Skip to content
“Since Inauguration Day, President Trump has had the lowest job-approval ratings of any newly elected president since the first ‘scientifically based’ poll by George Gallup in 1936. More than anything else, midterm elections are referenda on the incumbent president. Obviously no one knows what is going to happen in next year’s midterm elections, but analysts who have watched congressional elections for a long time are seeing signs that 2018 could be a wave election that flips control of the House to Democrats.”
56
The Cook Political Report compiles 56 interesting observations about the 2016 presidential election. Here’s a sample: Trump won the White House by winning 76 percent of counties with a Cracker Barrel Old Country Store and 22 percent of counties with a Whole Foods Market. This 54-percent gap is the widest ever recorded. When Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, it was 19 percent; when George W. Bush was elected in 2000, it was 31 percent; and when Barack Obama was elected in 2008, it was 43 percent.
There is a food fight under way among many of those doing presidential-election modeling… It’s not my style or expertise to put a specific percentage on Clinton’s chances of winning, but, suffice it to say, it’s a really big number. … The Senate is tougher to call. The strong likelihood of a Clinton victory means that the Democratic target is 50 seats, a gain of four, with Vice President Tim Kaine casting a tie-breaking vote if necessary. Right now, I think the odds are highest for a four-seat gain, next likely would be five seats.
It’s interesting to watch Hillary Clinton’s highly schizophrenic campaign. On one level, in terms of strategy and tactics, organizational abilities, use of technology, and the like, it is a very impressive effort, a blending of the best from her 2008 campaign with the cream of the 2008 and 2012 Obama presidential efforts. … But as the concentric circles get closer to the candidate, the people occupying the inner circles are heavier on longtime Clinton loyalists rather than political pros, the campaign becomes more opaque, and the tactics get more baffling. Whether it is pre-campaign decisions on handling emails, going eight months without a press conference, or the bumbling handling of her health situation in recent days, the question keeps recurring: Is Clinton not getting good advice or just not taking it? One wonders whether there are enough people willing to stand up to her and tell her what she needs to know but may not want to hear.
At this point, my gut suggests that by the time we get deep into the process, Trump will appear to have the support of the populist, less ideological third of the GOP, roughly where he is now; Cruz will have consolidated conservatives and roughly one third of the party; a conventional candidate (Bush, Christie, Kasich, or Rubio) will be pulling about a quarter, with the remaining fifth up in the air. That spells a contested convention.
A hard move to the left would make her job of winning over independent and moderate voters in the general election even more challenging. Independents tend to have very complicated views of Clinton, seeing her on one hand as smart, knowledgeable, and competent, but on the other hand as not particularly likable or trustworthy. Big ideological swings over the course of the campaign aren’t likely to help her credibility. … It can’t be fun for Clinton to be Sanders’s piñata this month and next, but for March 1 on, it shouldn’t be that bad, and there is no point winning the nomination if you render yourself unelectable in the fall.
I remain convinced that between now and the March 1 Super Tuesday/SEC primaries, and particularly the March 15 set of primaries and some contests after, those angry and profoundly anti-establishment voters will have finished venting their spleens. They will have sent their angry messages to the political establishment and will turn to the serious business of selecting a president, taking into account such things as temperament and judgment, marking the beginning of the end of their affair with Trump. They will coalesce behind a more plausible vehicle for their anger and anti-establishment views. That candidate is likely to be Cruz.
5%
Percentage of the 2012 electorate who were true independents, who don’t lean toward either party, according to the American National Election Studies survey, notes Charlie Cook. In 2012, the ANES survey “found that 87 percent of independents who, when pushed, conceded they feel closer to the Democratic Party wound up voting for Obama. The same percentage of independents who admitted a soft spot for Republicans went for Romney. In 2008, Obama’s hope-and-change campaign drew a whopping 91 percent of Democratic-leaning independents, while McCain won 82 percent of independents who leaned Republican. Simply put, many of the people who self-identify as political independents are, for electoral purposes, partisans. They vote almost as predictably as Americans who simply label themselves as a Democrat or a Republican.”
It’s still a great question how this Republican nomination race will sort out once this Trump nonsense ends. The GOP splits roughly 60-40 these days: 60 percent of its voters are pretty conventional, mainstream Republicans, while the other 40 percent are of a somewhat more exotic variety, up from just a third a decade ago. This latter group is made up of three subgroups: secular, anti-establishment, tea-party adherents; evangelical conservatives driven chiefly by cultural issues; and those who are just really conservative and more ideologically driven than your normal garden-variety Republicans. … Historically, this collection of less-conventional Republicans has loomed large in Iowa, then gradually given way to more-mainstream GOP voters in the final stretch, but the harder-edged Republicans have been on the ascendency and may play an even greater role in choosing the nominee this time around than in the past.
The momentous events of the last week can be interpreted in numerous ways. But one thing has become increasingly clear: The Republican Party needs to change. … Simply put, Republicans are loaded up in a car, racing toward a generational cliff with their eyes focused on the rearview mirror, with many (but notably not all) oblivious to the societal changes taking place all around them and the growing wedge building between their comfort zone and presidential swing voters… Republicans need to do some soul-searching about their future and their relationships with voters of generations to come. Vibrant parties change with the times, adapt themselves to changing conditions and circumstances. Maybe this past week will help the GOP do this.
