These Trump numbers should scare the GOP

Some Republicans have been trying to talk themselves into believing that Donald Trump would not be so bad as the Republican nominee for president. Maybe he really would scramble the political deck sufficiently, they think, to allow the party to retake the White House.

Those Republicans are whistling past the graveyard. A Trump nomination has as much chance of success in the general election as Trump University, or Trump Mortgage, or Trump Shuttle, or Trump Vodka, or Trump Casinos. Trump is an electoral disaster waiting to happen.

Demographic trends make clear that a Republican nominee who hopes to win a majority of the popular vote in 2016 must gain either 30 per cent of the non-white vote or 65 per cent of the white vote, a level not seen since former president Ronald Reagan’s 49-state landslide sweep in 1984. Trump doesn’t stand a chance of doing either one.

Gain 30 per cent of the nonwhite vote? Trump’s favourable to unfavourable ratings in the latest Post-ABC News national poll among nonwhites are 16 percent to 81 percent (72 per cent strongly unfavourable); among Hispanics alone — the largest and fastest-growing minority group — they are 14 per cent to 85 per cent (74 per cent strongly unfavourable). A Trump nomination could lock Hispanics into the Democratic column for a generation or more, threatening Republican presidential victories as far as the eye can see.

Gain 65 per cent of the white vote? Trump’s favourable to unfavourable ratings among white women are 29 per cent to 68 per cent. His strongly unfavourable rating of 55 per cent among white women is more than four times his strongly favourable rating among that group of 13 per cent. How in the world could Trump reach 65 per cent among whites overall if more than two-thirds of white women give him an unfavourable rating today, and if most of that unfavourable rating is intensely negative?

And that’s not all. Millennials have now passed baby boomers to become the largest generation. Trump’s ratings among millennials are now 18 per cent favourable to 80 per cent unfavourable, with 70 per cent strongly unfavourable. Partisan identifications that are formed when voters come of political age tend to stick with them the rest of their lives, and a Trump nomination could push an entire generation into the Democratic column.

Negative ratings at these levels are historic for a major party nominee, creating hurricane-force head winds. And just imagine what Trump’s unfavourable ratings would be once the Democrats’ ads finish running.

But what about “the missing white voters” whom Trump supposedly would energise and bring into the electorate? Weren’t there more than four million whites who voted in 2008 but not 2012? Yes, and Mitt Romney lost by five million votes. Had every one of the missing white voters turned out and voted for Romney, he still would have lost.

Those whites who did not vote were concentrated in the deepest red states — Arkansas, Oklahoma, West Virginia — where President Obama never had a chance and lack of competition drove down turnout. No evidence exists of a dramatic falloff among white voters in the swing states that decide the outcome of a presidential contest.

Conservatives are fond of calling for dynamic scoring of the financial impact of changes in tax policy, where individuals’ behaviour is incorporated into the estimate. For example, doubling the tax on yachts does not generate twice the revenue, because people in turn do not buy as many yachts.

We should apply the same concept to voter turnout. Would a Trump nomination bring more white voters to the polls? Undoubtedly, based on the high viewership of Republican debates and the high turnout in Republican primaries so far. Higher white turnout could conceivably put some of the Democratic-leaning but overwhelmingly white states of the Great Lakes region into play.

But the other side gets to play this game, too. There may have been four million fewer whites who voted in 2012, but there were also 12 million eligible Hispanic voters who stayed home. We know it is easier to drive voters to the polls to vote against rather than for a candidate — witness the tea party’s success in 2010 and 2014 in trying to stop the Obama agenda.

How difficult would it be to increase Hispanic turnout, given Trump’s ratings and his threat to deport 11 million immigrants? The easiest job in United States politics in 2016 goes to the Democratic operative charged with doubling Hispanic turnout to stop Trump. And that could put some Republican-leaning states with higher non-white populations, such as Georgia, into play.

Trump has a serious Republican problem as well. Since 1984, no victorious Republican presidential candidate has received less than 91 per cent support from Republicans. Trump’s favourable to unfavourable ratings among Republicans are 52 per cent to 47 per cent, with 34 per cent strongly unfavourable. A candidate beginning a general election campaign with almost half of his party holding unfavourable views is a non-starter. Contrast that with Hillary Clinton’s favourable to unfavourable ratings among Democrats of 78 per cent to 20 per cent.

A Trump nomination will put a Democrat in the White House, seriously threaten Republican majorities in Congress and leave the Republican Party in shambles. Let’s hope Republicans wake up before it’s too late.

— Washington Post

Whit Ayres is president of North Star Opinion Research, a GOP polling firm, and was the pollster for Marco Rubio’s presidential campaign. He is the author of 2016 and Beyond: How Republicans Can Elect a President in the New America.