The fact that Donald Trump remains firmly in contention to be the Republican presidential nominee in 2016 is dominating American media; concerning political leaders; keeping policy wonks, commentators and pollsters engaged; and bemusing those watching from outside the United States. All this has taken attention away from the other half of the political equation – the Democrats' candidates.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Despite Trump's dominance, there is huge fluidity, uncertainty and concern about who will emerge from a large group of Republican candidates. In contrast, there is a striking coalescence towards an early consensus on the Democrat's candidate. In a courteous and respectful campaign dominated by just two candidates, former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders, Clinton has consistently been seen as the party's nominee.
Recent national polling of potential Republican voters shows Trump has solidified his front-runner status, with only Senator Ted Cruz now a likely threat, but in these polls Trump never has more than one-third of the vote. In contrast, Clinton leads Sanders among Democrat-leaning voters by 30 percentage points with 60 per cent of the vote. In hypothetical match-ups, Clinton beats every Republican candidate. An aggregate of recent polls has Clinton beating Trump by 3.3 percentage points.
To date the major focus of the Republican candidates – when they are not denigrating each other – has been President Obama rather than their future opponent. They have worked hard to portray the Obama presidency as an unmitigated disaster, preferring to use this as a rationale for electing a Republican president rather than putting forward their own agendas or dissecting the raft of policies that Clinton has already announced.
Clinton used to dismiss Trump with asides, but since his announced plan to ban Muslins from entering the US, she has delivered direct criticisms, saying that his proposal was shameful and dangerous and calling him out for trafficking in prejudice and paranoia. However, she and her campaign have recognised that Trump has effectively tapped into heightened feelings of fear and insecurity and they have struggled to find an adequate response for those potential Clinton voters who agree with Trump's pronouncements on terrorism and keeping the US safe.
Polls show that Clinton is seen as better able to handle foreign policy and the responsibilities of being commander-in-chief. She is as well qualified in these areas as any presidential candidate in recent times, while it's hard to see any of her opponents, including Trump, effectively negotiating with OPEC, China, Iran and IS. Her game plan is to tie the entire Republican Party to Trump's incendiary remarks on terrorism, Muslims and immigration.
On the domestic front, Clinton really only has to make two basic arguments: that things have gotten so much better over the seven years of the Obama presidency – reductions in unemployment, child poverty and the budget deficit, increases in the number of people with health insurance, and efforts to reduce carbon emissions – and that a Republican president will erode all these gains and more, including having a long-lasting impact on the make-up of the Supreme Court.
Conservative policies and pronouncements are increasingly driven by the cultural and racial resentments of older white males in the south and the outrage confected by segments of the mainstream and social media. Trump is adept at playing to these constituencies; he has been described as "conservative resentment and spectacle made flesh". His efforts and those of his fellow candidates are said to have the GOP "on the cusp of a nervous breakdown".
Clinton's biggest problem is that she is not universally liked. For women her own age, her candidacy is seen as the apex of their generation's aspirations, but her candidacy has not yet galvanised younger women. Still, the growing list of insults and outrageous comments from her opponents will help to deliver her not just the women's vote, but also that of gays, African-Americans, Hispanics, and other minority groups.
By the end of March next year, the likely Republican nominee will emerge from the ranks of what has been described as "the most dishonest, bumbling and underqualified pack of presidential candidates in history". Those Democrat and independent voters who are not enamoured of Clinton must then confront their choices.
Senior Republican political consultant Karl Rove has seen the future. In an editorial last week, he warned Republicans that nominating Trump could be a death wish for the party. He knows that Trump would be a dream candidate for the Democrats and stated that Trump would get "creamed" in a match-up with Clinton.
It's hard to see how any other Republican candidate, including an outsider like Mitt Romney, could escape the same fate. The one faint hope may be a "draft Paul Ryan" (currently speaker of the House of Representatives, and Mitt Romney's pick for vice-president in 2012) campaign. Now that would give Clinton a candidate to run against!
Dr Lesley Russell is an adjunct associate professor at the Menzies Centre for Health Policy at the University of Sydney.
