Political punditry: Why Trump Won't Win
Even a small number of disaffected loyal Republicans can help add a margin to Biden's 2020 numbers. "Unfavorable" numbers in polls don’t measure the depth of dislike.
I’ve avoided political punditry here at the Pancake. There’s plenty of it elsewhere, at the Bulwark—my favorite,—or the New York Times, MSNBC, Fox “News,” The Wall Street Journal (how do they find so much to dislike about President Biden?), ad nauseam. But amidst sundry polls that show Trump and Biden roughly statistically tied, I came across this reporting from the Times, “A Consensus Emerges at Davos: Trump Will Win Re-Election.”
Publicly, the global business leaders who gathered at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, haven’t wanted to predict the winner of the upcoming U.S. presidential election. The closest they’ve come? Referring to it as a “geopolitical risk.”
But talk to executives privately, and they’re more explicit: They expect Donald Trump to win and while many are worried about that, they are also resigned to it….
That said, the Davos crowd often gets things wrong. A common critique of those who attend the forum is that they are a contra-indicator of what’s to come, so their expectations could bode well for Biden or for Trump’s Republican rivals.
The poo-bahs at Davos are not exactly representative of the U.S. electorate. And, at the moment, Trump is not definitely the Republican nominee, though it may take an act of God to prevent that.1 Assuming he is, my own analysis is that, contrary to some polls and pundits, Biden has a pretty strong expectation of getting another term. (To see the case for Trump, see this devil’s advocate piece by Bret Stephens). Polls that track “unfavorable” for Trump and Biden don’t touch the saliency—the depth—of the unfavorable attitude. Unfavorable for Biden often means, “I’d rather it be someone else.” For Trump it more often can mean, “anyone else.”
I work at not engaging in wishful thinking. So why am I moderately confident? Six factors, then a caveat.
1. Trump has never won the popular vote
In 2016, Hillary Clinton received more votes than Trump, 65.8 million to 63.0 million). A change of only 107,000 votes in three key states (Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania), would have made Clinton President. That’s .08% to change history.
In 2020, Biden had a larger popular margin of 7 million. Yet the Electoral College votes were nearly identical to 2016, just reversed. We can’t lose sight of the reality that the Electoral College is slanted (rigged?) in favor of Republicans. I just don’t see Trump winning over new votes that he didn’t have in 2020.
Trump promoted a slate of MAGA-approved candidates in the 2022 mid-terms, including Kari Lake for governor in Arizona and Mehmet Oz for Senate in Pennslyvania. They lost and the Democrats in the House defied the usual losses as the Republicans barely won sort-of control. Why would that change in 2024?
2. Everyone who loves Trump is already counted
Trump is likely the best-known politician in American history. Well, maybe except for Franklin D. Roosevelt. Unlike any typical nonincumbent challenger. Love him or despise him, we understand who he is. It is hard to imagine that there are voters who are thinking, “I’d like to know a little more about this guy before I decide who to vote for.” The MAGA block is basically fixed. After one insurrection, two impeachment trials, three lost elections (two popular votes plus his candidates in 2022 midterms) and four criminal indictments, over 50% of Republicans still strongly prefer Trump as their man. However, that translates into only about one-fourth of the total electorate. He could get votes from among the relatively small 9 percent of voters who claim to be undecided at this point (largely the youngest voters, who typically break more for Democrats), as well as others who would have preferred another Republican, but like NH governor Chris Sununu, would nonetheless vote for him. But this does not aggregate to a convincing majority of all voters.
3. Iowa was not a big Trump win
The media covered the Iowa caucuses as though they meant something, although not since 2000 has the Iowa winner, when a nonincumbent was running, won the Republican party’s nomination. In 2016, Republican caucus goers preferred Ted Cruz to Trump. Previous winners have included Rick Santorum and Mike Huckabee, neither of whom came close to repeating their Iowa performance in real primaries. Racially, Iowa is 88% white and 39% of the population lives in rural areas, compared to 76% white and 20% rural for the U.S. So Iowa is not exactly very representative of the American voter base.
Last week, Trump received just a bare majority of the 110,000 caucus votes. That means 49% of Iowa Republicans wanted someone other than Trump. This isn’t as strong a vote of confidence in a former President as some analysts made it out to seem. Moreover, in 2016, 70% more Republicans participated in the caucuses. Cold weather can only partially account for the reduced turnout. I suspect a lack of enthusiasm for Trump other than his core minions was a substantial portion.
In addition, via Charlie Sykes at The Bulwark:
Only about 14-15% of GOP voters showed up; which means that Trump’s landslide total comprised about 8 percent of Iowa Republicans.
A substantial number of Republican voters are signaling that they are Never Trump. NBC reports that nearly half of Haley’s Iowa backers say they’d vote for Biden over Trump. As Mona Charen noted yesterday the pre-caucus poll by the Des Moine Register found that fully 25 percent of Iowa Republican caucus-goers say they won’t vote for Trump in November.
4. Indictments—and a conviction?
“Trump is fit to be president, even if convicted, most Iowa voters say.” and “Majority of GOP Iowa caucusgoers would support Trump even if convicted: poll.” The headlines missed the point. They are looking at these poll results as a glass being half (or, actually, about two-thirds) full. More critical is that about a third of the most motivated Iowa Republicans would NOT vote for Trump if he is convicted in any of his four indictments, at least one of which is likely to be resolved before the election.2 If this is a reasonable approximation for involved Republicans generally, that one-third in states such as Michigan, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania would be substantial additional padding to the slim Biden margins in those states in 2020.
5. The Democrats have kept their powder dry
While the Republicans have been the focus of attention so far, President Biden and the Democrats have given them space to engage in a circular firing squad. Chris Christie, though getting little primary traction, was out there making the anti-Trump case. Finally, Haley has finally started to directly criticize Trump.
Although the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC have been making noises about Democrat complacency, the Biden campaign has been wise to hold fire until after the Republicans are spent and Trump is confirmed as the de facto nominee. They have plenty to work with. But not with the expectation that they will change the view of the MAGAverse. Rather, their objective is to keep reminding the anti-Trump Republicans and the few still undecideds (how can that be?) why they either need to sit out (a Republican voter who doesn’t vote for Trump, especially in the swing states, is as good as a Biden vote) or send a message for reclaiming “their” party by neutering Trump and voting for Biden.
Keep this in mind: the ads and the message are not to convince the folks who would vote for Trump even if he shot someone on 5th Ave. (which his lawyers seem to claim a President could legally do). It is to reinforce the voters who may have never voted before for a Democrat and to remind unenthusiastic Democrats why they must vote—again, especially in key states. They don't need my vote in Massachusetts—there are plenty to spare.
6. The economy
Yes, much of the public still seems to think the economy stinks. That’s likely a vestige of the post-pandemic inflation of 2022 and the bulge in gas prices in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But inflation is down, as are gas costs. Meanwhile, other economic factors—unemployment, wages, and overall growth— remain robust,. Over the year this will sink in.
Caveat: Unknowns and Black Swans
It should go without saying—but, what the heck, I’ll say it—that all this assumes that there are no major upheavals, economic hurricanes, or world crises that can change the trajectory of events. Either candidate could have health issues. In January 2020, I don’t recall any predictions that a coronavirus pandemic would close the economy and give our President the forum to ruminate on injecting disinfectant or prescribing horse medicine.
Russia, China, North Korea, or Iran could initiate something big. Any event that could change the direction of the economy or push up the cost of energy can have an impact in an unknown direction.
Will Joe Manchin run as an independent? Will Robert Kennedy, Jr. gain any traction and, if so, would either pull more from Trump or Biden? Hard to know at this point.
However, we can’t bake in speculative exogenous variables. Nevertheless, looking at the macro forces and trends, my take is that we should appreciate that if just a small number of heretofore hardcore Republican voters join the Democrat base and a majority of true independents who see Trump for what he is, Joe Biden should exceed his 2024 popular vote and have more breathing room in the Electoral College. This isn’t a big leap. Maybe 100,000 converts over a few states will make a measurable difference.
Joe Biden has his negatives. But the contrast between him and Trump, stark in 2020, has become exponentially greater. Whatever faults one may attribute to Biden, they are a pimple compared to Trump’s megalomania. I’m convinced 2016 was an aberration. I’m also a realist, and I don’t think I’ve reached this conclusion by self deception.
Epilogue: A thought experiment for Biden supporters
What if a Genie popped out of a bottle and offered you a choice of two scenarios: One, that Trump is the nominee and had a 25% chance of winning vs. Biden. Or, second, that Haley is the nominee and had a 60% chance of winning vs. Biden. Are you willing to live dangerously, and risk even a small chance of Trump when you understand the implications? Or would you feel safer with a guarantee that Trump doesn’t get on the ballot, but a real conservative has a better than even chance of being the President? Comments welcome.
My first inclination was to write here “Oh, please God, make it happen).” But, then, see my Epilogue.
Nothing is guaranteed, but the Jan. 6 insurrection case is the most likely to move ahead this Spring.
Shocking, I know, but I agree with all your points. However, the failure to measure intensity of feeling works both ways. Trump's people are intensely for him. Can Biden get the record turnout required as he did in 2020? Not that many people sound enthusiastic about Biden. Turnout is the primary variable. I hope and think you are right, but it is far from a sure thing. On the Haley issue, I find that I am hoping for her to beat Trump (however unlikely), even if her presidency would be a major step backward. There is a real risk that the democracy would be destroyed under a second Trump presidency and we would become a fascist state. I don't think I would take a 10 percent risk of that (if I could choose). Haley looks like she would win now but talk about losing votes, how would she do with the MAGA crowd after Trump explains that she cheated and stole the the nomination.
Let it be so. Even Hailey is better than Trump. He needs to go away but we can only hope.