If it's in the News, it's in our Polls. Public opinion polling since 2003.

 

For Being Such An Idiot, Trump Is Pretty Smart

A Commentary By Brian Joondeph

Thursday, July 25, 2019

We have been hearing now for four years, ever since that escalator ride at Trump Tower, how then-candidate, now President Trump is such an idiot. The media, Democrats and NeverTrumpers virtually in lockstep assured us that Trump would never be the Republican nominee. When he was, they doubled down promising that he would never be president. Nearly every so-called opinion poll confirmed their predictions.

Who turned out to be smart, winning the White House, and who turned out to be the buffoons? They still couldn’t admit that they were wrong, predicting that Trump would be impeached or that he would resign from office under intense pressure from critics and scandal. From Stormy Daniels and Michael Avenatti to Robert Mueller and Megan Rapinoe, each one was portrayed as the dragonslayer ready to bring down Trump.

All have come and gone like the seasons, bringing down nothing but their reputations and what little integrity they might have possessed. Yet Trump haters won’t give up. Trump is still too stupid and incompetent to be president, they tell us. He is an embarrassment to the country and the world.

Yet on Friday, July 19, Trump sits at 50 percent total approval in the Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, six points higher than his predecessor, Mr. Perfect, exactly eight years ago. These approval numbers are despite what many have described as a bad week for the president with his “unforced error” of going after the four lovely patriots of the “Jihad Squad” and telling them that if America is so bad, they are welcome to “go back” to somewhere, anywhere, that is more to their liking.

Brit Hume, godfather of the Republican DC establishment, not a NeverTrumper, but more of a SometimesTrumper, said Trump’s tweets were “politically stupid.” When Rush Limbaugh and others suggested that Trump’s tweets were strategic and calculated rather than stupid, Hume dismissed this immediately, “I think that's too smart by half, too clever by half. Trump couldn't put something like this together, are you kidding me?”

Of course, Trump couldn’t put something like this together. He isn’t clever enough. Yet he was smart enough to defeat 17 competent and experienced contenders for the Republican nomination in 2016 despite having never run for political office. He is still president after two-and-a-half years of nonstop negative media coverage and criticism from Democrats and many Republicans.

Reuters reluctantly reported, “Republican support for Trump rises after racially charged tweets.” Jake Tapper, liberal CNN mouthpiece, had to acknowledge, “Dem sources admit Trump's 'brilliant' move to make stars of AOC, Omar.”

So, which is it? Did Trump stupidly make a racist, sexist, xenophobic, nativist, white supremacist tweet as the media and NeverTrumpers claim? Or did he just make the Jihad Squad the new face of the Democrat Party?

Who hasn’t been in the news this past week? How about the 20-plus Democrats vying for the party’s nomination to go up against Goliath next year? Other than news of the next Democrat primary debate or who is ahead of who in the latest poll, Warren, Sanders, Harris, Beto and Pete are no longer newsworthy.

Instead they, along with Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democrat party, have been forced to rally around Cortez and Omar. That seems a pretty smart move by Trump.

Axios recently polled, “White, non-college voters who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts.” Only 22 percent had a favorable view of Cortez, with shockingly only nine percent viewing Omar favorably. This same poll noted that socialism was viewed negatively by 69 percent of swing voters.

With a few tweets and comments, Trump has rebranded the Democrat party as the party of socialism, with the new party leaders viewed negatively by the vast majority of swing voters.

Are Republicans fleeing the party over Trump’s tweets? Hardly. GOP support for Trump rose this past week. His rally in North Carolina was as enthusiastic as ever. And those hapless Democrats running for their party’s nomination became yesterday’s news as quickly as Trump-slayer-of-the-week Megan Rapinoe.

Democrats, in a fleeting moment of honesty, understand the brilliance of Trump’s tweets and framing of the Democrat party, as they admitted to Jake Tapper. Rasmussen also reported that by a 42 to 29 percent margin, likely Democrat voters want the party to be more like Nancy Pelosi than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Yet thanks to the president, Pelosi has had to shift toward Cortez rather than vice versa, defending the Jihad Squad against Trump’s tweets.

For Pelosi it’s the path of least resistance. If she denounces the squad, there will be an internal civil war within her party. If she defends them, she makes them the face of the party. Trump has put her in a box.

Some may call it 4-D chess. Instead it may be decades of street smarts developed in the trenches of the New York City real estate development world, along with the branding experience of running a successful television reality show for a decade. What it is not is Trump being stupid.

It’s not just politics. Trump’s supposed stupidity is on display elsewhere. His tough trade war with China is reaping benefits. The U.S. economy is humming along, and as the Wall Street Journal reports, “China’s State-Driven Growth Model Is Running Out of Gas.” Trump has visited North Korea and has a constructive and personal relationship with Kim Jong-un, a first for an American president.

Mexico is suddenly securing its southern border, and Trump is doing via executive order what Congress is too lazy to do for asylum seekers and birthright citizenship. Spygate is ready to unfold and burst, with declassifications and hopefully accountability for the wrongdoers.

Jeffrey Epstein, the latest Trump-slayer for the wishful thinking Democrats and media, will be anything but. Does anyone really believe that if Epstein had dirt on Trump, we wouldn’t have known it before the election? Epstein and the Clintons were good pals. If Epstein had incriminating photos of videos of Trump with underage girls, Hillary would have used this in 2016 rather than paying millions for a phony dossier. Instead like everything else, Epstein will likely backfire on the left. “It’s going to be staggering, the amount of names,” Vanity Fair says.

For being so stupid, Trump continues to outsmart the smart set on the left, the media geniuses, Hollywood, academia and the Democrat party. His opponents keep calling him an idiot, and he runs circles around them. Trump is winning, and his supporters are far from tired of it.

Brian C Joondeph, MD, is a Denver-based physician and writer whose pieces have appeared in American Thinker, Daily Caller and other publications. Follow him on Facebook,  LinkedIn, Twitter and QuodVerum.

Rasmussen Reports is a media company specializing in the collection, publication and distribution of public opinion information.

We conduct public opinion polls on a variety of topics to inform our audience on events in the news and other topics of interest. To ensure editorial control and independence, we pay for the polls ourselves and generate revenue through the sale of subscriptions, sponsorships, and advertising. Nightly polling on politics, business and lifestyle topics provides the content to update the Rasmussen Reports web site many times each day. If it's in the news, it's in our polls. Additionally, the data drives a daily update newsletter and various media outlets across the country.

Some information, including the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll and commentaries are available for free to the general public. Subscriptions are available for $4.95 a month or 34.95 a year that provide subscribers with exclusive access to more than 20 stories per week on upcoming elections, consumer confidence, and issues that affect us all. For those who are really into the numbers, Platinum Members can review demographic crosstabs and a full history of our data.

To learn more about our methodology, click here.