Republican Convention, Day 4: Trump Swings and Misses

The party is over in Cleveland. And while the final day of the Republican Convention did not have the drama of day 1 (plagiarism!) and day 3 (Cruz!), it was certainly not the ending that Reince Priebus & Co. were hoping for. The key moments:

• The first address that had people talking was delivered by Donald Trump's billionaire friend Peter Thiel, who announced that, "I am proud to be gay" and then proceeded to lambaste the GOP for its anti-gay laws and platform planks. The crowd was respectful, and even offered moderate-to-enthusiastic applause. One imagines that quite a few Republicans who were not under the watchful eye of the news cameras had a different response.
  
  
• The best speech of the night was given by Ivanka Trump, who was warm, charming, and offered up a number of anecdotes that helped to personalize her father. "If It's possible to be famous and not really well-known, that describes the father who raised me," she said.
  
  
• After Ivanka, it was The Donald's turn to explain to America why he should be president. By then, the address had already been leaked on the Internet, so there wasn't much drama. And beyond that, although he used a teleprompter, it was still essentially the standard stump speech. Trump hit on his usual themes—banning Muslims, wall on the Mexican border, no TPP, more high-paying jobs, etc.—meandering from topic to topic without much structure, as is his usual style. While there were no hugely embarrassing gaffes—say, accidentally using a passage from Barack Obama's 2008 acceptance speech—it was most certainly not the home run he needed.
  
  
• The first problem is that the address was very long, clocking in at a little over 1 hour, 15 minutes. This is likely the longest acceptance speech since FDR inaugurated the tradition of personally addressing the conventions in 1932 (we can't be 100% sure, because a few speeches between 1932 and today were not recorded for posterity). The standard acceptance speech checks in at something more like 40 minutes, because Americans have short attention spans, and because if you go past 11:00 p.m. EST (which Trump did), you're going past peoples' bedtimes. By the end of the speech, much of the crowd was listless, and even a few of Trump's staffers were caught staring at their smartphones.
  
  
• The second problem is that the speech was not very personal. There is much truth in the adage that people vote for the candidate they would most want to have a beer with. Trump is a billionaire reality TV star who sleeps on silk sheets and jets around the country on a private Boeing 757-200. That's hard for people to connect with; he should have taken a page from Ivanka's book, and done much more to present himself as a regular guy.
  
  
• The third problem is that the speech was chock full of distortions, half-truths, and very questionable statements. To take but one example, Trump repeated one of his favorite chestnuts, declaring that there is no way to screen Syrian refugees coming into the United States. This is patently untrue, of course. Politico did a quick rundown, and identified more than a dozen other false or highly questionable assertions. This is par for the course for The Donald, and his base obviously does not care. However, the convention is supposed to be about connecting with undecided voters, and they may be a little less forgiving about the fudging.
  
  
• The final problem is that the speech was very negative. It's true that pointing the finger at Muslims, or Mexicans, or Communists, or gay people, or Japanese Americans, or Irish immigrants, or whoever the scapegoat-du-jour is can work. At least, it can work to an extent. But the real mojo that wins elections is hope. We think of FDR's "nothing to fear but fear itself," Kennedy's "ask not what your country can do for you," or Reagan's "morning in America." Trump did very little to paint an optimistic vision of the future, preferring instead to focus on a pessimistic assessment of the past and present. That's just not smart politics.
  
  
• Hillary Clinton, of course, hated the speech. She even live-tweeted her responses. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) did the same, and was appalled when Trump mentioned his name. Quite a few prominent conservatives, beyond the ones who already hated Trump, also gave the speech the thumbs down. David Duke liked it, though.
  
  

Thus comes to a close one of the most memorable conventions in recent memory. All-time, it's not quite the 1860 Republican Convention or the 1896 Democratic Convention, but it's way up there. Politico has a nice postmortem, wondering if voters will be attracted by the "warts and all" honesty of the thing, or will be repelled by the infighting, chicanery of various sorts, and amateurish lapses. The polls should soon tell the tale. (Z)

Hillary's Speech

If Donald Trump had studied Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign, he would have known that hope triumphs over fear. But he didn't, and is running a negative campaign, claiming that America's best days are behind her, and only he can fix things. Most likely Hillary Clinton's speech next week is going to be positive and upbeat, possibly starting out with something in this vein:

Ladies and gentlemen. Democrats, independents, and Republicans. Thank you for listening to me. I hereby gratefully accept the nomination of the Democratic Party to be its candidate for president of the great United States of America. Last week Donald Trump said he was going to make America great again. Well, I've got some news for you, Donald. America has always been great, and is still great, and is going to be even greater under my administration. And it will be great not only for the 1%, but for all Americans. It was not so great in the days of Jim Crow, nor when when women were expected to stay in the kitchen, nor when when gay people had to be in the closet. That may be the America you think is great, Donald, but we're not going back. We're going forward, to an America where all people have the opportunities that only a few have in your vision. ...

One theme that didn't come up at all during the GOP convention is the middle class. Clinton is no doubt going to make helping the middle class a key theme of her convention. Unlike Trump, Clinton is a policy wonk and does her best when talking about details. She is no doubt going to discuss many specific policy items, some of them borrowed from Bernie Sanders, such as a $15/hr mininimum wage, free college, and other things that actually affect people's lives. It's going to be a big contrast with the Republican convention. (V)

Ailes Is Forced Out as Head of Fox News

Fox News Chairman and CEO Roger Ailes was forced out yesterday. Technically, he resigned voluntarily, but had he not resigned he would have been summarily fired. The immediate cause of his current troubles is the lawsuit brought by former Fox News employee Gretchen Carlson alleging sexual harassment. However, Rupert Murdoch's sons, James and Lachlan, who are now running the business, have long wanted to get rid of Ailes and this was just the straw that broke the camel's back. Fox has not yet named a permanent successor, but whoever that is will have a huge impact on the Republican Party and politics in America.

Perhaps Ailes' successor will just keep the same formula and change nothing. After all, Fox News is the most popular cable channel in America and also brings in something like $1 billion in profits every year. However, there are clearly problems down the road. One of the biggest is demographics. The average age of Fox viewers in prime time is 68. The average for CNN is 59. And for some shows, it is even worse. Bill O'Reilly's audience averages 72 years old. No doubt one of the top goals of the new Fox News CEO will be to attract younger viewers, but it is unlikely the current formula will be able to do that, so there may be changes afoot and those changes could have a big impact on politics. (V)

Trump's Battle with Kasich Heats Up

Gov. John Kasich (R-OH) has not endorsed Donald Trump and is not even attending the Republican National Convention, even though it is in the state he governs. Trump responded by calling Kasich petulant and embarrassing. Now it is Kasich's turn to shoot, and he has the bigger gun. Trump has almost no ground operation in Ohio, and ground operations are crucial to getting out the vote on Election Day. No matter what people tell pollsters when they are called, if they don't make the effort to actually vote, what they told the pollster doesn't matter so much. Trump is counting on the state parties in all the competitive states to organize the ground war, from getting people to knock on doors to the get-out-the-vote operation. Kasich has now made it fairly clear that he has no current plans to help Trump in Ohio and has told senior political operatives to stay on the sidelines for the time being. If Trump can't make up with Kasich—and right now that seems very unlikely—he is on his own in this key swing state. Trump may or may not be aware (or care) that no Republican has ever been elected president while losing Ohio, but Kasich certainly knows this. Kasich also knows that if Trump wins, Kasich 2020 is dead in the water, but if Clinton wins, his ace in the hole will be: "I can win the critical state of Ohio."

It is interesting to compare Kasich's position with that of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX). Kasich has an 80% approval rating among Ohio Republicans, so what he says matters a lot in the Buckeye State. Cruz is popular with movement conservatives, but very unpopular with everyone else and with elected Republican officials. More important though, is that almost everyone thinks that Cruz's antics have nothing to do with the 2016 election or even conservatism as a movement, and everything to do with Cruz's desire to be elected president in 2020. Kasich is seen as a principled conservative governor who is mostly looking out for the long-term interests of the Republican Party, and not only his own interests. There is a difference and it matters. (V)

Bill Clinton Said to Favor Kaine

It won't be long before we know who Hillary Clinton's running mate will be, but another sign that it will be Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA) came yesterday when Bill Clinton privately expressed a preference for the Virginia senator, according to three Democratic insiders. Now, it is Hillary's call and not Bill's, but it seems doubtful that Democrats would leak the story if Kaine weren't close to the top of the short list. Kaine's upsides (mayor, governor, senator, DNC chair) are well known, but he also has a few downsides. First, he is pro-life Catholic, although that could possibly help with ethnic Catholics in the Midwest. Second, the supporters of Bernie Sanders, who are hoping fervently for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), will be sorely disappointed with Kaine. Third, although Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D-VA) will almost certainly appoint himself to the vacant Senate seat if Kaine is elected vice president, McAuliffe would have to face the voters in a special election in 2017 held at the same time as the regular gubernatorial election. He wouldn't have nearly the incumbent advantage that Kaine would. (V)

The 2020 Race Is in Full Swing

The Democrats haven't even nominated a candidate yet, the election is 3½ months away, yet the battle for the 2020 Republican nomination is already going full blast. Cruz is certainly running, and very likely Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI), Gov. John Kasich (R-OH), Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), and a host of others. Republicans have already mentally conceded 2016 to Hillary Clinton and are thinking that after three consecutive terms, the Democrats will have worn out their welcome, so 2020 will be an easy GOP win. The former executive director of the Republican Governors' Association, Phil Cox, said: "If you thought this year was an attractive race on our side, imagine 2020. You'll have 30 people running." That might be a tad over the top, but we had 17 this time, so 20 could be doable. Sometime in the coming year or two, the Republican National Committee, with or without the services of Reince Priebus, is going to have to figure out rules that make sense with such a large field. How about three debate tiers: small, medium, and large? What about cutoffs? If the rules require 5% in the polls to qualify for debates, what happens if nobody qualifies? Although 2020 is four years away, it is closer than you think. (V)

McConnell Upbraids Trump on NATO

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) yesterday publicly disagreed with Donald Trump's statement that the United States might not help NATO allies if they were attacked. McConnell said: "NATO is the most important military alliance in world history. I want to reassure NATO allies that if any of them get attacked, we'll be there to defend them." McConnell, of course, understands that Vladimir Putin might take Trump's remark as a reason to at least threaten the Baltic republics that were once part of the Soviet Union. He also wanted to make clear to Putin that if he tried some monkey business there and President Obama responded, Obama could count on the Senate to back him up. Nevertheless, McConnell also said that although Trump was wrong on that issue, he wasn't concerned about Trump's fitness to be commander-in-chief because the secretary of state or secretary of defense would be unlikely to hold the same view.

In an interview with Politico, McConnell also said that the Republicans would hold the Senate because incumbent senators were going to put a lot of daylight between themselves and Trump. He then added that 2016 would not be a year of straight-ticket voting. That may be a bit optimistic on McConnell's part, since straight-ticket voting is becoming more and more common with every passing year. (V)

A Trio of Victories for Voting Rights

As we have noted many times on this site, the Supreme Court's decision to strike down most of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 led GOP-controlled states to pass various types of laws that are ostensibly designed to combat voter fraud, but are really meant to depress turnout among minority and lower-income voters (a.k.a. Democrats). This week, such efforts suffered a triple defeat.

The first ruling came from Wisconsin. There, a federal judge ruled that the state's Voter ID law placed an undue burden on citizens wishing to cast their ballots. Then, a Texas judge struck down that state's even more stringent ID requirements, deciding that they disproportionately affected minority voters. Finally, a Michigan judge overturned the state's prohibition on straight-ticket voting, wherein a person pushes one button to vote "all Democrats" or "all Republicans." Since straight-ticket voting is particularly common among black voters, the law would have made it more time-consuming for them to vote, and would have led to longer lines at inner-city polling places. In short, it would seem that, Voting Rights Act or not, efforts to curtail Democratic turnout will face problems in the courts. (Z)

Email a link to a friend or share:

---The Votemaster and Zenger