One on Three
Donald Trump is taking on too many opponents.
During the second presidential debate, the moderators seemed to interrupt and correct Republican nominee Donald Trump more often than Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton — and Trump took notice. Frustrated over the lack of questions regarding Clinton’s private email server Trump asked moderator Anderson Cooper, “I’d like to know, Anderson, why aren’t you bringing up the e-mails? I’d like to know. Why aren’t you bringing…,” Cooper interjected, “We brought up the e-mails.” Unsatisfied, Trump fired back, “No, it hasn’t. It hasn’t. And it hasn’t been finished at all.” Cooper tried to shift to a town hall participant, “Ken Karpowicz has a question,” and Trump launched his final retort of this dispute, “It’s nice to — one on three.” In other words: Trump versus Clinton versus the moderators.
Trump may have a point. It is now a one-on-three race because Trump made it that way, but he didn’t have to do so.
Recently uncovered audio released by the Washington Post revealed Trump discussed women in the most indefensible terms back in 2005. The revelation has led to mass-condemnation from all political corners, and has prompted endorsement revocations and multiple calls from Republicans at all levels for Trump to withdraw from the race.
Trump responded defiantly, telling the Wall Street Journal there was “zero chance” he would withdraw from the race. Then at the second presidential debate, Trump went on the offensive against Hillary Clinton, shifted focus away from the leaked audio, and was able to claim victory at least among Republicans because the damaging comments did not consume the debate or his campaign.
Trump’s comments are indefensible, and given that we are now less than a month out from Election Day, many consider the tape to be a pre-emptive strike on Trump Tower, a blast from the past that is sure to end his chances to win the White House. To his credit, Trump is still standing even though recent polls look grim.
After the full-scale crisis prompted by the release of the 2005 audio, Trump emerged alive but wounded, only to adopt a strategy of one-on-three — Trump versus Hillary Clinton, Trump versus Bill Clinton, and Trump versus Paul Ryan. This strategy is a mistake.
Trump only has to defeat Hillary Clinton on November 8th, therefore talking on Bill Clinton’s past is not necessary. Trump brought with him to the second presidential debate four women who accuse Bill and Hillary Clinton of sexual assault and intimidation respectively. It was a move that was nothing short of stunning, meant to deal a psychological blow to both Clintons inside the debate hall. But was this a necessary move? It certainly was effective in getting the media to stop talking about the 2005 tape for a moment, but re-litigating Bill Clinton’s past actions will not be an effective way to shift focus away from Trump’s own words or increase his standing in the polls, which have worsened since the release of the audio.
Post-debate, Trump took on another unnecessary opponent: the Republican Speaker of the House Paul Ryan. After Trump’s own words were heard on a 2005 tape talking about women in an indefensible manner, several Republicans and many in Congress condemned the Republican nominee and some even revoked their endorsement. Notably absent from the list of House Republicans who revoked their endorsements of the GOP nominee is Paul Ryan himself. Ryan did however endorse the idea of maintaining distance from Trump, telling House members on a conference call the day after the debate, “you all need to do what’s best for you in your district,” according to Politico. Ryan also made clear he would not campaign with Trump. Paul Ryan’s mission is to protect the Republican majority in the House with a new sense of urgency thanks to the damaging Trump tape. Trump’s new mission is to degrade Paul Ryan. What is the goal of this strategy? The only likely outcome would be a phony loss of confidence in congressional Republicans that could cost the GOP their sizable majority. Perhaps it’s time for Trump to rethink his stance on Paul Ryan.
Paul Ryan is not a “weak and ineffective leader,” as Trump tweeted out. In fact, Ryan helped to successfully put a bill on the president’s desk to repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood. That success was made possible in January 2016 through the reconciliation process. Trump abhors the “all talk no action” politician, but Paul Ryan is anything but. Ryan’s goal was to establish a strong foundation in the House that the next Republican president could use to pass meaningful, conservative legislation, but Donald Trump wants to do it his way. In another tweet among those that were aimed against Ryan, Trump seemed liberated writing, “It is so nice that the shackles have been taken off me and I can now fight for America the way I want to.” Imagine what a Trump-Ryan partnership could accomplish if both leaders put their differences aside. That’s the potential of a united Republican Party.
The bottom line is that Donald Trump has voluntarily taken on two additional opponents in this election, which is unnecessary. Trump’s one-on-three strategy is an extra burden the GOP nominee can’t really afford to bear at this stage in the campaign. Trump should reconsider his campaign’s message to focus more on making America safe and prosperous again for all and less on Bill Clinton’s past. Trump should also recognize the impact of his own words on congressional races across the country and accept the “do what you have to do to win” reality facing many Republicans in their home districts. Trump only has to focus on Hillary Clinton: her failed policies, her bad judgment, her shady connections to her family foundation, and her Wall Street speeches. By staying on-message and focusing on Hillary Clinton’s widespread unpopularity, Trump could begin to get back on the right course. If there is one person who does benefit from Trump’s one-on-three strategy, however, it’s Hillary Clinton. No more distractions are needed. One-on-three is not a realistic strategy.
