The Illusion of Trump's "New Republican" Voters

Trump continues to claim that he is bringing droves of new voters (even Democrats!) into the GOP tent, citing to record turnouts at the primaries.



Unfortunately, the data show otherwise:



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-polling-turnout-early-voting-data-213897



In short, the "new voters" are nearly all general election GOP voters who usually vote in the general election, but have not been active in the primary process before 2016.



So, rather than growing the GOP as Trump claims, the reality is that he is polarizing and factionalizing existing GOP general election voters.

snoscythe wrote:
Trump continues to claim that he is bringing droves of new voters (even Democrats!) into the GOP tent, citing to record turnouts at the primaries.



Unfortunately, the data show otherwise:



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-polling-turnout-early-voting-data-213897



In short, the "new voters" are nearly all general election GOP voters who usually vote in the general election, but have not been active in the primary process before 2016.



So, rather than growing the GOP as Trump claims, the reality is that he is polarizing and factionalizing existing GOP general election voters.

Very interesting. That isn't a winning trend. The WSJ had an article analyzing the five counties most supportive and least supportive of Trump (Utah County was one of them). I don't have the link, but the difference was stark. The five counties most supportive are poorer and have less education (measured by how far you went in school) than the ones least supportive.

BoiseBYU wrote:

Trump continues to claim that he is bringing droves of new voters (even Democrats!) into the GOP tent, citing to record turnouts at the primaries.



Unfortunately, the data show otherwise:



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-polling-turnout-early-voting-data-213897



In short, the "new voters" are nearly all general election GOP voters who usually vote in the general election, but have not been active in the primary process before 2016.



So, rather than growing the GOP as Trump claims, the reality is that he is polarizing and factionalizing existing GOP general election voters.

Very interesting. That isn't a winning trend. The WSJ had an article analyzing the five counties most supportive and least supportive of Trump (Utah County was one of them). I don't have the link, but the difference was stark. The five counties most supportive are poorer and have less education (measured by how far you went in school) than the ones least supportive.

The five least supportive counties all have large LDS populations too....

BoiseBYU wrote:

snoscythe wrote:
Trump continues to claim that he is bringing droves of new voters (even Democrats!) into the GOP tent, citing to record turnouts at the primaries.



Unfortunately, the data show otherwise:



http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-polling-turnout-early-voting-data-213897



In short, the "new voters" are nearly all general election GOP voters who usually vote in the general election, but have not been active in the primary process before 2016.



So, rather than growing the GOP as Trump claims, the reality is that he is polarizing and factionalizing existing GOP general election voters.

Very interesting. That isn't a winning trend. The WSJ had an article analyzing the five counties most supportive and least supportive of Trump (Utah County was one of them). I don't have the link, but the difference was stark. The five counties most supportive are poorer and have less education (measured by how far you went in school) than the ones least supportive.

The five least supportive counties all have large LDS populations too....

There is an interesting parallel here with Church history. The reason Joseph Smith ran for the Presidency was because neither main party candidate in the Whigs or Democrats could satisfactorily answer what they could do to help redress the Mormon's grievances in Missouri. Rather than vote for either scoundrel, the idea was forwarded to nominate Joseph for the President. He accepted, though, he probably knew he didn't have a realistic chance. That isn't to say he wouldn't have given the other two candidates a run for their money since he was very persuasive with some of his ideas in helping Texas gain independence and solving the slave problem by paying for the freedom of slaves through the treasury. Coincidentally, the Whig party did not last much longer, as may happen with the Republican party now.



Similarly, it seems members as a body cannot find a candidate fit to vote for among the two main party candidates, and may in mass vote for a third party candidate or one of several third party candidates. Hopefully, whoever wins the Presidency will be above seeking revenge...but, I doubt it. I anticipate some form of religious persecution no matter who wins the presidency. I don't say this because I am someone with a persecution complex...it is more of reading the tea leaves on the standards people are accepting these days and knowing that the Church will not change its standards.