mykeystrokes.com

"Do or Do not. There is no try."

“A Lone Ranger”: Not Much Evidence Donald Trump Can Win The Presidency On The Shoulders Of The White Working Class

It took the chattering classes a while to figure out that Donald Trump had a particular appeal to white non-college-educated Republican primary voters. But once they figured it out, some leaped to a very different proposition: that Trump could ride an army of white working-class voters to the White House despite his many electoral weaknesses, via boffo performances in normally Democratic-leaning midwestern states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa (all carried twice by Barack Obama).

A closer look at the data shows Trump not quite so dominant among non-college-educated white voters (particularly outside the South), and not adding enough value in this one demographic compared to what he loses in others.

The most sophisticated version of the argument that Trump could have a narrow path to victory comes from the estimable Ron Brownstein, who believes that all other things being equal, Trump might reverse some narrow Democratic margins in the Midwest by reversing equally narrow Democratic margins (atypical for the country as a whole) among white working-class voters. I emphasize the qualifier because it’s not all that likely that all other things will be equal with Trump at the top of the ticket; he will surely lose some 2012 Romney voters, perhaps a lot of them.

But it’s important to remember that Republicans are already winning non-college-educated white voters by a big margin. Mitt Romney won an estimated 62 percent of this vote in 2012. Any Trump “bonus” will have to come either from improvements in that number, increased white working-class turnout (against the stiff wind of that group’s declining share of the population), or from some significant redistribution of the white working-class vote by region or state.

One broad indicator of the very different picture you get by shifting from white working-class voters within Republican primaries and white working-class voters generally is in the new ABC/Washington Post analysis of Trump’s favorability ratios among different demographic groups. He comes in at 47-52 among non-college-educated whites, a truly terrible performance not just in terms of his perceived strengths but as compared to Romney’s actual support in the last election.

But there’s some more granular evidence as well of the limits of Trump’s white working-class vote in a competitive environment in the very midwestern cockpit where it should matter most. At the Democratic Strategist (disclosure: I have a long association with that site), Andrew Levison has examined the relative performance of all candidates from both parties in three recent midwestern open primaries, and shown that Trump’s share of the total white working-class vote ranged from 26 percent in Illinois to 30 percent in Ohio (where he actually lost the primary to John Kasich). These numbers should reflect whatever appeal Trump has among marginal voters — i.e., those he can uniquely bring to the polls. Moreover, despite significantly higher overall turnout, the Republican field with Trump in it registered less than overwhelming margins among white working-class voters in Illinois (56 percent) and Michigan (58 percent). Republicans did win 67 percent in Ohio, almost certainly as a product of the appeal not of Trump but of home-state governor John Kasich.

Even if you only discount the GOP percentage of white working-class voters in these midwestern states a few points to reflect across-the-board turnout factors that probably had little to do with any one demographic, it’s not looking like the kind of tsunami that could come close to offsetting Trump’s probable drop in Romney-level support in other parts of the electorate — most notably in Republican-leaning women and highly educated professionals. The ABC/Washington Post analysis put Trump’s favorability ratios at 14-85 among Hispanics, at 18-80 among voters under the age of 35, at 29-68 among white women, and at 23-74 among white college graduates. This is a long, long way from looking like a winning coalition.

 

By: Ed Kilgore, Daily Intelligencer, New York Magazine, April 1, 2016

April 3, 2016 Posted by | Donald Trump, General Election 2016, GOP Primaries, White Working Class | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“America Declines Dinner Date With Jeb Bush”: Most People Seem To Be Washing Their Hair That Night

Nobody wants to have dinner with Jeb Bush.

At least, that’s the sense you’d get from reading the comments on his posts encouraging Facebook users to sign up for a chance to dine with him. The Bush campaign’s official page sponsors a post from time to time that encourages users to hand over their names and email addresses in exchange for a chance to eat dinner with the former Florida governor.

Campaign spokesman Tim Miller said the post does well for Bush, and outperforms most of their other Facebook outreach efforts. But based on the comments, you might not know it. The responses on the most recent available version of the post are overwhelmingly negative—and trollishly so.

“The ‘prize’ seems more like a booby-prize……” says the top comment, written by a user named MrNoam Zsnc, whose avatar features the weird kid from Deliverance. “Winner gets to have dinner with Jeb! Loser gets to have 2 dinners with Jeb!”

MrNoam Zsnc the Deliverance Kid wasn’t the only person to express that uncharitable sentiment.

“Does the loser get two dinners with Jeb!?” wrote user Volodya Shevchenko, whose avatar features a cat wearing a bright red pigtail wig.

Of the 100+ comments appending that post, only 15 were even remotely positive. The rest were a hodgepodge of mean-spirited memes, poorly spelled comments, eye-rolling references to polls, and general crabbiness.

“Nope. Drop out Mr. 3%,” wrote a user called Jace Tobias, whose comment received at least 31 likes—the most of any comment on that particular posting of the ad.

One commenter, a Tennessee college student named Maxwell Bentley Lee, flagged to a group of Bernie Sanders supporters that his anti-Jeb comment was at one point the top response to the advertisement.

“Nobody wants to eat dinner with Jeb,” he wrote in that comment. “The only people who would actually want Jeb as President are other millionaires in Congress who would benefit from going to White House parties if Jeb was elected.”

That comment got 36 likes and appeared in directly under the promoted post.

Reached for comment via Facebook Messenger, Lee reiterated to The Daily Beast that he would not like to have dinner with Jeb.

“I am not interested at all—would be a waste of both our time,” he wrote.

A number of users made jokes about being expected to pick up the check if they dined with the former governor. One posted a weird photoshop of Bush’s face over the Little Debbie logo, titled “Little Jebbie.” The poster did not respond to a Facebook message politely requesting explanation as to whether the pre-packaged bakery snack image was an allusion to any of Bush’s particular policy goals. (Anonymous Facebook posters aren’t the only political observers with a penchant for unsettling photoshops; Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump recently tweeted a picture of Ted Cruz’s mug photoshopped onto what appears to be a likeness of notorious Sen. Joseph McCarthy.)

“Hey can I throw tamatos at him,” wrote another.

The Huffington Post’s poll tracker shows that Bush’s favorables have gone largely gone down and unfavorables have gone up since he entered the race. Currently, he’s at 53.8 percent unfavorable and just 31.5 percent favorable. A Quinnipiac poll in November gave him the worst net favorability rating of any presidential candidate. And earlier this month, a Gallup poll indicated that his net favorability with Republicans is 10 percentage points lower than it was this summer.

And while there are a panoply of explanations for this, it’s unwise to write off the impact of Internet comments. A study published in The Journal of Advertising early last year indicated that people take Internet comments seriously if they perceive the authors as credible. And being perceived as credible, on the Internet, isn’t too darn tough. So a constant drone of persistently negative commentary on every ad that Jeb promotes doesn’t do him any favors.

It also wouldn’t make for very pleasant dinner conversation.

 

By: Betsy Woodruff, The Daily Beast, January 22, 2016

January 25, 2016 Posted by | Campaign Advertising, GOP Presidential Candidates, Jeb Bush | , , , , , | Leave a comment

   

%d bloggers like this: