Trump and those on his campaign believe his inability to free-associate before tens of thousands of adoring fans is the principle reason he seems helpless to reverse his poll slide against Joe Biden. Strangely, a lot of pundits seem to concur. But I’m not convinced. The ratings for Trump’s pre-pandemic rallies were already on the wain; they drew the usual regular crowd but (it seems to me at least) they no longer broke through the daily noise and shifted the narrative in a way favorable to the president. I think most of the non-conservative media had ceased to cover them live. The Tulsa rally’s paltry attendance was undeniably an embarrassment, but even if he’d packed the place, what would he have talked about that might have moved the needle? He still would have gone on and on about walking down the ramp (give him a break, there was no tread on his soles!) and drinking his water like a big boy.
I think the chief difference the lack of rallies is making is providing Republicans an excuse for their candidate’s unpopularity, rather than the candidate himself. But maybe I’m wrong. Would the old barnstorming Trump be higher in the polls than he is now?
This strikes me more of an opinion response, since it’s highly speculative, but I do think it is a factor, even if I don’t think it’s a major one in terms of his slide in the polls. Like any live event, at a rally you build a sense of community, of being surrounded by like minded folk, and exclusivity - you are part of a chosen crowd. The comparisons to a religious experience have been done, so I won’t do it myself in detail. Seeing 5k or 10k or more people around you supporting the same person (or band, or church, etc) reinforces your belief, enjoyment, and sense of superiority. Which in turn, makes you less likely to show your disapproval for the source of your faith.
So yeah, I think there is a drop in the numbers linked to a lack of rallies, he’s not able to give his supporters a “hit” of that old community spirit - but it’s not causing the double-digit losses in the polls. I believe the loss is that when everything is normal, the incumbent has the advantage - even if you don’t approve, you don’t want to rock the boat and make it worse. When the situation is, pardon my language, crappy, the incumbent is going to get hit with the responsibility, even if he denies it. Even with all the claims of “all is well” from the GOP and the folks at FOX, people get daily reminders that they aren’t.
The rallies wouldn’t really make much of a difference, no. The fact that he could hold them would.
Trump supporters love his rallies when things are largely pretty good for them and they can afford to focus on the culture war, which he is adept at stirring emotions for. But in the real world when things are shitty and there’s a deadly pandemic, rallies aren’t going to move the needle.
If there weren’t a deadly pandemic going on, would Trump be holding rallies, and also be doing better in the polls? Yes. But the reason is the pandemic, not the rallies.
Bernie was able to hold rallies. He drew huge crowds. Where did that get him?
The rallies are for Trump, not for the voters and not for the polls. They keep him in a relatively good mood, and a happy trump is a Trump who can be manipulated by his handlers.
The longer he goes without a rally, the less manageable he becomes, the more ludicrous stuff he says, the more the polls suffer.
When Trump has rallies he also says ludicrous stuff.
I would think the general public have made up their minds by now. Barring serious change in the situation of the nation, likely not too many will change their mind one way or another. What rallies could do is energize his supporters to get out and vote, despite what the lamestream fake news polls tell them. OTOH, if he gets too much off the rails and says stupid (sorry, “bigly stupider”) things, that may energize even more of the other side to vote.
“You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time…”
The rallies make Trump happy, give him a chance to capture headlines, gives an oversized voice to his attacks on others and are great for data collection from his supporters.
I don’t know if they were turn anything around but they are a positive for him so I don’t doubt that he’s hurting for not having them.
I think the rallies build voter enthusiasm, so they would be more likely to go the polls. Trump seemed to overperform in 2016, and the rallies might have been one of the reasons for that. The rallies do not improve his poll numbers, and they only change minds in one way: from vaguely supporting Trump (but not bothering to vote) to supporting Trump (and turning out to vote).
This is a case of actions have consequences. Trump’s actions in “fighting” the coronavirus created a situation where you can’t hold rallies, which are now hurting him. Naturally he will not blame himself for this, he will blame his former campaign manager instead.
Bernie voters don’t vote. I really don’t understand why young people vote in such small numbers. (It’s not just an American phenomenon, either. Quebec didn’t separate, and the UK did separate, because young people didn’t participate in referenda, both of which were close.) Trump voters do vote, or at least they did in 2016.