Posted on 03/16/2016 11:10:08 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
This is not an argument for what should happen or what I’d like to happen in the November presidential election, but about what would likely happen in a Donald Trump-Hillary Clinton race: Clinton would win, and probably by a wide margin.
I caution Trump supporters: You can’t just say that Trump will win. That claim must be based on evidence and recognized patterns of political behavior. Crowds at rallies and winning primary elections, especially with only a plurality of the vote, is not evidence that a candidate can win in a general election.
Even if you add up everyone who has attended a Trump rally, that’s only a tiny fraction of total voters in a presidential general election. In both 2008 and 2012, there were about 130 million voters in those presidential elections. And the difference between a turnout in a primary and general election is great. For example, Trump won both the South Carolina and Michigan primaries, but in the general election in those states there will likely be twice as many voters as the number that voted in the primary (counting both Republican and Democratic primary voters).
You could look at head-to-head polls to predict an outcome. Real Clear Politics has nearly 50 polls going back several months which polls a Trump-Clinton race, and Trump has small leads in only five of those polls. In the last month, Clinton’s advantage has been just over 6 points.
But months remain until the election, and there will be barrages of ads trashing candidates.
So how do people choose whom they are voting for? For those people who identify with a political party, party identification is the most important factor. For example, in the 2012 race, 92 percent of Democrats supported Obama and 93 percent of Republicans supported Romney. And in 2008 it was similar with 93 percent of Democrats supporting Obama and 93 percent of Republicans supporting McCain.
Obama and Romney in 2012 and Obama and McCain in 2008 came very close to splitting the independents in both of those elections. So what was the difference? There were more people who identified as a Democrat than as a Republican (according to Gallup). Right now, according to Gallup, Democrats have only a slight advantage when it comes to party identification, so that’s good news for the eventual Republican nominee.
So if party identification is a very important predictor of voter choice, then the way to victory is to get your party to vote for you, win half or more of the independents, and try to peel away some voters from the other party.
But can Trump get nearly all of those who identify as a Republican? I can’t think of any candidate in recent history who generates such strong dislike from some members of his party.
Trump and his supporters can claim that nearly all of the party will come around to support him in the fall, but that seems implausible. Still, assume that most Republicans would come around to support Trump. Even getting 80 percent of Republicans would put him in a difficult position to win.
But Trump claims that he’s drawing independents and Democrats. But the polling suggests it’s going to be very hard for him get enough independents and Democrats to win in the fall. A January poll from Gallup indicated that Trump had the worst favorability ratings among any Republican candidates among independents and Democrats. Trump was net -27 among independents (that is, his unfavorability rating was 27 points higher than his favorability rating) and -70 among Democrats. No other Republican was so far underwater with non-Republicans. It’s not enough to get some independents and Democrats. For Trump to win, he gets a majority of independents and at least 20 percent of Democrats.
Trump, the businessman, should understand you need a plan for winning. In presidential politics you need a plan for winning a majority of electoral votes because there’s only one winner. Attracting a dedicated minority of voters wins no prize.
The Trump campaign is like one of those outlandish business ideas, like personal travel to the moon, that has some potential customers, but it doesn’t have a winning business plan.
Yes, Trump can win the general election. Trump can also lose it. We’ll find out in November.
Some of y’all probably know by now that I’m no fan of Donald Trump. Never have been for any of his various manifestations and television personae over the decades. But this “Can’t win in November” is exactly what was said about Ronald Reagan at this same point in the 1980 process, polls and all, against an incumbent who was utterly incompetent but with a fraction the negative baggage of Hillary Clinton.
You bring up a good point. I call it the “Parasite” factor. When the parasite outnumbers the host, the host dies. The host ,to keep from dieing, must throw off the parasite.
People want free stuff from other people that own it. They don’t care who gives it to them. Hillary would be fine.
I was assuming a rational thoughtful electorate with the good of the nation in mind. You promote that that concept has no place in what is left of out failing country. You may be right.
Trump proved that he can cut Hillary off at the knees about a month ago.
I was shocked at that statement. It is not from a healthy mind.
What will make the difference is voter turnout. If we can drive and motivate Republican voters to show up and vote for Trump, we’ve got this. Remember that Hillary’s unfavorables are worse than Trump’s, she’s despised even by many Democrats.
Many Democrats are loathe to vote for Hillary, likewise some Republicans are loathe to vote for Trump. The party that best convinces its detractors to suck it up and vote for the nominee will be the winner.
Hillary’s base is blacks and gays. Regular liberals aren’t crazy about her. We can carve off a large segment of blue collar Dems, and among those we can’t convince, there are many who will stay home.
Our effort has to be in getting our people to show up and vote. It’s time to put differences aside, our whole future is at stake.
The ONLY time this forecast, has been incorrect when applied, was ONCE, which was in 1960.
This is a PROFOUND PREDICTION
Political science professor forecasts Trump as general election winner
The Statesman | February 23, 2016 | Christopher Cameron
Professor Helmut Norpoth's forecast presentation took place Monday evening in the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan, which was organized by the Stony Brook Alumni Association.
Norpoth created a statistical model of presidential elections that uses a candidate's performance in their party's primary and patterns in the electoral cycle as predictors of the presidential vote in the general election.
Donald Trump has a 97 percent chance of defeating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of defeating Bernie Sanders in the general election, according to Norpoth's formula.
"The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president," Norpoth said, "if he's a nominee of the [Republican] party."
Norpoth's primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.
Complete story source:
“So if party identification is a very important predictor of voter choice, then the way to victory is to get your party to vote for you, win half or more of the independents, and try to peel away some voters from the other party.”
Your model is flawed. Romney won the independent vote in 2012, and still lost.
Hillary is not popular in her party. There are lots of Democrats that do not like her, and a fair amount of Democrats that like Trump.
Polls at this stage are often used to create outcomes, rather than as a predictor of what the vote will be like.
Not far from this far out in the election in 1992, George Bush the first was riding high in the polls. He lost.
But most of that is history. The big difference is that most people now distrust the media cartel, changing all the dynamics of a presidential election. It is why Trump has fractured and destroyed “political correctness”.
Trump certainly has the capability of winning big, just as Reagan did. It is way too early to be considering polls about potential nominees as anything serious.
Jeb?
The American sense of fairness at play and the denial of rewarding Trump for his hard work and earning the nomination has change the conversation in the last 24 hours.
It makes me wonder if Boehner and Curly are actually in Trump’s corner on this.
FWIW, we don’t discuss politics in my office, but as of today, I’m hearing that people are starting to give Trump a second look. With Romney taking a shot at him and then after Kasich won and people trying to prop him up, they truly believe the GOPe is scared because of things THEY have done.
Second person is a very panicked pro-Hillary voter who will blindly vote for her but has no idea she’s being investigated and just insists Trump can win.
So, my take is the Trump can’t win choir is coming from the Left.
Florida , North Carolina , Virginia , and Ohio
Trump won everyone but Ohio
Cruz was close in North Carolina
Third in Florida, Virginia and Ohio.
Kasich won Ohio , last in Florida less than 10% , last in North Carolina , last in Virginia
and the GOP says he the only one that can beat Hillary?
By the time General Election rolls around, all the negaitives will have become "old, discredited attacks." And easily laughed off by Trump/Cruz
Meanwhile, Hillary has avoided any criticism during the primaries. No discussion of Benghazi or the emails. Hillary has not been toughened up for th egeneral election.
Trump will rip her apart.
I still think Cruz will be the VP.
Many of them brag about how many times they voted. When no ID is required, they send folks in to vote in place of those that they know won’t show up. This is one more reason that we need to win this one, and get the DOJ to crack down on this obvious fraud.
I can’t wait for Trump to remind Hillary that he donated to the Clintons in the past! He’ll remind her how much she liked him then!
Many financial analysts aren’t worth his petty cash : )
In March of 1980, polls showed Jimmy Carter beating Ronald Reagan 58% to 33%. We all know how that turned out.
“Based on the turn out number the hard voter data does not support these “polling” assumptions the Hate Trump Always squad throws around.”
Indeed, Trump’s turnout at the voting booth is consistently LOWER than the polls predict.
The best part of that?
She can’t complain about it without bringing national attention to it and sounding like she is whining.
She wants the job, she better learn how to fight like a man, because I don’t see a lot of lefty Vasser feminists running EMEA, Pan-Asia or Europe.
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.