Polling editor: Trump's 'Space Force' proposal rocked by partisanship

Real Clear Politics executive editor Carl Cannon argues that most Americans remain interested in space, even if President TrumpDonald John TrumpTrump calls for Republicans to be 'united' on abortion Tlaib calls on Amash to join impeachment resolution Facebook temporarily suspended conservative commentator Candace Owens MORE's "Space Force" proposal has caught flak.

“I think the branding problem isn’t Space Force,” Cannon told Hill.TV's Joe Concha on "What America's Thinking," noting that the proposal was unveiled by Vice President Pence recently.

"What’s going on in this country now is we’re so polarized – if Donald Trump announced something that everyone was for previously, the Democrats would say, ‘Well obviously we can’t be for that,’”  he continued.

"If there’s a consensus, I actually think all Americans have always been in favor of space – not war in space, but the idea that we’re taking the lead in space is something Americans have supported for fifty years,” Cannon added.

The polling website editor argued that while most Americans remain interested in space generally, Trump's proposal to create a sixth military branch dedicated to space is likely to get more polarized support, closer to "50-50."

Trump has spent months trying to get the proposal off the ground. He signed an executive order establishing a Space Force in June, and said he would direct the Pentagon to establish a sixth military branch dedicated to military initiatives in space.

Last week, Pence threw his support behind the president’s plan and outlined immediate steps for the Department of Defense to take during a speech at the Pentagon.

"Our administration will soon take action to implement these recommendations with the objective of establishing the United States Department of the Space Force by 2020," Pence said during the announcement.

But the new military division requires legislation that must be approved by Congress and it appears that some lawmakers are still split over the issue, arguing it might create more unnecessary bureaucratic tasks.

— Tess Bonn