« Some Resources for Grading | Main | The New Constitutional Right to Post-Conviction Habeas »

Thursday, September 15, 2016

I think I agree with this

From David Wasserman (no relation) at Cook Political Report: "Beginning to think beyond-pale Trump statements are the oxygen Clinton needs to sustain large polling leads. Last few weeks, been in a lull." We can debate whether there has been a lull in beyond-the-pale statements or whether the press has stopped reporting on them because they have become so commonplace and the press would rather write about emails. But I think the basic idea is correct.

Posted by Howard Wasserman on September 15, 2016 at 11:57 AM in Howard Wasserman, Law and Politics | Permalink

Comments

the fact that her campaign has failed to create virtually any positive stories or appealing messaging about the candidate since the convention

The image-meisters do not have good material with which to work.

Posted by: Art Deco | Sep 20, 2016 3:27:31 PM

Apparently the plan is to say that Hillary raised the question of Obama's birthplace in 2008 (false)

No, true. The perpetrator was Hilligula consigliere Sidney Blumenthal.

Posted by: Art Deco | Sep 20, 2016 3:26:04 PM

So what you're saying is that David Wasserman saw the season premier of South Park where Mr. Garrison (taking on the Trump role) keeps saying dumb things in his presidential race in order to boost support for Clinton?

Posted by: Derek Tokaz | Sep 18, 2016 9:24:15 AM

I, for one, cannot wait for the debates. I fully expect Trump, under pressure, to use at least one racial slur or derogatory reference to Clinton's gender.

Posted by: Paul Gowder | Sep 16, 2016 4:47:36 PM

I forgot to add the inability of Hillary's campaign, or the candidate herself, to respond to the cascade of bad news without compounding the political damage (even if you're convinced by the substance of what she says about the e-mail investigation, the Foundation, and so on). However, Trump has started to give interviews again and is refusing to answer questions about where Obama is born; in his latest comments, he promises "a major statement" but says that for now "we have to keep the suspense going." Apparently the plan is to say that Hillary raised the question of Obama's birthplace in 2008 (false), but unlike Trump, lacked the 'strength' to force Obama to release his birth certificate and answer what Trump will still describe as legitimate questions about Obama's place of birth. I wouldn't advise Trump to go back to this well, but I don't think it will hurt him much.

Posted by: Asher Steinberg | Sep 16, 2016 11:02:54 AM

Hillary already has ten times the money that Trump does. Why does her campaign think that spending her time with the oligarchs of Wall Street, Silicon Valley, and Hollywood to raise even more should be her highest priority?

Posted by: PaulB | Sep 15, 2016 12:51:32 PM

They've definitely declined, as 90% of what Trump says these days is read from a teleprompter and written by a relatively sane speechwriter. Previously, almost 100% of what Trump said was improvised. That said, I think that the cascade of bad news about Clinton, her absence from the trail for much of August while fund-raising(and this week while recuperating), and the fact that her campaign has failed to create virtually any positive stories or appealing messaging about the candidate since the convention - what Hillary speeches or remarks can you remember since her acceptance speech besides the alt-right speech, the basket of deplorables, and "it's a beautiful day in New York"? - are as much of a drag on her numbers as Trump's better behavior has improved his numbers.

Posted by: Asher Steinberg | Sep 15, 2016 12:21:57 PM

Post a comment