Dem
51
GOP
49
We remain shocked that, after showing the chops of a proper, professional political operation throughout much of this campaign cycle, the Trump campaign and the Republican Party seem to be totally clueless when it comes to their new presumptive opponent. Certainly, they have been losing the messaging battle over the past few days.
To start, Donald Trump called into Fox yesterday, and went on an extended, only semi-coherent rant about Kamala Harris. Needless to say, that isn't going to do him much good, since Fox viewers already despise her. But, on top of that, the Harris campaign was watching, and quickly put out a press release with the heading: "Statement on a 78-Year-Old Criminal's Fox News Appearance." The statement runs down, in bullet-point form, all the ways in which voters might find Trump's words objectionable, and ends with "If anyone wants an alternative, Kamala Harris is offering one."
And that was not all. One of the things Trump said during his Fox appearance is that Harris is further left than Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). The Senator appeared on CNN last night, and was asked about that claim. He had a very Bernie-esque response: "Uhhh, probably not. It is just possible for the 83,000th time that Trump is lying. No, I don't think that is the case." He did have kind words to say about Harris' work in the Senate and as VP, but reiterated: "But no, I don't quite think that her record is where mine is in terms of being progressive."
Harris was not the only target of Trump's invective yesterday. In an attempt to slur her by association, he also went after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who just announced an executive order allowing law enforcement officials to clear homeless encampments. Trump's message:
Why didn't Gavin Newscum do this a long time ago? He's only doing it because, just like Crooked Joe Biden, his Radical Left Democrat Presidential Candidate, Lyin' Kamala Harris, is losing BIG in the Polls. They just did it for Political Reasons, because she comes from California, and looks terrible. Right after the Election, it will go back to SLUM LIKE condition, unless we WIN — THEN, AMERICA WILL BE GREAT AGAIN!
We must say, "Gavin Newscum" is rather better than "Lyin' Kamala Harris." However, we are very doubtful that making a tenuous connection between the policy choices of a California politician and the sitting VP will work very well as a line of attack.
House Republicans are also getting in on the game. Yesterday, they voted on a resolution slamming Harris for her failures as border czar. The measure passed, with all Republicans and six Democrats voting for it. Here are the six Democrats, along with the PVI of their districts: Jared Golden (D-ME; R+6), Yadira Caraveo (D-CO; EVEN), Don Davis (D-NC; D+2), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA; R+5), Henry Cuellar (D-TX; D+3) and Mary Peltola (D-AK; R+8). These are the blue doggiest Democrats, with many of them trying to hold on in very red districts.
While we see some potential in the messaging bill on presidential immunity (see above), we are skeptical that this one will have any real impact. First, because it's one thing to vote for or against a policy (like, say, presidential immunity). It's another thing to vote for or against a proclamation that someone has been a naughty VP. Voters and pundits are far less likely to take note of a person's vote on the latter, we think. On top of that, it's about 100 days to the election. Do you think anyone is going to remember this in November? There are ways the proposed constitutional amendment could reappear in the headlines (as we describe above). But this is pretty much one and done.
And finally, we'll add one last bit of information here. During his Wednesday appearance before a House committee, FBI Director Christopher Wray was asked about the injury done to Donald Trump, and bent over backwards to avoid saying that he (Wray) is not so sure it was a bullet, and that it might well have been shrapnel. If it's proven that it was indeed shrapnel, or even if it's not proven but that understanding begins to take hold among the voting public, then it will make Trump's "I took a bullet for democracy" bit a lot less effective.
Presumably, the pros who work for Trump's campaign will rein things in, and the campaign will stop flailing about the way it has been for the last several days. But maybe not. What's very clear, at least at the moment, is that: (1) Trump and his acolytes have very little idea as to how to deal with Harris, and (2) Trump is enraged that he doesn't get to run against Biden. (Z)