I get it, I get it You don’t want to write about Trump bc you don’t respect him But you’re a political journalist No one respects you either
— Ben Dreyfuss (@bendreyfuss) August 5, 2015
Dave Weigel, at the Washington Post: “Political data gurus wrote off Trump. Here’s how they’re defending that.”
… In a rough year for polling analysis, the Trump surge stands out. The first-time candidate whom so many people wrote off has done for 2016 what Isaac Asimov’s Mule did for the psycho-historians of Foundation — a conquest from out of nowhere, unpredicted by any of the calculations, turning his enemies’ blasted palaces into new (and classy) throne rooms…
That might mean that the days of writing off Trump are over. His fate is not predetermined by polls or by prior right-wing insurgencies. The press may actually have to cover a campaign….
Percent who said they'd never vote for Trump in early June Fox poll: 59. Percent who say that now: 33. http://t.co/RnmqUX57yf
— Byron York (@ByronYork) August 3, 2015
… So now the conventional wisdom is that we’re witnessing a temporary triumph of style over substance; Republican voters like Trump’s bluster, and haven’t (yet) realized that he isn’t making sense.
But if you ask me, the people who are really mistaking style for substance are the pundits. It’s true that Trump isn’t making sense — but neither are the mainstream contenders for the GOP nomination.
On economics, both Jeb Bush and Scott Walker are into deep voodoo. Bush takes his experience of presiding over a giant housing bubble in his state, as proof that he can double America’s underlying growth rate. Walker is Brownback-light: his governorship on Wisconsin was premised on the proposition that tax cuts, spending cuts, and union-bashing can create an economic miracle, but the reality is budget deficits and subpar growth, lagging in particular the performance of neighboring Minnesota…
So why is Trump regarded as ludicrous, while Bush and Walker are serious? Again, on the substance they’re all ludicrous; but pundits are taken in by the sober-sounding personal style of the runners-up, while voters apparently are not…
The fun thing about Donald Trump in the debate is it's so much harder to dog whistle when somebody is already feeding the rabid mutt steak.
— Bob Schooley (@Rschooley) August 6, 2015