-hate. 

To the real, diehard Trump supporters, I can only say Be Realistic. Discount any and all horse-race polls (except for comparison to snapshots taken in earlier races at this point in the cycle) and concentrate on the in-state polling, and pay great attention to the bottom lines.  Play the electoral college bingo as state polls come on line. Help focus the efforts of the Trump campaign where they are needed -- in soft and shifting spots on the landscape.

Some partisan slavering over bottom-lines from ABC news (emphases added):

Quote

Hillary Clinton surged to a broad advantage against Donald Trump in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, capitalizing on Trump’s recent campaign missteps. Two-thirds of Americans see him as biased against groups such as women, minorities or Muslims, and a new high, 64 percent, call Trump unqualified to serve as president.

These and other doubts about Trump have produced a sharp 14-point swing in preferences among registered voters, from +2 points for Trump in mid-May, after he clinched the GOP nomination, to +12 points for Clinton now, 51-39 percent. That snaps the race essentially back to where it was in March.

Underlying Views

Trial heats are hypothetical; they ask which candidate people would support if the election were today – which it isn’t. At least as important are the underlying sentiments informing current preferences, and they show the extent of Trump’s troubles given his recent controversial comments. Among them:

• The public by 66-29 percent think he’s unfairly biased against groups such as women, minorities or Muslims.

Another result marks a rebuke to Trump in his own party. On June 15, referring to Republican leaders, he said, “Just please be quiet. Don’t talk.” In this survey, however, Republicans and GOP-leaning independents by a wide 62-35 percent say party leaders should speak out when they disagree with Trump, rather than avoid criticizing their likely nominee.

Indeed, Trump is supported by just 77 percent of Republican registered voters in the two-way test in this survey, compared with 85 percent in this group last month and, again, essentially back to his in-party support in March. In the four-way trial he’s at 74 percent among Republicans.

Results of this poll temper the notion that last week’s Brexit vote in the United Kingdom marks a broader dissatisfaction with the status quo that advantages Trump on this side of the Atlantic. On one hand, nativist sentiment, populism and economic anxiety clearly benefitted Trump in the race for the Republican nomination. On the other, his general election campaign requires broader support – and he’s had a dreadful few weeks.

[...]

Qualifications, Temperament and Anxiety

Doubts about Trump are reflected in yet-sharper questions about his qualifications for office – perhaps the most basic hurdle for a candidate to clear – and continued widespread anxiety about a potential Trump presidency.

[...]

Sixty-four percent of Americans now see Trump as unqualified to serve as president, up 6 points from an already-high 58 percent last month. Thirty-four percent see him as qualified.

Clinton’s numbers are essentially the opposite, and unchanged: Sixty-one percent see her as qualified for the office, 37 percent as not qualified. Moreover, while 33 percent feel strongly that Clinton is not qualified, many more – 56 percent – feel strongly that Trump doesn’t pass this test.

[...]

Republicans account for 24 percent of all adults and 27 percent of registered voters, about their average in recent years, with the rest independents.

This accounts for little of the shift in voter preferences, however. Even using the same party divisions from last month’s ABC/Post survey, in which Trump was +2, he’d now be -8. The reason, mentioned above, is his comparatively weak performance among Republicans – 77 percent support – compared with Clinton’s support among Democrats, 90 percent.

[...]

Methodology

This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone June 20-23, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 1,001 adults, including 836 registered voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect, for the full sample, and 4 points for registered voters. Partisan divisions are 36-24-33 percent, Democrats-Republicans-independents, in the full sample, 37-27-30 among registered voters.

 

 

 

 

Share this comment


Link to comment

Five OL members weighted the Trump campaign challenges, which will glean more thrills on the 129-day road ahead.   These are the top two.

  • Hostile and adversarial media environment
  • National campaign strategy and tactics

With this focus, the rest show up as knock-ons, ramifying the fundamental challenges.  

  • "Unfavorable" opinion / Demographic change since 2012
  • 'Lack' of conventional campaign superstructure
  • Coordination with GOP campaign
  • Wavering support from GOP / Unity at the Cleveland Convention
  • "Incoherent:" policy proposals
  • Bias, prejudice, "political correctness,: conventional wisdom

I can add a little reporting on the final two items, Money and Unity.

Briefly, the Trump campaign has swung into fund-raising action, from 1-800s to direct appeals, email solicitations to invite-only warbucks closed-doors. The tally of all this will be given at the next FEC deadline, the week of the festivities in Cleveland. The only metric to compare are the boasts from both campaigns (which gives us nothing).

Unity is to be accomplished in Cleveland. I foresee some surprises.  But we can get back to that later. To the fundamentals, media manipulation and Grand Strategy. Here I combine them in a boring mush.

Hostile, adversarial media need something to stoke the hostility. The fourth estate evolved as check against government, the fourth 'voice' in relations of power. However, in the media explosion of the information age, the voices are segmented. There is no MOR trusted organ of information. There are large commercial industries devoted to 'the news' -- but any particular segment's truthiness is usually related to the partisan stripe of the observer.

So, if the spectrum of opinion tends to self-sort into partisan bubblery and silos of Us and Us, what does that mean for a presidential candidate?

In my mind, it means multiple fronts in a real information war. Mr Trump and Mrs Clinton will be 'paid' for campaigning and appearances by 'free' media: whether live and endless in the convention cities, or live from 'important' topic speech or live in studio, and in a 1001 iterations of taped and edited. There will also be those blocks of crazy expensive TV ads in all major markets, targeted local ad buys, Facebook and other social media come-ons, and actual po-faced canvassers, naggers and phone-bankers staggering through the get out the vote routines.  

Add to that a contra-barrage and 1001 iterations of the GOP message tailored to all these markets. 

Then add to the barrages from the Truthinessless new media of all silos. 

As Mrs Palin said in Colorado, there are lots of 'splodey heads 'sploding. She is right -- and yet the 'sploding is occurring in silos/bunkers ... eek splat eek,  bing bing bong bing ... it rarely slops over into adjacent real estate. Surely GOP 'elite' heads asploded, but there is little fallout in Trumpistan -- it doesn't always even register beyond a chance to knock a weak opponent. It doesn't matter where the Eek resistance comes from. Witness the Trump campaigner in this precinct: He tends to laugh at, mock or otherwise exhibit amused contempt for almost all schmutz from legacy silos and other partisan sumps leaning Clinton-ish.

So yeah, the barrage of hoopla/bullschmutz from the legacy media will be historic, yet both campaignerswill be prepared to the best of their ability. If indeed all the major networks and national journals of record are opposed in their hearts to the Red candidate. the best Red response will denounce 'bad' news as coming from partisan, lying, sleazy, untrustworthy sources of information.  

 

That is the broad strokes of my Red Hat advice: push the fourth estate into blocs of patriotic or coward, liars and truth-tellers.  Mr Trump can call anyone a liar, a cheater, a weakling or a fool, and can cast the fourth estate writ large as a bought property. It sings. It can work.

Rigged systems. Fat cats. Vested Interests. Partisan sump-holes. Sleazy, lying dogs.  Corruption. 

Is that the Grand Strategy in a mush? Yes, but I should add a couple more contingencies.  I think Mr Trump is thinking on a very grand scale. I believe that he wants a historic victory, a very large mandate that can come with huge  popular and electoral votes. I think he wants to win everywhere, nation-wide, to turn the whole map red.

I see him campaigning tirelessly (after the convention) in all the so-called swing states, but also strongly present in such states as California, New York, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey. I think his campaign will conform to his wishes in where to 'spend' its most valuable commodity:  he will stage some breathtaking rallies in unlikely places. It will be fun and it will fill the calendar as we tick off the days.

Beyond that, my clairvoyance fails. As always, interested in views, opinion and analysis from the OL bench.

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 7/2/2016 at 3:24 PM, william.scherk said:
  • Hostile and adversarial media environment
  • National campaign strategy and tactics

These two were IDed by our panel as the most important challenges facing the Trump campaign. Our perspectives were borne out: the hostile and adversarial media has become the new 'norm' for presidential politicking.  Here is a brief extract from an Ezra Klein take on the 'new' role of the major media in poisoning the well.  I don't know if anyone will find it convincing, but it is a more-or-less thoughtful read from the progressive Blue side of the gulf.

-- from The media vs. Donald Trump: why the press feels so free to criticize the Republican nominee, at the pinko Vox.

Quote

It’s a common criticism of political reporting that it’s hampered by a faux-evenhandedness — if one side says the sky is blue and the other side says it’s orange, then the headline will be "Opinions on Color of Sky Differ." But that hasn’t happened this year. The media has felt increasingly free to cover Trump as an alien, dangerous, and dishonest phenomenon. "Trump has freed journalists from the handcuffs of false equivalence," says Brian Stelter, host of CNN’s Reliable Sources.

Trump, for one, has noticed the negativity of his coverage. It’s become a favored explanation for his sagging poll numbers:

As with much Trump says, there’s a kernel of a point here. While it’s ridiculous to suggest the media likes Hillary Clinton — her relationship with the press is famously, legendarily toxic — the media is increasingly biased against Trump. He really is getting different, harsher treatment than any candidate in memory. That he deserves it is important context to the discussion, but not, I think, the whole explanation.

Trump’s deteriorating relationship with the press is revealing about Trump himself — about the ways in which an attention-at-all-costs strategy that carried him through the primary has proven maladaptive in the general election. But it’s also interesting as a window into how the political press works, and why it does or doesn’t follow rules of evenhandedness in different circumstances.

Share this comment


Link to comment

Yes. yes. YES! orry guys, but after two weeks of watching and reading "evenhanded' coverge, some of which from Fox "News",nothing to say but thank gord that my William can say it. TW, where is Chelsea's Arkansas accent? Didn't she grow up there? Even Hillary has kind of a twang. The only reasonable conclusion is that she, or it, was secretively adopted from an outer space for a big financial consideration. Watch out, Ivanka... ther liberal media will come after you too.

Share this comment


Link to comment

And while I am at it, how about his spokesgirls who hint exotically of "Miss Universe vet" who did indeed go to college and no doubt want world peace? They are doing yeoman work and should be rewarded probably more than they are going to be.

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 7/2/2016 at 3:24 PM, william.scherk said:

That is the broad strokes of my Red Hat advice: push the fourth estate into blocs of patriotic or coward, liars and truth-tellers.  Mr Trump can call anyone a liar, a cheater, a weakling or a fool, and can cast the fourth estate writ large as a bought property. It sings. It can work.

Rigged systems. Fat cats. Vested Interests. Partisan sump-holes. Sleazy, lying dogs.  Corruption. 

And the campaign listened!  The Trump campaign is running against a corrupt media.  If the media did not tell so many lies, the GOP candidate would be beating Hillary by 20%. 

And now, in what Scott Adams will likely note as genius, the Trump campaign has two new honchos under Mr Trump.  While Paul Manafort retains his title of Chairman of the campaign, Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen Bannon is now campaign CEO. In addition,  GOP strategist and pollster Kellyanne Conway has been raised from erstwhile advisor to the position of campaign manager.

And from Vox ...

Indeed, Breitbart News has effectively positioned itself as the major website for Trump fans, which has helped it draw big traffic numbers while infuriating many traditional conservatives. Ben Shapiro, an editor at large for the site, resigned earlier this year and said it had become "Trump’s personal Pravda.". Reporter Jordan Schachtel also quit, saying, "Breitbart News is no longer a journalistic enterprise, but instead, in my opinion, something resembling an unaffiliated media Super PAC for the Trump campaign."

-- since this is relatively fresh news, we can put our own spin on it.  My thoughts are that this is a victory for the Popeye proponents who want I Yam What I Yam.  This is a victory for Let Trump Be Trump. This is a victory for the Roger Stone style of politicking. This means more of the things that brought Mr Trump to victory in the GOP primary race: rallies, rallies, rallies, bozillions of units of free air-time (on the shows).

In other words, in other words, the candidate gets what the candidate wants, his way.  Whether this 'works' ought to become apparent in public opinion in the coming fifty days or so, starting tomorrow.  

What will be offered as spin on the news?  Here's a sample from the front page of Memeorandum.com right this minute. Hoopla!

Quote
Trump shakes up campaign, demotes top adviser  —  Donald Trump, following weeks of gnawing agitation over his advisers' attempts to temper his style, moved late Tuesday to overhaul his struggling campaign by rebuffing those efforts and elevating two longtime associates who have encouraged his combative populism.
Discussion:
RELATED:
i13.jpg New York Times:
Donald Trump, in Shake-Up, Hires Breitbart Executive for Top Campaign Post  —  LAS VEGAS — Donald J. Trump has shaken up his presidential campaign for the second time in two months, hiring a top executive from the conservative news site Breitbart News and promoting a senior adviser to a key …
Discussion:
i12.jpg Monica Langley / Wall Street Journal:
Donald Trump Overhauls Campaign Team  —  Republican nominee adds two managers to help stem slide; Paul Manafort remains chairman  —  Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump is bringing two new managers to the top of his campaign in a bid to recover ground he has lost in recent weeks.
i133.jpg Beth Reinhard / Wall Street Journal:
Trump to Air First TV Ads of General Election Campaign  —  As he continues to slip in the polls, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump is poised to begin airing his first television ads of the general election starting Friday in Florida, Ohio, North Carolina and Pennsylvania, according to a campaign adviser.

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
On 7/2/2016 at 3:24 PM, william.scherk said:

Five OL members weighted the Trump campaign challenges, which will glean more thrills on the 129-day road ahead.   These are the top two.

  • Hostile and adversarial media environment
  • National campaign strategy and tactics

I believe  the Trump campaign strategy and tactics are not failing Trump, but that the Electoral College arithmetic is pretty grim when taken in concert with demographic change.  The media challenge is however more intense now than at any time since I posted the topic.

A couple weird, touching, pathetic or notable things from the last few dramatic days.  Some small, some smaller. First, according to the drones at Politico, Trump is wondering where the Republicans are.   He said at a fundraiser on Tuesday: “I think they forgot that there was an election, because something happened in the last month where you didn't see them, right? You didn’t see them. I said, ‘Why aren't they on the shows? Why aren’t they all over the place?’”

It's true. There isn't a lot of GOP folk getting on 'the shows' lately to rally support for him.

It gets a little bit more obscure. “There’s a whole deal going on there. I mean, you know, there’s a whole deal going on. We’re gonna figure it out. I always figure things out. But there’s a whole sinister deal going on.”

A small remark from the brain of New Gingrich rounds out that little thing:  He said this morning on Fox Business network that "There is a big Trump and a little Trump," which I didn't know.  

He said “Look, first of all, let me just say about Trump, who I admire and I’ve tried to help as much as I can. There’s a big Trump and a little Trump. The little Trump is frankly pathetic. I mean, he’s mad over not getting a phone call?”

-- this refers to a Little Donald whine at a rally -- about not getting a call from Ryan congratulating him for crushing Hillary Clinton in last weekend's debate.

Also from the same programme's Gingrich advice, "“Donald Trump has one opponent. Her name is Hillary Clinton. Her name is not Paul Ryan. It’s not anybody else."

-- one other not-so-little thing. Scuttlebutt has it that the Trump campaign is 'pulling out of Virginia.'   What the hell does that mean, if true?

Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, Poll: Clinton leads Trump by 9 in Pennsylvania

-- does this mean they will pull out of Pennsylvania too? I think not.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...