The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Opinion How Democrats hope to use Trump’s ‘strength’ to weaken the GOP

Columnist
December 17, 2015 at 9:23 a.m. EST
Trump STRONG! Trump TOUGH! Trump POWERFUL! Or, you know, not. (AP Photo/Cliff Owen)

THE MORNING PLUM:

In coming days, Democrats plan to amplify the argument that the GOP presidential candidates’ efforts to display “strength” actually betray their own weakness, in both political and policy terms — and Exhibit A for this case will be the strongest, toughest, manliest Republican in the land, Donald Trump.

Dems allied with Hillary Clinton say that they will increasingly raise the question in coming days: If the GOP candidates won’t stand up to Trump, how can they be trusted to stand up for America?

That formulation is obviously a well worn trope often used by operatives in both parties to get a cheer out of partisans. But in this case, it also hints at a deeper strategy and argument Democrats hope to employ.

The Hillary Clinton-aligned Priorities USA Super PAC is releasing this Web ad today designed to make the point:

Obviously that’s light fare. But Democrats will be making an actual substantive argument that tracks with this gag. The basic idea is that Trump’s hostile takeover of the GOP has forced the other candidates to address complex international problems with simplistic belligerence and bluster, and that this could actually lock them into an overall posture that could prove a liability in the general election.

As the Post reports in a big piece today:

Using bellicose language at a moment of pitched voter anxiety, many of the candidates committed themselves to a confrontational set of policies that, while energizing conservative activists, could prove difficult to carry out internationally and pose the risk of a backlash from war-weary swing voters next fall.

Priorities USA’s pollster explains how Democrats hope to exploit this to Clinton’s advantage:

Pollster Geoff Garin, who advises a super PAC backing Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton, said the GOP debate opens the door for Clinton to be “the strong and steady grown-up in the room.”
“What [voters] appreciate in a presidential leader is quiet strength, and what they heard last night was a ton of dangerous bluster,” Garin said Wednesday. “Being the party of military adventurism may be passable politics for their nominating process, but it is very likely to cause lots of doubts and concerns in a general election.”

Obviously many Republicans would scoff at the idea that Clinton could ever outflank them on national security issues, which will favor the GOP always and forever. And Republicans can legitimately argue that Americans have taken a dim view of President Obama’s handling of terrorism and national security, and that Hillary Clinton may well take some of the blame for the rise of the Islamic State and all that has resulted from it.

Still, the Post reports that even some Republicans, such as former New Jersey Governor and 9/11 commission co-chair Thomas Kean, are worried that the party is getting dragged to a compromising place.

Democrats appear to think that Republicans are in a tough spot right now. As we noted here yesterday, large majorities of voters who back either Trump or Ted Cruz (who is working harder than anyone else to capture Trump’s essence in a bottle) support Trump’s Muslim ban and do not believe U.S. Muslims face unjustified discrimination. A majority of them says mainstream Islam encourages violence against non-Muslims. That makes it harder for the candidates to stand up and condemn Trump’s xenophobia — and pretty much requires them to all pledge to support Trump if he is the nominee (as do Trump’s hints at a third party run).

But Democrats hope to cite that reticence about taking on Trump — and the GOP candidates’ spirited efforts to match and keep pace with Trump’s bluster — as evidence that they are not prepared for the presidency. What’s more, as the video signals, part of this argument will be that all of Trump’s Muslim bashing is actually harmful to national security — making the unwillingness of the other candidates to condemn it in a full-throated fashion more consequential.

**********************************************************************

* REPUBLICANS TO TAKE ‘ANOTHER LOOK’ AT WIRETAPPING:  GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell tells the Associated Press that in the wake of the Paris and San Bernadino attacks, Senate Republicans may reopen debate on restoring broad NSA wire-tapping authority:

“There could be some second thoughts among both Republicans and Democrats in the wake of Paris and San Bernardino about the appropriateness of watering down our national security tools,” McConnell said. “It’s an area we’re going to take a look at. Because look, national security and these threats of terrorism are now right at the top of the list of concerns of the American people.”

This could impact the GOP primaries: Marco Rubio favors rolling back the U.S.A. Freedom Act, which reined in bulk surveillance, while Ted Cruz opposes that. McConnell and company probably assume this debate automatically favors Rubio among GOP primary voters.

* CRUZ-MENTUM RAGES AS HE LAUNCHES A NEW TOUR: Today Ted Cruz is launching a seven-day tour of a dozen Super Tuesday states. The idea: “Mr. Cruz has invested heavily in the many Southern states that vote on March 1 and his delegate strategy is predicated largely on amassing victories across the region.”

If Cruz can win or place second in Iowa, and stays in the mix in the early contests, it’s on to the south, where all bets are off, and Cruz may hold a real advantage over Marco Rubio as the candidate to capture Trump supporters, should the Donald fade.

* CRUZ NOMINATION COULD WEAKEN GOP GRIP ON HOUSE: The Texas Tribune has an interesting look at the possibility — which even some Republicans are not willing to dismiss — that nominating Cruz could put a lot of GOP-held House seats at risk. Note:

Democrats are actively making plans around a would-be Cruz or Trump nomination as they enter the final stretch of 2016 candidate recruitment. Several House Democratic sources said the party pitch to recruits shifted this fall: If there is any time to run for Congress, it’s the year when Republicans are postured to run a controversial nominee.

Of course, given the size of the GOP majority and underlying structural factors, a Democratic takeover of the House seems remote at best. Still, a dynamic worth watching.

 * AMERICANS FEARFUL ABOUT TERRORISM: Some new nuggets from this week’s New York Times/CBS poll:

Roughly three in five Americans said they were very worried about terrorists coming from abroad or domestic attackers inspired by foreign extremists….All told, almost nine in 10 Americans said in the poll that they worried to some degree about the threat of terrorism by extremists and foreigners…

This means the political environment will be certain to favor Republicans next year, say Republicans.

* GOP APPROACH TO NATIONAL SECURITY IS VERY NARROW: E.J. Dionne, on this week’s national security debate:

Every tool of foreign policy other than force — aid, economics, diplomacy, democracy promotion — got short shrift Tuesday. There was nothing on climate change except for a couple of dismissive asides by Trump and Ohio Gov. John Kasich. By my count, the word “trade” came up six times, but three were references to the World Trade Center. Asia, Africa and Latin America received little attention. But variations on the word “war” were used 54 times.

Good points. However, I would reiterate that if Republicans ignore the Paris climate deal, that’s probably a good thing for climate action’s prospects.

* BROAD SUPPORT FOR CAMPAIGN FINANCE CHANGES: The campaign reform group Every Voice is releasing a poll today conducted by veteran Dem pollster Stan Greenberg that finds a large majority of Americans favors reforms that would provide limited public matching funds for small donations and disclosure for all outside spending. The support is also broad among independents, Republicans, and Tea Partyers.

The challenge Dems face: while there is majority support for their economic proposals, many voters may not believe government can deliver on those proposals. One possible way to solve this: package those policies with a broad reform agenda to restore faith in government first.

* AND TRUMP COULD STILL RUN AS AN INDEPENDENT: Politico examines the logistical challenges Trump would face if he decided to mount a third party run, and determines that he could get on the ballot in many states if he’s willing to do the work to surmount the legal hurdles and foot the bill to gather the signatures. Note this:

Trump could compete in Republican primaries through late March — when two-thirds of states will have voted and two-thirds of delegates will have been awarded — before deciding to mount an independent run and still make the ballot in every or nearly every state if he is willing to pay the seven-figure price.

This week, Trump suggested he’d support the eventual GOP nominee. But surely he’ll be able to find a pretext to claim that the GOP has treated him unfairly, should he change his mind.