# Trump General Election Viability Predictions **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [February 27, 2016, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338 "2016-02-27T22:03:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![davida03801](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5e925/32.png) [@davida03801](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davida03801)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 11:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/41 "2016-02-28T11:19:55Z")
My prediction is a repeat of Reagan v Carter. Trump to be dissed all the way to election day and then everyone will be surprised when he wins by substantial margin. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/42 "2016-02-28T11:51:58Z")
> [@davida03801](#): > > My prediction is a repeat of Reagan v Carter. > > Trump to be dissed all the way to election day and then everyone will be surprised when he wins by substantial margin. but Carter had job approvals under (less than) 40% on election day, under which the incumbent party loses every time (1968, 1980, 1992, 2008). Obama’s in the toss-up zone (between 40 and 50%). Of course Carter was going to lose, Iran or no Iran, given the stagflation and interest rates. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/43 "2016-02-28T12:12:00Z")
Let’s note that 1968 was very close. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/44 "2016-02-28T13:12:31Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Let’s note that 1968 was very close. True, but Humphrey lost, and a loss is a loss. Additionally, unlike Anderson and Perot, George Wallace did siphon disproportionately from one candidate, Nixon, [per Nate Silver’s analysis](http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/trump-would-lose-badly-in-a-third-party-bid-but-he-could-take-the-republican-down-too/), as well as that LBJ and his party got the “blame” for Civil Rights in the South, which would never have voted HHH in Wallace’s absense. After the GOP convention, HHH [never led once](http://www.gallup.com/poll/110548/gallup-presidential-election-trialheat-trends-19362004.aspx), not even MoE, per Gallup. A Nixon win was inevitable. You can see [LBJ’s approvals](http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/presidential-job-approval-center.aspx) around November 1968, the closest to the election was 41%, but given the margin of error (from 2-4%, its as good as being below 40%) ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/45 "2016-02-28T13:17:48Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Hillary will go all out in negative attacks, with a very robust opposition research program (which, reportedly, Rubio and Cruz don’t have). If this is successful, and they find some really bad stuff that hasn’t yet come to light about Trump, it could torpedo his candidacy and result in a landslide. > > But that’s a big if, so we’ll see. Yes, because going negative on Trump has worked so well. Plus you’ve got the problem of Trump bringing out record numbers of voters, while the Democratic primaries are looking pretty moribund. I’m not predicting a Trump win, more predicting that Trump’s support is unpredictable. He’s a Democrat running in a Republican primary and winning. No matter what he does, it doesn’t change his support. If anything, he’s GAINING support in general election polling. And then you’ve got the problem that his unfavorables are not much worse than Clinton’s. But I’m rooting for you on this one. We haven’t been able to stop Trump. See if you have better luck. He must not become President. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/46 "2016-02-28T13:38:09Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Yes, because going negative on Trump has worked so well. > > Plus you’ve got the problem of Trump bringing out record numbers of voters, while the Democratic primaries are looking pretty moribund. > > I’m not predicting a Trump win, more predicting that Trump’s support is unpredictable. He’s a Democrat running in a Republican primary and winning. No matter what he does, it doesn’t change his support. If anything, he’s GAINING support in general election polling. And then you’ve got the problem that his unfavorables are not much worse than Clinton’s. > > But I’m rooting for you on this one. We haven’t been able to stop Trump. See if you have better luck. He must not become President. How much of Trump’s strength in beating back attacks is because he’s a legit savvy pol (which he appears to be) vs. the fact he wants to deport all the illegal immigrants and feeds the fact that many of the GOP base can’t differentiate between Islamist ideology and individual Muslim people? His stance on immigration seems to be the holy grail for a GOP primary candidate; GOP base voters have been searching for it for decades, especially as they see the fall of the religious right from its heyday of the 1980s and 2000 and 2004. You have a great point, which is why I predicted (as of now) it would be too close to call. Trump will either win or lose closely, or lose in a landslide, unless Obama’s job approvals (not favorability) numbers sink, especially since Trump and Hillary currently have similar honest/trustworthy numbers. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/47 "2016-02-28T13:38:30Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Yes, because going negative on Trump has worked so well. > > Plus you’ve got the problem of Trump bringing out record numbers of voters, while the Democratic primaries are looking pretty moribund. > > I’m not predicting a Trump win, more predicting that Trump’s support is unpredictable. He’s a Democrat running in a Republican primary and winning. No matter what he does, it doesn’t change his support. If anything, he’s GAINING support in general election polling. And then you’ve got the problem that his unfavorables are not much worse than Clinton’s. > > But I’m rooting for you on this one. We haven’t been able to stop Trump. See if you have better luck. He must not become President. The other Republican candidates have barely gone negative on Trump – they’ve expended much more effort on each other, until perhaps the last debate. The general election will be very different, and will have a very different audience. Going after Trump may not be so effective with a Republican primary audience, but the general election audience is incredibly different. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/48 "2016-02-28T14:04:19Z")
**Andy** is right. **Derek** , point taken about Wallace, but I don’t agree that “a loss is a loss”. Note that in my poll, there are seven options, but a one point win for Trump or a one point loss are the same answer. And more than one of you keep falsely claiming Hillary’s approval/disapproval numbers are similar to Trump’s. Stop it. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/49 "2016-02-28T14:16:53Z")
That 538 app is fascinating. I was sad to the that the following scenario is quite plausible College white 51 D, 82 turnout Non-college white 74 R, 78 turnout Black 92 D, 48 turnout Hispanic 84 D, 58 turnout Asian/other 73 D, 55 turnout Result: Trump wins, 49.9% to 48.3% popular; 303 to 235 electoral ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/50 "2016-02-28T14:23:24Z")
I ran my own numbers, actually assuming lower white turnout than you did and higher black turnout. Pretty much went with your Latino and Asian numbers. If white turnout increases as it has during the primaries in the general, then Trump only needs to win 1% more of the white vote than Romney did and it won’t matter what minority voters do, unless they can also muster higher turnout than 2008 and 2012. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/51 "2016-02-28T14:25:06Z")
IMO \*\*Snowboarder Bo \*\*nailed it. IMO … The problem everybody else has here is they persist in seeing this as an election between Democrats & Republicans. It’s NOT. I laid out my position in the Trump primary thread here [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19136145&postcount=2054](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19136145&postcount=2054). If you can’t understand how a Sanders supporter can easily become a Trump supporter you’re too stuck viewing the situation through your traditional Left / Traditional Right lenses. What is Sanders’ bumper-sticker message? “Fuck the fat-cats! Up with the (white)working class!” What is Trump’s bumper-sticker message? “Fuck the Others! Up with the (white)working class!” They differ only in whether they use a high school or a college vocabulary to sell the same message. How many posts do we have here where both D & R voters insist Hillary is a Wall Street shill? Dozens if not hundreds. That’s not a message that brings cheer to a traditional D voter. Recall the first Reagan election. Nobody predicted the huge crossover vote of Ds for him. The problem was the conventional wisdom assumed it was an election over ideology when it was really an election over economics & tone. This situation in 2016 is similar. Worrying about racial equality or poor Syrian refugees or global warming or air pollution or any other totemic D issue is all well and good. But it’s a luxury of people who are having a good life by their own standards. When 80% of the populace is getting utterly screwed by the current economic system (or believes they are), they’re going to forget ideology and vote for what they think is their economic interest. The “magic” of Trump is he let Fox & Limbaugh prepare the ground then he’s swooping in to collect their prize. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/52 "2016-02-28T14:28:13Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I ran my own numbers, actually assuming lower white turnout than you did and higher black turnout. Pretty much went with your Latino and Asian numbers. > > If white turnout increases as it has during the primaries in the general, then Trump only needs to win 1% more of the white vote than Romney did and it won’t matter what minority voters do, unless they can also muster higher turnout than 2008 and 2012. Exactly – that sums up the situation well. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/53 "2016-02-28T14:29:55Z")
Thing is, Trump isn’t only about “the others”. Trump is also after some of the fat cats too, namely the political class. Sanders should be including them in his pitch too. He seems constrained by his pro-government ideology. Americans have many targets for their ire: foreigners, minorities, intellectual elites, political elites, wealthy elites. Trump is directing his fire in all directions. Sanders is limited to just one group that Americans don’t like, and it’s probably the one they dislike the least, since they want to be them. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/54 "2016-02-28T14:34:21Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I ran my own numbers, actually assuming lower white turnout than you did and higher black turnout. Pretty much went with your Latino and Asian numbers. > > If white turnout increases as it has during the primaries in the general, then Trump only needs to win 1% more of the white vote than Romney did and it won’t matter what minority voters do, unless they can also muster higher turnout than 2008 and 2012. This. If Trump gets the Sullen Majority to show up he’ll destroy HRC even though Hillary may get more total votes than Obama did in 2012. > [@adaher](#): > > Thing is, Trump isn’t only about “the others”. Trump is also after some of the fat cats too, namely the political class. Sanders should be including them in his pitch too. He seems constrained by his pro-government ideology. > > Americans have many targets for their ire: foreigners, minorities, intellectual elites, political elites, wealthy elites. Trump is directing his fire in all directions. Sanders is limited to just one group that Americans don’t like, and it’s probably the one they dislike the least, since they want to be them. And this. I distilled my bumper sticker a bit to much to make it look pretty. Trumps pitch is really “Fuck the non-working class! Up with the (white) working class!” ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/55 "2016-02-28T14:56:50Z")
> [@dracoi](#): > > Honestly, I would say the exact same thing about Trump’s support from _Republicans_. Look at Trumps life history. Other than the last ten years (birther nonsense and the current campaign), what has he actually done that makes him the “true conservative” his supporters say they want? From my reading, I don’t think his supporters are looking for a “true conservative.” They are looking for an abrasive personality to give voice to their discontent about brown people, women, jobs, and the state of the country. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/56 "2016-02-28T14:57:24Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > IMO \*\*Snowboarder Bo \*\*nailed it. > > IMO … > > The problem everybody else has here is they persist in seeing this as an election between Democrats & Republicans. It’s NOT. I laid out my position in the Trump primary thread here [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19136145&postcount=2054](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19136145&postcount=2054). > > If you can’t understand how a Sanders supporter can easily become a Trump supporter you’re too stuck viewing the situation through your traditional Left / Traditional Right lenses. > > What is Sanders’ bumper-sticker message? “Fuck the fat-cats! Up with the (white)working class!” > What is Trump’s bumper-sticker message? “Fuck the Others! Up with the (white)working class!” > > They differ only in whether they use a high school or a college vocabulary to sell the same message. > > How many posts do we have here where both D & R voters insist Hillary is a Wall Street shill? Dozens if not hundreds. That’s not a message that brings cheer to a traditional D voter. > Recall the first Reagan election. Nobody predicted the huge crossover vote of Ds for him. The problem was the conventional wisdom assumed it was an election over ideology when it was really an election over economics & tone. This situation in 2016 is similar. > > Worrying about racial equality or poor Syrian refugees or global warming or air pollution or any other totemic D issue is all well and good. But it’s a luxury of people who are having a good life by their own standards. > > When 80% of the populace is getting utterly screwed by the current economic system (or believes they are), they’re going to forget ideology and vote for what they think is their economic interest. > > The “magic” of Trump is he let Fox & Limbaugh prepare the ground then he’s swooping in to collect their prize. In just over six months, this will look very smart…or it won’t. Hell, I will give you partial credit if Trump loses by less than five points, which I don’t see happening. Are you sure some of you aren’t forgetting to factor in women voters? Again, that’s a major flaw of the 538 widget. P.S. What’s with the mismatch between the poll and the comments? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/57 "2016-02-28T16:12:12Z")
There is [little historic precedence](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/02/01/how_much_does_voter_turnout_matter_112990.html) for presuming a straight up correlation between primary participation and general election turnout. Please again note that the Democratic side turnout is off compared to 2008 but still at very healthy levels compared to other years. In NH, for example, it was the second highest ever recorded. Behind 2008 in first, and above 2004 in third. In 2008 Clinton worked to help unite those who supported her to enthusiastically support Obama and the increased involvement in the Democratic primaries moved into the general. It is unknown how it will play out on the GOP side this time. Are these still those who normally come out and vote in the general and reliably GOP, or previous nonvoters? Will those who support candidates who are not Trump in the selection process come out for him in the general as Clinton supporters did for Obama, or will they stay home or even vote for Clinton? Will Rubio and Bush and Cruz join Christie in supporting Trump and enthusiastically encourage their supporters to rally behind him, as Clinton did for Obama? Maybe. Maybe not. The phrase “The Sullen Majority” is quite clever, I like it, but thing is they aren’t. They are a minority and a minority that traditionally is more likely to be nonvoters. Trump has increased their turnout in the primaries and gotten most of their share there. He _will_ increase their turnout and get a bigger share of them in the general, including some who currently support Sanders and voted Obama. But not from 57 to 78%. And he will lose some college-educated White share. And yes **Slacker** some women across the board, especially White college educated but also some non-college educated. And provoke bigger turnout against him in some other demographics. I’ve made my bet on a close Hillary win but dang there is so much that is unknown and a solid Trump win to a blow out Hillary one are all outcomes that would not surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/58 "2016-02-28T16:14:29Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > Are you sure some of you aren’t forgetting to factor in women voters? Again, that’s a major flaw of the 538 widget. > > P.S. What’s with the mismatch between the poll and the comments? Good point about women voters. As for the mismatch, several posters (myself included) chose one of the options, and THEN started to learn more by reading this thread – and/or by playing around with the 538 widget. So, some of our comments don’t reflect our initial assumptions (or hopes). ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/59 "2016-02-28T16:16:06Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > . > P.S. What’s with the mismatch between the poll and the comments? I assume that since “Trump wins” is so against the conventional wisdom atm those guys feel more of a need to defend the position. ---
**Author:** ![JKellyMap](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jkellymap/32/15880_2.png) [@JKellyMap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JKellyMap)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2016, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338/60 "2016-02-28T16:24:20Z")
Okay, here’s one more scenario from that 538 widget – very plausible, and very interesting, because the Dems win the popular vote (49.3% to 49.0%), but the Reps win the electoral college (290 to 248): College white 50-50, 82 turnout Non-college white 73 R, 69 turnout (is that more realistic, DSeid?) Black 89 D, 59 turnout Hispanic 82 D, 60 turnout Asian/Other 74 D, 52 turnout [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trump-general-election-viability-predictions/747338.md?page=4)