Based on the results in Iowa and the polling in New Hampshire and South Carolina, the answer to the question posed in my headline appears to be not only 'yes,' but a fairly resounding one at that. Barring a dramatic turn over the next few weeks, Donald Trump will again become the Republican nominee for president. He's run twice before, winning an upset over the reviled Hillary Clinton, then losing a winnable election to the underwhelming Joe Biden four years later. If he's nominated again, will his record improve to 2-1, or drop to 1-2? Current polling suggests that if the election were held very soon, Trump is well-positioned to secure a second term. He narrowly leads Biden in the average of national surveys, is ahead in most battleground states (including several in which he fell short last time), and generally out-performs his polling vote share levels anyway. Right now, he is the favorite. But will he remain the favorite for long? And will he bring home the win in November?
I've argued on several occasions that it would be a mistake to nominate Trump for a third time, for multiple reasons. Most Republican voters clearly do not agree that his series of election lies in 2020, leading to the national disgrace of the January 6th Capitol riot, constitutes disqualifying conduct. For the sake of argument, let's set that substantive and prudential question aside, and instead discuss something more empirical: Winning. Do Republican voters truly prioritize winning the next election and ridding the country of the Biden dumpster fire (which would likely become the Harris dumpster fire in a second term)? The nearly-unanimous answer, I'd guess, would be of course, with many people arguing that Trump offers the party its best chance at achieving that outcome. I believe this ignores Trump's losing track record since his surprise victory in 2016. Republicans lost the House in 2018. They lost the presidency in 2020 and the Senate in early 2021. They historically underperformed in 2022. They're still dropping attainable races in which Trump loyalty is the animating issue. This fall could go differently, largely thanks to Biden's abysmal standing with voters, and a prevailing sense that the economy would be better, and the world safer, under Trump. That's why I believe Trump would win a 'snap' election held in the very near future.
But the actual election is more than nine months away. Over the course of that slog, Democrats will drop $1 billion or more on Trump's head, relentlessly reminding swing voters why they voted him out in the first place. Trump's campaign and the RNC are poised to be vastly outspent, and Trump himself will be juggling multiple civil and criminal trials during the pre-election stretch, limiting his ability to campaign as aggressively as he'd like. The 'news' media will mobilize as a massive, nearly-monolithic Democratic SuperPAC, even more so than usual. No one can deny this is coming. In many ways, it's already here. Maybe the onslaught won't matter. Maybe it'll all be noise, as voters conclude Biden isn't up for the job and decide they're better off under Trump. Maybe he transcends all the obstacles and pulls it off. Or maybe the trap will be sprung, and they'll bludgeon Trump's candidacy to death -- with significant assists from Trump himself. Two developments in the last few days are again ringing some alarm bells on this front. First, I'm not sure GOP voters have seriously grappled with how one or more felony convictions against Trump could reshape the race in the coming months. I tacked this poll onto a previous post, but it deserves to be highlighted and considered more thoroughly:
Would you vote for Donald Trump for president in 2024 if he is/has been...
— InteractivePolls (@IAPolls2022) January 17, 2024
Convicted of a felony crime by a jury:
YES: 20% [-5]
NO: 58% [-1]
.
Currently serving time in prison:
YES 18% [-6]
NO 61% [-1]
[Change vs December]
Reuters/Ipsos | n=4,677 | 1/3-9… pic.twitter.com/61mMlcw6iM
I'm skeptical that Trump's support would truly fall off a cliff like this if he's convicted. In fact, I'd bet that a lot of people who told this pollster they'd definitely vote against Trump under those circumstances would wind up finding a way to pull the lever for him -- especially among Republicans and some independents. But even a modest drop in support could be fatal to his chances. Democrats are worried about the softness of Biden's support among young people, black voters, Muslims in places like Michigan, and other groups. They should be. If even slightly fewer voters from these demographics vote (or show up at all) for the Democratic ticket, that could be enough to doom Biden's re-election. But by the same token, an anti-Trump swing of just a few points among voters who can't stomach supporting a convicted felon could mean lights out for the convicted felon's campaign. It may not matter if it's 'fair,' or if there are two tiers of justice, or if there are glaring double standards at play, or if it was all a Democratic set-up, or if there are appeals pending. Some universe of voters within the 2024 electorate will just not be able to stomach it.
What is the plan if a conviction arrives? I repeat: It's totally possible that Trump's support would only be dented, that some of the people who initially run off would find their way back into the fray eventually. I think it's very plausible that 'major Trump legal problems' is a consideration that's already baked into the cake for many voters, some of whom may have caught wind of the saturation coverage of Trump's multiple indictments and wrongly assume that he's already been convicted. In other words, I'm open to the argument that a conviction wouldn't necessarily tank Trump's numbers. But it might take far less than a catastrophic plunge to make the difference between winning and losing. It's a huge, high-stakes gamble to nominate the man with dozens of active criminal indictments lodged against him, with various trials underway or pending. The second development is this outburst:
A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY, WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM/HER TO PROPERLY FUNCTION. ANY MISTAKE, EVEN IF WELL INTENDED, WOULD BE MET WITH ALMOST CERTAIN INDICTMENT BY THE OPPOSING PARTY AT TERM END. EVEN EVENTS THAT “CROSS THE LINE”…
— Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) January 18, 2024
"A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES MUST HAVE FULL IMMUNITY, WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM/HER TO PROPERLY FUNCTION. ANY MISTAKE, EVEN IF WELL INTENDED, WOULD BE MET WITH ALMOST CERTAIN INDICTMENT BY THE OPPOSING PARTY AT TERM END. EVEN EVENTS THAT “CROSS THE LINE” MUST FALL UNDER TOTAL IMMUNITY, OR IT WILL BE YEARS OF TRAUMA TRYING TO DETERMINE GOOD FROM BAD. THERE MUST BE CERTAINTY. EXAMPLE: YOU CAN’T STOP POLICE FROM DOING THE JOB OF STRONG & EFFECTIVE CRIME PREVENTION BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GUARD AGAINST THE OCCASIONAL “ROGUE COP” OR “BAD APPLE.” SOMETIMES YOU JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH “GREAT BUT SLIGHTLY IMPERFECT.” ALL PRESIDENTS MUST HAVE COMPLETE & TOTAL PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, OR THE AUTHORITY & DECISIVENESS OF A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES WILL BE STRIPPED & GONE FOREVER. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE AN EASY DECISION. GOD BLESS THE SUPREME COURT!
Donald Trump Truth Social 12:59 AM EST 01/18/24"
Trump is arguing, IN ALL CAPS, that any and all presidential actions must be automatically immune from prosecution, including ones that 'cross the line.' One of his attorneys recently argued in federal court that if a president ordered a team of Navy SEALs to assassinate a political rival, that would be grounds for impeachment and conviction, but not criminal prosecution, absent the impeachment process. Whether you agree or not, are such legal pronouncements likely to attract or repel the sorts of undecided voters who decide elections? Democrats have made it crystal clear that they intend to make Trump/January 6th/'democracy on the ballot' the central pillar of the campaign if the 45th president is the Republican standard-bearer. They will talk about it incessantly. The media will talk about it incessantly. And apparently Trump will talk about it incessantly and even gratuitously, when he doesn't have to. This does not strike me as a recipe for success.
It's a testament to Joe Biden's utterly horrendous governance and waning acuity and stamina that he could very realistically still lose this race. I'll leave you with an example of how weak the economic spin from the media and Democrats will be if the election is actually decided on issues, rather than the candidates' flaws:
Good luck with this one. https://t.co/j6AzeDkg88
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) January 18, 2024
Join the conversation as a VIP Member