Donald Trump’s plan to bar Muslim entry into the United States in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino provoked sharp reactions from all quarters. Republican establishment-types immediately distanced themselves from Trump, with Jeb Bush notably calling the frontrunner “unhinged.” They joined Democrats in making statements to the effect that Trump’s plan is against everything we hold dear as Americans.
For those on the Left, there was an additional reaction: glee. While just as repulsed by his remarks, in them they saw opportunity, specifically as a way to hit Republicans. The strategy is a familiar one in modern politics: get your opponents on record supporting fringe positions, then attack. They saw Trump’s comments as a gift – and they intended to use it right away.
Just yesterday, Thom Tillis was savaged on social media for voting against a non-binding resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that the United States does not use religious tests for immigrants. The resolution was tacked on to an unrelated bill relating to nuclear terrorism and was the work of Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vermont), who no doubt wanted to put Republicans on the spot. Tillis said he voted against the bill on procedural grounds.
Tillis wasn’t the only Tar Heel politician to be subject to the “tarred by Trump” strategy. NC Policy Watch’s Rob Schofield called on Governor Pat McCrory to “disavow and sever” all ties with the Rev. Franklin Graham. Graham made news for supporting Trump’s proposal, even boasting that he wanted a moratorium on Muslims long before Trump ever entered the picture. McCrory is unlikely to take the bait and throw an evangelical leader under the bus, but that’s OK: progressives can then use that against him.
Implicit in this strategy is the conviction that Americans by and large share progressives’ enthusiasm for mass Islamic immigration. Because regardless of the efforts of some to reframe it as a question of religious liberty, essentially Islamic immigration is the topic of discussion. And the few surveys we have on this issue show that Trump’s position is far from being fringe. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 46% of Americans favor a temporary ban on Muslim immigration, with 42% opposed. Other polls show more opposition – CBS finds 36% in support with 58% in opposition. MSBNC also did a poll (presumably online and therefore suspect) on whether Trump “went too far” with his statements. Every demographic group said no, including 96% of African Americans.
If anything, I would imagine these polls, at least the telephone ones, underestimate the “anti-Muslim” vote, similar to when polls would underestimate opposition to gay marriage. Voters know the politically correct and incorrect responses, and this changes the way they answer the question. Many respondents who take the “incorrect” position will land in the undecided category.
The bottom line is that Democrats – and many of Trump’s hapless Republican opponents – should tread carefully when it comes to this issue. Far from making their GOP foes toxic, they could be throwing them into Trump’s briar patch. Heading into 2016, the chief concern for Americans is that they be kept safe from terrorism. To dismiss their concerns and their reactions to it would be folly. At this time, they would prefer their politicians be too tough than too soft. And my prediction is that if the current climate continues – or escalates – appeals to “values” and “tolerance” will be losing tactics.
John Wynne is the “conservative voice” at PoliticsNC, where he also provides polling analysis and commentary on legislative campaigns. When not writing about politics, he enjoys gardening and listening to opera. Contact: johncwynne@gmail.com.
I am fed up with the broad assumptions, such as “progressives’ enthusiasm for mass Islamic immigration.” Support for rational and compassionate immigration, and for allowing more immigration for those fleeing war, is to me an American value. Sorry you and so many others don’t share it. As for Trump, he and his supporters help ISIS when they support his proclamation that all Muslims should be barred for entering the US — even for a short time.
The discovery of IS members having used the Moslem “refugee” mass immigration in the EU to enter there, and the ISIS videos bragging that they use such immigration measures to go into Western countries proves that any fear of further immigration of Muslims is far from irrational.
Trump and his supporters are the only ones not helping Islamic S. Islam means “submit” which is exactly what you are doing when you submit to the claim, sponsored and promulgated by Islamic supporters of terrorists, that allowing more immigration from countries where there are many ISLAMIC S. supporters is “an American Value.”
Your comment simply illustrates why “progressives’ enthusiasm for mass Islamic immigration” is a truth.
“Those who would give up freedom in exchange for security deserve neither.” -Ben Franklin. Tell you what buddy, you keep fearing everything and I’m gonna hold out hope over the basic goodness of most people. We’ll see who has a better life in the end.
I don’t understand all the hoopla about Donald Trump’s racist remarks or the need for mainstream Republicans to try to disassociate him from their party. Trump is simply stating out loud what Republicans have promoted since the 1980s. While most Republicans would never say, “We don’t want African Americans to vote,” their actions in passing legislation that is designed to decrease minority voting (gerrymandering, photo IDs, decreased early voting days, elimination of Sunday voting, etc.) are clearly racist. Trump is their ultimate creation and he appeals to many Republicans who have a regular diet of extremist political drivel from Fox News and other right wing media outlets. It’s too late to disown their crazy uncle now. At least Trump doesn’t speak out of both sides of his mouth. He’s a racist xenophobic blow hard and proud of it. It just doesn’t sound so innocuous when he says it out loud.
Exactly right, Dwight. It why all the leading figures in the GOP — who nowadays are uber-conservatives or at least genuflecting at the neo-con altar — keep saying they’ll support whoever their nominee is and why they won’t say that Trump’s xenophobic remarks disqualify him as a candidate. They are essentially winking and nodding at his statements.
Xenophobic means an irrational fear of foreigners in general.
Therefore another of your words that does not apply.
It is hardly irrational to fear that Islamic State members wish to kill Americans, since they loudly proclaim that themselves.
The discovery of IS members having used the Moslem “refugee” mass immigration in the EU to enter there, and the ISIS videos bragging that they use such immigration measures to go into Western countries proves that any fear of further immigration of Muslims is far from irrational.
Many Americans are more angry than fearful about the Islamophilia and Shariaphilia of the Democrats and their donors.
It is clear that the irrational ones are those deniers that there is a problem after Paris attack and SanBernadino attack.
Islamoterrordeniers.
Misoamerican, islamophilliac, shariaphilliac, islamoterrordeniers= progressives
No one is winking and nodding about their agreement with Trump. We are cheering out loud.
Well, keep on cheering to another loss in the POTUS race, and the complete breakdown of your parasitic host —- the GOP.
There is no racist comment in Trump’s call for a pause on immigration. People of that area are not of a race, but of many races. Their religion includes a required form of government incompatible with that in the USA.
Liberals think they can use McCrory’s support of Franklin Graham against the Governor? Oh, that would be a really effective strategy in North Carolina—for McCrory.
What Americans need to do is wake-up and start questioning the reliability of their corporate news sources, especially as the news they are being told is more accurately termed sensationalism. You are guilty of that very thing right here by stating: “the chief concern for Americans is that they be kept safe from terrorism.” Says who, the mainstream conservative zealot media? Every supposed terrorist attack in this country to date has been broadcast as such to the general public without the benefit of a thorough, professional investigation. Anyone fact checking alternative news sources will find that police at the San Bernardino crime scene kept witness from talking to reporters, with many of those witnesses claiming there were three ‘tall white men in black khaki pants, black shirts, black ski masks and brown boots that entered the building and opened fire in a very professionally trained manner. Furthermore, we are again treated to the typical US. terrorist attack coincidence: there just happened to be an anti-terrorism drill taking place that day in San Bernardino not far from the clinic where the shooting took place – that now makes it an improbable three for three terrorists attacks in the US. since the advent of the GWOT – Sandy Hook being a non-Islamic terrorist massacre. Sensationalized terrorism and fear shouted repeatedly by every major news network; where has this very thing happened before? does 1930’s Germany ring a bell?
Only a callous and American-principle-deficient Republican could view “appeals to values and tolerance as losing tactics.”
And, please, stop with the hyperbole. Progressives do not have “enthusiasm for mass Islamic immigration.” They simply still believe in something that you and your GOP friends apparently do not, i.e., that the Constitution guarantees no religious testing for becoming an American, or for visiting or settling in this country.
Could you kindly quote the passage of the Constitution that guarantees any right to any non citizen of the US?
The 1st Amendment sets forth a standard of treatment and behavior that is not contingent on the citizenship of an individual.
Amendment XIV
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Thanks, Troy. But as you might guess, those words don’t mean a thing to a Trump supporter. To him/her, US constitutional rights and basic humanitarianism need not be extended to certain ethnic groups and races
Oh I know. Republicans generally only take due notice of the Constitution when it is politically expedient to do so.
Reading the other posts from our newest voice of conservative balance and reason one gets the feeling that, well, the antithesis to “no child left behind” might not be all bad.