
Trump picked a fight against Harvard and he's already losing
President Trump and his minions are operating on the assumption that Americans harbor substantial animosity toward colleges and universities. Their premise is importantly wrong.
Our institutions of higher learning are not perfect, and the public doesn't see them as faultless, but most Americans recognize their immense value and oppose Trump's attacks on them.
In an AP/NORC poll earlier this month, 14 points more disapproved than approved of Trump's performance on 'issues related to colleges and universities.' Most Americans dislike what Trump is doing to these institutions.
The rest of the data in that poll makes clear why: College costs are a real issue for the public, with 58 percent at least very concerned about tuition prices. In contrast, 'liberal bias' is not particularly salient. Just 36 percent claim to be concerned about ideological prejudice in colleges. A similar number, 32 percent, professes a complete lack of concern around liberal bias.
Conservatives have been lambasting the liberalism of colleges and universities at least since William F. Buckley skyrocketed to fame for publishing 'God and Man at Yale' in 1951.
It was less true when Buckley wrote and less true 20 years later when Seymour Martin Lipset and Everett Carl Ladd first surveyed the nation's professoriate, uncovering a liberal plurality, but not quite a majority — 46 percent described themselves as liberal, 27 percent as moderate, and 28 percent as conservative.
In this century, the 2024 FIRE Faculty Survey interviewed 6,269 faculty across 55 four-year U.S. colleges and universities and found 64 percent identified as liberals, 19 percent moderate and 18 percent conservative.
Different schools present somewhat different profiles, ranging from Harvard among the most liberal (73 percent), to Bringham Young University and University of Texas, Dallas where conservatives slightly outnumber liberals.
A survey of Harvard faculty by the student newspaper found a similar 77 percent calling themselves liberal or very liberal, 20 percent moderate and just 3 percent conservative. At Duke, a Chronicle of Higher Education poll revealed 62 percent of the faculty to be liberals, 24 percent moderate and 14 percent conservatives.
Such liberal unanimity understandably makes some people uncomfortable. Just 27 percent of Americans think universities in general do a good job of providing 'a respectful and inclusive environment'for conservatives.
Interestingly, students themselves are less clear. According to a Gallup survey of students then enrolled in a four-year college, 74 percent of Democrats and 73 percent of Republicans believe their school did a good job promoting free speech.
Nonetheless, in a country where liberals constitute a distinct minority, the professoriate does not reflect our ideological diversity and apparently never has.
Politically though, it's key that voters don't really care so much about liberal bias, oppose the Trump approach in principle and see enormous value in these institutions.
An earlier AP/NORC poll found that only 30 percent would allow state governments to restrict what is taught at state universities funded by those same governments. Sixty-eight percent would prohibit state government from exercising that level of control over their own universities. Allowing the federal government to interfere with private universities is likely to be even less popular.
At the same time, voters do perceive socially redeeming value from colleges and universities.
Seventy percent of adults without a college degree told Gallup they regarded a four-year degree as at least 'very valuable,' while 92 percent of college students felt confident a degree would help them get the kind of job they want.
Benefits go beyond personal economic advancement. Nearly two-thirds of American adults believe universities make a positive contribution to scientific and medical research, while 63 percent believe they contribute 'new ideas and innovative technology.'
So, it is no surprise that 62 percent favor 'maintaining federal funding for scientific and medical research' at universities, while a mere 11 percent are opposed. Only 27 percent favor Trump's policy of 'Withholding federal funding unless [universities] comply with requirements related to the president's goals.'
A plurality oppose removing tax exemptions from colleges and universities. This issue may be a bit esoteric as a third have no opinion.
Trump apparently perceives Harvard as an object of particular antipathy given his focus on that institution. But in a Washington Post poll, just 32 percent of Americans took Trump's side in 'trying to take a greater role in Harvard University's hiring of faculty, admission of students, and operation of its academic programs.' Sixty-six percent sided with Harvard which 'says this intrudes on its freedom as a private university.'
Further evidence comes from a YouGov poll which found just 35 percent approve of the 'the Trump administration…trying to take a greater role in Harvard University's hiring of faculty, admission of students, and operation of its academic programs.' Half disapprove.
Historically, Trump has proven politically adept in choosing his antagonists. Perhaps not this time.
Mellman is president of The Mellman Group a consultancy that has helped elect 30 U.S. senators, 12 governors and dozens of House members. Mellman served as pollster to Senate Democratic leaders for over 30 years and is a member of the American Association of Political Consultants' Hall of Fame. He holds degrees from Princeton and Yale.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


UPI
7 minutes ago
- UPI
In letter, more than 300 scientists rebuke Trump research cuts, NIH director
June 9 (UPI) -- Hundreds of scientists via the National Institute of Health signed a published letter in protest to NIH leadership and recent cuts by the Trump administration. "We are compelled to speak up when our leadership prioritizes political moment over human safety and faithful stewardship of public resources," more than 300 scientists wrote Monday to NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in a so-called "Bethesda Declaration" published by Stand Up For Science in rebuke to Trump administration research funding cuts and staff layoffs. They added in the letter to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and members of Congress overseeing NIH that they "dissent" to Trump's policies that "undermine" the NIH mission, "waste" public resources and harm "the health of Americans and people across the globe." In the open letter, they said the current endeavor to "Make America Healthy Again" referred to "some undefined time in the past." "Keeping NIH at the forefront of biomedical research requires our stalwart commitment to continuous improvement," the letter's writers said, adding that the life-and-death nature of NIH work "demands that changes be thoughtful and vetted." According to the letter, the Trump administration terminated at least 2,100 NIH research grants since January, totaling around $9.5 billion and contracts representing some $2.6 billion in new research. "We urge you as NIH Director to restore grants delayed or terminated for political reasons so that life-saving science can continue," the letter added in part. "This undercuts long-standing NIH policies designed to maximize return on investment by working with grantees to address concerns and complete studies," it said. It further accused the White House of creating a "culture of fear and suppression" among NIH researchers. Bhattacharya, a Stanford University professor and health researcher, called the agency the "crown jewel of American biomedical sciences" and said he had the "utmost respect" for its scientists and mission during his confirmation hearing in March. On Tuesday, Bhattacharya is scheduled to testify before the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Trump's 2026 NIH budget proposal which seeks to cut roughly 40% of NIH's $48 billion budget. "This spending slowdown reflects a failure of your legal duty to use congressionally-appropriated funds for critical NIH research," the scientists penned to Bhattacharya. The letter goes on to characterize it as "dissent" from Trump administration policy, quoting Bhattacharya during his confirmation as saying "dissent is the very essence of science." "Standing up in this way is a risk, but I am much more worried about the risks of not speaking up," says Jenna Norton, a program officer at the NIH's National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. "If we don't speak up, we allow continued harm to research participants and public health in America and across the globe," Norton said in a statement, adding that if others don't speak up, "we allow our government to curtail free speech, a fundamental American value."


Axios
8 minutes ago
- Axios
California union leader faces criminal charge for protesting ICE raid
David Huerta, a beloved union leader in Los Angeles, is facing a federal criminal charge after his arrest at a worksite immigration raid on Friday where he was serving as a community observer, according to multiple reports. Why it matters: Huerta's arrest Friday has energized Democrats and union opposition to the Trump administration's fast-escalating anti-immigration push. Zoom in: Huerta is president of the Service Employees International Union-United Service Workers West (SEIU-USWW), representing more than 45,000 janitors, security officers and airport service workers in California. The Justice Department is charging the 58-year-old union leader with "conspiracy to impede an officer," per NBC news. He was among dozens arrested over the past few days in L.A. The union is calling for his immediate release and on Monday organized rallies in at least 19 cities across the country in support — including in New York, Chicago and Washington D.C. Catch up quick: Video shows Huerta being pushed to the ground by an officer on Friday — he was initially hospitalized. "This is about how we as a community stand together and resist the injustice that's happening," Huerta said in a statement Friday. "Hard-working people, and members of our family and our community, are being treated like criminals." U.S. attorney Bill Essayli said in a statement Friday federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta "deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle." "I don't care who you are—if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted. " What they're saying: "In this moment, obviously, given David's role in our union, is one where we are being outspoken," SEIU president April Verrett told Axios Monday morning before the criminal charges were filed. "But this is not just about David. This is about all of us who just want to go to work every day." "House Democrats will stand with David Huerta for as long as it takes until the charges are dropped," House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said in a statement over the weekend. Zoom out: Huerta is at least the third SEIU member to get detained by the Trump administration. Last month, federal authorities released a 64-year-old healthcare worker, Lewelyn Dixon, who had been detained for three months and has legal permanent status in the U.S. for the past half-century. Rümeysa Öztürk, a Tufts graduate student and SEIU member, was released after six weeks in custody. The big picture: Immigrants have played a key role in most unions for the past couple decades, but perhaps none more than SEIU in California, which has seen a lot of success organizing janitors, health care workers and fast food employees.


Axios
8 minutes ago
- Axios
Scoop: Cotton urges GOP senators to double down on fiery LA protests
Senate Republican leadership is urging senators to double down on condemning the chaotic protests that erupted over the weekend in Los Angeles, Axios has learned. Why it matters: Republicans are convinced they have a winning issue. " This gives us an opportunity to remind Americans how extreme the Democratic party is on immigration," Sen. Tom Cotton's office wrote to communications staff on Monday. "Americans have a choice between Republicans' law & order vs. the Democrats' car-burning, illegal alien rioters," the email, obtained by Axios, continues. Republicans see a political opening: "So far, every Senate Democrat who has spoken out has backed the rioters..." Zoom in: Republicans want to specifically target California Governor Gavin Newsom. The Cotton staffer encouraged Senate offices to paint Newsom as "the lead enabler of these riots." "What kind of governor blames police officers and the National Guard for 'inciting' this violence," Cotton wrote on X. Newsom is viewed as a likely formidable 2028 presidential candidate. Republicans also see it as an opportunity to remind voters that a key part of their sweeping "one, big beautiful bill" involves providing significant resources to ICE. The conversation around the bill has largely been focused on tax and spending cuts. Zoom out: President Trump deployed the National Guard over the weekend to help tamp down on the escalating protests — in spite of Newson's opposition. Trump has also threatened to arrest Newsom.