Henry Ford said, “Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it.” This may also explain why many speak without thinking.
This brings me to Donald Trump.
I don’t think he’ll win the Republican nomination—But he’s leading in the polls!
I know, but early poll numbers remind me of the “Bradley Effect.”
Tom Bradley, Black Democratic candidate for governor of California in 1982, had a huge poll lead over his White opponent, exit polls on Election Day projected Bradley as the winner, but Bradley lost.
The inaccuracy of the polls was based on what analysts called a social desirability bias.
This suggested people felt pressured by “political correctness” to provide publicly acceptable answers to poll questions instead of their actual preference.
(The winning strategist argued the “Bradley Effect” was an excuse for a flawed poll, but it made me wonder if the only accuracy of public opinion polls were their margin of error.)
I doubt if Trump’s affect on polltakers is from a social desire to be favorable. His support most likely stems from social discontent with candidates as usual, especially candidates with familiar last names. If Trump was in the Democratic primary the same social discontent would make his early poll numbers competitive with Clinton’s.
But its unlikely polltaker’s discontent will actually transfer into primary votes.
The same ABC/Washington Post poll that indicated Trump’s lead also suggested many Republicans feel Trump does not reflect the core values of the Republican Party, and “31 percent of Republicans said they would not consider voting for Trump if he was the party’s nominee—a large group to lose on his own side.” (And his lead in a 16 candidate primary field still left a 76 percent preference for others.)
The ABC/Washington Post poll had another standout statistic. Trump was backed by 38 percent of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents that feel immigrants, overall, mainly weaken the United States. These numbers explain why Trump’s first detailed policy plan is about immigration reform.
Trump plans to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it, he wants mandatory return of all criminal aliens, and everything else said before by a complaining caller to conservative talk radio.
But Trump also demands an end to birthright citizenship.
Trump’s plan calls for amending the constitution to alter the first sentence of the fourteenth amendment. (All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.) The fourteenth amendment was landmark legislation passed by the Republicans to establish citizenship for former slaves and now Trump wants to alter it to restrict citizenship for another minority group, which is a part of a larger demographic that can swing the presidential election either way. (And this idea doesn’t tilt it toward the GOP.)
But is birthright citizenship the only aspect of the fourteenth amendment Trump wants to tamper with? What about corporate personhood? U.S. courts have long declared under the fourteenth amendment corporations have the same legal rights and responsibilities as an individual. But in 2010 the Supreme Court ruled corporations have the right to make political expenditures under the first amendment and ever since many have called for a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood.
So does the Trump campaign advocate amending the constitution to abolish birthright citizenship and corporate personhood or just birthright citizenship? And if it’s just birthright citizenship then the Trump campaign hasn’t considered the totality of the fourteenth amendment and they didn’t engage in what Henry Ford called the hardest work there is.
(J. Pharoah Doss is a contributor to the New Pittsburgh Courier. He blogs at jpharoahdoss@blogspot.com)
About Post Author
