SSSSSoooooo … the race is getting a bit frightening.
Trump’s bordering-on-fascism approach is a pretty big success across the GOP. This may hurt the GOP’s image, I would say.
But, not all is lost. This article actually looks at data I’ve collected about the race thus far. Hopefully it will put things into perspective, and you can get a better idea of what actually happened last night and in the primaries in general. Also, I’ll touch on my last prediction, and see where it was wrong, and where it was right.
Hey nerds: I have data. Keep in mind that not EVERY single vote is counted for all of the counties in every state yet, but the additional votes will be negligible. Most states are at least 97% counted.
Dig this: Thus far, from all the states that had a primary/caucus, here is the breakdown:
REPUBLICAN TURNOUT: 9,785,765 (across 15 states, 30% of US states, not counting territories)
DEMOCRATIC TURNOUT: 6,522,967 (across 15 states, 30% of US states, not counting territories)
If I estimate the population of the United States to be 320,000,000, that means that, thus far, 5.1% of the population has voted.
This isn’t very much. But, it’s actually a pretty impressive turnout compared to normal primary season.
And now the breakdown that’s more interesting … the REPUBLICAN breakdown (of Trump, Cruz, and Rubio):
Trump: 3,344,678 votes (about 34% of the Republican vote)
Cruz: 2,751,489 votes (about 28% of the Republican vote)
Rubio: 2,125,000 (about 22% of the Republican vote)
In the grand scheme of things, Trump is winning more delegates, but, according to popular Republican vote, he doesn’t have a “tremendous” edge, as Trump would say, over the other two.
What does any of that mean?
Well, the data is up there for the reader to interpret as well.
But, I would say it means a few things. First, it’s that those Trump supporters are actually showing up to the polls. Second, I would say that a bulk of the heavy hitting conservative states have pretty much run their course. Seeing what happens on the west coast is going to be interesting. Third, Trump’s lead I think is a little overstated/overhyped by people and the media (for ratings, of course).
Yes, the Trump crazies are showing up in droves. I mean, Trump has taken a third of the Republican support thus far! But, lest we forget, this still is only a third of the 30% of states that had primaries/caucuses; hence not a majority yet. The point is that, no, Trump does not have decisive Republican support quite yet.
Does Trump have more delegates? Yes. Is his nomination in the bag? Well, I would say no, but I would also say that the likelihood of him getting elected is definitely increasing. There’s still the chance that more mild elements of the American right will show up to the polls.
A bulk of the traditionally majority Republican states are now done. The Democrats are trailing in voter turnout (it was abysmally low in Iowa), but that doesn’t mean that the larger, Democratic friendly states won’t compensate for that (particularly states like California, New York, Oregon, or Washington). So, as of now the Republicans are more enthusiastic about voting, but I have a feeling that should normalize as the primaries move forward.
Lastly, I would say that Trump’s victories will be a bit overstated, particularly when you look at the actual voter turnout. As far as delegates go, he has 316 (one needs 1200 or so), which means he COULD be the nominee granted he doesn’t hit any walls somehow (but he’s been pretty bulletproof thus far).
If he does get the nomination, I think Republicans really do need to take the Hillary situation seriously. I can imagine all the millennials who didn’t show up for primaries showing up for the presidential vote, and the Republicans being consequentially sad for at least another 4 years. Conservatives in the US are playing with fire, indeed.
But, after all things are considered, and you see that a lot of the more hard-lined Republican state primaries are now essentially over, then it’s not as clear that Trump will keep his momentum up … but, we’ll have to see how the party reacts to this.
MY past prediction:
Oh ya, I predicted the nominees about a month back or so? I think that was even before Iowa.
Anyway, I’ll still stand by it. I’m pretty pleased with it for a few reasons. First, I think the logic of the prediction is accurate. Rubio has, thus far, pulled through as the establishment favorite. And he is running on the same platform I predicted — that he’s the only moderate candidate to capture broad Republican support necessary to beat Hillary. Also, I’ve been right about the Hillary nomination as well (and I wrote about Sanders, which I think is largely accurate as well).
Where it’s looking like I’m not right, however, may be the prediction itself on the Republican side. I assumed that the Republican base would recognize that a divided party would ensure Democratic victory, therefore the voters would recognize this, account for it, and adapt it in their voting choices. If that were true, then Rubio would be getting more support.
However, as it stands, there is a faction within the Republican party that doesn’t care about stuff like policy discussion, plans for action, visions for American conduct overseas, and ideas of how the country can develop fresh approaches to economic, environmental, international, and political issues. Instead, this faction cares about anti-“political correctness,” which, to me, really just means being considerate and having manners.
The reality is that this rural-centric, working-class, mob-like faction is overtaking the conservative voice in America, and I think it’s dangerous.
I watched footage at a Trump rally where the crowd nearly attacked a protester wearing a shirt indicting Trump’s KKK affiliations. Trump is dangerous. He could have ordered that mob to tear that protester apart if he wanted, and they would have gladly done it. I find that frightening.
Trump appeals to the most basic of human logic. He amplifies hate, radically simplifies any problems, and offers to fix such “simple” problems. The failure to realize that our problems are complex is dangerous.
— Claiming Mexicans bring drugs in the country, and we need to target them is dangerous.
Consider this: The United States has a HUGE appetite for illegal drugs. Without that appetite, the cartels would have no reason to exist.
— Claiming that we need to target and restrict groups of people from travel without cause is dangerous.
Consider this: Imagine a world where Europe closed its borders to all Americans for fear their radical right-wing ideologies would infest Germany, again. … and I wouldn’t blame them if a Trump represented the US.
— Childish taunting and mudslinging opponents is no replacement for actual ideas.
Consider this: Trump hasn’t mentioned a single idea. At all.
As for what happens next, it’s anybody’s guess. But, in this writer’s mind, we could be wading into dangerous territory.