Trump should find himself a few advisers who don’t hold their fellow Americans in contempt.
There’s a certain type of political observer whose low esteem for his fellow Americans’ character and intelligence is matched only by his high regard for his own talents and temperament. That’s the sort, overrepresented on social media, who assumed that the savage masses would fall to their knees in gratitude to Donald Trump over his promise to provide several hundred million of them with $5,000 checks — that is, so long as they vote Republican in November. That same archetype seemed perfectly befuddled by the public’s rejection of Trump’s proposed kickback.
The latest Reuters/Ipsos survey found that 63 percent of Americans — “including four in 10 Republicans and nine in 10 Democrats” — disapprove of the president’s $5,000 pledge. With that, social media lit up with a cynical assessment of the American people, albeit in a rhetorical framework designed to disparage Trump more than the voting public. The refrain was endlessly reprised: Trump is so unpopular that he’s turned the American people against free money!
Trump may be the target, but this line of attack does collateral damage to voters.
I’m not surprised by the public’s rejection of this exercise in political payola. As I told CNN’s Abby Phillip on September 10, Trump’s proposal wasn’t just awful policy — it was bad politics:
.@NRO's @NoahCRothman on the proposed Trump dividend…
"This is horrific policy, if it were to happen and it's not going to happen, but I don't even think it's especially savvy politics. So, obviously, it's not a dividend. There has been no windfall. We're $40 trillion in debt.… pic.twitter.com/5eNRhHkAvH
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 11, 2026
For the better part of a decade, Americans have had to live with the consequences of “free money.” And they can connect the dots.
As early as October 2021, as voters felt the pain of the pandemic’s supply chain disruptions, coupled with the government’s efforts to stimulate demand while artificially suppressing commercial and social activity, pollsters found that voters understood that a government check came with strings attached. The bipartisan polling team of Joel Benenson and Neil Newhouse found that voters, including over seven in ten independents, agreed with the following expression of elementary logic: “People will continue to pay more money on everyday expenses unless the government becomes more fiscally responsible.”
In other words, voters understood that profligacy in Washington contributes to inflation and, therefore, reduces their own purchasing power. The following year, Americans for Prosperity sponsored a survey that confirmed Benenson and Newhouse’s suspicions. Just shy of three-fourths of respondents said government spending is a “major cause” of high prices and that “continued high levels of government spending in Washington would cause prices to keep rising.”
The voting public hasn’t suddenly forgotten the painful economic lessons that bitter experience drilled into them during the Biden years. It’s the height of condescension to suggest that voters would compartmentalize all they’ve learned about inflationary pressures merely because Trump dangled a shiny lure in front of their faces. And yet, so many succumbed to that patronizing temptation.
If the president were surrounded by folks with a little more faith in voters’ intelligence, he might not have insulted them with the promise of a greasy payoff. He should find himself a few people who don’t hold their fellow Americans in contempt. That might make the next two years a little easier on this White House, the GOP, and whomever Republican voters pass the party’s baton to in 2028.