Most pundits have been waiting — for six months — for Donald Trump to fall. With less than a month until voting begins, the bombastic billionaire Democrat-turned-Republican still leads the national polls, by a lot.
Supporters of U.S. Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump jeer at protesters during a campaign rally in Burlington, Vermont January 7, 2016. Reuters
Trump also leads in some Iowa polls plus every other state poll taken in the past three months (including the home state of Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush).
Yet the “Trump will fall” chorus continues — now in more warbling, worried tones than before. Ross Douthat at the New York Times laid out a plausible narrative for a Trumpfall: Trump never rises above 30 percent, even after the minor candidates begin to drop out and the undecideds decide. After Cruz wins Iowa, he becomes the evangelical candidate, and sweeps the South. Soon, the Christie-Kasich-Rubio-Bush Establishment lane is whittled down to one candidate. In a three-way race, Trump can’t win, the argument goes.
If you delve deeper into the numbers and the history, there’s plenty of evidence to support this story, or a similar one.
First, there’s strong evidence Trump will lose Iowa. He may not even come in second. Although the latest Iowa poll shows Trump tied with Cruz at 31 percent, Cruz leads in most recent Iowa polls, and leads Trump by four points in the RealClearPolitics average.
The nature of the caucuses suggests Trump will underperform his polling. To caucus is much more of a commitment than a simple primary vote. You can’t simply find twenty minutes to pop over to the polling place and pull a lever, you need to be at your local caucus location for an hour or more at the actual caucus time.
This requires much more organization than the simpler task of turning out voters. And Trump doesn’t appear to have that organization. The Des Moines Register recently reported on a Trump event for precinct captains — only about 160 attended or tuned in. There are 1,681 precincts in the state.
Most of Trump’s precinct captains have never before even attended a caucus. “Many openly admitted to having a feeble grasp of the caucus process,” the Register reported.” Precinct captains ideally identify and connect with all supporters in the precinct. They sometimes help supporters line up babysitters and secure rides to and from the caucuses. It’s a rough job for someone who has never been to a caucus. And in most Iowa precincts, there may not even be a Trump captain.
Ted Cruz seems to have a formidable operation. Chris Christie has many Iowa GOP veterans on his side. Rubio will have a stronger ground game than Trump. All three have a decent chance of beating Trump in the caucuses.
After Iowa, there’s New Hampshire, where Trump still leads in the polls. Why wouldn’t he win there? Deeper digging around poll numbers suggest some reasons.
The headline numbers in the latest New Hampshire polls paint this picture: Trump at about 25 to 30 percent, Cruz at 10 to 15 percent, and the Establishment crew (Rubio, Christie, Kasich, and Bush) at about 45 percent total. If the Establishment vote coalesces before New Hampshire, Trump’s lead becomes very vulnerable.
Establishment consolidation doesn’t even require candidates dropping out. If one of those four finishes second or a very strong third in Iowa, the supporters of the other three could very likely flock to that one as their best chance against Cruz and Trump.
Here’s another telling detail from New Hampshire: Trump has the highest unfavorable rating in the latest Public Policy Polling surveys — 44 percent. When PPP asked voters who their second favorite was, only 7 percent chose Trump, putting him in fifth place in the category — and those seemingly came from Cruz. Undecided New Hampshire voters have an 86 percent unfavorable view of Trump.
And what about Trump’s constant, continuous lead in the national polls? You can put that question to Presidents Giuliani, Gingrich, and Hillary Clinton, all of whom led in the national polls at this point and lost nominations.
Trump’s national lead tells us little — and that little bit may actually be negative for him. The numbers, writes Harry Enten at the data-journalism site FiveThirtyEight, suggest that good national poll numbers could be negatively correlated with winning an early state.
How could that be? High national polls may mostly reflect high name recognition and high familiarity — meaning less potential upside.
The counter-argument: Gingrich and Giuliani didn’t have nightly rallies with thousands of eager fans. So Trump might really be something unique in American politics. Or he may soon be just another also-ran.
Timothy P. Carney, The Washington Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted at tcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Tuesday and Thursday nights on washingtonexaminer.com.
from AEI » Latest Content http://ift.tt/1TJJkXW
0 التعليقات:
Post a Comment