I’m republishing an older blog post by Paul Krugman, who spoke of why Trump’s easy domination of the Republican primary process doesn’t mean he’s got any game for the General Election.
In part:
Think about Trump’s obvious weaknesses, why Republicans couldn’t exploit them, but why Democrats can.
First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism. But Republicans couldn’t call him on that, because more or less veiled appeals to racial resentment have been key to their party’s success for decades. Clinton, on the other hand, won the nomination thanks to overwhelming nonwhite support, and will have no trouble hitting hard on this issue.
Second, Trump is proposing wildly irresponsible policies that benefit the rich. But so were all the other Republicans, so they couldn’t attack him for that. Clinton can.
Third, Trump’s personal record as a businessman is both antisocial and just plain dubious. Republicans, with their cult of the entrepreneur, couldn’t say anything about that. Again, Clinton can.
The G.O.P. paralysis on these issues explains why, again and again, Republicans turned to a proven line of attack — that is, proven not to work: insisting that Trump isn’t a true conservative, which matters to voters not at all. Obviously Democrats will be able to go after different and, I imagine, a lot more salient issues.
And there’s one last thing, which I suspect may make the biggest difference of all: Clinton’s campaign can go after Trump’s fundamental buffoonery.
I mean, he is a ludicrous figure, and everything we learn just makes him more ludicrous. So why couldn’t Republicans make that stick? I’d argue that it was because there was something fairly ludicrous about all his opponents, too.
krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/...
I think this comment has been shown to be prescient. The republican contenders were hammering at ideology, while being unable to attack Trump on all the things the MSM and public at large were appalled by.
Clinton, on the other hand, has already exploited Trump’s record as a con and shill masquerading as a businessman, a racist, and a buffoon.
And she did more damage just by calling Trump “thin skinned” than all the Republican contenders did. In fact, the label reminds me of Trump’s coup in labeling Jeb Bush as “low energy”.
I don’t think that the Republican party can distance itself from Trump, either. In the same way republicans were hobbled in the primary, they can now only quibble with “tone”. Or, suggest that he “pivot to the general” since they have operated on the assumption that presidential nominees say one thing to the base and another for the GE.