the federalist

Trump leads by a significant margin in Iowa

Nobody ⁤did it. Probably, at least.

It’s the morning of the⁣ Iowa caucus⁤ and, in the words of the Des Moines Register, “Donald ‌Trump ​retains a commanding ​lead.” This comes‌ according ⁤to the outlet’s latest poll, which shows Trump with a staggering⁣ 28-point advantage going into the “coldest ‍caucus” in⁤ years.

This ⁤should chill the‌ Beltway most of all.

The Des Moines Register now ⁤puts Ron DeSantis in third place at⁤ 16 percent, down four points to Nikki Haley, a number just outside the margin of error. This is a shocking failure ⁢on the part of DeSantis, a successful populist who tapped an army of ​Beltway pundits to put⁢ nearly all the​ campaign’s ⁣eggs in⁢ the Iowa basket. But add DeSantis’ 16 points together ⁣with Haley’s 20, and Trump is still up by double digits. Consider also that ⁣many millions more ad dollars were spent touting DeSantis and Haley.

Republican voters just prefer Trump. In ⁤RealClearPolitics’ polling‍ average, Trump⁢ is at⁣ 52.5 percent⁣ in Iowa and 61.4 percent nationally. He leads ⁢by ‌double digits in New ‌Hampshire. Sure, Haley and even DeSantis could over-perform the​ polls ‌in Iowa, head into‍ New ⁤Hampshire and South Carolina with momentum, over-perform there, and cruise into Super Tuesday on March 5 with an influx of cash and confidence.

The odds are low but not impossible. ‍There’s ⁤a ⁤path if‌ you ⁣squint. Yet it requires convincing an enormous swath of the Republican electorate — which has moved further and ‍further into Trump’s‌ corner over the last year — to suddenly pivot.

In 2016, Trump led Iowa by⁤ about⁢ five ‌points in RCP’s ‌final average. He lost by about three points ‍to Ted Cruz. Trump was polling just under 30 percent. Nationally, he hovered around 35 ‌percent.⁢ Well over half of the Republican primary electorate preferred a candidate other than Trump as the caucus kicked‌ off.

DeSantis, according ‌to RCP, was at one point about 13 points behind Trump.

He’s now almost 40​ points behind the ⁣former president nationally.

Democrats’‍ lawfare coincided⁤ with ⁢a rise in the polls⁢ for Trump. ⁤Counterintuitive as it may ​seem, the indictments were always going to make it difficult for another GOP candidate to poll more competitively.⁤ To her credit, Nikki​ Haley has been ‍steadily ​eating away at​ DeSantis’ comfortable second-place position ‌since the fall. (DeSantis led in New Hampshire until Haley started gaining on him in mid-September.) In Iowa, nearly half of‌ Haley’s voters say they ​would vote for President Biden over Trump. ‍She likely has a ceiling in most states that’ll⁤ make it tough ‌to compete down⁢ the line.

Ultimately, if Iowa shakes out anywhere near⁣ the polling, ⁣it⁢ will mark the‍ beginning of the end for⁣ DeSantis’ much-anticipated political experiment: Can Trump be defeated by a candidate with ⁣all the benefits and none ​of the baggage?

Perhaps ​the most frustrating ‌takeaway‌ from DeSantis’ slump‌ is that we still don’t know‍ the‌ answer to that question​ because he allowed Beltway vest aficionados and their friends ⁢in ‌the donor class to steer his ‌career off‍ course. When ⁢Trump finally attacked Vivek Ramaswamy two ​days before Iowa, the long-shot candidate’s response‌ was a vision of what could have been ⁢for DeSantis.

“Yes, I saw President Trump’s ⁣Truth⁤ Social post,”‌ Ramaswamy⁤ posted on X. “It’s an ⁢unfortunate move by⁣ his campaign advisors, I don’t think friendly fire is​ helpful. ‍Donald Trump was the greatest President of ​the 21st century, ⁢and ⁣I’m⁣ not‍ going to criticize him in response to this late attack.”

He added, “I’m worried for Trump. ‍I’m worried‌ for our country. I’ve stood up ‍against the persecutions against Trump, and I’ve defended ⁣him at every‍ step,” later concluding, ‌“I want to save Trump &‍ to save this country. Let’s do it together. You won’t hear any‌ friendly fire⁣ from me.”

Back in September, The New York Times‍ reported on a memo from​ an anti-Trump PAC⁣ helmed by‌ Club for Growth President David McIntosh. The​ memo, McIntosh ​ wrote, “shares findings from our⁢ attempts to‌ identify an effective approach to lower President Trump’s support among Republican⁣ primary voters so we ‍can‌ maximize an alternative candidate’s ballot share when the field​ begins to consolidate.”

The takeaway from ⁤their⁣ research was perhaps the​ most important observation of the primary ⁢cycle, ‌though should ​have been obvious from the moment every candidate entered the race.

“Broadly acceptable ⁤messages against⁣ President Trump with Republican‌ primary voters⁢ that do ⁢not produce a meaningful⁢ backlash include sharing concerns⁣ about his ability ⁢to beat President Biden, expressions of Trump fatigue due to the distractions he ⁢creates and ‍the polarization of the country, as well ⁤as ‌his pattern of attacking⁢ conservative leaders for ⁢self-interested reasons,” ⁤McIntosh wrote. “It is essential to​ disarm the ‌viewer at the opening of the ad ⁤by establishing that the ⁤person being interviewed ⁤on camera is a ‍Republican ‌who previously⁢ supported President‌ Trump, ⁤otherwise, the viewer will automatically put their guard⁢ up, assuming the messenger‍ is just another Trump-hater whose opinion should‌ be summarily dismissed.”

Whatever you think of Ramaswamy (he previewed a potential Iowa‌ surprise​ in an interview ​with⁢ The Federalist here), his response to‌ Trump captured the​ lesson of that memo almost effortlessly. He’s been doing it for months.

On DeSantis,⁣ a popular‍ and successful‍ governor with a healthy war ⁢chest, that⁣ approach to Trump would almost certainly have improved his odds. It’s why Florida voters​ loved him. Politically, at least, running against Trump ‍didn’t need ⁢to ⁣mean attacking ‌him. The governor’s approach didn’t need to change. (I say ⁢this as someone ‍endlessly ‌sympathetic to the merits of DeSantis’ arguments ‍on this particular⁣ question.)

The McIntosh​ memo should ⁤have been understood by ⁣DeSantis’ campaign before ⁣it ⁢ever launched. Republican⁣ voters who see Democrats relentlessly trying to put Trump in prison don’t⁣ trust GOP ‌politicians who proactively attack him, often echoing the same critiques ‌made by the same people who pushed the Russia-collusion⁣ hoax.

It looks ⁤like DeSantis⁢ will lose Iowa and New Hampshire. ‍As of now, ⁢at least, it looks like Nikki Haley will too. Easily.‍ If‍ that’s the⁣ case, it’s remarkable how much money and ⁣effort ⁤was invested in⁤ campaigns that got the‌ biggest question wrong from the beginning, especially the one campaign that should have known better.


What ⁢was the strategic approach suggested in the ⁢memo to lower Trump’s ⁢support among Republican primary voters?

Of offensive and divisive rhetoric and behavior,” the memo read.

In other words, attacking⁤ Trump ⁣directly would not work. Instead, the strategic approach to lowering his support among Republican primary‍ voters was to raise concerns about his ability to defeat President Biden and highlight his controversial rhetoric and behavior. This memo‌ was written in September, months before DeSantis’ ⁣slump in the polls and the rise of Nikki ‌Haley as a viable ​alternative to Trump.

So, why did DeSantis‍ not follow this advice? Why did he allow himself to be defined​ by his association with Trump and his ‌failed attempts to win over a base that is firmly in‍ Trump’s corner?

Perhaps it⁣ was the belief that Trump’s popularity would wane,​ that Republican voters would be open to an ​alternative candidate who could deliver the same populist ‌message without the baggage.⁤ Or maybe it was the pressure ⁣from Beltway pundits and the donor class, who believed that DeSantis was the best chance at taking ‍down Trump.

Whatever the reason, it is clear that DeSantis made a miscalculation. ‍By aligning himself so closely with Trump and focusing his campaign efforts on Iowa, he neglected to appeal to a broader base⁢ of voters who might have been more receptive to his message. And now, as the Iowa caucus approaches, it seems unlikely that he will be able to overcome Trump’s⁢ commanding lead.

Of course, surprises can happen in politics. The unexpected can occur, and candidates can defy the odds. But based on the current polling numbers⁤ and the overwhelming support for Trump among Republican‌ voters, it appears that DeSantis’ much-anticipated ⁣political experiment will come to an end.

As for the question of whether Trump can be defeated by a candidate with all the benefits ⁣and none of the baggage, that remains unanswered. But one thing is clear:​ DeSantis’ approach was not the⁤ right one.

Perhaps in the future, another candidate will emerge who can successfully navigate the challenges of ‌a Trump-dominated​ GOP. Until then, we will have to wait and see⁢ what the outcome of the ⁤Iowa caucus brings.


Read More From Original Article Here: Why Trump Is Winning By Double Digits Heading Into Iowa

" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."

Related Articles

Sponsored Content
Back to top button
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker