AGAINST THE GRAIN

Why It’s So Hard for Democrats to Pick Off Trump Supporters

A cultural disconnect with the Democratic Party helped create a bond with him, and they trust him to protect their economic interests.

President Trump at a rally on Feb. 18 in Melbourne, Fla.
AP Photo/Chris O'Meara
Josh Kraushaar
Add to Briefcase
Josh Kraushaar
March 19, 2017, 6 a.m.

Fo­cus groups can be self-ful­filling Rorschach tests, with prac­ti­tion­ers cherry-pick­ing the parts that fit their pre­con­ceived nar­rat­ive. But it’s non­ethe­less use­ful to pay close at­ten­tion to Demo­crat­ic poll­ster Stan­ley Green­berg’s find­ings from a group of Ma­comb County, Michigan sup­port­ers of Pres­id­ent Trump, all in­de­pend­ents and Demo­crats. The fine print of these swing voters’ re­ac­tions is as sig­ni­fic­ant as Green­berg’s con­clu­sion that Demo­crats can win back some Trump voters by pivot­ing left­ward on eco­nom­ic is­sues.

The full re­port should be read by any Demo­crat in­ter­ested in for­ging a path back to power with Trump in of­fice. For all the anti-Trump sen­ti­ment cours­ing through the coun­try, many will find Green­berg’s find­ings sober­ing. Yes, Demo­crats could win a small slice of Trump voters by ad­opt­ing a more eco­nom­ic­ally pop­u­list mes­sage geared to­wards the Mid­west­ern states. But the cul­tur­al dis­con­nect between Trump’s voters and the op­pos­i­tion is so wide that it’s hard to see Demo­crats mak­ing com­prom­ises with this siz­able, dis­af­fected con­stitu­ency.

Green­berg has ex­tens­ive ex­per­i­ence in Ma­comb County, where he con­duc­ted a series of sem­in­al stud­ies of Re­agan Demo­crats in the 1980s. Barack Obama com­fort­ably won the county twice—by a 4-point mar­gin in 2012—lead­ing Green­berg to con­clude that the county’s leg­acy as a work­ing-class bell­weth­er was out­dated. But its leg­acy re­turned with a ven­geance last year, giv­ing Trump a whop­ping 12-point vic­tory, and provid­ing him his mar­gin of vic­tory in a tra­di­tion­ally Demo­crat­ic state.

Here are some of Green­berg’s most con­sequen­tial find­ings:

Trump’s base is ex­traordin­ar­ily loy­al. Not a single one of the 35 Trump voters sur­veyed said they had any re­grets about their vote for Trump, des­pite the swirl of con­tro­ver­sies con­sum­ing the White House. They agreed that Trump “gives them hope” when he speaks. “They ac­cept Trump’s ver­sion of the news and facts, and their re­ac­tions to videos of his press con­fer­ences and in­ter­views re­in­forced that point,” Green­berg writes. Trump’s au­then­ti­city—the idea that he is “blunt,” “out­spoken,” and “not afraid to speak out”—is a huge selling point to his base. They view Re­pub­lic­an con­gres­sion­al lead­ers as shifty and ca­ter­ing to the wealthy, but view Trump’s motives as heart­felt.

This loy­alty has con­sequences for the GOP’s le­gis­lat­ive agenda: The Wash­ing­ton Post fea­tured a front-page story this week about a Ten­ness­ee wo­man who be­lieved Trump, with some di­vine in­ter­fer­ence, helped her af­ford health in­sur­ance thanks to a gen­er­ous sub­sidy. The real­ity was that the sub­sidy was a part of Pres­id­ent Obama’s ori­gin­al law, and would likely be rolled back as a res­ult of Re­pub­lic­an re­forms.

To take a page from James Carville, “It’s the cul­ture, stu­pid.” Read between the lines of Green­berg’s re­port, and it’s clear he re­cog­nizes his pre­scrip­tion that Demo­crats emu­late Bernie Sanders on eco­nom­ic is­sues has lim­ited pull with most Trump sup­port­ers. He quotes ex­tens­ively from voters whose eco­nom­ic in­terests may align with Demo­crats, but who also ex­press a panoply of anxi­et­ies over a chan­ging Amer­ic­an cul­ture. Wor­ries about ter­ror­ism, con­cerns that im­mig­rants aren’t in­teg­rat­ing in­to Amer­ic­an so­ci­ety, and com­plaints about worsen­ing race re­la­tions all dom­in­ate the fo­cus-group con­ver­sa­tions—in­clud­ing among people who backed Obama in the past.

Obama­care is still widely dis­liked, even among work­ing-class voters who stood to be­ne­fit. There’s been a rising chor­us of Demo­crats who be­lieve that Pres­id­ent Obama’s health care law is grow­ing in pop­ular­ity, in­clud­ing among work­ing-class Trump sup­port­ers. A Demo­crat­ic sur­vey (which I cited in my last column) showed a siz­able ma­jor­ity of Obama-Trump voters sup­port­ing Obama­care. But the re­ac­tions from these Trump-back­ing swing voters should pour some cold wa­ter on that be­lief.

Many par­ti­cipants in the fo­cus group shared some hor­ror story about their health in­sur­ance as a con­sequence of Obama’s health care law, cit­ing con­crete ex­amples of how the law was a net neg­at­ive for them. “Nearly every per­son in our groups was strug­gling with how to af­ford their plans, co-pays, and med­ic­a­tions,” Green­berg wrote. He ad­ded that these voters don’t have an al­tern­at­ive in mind, but they’re con­vinced the law needs to be changed—and have enough faith in Trump that he’s up to the task.

No one ex­pressed much re­ceptiv­ity to sup­port­ing Demo­crats. The fo­cus group was com­mis­sioned by the Roosevelt In­sti­tute, a pro­gress­ive think tank, so it’s not sur­pris­ing that Green­berg’s pre­scrip­tion jibed with their policy pref­er­ences. But what was sur­pris­ing was how little any­one men­tioned sup­port for spe­cif­ic Demo­crats even though their pre­ferred eco­nom­ic policies aren’t all that dif­fer­ent from what lib­er­als gen­er­ally ad­voc­ate.

Green­berg elided this con­tra­dic­tion by ar­guing that two-thirds of the fo­cus group found a gen­er­ic, pop­u­list Demo­crat­ic pro­file “more ap­peal­ing than a mod­er­ate one fo­cused on help­ing busi­nesses be more com­pet­it­ive glob­ally.” He then sug­ges­ted that pro­gress­ive icons like Bernie Sanders and Eliza­beth War­ren fit the pro­file. But there was little or­gan­ic en­thu­si­asm for Sanders, War­ren, or any oth­er na­tion­ally known pro­gress­ive fig­ures on the Left. And he fre­quently sprinkled ana­lys­is with op­tim­ist­ic pro­nounce­ments that Trump’s luster would even­tu­ally wear off with these voters, even though their re­ac­tions sug­ges­ted oth­er­wise.

TRAIL MIX:

1. New Jer­sey Gov. Chris Christie is end­ing his ten­ure with rock-bot­tom ap­prov­al rat­ings, among the low­est of any elec­ted of­fi­cial in re­cent memory. A new Quin­nipi­ac poll shows the out­go­ing gov­ernor at 19 per­cent ap­prov­al, with 76 per­cent of New Jer­sey voters dis­ap­prov­ing of his job per­form­ance. A 48 per­cent plur­al­ity of Re­pub­lic­ans view him un­fa­vor­ably. For con­text, a Morn­ing Con­sult on­line sur­vey con­duc­ted last year found that even the least pop­u­lar gov­ernor in Amer­ica (Kan­sas’s Sam Brown­back) hit an ap­prov­al rat­ing above the 20 per­cent mark.

If his­tory is any guide, Demo­crats should be a near-lock to win back the gov­ernor­ship this year. The same poll shows Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno—the ex­pec­ted GOP stand­ard-bear­er—trail­ing Demo­crat­ic front run­ner Phil Murphy by 22 points, 47 to 25 per­cent. That’s a re­mark­able early spread, par­tic­u­larly giv­en that Guadagno has a high­er pro­file as the second-in-com­mand in the state.

2. Re­pub­lic­ans are in­creas­ingly con­vinced that Flor­ida Gov. Rick Scott will jump in­to the state’s Sen­ate race against Demo­crat­ic Sen. Bill Nel­son, which would make it one of the most com­pel­ling and ex­pens­ive con­tests next year. One tell­tale sign? Scott, even though he can’t run for reelec­tion, is fea­tured prom­in­ently in a new ad from his polit­ic­al com­mit­tee to pro­mote eco­nom­ic-de­vel­op­ment le­gis­la­tion. It’s an aw­fully ex­pens­ive—and timely—per­son­al pitch as he nears a de­cision about run­ning for the up­per cham­ber.

What We're Following See More »
CAN’T WITHHOLD FUNDING
Trump’s Sanctuary Cities Order Blocked
7 hours ago
BREAKING
EMERGING BUDGET FRAMEWORK?
Dems Proposes Obamacare-for-Defense Deal
7 hours ago
THE LATEST

"An emerging government funding deal would see Democrats agree to $15 billion in additional military funding in exchange for the GOP agreeing to fund healthcare subsidies, according to two congressional officials briefed on the talks. Facing a Friday deadline to pass a spending bill and avert a shutdown, Democrats are willing to go halfway to President Trump’s initial request of $30 billion in supplemental military funding."

Source:
WHITE HOUSE BLOCKING DOC REQUEST
Michael Flynn Remains A Russian-Sized Problem
8 hours ago
BREAKING

The Michael Flynn story is not going away for the White House as it tries to refocus its attention. The White House has denied requests from the House Oversight Committee for information and documents regarding payments that the former national security adviser received from Russian state television station RT and Russian firms. House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz and ranking member Elijah Cummings also said that Flynn failed to report these payments on his security clearance application. White House legislative director Marc Short argued that the documents requested are either not in the possession of the White House or contain sensitive information he believes is not applicable to the committee's stated investigation.

Source:
MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, D.C.
DC Area To Experience Terror Attack Drill Wednesday Morning
8 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The Washington, D.C. area will undergo "a full-scale exercise" Wednesday morning "designed to prepare for the possibility of a complex coordinated terror attack in the National Capital Region." The drill will take place at six different sites throughout the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. The drill should not be taken as a sign that emergency services are expecting an attack, said Scott Boggs, Managing Director of Homeland Security and Public Safety at the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments.

Source:
HUFFINGTON POST EFFORT ID’D PROBLEMS
Inauguration Committee Admits to Faulty Donor Records
9 hours ago
THE DETAILS

The Presidential Inaugural Committee "acknowledged late Monday that a final report it filed with the Federal Election Commission this month was riddled with errors, many of which were first identified through a crowdsourced data project at HuffPost." The committee raised about $100 million for the festivities, but the 500-page FEC report, which detailed where that money came from, was riddled with problems. The likely culprit: a system of access codes sent out by the GOP's ticketing system. Those codes were then often passed around on the secondary market.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login