7 ways the latest Fox poll is the Republican establishment's worst nightmare

Vox ^ | August 17, 2015 | Matthew Yglesias, Liberal American writer

[2ndDivisionVet]

National polls taken in August in the year before a presidential election do not reveal a great deal about whom the parties are going to nominate at their conventions the following summer. Still, you know this national poll of self-identified Republicans is not what Republican consultants, members of Congress, donors, and governors wanted to see after the Fox News debate.

Mark Halperin
✔ ‎@MarkHalperin NEW @FoxNews national poll. Trump & Carson big.

8:02 AM - 16 Aug 2015

From an establishment point of view this is a shockingly multifaceted disaster.

Let us count the ways:

1) Trump is unbowed, unbent, and unbroken

The Fox News debate hosts went hard at Trump and probably succeeded in making him even more toxic to a general election audience, but they didn't actually dent his support. Trump as the GOP nominee remains fantastically unlikely, but for now at least, Republicans need to keep talking about him, the media is going to keep covering him, and an independent run seems like a real possibility.

2) Ben Carson is rising, not falling

Before Trump-mania, the world was prepared for Ben Carson to play the role of not-gonna-be-the-nominee-but-polling-well-early. That meant Trump largely seemed at first to be overshadowing Carson. But Carson's poll numbers are now strong and rising. With Trump in first and Carson in second, all the actual politicians are lagging way behind.

3) Ted Cruz is beating the rest of the real politicians

Unlike the guys in first and second place, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is a real politician. And while it would be unusual for a first-term senator to win a presidential election, it did happen as recently as 2008, so it's not the craziest idea in the world. What would be crazy, however, would be for a party to nominate a first-term senator who's despised by the party's congressional leadership and whose record in office consists largely of counterproductive tactical blunders.

4) The Trump/Carson/Cruz/Huckabee vote is bigger than the Bush/Walker/Rubio/Kasich/Christie vote

Back on August 5, I was dismissive of Trump's lead in the polls on the grounds that when the more mainstream candidates' support was consolidated it still overwhelmed Trump. That's no longer really the case.

The combined 26 percent behind Bush/Walker/Rubio/Kasich/Christie is basically neck-and-neck with Trump. A majority of Republican voters currently say they like Trump, Carson, Cruz, or Huckabee — none of whom are acceptable to the party elites.

Simply consolidating everyone behind one of the candidates who is acceptable to elites isn't going to get the job done. Party leaders need to find a way to actually pry support away from one of the candidates who's unacceptable to them. So far, they have no idea how to do that.

5) The good performances didn't help

Watching the debate, I thought Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio had the most impressive performances. So did almost every other journalist I know.

Guess who doesn't get a vote in the GOP primaries? Most of the journalists I know. And yet "can sound good to moderate-to-liberal journalists without conceding much on policy substance" is a skill that would be useful in an actual nominee. But Republican voters don't much seem to care about it.

6) The most likely nominees are underperforming

It still seems very likely that either Jeb Bush or Scott Walker will be appearing on the ballot in November 2016. The August slide in their poll numbers reminds us, however, that so far Bush has looked rusty and Walker has looked dull. These guys are having trouble getting Republican rank-and-file to care about them. And while there's little chance that will result in Trump or Carson becoming the nominee, it does mean that to ultimately win Jeb or Walker may have to fire up crowds with increasingly extreme positions.

Walker's debate contention — undisputed by Bush — that to be authentically pro-life requires making abortions illegal even when necessary to prevent a pregnant woman from dying is a hint of the kind of stance a long primary can draw out.

7) Mike Huckabee ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

For years now, people have been talking about Republicans' "strong bench" compared with the weak set of Democratic Party alternatives to Hillary Clinton. That bench is the legacy of the bumper crop of governors elected in the GOP's sweeping 2010 midterm victory, almost all of them reelected in 2014.

And yet, guess who is beating every single member of that farm team? A former governor who left office in 2007, ran for president in 2008, and whose views are anathema to the party's donor base.

[TomGuy]

I think everyone is getting sick and tired of “sounds good!”

That, and "looks presidential."

[unsycophant]

I’ve come across three separate articles this morning already, identifying “hardcore conservatives” as the ones who will bring Trump down and wrangle the GOP into line.

All three authors do exactly (exactly!) what you describe. Throw out biases in the form of name-calling, then write around the bias with theory to support.

Each author identifies himself as a “real” or “hardcore” conservative, and apparently believes it’s his mission to “expose the real Donald Trump” to the rest of us.

It’s total lefty thinking.

[Patton@Bastogne]

hey ... it worked for Elmer Gantry ... why not the “Huckster” ?

[LS]

Cuz he doesn’t look like Burt Lancaster?

[Carthego delenda est]

“Throwing in bias in the form of adjectives unsupported by the raw data — i.e. “fantastically” unlikely — is an only slightly more subtle form of yellow journalism than outright name-calling.”

Yeah, slightly more subtle than saying “He’s unelectable.”

[richardskeet]

Let me guess...
Trump is dominating, but can’t win.
Isn’t this story getting stale?

[SamAdams76]

So Trump's polling numbers are triple that of establishment choice ¿Jeb? Bush and it's Trump that "can't win."

This is a case of the establishment Republicans trying to turn a fervent wish into reality by lying about the facts over and over again. It's like they are closing their eyes, covering their ears and chanting "He can't win; he can't win; he can't win" over and over again like a small child that doesn't want to face reality.

My Twitter results below, updated through yesterday at noon, bear out that non-traditional candidates are getting huge growth in Twitter followers while the establishment candidates are by and large flat in Twitter follower growth. What does that mean? It basically means that the establishment candidates are generating little to no excitement out there.

Name	Twitter Handle	8/1/2015	8/15/2015	MTD Gain
Donald Trump	@realDonaldTrump	3,409,127	3,728,446	319,319
Ben Carson	@RealBenCarson	393,107	490,835	97,728
Carly Fiorina	@CarlyFiorina	384,524	453,085	68,561
Marco Rubio	@marcorubio	772,150	816,938	44,788
Ted Cruz	@tedcruz	443,426	471,349	27,923
¿Jeb Bush	@JebBush	239,197	266,089	26,892
Scott Walker	@ScottWalker	167,564	190,613	23,049
John Kasich	@JohnKasich	80,497	97,362	16,866
Rand Paul	@RandPaul	654,136	669,697	15,561
Rick Perry	@GovernorPerry	305,523	312,701	7,178
Bobby Jindal	@BobbyJindal	203,428	209,695	6,267
Rick Santorum	@RickSantorum	236,439	239,817	3,378
Chris Christie	@ChrisChristie	40,234	42,282	2,048
Linda Graham	@LindseyGrahamSC	23,043	24,200	1,157
Mike Huckabee	@MikeHuckabeeGOP	0	849	849
Jim Gilmore	@gov_gilmore	356	985	629
George Pataki	@Gpataki2016	0	498	498

[Leep]

Bush 9% :(

When will America learn?

[Sir Napsalot]

That was the sentences that jumped out at me, too.

Too funny, those guys really think themselves objective journalists.

[Amntn]

I read an article this morning, that I can’t find now, that said Trump’s actual numbers are probably higher than what is being published because of who is being polled.

[RetiredArmy]

Maybe it because Christians trust another Christian more than they trust a bunch of RINO’s, Bush, Trump, etc. Cruz is the best one of the group. But, then again didn’t the republicans win the Congress on promises to stop Obama, yet when they got the majority, they only gave Obama more of a majority to get away with his unlawful acts? The so called speaker of the House is basically a dimocrat and ole Mitch is also as they endorse everything Obama wants. So, why should Christian not trust the Hulk? Maybe they see him as one who might actually keep his word. The grand majority of the others certainly will not. Their actions in the past few months have proven that in Congress. I told my local congress-critter that he was dangerously close to losing our votes and not voting for his position at all, because I will not vote for a dim. He collects his pay check and I never see him out front, speaking, leading, etc. and I TOLD him that. I said do something beside collect a pay check.

[tbw2]

Pandering to illegal immigrants doesn’t help recent immigrant voters if they realize adding new immigrants costs the recent ones their jobs.

[BO Stinkss]

Did you know that Kasich’s dad was a mailman. Wow...

[2ndDivisionVet]

My dad was a retired Marine and a warehouseman. What was/is your dad?

[BO Stinkss]

Did you know that Kasich’s dad was a mailman? Wow...

[BO Stinkss]

Retired Chief Master Sergent

[2ndDivisionVet]

Why polls likely miss size of Trump’s support
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3325545/posts

[Amntn]

Thanks. That’s it.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Air Force, huh? Mine was a Gunnery Sergeant (Commo Chief) in the Marines. World War II, Korea and early Vietnam.

[LS]

I think you're right. You know, when Mormons circle the wagons to protect another Mormon there is great outcry, but when non-Mormons do so, it's viewed as ok.

My problem with trying to attach a religious component to any politician is that in the Bible God constantly used people who wouldn't measure up to our modern "holier-then-thous." Moses was a murderer, David an adulterer who sent his girlfriend's husband off to be killed, Saul was in charge of persecutions and murders, Peter was an egotistical liar, James and John were power hungry, and so on. Yet God chooses these and other "losers" to make His point. So far from needing an outspoken, self-delcared born again politician, I think I will trust God to raise up His guy and meanwhile vote for the guy who most appeals to my political and cultural sensibilities.