An interesting article explores Trump’s claim that he is drawing in new voters to the Republican party.
This may be true, but there is another explanation. Most people don’t vote, and in primary elections it is even worse. Yes, there are more Republicans voting in the presidential primaries this year than usual. But so far, more people have voted for someone other than Trump than have voted for Trump. So while it is true that Trump is bringing in new people to vote in the GOP primaries, it is more likely that he is bringing in more people because they want to vote against him.
We won’t know whether this is true or not until (and unless) he makes it to the general election and we see how many people (not just Republicans, but also Democrats and independents) actually want him to be president.
15 Comments
He has the white male chauvinist misogynist ignorant vote no matter what party or no party they belong to.
Not too sure if this is true or not. As far as I know quartz is not a liberal news site:)
http://qz.com/639956/republican-lawmakers-may-not-trust-science-but-they-do-believe-in-magic/
It’s true.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-resolution/642/text
EBDOUG, “there is special place in hell for men who don’t vote Trump”
I think what is overlooked is how much many Trump voters are not so much voting FOR Trump, as they are AGAINST the perceived hegemony of the special interests that control both parties. Same thing goes to some degree for Bernie supporters.
Carter, that does explain the people who say that if they can’t vote for Trump, they would vote for Sanders. I think the GOP has been almost too successful at convincing Americans that “government is not the solution, it is the problem”. So anything that sounds different than the status quo is attractive to them.
I think Carter has the major point. Voters are really sick and tired if politicians that don’t vote their concerns, but do use them as political footballs to keep their job. I’d love to see some referendum votes on items like in the states.
I think if voters are voting for trump since they are against the status quo that’s being misguided. Trump exemplifies most of the special interests that try to control both parties. He’s given donations to both parties to promote his own personal agenda. He’s guilty of promoting quite a few things that he is now speaking against like illegal immigration and manufacturing overseas. Moreover his attitude of trying to stifle members of the media that are critical of him is downright troubling. And that’s putting it mildly. Essentially those voters who are supposedly against the status quo are now asking the fox to guard the hen house. If the worst case scenario does happen and he becomes president I would bet on an impeachment down the road.
A better example of a candidate who is not subject to the special interests of both parties is probably Obama. Its pretty clear most of the voters who wish to vote for Trump are very unlikely to vote for Obama. What does that say?
Jonah, I understand your point, but what about Hillary. The press is not allowed to ask questions unless it has been pre arranged and the questions agreed upon. Every interview she does for TV has been agreed upon, with questions again pre-approved.
Hiring illegal immigrants is almost impossible not to do if you have any service oriented business. (hospitality, food, etc).
Yes he has given to politicians, both left and right. Maybe, instead of a weakness, its actually a strength. Both sides owe him favors. It’s also a sad commentary that he only way you can do business in America to bribe, I mean donate to, politicians. At the end of the election, the one truth is Trump will owe no one, Hillary will owe a billion dollars worth of favors. Which would you prefer.
Hey Patriotsgt, you forgot to invoke Benghazi! Same old tired talking points, having little to do with reality, but ingrained on our amygdalas (amygdali?) through years and years of braying republicans.
Sure, Trump doesn’t owe anybody anything… except for the banks, which is financial filings suggest he may owe at least half a billion dollars. Not to worry though, if he becomes the GOP nominee, the ~$20 million of his own money that he’s spent on (read: loaned to) his campaign becomes recoverable from the RNC war chest.
THATGUY- He’s still probably got a better balance sheet then the US Gov’t when you factor in our debt, unfunded liabilities and fairly flat growth.
To the best of my knowledge, the US government has never filed for bankruptcy… several times. Then again, maybe he leans on being able to shirk those bankruptcies into his failed ventures the same way the USG leans on not being subject to the same constraints and individuals.
But if the overall point is that he’s no dummy, I’d agree. Look to his rather scammy plan to spend comparatively little while claiming to be self-funded if he gets the nomination. Not that I feel bad for the RNC having to pay him back, but anyone who believe he’s truly self-funded at this point isn’t paying attention.
Patriotsgt, where do i start? Lets start off with the topic of supporting someone who owes no one. Lets assume for a minute that Trump is that someone. Would you prefer him just because he owes no one or because his agenda matches yours? If his agenda doesn’t match yours then why would you prefer him even if trump is his own man? I for one don’t find anything appealing in Trumps agenda (even though that website claimed I was 30% aligned with him). Trump typically highlights the following issues
1) Immigration
2) Moving back jobs from overseas
3) Islam
Quite frankly 1) is not a huge concern of mine. I think wall is a waste of time and money and has anyone heard of tunnels? I have no idea how Trump is going to move jobs from overseas without repercussions. This CNN article gives one reason why http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/12/news/economy/donald-trump-china-mexico-jobs/
And trump blaming every single muslim is beyond silly. So he has nothing. A fiscal conservative may prefer Trump because he/she believes Trump is a fiscal conservative and wont bow down to special interests and blow up the deficit. Not entirely true. His tax plan doesnt openly give money to special interests but does give back a lot of money to his wealthy buddies. And it increases the deficit even more
http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/22/pf/taxes/donald-trump-tax-plan/
http://www.wsj.com/articles/analysis-of-trumps-tax-plan-shows-big-cuts-in-taxes-federal-revenue-1450807194
Quite frankly if someone who owes no one is the main criteria one could literally pick someone off the street for the job. Just no one from DC.
Regarding Hillary, she has been in debates where she gets tough questions. I don’t hear her complain about a male moderator and make any sexist comments. Thats a typical Trump routine after every debate. Also regarding specific questions read the paragraph before the last http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/22/media/donald-trump-joe-scarborough-hot-mic/
Jonah, very well put. When you look past all the bluster and posturing, there’s simply no there there.
Maybe I’m getting old and I know we’re in Reality Show America now, but since when did President become an entry level position?