by Richard Skinner
To no one’s surprise, Donald Trump dominated last night’s
debate. But perhaps more surprising was
that he spent much of his time clashing with the Fox News moderators. Even after the debate, he seemed obsessed
with Megyn Kelly, who had the nerve to call him on his long history of
misogynist comments. (Like a lot of
loud-mouthed provocateurs, Trump has problems with women, both personally and
as a candidate). Despite having no real
history as a conservative, Trump has enjoyed a warm relationship with the
conservative media, perhaps
because he gives them the “affect” that fuels ratings: arrogance, resentment,
hostility. He appeals to the authoritarian
and ethnocentric
sentiments of the talk-radio audience – essentially, he is the living
embodiment of “white male privilege.” But
now he has tangled with the most prominent conservative media outlet of all. Is Fox News acting as an element in the
Republican Party network, trying to purge the race of a toxic candidate? Maybe. Is
it a great idea for Trump to feud with the media source most trusted by
Republican voters? Not anymore than
it was for Joe McCarthy to attack the U.S. Army. But nobody can censure Trump.
Trump’s refusal to rule out an independent run could be a
double-edged sword. It might make some
Republicans wary of attacking him – while Trump’s ideological incoherence makes
predictions difficult, a third-party run by him would probably hurt the GOP more.
But trying to “handle” Trump seems like a fool’s errand. On the other hand, asking candidates to sign
a “loyalty oath” might be a good way for Republicans to keep Trump out of
campaign events. And the Fox moderators
repeatedly showed how Trump can be attacked from the Right.
Public
fascination with Trump boosted the Clash in Cleveland’s audience to perhaps the
highest ever for a nomination-stage debate.
But Trump so dominated the proceedings that I doubt any other candidate
really broke through. Observers seem to
agree that Marco Rubio was the strongest performer. I’m not sure that he will greatly help his
public standing, but his showing probably will assist his campaign make the
case to GOP insiders that the Florida senator would be a formidable
general-election candidate. I guess John
Kasich started on a good foot with a national audience, but probably in a way
that appealed more to the media than to Republican activists. (But keep in mind that New Hampshire primary
voters are more moderate than the GOP norm).
Rand Paul got some attention for wrangling with Chris Christie on
foreign policy and surveillance, issues where he disagrees with most
Republicans. He may have helped his
cause with his father’s libertarian base, while further alienating the broader
party.
The other candidates neither helped nor hurt themselves. Except for a poorly-thought out response on
Iraq, Jeb Bush performed well on substance (including on the hot-button issues
of immigration and Common Core), although he seemed surprisingly nervous and
low-key for a quasi-frontrunner. But he
risked little and lost nothing. Scott
Walker, the other candidate at the head of the pack, followed an even lower-key
path. Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz did
their usual schticks, and probably pleased their constituencies. Until the very end, Ben Carson was almost
invisible. Nobody performed badly enough
to seriously damage their chances.
This will go down in history as one of the most entertaining
primary debates. Perhaps it will mark a
turning point in the Summer of Trump – when he swerved toward an Independent
run, or when the Republican Party began to expel an intruder. Maybe someday it will be counted as an early
step in the march of Marco Rubio to the White House. But
like most debates, whatever effects it may have in the short run will probably
dissipate quickly.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.