The Briefing, Vol. XIII, Issue 15
April 14, 2025
This week:
- Trump has flipped the “empathy” numbers on Democrats
- White House needs to figure out what tariffs are trying to accomplish
- Paxton vs. Cornyn could be the Right’s big fight of 2026
Outlook
Polling flip: When most people think of President Trump, “empathy” is probably not the first word that comes to mind. Yet he is changing the way people view his party. For decades, Democrats have led on this measure in polling, yet Trump appears to have successfully hijacked it.
CNN’s Harry Enten received a lot of attention for pointing this out last week. The poll question in particular was about which party “cares more for needs of people like you.” Democrats have led in this metric for nearly all of modern polling history. For example, even in 1994 — the Republican Party’s breakthrough election in the modern era, in which they seized control of both houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years — Republicans trailed by 19 points in Associated Press polling. Think back to former President Bill Clinton’s famous “I feel your pain” campaign theme.
In 2005, Democrats led on this question by 23 points, despite four years of George W. Bush’s “compassionate conservatism.”
In 2017, at the beginning of the first Trump administration, the Democrats’ lead on this measure ebbed somewhat, to 13 points.
But this month, the two parties find themselves tied on this “empathy” metric, according to a new survey by Quinnipiac University. An additional wrinkle here is that this appears to be entirely a function of non-college voters changing their minds about the parties’ levels of empathy. Whereas voters with college degrees have not shifted their opinions at all since 2017 — they still view Democrats as more empathetic by precisely the same 18 points — non-college voters (of all races) view Republicans as more empathetic by nine points, a 16-point swing away from Democrats over eight years.
Tariff-ying confusion: Even so, not all is rosy in Trumpland. The same poll, it should be noted, has a rather large majority (55 percent) disapproving of Trump’s trade policy, versus just 39 percent approving. This comes immediately after the on-again-off-again imposition of tariffs against imports from a large number of trading partners, including Canada and Mexico, and a concurrent plunge in the stock market.
With all the talk of a potential recession, there are a few issues that need to be sorted out and quickly, because if unaddressed it could derail Trump’s presidency, much like inflation due partly caused by former President Joe Biden’s own policy choices arguably derailed his presidency.
The most even-handed and cogent critique of the Trump policy has been that its goals are unclear and potentially inconsistent.
Is the aim to force manufacturers to come back to to the U.S. and set up factories? If so, then why is Trump meeting with other countries to negotiate lower reciprocal tariffs? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose? Also, if that is the goal, then why are the tariffs with most countries (China excluded) being paused for 90 days? After all, the potential that tariffs will be lower later on creates too much uncertainty for companies to start making such moves.
On the other hand, is the goal to make other countries treat American goods more fairly by eliminating unequal tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers (regulations designed unfairly to exclude American products)? This goal seems incompatible with the other one. Yet it makes more sense, given Trump’s stated willingness to negotiate bilaterally with multiple countries.
Or, to offer another alternative, is the goal to raise massive amounts of revenue with the tariffs, even to the point of being able to abolish the income tax? If so, that goal is not compatible with either of the other two goals outlined above. If manufacturers relocate to the U.S. to avoid the tariffs, or if Trump negotiates a more open reciprocal trade policy with other countries, then of course there will be far less revenue from the tariffs.
A fourth possible explanation inconsistent with the other three is that the tariffs are actually just camouflage from behind which Trump is taking a calculated strike at China’s communist regime just when China is at its weakest economically. This would suggest an entirely different approach to bilateral trade talks with other countries.
In the end, the administration can probably sell its policy politically, but it will need to get its story straight. To date, several major players in Trump-world have not been on the same page. It may be that this question is already being resolved, as the most protectionist of the Trump advisors, Peter Navarro, is reportedly being sidelined (he denies it, of course) in favor of other spokesmen for the policy and negotiators.
Governor 2024
Colorado: Sen. Michael Bennet (D) announced last week that he is running for governor. This puts him on an apparent collision course with Attorney General Phil Weiser (D).
Bennet has problems with his party’s progressive base, but they have been unsuccessful in stopping him ever since former state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff’s (D) first attempt to primary him in 2010.
Eight years ago, the candidate whom Weiser later defeated to win his current job warned, “We will become California.” This is pretty much happening now in the Centennial State. Democratic legislators have just recently banned most firearms and are trying to make “misgendering,” “mispronouning” and “deadnaming” of one’s own children into forms of child abuse and thus grounds for losing custody.
As the Centennial State’s legislature gets increasingly radical and its economic and population metrics start to resemble those of heretofore less well-governed Blue States like New York, Illinois, and California, there’s always the slight chance that the state Republican Party can stage some sort of comeback, probably by drawing in large numbers of Hispanic voters. But for now, the Democratic nominee must be heavily favored, whoever it ends up being. The most prominent Republicans currently declared for this race are state legislators — state Sen. Mark Baisley (R) and state Rep. Scott Bottoms (R).
Michigan: Rep. John James (R) will be giving up his swingy House seat based in Macomb County to run for governor. This a clear sign that he feels more confidence about what will be one of the strangest such races in America next year than the relatively meager existing polling would suggest.
With Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan running as an independent candidiate, the most likely outcome is that this will shape up as a three-way race between him, James, and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson (D). It should be noted that neither major-party primary has been cleared, however. Benson still faces Lt. Gov. Garlin Gilchrist (D), if not others as well. James will face state Senate Republican Leader Aric Nesbitt (R).
Senate 2024
Michigan: Former House intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers (R), having only narrowly missed in the 2024 Senate race in what turned out to be a favorable national environment, is announcing this evening that he will take another shot at an open-seat race whose prospects will likely depend on Trump’s performance in office and public perceptions of local Democrats such as likely gubernatorial nominee Jocelyn Benson and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (speaking of whom, yikes).
On the one hand, Michigan has not elected a Republican senator since Spence Abraham won in 1994. On the other hand, it has now voted twice for a Republican presidential candidate in eight years. Back on the one hand again, Rogers might have been the least Trumpy Republican in a competitive race in 2024.
Trump may well back Rogers anyway if he ends up in a contested primary, but the main reason he did so in 2024 was probably that two of his opponents in the Republican primary had voted for his impeachment while serving in the U.S. House.
New Hampshire: This was a big miss for Republicans. Former Gov. Chris Sununu (R) has taken himself out of the running for the open U.S. Senate seat being vacated by incumbent Jeanne Shaheen (D).
Sununu’s exit leaves the bench of prominent statewide Republican candidates somewhat depleted. Gov. Kelly Ayotte (R) already has a job and faces re-election in two years. Former Trump aide Corey Lewandowski has been mentioned, as has former Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.), who carpetbagged it up to the Granite State only to come up short against Shaheen in 2014.
Rep. Chris Pappas (D) is the strongest Democrat in the race so far.
Texas: Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), is flying high after beating three raps that at one point loomed over his political career. He overcame an attempted impeachment by Democrats and hostile Republicans in the state legislature; a federal investigation for securities fraud (which he settled without admitting wrongdoing); and a federal corruption investigation, which the Biden administration chose to drop quietly late last year.
Now Paxton has officially announced he is challenging Sen. John Cornyn (R) in a primary that is coming up relatively soon — March 5, 2026, with a potential runoff May 3 of next year. Paxton leads the incumbent in all three of the polls taken so far and could even amass enough support to avoid a runoff. Assuming Cornyn does not bow out (and that Trump does not appoint Cornyn to some position), this will probably be the most anticipated Republican primary clash in America.
On the Democratic side, former football player and U.S. Rep. Colin Allred (D) is talking about running again. He lost to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) last year by 8.5 percentage points.
