Posted on 02/08/2016 12:23:53 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Two-and-one-half months before last week's Iowa Caucus, columnist S.A. Miller of The Washington Times noted what could be called "The Trump Effect" on poll numbers with an article entitled "Donald Trump seen unlikely to win in Iowa despite poll numbers":
Laura Kamienski, a Republican Party caucus precinct representative for Hiawatha District in Cedar Rapids ... said she expects a surprise in the caucus this cycle similar to former Sen. Rick Santorum's unexpected win in 2012. Mr. Santorum is back in the 2016 Republican race but is polling near the bottom of the crowded field in Iowa and nationally.
...Pollsters defended their survey methods and stood by their numbers. But some credited Mr. Trump's dominance in polls to his near-universal name recognition as star of the hit TV shows "The Apprentice" and "Celebrity Apprentice."
Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski dismissed any doubt about the poll numbers. He said it was coming from the same "political pundits who have been wrong every step of the way" about Mr. Trump's candidacy, including predicting he would fade after the summer... He also noted that they had hired the Iowa organizer from Mr. Santrorum's 2012 campaign, Chuck Laudner, who is considered one of the most formidable grass-roots organizers and get-out-the-vote strategists in the state.
At the time, Trump and Carson were dominating the polls in Iowa. As it turned out, Kamienski -- who pointed out that she had seen no real evidence of large-scale Trump support -- astutely predicted a surprise in February. That turned out to be case as Ted Cruz walked away the victor by a significant margin.
The critical question that Miller and others have raised is the possibility that some poll respondents choose Trump based not upon policy positions but because they recognize his name.
In my non-scientific discussions with various registered voters, I have discovered a rather significant percentage who are unfamiliar with the name of any GOP candidate, except for that of Donald Trump.
Mention Trump's name, however, and you see faces light up. The recognition and the reality show association is immediate. Quite a few are able to parrot Trump's (in)famous quote from The Apprentice -- "You're fired!" -- but know little else of the candidate's background or political preferences.
Of course, many Trump advocates are quite familiar with the candidate and are certainly energized to vote. A Trump advocate observed after a November speech by the GOP frontrunner that many of the attendees "are not simply gawkers or fans of his TV shows."
I suspect that many of these people are frustrated with the additional burdens and strife that Obama and the federal government have inflicted upon them; they are turning out as a result of Trump's fame and the role he portrayed on his reality television show.
The term "low-information voter" may be too harsh, but I suspect that many Trump supporters feel the increased problems weighing them down but they can't exactly identify the cause nor the origin of their problems.
They are not aware of imminent crises here and abroad, but they have then taken Trump's reality show role and are applying it to the real world. They then conclude in their own minds that whatever the reason for the problems, Donald has always been successful dealing with it on TV and they extend that notion to Donald being the answer in present world circumstances.
These folks have stayed glued to the television for so long that they are convinced that the Donald is the solution to their problems. They have, however, come to the realization that they cannot change the channel.
With that said, it is also likely that many poll respondents who offer Trump as their preferred candidate do so only because they recognize his name.
This could provide insight into Trump's inability to meet the pollsters' predictions in Iowa and it could portend further disappointment for the billionaire real estate investor.
It may also explain Trump's lowering of expectations in New Hampshire over the past several days.
I’m with you...stupid system. Have a primary, or nothing.
America lives and dies for reality TV and you see it here on FR how a Reality TV star carries more water than a true conservative
In Iowa, “vastly inflated” equaled about 4 points. If that holds true for the rest, he commands a pretty hefty lead in a lot of areas.....
One could take DT’s # of rally attendees and actual Iowans caucasing to derive his conversion/commitment rate.
Trust me, he/she can have it both ways and often covers for Trump no matter what.
100% Trumpanzee, swinging for Trump kind of like his hair plugs in the wind.
There was a bit of “name recognition” with Ronald Reagan, too, and he did pretty well, IIRC.
Speaking just for myself.. I would have been a strong favorable for Cruz at the time that poll was taken. But now I am at the point where I would register an unfavorable view of him. Over the last few weeks it's been all downhill for him in my esteem.
And the SNL stuff is not good for him at all - give that a chance to hit the polls.
Sheesh
Try comprehending the words that are written before you start inserting your ‘spin’ on them.
Get rid of caucuses, and determine the order of primaries on a lottery basis every four years. There’s no justification for Iowa having so much influence. It’s just one of 57 states.
I’ve said it before. Trump doesn’t have a lot of supporters. Most of what he has is fans. People who come out for the show. Supporters turn out at the polls and fans don’t. I think Trump wins tomorrow but by a narrower margin than the polls show. And what will he blame that on come Wednesday?
I agree with all that.
But if he were to win the nomination, what about the 10% of voters who are swing voters that supposedly decide national elections? I have to think he would might a huge leg up with them just because of the name recognition thing, the reality show garbage and pro-wrestling appearances. They actually get out and vote, but are usually too dumb to tell you why they vote one way and then another over the course of different presidential elections.
Freegards
The NH results will provide better intel regarding the polls.
www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_cruz_vs_clinton-4034.html
Today Cruz is running even with Hilary Clinton cause far more people know Ted Cruz from the highly TV rated GOP debates and the more they get to know him, the more they like him.
Iowa had two issues that hurt Trump.
#1 Democrats who changed registration to stop Trump. In entrance interviews there were many who said they were there to vote against Trump. Note those answers not for a candidate.
#2 Despite what Cruz supporters want to argue, the Carson deal hurt Trump.
Hopefully neither of these issues will be big in NH.
This would be validated by Trump winning by less than 10 points in New Hampshire. (Too many people splitting the not-Trump vote.)
You are right. He did not get this recognition overnight.
He had to have numerous sex scandals with numerous different wives
He had to have his face plastered on tabloids and the top fold of many newspapers disparaging him for bankruptcy, divorces and ludicrous statements
He has been made famous for going on talk shows and making statements about having sex with his daughter
Yep, things like this will make you famous and universally known and in my eyes an immoral POS that does not belong in the White House
Nonsense. Carson outperformed his poll numbers and did about the same as entrance polls said he would. This made up “Carson deal” came out half way through voting. This faux "scandal" had zero effect on Carson, let alone Trump. Trump was beaten fair and square.
You nailed it right there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.