I was right: Trump lost by promising to deal with Democrats

In Monday’s Iowa caucus, Donald Trump greatly underperformed. While I do believe some of that is due to his lack of ‘ground game’, something that was touted as Ted Cruz’s strength before the vote was taken, and which reporters have noted was almost completely absent in Trump’s Iowa campaign. But I don’t think that’s the entire explanation.

I think his failure was at least partly due to Donald Trump touting himself as a dealmaker. In my article on Jan 27, I opined:

“It comes as a surprise that Donald Trump has dissed Ted Cruz as somebody who can’t get along in Washington. He opined that he would make a better President than Cruz because he is willing to cut deals. This argument makes some sense but it is not what Republican voters want to hear. As they see it, the problem is not Washington “gridlock” nor is it Republican inability to “get along” with their Democrat counterparts, but rather it is that the Washington politicians (of both parties) come to too many mutually beneficial arrangements that screw regular Americans. The Gang of 8 Amnesty deal is the paradigmatic example, but so is the recent omnibus spending bill championed by Paul Ryan. In making this accusation against Cruz, Trump opened himself up to the charge that he is a pay-to-play Washington insider wannabe. Noted Democrat pollster Pat Caddell agrees with this assessment.”

I feared that Ted Cruz would not press home the attack on this opening created by Trump’s mistake. After Iowa, it looks like my fears were misplaced. That astute political observer, Rush Limbaugh, agrees.

I think this shows that success has gone to Trump’s head. He likes to think that his popularity is due to the alpha male mojo that he is projecting. While that is likely partly true, his stunning success (at least until Iowa) was also due to the fact that Trump has hitched his wagon to three pre-existing issues that the voters care about a great deal but which every other candidate had studiously ignored. In my essay dated Dec 29, I pointed out that these are:

“I see three underlying issues propelling Trump forward. In descending order of importance, they are: immigration, the GOP establishment, and Political Correctness.”

In touting his ability to make a deal, and bragging about his ability to get along with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, Trump completely undercut the second issue. At this point in time, the American voters don’t want a dealmaker. To them, the problem with Washington isn’t that there aren’t enough deals going on. Rather, they see an insular class all too eager to make self-serving bipartisan deals that cut the average person out of the loop. For a while, they saw Trump as a champion against all this - the brash outsider, rich enough to act independently. Now, as a result of his poorly thought-out attack on Ted Cruz, he accidentally reveals himself to be just another pay-to-play politician.

As well, by singling out Pelosi and Reid by name, he invites criticism on all of his other past dalliances. Just as when John Kerry made his Vietnam service fair game by attacking Bush for staying out of the Vietnam War. When you criticise, be careful what you wish for.

In the same article, I asked this question:

“While Trump has certainly shown far more political skill than his detractors give him credit for, I don’t think he would have skyrocketed to the top if he hadn’t hitched his ride to a number of pre-existing issues and trends. How much of this was deliberate strategy and how much pure luck I can only guess, but I suspect that Donald Trump is genuinely surprised by how well things are going.”

Well, I now have my answer. It is mostly pure luck. Unless and until Trump gets a grip on his ego, and genuinely reflects on the nature of his success, watch him fall further.

Comments

[Fran Auger]

Trump was no longer an "outsider" and he misunderstood that Americans are tired to death of the "insider". For the Democrats that would be Sanders. Eight years of Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the go along to get along Republicans has made for a very interesting candidate dynamic.

[Al in Cranbrook]

Trump and Cruz have cranked up the volume on bashing the hell out of each other. This is going to end up badly for both of them. This kind of stupid nonsense gets stale and tired pretty quickly with voters.

And clearly the one who is going to benefit is Rubio, who is going out of his way to stay ABOVE the fray. Bush and Christie are getting downright desperate now in their unrelenting attacks on Rubio, which also is turning off voters.

IMHO, the secret to Rubio's success is the stark contrast between how he conducts himself and what's becoming a childish GOP gong show.

Which is to say, by far he's appearing the most "presidential" of any of them.

[Autoguy]

Al, there is truth in what you say, but a great deal of the bashing is to be expected in a vigorous primary season.
Trump miscalculated, no doubt. Honestly, when the reports came out on his statement, it struck me as poorly thought out.
There is some evidence that Trump is reining in his ego though. His speech after the Iowa caucus showed some humility - I expected something else. Whether this humility is real or false, temporary or long-lasting, minor or wide spread - we will have to wait and see.

[dolleric]

When Trump talks about negotiating and dealmaking he obviously means bringing the other party around to accepting his objectives. He has spoken repeatedly on this issue and clearly thinks he can out-negotiate anyone except Putin and the Chinese with whom he expects to reach a detente. The Trump bashing has to stop. If we want to pick up clues as to what kind of president he would be we have to listen carefully and winnow his seemingly careless words for grains of insight. He knows money and power; with his pragmatism and a strong team to inform and guide him, he alone among the contenders could actually change the way things are done.

[Cincinnatus]

Dear Dolleric:

Have you read any of my previous posts on Trump?

I used to sound just like you.

But then I started looking closer and all I see is a hollow man, a stuffed man, headpiece filled with straw...

[Autoguy]

Cincinnatus, I'm not used to disagreeing with you, but on this one...
I understand where you're coming from. There are indeed some signs of what you say. But how can you say that given his success and many accomplishments? A headpiece filled with straw vs first in his class at Wharton, only the best business school on the planet. A hollow man vs the builder of landmarks all over the world. A stuffed man vs the guy able to cut through all the red tape in New York City and get stuff built.
He may be what you say. I've seen signs of it too. But I'm not there at this point. His career leads me to give him more cred.