Trump’s Plan To Cut $5,000 Checks For Americans Not Landing With Many Midterm Convention Attendees

DALLAS — Several attendees of the Republican National Convention (RNC) midterm convention Thursday were less than enthusiastic about President Donald Trump’s $5,000 dividend proposal or had not formed an opinion yet.

During his first speech at the convention Wednesday, Trump proposed handing out those dividends, framed as the “Trump dividends,” to every U.S. adult as a condition for Republicans winning the House and the Senate in the midterm elections. The idea did no energize several attendees the Daily Caller News Foundation talked to at the convention, while some said they supported the plan.

“I think the devil’s always in the details,” Republican Texas Rep. Beth Van Duane told the DCNF. “I don’t know what I’m supporting. So that will have to be discussed.”

“I don’t have an opinion,” one attendee told the DCNF. “I don’t have enough knowledge on it to give an opinion,” another said.

Another woman at the event said the policy appeared to be a tactic used by Democrats. “[Trump’s] using the Democrats’ tactics against them,” she told the DCNF.

Another attendee wearing pro-Trump merchandise told the DCNF she did not support the idea, arguing many people do not need an extra $5,000 from the government.

“I don’t,” she said when asked if she supported it. “I don’t think a lot of people need $5,000. Plus, there would be like a litmus test on income. So no, I don’t agree with it.”

Some Republican operatives supported the potential dividends, arguing Trump was giving back to Americans. One New York delegate told the DCNF it was a good idea.

“I think it’s a perfectly legitimate and good proposal,” the delegate told the DCNF. “As he said, a company when it does well has all the dividends. If the country is getting tariff revenue, the idea of its citizens being rewarded with that, getting dividends from that revenue coming into the country, I think that’s a perfectly legislate and good idea. And look, you’d had this criticism of, ‘oh, is he doing enough or is the administration doing enough to address the issue of affordability. Well, how better to address the issue of affordability than putting money directly back into the pockets of the American people?”