Pundits now regularly proclaim that Hillary Clinton has an almost singular and unique problem with voters who don’t think she’s honest or forthright.
These pundits are wrong, both as a matter of fact and of voter perception.
Nonetheless, the commentariat has elevated this view to the lofty level of a “narrative” into which every new fact or incident must be fit.
A Washington Post headline proclaims “Hillary Clinton has a major honesty problem …,” while Politico headlined a story “Why can’t Hillary stop fudging the truth?” PBS’s “NewsHour” asked, “Can Hillary Clinton convince voters that she’s honest and trustworthy?” And a CNN reporter labeled the Democratic presidential nominee’s rating on integrity “the equivalent of a 5 alarm fire.”
When one of those ubiquitous faux “Democratic strategists” on another CNN show attempted to steer the conversation toward Donald Trump’s mendacity, the host cut her off declaring, “it’s Hillary Clinton who has the honesty problem.”
Of course, in reality it’s Trump who has “the honesty problem.”
The GOP nominee has lied about everything from his position on the Iraq War to his net worth, his charitable giving and even about what he said just five minutes before.
Trump is in a lying league of his own. Sen. Al Franken’s (D-Minn.) famous book, “Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them,” could well have been a biography of the real estate mogul.
PolitiFact rated 27 percent of the Clinton statements it has investigated as mostly false or worse, compared to 70 percent of Trump’s. It found 2 percent of statements from the former secretary of State it examined were complete “Pants on Fire” fabrications, compared with 19 percent for Trump.
That means Trump has uttered nine times as many the flat-out lies as Clinton.
Separately, The Washington Post awarded its most dishonest ranking, “Four Pinocchios,” to 16 percent of the Clinton statements it checked, but handed out that sobriquet to 64 percent of Trump’s.
After following Trump for a week, Politico found him making a misstatement every five minutes on average.
I don’t always agree with the fact-checkers, but those are pretty stunning numbers.
Whatever the truth of the matter, though, how do voters see it? Is honesty an albatross hanging uniquely around Clinton’s neck, as the pundits seem to think?
Not at all.
The most recent ABC/Washington Post poll put the question in two different ways.
First, it asked voters to compare the two candidates on who was “more honest and trustworthy.” Clinton came out 5 points ahead—more honest than Trump.
Another pair of questions asked whether voters thought either candidate was honest and trustworthy. Thirty-one percent said Trump was, while a slightly larger 35 percent said that of Clinton. Again, advantage Clinton.
The ABC/Post poll is hardly the only survey to reach these conclusions. An online poll by YouGov found voters equally (un)likely to say the two candidates were honest and trustworthy.
In fairness, there are some discordant notes. Fox News found Trump holding a 4-point advantage on being honest and trustworthy.
Not exactly numbers to be proud of for either candidate.
But suggesting that voters see this as a uniquely Clinton problem is simply wrong. The sad truth is that neither candidate is trusted.
And if they are mistrusted by roughly similar numbers, it’s difficult for that to be the dispositive factor in voters’ decision-making process.
Choosing is about differences, not similarities.
If Clinton and Trump are perceived as similarly (dis)honest, that is unlikely to be the deciding factor in this election.
However, while the two are perceived similarly on trust, Trump does face some unique obstacles.
Clinton is between 10 and16 points ahead of him on empathy, 20 points ahead on intelligence, 24 points up on being qualified and 26 points ahead of Trump on having the right temperament.
The media narrative suggesting Clinton has a special problem with honesty, which could derail her campaign, doesn’t hold much water.
Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the minority leader of the Senate and the Democratic whip in the House.