Could Axelrod’s 2009 Instinct Have Been Right?

Even some of Donald Trump’s own voters were shocked to see he summarily demolished part of the White House, surprising many Democrats who had convinced themselves Trump is teflon and people don’t care about his corruption or vulgarity. In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:

* The long history of politicians not doing stuff like this, fearing political backlash;

* Whether this episode suggests swing voters can be moved by symbols and appeals to American greatness, or whether this, too, is a distraction from the issues that really matter;

* What other corruption scandals Democrats might drag into the partisan fray, now that the middle of the country is wising up to Trump’s let-them-eat-cake greed, at the expense of normal citizens.

Then, for paid subscribers, if Trump’s recent political troubles stem from shocking images of the East Wing reduced to rubble, what else in politics is an artifact of media effects? Are Democrats lucky that Trump is so venal and lawless, because Americans would otherwise be highly supportive of how he governs? Or does he mostly get a pass on corruption (because Democrats want to focus on issues) while Republicans invest billions of dollars to define Democrats as out-of-touch wackos?

Further reading:

* Brian on a Democratic-friendly way to make Trump pay for his corruption, now that it’s breaking through.

* Matt: It’s all about policy, including (maybe particularly?) immigration.

* A nerd-off between Biden alums who think their biggest mistake was not creating enough winning ideological conflict and outside strategists who think Democrats earned their toxic unpopularity fair and square.