Trump, issues & ratings

[Mac1958]

A candidate's ratings can improve. Stipulated. Let's get that out of the way.

But as Trump's ratings begin to hit historically bad levels, his supporters have to face what has to be a disturbing thought: If he remains so disliked -- or if it gets even worse -- he could be causing real, long-term damage to the very issues his supporters care about the most.

If he is pummeled in November, so are his lead issues -- illegal immigration, the border, trade, anti-establishment, etc. The two go together, whether they should or not.

Is this a concern to Trump supporters?
.

 

[aaronleland]

Trump supporters are still in a state of denial over the numbers. They point to those in the media questioning whether his campaign would flame out during the primaries. What they ignore is the fact that during the primaries his numbers were consistently rising. Now they are falling. It seems he has hit a ceiling. Now he has to appeal to a broader base, but seems unwilling to change the direction of his campaign to adjust to a general election.

 

[candycorn]

Not a Trump supporter but FWIW, no.

Its a matter of honesty and calibration.

The wall is a good idea. The reason it is a good idea is because it limits payload. It won’t stop immigration one iota. Saying that it will is snake oil salesmanship 101. Saying Mexico will pay for it is simple dishonesty.

I think most Americans would love it if the State Department/DHS took a good long look at everyone coming into the country for any reason, from any other nation, and would support INS knocking on their door one minute past midnight of when their visa expires. That being said, promoting expulsion of persons as a jobs program is snake oil salesmanship 101.

I honestly cannot tell you what other stances he may have. They seem nebulous at best.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump supporters are still in a state of denial over the numbers. They point to those in the media questioning whether his campaign would flame out during the primaries. What they ignore is the fact that during the primaries his numbers were consistently rising. Now they are falling. It seems he has hit a ceiling. Now he has to appeal to a broader base, but seems unwilling to change the direction of his campaign to adjust to a general election.

Yeah. You would think that, at some point, he would moderate a bit. But either he himself, or he and his closest people, have decided that he's gonna stick with what got him there.

That's the kind of decisions that are made in echo chambers. So those issues are in real danger.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Not a Trump supporter but FWIW, no.

Its a matter of honesty and calibration.

The wall is a good idea. The reason it is a good idea is because it limits payload. It won’t stop immigration one iota. Saying that it will is snake oil salesmanship 101. Saying Mexico will pay for it is simple dishonesty.

I think most Americans would love it if the State Department/DHS took a good long look at everyone coming into the country for any reason, from any other nation, and would support INS knocking on their door one minute past midnight of when their visa expires. That being said, promoting expulsion of persons as a jobs program is snake oil salesmanship 101.

I honestly cannot tell you what other stances he may have. They seem nebulous at best.

We tend to knee-jerk as a society (maybe others do too). So if the candidate is repulsive enough, any idea they promote that is even CLOSE to reasonable is at risk.

What concerns me is that, in response to him, the country knee-jerks too far.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Ross Perot got a remarkable 20% of the vote (in a 3 way race in a 2 party dominated system) in 1992 running almost exclusively on trade/jobs/economic issues.

But he didn't include being an obnoxious, egomaniacal, sociopathic, jackass in his campaign.

 

[there4eyeM]

This is all a very good demonstration of the ludicrous primary system, dependence on two parties, electoral college and voter incapacity for reasoned debate. Rationally, it would lead to examination and improvement in these fields.
We deserve better, but, in the words of William Munny, "deserve's got nothin' to do with it."

 

[BULLDOG]

I still say Trump never intended to be president, and he wants to lose. He loves being the reality show character that everybody looks to for the deciding decision, and he has built a big enough following to launch another show, only this one will be about his judgement on politics instead of business. Even after he fails miserably in the election, he can say some conspiracy stole it from him, and his viewers will believe it. Look for Trump's new show within a year after the election.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If Trump is pummeled in November, it won’t necessarily be because of his lead issues, but that he’s wrong on those issues, and was rejected by the voters accordingly and appropriately.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump is the end product of the Tea Party movement (remember them?)

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump is the end product of the Tea Party movement (remember them?)

A fitting end.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If Trump is beaten in November, the number one cause remains always in his defective character.

70% of America distrust him.

 

[Mac1958]

I'll try to drag this away from the standard partisan insults and back to the actual point.

Trump is, to say the least, "fluid" on several issues. But I think it's fair to say that illegal immigration and jobs/trade are two pretty important issues for both parties.

Hopefully some Trump supporters will chime in to discuss their concerns about the question posed in the OP. And I'd also wonder what a knee-jerk reaction to those issues would actually look like.
.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If Trump is pummeled in November, it won’t necessarily be because of his lead issues, but that he’s wrong on those issues, and was rejected by the voters accordingly and appropriately.

He isn't wrong on trade, in general. The NAFTA type trade agreements have never been popular with the American people.

 

[aaronleland]

If Trump is pummeled in November, it won’t necessarily be because of his lead issues, but that he’s wrong on those issues, and was rejected by the voters accordingly and appropriately.

I don't think it will be as much the issues as the rhetoric. You can oppose illegal immigration without calling them rapists and drug dealers. You can criticize your opponent's policies without name calling.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Charisma wins presidential elections.

Neither Clinton nor Trump have much. Trump is going out of his way to have none.

 

[Mac1958]

I don't think it will be as much the issues as the rhetoric. You can oppose illegal immigration without calling them rapists and drug dealers. You can criticize your opponent's policies without name calling.

Sure, but do you think it's possible he's causing damage to the Republicans' stand on those issues with his behaviors?
.

 

[G.T.]

After the convention is over, if he's still their guy, enough people will have spoken to him at that little circle jerk to intimidate his dumb ass into becoming more moderate. He will do his best, and be easily rattled.

 

[EriktheRed]

A candidate's ratings can improve. Stipulated. Let's get that out of the way.

But as Trump's ratings begin to hit historically bad levels, his supporters have to face what has to be a disturbing thought: If he remains so disliked -- or if it gets even worse -- he could be causing real, long-term damage to the very issues his supporters care about the most.

If he is pummeled in November, so are his lead issues -- illegal immigration, the border, trade, anti-establishment, etc. The two go together, whether they should or not.

Is this a concern to Trump supporters?
.

I'd guess no, for the most part. The Dumpster isn't selling policy as much as he's selling attitude and that won't go away even with a really big electoral beatdown.

 

[JakeStarkey]

If Trump is pummeled in November, it won’t necessarily be because of his lead issues, but that he’s wrong on those issues, and was rejected by the voters accordingly and appropriately.

I don't think it will be as much the issues as the rhetoric. You can oppose illegal immigration without calling them rapists and drug dealers. You can criticize your opponent's policies without name calling.

The violent rhetoric can be traced to the 2009 town hall meetings when the far right screamed at their congress people.

I thought then the day would arrive when those people would get a political armored fist in the mouth and an armored boot in the crotch.

November will be a testament to that feeling. The American people will not tolerate that type of behavior in a presidential candidate.