Donald Trump broke all the rules to win the Republican primary. He can't do the same against Hillary Clinton.
His campaign isn't "lean" — it's skeletal
The story we've all heard a thousand times about Donald Trump is that he's broken the rules, upended the conventional wisdom, and proven all the critics wrong. He doesn't have to do things the way they've been done before, and his success in this campaign is proof. Which is all true. But is it also true that he doesn't have to do anything the way it's been done before, and that none of the rules apply to him?
He's going to be testing that proposition in any number of ways, including in how he structures his campaign. Instead of having a large staff spread across the country performing all the challenging tasks associated with a presidential campaign, Trump for President is employing about the same number of people as your local Safeway. Consequently, there will be entire elements of campaigning that Trump probably won't even bother with.
The modern presidential campaign is an extraordinarily complex enterprise that has to be assembled in an incredibly short time (and then all but disappears once the election is over). What typically starts with a candidate and a few aides plotting things around a kitchen table can, in the course of just a few months, balloon to hundreds of staffers bringing in and sending out millions of dollars, opening offices in towns and cities around the country, and being put through a rolling series of tests where the risk of failure is high. Yet Trump managed to win his party's nomination with a small staff, without bothering to air many TV ads — which he didn't need because he was getting so much media coverage — and primarily through the use of large rallies rather than traditional voter contact.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
He and his team seem to think they can carry that through to the general election, and things will work exactly the same way. They're barely bothering to do any work on voter targeting, the increasingly sophisticated science of demographic analysis that allows today's campaigns to know at a granular level who voters are and how to shape their appeals to target them. As The Associated Press recently reported, "Trump spent more than $1 million in April on campaign paraphernalia like caps, T-shirts, and signs. Even as he was effectively seizing the nomination, he spent less than a third of that amount on data and related functions such as telemarketing." That's a fraction of what Hillary Clinton's campaign is spending on building a comprehensive database it can use to target, persuade, and turn out voters.
The Trump campaign says they don't need it partly because they'll outsource much of that work to the Republican National Committee, but mostly because it's just superfluous. When asked on Fox News Sunday about the fact that they lag far behind the Clinton campaign in establishing an infrastructure, campaign manager Corey Lewandowski replied, "She's got 800 people on staff. We got 70 people on staff, right? They think that bigger is better. That's the mindset that a Clinton administration will take to the federal government. You know, you juxtapose that with the Trump mindset, which is smaller, leaner, more efficient, and better results, that's the mindset you need for the federal government."
I don't know if the Trump campaign actually employs only 70 people (in the same interview, Lewandowski also said Trump is leading in the polls among women and Hispanics, which suggests he was visiting from Bizarro World), but if that's true, it's nothing short of stunning. With that tiny number, there are many things you just couldn't do; for instance, there would be no way to run a field operation mobilizing volunteers to make phone calls, knock on doors, and identify your voters so you can be sure they show up to the polls on election day. It's just too labor-intensive. Trump has only one communications staffer, which would be a small number for a congressional campaign, let alone a presidential nominee. It's one thing to be "lean" and not waste money, but Trump's campaign sounds positively skeletal.
Trump may be half-right in his apparent disdain for traditional campaign organization, in the sense that many of the things campaigns do require a lot of effort but produce effects only at the margins. The problem is that in a close race — and we're in an era where every presidential race is going to be close — the margins matter a great deal. If your field operation can produce an extra point or two on election day, even if it required the tireless labor of hundreds of staffers and thousands of volunteers, that might be the difference between defeat and victory.
To be clear, there are plenty of norms of campaigning that can and should be challenged. And sometimes the right candidates can try. Bernie Sanders challenged the idea that a candidate needs to rely on big donors to be competitive; he's raised over $200 million, mostly with small donations. Eight years ago Barack Obama challenged the way media consultants were traditionally paid in campaigns. They always charged a percentage of the money spent on airing their ads; the Obama campaign told consultant suitors that they'd get paid a flat fee, and if they didn't like it, they'd miss out on the chance to have one the most remarkable campaigns in history on their resumes.
From where Trump sits, having his presidential campaign consist of little more than mounting rallies, phoning in to Fox & Friends and Morning Joe, and thinking up Twitter burns to fire at any and all who displease him might seem like a winning strategy. After all, that's all that it took to win the nomination. But a general election, which plays out all at once and not one state at a time, and which requires an exponentially more complex organization to execute, is a whole other matter.
Perhaps Trump thinks it's just too much bother, and he can keep winging it. But he may be in for an unpleasant surprise.
Create an account with the same email registered to your subscription to unlock access.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Paul Waldman is a senior writer with The American Prospect magazine and a blogger for The Washington Post. His writing has appeared in dozens of newspapers, magazines, and web sites, and he is the author or co-author of four books on media and politics.
-
'Biden is smart to keep the border-security pressure on'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Harold Maass, The Week US Published
-
Bird flu worries mount as virus found in milk, cows
Speed Read The FDA found traces of the virus in pasteurized grocery store milk
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
Palazzo Durazzo Suites in Genoa: a palatial gem in northern Italy
The Week Recommends Live your Italian dream in this astonishing and recently restored palace in the heart of the city
By Nick Hendry Published
-
Arizona court reinstates 1864 abortion ban
Speed Read The law makes all abortions illegal in the state except to save the mother's life
By Rafi Schwartz, The Week US Published
-
Trump, billions richer, is selling Bibles
Speed Read The former president is hawking a $60 "God Bless the USA Bible"
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
The debate about Biden's age and mental fitness
In Depth Some critics argue Biden is too old to run again. Does the argument have merit?
By Grayson Quay Published
-
How would a second Trump presidency affect Britain?
Today's Big Question Re-election of Republican frontrunner could threaten UK security, warns former head of secret service
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
'Rwanda plan is less a deterrent and more a bluff'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By The Week UK Published
-
Henry Kissinger dies aged 100: a complicated legacy?
Talking Point Top US diplomat and Nobel Peace Prize winner remembered as both foreign policy genius and war criminal
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Last updated
-
Trump’s rhetoric: a shift to 'straight-up Nazi talk'
Why everyone's talking about Would-be president's sinister language is backed by an incendiary policy agenda, say commentators
By The Week UK Published
-
More covfefe: is the world ready for a second Donald Trump presidency?
Today's Big Question Republican's re-election would be a 'nightmare' scenario for Europe, Ukraine and the West
By Sorcha Bradley, The Week UK Published