The Trump effect
Tuesday, Mar 8, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Mark Brown asks a good question today: Is Trump reviving Reagan Democrats?…
The evidence is mainly anecdotal at this point, with Democratic ward committeemen reporting more Democratic voters than usual requesting Republican primary ballots this year. City election officials report only a slight uptick to 9 percent GOP primary voters from 6 percent in 2008.
Some Democrats may be taking a Republican ballot for the express purpose of voting against Trump, but I doubt there are many, especially in a year with a contested presidential race and other important contests on the ballot.
I’d actually made the drive out to the 23rd Ward to look into a related phenomena — Democratic voters who never really understood the legal requirement to declare their party until they went to vote for Trump. These voters have been caught off guard to learn that in a primary they can’t have their cake and eat it, too, meaning vote for their state and local Democrats and Trump as well.
When that happens, those angry Trump voters have found one more reason to be angry.
“People are mad because they never realized before they couldn’t vote for who they wanted,” said Larry Thomas, a poll watcher for Jason Gonzales, the Democrat trying to unseat House Speaker Mike Madigan.
Thomas, who is stationed outside the Clearing Library, said he’s been amazed at how many voters were unaware there is no ticket-splitting in a primary.
He said he spoke to three or four voters last week who emerged from the polling place to say they had written in Trump’s name on their Democratic ballot. That’s a vote that won’t count, of course, but if you’re making a statement you’re making a statement.
A jump from 6 to 9 percent may be more significant than I think Mark gives it credit for being.
I was in that district over the weekend and saw a house with a Jason Gonzales sign and a Trump sign. That person will have to decide which race is more important to him.
* But this is important…
In a general election, it only gets easier to abandon the Democrats.
Yep.
Ronald Reagan won Madigan’s 13th Ward in both 1980 and 1984.
* Related…
* Trump leads splintered Republican primary field in Illinois: Trump’s lead in Illinois comes despite 42 percent of Republican voters holding an unfavorable opinion of him — far more than the 31 percent of voters who view Cruz unfavorably. Trump is viewed unfavorably by 50 percent of Cook County voters, 49 percent of white suburban women and 47 percent of women voters statewide.
* Clinton holds commanding lead over Sanders in Illinois: Among Democratic voters ages 18 to 35, Sanders had 56 percent to 44 percent for Clinton. But voters ages 36 to 49 broke for Clinton, 51 percent to 43 percent. She also dominated among voters older than 50, with nearly 70 percent of voters favoring Clinton.
* Bill Clinton stops in Austin neighborhood before Evanston speech
- Tom - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:15 am:
The Republican establishment has no clue what they are setting up. They are attacking Trump who would at the very least be a force in legislative races for them and in turn helping Cruz. Cruz will be killed by Hillary and those suburban Senate/House districts will all be won by the democrats. They are beyond stupid.
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:17 am:
As a progressive, I’ve voted in vastly more Republican primaries than Democratic primaries. When there isn’t a candidate representing my beliefs on the D side, I vote for chaos in the R party. I wouldn’t read too much into it. Lots of Ds may vote FOR Trump for the chaos and lulz
- D.P.Gumby - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:18 am:
Actually, it is more like the Geo. Wallace effect that was the precursor to the Reagan Democrats.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:21 am:
Trump has also been attracting large numbers of Democrats and Independents in open primary states. There is a reason Republican primaries are breaking turnout records, and it ain’t because of Cruz, Rubio or Kasich.
- Robert the Bruce - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:21 am:
Good history lesson.
Trump’s inflammatory rhetoric against immigrants, minorities, and women can cause people who hate Trump to understandably overlook some of his other rhetoric directed for the little guy, against big insurance companies, and delivered convincingly.
- walker - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:26 am:
Answer: yes
Trump could certainly win this thing by taking more potential Democratic voters away, than potential GOP voters he loses. The key will be if he can stay with vague emotional appeals and whistles right through the Fall election. Trump has done that brilliantly so far. He can win on image and emotion, unless the Dem can drag him into the knowledge and policy arena.
- Stones - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:26 am:
I have to believe that Hillary Clinton with all her negatives is a stronger candidate overall than Walter Mondale / Mike Dukakis.
- Stones - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:27 am:
Strike that…Jimmy Carter (1980)
- RNUG - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:28 am:
== “People are mad because they never realized before they couldn’t vote for who they wanted,” ==
Yep. I had to explain to the wife that, this round, we got to vote for / against on the R side (she also supports Sam) and we get a “do over” in November if the wrong guy makes it through the primary.
Will voters will get mad enough to demand an open primary? The existing pols, for the most part, won’t support it because it removes some of their voter control.
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:33 am:
===People are mad because they never realized before they couldn’t vote for who they wanted,===
And yet their votes count just as much as mine. That’s so depressing.
- Gooner - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:35 am:
Democrats have done terribly with white working class voters since at least 1980.
The idea that there are enough of them left voting for Democrats to make a difference seems contrary to thirty years of history.
- train111 - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:36 am:
So in the end does the ‘pro Trump effect outweigh the ‘anti-Trump effect’
In the 13th ward or areas with a lot of Reagan Democrats, perhaps–but it doesn’t help you any in the suburbs where perhaps the anti-Trump effect would be more.
BTW, I told my wife’s 26 year old friend that Nancy Reagan died this past weekend and the response: “Whose that?” So we date ourselves if we know what Reagan Dems are and ponder how much effect they have any more.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:39 am:
While I like part of what Trump says, I don’t like a lot of it. But he’s running like Rauner did, lots of general noise and bold statements. And he bullies out the opposition. The only difference I can see is Trump is somewhat more specific in his promises … but some are so outrageous nobody really expects him to keep them. It’s all about outrage at the status quo. And it’s really ironic that the “outsider” / “common person” leaders are such wealthy insiders
This whole campaign season, on both sides, has just made me wish there were better candidates running. My preferences on the two sides would be Kasich and Sanders (yes, quite opposite), but neither is going to make the cut.
It will be one more election where I vote for the lesser of two evils. Suspect a lot of other people will be doing the same thing.
- walker - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:40 am:
The Sanders/Clinton age breakdowns are striking. I see them locally as well.
The true Bernie legacy might be that twenty years from now, self-described “Democratic Socialist” candidates for Congress and President might be a regular occurrence in this country, with some expected to win.
- Tone - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:41 am:
Wow, people are really stupid. You have to pick a party, a whole party. Why should you be able to vote in both primaries?
That said, it was great to early vote for Clinton and Alvarez.
- Vole - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:41 am:
Democrats voting for republican candidates, nationally, have ranged from about 6 to 9 percent the last 4 presidential elections.
Folks always get a bit confused about feeding the hand that bites them.
- Tone - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:42 am:
What were the demographics of Madigan’s district in the early 80s? I bet significantly more white and a lot less hispanic than now.
- Tommydanger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:43 am:
I know a few Dem voters taking Republican ballots so they can vote for Trump–not because they want him to be President, but only so he can be a more favorable match up for the Dems in the fall.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:44 am:
Funny thing, Trump’s bluster and political puffery make him “sound” conservative, but he is probably the most moderate R of viable candidates left in the race based on his history of causes he supports. Without all the bluster, he’d have a far better shot of attracting the suburban female vote than a Ted Cruz, but then again, without his personality he wouldn’t be Trump, would he?
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:45 am:
–Is Trump reviving Reagan Democrats?…–
That certainly has to be the game plan, to increase the percentage of white blue collar voters to go Republican. He’s not doing himself any favors with other segments of the electorate.
Not only the percentage, but to attract more of them to the polls, as that group as a percentage of the electorate has been on a steady decline.
Plus, it does no good for those increases to be in states any GOP candidate is going to win anyway down South or in the Plains.
Eighteen states plus DC, including Illinois, representing 242 electoral votes, have gone Democratic in the last six elections. It takes 270 to win.
The ceiling for the GOP in those six elections was W’s 286 in 2004. The Dems floor was Kerry’s 251 the same year. That’s just razor-thin for the GOP.
At some point, the GOP needs to make some breakthroughs in the Upper Midwest, such as Iowa or Wisconsin, or the Northeast, most likely Pennsylvania, that they haven’t won in a generation.
But if the GOP can’t win Florida and Ohio, it’s probably academic.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:45 am:
Funny thing, Trump’s bluster and political puffery make him “sound” conservative, but he is probably the most moderate R of viable candidates left in the race based on his history of causes he supports. Without all the bluster, he’d have a far better shot of attracting the suburban female vote than a Ted Cruz, but then again, without his personality he wouldn’t be Trump, would he?
And anything is possible in a state that voted for Blago twice and Rauner once.
- Because I said so... - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:48 am:
I am sure some Dem’s are at least thinking of taking Republican ballots to vote against Trump because they are frightened by the guy.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:56 am:
FWIW, Pres. Clinton knows his Southern cooking on the West Side.
MacArthurs on Madison between Central and Laramie is the goods.
- doofusguy - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:56 am:
I’m with Johnny Pyle Driver - I vote for chaos in the R party - especially since there’s rarely a contested D race up here in McHenry County!
- James Knell - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:56 am:
Reagan Democrats? They were mostly over 40 in 1980. 2016 - 1980 = 36 + 40 = over 76 year old white males. How about we just call them white male seniors? If 3% more Dems take Rep ballots, and that’s the Trumpetariat wave, they are even more overblown that the white union voters who so willingly dug their own graves in 1980.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:57 am:
=== If 3% more Dems take Rep ballots===
Try a third more.
- walker - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 11:58 am:
wordslinger once again transcends BS with fact-based analysis. kudos
- train111 - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:00 pm:
After more thought:
I think that any Reagan Democratic effect in Chicago has been pretty muffled by the change in demographics. What’s the percentage of white working class Dems in Ward 13 today vs 1980. Even though Hispanic turnout is dismal in a primary, the percentage is far higher than in 1980, and I don’t believe they are chomping at the bit to vote for Trump. In the general where the Hispanic turnout will be higher the Trump effect will probably be further drowned out and then some by the anti-Trump effect.
The 19th I think is the only majority white ward on the south side anymore, so the Trump effect, while there, has been hamstrung by changing demographics.
train111
Trump must be driving new voters to the polls, because anybody who has voted in an Il primary before knows that you can’t split your ticket.
- The middle - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:05 pm:
This is potentially a real problem for Anita Alvarez.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:08 pm:
Clinton is the ultimate insider. Trump is a moderate on everything but immigration and about as anti-establishment as you can get in terms of candidates for prez. The mood of the electorate will have a big influence on this race if they are the nominees.
- Enviro - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:15 pm:
There should be less crossover in the Illinois Presidential Primary among Democrats than Republicans because Democrats are happier with their choices:
According to the Chicago Tribune: “Illinois Republicans are less satisfied than their Democratic counterparts with their slate of candidates, according to the poll….64% of Republicans said they are satisfied with their options… 83% of Democrats said the same.”
“On the Democratic side, the Tribune poll finds former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with a wide lead over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders among Illinois Democrats, 67% to 25%.”
- JackD - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:16 pm:
Gooner and James Knell have it right. The “Reagan Democrats” have been Republicans for a long time.
- RIJ - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:27 pm:
I wonder if a large number of people who are being counted as Democrat have, like me, become Independent. Especially people who are generally progressive rather than liberal.
I vote in whichever primary will best foster my political goals. This year, I’m a bit torn. I’d like to vote Trump in order to set up Clinton for a smashing victory. On the other hand, I’m really ticked about the crude going on with the negative lies that Mike Halpin (who originally had my vote because of his Lane Evans connection) or those on his behalf have spun about Katelyn Hotle.
All the negative ads did was make me look more closely at Hotle, and I switched my vote.
- Archiesmom - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:31 pm:
The words Trump and Reagan should never appear in the same sentence, much less the same headline.
- Otis - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:32 pm:
In order to vote against Reggie there are a lot of dems pulling gop primary ballots and while they’re at it voting for trump.
- James Knell - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:41 pm:
Rich, good point… it’s a matter of scale. I just don’t see Trump voters as people who have voted for Democrats very often, but I haven’t studied the numbers in any detail.
- Educ - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:43 pm:
It IS frustrating when there’s no opposition in a race — particularly a municipal race — and you want to vote in, say, a GOP primary sheriff’s race where the only action will be in the primary, but you’d like to vote for your usual Dems in your usual primary. I’ve noticed more municipal/county seats downstate that are contested (or meaningfully contested by serious candidates) only in the primary than there used to be. I’ve wondered if some of those races ought to be nonpartisan to pull them out of the primary process so that voters don’t have to exclude themselves from half those races.
I pulled a GOP ballot to vote for “not-Trump.” Most Democrats I know around here who are pulling GOP ballots are doing it for the same reason, not to vote FOR him. But maybe I just do not have the right kind of friends to see pro-Trump Democrats.
I didn’t miss out on any Democratic primaries except for Duckworth/Zopp and Clinton/Sanders, and those probably won’t be close enough to need me. Nothing local on the D side was contested this primary.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:44 pm:
Is Trump reviving Reagan Democrats?
Right now, yes.
He most definitely is now.
- Mittuns - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:44 pm:
I would like to encourage tens of thousands of Clinton supporters to pull a Republican ballot and vote for Trump.
- Mama - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:54 pm:
“Thomas said he’s been amazed at how many voters were unaware there is no ticket-splitting in a primary.”
I have a feeling those people normally do not vote in the primary because they do not want to declare whether they are an ‘Rep’ or a ‘Dem’. That is why they do not understand why they can not vote for whoever they want regardless of party.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:55 pm:
–I would like to encourage tens of thousands of Clinton supporters to pull a Republican ballot and vote for Trump.–
Why? To put him one step from the White House?
It’s flat-out lunacy to think a nominee of one of the major parties “can’t win” the general election.
The Dem and GOP nominees will each start with about 40%. The fight will be between the forty-yard lines.
Last I saw, nationally among all voters, Clinton’s disapproval was at 53%, Trump’s was at 57%. That’s not a cakewalk for Clinton.
- Mama - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 12:57 pm:
People who used to be gun- ho on Trump are starting to say they like Cruz now.
I can not see Cruz winning.
- Mama - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:00 pm:
Thanks Rich for educating the voters.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:06 pm:
===It’s flat-out lunacy to think a nominee of one of the major parties “can’t win” the general election.===
Agreed.
Jimmy Carter wanted to run against Reagan.
Pat Quinn wanted to run against Rauner.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:07 pm:
And, btw, I’m not comparing Trump to either of those guys. I’m just saying be careful what you wish for.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:19 pm:
–Jimmy Carter wanted to run against Reagan.
Pat Quinn wanted to run against Rauner.–
Truman couldn’t beat Dewey because Thurmond walked out with the Dixiecrats and Wallace walked out with the lefties.
FWIW, the only ones I’ve heard in recent months saying “Trump can’t win” are GOP also-rans and GOP consultants who get kicked off their guy’s gravy train when he dropped out.
For crying out loud, Trump has hardly spent a dime and he’s clearly the front-runner. Who thought that was possible four months ago?
If you oppose Trump, why would that not concern you?
I don’t think Clinton will underestimate him. They’ll unload with all that oppo the GOP candidates did not because they hoped to get Trump supporters when he dropped out.
How’s that strategery looking now?
- Mittuns - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
-wordslinger-
I agree. The audacity of Clinton supporters to think they’re going to play a great trick on the GOP by helping Trump. Trump can win.
The Democratic primary is far from over. Bernie can win a majority of earned delegates. I dare the superdelegate elites to go against a majority voters if that were to happen.
- Last Bull Moose - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:26 pm:
I agree with Wordslinger, putting Trump within striking distance of the Presidency is dangerous.
In historical terms, Trump may be this times Andy Jackson; rich populist, strong leader, crude, bad economics, and dangerous to minorities.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:28 pm:
I was this close to pulling a Republican ballot and voting for Trump when I voted. This close. There’s a TV ad talkin’ about sending the establishment a message and voting for conservative Rubio. I wanted to send a message of my own.
- X-prof - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:40 pm:
“I would like to encourage tens of thousands of Clinton supporters …” No mention of Sanders supporters. I think Mittuns feels the Bern. Yes?
- Century Club - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:41 pm:
Wouldn’t the 6 - 9% bump be more of a return to normal from a cycle when moderate R’s pulled a Dem ballot to vote for Obama in 2008? He was massively popular here in 2008.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 1:43 pm:
==The Democratic primary is far from over. Bernie can win a majority of earned delegates. I dare the superdelegate elites to go against a majority voters if that were to happen.==
Democrats clearly have their own challenges as well, in addition to the ==enthusiasm gap== for Secretary Clinton.
Plus, there is the x-factor of the FBI investigation. That could make Bernie the nominee, who polls even better against Trump than Clinton.
- Over Rover - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:38 pm:
It is over when Nate Silver says it is, and his web site has been reporting “Hillary’s got this”
- Tommydanger - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:47 pm:
In the end, meaning the general election, I have faith that the majority of voters will not cast their ballots for the real life version of Sideshow Bob.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 2:59 pm:
The road to a Trump or a Sanders presidency has been paved by NAFTA. Anyone thinking this is about racism or stupidity is not listening or thinking. Trump has few tunes but the one winning him the presidency is called THE DAMAGING EFFECTS OF FREE-TRADE.
We were warned back in 1992 about how free trade was going to suck jobs out of the US. It has. It has. The people who are hurting are angry. The people who did it are so ideologically focused upon their Econ 101 class about the glorious benefits of free trade - they aren’t looking at the real side effects and negative consequences of free trade upon American workers.
You aren’t stupid when you see your neighborhoods lose to other countries willing to do what it was you got paid to do, for peanuts. You aren’t bigoted because you are angry that someone on the other side of the world is getting a dollar a hour to do what you used to support your family doing.
The fact that these political “geniuses” are trying to block Trump and Sanders over ideology, or hypocrisy, or personal style of campaigning are not focused on why they are popular.
What makes Bernie burn and what makes Trump win is the same thing - Americans wants Wall Street to pay for the ruin they caused and the don’t want the people who sat on their hands and let it happen, stay in power.
Either embrace the fervor, or be fodder for it.
- Rabid - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 3:10 pm:
Will the GOP pulling a ballot for gonzo and dunkin feel the burn?
- Qui Tam - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 3:43 pm:
Wall Street and the Neo-Cons are again joining forces to stop Trump and Sanders.
That alone could be considered an endorsement by many.
- Tone - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 5:35 pm:
Americans love free trade. They love as much crap for the lowest price as possible.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 6:36 pm:
== Americans love free trade. They love as much crap for the lowest price as possible. ==
But only when they have a good job that lets them pay for the stuff.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Mar 8, 16 @ 6:44 pm:
== The road to a Trump or a Sanders presidency has been paved by NAFTA. ==
Our parents (the WW II Generation) warned us to Buy American and Buy Union … but a lot of us didn’t listen.
Walmart under it’s founder did well encouraging American companies; the managers today only look at the company’s bottom line, not the effect of their decisions on the US economy.
So we are unhappy with the remaining low paying jobs in … and the politians are mining that discontent.