You Play the Game to Win

The sole purpose of a political party in a representative republic is to choose and support candidates that can win elections.  After eight years of Obama the 2016 election has become extraordinarily important and who the Republicans choose as their presidential nominee must win in November.  Therefore, it is time for a proverbial “Dutch Uncle” talk without the usual rancor, meaningless accusations, vile epithets and unthinking loyalty to any one candidate.

In 2012 approximately 127 million Americans voted in the presidential election (in 2008 there were nearly 130 million).  It is generally estimated that between 130 million and 132 million will vote this year in a nation with ever changing demographics and voting patterns.  Donald Trump is the current leader and odds on favorite to win the Republican nomination and challenge Hillary Clinton.  As of today what are Trump’s unvarnished chances to win in November?

In 2012, 53% of the voting electorate was made up of women.  However, in 2008 women accounted for 54%.  With the potential interest generated by having the first women ever nominated for president, it is estimated that in 2016 the female vote percentage will be higher than the 2008 level or 55% of all voters.  Among women Trump presently records an astounding 73% negative rating (only 27% of women have a favorable opinion of Trump).  In 2012 Romney won 44% of the total female vote (Romney lost women by 11 percentage points) but at present Trump is currently losing to Hillary among women by 23 percentage points.  Just to get back to the level of Romney in 2012 will be a herculean and in all likelihood an impossible task considering his astronomically high unfavorable rating. It is projected that the male vote in 2016 will be about 45% of those voting.  In 2012 Romney won 52% of that group.  In an astonishing turn of events Trump is viewed unfavorably by 57% of men (a first for a Republican in many years of polling).  It will, therefore, be a very difficult task, considering the changing racial makeup of the electorate, for Trump to get to the same level as Romney in 2012.

Nonetheless if Trump somehow manages to just equal Romney’s performance in 2012 he will lose the election by over 5 million votes.  In order to win the general election, he must win 47 per cent of the female vote as well as 55% of the male vote -- or 59% of the male vote in combination with 44% of the women’s vote.   Considering where he is today it is hard to visualize that eventually coming to past.

Within the above voting groups are the demographic subsets which will also factor into the difficulty Trump will have in just matching Romney’s results in 2012.

In 2012 Whites made up 72% of all voters in 2016 it is estimated that percentage will fall to 69% as the Hispanic vote will account for 14% (11% in 2012, 9% in 2008), the African-American vote will remain stable at around 13% and the Asian vote, 3% in 2012, will be 4% in 2016.

Among those groups Trump’s current unfavorability ratings are:

Whites                                     60% 

Hispanic                                  85%

African-Americans                  81%

In order to offset the extraordinarily high negatives among non-whites, Trump would have to win in excess of 65% of the White vote (he is currently viewed negatively by 67% of White women alone).  That high a percentage of the overall White vote is a feat not accomplished since Reagan’s 49 state landslide in 1984, when Whites made up nearly 83% of the voting electorate.  Trump could offset that by or winning at least 32% of the non-white vote in combination with what Romney achieved in 2012 among White voters.  Either scenario seems an impossible task. 

A further nail in the coffin is found in the generational subsets.  The largest single generation, from a population standpoint, are the Millennials having passed the Baby Boomers in terms of numbers.  This voting group, while accounting for 20% of the vote in 2012 will in all likelihood account for 28-30% of the those voting in 2016.  Trump currently is viewed unfavorably by nearly 78% of this voting bloc.

The Trump forces, in order to counter these dismal poll numbers, have recently claimed that Reagan was in a similar position in 1980.  However, that talking point has been thoroughly debunked by the Gallop polling group who reviewed the archived data and found that Reagan, in May of 1980, was viewed favorably by 60% or more American people as compared to Trump who carries around the baggage of a 67% unfavorability rating (an historic high).

No one in modern history has ever been able to overcome such depth of dislike and negativity to win the presidency. The only way that a Trump candidacy could succeed in capturing the White House is if the economy collapses as it did in 2008 or if the Democratic Party nominee is indicted for a felony.  Hillary, as long as Obama controls the Justice Department, will escape an indictment unless so much evidence is produced that there is little choice.  But likely that will be known before August in which case the Democrats will nominate another candidate at their convention who, in all likelihood, would be even more formidable than Hillary against Trump. 

Therefore, for the first time in this nation’s history, is a nominating process being used solely to vent anger and seek revenge?  Is there no thought as to the consequences in a general election?  Is there no determination to defeat the opposition? Apparently not.  These are desperate times for the United States as it rapidly approaches the point of no return.  Another four to eight years of Democratic Party control will set this country on a permanent path of evolving into another failed Euro-socialist democracy. 

Defeating any Democrat presidential nominee in the America of 2016 will be a daunting and formidable task but the least that can be asked of the Republican Party voters, leaders and convention delegates is to nominate someone who has a genuine chance to win in November and that is not Donald Trump.

The sole purpose of a political party in a representative republic is to choose and support candidates that can win elections.  After eight years of Obama the 2016 election has become extraordinarily important and who the Republicans choose as their presidential nominee must win in November.  Therefore, it is time for a proverbial “Dutch Uncle” talk without the usual rancor, meaningless accusations, vile epithets and unthinking loyalty to any one candidate.

In 2012 approximately 127 million Americans voted in the presidential election (in 2008 there were nearly 130 million).  It is generally estimated that between 130 million and 132 million will vote this year in a nation with ever changing demographics and voting patterns.  Donald Trump is the current leader and odds on favorite to win the Republican nomination and challenge Hillary Clinton.  As of today what are Trump’s unvarnished chances to win in November?

In 2012, 53% of the voting electorate was made up of women.  However, in 2008 women accounted for 54%.  With the potential interest generated by having the first women ever nominated for president, it is estimated that in 2016 the female vote percentage will be higher than the 2008 level or 55% of all voters.  Among women Trump presently records an astounding 73% negative rating (only 27% of women have a favorable opinion of Trump).  In 2012 Romney won 44% of the total female vote (Romney lost women by 11 percentage points) but at present Trump is currently losing to Hillary among women by 23 percentage points.  Just to get back to the level of Romney in 2012 will be a herculean and in all likelihood an impossible task considering his astronomically high unfavorable rating. It is projected that the male vote in 2016 will be about 45% of those voting.  In 2012 Romney won 52% of that group.  In an astonishing turn of events Trump is viewed unfavorably by 57% of men (a first for a Republican in many years of polling).  It will, therefore, be a very difficult task, considering the changing racial makeup of the electorate, for Trump to get to the same level as Romney in 2012.

Nonetheless if Trump somehow manages to just equal Romney’s performance in 2012 he will lose the election by over 5 million votes.  In order to win the general election, he must win 47 per cent of the female vote as well as 55% of the male vote -- or 59% of the male vote in combination with 44% of the women’s vote.   Considering where he is today it is hard to visualize that eventually coming to past.

Within the above voting groups are the demographic subsets which will also factor into the difficulty Trump will have in just matching Romney’s results in 2012.

In 2012 Whites made up 72% of all voters in 2016 it is estimated that percentage will fall to 69% as the Hispanic vote will account for 14% (11% in 2012, 9% in 2008), the African-American vote will remain stable at around 13% and the Asian vote, 3% in 2012, will be 4% in 2016.

Among those groups Trump’s current unfavorability ratings are:

Whites                                     60% 

Hispanic                                  85%

African-Americans                  81%

In order to offset the extraordinarily high negatives among non-whites, Trump would have to win in excess of 65% of the White vote (he is currently viewed negatively by 67% of White women alone).  That high a percentage of the overall White vote is a feat not accomplished since Reagan’s 49 state landslide in 1984, when Whites made up nearly 83% of the voting electorate.  Trump could offset that by or winning at least 32% of the non-white vote in combination with what Romney achieved in 2012 among White voters.  Either scenario seems an impossible task. 

A further nail in the coffin is found in the generational subsets.  The largest single generation, from a population standpoint, are the Millennials having passed the Baby Boomers in terms of numbers.  This voting group, while accounting for 20% of the vote in 2012 will in all likelihood account for 28-30% of the those voting in 2016.  Trump currently is viewed unfavorably by nearly 78% of this voting bloc.

The Trump forces, in order to counter these dismal poll numbers, have recently claimed that Reagan was in a similar position in 1980.  However, that talking point has been thoroughly debunked by the Gallop polling group who reviewed the archived data and found that Reagan, in May of 1980, was viewed favorably by 60% or more American people as compared to Trump who carries around the baggage of a 67% unfavorability rating (an historic high).

No one in modern history has ever been able to overcome such depth of dislike and negativity to win the presidency. The only way that a Trump candidacy could succeed in capturing the White House is if the economy collapses as it did in 2008 or if the Democratic Party nominee is indicted for a felony.  Hillary, as long as Obama controls the Justice Department, will escape an indictment unless so much evidence is produced that there is little choice.  But likely that will be known before August in which case the Democrats will nominate another candidate at their convention who, in all likelihood, would be even more formidable than Hillary against Trump. 

Therefore, for the first time in this nation’s history, is a nominating process being used solely to vent anger and seek revenge?  Is there no thought as to the consequences in a general election?  Is there no determination to defeat the opposition? Apparently not.  These are desperate times for the United States as it rapidly approaches the point of no return.  Another four to eight years of Democratic Party control will set this country on a permanent path of evolving into another failed Euro-socialist democracy. 

Defeating any Democrat presidential nominee in the America of 2016 will be a daunting and formidable task but the least that can be asked of the Republican Party voters, leaders and convention delegates is to nominate someone who has a genuine chance to win in November and that is not Donald Trump.