A lot of the very serious pundits have at least tired of predicting Trump's imminent demise every few days. Ezra Klein well describes the conventional wisdom since June-after going six months where the Beltway was certain he wasn't going to run.
"Many people — myself included — thought it would look something like this: Trump says something truly beyond the pale. Media erupts. GOP elites erupt. Republican primary voters receive a strong signal that Trump lacks either the qualities necessary to win the presidency or the temperament necessary to be the president. Voters abandon him in droves."
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/5/10717690/donald-trump-loss
Ezra admits that this was totally wrong and that he and other Serious pundits have egg on their faces for repeating it for so long. But, he is still not giving up. Trump won't win the nomination, he's pretty sure.
His theory is what you might call the bellyflop theory of Trump's demise, or the 'He's just another Howard Dean/Rudy Giuliani' theory-Trump's numbers will implode overnight for no real reason.
"But there's another model of failure. Trump could just ... not win. He could lose the Iowa caucuses. He could fall short in New Hampshire. A loss in any early state might lead to a loss in every state. Losing a presidential primary is often like going bankrupt: It happens slowly, then all at once."
"But this is, I think, what will happen to Trump. He will lead until he doesn't. His fall will be quick, and it won't obey the apparent rules of his rise. If there is a reason for it, it will fundamentally be, "People get more pragmatic the closer they get to an actual vote." As much as Republicans tell pollsters they think Trump can win the general election, I am skeptical they will truly believe that come Election Day."
Ezra, along with Nate Silver and his fellow wonks over at FiveThirtyEight are some of the last holdovers for this theory. I can't help but note that Klein's theory is based on the pragmatic reasonableness of this year's Republican base. A rather brave belief based on everything we have seen recently.
micah: One of the main reasons I’ve been skeptical of Trump’s chances of winning the nomination is that the GOP establishment hates him, which is different from simply not liking him. So not only will they not support Trump, they’ll do everything in their power to prevent him from winning. Or, that’s at least what I thought. If they stay as feckless as they’ve been, I think the chances of Trump winning go up appreciably.
To answer your question, Nate, I could argue they should make a move before Iowa. What if Trump wins Iowa, New Hampshire AND South Carolina — that’s a real possibility.
clare.malone: In the words of Pete Hornberger, it’s never too late for now, Nate.
harry: Folks, if he wins those three, there’s a better chance than not that he will win the nomination, in my opinion.
natesilver: Interestingly enough, some of the reporting (see Byron York, for example) suggests that one reason the establishment has been sluggish to act is because they still think Trump might implode on his own.
But he probably won’t win all three. He might not win any of them. I don’t want to spoil our primary forecasts, which will be launching soon, but …"
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-gop-establishment-blowing-its-anti-trump-campaign/?fb_comment_id=1000294936696035_1000897369969125&comment_id=1000897369969125#fdfe245ac
If I'm going to bet, he probably won't win all three, but I see a real case for him winning two of three-a narrow loss in Iowa but then wins in NH and SC. What I can't help but notice is that neither Nate nor Ezra are every willing to even entertain the chance that Trump could win in NH.
"The status quo clearly favors Trump: In the latest RealClearPolitics rolling averageof surveys in the state, Trump sits in first at 26.3 percent with nearly twice the support of Rubio, his closest challenger. New Hampshire voters still have plenty of time to change their minds—but they have been far from fickle to date. The Donald’s held a double-digit lead in the state for five months and counting, and has topped each and every one of the past 30 RCP-tracked polls. There are reasons to suspect Trump’s current polling support won’t fully translate into votes, but he does have a double-digit cushion to work with in the event some voters have second thoughts when it comes time to pull the lever. Meanwhile, if Trump’s establishment rivals can’t give his fans a reason to change their minds—and it appears they’re no longer even trying, instead content to fight with each other for the runner-up slot in the second contest of the year—they’ll have to hope enough of them simply stay home instead. That could ultimately happen, but it’s hard to overstate just how much the GOP race would be turned upside down if it doesn’t."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/01/06/what_happens_if_donald_trump_actually_wins_new_hampshire.html
So maybe this is why Nate Silver and Ezra Klein can never even entertain the possibility that maybe Trump wins NH-because they realize that if that happens, it will be too late to close the barn door.
We keep hearing from the pious pundits like them that 'There's still a lot of time.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/06/why-its-still-too-early-to-pick-winners-in-iowa-and-new-hampshire/
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/5/10717690/donald-trump-loss
Ezra admits that this was totally wrong and that he and other Serious pundits have egg on their faces for repeating it for so long. But, he is still not giving up. Trump won't win the nomination, he's pretty sure.
His theory is what you might call the bellyflop theory of Trump's demise, or the 'He's just another Howard Dean/Rudy Giuliani' theory-Trump's numbers will implode overnight for no real reason.
"But there's another model of failure. Trump could just ... not win. He could lose the Iowa caucuses. He could fall short in New Hampshire. A loss in any early state might lead to a loss in every state. Losing a presidential primary is often like going bankrupt: It happens slowly, then all at once."
"But this is, I think, what will happen to Trump. He will lead until he doesn't. His fall will be quick, and it won't obey the apparent rules of his rise. If there is a reason for it, it will fundamentally be, "People get more pragmatic the closer they get to an actual vote." As much as Republicans tell pollsters they think Trump can win the general election, I am skeptical they will truly believe that come Election Day."
Ezra, along with Nate Silver and his fellow wonks over at FiveThirtyEight are some of the last holdovers for this theory. I can't help but note that Klein's theory is based on the pragmatic reasonableness of this year's Republican base. A rather brave belief based on everything we have seen recently.
But I think this is what makes Serious People, Serious-they have to believe that the GOP is a rational party that isn't seriously dysfunctional or notably worse than the Democratic party. So in the end the base will eat their vegetables and vote for Marco Rubio.
Nate Silver in his analysis always starts from the same premise as well-'Trump may just implode and lose Iowa, lose NH and never win a thing.'
micah: One of the main reasons I’ve been skeptical of Trump’s chances of winning the nomination is that the GOP establishment hates him, which is different from simply not liking him. So not only will they not support Trump, they’ll do everything in their power to prevent him from winning. Or, that’s at least what I thought. If they stay as feckless as they’ve been, I think the chances of Trump winning go up appreciably.
To answer your question, Nate, I could argue they should make a move before Iowa. What if Trump wins Iowa, New Hampshire AND South Carolina — that’s a real possibility.
clare.malone: In the words of Pete Hornberger, it’s never too late for now, Nate.
harry: Folks, if he wins those three, there’s a better chance than not that he will win the nomination, in my opinion.
natesilver: Interestingly enough, some of the reporting (see Byron York, for example) suggests that one reason the establishment has been sluggish to act is because they still think Trump might implode on his own.
But he probably won’t win all three. He might not win any of them. I don’t want to spoil our primary forecasts, which will be launching soon, but …"
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-the-gop-establishment-blowing-its-anti-trump-campaign/?fb_comment_id=1000294936696035_1000897369969125&comment_id=1000897369969125#fdfe245ac
If I'm going to bet, he probably won't win all three, but I see a real case for him winning two of three-a narrow loss in Iowa but then wins in NH and SC. What I can't help but notice is that neither Nate nor Ezra are every willing to even entertain the chance that Trump could win in NH.
All we ever get from them is 'Maybe he wont' win there or anywhere'-but what if he does? Listen, I agree that it's quite plausible to say with Nate that Trump probably won't get the nomination in the long run-that the GOP would probably end up cheating to keep him out or something; though this would lead to a terrible backlash which would be almost as bad as Trump winning the nomination
But it's one thing to say that he won't ultimately win, it's another to insist he won't win a single primary. Maybe this is because they know that if he were to win in NH then there is real trouble.
"The Granite State has always been integral to the GOP Empire’s hopes of striking back after the unfriendly terrain of Iowa, where this year conservative caucusgoers appear set to decide between Ted Cruz, a candidate the establishment hates, and Trump, a candidate the establishment really hates. A strong second-place showing by Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, or Chris Christie in New Hampshire on Feb. 9 would be welcome news to party power brokers eager for donors and Trump-haters to finally rally around a candidate they could live with, but it won’t change the fact that a Trump win would legitimize his candidacy in ways that his polling performances and crowd sizes have been unable to—and that even an Iowa victory, in the less likely event it happens, would not. If Trump wins New Hampshire, in one fell swoop, he will have bested the best the Republican establishment has to offer in a state where they’d have no excuses given primary voters there are considerably more moderate and establishment-minded than Iowa’s GOP caucusgoers.""The status quo clearly favors Trump: In the latest RealClearPolitics rolling averageof surveys in the state, Trump sits in first at 26.3 percent with nearly twice the support of Rubio, his closest challenger. New Hampshire voters still have plenty of time to change their minds—but they have been far from fickle to date. The Donald’s held a double-digit lead in the state for five months and counting, and has topped each and every one of the past 30 RCP-tracked polls. There are reasons to suspect Trump’s current polling support won’t fully translate into votes, but he does have a double-digit cushion to work with in the event some voters have second thoughts when it comes time to pull the lever. Meanwhile, if Trump’s establishment rivals can’t give his fans a reason to change their minds—and it appears they’re no longer even trying, instead content to fight with each other for the runner-up slot in the second contest of the year—they’ll have to hope enough of them simply stay home instead. That could ultimately happen, but it’s hard to overstate just how much the GOP race would be turned upside down if it doesn’t."
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/01/06/what_happens_if_donald_trump_actually_wins_new_hampshire.html
So maybe this is why Nate Silver and Ezra Klein can never even entertain the possibility that maybe Trump wins NH-because they realize that if that happens, it will be too late to close the barn door.
We keep hearing from the pious pundits like them that 'There's still a lot of time.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/06/why-its-still-too-early-to-pick-winners-in-iowa-and-new-hampshire/
The beauty of it is that they won't be able to say 'it's still early'' much longer. I mean in a month both states will be done. If Trump wins NH then it will no longer be early.
P.S. Ezra at least has some humility-he admits that he thought Trump would implode much earlier by saying something offensive and that he was dead wrong. Nate still has this pomposity where he pretends that things are going totally the way he thought they would all along.
Yet for months he and Harry Enten were talking about Herman Cain as if Trump is a two week boomlet like Cain was If Silver could at least admit that this race has been pretty different so far-but he cant do it. He so needs to be right about this it seems.
No comments:
Post a Comment