Why GOP Hopefuls Are on the Wrong Side of Public Opinion—About Everything

Unlike in their first debate in August, Republican presidential hopefuls were forced Wednesday night to address issues of substance in between repeated bouts of shouting over one another. The Fox and Univision debate moderators—seemingly operating under orders to make the GOP look less detached from reality—repeatedly gave the seven candidates on stage the opportunity to distance themselves from the most toxic Republican policy positions out there. Instead, the contenders conducted a perversely mesmerizing master class in how to position themselves on the wrong side of public opinion on nearly every issue that came up.

It started early and never let up. The hosts—Dana Perino of Fox News, Stuart Varney of Fox Business, and Ilia Calderón of Univision, ostensibly the good cops—first presented the autoworkers’ strike, an issue that is front and center in the news right now, as a way for the candidates to at least pay lip service to blue-collar laborers. Yet instead of embracing the striking United Auto Workers, or even lighting into self-dealing executives who keep giving themselves raises while stiffing their employees, the candidates railed against unions and electric vehicles and insisted that the strikers would have better luck taking their case directly to President Joe Biden. “Go picket in front of the White House,” said biotech provocateur Vivek Ramaswamy. American adults support the union 53 percent to 22 percent who oppose it, according to Morning Consult.

Shortly thereafter, Ramaswamy went on an unhinged riff about how he and no one else understands how the 14^th Amendment doesn’t actually confer birthright citizenship on people born on American soil. The moderators turned to South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott and invited him to disagree—like Kevin Costner’s catcher telling the batter what kind of pitch is coming from Tim Robbins in Bull Durham. Scott instead said that he agrees with Ramaswamy substantively and that his only concern is that the Supreme Court would not uphold eviscerating the 14^th Amendment. A June YouGov/Economist poll showed that just a quarter of respondents support ending birthright citizenship. No one on stage stuck up for it.

The debate took place at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, and during the section on immigration and border security, moderators showed a well-known clip of the Gipper supporting amnesty for undocumented immigrants and asked whether candidates would support a path to citizenship for Dreamers—children of undocumented immigrants who have spent their whole lives in America. Former Vice President Mike Pence ostentatiously dodged the question, and none of the other six candidates chimed in to say they would fight for the Dreamers. That might seem unsurprising in today’s Republican Party, but more than 70 percent of voters say they support a path to citizenship for those who were brought to the United States undocumented as children—even Trump supporters.

Shockingly for a debate hosted by Fox, the impending child care apocalypse caused by pandemic-era funding expiring came up, and no one could bring themselves to unambiguously support aid for child care centers. At one point a perplexed North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum tried to talk about his child care record in North Dakota. “You asked about child care,” he said, “and nobody answered the question.” Seventy-nine percent of Americans support capping child care costs and other measures meant to address the crisis, according to Data for Progress. Zero percent of the Republicans debating seemed to have any interest in preventing the closure of an estimated 70,000 child care facilities.

Calderón at one point tried fruitlessly to raise the issue of mass shootings, throwing a softball question at Burgum. “We have to get back to the family,” Burgum said, bragging inexplicably that North Dakota is the “most military-friendly state in the country.” No one else said a word about it until Pence advanced his proposal of an “expedited federal death penalty” for mass shooters. The percentage of Americans who support stricter gun laws is close to 30-year highs, according to Gallup, and the death penalty is sporting its smallest public opinion majority since 1972.

Pence was asked if he would repeal Obamacare, and he basically said he would return all health spending to the states. So yes, he would. Kaiser Family Foundation polling recently showed that 59 percent of Americans support the Affordable Care Act. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, mostly consigned to the sidelines again, was asked directly about Floridians without health insurance and blamed unrelated price increases. Burgum, extremely puzzlingly, pointed the finger at software used by health care workers for a decline in medical productivity.

Calderón raised the issue of rising hate crimes against LGTBQ+ people amid a pervasive climate of right-wing fearmongering and persecution and asked Pence what he would do about it. Pence said, halfheartedly, that “I’ll stand up for the civil liberties and safety of every American” before pivoting with maximum cringe to note that he’s been sleeping with a teacher for 38 years—a needless response to former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie’s gross bed-based jab at (teacher) Jill Biden’s influence on her husband—and proposing to ban all gender-affirming care in the United States. Supermajorities of Americans support pro-LGBTQ+ policies like same-sex marriage and oppose discrimination against gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals.

It wasn’t all bad for Republicans. They took their shots at inflation and spending, promised to repeal laws that don’t exist like the Green New Deal, and trotted out 2020-era hallucinations like the idea that Joe Biden is hiding in his “basement.” There were puns galore, including Christie’s claim that skipping the debates means that Trump should be known as “Donald Duck.” Womp womp. Perhaps most entertainingly, the other candidates successfully beat up on the utterly unbearable Ramaswamy.

And none of this is exactly unprecedented. Courting primary voters sometimes means taking unpopular positions that you have to massage or walk back before the general election, because voters who consistently turn out for their party’s primaries tend to be somewhat more ideologically extreme and much more partisan than November voters. But what we saw Wednesday night was a political party so confident in its systemic advantages in the U.S. political system that it can brazenly disregard public opinion, bash people and groups with broad public sympathy—like teachers, immigrants, and transgender individuals—and win anyway.

Maybe they’re right, but adapting party orthodoxy to changing public views would still be a much easier path to power.