One in three Republicans now think Donald Trump was wrong candidate choice
newsweek.com
One in three Republican voters would have preferred a different candidate to Donald Trump for the upcoming presidential election.
In March, the former president won enough primary races to secure the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential election.
However, according to a survey of 1,003 Americans by Canadian polling firm Leger, Trump does not command the full support of his base and 33 percent of this demographic would have preferred another politician. Meanwhile, this proportion is higher (47 percent) among Republican voters aged 18 to 34 years old.
3 out of 3 will probably vote for trump in the general election.
Yup, exactly. That's the question that actually matters. Tons of Republicans were very vocally against Trump in 2016 too, but fell in line as soon as he was named their official candidate. The Republican Party is great at unifying around candidates and messaging when it counts (probably one of their only legitimate strengths.)
Democrats fall in love. Republicans fall in line.
The problem with Democrats is that because it's a big tent, it's harder to coalesce around one or two issues. Some Democrats really care about the environment and won't come out to vote unless the candidate says they'll do right by it. Other Democrats care about prison reform and won't vote for a candidate that has a history of supporting laws that put more people into prison.
When the Republican platform is "At least we're not liberals", it's much easier to get your people out to vote.
The whole Democrat approach has been "we aren't donald trump" for the last 8 years. The GOP base stopped caring about "electability" after 2012 and just started replacing their lukewarm candidates with rabid evengalists who say and push for what the hardliners want. No one at the RNC pre-Trump takeover of it actually liked people like MTG, Bobert, Matt Gaetz, or even Trump. But those people are massively popular with their voters, so leadership has to accept them.
Meanwhile the Democratic party is so opposed to listening to what their base actually wants and are constantly trying to chase conservative voters like Charlie Brown trying to kick a football. Progressives face opposition at every step from the party structure, while people who support those progressives get belittled, ridiculed, and told not to participate. And when by some chance a progressive candidate actually gets elected and starts to get media attention, the Democrats cave to the conservatives criticizing those progressives rather than protecting their own. The only ones who cared about MTG going on about Jewish space lasers were Democrats. Meanwhile when Ihlan Omar made comments about Israeli crimes against Palestinians and Israeli attempts to whitewash those crimes, the Democrats were the ones drafting legislation to censure her in all but name.
What the GOP cares about is power and doing whatever it takes to hold that power. But the Democrats only care about maintaining the status quo at all costs. One has am actual vision, while the other is treading water and wondering why they are going nowhere.
Green energy, student debt relief, likely marijuana reform after rescheduling, infrastructure building, drug price controls, Union empowerment, etc etc but you say they're
not listeningopposed to listening to their base. It's unreal.See above. That's BS.
Funny, because i live in a state that decriminalized marijuana and i just lost my job for testing positive for marijuana on a drug test. Meanwhile the Democratic senator is running ads about his bills that Trump signed. Nothing about any of those things you just listed off. He mad appearances at the UAW strikes last year, but there hasn't been any actual legislation or policy change to support unions, just photo ops and tweets.
Decriminalization is not legalization. That you don't even know this...
Then you have to limit actions to a specific dem senator, about not running ads about the things I listed. Holy mental gymnastics.
And then the final: But but but it's not being done fast enough!1!
It's unreal.
Not only is decriminalization not legalization, even if something is legal your employer can prohibit it as a condition of employment.
I can guarantee you, even if marijuana is completely legal tomorrow and available in every 7-11 I'll be fired for testing positive, and for good reason. At least the reasons are good for me, for a lot of other jobs drug testing is bullshit.
Yup, just like you can't show up drunk, you can't show up high. Anything requiring uhh sober operation will be an issue. The long time frame of marijuana staying in your body is an issue, I think the airlines said you can't use it 28 days before your shift (lol effective ban).
Maybe at some point in the future someone will come up with a test that determines if you're high right now instead of our current test that only determines if you've used it in the past couple weeks. But until then prohibition for any safety related job is the only option.
That sounds to me like you violated the terms of your employment agreed upon by you and your employer when you entered into an employment contract with them. The federal government has little-to-no control over stuff like drug testing at non-governmental jobs.
Alcohol is legal, but if you test positive for alcohol in a piss test or breathalyzer there’s a good chance, depending on your employer, that you won’t be working for them.
You ought to be cognizant of your own habits with regard to your employer’s drug testing policy. Marijuana can show up in a piss test for weeks if you’re a heavy or frequent user. If you know you regularly or randomly get tested, don’t partake or find a different job.
That’s not the Democratic party’s fault, that’s between you and your employer. Stupid? Sure. Unfair? Absolutely. A useless policy that pushes people out of jobs for no good reason? You betcha. Doesn’t change the contract you entered into when you took the job.
Oh yeah here we go - Tankie Trolls Assemble!
I don't know if you've seen the news in the last few years but there's been a fair bit of positive legislative and policy changes due to the Democrats having at least some power for now. I'm not going to list them here because I don't think you care.
Yeah they didn't give us free energy and cops still shoot people without consequence so it must be the Democrats fault for sucking.
Those of us who were old enough to read the news when Trump was first illegitimately put in power were also super pissed off at the weak response from the Democrats. Their whole "statement of very concerned" bullshit for four years was excruciating. There was room for improvement. Absolutely. And I think we've seen improvement.
But shitting on them right now is not. helping. You wanna help sink the boat, GTFO. There you go - open water and batshit nazi sharks. Enjoy.
I've stopped believing it's the Democrat's fault for sucking and started believing that it's America's fault for sucking.
Technically correct.
It's the best kind.
I'm not trying to sink the boat. The boat is sinking and the Democrats are trying to remodel the dinning hall instead of patch the holes in the hull.
Every thread about Biden's support of Israel is bombarded by liberals saying "Trump will be worse!" and "we need Biden to stop Trump!" Which is not an actual policy.
Yeahhh there we go. “BiDen GeNoSiDe”. Classic. That’s the stuff.
Hey good luck throwing the world into chaos. We’re all counting on you.
The world is already in chaos. You can cover your eyes all you want, but things aren't going to return to how they were.
Cover our eyes? Hardly. How do you think anything gets addressed? Performative outrage on the interwebs? HA!
Stopped right there because it's obvious that this whole post won't be rooted in reality. Biden has almost gone out of his way to avoid mentioning trump. Not that he hasn't at all, but he has focused primarily on his accomplishments.
Absolutley correct. Let's watch those downvotes pour in from the tankie brigade.
Idiots to the left of me Fascists to the right Here I am stuck in the middle with you
Democrats have been funding the most extremist and crazy of their opponents in political races for years now because it's a lot easier to run on the policy of "At least I'm not that guy" than it is to actually convince people to vote for you based on your policies and agenda. Hell, some lady wrote a book about how she did it to win a seat, only to lose to that same guy in the very next election.
It's one of the oldest and most effective campaign strategies there is, but it keeps biting Democrats in the ass and they keep trying it anyways. Democrats seem to think that moderate Republicans will vote for them over the extremist candidate, but Republicans don't care about who the candidate is so long as they're a Republican.
Unless you want to pretend that Joe Biden is the whole of the Democrats, that hardly seems relevant. As a counter example, this writer for the San Francisco Chronicle seems to think Biden is running on "at least he's not Trump."
In a presidential election? Uh, yeah. It's relevant. Ok? Ok.
No, it's really not. In any election, there are a multitude of voices on either side. Joe Biden isn't the only person in America carrying water for Joe Biden. That's just absurd. Would you say the same about Donald Trump? The whole liberal media establishment is backing Joe Biden, and a lot of them are using the "anyone but Trump" argument. I was convinced to vote for both HRC and Biden by exactly that reasoning. It's just ridiculous to pretend that isn't an argument being made by Democrats.
Yeah that danged liberal media establishment
Sarcasm is a poor substitute for thinking. Taken literally, you appear to be agreeing with me. Your tone suggests otherwise. But what are you actually saying? That there is no such thing as the liberal media establishment? That would be absurd. MSNBC, The View, etc. all definitely exist. So then what can you possibly mean? And why obscure your point behind sarcasm?
Could it be because you don't actually have a point? I think it just might be.
“The liberal media establishment” is a right-wing meme pushed by fox news, talk radio, and, yes, Russia Today for almost thirty years now.
The “media establishment” such as it can be recognized as singular, and with specific regard to political reporting, is conservative. Not liberal.
Broadway, is liberal. Except for maybe Spider-man: Turn Off the Dark. Or Cats. But anyway.
Sarcasm is the inevitable result of hearing right-wing talking points unendingly.
lol. Who told you that? The liberal media establishment? In a UCLA study of the 20 major media outlets, 18 scored left of center, with CBS’ Evening News, The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times ranking second, third and fourth most liberal behind the news pages of The Wall Street Journal. Only Fox News’ Special Report and The Washington Times scored to the right of the average U.S. voter.
No, you're sarcastic because you're absolutely terrible at making arguments, you don't actually understand your position, and you're a self-righteous bigot who thinks you're so intellectually superior to anyone with a different worldview that you don't even have to bother to actually engage, you can just mock, deride and dismiss. You're an NPC. That is exactly how NPCs act.
Well, considering he is the de factor leader of the Democratic party right now, it's enough to point out that it is not "the whole democratic approach."
Oh and look you found someone who shares your opinion. But not even really because they aren't saying it's their whole strategy, but a pitch that doesn't work, nor certainly it's not referring to the entire last 8 years.
I think OP was obviously being hyperbolic and didn't mean that it was literally the entirety of their strategy, but if you want to claim victory through pedantry, you do you.
Cool! I'm not voting Biden because of his support for the genocide of Palestinians.
3... 2... 1...
Good for you and you're vanity vote. Really working to make a difference.
Vanity has nothing to do with it. I'm not voting for him because I don't like what he's doing, simple as that.
It doesn't do anything, making it pointless. It just makes you feel like you're doing something, without actually doing anything.
It's absolutely 100% vanity.
An individual vote doesn't really affect the outcome regardless of who you vote for. From that perspective, sure, all votes are just about vanity, I suppose.
But personally, I think it's worth the time to go out and try to promote politicians I support. To each their own, I guess.
That's not the perspective I'm coming from.
That's the thing: voting third party doesn't really do anything to promote a candidate.
If you want to change the system to promote candidates you want, go out and actually do something so you can vote for who you truly want in a presidential election. That's how you actually promote politicians you want to support. Voting third party is just, as I said, pure vanity.
Really? Why not? You've said this several times now with zero explanation.
If a party reaches 5% of the vote, they're eligible for federal campaign funding. I believe 15% is the threshold for TV debates. Bringing them closer to that goal really seems like it's promoting them. Parties tend to get more attention as they get more votes.
Either way, I have no interest in promoting a candidate I'm opposed to. If voting for someone I support doesn't do anything, I'd just stay home.
That's actually the core belief of conservatism, but this bunch has its target at a 1945 status quo for everything they like (pipes, big cars, father knows best) and nothing they don't (high tax for rich assholes).
Hint: its root is 'conserve'.
Isn't that the same thing as caring about power and whatever it takes to hold onto that power? The Democrats are representative of the liberal establishment, which controls the bureaucracy, the culture makers, social media, etc.
HAHAHA - shit Dmitry, you need new material man. The culture makers? FFS.
Here - in America, where we live - the "liberal establishment" makes approximately 10% of the "culture" in most of the southern and midwestern states. (A state is like a small country here.)
Ah, yes, the South and Midwest. Famous centers of American culture production. I was, of course, referring to Los Angeles and New York, which are the major cultural meccas of America. Hollywood, Broadway, Madison Avenue, the major labels, the major publishers, the major networks, etc. It's funny that you accuse me of being a foreigner when you don't know that you just listed the two regions infamously referred to as "flyover country" by the elites who actually shape American culture.
If you’re equating culture with movies and . . . Broadway? Then, uh, yeah I guess? To a large extent movies and Broadway and televised advertisement appeal to and thus reflect some liberal positions, sure. In a necessarily very non-threatening, centrist kind of way.
But that manufactured media of movies, tv, Broadway shows and the rest is an input to the actual culture in which humans usually live, and it ain’t liberal in a lot of the swing states. Turns out, there’s plenty not-liberal movies, tv, and . . . okay maybe not Broadway, ya got me there.
Liberal elite media establishment - thats some Russia Today language, man. Or Fox News. Same thing, I guess.
Also the south is where all the music came from, and the midwest made it possible. So, culture production ftw.
"Culture is a complex and multifaceted concept that encompasses the beliefs, behaviors, values, customs, symbols, language, and artifacts that are shared by a group of people. It shapes their worldview, influences their social practices, and provides a framework for understanding their environment and interactions with others. Culture is both dynamic and adaptive, evolving over time as societies change and individuals contribute new ideas and practices. It is transmitted from generation to generation through socialization, education, and communication, and it plays a critical role in shaping individual and collective identities.
Cultural production refers to the processes and activities involved in creating, disseminating, and perpetuating cultural content such as art, literature, music, film, fashion, and other forms of expressive and symbolic materials. This encompasses not only the creative acts themselves but also the economic, social, and institutional frameworks that support and distribute these cultural products.
The cultural elite, on the other hand, consists of individuals and groups who hold significant influence and authority within the cultural sphere, often shaping trends, tastes, and norms. These elites typically include prominent artists, intellectuals, critics, curators, media moguls, and others who have the power to determine what cultural products gain prominence and how they are perceived by the broader public."
The above was written by Chat.GPT. Just in case you think I'm making up terms.
The cultural elite in America, who shape the mainstream culture, have very liberal/progressive values and use their position to push those values on Americans. This is then reinforced through the public education system, including state universities, which are also liberal institutions.
There is no "centrist" position in the culture war. The left has embraced queer theory as central to its cultural values, and queer theory is necessarily completely and totally opposed to the traditional Christian values that have been the bedrock of Western civilization for 1600 years. The one must necessarily destroy the other.
This is a non-argument, just an attempt at poisoning the well. "The establishment" refers to the dominant group or elite who hold power and influence in a society, typically maintaining the status quo and resisting significant changes. There's no point in denying that a liberal media establishment exists. Fox News would be part of the conservative media establishment -- hell, Fox News practically defines the conservative media establishment, with the Daily Wire and a network of podcasts defining conservative media counterculture. The liberal media counterculture would be things like The Young Turks, Hasan Piker, The Hill, etc.
lol. Glad I didn’t read it. Gonna leave you to it now.
How very NPC of you.
I’m not the one getting a phrase generator to write my arguments then accusing the other of being a non participant.
Hmm.
Loyalty is their core attribute, like hand-wringing and second-guessing is for Democrats.
There was just another poll that said only 10% of Republican voters WONT vote for trump.
So that means 23% of Republican voters dont want trump but still will vote for him.
That also means 2/3 want him flat out.
As someone who's a registered Democrat who doesn't want to vote for Biden but will still vote for him, I feel their pain.
Nobody changes how they vote, but turnout might be more depressed among Republicans, in which case maybe only 1 in 3 will for for trump
I wish. It's a cult. They do cult-like things that don't make sense unless you drink the kool-aid.
I mean parts of it are for sure. But its not a monolith.
But would it even make a difference? The Republicans haven't won the vote in about 2 decades, and in 2016, the Supreme Court said that the Electoral College doesn't have to vote the way that the voters that they represent voted when multiple representatives said that they were going to cast their votes for Trump despite Hillary winning the state.
Yep, even if he ends up in prison by some miracle.
It doesn’t matter what they think. They’re going to coalesce around this pus filled boil and form the usual carbuncle. Get out and vote because at the end of the day they’re going to vote for Trump anyways.
Oh NOW they think that. It took until NOW to figure it out.
If they're still voting for him, being non preferred isn't exactly a damning opinion.
Party over country
They will still vote for him. They're Republicans for a reason.
Stop riding dead horses, uhm?
I've seen my parents abandon all the values they once claimed to have to follow that man. I don't have much respect for his followers' ability to snap out of it.
Hope I'm wrong.
Better headline: 2 out of 3 Republicans (the party of "Law and Order") support a candidate convicted of 34 felonies. And 3 out of 3 will still vote for him in the general election.
The original headline is just them saying I wish there was something better, but we got what we got. Which is the same thing I am saying on the left.
Doesn't matter. Get out and vote.
They'll vote for him anyway.
Some will, but some will also just not feel as engaged and stay home.
Real question is, how large a percentage of potential Trump voters will be demotivated enough to stay home, vs how many potential Biden voters are being turned off by his age and ball-less stance on the war crimes in Gaza.
You get a president that does nothing to stop Isreal or a president who signs the bombs with an erection. Those are the choices. As always.
I really think Biden is secretly more popular with Republicans than individual Republicans let on. He hasn't spoken much on abortion and queer support (kind of like it belongs in the background unseen and then we will tolerate it mentality), he wants to lock down the US-Mexico border more, and is very Zionist. He's honestly a good fit for the Republicans before Trump "consolidated" the Republicans under a[n even] crazier branch of conservatism.
I think that's his "plan", whether it works or not we'll see.
The reality is, most "progressives", that are screaming about Gaza, etc. Are in deep blue states. Their votes don't matter in the electoral view. It's a total of like 3 states that are going to decide the presidency.
Which is one of many reasons our system sucks so bad...
It's definitely one of the more important reasons why our system is suffering. A minority of rural voters have way too much influence. How are we supposed to navigate the future with that kind of albatross around our necks?
If only youths consistently came out to vote.
Another way of writing that 33 percent prefer another politician is that 67 percent prefer Trump. Last I checked, 67 percent support is enough to secure the Republican nomination.
Again, another way of writing this is that 53 percent of Republican voters aged 18 to 34 years old support Trump. I'll double check my arithmetic, but even this seems to be enough to win primaries.
With a title like "One in three Republicans now think Donald Trump was wrong candidate choice," I would expect to see a poll which showed that fewer than "One in three Republicans" used to "think Donald Trump was wrong candidate choice." That seems like a straightforward way to make the point this article is trying to make. Yet none is provided. Instead we are treated to some general electorate polling showing some minor fluctuation and some republicans who were already critical of Trump continuing to be critical of Trump.
The centrist will to make the Republicans look better than they are is so powerful.
Those numbers are worringly low. I have been assuming that the vocal group, the ones taking to the streets with their little hats and grumpy faces, were a very verbal minority. I'd expect way more than 1/3 to prefer some other candidate. Not great.
I don't know why. These numbers are better than I expected. The GOP has become a cult like organization. Those usually don't tolerate non believers.
I'm pretty sure 'thinking' never got in the way of them voting for him before.
Something about laying in a bed you made yourself...
*peeing
Maybe, just fucking maybe... enough will attrition off to Libertarian to split the vote.
Not while the libertarian candidate is gay.
It's a fair point but - counterpoint - libertarians are famously contrarian.
Vote for biden and get trump going to jail for free!!!
Maybe, but 2/3 is a majority.
Which means 2 out of 3 will gleefully vote for him with visible metaphorical (?) erections; the 1 out of 3 will maybe metaphorically cover up their metaphorical erections with a pillow...
Listen, I don't like him any more than you do, but he's the only candidate who can beat Other Candidate, alright? If you don't want another four years of Disastrous Joe Brandon's Economy Killing Policies of Doom ruining our country with Woke, the only man who has consistently succeeded in Making America Great Again is the guy who won the primary.
They will be shamed into compliance by their MAGA neighbors, because if you're not voting for Trump then you must secretly support Biden. You need to prove that you aren't a soy transgender liberal pedophile or we won't invite you to the next wine cave fundraiser / good ole boy tailgate party / Epstein Island junket.
You're either with us or you're with the Terrorists.
The other two will threaten the first.
The first is married to one of the other two and will vote the way he does because Jesus.
The third is their offspring who has been raised on a steady diet of talk radio and fox news and knows exactly what is true and right and will vote republiQan accordingly.
How many had their choice made for them before they even had a chance to vote in a primary?
Nikki Haley was the last to drop out on March 6th, when there were still dozens of primaries to go.
I'd love to see a national primary. But people complain... But... but... it's not fair to small candidates who can't run a national campaign...
Yeah, if you can't run a national campaign, you have no business being President either.
If we're going to be proposing things that will never happen: Total public funding of elections, so everybody can run a national campaign if they get enough signatures.
That or we get a watery tart to lob a scimitar at someone.
But when all the choices are shit, go for the shittiest shit that ever shitted in shitstown.
meanwhile two of three republicans can still taste their colons.
when will these people pull their heads out of their asses?
Sounds like a lot until you consider the fact that 3/3 informed adult humans of sound mind absolutely despise him..
LOL they'll certainly try another 1/6, but this time the place will be crawling with plainclothes feds, dozens of snipers (visible; even more out of sight), swat, MRAPs, helicopters, etc etc. and it would be dumb to assume they haven't installed more cameras with audio everywhere
One guy with a mounted machine gun at the top of the capitol stairs should be enough of a deterrent I would think.
Only if he uses it. They'll need some people dressed up as black people and vegetarians rushing the position to trick him.
Surprise Pikachu 😱😱😱😱
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In March, the former president won enough primary races to secure the Republican nomination in the 2024 presidential election.
However, according to a survey of 1,003 Americans by Canadian polling firm Leger, Trump does not command the full support of his base and 33 percent of this demographic would have preferred another politician.
Newsweek contacted a representative for Trump by email outside of business hours to comment on this story.
A similar pattern emerged in other states and Joe Biden, the Democratic candidate for the election and the incumbent president, has too been hit with protest votes in his own primary races.
Meanwhile, Trump has now been found guilty on all 34 counts in his high-profile hush money trial concerning payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels.
Nevertheless, polls are still tight and when Trump and Biden face each other on November 5 in a rematch of the 2020 election, the verdict is expected to be close.
The original article contains 401 words, the summary contains 157 words. Saved 61%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I fully endorse Trump if it means it's sabotaging the GOP fascists from the inside lol
Who could've known that an extremist criminal as your leader might cause issues.
That's okay, 3/3 democrats think that Biden is the wrong choice, but here we are.