But Politico reports this morning that even Republicans think that Trump’s response to the shooting is profoundly problematic. What’s important about this report, though, is that Republicans say that his response was worrisome both in terms of the substance and in terms of the politics.

AD

Republicans tell Politico that Trump failed what is known as the “desk test,” i.e., whether his behavior inspires voters to confidently picture Trump in the Oval Office during a time of crisis. Others worry that Trump’s post-Orlando behavior raises doubts about whether he understands the president’s role. And on the substance, the blowback was even worse:

AD

The proposed ban on Muslim immigrants had already been rejected by Speaker Paul Ryan and the overwhelming majority of Republicans in Congress. But House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said again he wouldn’t support it, and that he had no interest in seeing it get a vote. “You don’t ban somebody on race [or] religion,” McCarthy said. “I don’t see that coming to the floor.”… Hill Republicans expressed concern over everything from the tone of Trump’s remarks to their substantive impact. “I think you have to be a little careful with the rhetoric,” Rep. Michael McCaul, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said of Trump’s renewed call for a ban on Muslim immigrants. “You don’t want to inflame or help the recruiting efforts.”

That is striking: The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee wondered aloud whether the GOP standard bearer’s high profile response to a major terrorist attack might actually exacerbate terror recruitment. And the Number Two Republican in the House flatly declared the GOP standard bearer’s main policy proposal on terrorism to be an unacceptable religious test that would never make it to the House floor.

As I argued yesterday morning, while it’s regularly assumed that terrorism helps Trump, it’s perfectly plausible that his response to this horrific event could end up raising further doubts about his temperamental and substantive fitness for the presidency. It appears that after watching Trump’s speech yesterday afternoon, even some Republicans agree with this.

AD

Indeed, Trump’s speech presents Republicans with something of a fork-in-the-road moment. As Brian Beutler points out, by ratcheting up the demagoguery and xenophobia, Trump revealed that he fully believes, and fully intends to continue campaigning on, precisely the things that had given Republicans grave doubts about his candidacy. If Republicans previously told themselves that Trump could be managed or moderated by getting him to stick to some kind of softer script, they have been violently disabused of that notion. Trump’s actual beliefs can no longer be ignored or wished away: In the midst of a crisis moment — the type of general election crisis moment that tends to reveal what presidential candidates are really made of — Trump explicitly confirmed his full intention to carry out a program that these Republicans profess to find deeply alarming.

AD

And once again, this isn’t simply about the ways in which Trump represents an affront to American values. It’s also about the ways in which his specific proposals could risk further endangering national security, by the lights of the Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. In other words, even some Republicans agree that Trump’s idea of a “strong” response to terrorism could further weaken us.

This has deeper implications, too. As Jonathan Chait points out, by ratcheting up the anti-Muslim xenophobia in wretched and substantively dangerous ways, Trump is guiding the GOP to a place where it has left behind any remnants of whatever idealistic and practical “vision for defeating radical Islam” guided George W. Bush. Left behind is nothing more than a “residue of fear and nationalism, ripe for manipulation by a demagogue.” The crucial point is that it’s becoming clearer and clearer that many Republican agree with this. Yet they continue to support Trump as their standard bearer, anyway. Trump’s first high profile response to a major terrorist attack, and the Republican discomfort with it, raise new questions about how much longer this can be sustained.

AD

None of this even begins to get into whether Republicans can countenance Trump’s insinuation that Obama somehow tacitly sides with terrorists who are trying to kill Americans. And here, too, Republicans will no longer be able to dismiss this as a temporary fancy on Trump’s part, as something that can be addressed by confining Trump to a more (dare we say it) politically correct script. That’s because a Trump spokesperson has now confirmed that this claim is becoming an official argument of the campaign. But that brings us to our next item.

AD

*************************************************************************

* TRUMP CAMPAIGN DOUBLES DOWN ON ANTI-OBAMA SMEAR: Trump’s spokesperson Katrina Pierson, on Fox News last night:

AD

“Something is going on. Even today President Obama refused to even say the words ‘radical Islam.’ Why do we have a president who refuses to say radical Islam? We just had Americans butchered, murdered by radical Islam.This is also a president who has gone out there in public speeches and said civilization owes ‘a debt’ to Islam. What does that mean?”

Now that the Trump campaign is doubling down on this, it makes it more likely that Republicans will be forced to respond to it.

What Donald Trump is doing on the campaign trail share Share View Photos View Photos Next Image U.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump speaks at a campaign event at Trump Doral golf course in Miami, Florida, U.S. July 27, 2016. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri (Carlo Allegri/Reuters)

* DEMS EXPAND AD BUY HAMMERING TRUMP: The pro-Clinton Super PAC Priorities USA has been airing an ad in multiple swing states that pillories Trump’s mocking of a disabled reporter. Now I’m told that Priorities, in conjunction with Emily’s List, is expanding the size of the buy to $11 million — a sign that Dems think painting Trump as a full-blown sociopath by using his own words and behavior might be working.

That brings the total reservations of Priorities USA to $147 million, once again raising the question of whether Trump will be badly outspent on the air by the Clinton forces.

AD

AD

* CLINTON WIDENS LEAD IN NEW POLL: The new NBC News/Survey Monkey Tracking poll finds that Clinton’s lead over Trump has expanded to seven points, 49-42. Note:

Clinton picked up 7 points among moderate voters this week and now leads Trump 58 percent to 33 percent among them. Trump’s margin among male voters dropped from 14 points last week to 9 points this week and he now leads Clinton 51 percent to 42 percent. His 13-point margin among white voters last week also shrank to 9 points this week. White voters now favor Trump to Clinton 50 percent to 41 percent.

Trump is losing ground among whites? Impossible! Meanwhile, the polling averages, which you should pay the most attention to, show Clinton up five points.

* THE NEXT STEP FOR BERNIE SANDERS: USA Today’s Heidi Pryzbyla reports that Sanders is set to meet today with Senate colleagues and later with Hillary Clinton. Given that the final voting takes place today — in the D.C. primary — it’s likely we’ll have a good deal more clarity by tomorrow at the latest about how Sanders intends to manage the endgame.

AD

* BREAKING: DEMS NOT SPOOKED BY NATIONAL SECURITY FIGHT: Politico reports that Democrats think the presidential election ma7 be fought out on national security terrain, as Trump is hoping, but that they are not fearful that this plays to their disadvantage:

AD

By detailing her previously proposed measures to combat the Islamic State, including an “intelligence surge,” and ticking through specific proposals…Clinton presented a stark contrast with her Republican rival, who suggested President Obama may have had something to do with the tragedy….Clinton’s experience as secretary of state has Democrats less alarmed than they might have been by the prospect of a fight on Trump’s wheelhouse issue.

Wait, so Trump merely saying the terrorism issue will favor him doesn’t make it so? That can’t possibly be true.

* ORLANDO SHOOTING SPOTLIGHTS ‘LONE WOLF’ TERROR: The New York Times takes a deep dive into the broader law enforcement problem posed by terrorists like Omar Mateen:

His actions highlight the difficulty for the American government in trying to address a new style of terrorism — random acts of violence that may have been at least partly inspired by the Islamic State but were not directed by the group’s leaders. Unlike Al Qaeda, which favors highly organized and planned operations, the Islamic State has encouraged anyone to take up arms in its name, and uses a sophisticated campaign of social media to inspire future attacks by unstable individuals with little history of embracing radical Islam.

What’s really required to address this threat is a president who isn’t afraid to be politically incorrect.

* HOW CLINTON IS FRAMING THE ORLANDO SHOOTING: Alex Seitz-Wald reports on how the Clinton camp is seeking to frame the argument over the Orlando shooting, and how it contrasts with Trump’s approach:

While acknowledging the tragedy of the shooting, Clinton sought to extract some humanity from the cruelty by recognizing the acts of heroism and altruism carried out by victims, first-responders, and bystanders. And she connected the struggle against violent intolerance to that of gay rights, saying there is “no better rebuke to the terrorists and all those who hate” then rallying around the LGBT community. It was Clinton’s test drive as empathizer-in-chief — the role presidents must play after tragedy strikes, and one that Trump has shown little interest in embracing.