[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
politics and politicians Title: [Arguments for Trump's Electability Are] Weak and Getting Weaker Yet the electability argument against Trump is hardening, fast. He has a 67 percent unfavorable rating (per the Washington Post/ABC News poll), which would be the highest ever recorded for a major-party nominee, and a net favorable rating of minus-39 among white women and minus-31 among independents. Trump's numbers aren't just bad; they're the stuff of nightmares. When you add up all of the data, there are four reasons to suspect Trump's chances in the general election are incredibly slim. But the Trump-wins-by-turning-out-white-Republicans theory breaks down fatally when you look at where Trump is with every other group. In order to claw his way into the poor position he's in with white voters, Trump has cheesed off every other demographic group: He's minus-53 with self-described moderates; minus-62 with voters age 18 to 34; minus-71 with Hispanics. In order to beat Hillary Clinton, Trump has to outdo the Romney 2012 numbers. But even if he does better among white votersand right now it looks like he'll do worseit does no good if he can't stay at Romney's level among other groups. And Trump is poised to do much worse than Romney with just about everyone else. How is Trump going to challenge in those places when he has to defend spots like Utah and Mississippi, which are supposed to be gimmes for a Republican? Numbers don't move overnight. It took Trump two months to go from 5 percent in Republican polls to 30 percent. It took him seven months just to build another 10 percent of support among Republicansthe group most inclined to be open-minded about him. That shows you how hard it is for a candidate to convert marginal voters who aren't naturally part of their coalition. And in the process of finding those 10 additional points of support, Trump alienated a great number of other voters. So even if it were theoretically possible for Trump to build a coalition to beat Clinton, everyone now knows who Trump is, everyone has an opinion about himand he only has 30 weeks to pry people away from his would-be opponent. If Trump is the nominee he is either going to win it on the final day of the primaries or at a contested convention. Either way, it will be by one of the slimmest margins in history and it will signal that Trump failed to revolutionize the Republican party. Destroy the party? That's a real possibility. Take it over? Certainly. But in order to transform a party, a candidate has to offer a new program and build support among a growing number of the party's voters while also bringing the party's elites and organizational forces into the fold. Trump tried to do this initially. He has failed utterly. Once Trump began winking about violence at the Republican convention, and his on-again, off-again capo Roger Stone started talking about helping Trump supporters visit convention delegates at their hotel rooms to "discuss" matters with them, it was clear Trump no longer had any interest in transforming the party. He wants the Republican nomination, and he is perfectly happy to brutalize the party to get it. There will be no consensus building. Only submission and capitulation. That's his prerogative, of course. Trump owes the GOP just as much as the GOP owes himwhich is to say: exactly nothing. But as an electoral matter, this change is important. Because all of the scenarios for Trump's success in November were predicated on his being capable of uniting the Republican party. And not only does he not seem capable of this taskhe does not even seem interested in it. So clear that soon enough, even Trump's supporters may have to confront them. Poster Comment: This piece will appear in the Standard's print edition in 9 days. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
#3. To: TooConservative (#0)
Let's say you get your wish. Trump is cheated from the nomination, so you end up with Cruz, who got far fewer votes than Trump. Cruz is electable because...? With Trump, there's a transformative effect. With Cruz, there's nothing but a sleaxy bitter-ender. So, the party re-asserts itself and you get Cruz...and President Clinton and a Democrat Senate. Either way you look at it, you lose. I'd hate to be in your shoes.
Are you claiming we should vote for someone only if they are electable? Bubbette! is electable,and since you have already said you will vote for her if not Trump,does that mean you want us all to vote for YOUR "conservative candidate",Bubbette! Clinton? What ever happened to voting for a candidate because that was the one you wanted to see in office?
There are no replies to Comment # 6. End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.
Top Page Up Full Thread Page Down Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|