06-02-2016, 10:35 AM
David Wasserman (DW), over at 538.com, has a very smart analysis of the GOP's 'White Man's Hope' that Trump is going to turn out a massive increase in the White, particularly male, cohort and win the general election, and thus beat demographic fate of the increasing non-White (also female, urban, more educated) electorate -
‘Missing’ White Voters Might Help Trump, But Less So Where He Needs It
Using the "high tide" (and yes, I love that historic reference) of the Ross Perot driven non-Hispanic White turnout of 70% in the 1992 (compared to 62% in 2012) and substituting that for the actual turnout in 2012, in each state, DW shows on a national basis Trump could gain a few million more votes than Obama's margin of victory in 2012! Eek!
However, what DW also shows is that most of that gain would happen mostly in states that would not have any impact on the Electoral College. Only three of the 12 swing states (FL, OH, NV) would a return to Ross Perot election turnout by Whites potentially make a difference. And in those states, he would have to take 58% of the White vote in FL, 75% in OH, and 89% in NV - only Florida is within the range of around 60% that Romney got in 2012.
That might be doable except for a couple of big things -
The non-White cohort has increased from 29% in 2012 to likely 31% in 2016, and that's before considering any registration drives particularly within the Hispanic communities in reaction to Trump's candidacy. In 2012, there were 23 million eligible Hispanic voters; in 2016 that will grow to 26 million. And those are national numbers, this trend is being amplified in states like FL and NV. Trump will have to use some of his "Ross Perot White turnout" voters just to stay even with Romney's 2012 result.
Then there's the problem for Trump of getting all White voters. There is clearly a difference in support Romney got among educated White voters (56%) and what Trump is getting (a 46/45 split with Clinton; probable a result of his "woman problem"). Trump will need to use some of his increase in non-educated Ross Perot turnout voters to make up for decrease appeal to the White educated voter.
The analysis shows that Trump's path isn't impossible, but the challenge is pretty unprecedented (imagine the cold-hearted demographic facts of 2020!).
Also, one thing that DW's analysis didn't discuss is the likelihood of these new Ross Perot voters actually finding their way to the voting booth in November. The educated White cohort that is going for Sanders has been having problems doing that (busy students, 1st timer registration mistakes). What percentage of these working class voters that Trump is relying on will get permission from their modern-day plantation owners to take time off?
‘Missing’ White Voters Might Help Trump, But Less So Where He Needs It
Using the "high tide" (and yes, I love that historic reference) of the Ross Perot driven non-Hispanic White turnout of 70% in the 1992 (compared to 62% in 2012) and substituting that for the actual turnout in 2012, in each state, DW shows on a national basis Trump could gain a few million more votes than Obama's margin of victory in 2012! Eek!
However, what DW also shows is that most of that gain would happen mostly in states that would not have any impact on the Electoral College. Only three of the 12 swing states (FL, OH, NV) would a return to Ross Perot election turnout by Whites potentially make a difference. And in those states, he would have to take 58% of the White vote in FL, 75% in OH, and 89% in NV - only Florida is within the range of around 60% that Romney got in 2012.
That might be doable except for a couple of big things -
The non-White cohort has increased from 29% in 2012 to likely 31% in 2016, and that's before considering any registration drives particularly within the Hispanic communities in reaction to Trump's candidacy. In 2012, there were 23 million eligible Hispanic voters; in 2016 that will grow to 26 million. And those are national numbers, this trend is being amplified in states like FL and NV. Trump will have to use some of his "Ross Perot White turnout" voters just to stay even with Romney's 2012 result.
Then there's the problem for Trump of getting all White voters. There is clearly a difference in support Romney got among educated White voters (56%) and what Trump is getting (a 46/45 split with Clinton; probable a result of his "woman problem"). Trump will need to use some of his increase in non-educated Ross Perot turnout voters to make up for decrease appeal to the White educated voter.
The analysis shows that Trump's path isn't impossible, but the challenge is pretty unprecedented (imagine the cold-hearted demographic facts of 2020!).
Also, one thing that DW's analysis didn't discuss is the likelihood of these new Ross Perot voters actually finding their way to the voting booth in November. The educated White cohort that is going for Sanders has been having problems doing that (busy students, 1st timer registration mistakes). What percentage of these working class voters that Trump is relying on will get permission from their modern-day plantation owners to take time off?