The L-word
Republicans here in Milwaukee now believe the election is theirs to lose, as I noted yesterday. The bandaged Donald Trump’s reception on the convention floor was something to see. “’Ear ‘ear,” they shouted *. They were already optimistic that things were going their way after the debate on 27 June, and many now believe the country will rally behind the former president after the attempt on his life. Elon Musk’s endorsement was a further boost. Some here are going further and talking about a landslide. According to one experienced party figure I spoke to, Trump could be on course to win 30 or 40 states (four years ago, Joe Biden won 25).
Tom Emmer, Majority Whip in the House of Representatives, predicted at a reception on Monday night that not only will Trump win, the GOP will hold the House and flip the Senate with victories in Ohio, Montana, Pennsylvania and even liberal Maryland. He was optimistic that Trump would take his home state of Minnesota, which last voted Republican in a presidential election in 1972 and was famously the only state not to choose Ronald Reagan in 1984.
But there is a fine line between confidence and complacency, and this kind of talk makes the professionals nervous. “I hate hearing the L-word,” a campaign insider told me. “It’s bad juju and it’s bad practice. If you take anything for granted you make mistakes. You have to campaign as if you’re behind.”
* They didn’t really. I made that up.
The U-word
I’m here at the RNC with a group from the International Democracy Union, the association of centre-right parties from around the world of which I am Honorary Chairman. As I tell my American friends, we want to see for ourselves the process by which their political system unfailingly produces the two most competent, capable, energetic and trustworthy individuals the nation has to offer. (To be fair, some of them get the joke).
This crowd would usually be cheering on the Republican, but this time one thing worries many of them: Ukraine. Solidarity with Ukraine and European security are major themes of our regular gatherings, not least because many members are in what Russia calls its “near abroad”.
As my latest polling found, half of 2020 Trump voters think the US is already doing too much to help, with many complaining that American support is merely prolonging the war, diverting funds badly needed at home, and drawing the country further in to an unwelcome military entanglement. Trump’s selection of JD Vance as his running mate – an outspoken opponent of further aid to Ukraine – leads some of our European delegates to conclude that inside the GOP, these arguments are winning the day.
America First?
The party’s platform, published on Tuesday, puts it like this: “Republicans will strengthen Alliances by ensuring that our Allies must meet their obligations to invest in our Common Defense and by restoring Peace to Europe.” (Sorry about all the random capital letters. They do say Trump himself was heavily involved in the editing). Or as Vance put it rather more pointedly in a Senate speech in April, “For three years, the Europeans have told us that Vladimir Putin is an existential threat to Europe. And for three years, they have failed to respond as if that were actually true.” He criticised Germany in particular for failing to meet the NATO target of spending 2% of GDP on defence.
Richard Grenell, a former Director of US National Intelligence, argues that it is a mistake to conclude that Trump is indifferent to the institution. “The person who tries to strengthen and get more money to NATO is the one who cares about it more,” he told us. “I don’t know a single club in the world where you get to join, not pay your dues, but still go into the cafeteria.
Trump versus…?
Until Saturday, the question of whether Biden would continue as the Democrats’ nominee looked set to dominate the week. It seems an age since the president’s disastrous CNN debate was followed by the supposedly make-or-break press conference in which he introduced Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky as “President Putin” and referred to Kamala Harris as “Vice President Trump”, prompting figures as exalted as George Clooney to declare that time was up for Joe. (Notably, the argument for his stepping down was not that his obvious frailty made him incapable of serving as commander-in-chief for another four years, but that so many voters might think so that he would lose the election. There’s principle for you).
Some here at the RNC think the contrast between the faltering president and his newly invigorated challenger makes the need to replace him all the more urgent and therefore inevitable: “they’ll have to do something because he’s clearly not up to it,” as one operative put it to me.
But the prevailing view seems to be that the week’s events have strengthened Biden’s hand. The campaign to supplant him inevitably lost momentum as graver matters took precedence. The president himself is digging in. He told NBC’s Lester Holt on Monday that he was unmoved by calls to stand aside: “Look, 14 million people voted for me to be the nominee in the Democratic Party, okay? I listen to them… I’m only three years older than Trump, number one. And number two, my mental acuity’s been pretty damn good. I’ve gotten more done than any president has in a long, long time in three and a half years. So I’m willing to be judged on that.”
The fact is that the decision is his now alone to make. As another old campaign hand told me: “It’s hard to think of a sitting president who has stepped aside because people in his party have concerns about his capacity. He’s got the nomination; he’s got the votes. He’s in charge.”
