Replies

When you run someone that has tremendous appeal and BRINGS OUT VOTERS, wouldn’t that help in down-ballot races? It certainly did in 1980 when Reagan won the Senate and cut the huge Dem majority in the House by half.

That's a fair question. The answer is twofold: 1) Congress is much different now than it was in 1980, and 2) Trump's message is not Reagan's.

1) In 1980, the nation was still post-Watergate and Democrats were in complete control in Congress. They had a strong Senate majority, and a massive majority in the House. They also were defending an amazing 24 Senate seats (out of 34 that were up for election) that they'd won in the GOP massacre that was the 1974 (Watergate effect) Congressional elections.

That meant that an anti-incumbent/anti-establishment/"throw the bums out" message would benefit Republicans running for Congress, and hurt Democrats.

In 2016, that Congressional dynamic is exactly reversed. It is Republicans who control the House and Senate, and Republicans who have to defend 24 Senate seats. So in this election, an anti-incumbent/anti-establishment/"throw the bums out" message would hurt Republicans running for Congress. If you want evidence of that, simply read the comments of Trump supporters on FR raging against the "GOP-E", many of them saying that they hope those Republicans lose those seats. It at the least, don't care if they do. In the election of 1980, it was abundantly clear that we needed to send more Republicans to Congress if we wanted the Reagan Revolution to happen.

2) Reagan's candidacy, especially in 1976, was an insurgency to some extent, but it was never anti-GOP. It was simply an attempt to reorient the party in a more conservative direction, not destroy the brand itself. Again, read FR to see how many Trump supporters want to do exactly that. Reagan's strong support of the 11th Commandment is the exact opposite of the calls to "destroy the GOP-E".

Reagan also ran an openly ideological campaign. He ran on ideas to which any GOP candidate could ascribe, which created the potential for huge coattails.

In contrast, the arguments advanced by Trump and some of his supporters seemed designed to tear the GOP apart. Trump's generic anti-politician rhetoric inevitably will hurt GOP incumbents a lot more than it helps them. He's also gratuitously insulted a bunch of Republican politicians and essential crapped all over the 11th Commandment.

And as so many of his supporter have almost gleefully acknowledged, Trump is not running as a conservative, or even running an ideological campaign at all. So he and his supporters have made it impossible for the majority of GOP incumbents to hitch their wagon to him, because there's little to hitch to except "damn the politicians.". Which sentiment, for obvious reasons, does not help them get reelected.

In short, Reagan ran as a conservative Republican, repeatedly aligning himself with the party, refraining from nasty criticisms of other Republicans, and making the election a clear choice between two parties.

Coattails.

With Trump, the only time he even mentions the word "Republican" is when he's asked if he really is one. Other than that, he's basically blasting all politicians as being bought and sold.

Negative coattails.