Hill and Ciruli: President Trump’s First 100 Days

On May 1, Dean Christopher Hill and pollster Floyd Ciruli will present an analysis of President Donald Trump’s first 100 days at the University of Denver’s Korbel School.

The White House’s successes, failures, the polling results and where American foreign policy is headed are the topics. The White House may deny the historical standard is important, but they are rushing to put points up the final week. But, most importantly, it is useful to pause after the intense 14 weeks of the Trump administration and examine what’s been accomplished and what’s next. Hill and Ciruli will especially focus on foreign policy and what can be expected in Europe, the Middle East and the Pacific.

Will it be the best 100 days in history or the worst, is the White House a well-oiled machine or chaos center, and is the foreign policy unpredictable or incoherent?

Register for the event here

Trump Trying to Put Points on the Board

Donald Trump, who lives for ratings and is hypersensitive about crowd size, claims he’s no longer interested in the “first 100-day” standard. In fact, the White House has been obsessed about it for weeks, holding branding meetings and claiming that “no administration has accomplished more in the first 90 days.” Most recently, President Trump has made clear he needs “points on the board” by April 29 and is trying to revive health care.

For the Korbel School and Crossley Center, the historical standard is a useful measure. On May 1, join them for an assessment of Trump’s first 100 days.

Read:
Politico:  Trumpscoffs at 100-day mark as ‘ridiculous standard’
CNBC: Trump calls first 100 days as ‘ridiculous standard’ –even though he set it as a standard

Will it be the best 100 days in history or the worst, is the White House a well-oiled machine or chaos center, and is the foreign policy unpredictable or incoherent?

French Elections: Four Top Candidates in Margin of Error

Less than one week out, four candidates in the French election (April 23) are within the margin of error of making the first round. Since early March, the two frontrunners have been Marine Le Pen (22%) and Emmanuel Macron (23%). They remain locked in a tight race (see French Election-First Round Tie, April 10, 2017).

But ex-communist, nationalist candidate (both anti-German and anti-EU), Jean-Luc Mélenchon, has moved into a tie for third with François Fillon, the right of center candidate burdened with an unfolding family patronage scandal. Both are only four points behind the frontrunners. More than 30 percent of the electorate may not vote or was undecided on April 19, two days before published polling must cease.

Two weeks after the Sunday vote, May 7, a runoff will take place with most polls showing that in hypothetical face-off Le Pen loses to whoever joins her after the first round.

ABC News Interview with Dean Hill on North Korea

Christopher Hill, dean of Josef Korbel School of International Studies at DU and former U.S. ambassador to the Republic of Korea, told ABC News “This Week” with Martha Raddatz that he thinks President Trump’s rhetoric toward North Korea over its nuclear program “makes people nervous.” However, he believes the some of the administration's actions in response to the North Korean threat are positive.

“[Working with the Chinese] seemed to be an elusive concept at a certain point in time and, yet that, I think, is very much happening.” Hill said.

Watch entire interview here.

DU Sponsors “The First 100 Days” of Trump

On May 1, the Korbel School and the Crossley Center for Public Opinion Research at DU will sponsor a discussion of President Trump’s first 100 days in office.

Was it the best 100 days in history or the worst, is the White House a well-oiled machine or chaos center, and is the foreign policy unpredictable or incoherent?

Join the discussion with Korbel School Dean Christopher Hill and Crossley Center Director Floyd Ciruli to examine the first 100 days and discuss what’s next.

This session is a follow-up on the November 9, 2016 presentation when Hill and Ciruli deconstructed the election results and discussed what could be expected. Surprise has been the constant, from the Trump Tower transition, to the inaugural and first few weeks, to the latest foreign affairs crisis. “The First 100 Days” of Trump discussion will be stimulating and educational.

Join us.

Supercarrier Strike Force Carl Vinson Changes Course and Returns to Korea

Looking for new options now that “strategic patience” has ended, the Trump administration ordered the Navy Third Fleet supercarrier, USS Carl Vinson, and its compliment of destroyers and cruisers back to Korea, cutting short a port stay in Singapore and diverting it from planned exercises and leave in Australia. The Carl Vinson had just participated with South Korea in naval exercises in March.

U.S. warship on its way to Korean Peninsula | Getty

The order to change course came from Admiral Harry Harris, commander of the Pacific Command in Hawaii. The high-profile announcement signals that the decision is a show of force as the administration attempts to increase pressure on the North Korean regime of Kim Jong-un. The fleet move is receiving top Navy leaderships’ attention. Rear Admiral James Kilby is aboard the Carl Vinson and leading the strike group. Overall command is led by the Navy’s Third Fleet commander Vice Admiral Nora Tyson from her headquarters in San Diego.

Secretary of State Tillerson’s and President Trump’s recent statements indicate North Korea has moved to a top priority and strategic threat that policy is changing and some type of military action is possible, although still not likely.

Trump 
North Korea just stated that it is in the final stage of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the United States. It won’t happen. (January)

North Korea is behaving very badly. They have been “playing” the US for years. China has done little to help! (March)

If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will. That is all that I am telling you. (April)

North Korea is looking for trouble. If China decides to help, that would be great. If not, we will solve the problem without them. (April)

Tillerson 
Policy of “strategic patience” is over (March)

U.S. military action against North Korea is “an option on the table.” North Korea’s threat on the South would be met with “an appropriate response.” Twenty years of diplomatic and other efforts have failed. (March)

North Korea launched yet another intermediate range ballistic missile. The United States has spoken enough about North Korea. We have no further comment. (April)

H.R. McMaster  
The denuclearization of the Korean peninsula must happen. The President asked us to give him a full range of options to remove this threat to the American people and our allies and partners in the region. (April)

Sisi Scores a Victory

General Sisi was warmly welcomed to the White House, a coup for the Egyptian government to legitimize its rule and move it above its rank in American public opinion.

Egypt has a mid-level image among Americans, with a 52 percent favorable rating. But Sisi joined a group of American allies at the top of the opinion tree and his welcome was certainly warmer than Chancellor Merkel’s (Germany has an 82% favorable rating).

Sisi does have some assets in Middle East politics for the administration. He has stabilized Egypt and aimed its security resources at Islamic terrorists. President Trump and especially former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn believe the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization – so does President Sisi.

Egypt’s strategic position makes it important to Israel’s security and Libya’s western orientation. Also, as the largest country in the region, if it gets its economy moving, it could be a major player in the anti-Iran strategy of the administration.

Trump Sees a Line, a Red Line

Donald Trump’s quick action on the tragedy in Syria produced significant political benefits for him and the U.S. when Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, believing himself secure, decided to use chemical weapons again. It allowed Trump to frame himself as the world leader for the protection of innocent victims of a brutal, heartless dictator.

·       Trump can remind everyone of the near universal condemnation of President Obama’s feckless Syrian foreign policy, especially his walking away from his own Red Line in August 2013.

·       He demonstrated to President Xi and his North Korean associates that “bad things” can happen very quickly. It also rebukes Russia at a nice point to distract the endless Russian investigation and boost his anti-Kremlin credibility.

·       Europe likes it and has been calling for U.S. leadership. Even Merkel has a kind word. Our Middle East allies – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and others – never forgave Obama’s weakness or, in their view, disloyalty. It also rebukes Iran, always positive with Sunni allies.

·       Dictators of the world took notice. Russia, China, Turkey and North Korea just saw that nationalism of the campaign does not mean isolationism. That there are other influences surveilling around the White House, pulling for a more robust national security policy.

·       The action will quiet momentarily Trump’s critics in the Republican national security establishment. McCain, Graham and Rubio were withering in their condemnation of Trump’s and Tillerson’s Syria statements that Assad’s future is up to the Syrian people as a free pass for Assad’s bad behavior. After the chemical attack, they more or less blamed Trump for it. Now, they are praising his action.

·       Numerous liberals and Democrats have grudgingly given Trump some praise. Removing Assad was the diplomatic goal of Obama and Secretary Kerry (leading to endless lunches in Geneva) and held by most liberal Middle East analysts, scholars and advocates.

See my blog: The Red Line: A decision that leveled a foreign policy

Democracy in the US: Robust or Brittle? World Poll Conference in Portugal

Democracy worldwide is on the defensive. Attacks are reported daily on independent judiciary, on a free press and on access to political space by opposition political groups. Even American democracy, which is old and its political institution mature, appears to be vulnerable to the anti-democratic trends sweeping Western European nations.

In a panel at the World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) conference in Lisbon, Portugal, researchers from around the world will present on the Health of Politics. Floyd Ciruli, director of the Crossley Center for Public Opinion Research in the Korbel School at the University of Denver will present a paper titled: Democracy in the U.S.: Robust or Brittle?

Presentation description:

This presentation will review the literature on democratic stability and more recent 2016 election description of vulnerabilities and flaws. These attributes will be tested in U.S. and state-level surveys to highlight possible fractures in public opinion that support or oppose the theory that U.S. democracy is becoming brittle and unstable. Trust in government, party polarization and the desire for change are factors that will be examined.

The willingness of partisans of both parties to ignore their evaluations of the fitness of office of the candidates and vote for them anyway is one variable that will be measured against trust, desire for change and partisanship. A second factor to test with the variables is the statement that the other candidate’s victory will be illegitimate.

Key question: Is the 2016 election and its result the culmination of a long period of dissatisfaction and support for the regime and its democratic process, which will rebound, or is this the beginning of a more profound weakening in democratic culture?

Race and Police Practices in US: Law & Order Meets Black Lives Matter, World Polling Conference in Portugal

The World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR) will assemble in Lisbon, Portugal, in July to share research among the world public opinion researchers. Some of the most interesting papers are on major public opinion trends that are impacting public policy in the nations around the world.

Physical security in a nation and a community is, along with economic prosperity and government legitimacy, among the top factors of importance to the public.

The intersection of the need to impose social controls, the desire for liberty, and concern for fair and accountable police practices is a universal source of conflict in public opinion. In the U.S., the conflict has been exposed recently in a series of violent incidents between police and suspects, often minorities, and attacks on police by assailants, sometimes as specific targets of assassination.

The issue was most recently framed in the 2016 presidential election as a conflict between Law and Order vs. Black Lives Matter.

In a panel at the WAPOR conference titled, Racial, Cultural and Ethnic Issues, Floyd Ciruli, director of the Crossley Center for Public Opinion Research in the Korbel School at the University of Denver, will present a paper on the topic.

Race and Police Practices in U.S.: Law and Order Meets Black Lives Matter

Use of force by police and their being victims of assassination were among the biggest news stories in the U.S. in 2016. This presentation explores the public opinion gap between the U.S. public, police and the African American community on police practices, especially use of force. The data sources are surveys conducted in Denver, Colorado, and Chicago, Illinois, on police practices and community relations and Pew Research’s 2016 national polls of the public and police personnel on race and policing.

French Elections – First Round Tie

The first round of the French elections with 11 candidates will be held April 23. The run-off is May 7, 2017 if there is no majority candidate in the first round. As of April 7, two weeks out, Marine Le Pen (24%) of the right and Emmanuel Macron (24%) of the center-left are the frontrunners and tied. The remaining 52 percent of the voters are scattered among the other nine candidates and undecided. All eleven candidates just debated (April 4) for three and a half hours, an endurance test.

Candidates in French presidential election take part in debate on April 4 | CNN

Polling a run-off between the two evenly matched candidates has Macron winning about 60 percent to 40 percent. The far right position has increased 6 points since the last presidential election (2012, Le Pen 18%) to nearly two-fifths of the electorate in a run-off, but it is still not in position to take over the French government.

Le Pen is not the only candidate advancing an anti-EU position, but she is the favorite of the Trump administration (Steve Bannon’s position) and Russia (Marine Le Pen just visited Vladimir Putin). The anti-EU nationalists are powerful, but not yet dominant in France.

Candidates
Le Pen (48 years old) has been head of the National Front Party since 2011 and came in third in the 2012 presidential election with 18 percent of the vote behind the winners François Hollande (who won) and Nicolas Sarkozy (the former president). She has attempted to reposition the party away from its far right roots, but ride anti-refugee/immigrant sentiment.

Macron (39 years old) began his own party, En Marche! (Forward! or On the Move!), in 2016. A former investment banker and member of the Socialist Party who was in the current socialist government for two years as the economic minister. He resigned in 2016 to run for president. He represents much of the establishment from a center-left position, but claims to be independent with new thinking.

Polling
There has been some shifting among the top five candidates the last two weeks. Macron became the second-place candidate in late January 2017 and tied Le Pen about March 20. Le Pen has gained no ground since January when she held 27 percent of the vote.

Macron took second place after the collapse of François Fillon (The Republican Party – center-right) due to a scandal concerning his family on government payroll. A battle for fourth place shifted position in late March when Jean-Luc Mélenchon (Left Party and “Unsubmissive France”) moved into fourth displacing Benoît Hamon (Socialist Party).

Run-off
In the second round of voting, polling indicated that Le Pen would increase her position to about 40 percent, but lose to Macron, who would win with 60 percent. Fillon would beat her by a similar amount, if somewhat less (55% to 45%).

Hence, unless Mr. Trump’s fake news and rigged polls are at work, the favored candidate of Vladimir Putin and Steve Bannon represents a quarter to two-fifths of the French electorate and will lose the May run-off. There is still a month of campaigning, but it appears France’s two-tier electoral system is moving toward a business-oriented socialist as president.

See:
CNN: French election debate: Macron marches on as Le Pen loses out
Politico: 5 takeaways from France’s chaotic presidential debate
The Buzz: Outsiders take France – April 23

American Views on Trump’s Foreign Visitors

As President Trump familiarizes himself with world leaders and begins developing policies, it’s useful to examine public opinion concerning the countries’ favorability with Americans. Opinion tends to be fairly stable. The public’s views are affected by reported events and the positions of American leaders. Most of the public are only mildly interested in foreign affairs and don’t directly interact with foreign nations beyond periodic trips.

Gallup recently asked Americans to rate the favorability of 21 countries. At the top of the list were Canada and Great Britain with more than 90 percent of the public having a favorable view. In the 80 percent range was Japan, France and Germany. At the bottom were North Korea, Iran, Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq (ranging from 11 percent for North Korea to 19 percent for Iraq). In the middle range of 50 percent were China, Cuba and Egypt.

Some comments:

• President Trump has met with leaders from the most popular countries, which all correspond to our strongest allies. Each country had some trepidation in the new relations related to trade and security issues. German Chancellor Merkel probably had the most difficult visit.
• The least favored countries are causing the President his earliest challenges: North Korea (11%), Iran (12%), Syria (17%), Afghanistan (17%) and Iraq (19%). Relations with them have military implications, some with American boots on the ground. North Korea has managed to become a major power pariah, which it apparently believes is an effective strategy to secure its survival and win concessions. President Assad must have felt invulnerable with his allies, Russia and Iran, and America just focused on ISIS and not regime change. A few Tomahawks have likely changed his thinking.
• The President is attempting to change American policy and perceptions for some of the nations near the middle of the favorability pack. Egypt’s president has just had a successful visit. Cuba moved up the favorability rating due to the rapprochement. It’s not clear U.S. policy will change. Americans are ambivalent about China. They are competitors, could be a threat, but may be a partner.

Check out my blog: America’s views on world leaders

Donald Trump Is Losing Power

Donald Trump is a well-seasoned practitioner of the photo opportunity. He has built a valuable worldwide brand by mastering the urges and vagaries of modern media. And, while he may not have much experience or knowledge of government, he has applied his media talent with a vengeance to the presidency. From the transition parade into Trump Tower, to use of the “Winter White House,” to the endless signing ceremonies around the Resolute Desk, to the early start of 2020 campaign, Trump has controlled news cycles and become the number one topic in the world.

Usually non-stop coverage of a media savvy White House should accompany an uptick in approval ratings of the president’s job performance. But a host of polls, especially presidential approval, which has been collected since Harry Truman, show Trump’s record-low rating, starting at the inauguration, has slipped to even lower territory during Trump’s first ten weeks.

President Trump signs executive order halting immigrants from
some Muslim-majority countries from entering U.S. | Olivier
Douliery-Pool/Getty Images

Historically, low approval ratings weigh a president down and damage his agenda. They drain legislative support, can undermine investor and consumer confidence and, of course, hurt a party’s candidate’s recruitment and fundraising. If ratings in the low 40 percent level continue, it will start a panic in the Republican Party later in 2017 over the possible loss of the House in 2018.

The President’s biggest problem is that the media strategy can’t replace the failure to accomplish some of the most high-profile goals. The current book-ends are the travel ban roll-out on February 27 and the Obamacare defeat on March 24. The two failures, combined with his Twitter posts, press altercations and fights with his own party, reinforce the impression of an administration not in control.

Importantly, the Peggy Noonan problem is a recurring drag on his approval. The country’s moderate to conservative establishment, including independents, supports many of Trump’s policies, but struggle with his style and tone.

“Near the end of the campaign I wrote a column called ‘Imagine a Sane Donald Trump,’ lamenting that I believed he was crazy, and too bad. Too bad because his broad policy assertions, or impulses, suggested he understood that 2008 and the years just after (the crash and the weak recovery) had changed everything in America, and that the country was going to choose, in coming decades, one of two paths – a moderate populism or socialism – and that the former was vastly to be preferred.”

Trump’s performance reinforces these doubts about his fitness for office however it’s labeled: temperament, judgment and character.

As of April 4, Trump’s approval rating is 40 percent and disapproval 53 percent in the RealClearPolitics average. Because it is a rolling average, Trump’s numbers are better than some recent polls that give him 35 percent (Quinnipiac) and 39 percent (Gallup).

Read:
The Buzz: Trump starts at record low
Gallup: Trump’s approval rating unusually low, unusually early
FiveThirtyEight: Trump is beating previous presidents at being unpopular

Trump Could Use Immigration Reform for a Reset

Peggy Noonan, an indefatigable optimist, continues to hope that Donald Trump is going to “pivot” and get a bipartisan deal on health care. She lacks realism. Democrats won’t help Trump or Republicans pass “repeal and replace.” Trump doesn’t appear to have “pivot” in him. But, does another disastrous week lead Trump and his team to look for some action that shifts attention from tweets, Russians and health care?

Recently, we discussed immigration reform, an issue that would disarm critics, attract moderate Republicans and Democrats, and reduce deportations that will produce bad press for years. The latest CNN (ORC poll) confirms that there is a considerable upside for finding a solution to the status of undocumented residents. The public agrees with the President in deporting criminals, but rejects deporting all illegal citizens. Ninety percent of the public suggests illegal immigrants gain citizenship if they meet strict conditions.

Read my blogs: 

Is immigration reform possible?

The wall is a problem