Sunday, October 9, 2016
Hillary Clinton’s serious enthusiasm disadvantage covers all voting blocs
By Kevin “Coach” Collins
Earlier today, while campaigning in Pennsylvania, Vice President Joe Biden, a man who can often be counted on to let slip what Democrats do not want said out loud, said, “I know some of you, and some of the people you are trying to convince are not crazy about Hillary. I know that. Okay. I think she has gotten an unfair deal.”
There is an old axiom in politics “It all comes down to turn out.” The people that parrot this year after year never allow ENTHUSIASM, the ultimate indicator of who will show up, to enter into their thoughts; or if they do they certainly never admit it.
What is undeniable is that regardless of how much the pollsters under or over poll particular groups, if the numbers they work up are not built on enthusiasm they don’t mean anything.
Regardless of what the media and Democrats would have us believe, this country is still vastly populated by White people. All the talk about what “a must win this minority group or that minority group is” would mean nothing if the 2004 turnout that resulted in Whites being 77% of the electorate or 81% of the total vote in 2000, returned this year.
No one knows what the White turnout will be next month but hard tangible numbers regarding ENTHUSIASM point to it being higher than 2012’s 72%. If that number expands to 74% or more it would provide Trump a significant advantage.
As private people we can only discern the levels of enthusiasm among voters by carefully reading the internals of the polls they want us to see. Doing this enables us to uncover vast gaps in the levels of enthusiasm between Donald Trump’s supporters and those supporting Hillary Clinton.
A recent CBS News survey reported by a spread of 11 points those supporting Trump are more ENTHUSIASTIC than those supporting Clinton.
A mid-September “The Hill online” article said, this, “Most strikingly, a CNN/ORC poll indicated that more than 1 in 5 five would-be Clinton voters were “not at all enthusiastic” about backing her (more than 20%) almost twice as many as said the same about Trump. (Likely 11%). The poll found 58 percent of Trump supporters saying they felt either “extremely” or “very” enthusiastic about their choice, and only 46 percent in the Clinton camp feeling the same.”
It continued with, “A Washington Post/ABC News poll found that 46 percent of Trump backers were “very enthusiastic,” compared with only 33 percent of Clinton supporters. And a New York Times/CBS News poll saw Trump outperforming Clinton by the same metric, 45 percent to 36 percent.”
A Gallup review of publicly available levels of voter enthusiasm in past elections and how this factor influenced one side or the other, shows its importance.
In 1994 which was a banner year for Republicans, they had the edge in enthusiasm 88/79.
In 2006 a big year for Democrats, they had an 86/70 enthusiasm lead.
In 2010 the Republicans held a huge 62/44 enthusiasm edge and had a sweeping victory.
The Washington Examiner commented, “Just 65 percent of Democrats plan to vote in the election, and it's just 47 percent among all voters aged 18-34, a trend that has the party worried about the lack of enthusiasm for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Republicans hold an 11-point advantage in those planning to vote, 76 percent to 65 percent, but the GOP vote is also at a 16-year low, but by three points compared to nine for the Democrats.”
In 2014, leading into Election Day, Gallup reported Republicans held an 18 point enthusiasm edge. This reinforces the constant finding that among those who will answer pollster’s questions, Trump holds an 11 point enthusiasm advantage.
A July Pew survey noted the same 11 point enthusiasm gap even among those who practice no religion. Its report said, “Religious “nones” are, however, somewhat less enthusiastic about Clinton’s candidacy (26% now strongly support her) than they were about Obama in June 2012 (37%).”
Gallup reported it found just 47% of voters aged 18 to 34 plan to vote this year, which is not good since in the weeks leading up to the 2012 election, 75% of this group reported they would be voting. On Election Day 2012, young voters made up 19% of the total electorate.
Based on publicly available data this Republican enthusiasm edge has been in place since immediately after the 2014 elections.
As a word of caution for Democrats brought a December 2014 survey by CNN reporting that looking forward to 2016, Republicans were more enthusiastic to vote by a stunning 36/19.
Stan Greenberg, a Democrat speaking for Democracycorps.com, a Democrat polling firm, also cautioned Democrats with a more detailed warning when he said, “Republicans, especially older white conservatives, were significantly more interested in the 2016 elections than Democrats and their key demographic groups. Seventy-one percent of likely GOP voters rated their interest in the elections as a “10” on a 1-to-10 scale, compared with 58 percent of Democratic voters who said the same.”
More circumstantial proof of the existence of a large enthusiasm gap in favor of Trump can be found in the Langer Research report which found Trump winning White men by 65/25 and losing White women within the margin of error at 44/46.
Trump is also leading Evangelicals 71/22 and Catholics 57/33 which is a 26 point turnaround from what Mitt Romney was able to do in 2012 and most previous elections.
There are plenty of articles pointing out that Trump cannot win enough White votes to win the election. A review of Democrat performance with all White voters over the past 40 years shows Democrats have averaged 40.6 percent of the White vote.
Given the Langer Research report’s finding of Clinton getting 25% of White male support and 46% of White female support, Clinton is averaging 37.11% allowing for a 53/47 turnout of White women to White men. This means she is 3.49% below the Democrats’ forty year average of 40.6%. It is also 1.89% less than Barack Obama got in his victory in 2012 and 5.89 points under what Obama got in 2008.
Ordinarily going back to 1996 and 1992 would be useless as a point of comparison, but since Hillary Clinton is Bill Clinton’s wife it is instructive to note that even with H. Ross Perot in both elections, as a very strong third Party candidate in 1992 and to a lesser extent in 1996, Bill Clinton got 39% and 44% of the White vote. Hillary Clinton trails by comparison. She doesn’t bring excitement to the table the way he did even if many see her election as a way to bring Bill Clinton back into the picture.
This is more evidence of a lack of enthusiasm among White voters for Clinton and by extension, at least 72% of those expected to vote next month.
Enthusiasm among Catholic voters for Hillary Clinton is at an all-time low. Since 1952, the worst showing for a Democrat among Catholic voters was Walter Mondale’s 39% in his 49 state, landslide loss of 1984. With Clinton on the short end of a 57/33 split with Catholics she is now 6% below Mondale. This is evidence of low enthusiasm among Catholics for Clinton.
A recent CBS News poll has Trump down by a wide margin among Black voters in Florida but it also shows Clinton far off the percentage she needs to gain an advantage from African American voters. More than this, while some polls show Clinton with 80% Black support, others – enough for her to be worried about them- show her at 70% which is way below the 95 percent Obama got twice with what looks to be a larger turnout than Clinton can expect this year.
This quote from an article on a website dealing with the political concerns of African Americans provides anecdotal evidence of Clinton’s problems with low enthusiasm among Black voters. “But despite their dislike of Trump, there is not a lot of love for Clinton. If real enthusiasm for her existed here, [a young Black man says], it would pulsate inside the barber shop. It isn’t.”
We can find more anecdotal evidence about low enthusiasm for Clinton among Black voters by reviewing poll results from Washington DC.
That Trump will get at least 20% of the Black vote can be construed from the results of polling in the District of Columbia. In ten available surveys, Clinton leads in the District by an average of 52.5/23, a very impressive sounding number until it is compared to what Barack Obama did in the District in 2012. He won 91/9.
This means in a Democrat village like the District of Columbia, Hillary Clinton is running nearly 40 points behind what she should be getting just for having her name on the ballot. And, considering the town is 48.5% African American provides strong evidence that while the “wing tips” are not enthusiastic to vote for Clinton, Blacks are actually ditching her and supporting Trump at around a 20% rate.
Final Thought: Just two weeks ago, Nate Cohn of the New York Times wrote, “The bottom line is that Mrs. Clinton is unlikely to benefit from the same jump in black turnout and support that Mr. Obama had. Similarly, she is unlikely to repeat the same jump in support from Hispanic voters. It is possible she won’t see any gains among these groups at all.”
If she doesn’t get an advantage from these two groups and is behind with Whites where do her votes come from?