Discussing issues that The United States face both foreign and domestic. A Non-partisan viewpoint where we believe in right and wrong not right and left, hopefully forming a more UNITED States of America.

Sunday, November 3, 2024

2024 Election Prediction

The Keystone to the Election

1700s-1800s: William Penn’s Woods.

The land was the center of the 13 British colonies. Colonists wanted more rights and representation from the Crown. Philadelphia served as the backbone of trade, commerce, and meeting ground as an excellent halfway point by horseback between the southern states and fiery New England colonies to the north who were ready for a Revolution.

 

Pennsylvania is the Keystone to the forming of the United States, surviving the U.S. civil war, and building this great country via steel, coal, and rail. Now it serves as the Keystone to the Presidential election. Whoever wins the Commonwealth, has more than 90% odds to win the White House as it serves as a keystone to get to 270.

 

Flip-Flop Flippity Flop or Gone and Never Ever Getting Back Together?

 

In this polarized era of U.S. politics, there is always a state or two that bucks the trend and flirts with the other party, but eventually goes back to its traditional roots four years later. The same can be said for a state or two that flips overnight and never goes back. 

 

In 2008: Indiana and North Carolina were won by Obama. They have stayed Republican since. In the same election: Colorado and Virginia went to Democrats overnight after being rather reliable Republican states in federal elections. They have stayed reliably Democrat at the federal level. 

 

2016: Iowa is probably the best example of never going back after being the lynchpin of picking Obama over Clinton and voting for him twice. Meanwhile Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin were once the bastion of the “Blue Firewall” to make it “impossible” for Republicans to get to 270.  Suddenly that wall cracked and entered swing state territory.

 

Four Years Ago: Georgia and Arizona flipped and were once reliably Republican. Which way will they go along with the Rust Belt? So much of the future coalitions weigh on that answer in how they vote in 2024 in a rather 50/50 coin-toss election.

 

The states that could buck the trend this cycle are: Nevada, North Carolina, and dare I say Iowa?

 

In Nevada, the demographic changes are prime for a Republican victory here, but it's also fool's gold. It's probably the one and only state that overstates Republicans consistently in polls.

 

The only reason I bring up Iowa is J. Ann Selzer’s poll that was released Saturday evening. She is simply the Gold Standard for Iowa Polls. She was within a point or two in 2016 and 2020. She has Harris winning Iowa by 3. To directly quote Dan Pfeiffer on Twitter on Saturday, there are three options what this poll means:

 

1. Selzer is right and Harris wins in a massive landslide 

2. This poll is just a bad poll (it happens, but it happens to Selzer less than others) 

3. Harris isn’t really winning IA but the poll is capturing late stage momentum that bodes well for WI,MI,PA.

 

If it’s #3 and tied to abortion and Women moving further to the left, it’s over for Trump via the Rust Belt. It’s probably the most plausible of the three explanations. Her poll keeps Independents essentially the same as 2020, but has a massive shift in Republican women going Democrat and a noticeable shift in seniors going Democrat. See the Establishment Republican Factor (below) for why this concerns me.

 

Emerson (who has polled Iowa ok) has Trump +10. A +10 margin in Iowa would be indicative of a slightly favoring Trump in the Rust Belt. 7-9 points in Iowa means it’s too close to call on the national level.

 

The Great Lakes States

Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin. 

 

Since 1992, all have vote the same way in every election. In 1988, George HW Bush won PA and Michigan, but lost Wisconsin. Ironically if they were to split today, it may be Wisconsin as the GOP’s best chance of the three.

 

Early Voting in Milwaukee and Dane County (Madison) appear to be less than 2020, while the rural areas are surging. That bodes well for Republicans. On the flip side, the WOW counties surrounding Milwaukee (Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington) were once the bastion of Republican votes are now becoming more Democratic, even if they are still GOP counties, just by a lower margin. Door County (northeast of Green Bay) is a classic bellwether. Brown County (Green Bay), Trump must win by at least 8 points (if not north of 10) to be the favorite in that state.  

 

A similar trend is found in Pennsylvania. The collar counties (Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Bucks) are trending more Democrat (so is Lancaster) while the rural areas trend more to the right. Of all the early vote states, PA looks best for the Democrats as they have done better with lower and higher propensity voters than the GOP but Pennsylvania is still one of the few states left that really only votes on Election Day. 

 

Michigan is perhaps the most perplex. It’s certainly turned the most liberal since 2016 of the three and is perhaps the biggest uphill climb for Trump. Having said that, the demographics are challenging for Harris to connect with the working class in margins Biden got in 2020. The wild card is the Arab population. 

 

CAIR has consistently polled Arabs and found Jill Stein ahead of Harris for how they intend to vote. In fact, sometimes in Michigan, CAIR had Harris in third behind Stein and Trump. That factor alone could sway Michigan back to Trump should those results hold. Regardless, it’s a slight advantage for Harris in the Rust Belt. The results are probably somewhere between 2016 and 2020 for these three states on already razor thin margins.

 

Sun Belt

Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina, and Georgia.

 

The early voting looks fantastic for Republicans. Cannibalization is really the only concern here. Clinton felt good about early voting numbers in 2016, but then no one showed up on Election Day as their base already voted early. Could that happen here for Republicans? To some extent. The data I’ve been shown is a significant portion of the early vote is low propensity voters for the GOP (meaning they voted in 0-2 of the last four presidential elections). The numbers are not as good for Democrats as higher propensity voters are more so voting early. These trends are also largely nationwide too. In the end, this essentially means that if high propensity voters show up on Election Day for the GOP, it’s advantage them. There’s only one concern there (see Establishment Republican factor below).

 

Of the four: Nevada looks the best for the GOP, but I need to see the final mail vote Monday night for Clark County to be sure. The demographic changes are prime for a Republican victory here. It’s a state that has about 85% votes complete before Election Day. Republicans have about a 40,000 vote advantage at the time this was posted and have made great gains in voter registration. Tonight’s and tomorrows voting updates will reveal that state’s advantage, but the culinary union is thinking Trump. They have not been wrong since the Harry Reid era. If Trump’s margin is under 75,000 in Clark County (which it likely is), the rest of the state can carry him over.

 

Arizona is doing well too. Arizona’s concern is what’s said below (Establishment Republican). Trump must keep Maricopa County close or win outright. North Carolina and Georgia: The GOP is doing their part. The only question is if the trends of the people moving into those states is enough to surpass the Republican base. It will be close. Regardless, the Sun Belt appears to be advantage Trump.

 

The Trend is Your (Eventual) Friend

2000 Swing States: What if I told you the closest state in the 2000 election was not Florida? It was actually New Mexico and it was by 366 votes. 

 

Most of the swing states of 2000 (in both directions) are not really swing states anymore. The battle ground back then were: Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, New Hampshire, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Missouri, Oregon, Maine, Minnesota, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Arizona. 

 

Notice how only the last four (5 if Iowa is in play as noted earlier) are still competitive today? That’s because coalitions and voting demographics change over time. These occur about once every 30 years and we are entering a new coalition/realignment dynamic. 

 

Seriously: If you said back in 2006 that in 18 years it would be Democrats who would celebrate the endorsements of the Bush’s and Cheney’s for their candidates, you would have been sent to the nearest mental institution. Between 1932-2016, the only way Republicans won a Presidential election was if Nixon or a Bush (41 or 43) was on the ballot. 

 

So of the states listed below, I am not predicting they flip in 2024, however, I will be looking at their trends and see how they compare with the 2012, 2016, and the 2020 elections. In 4-12 years, these states could be more competitive as the coalitions change assuming the margins become narrower than in the past. The states are: Texas, Nebraska, Kansas, New Mexico, Virginia, New Jersey, and New York. 

 

Of those states, Texas is the most I know about. I lived there for nearly ten years. In late 2011/early 2012 I wrote an in depth report on the Lone Star State. By looking at data such as the decline of white birth rate, growth of Hispanic population, people moving to Texas from the Northeast (like me) and from California, and the majority of kids in school having their primary language be Spanish and not English led me to the following conclusion 12 years ago: Texas will be close in 2024, but probably still be Republican..in 2028 it will be Purple. I still stand by that prediction. 

 

My analysis was by no means perfect. Whites and Democrats moving from liberal states grew faster than I predicted. On the flip side, Hispanics finally started to change and vote Republican as the once very liberal Rio Grande Valley (near and at the Border) went from solid Democrat to toss-up/tilt Republican. If not for the Rio Grande Valley flip, a Democrat probably wins one of the statewide races in Texas sometime between 2018-Now. The last time that happened was in 1994. Trump needs to win by at least 8 to keep Texas solidly red. I doubt that happens. Four to seven points is my prediction for him while Cruz’s margin could be as narrow as 2 points. There is no near term path to the White House for Republicans without Texas. Whites are becoming more liberal while minorities are becoming more conservative. This is why places like the Sun Belt, Trump is polling better than the Rust Belt and why once solid Republican states are seeing narrower margins while once solidly liberal states are seeing tightening margins too.

 

Virginia could be within 5 points, which is shocking since it’s a solid 10-point state for Democrats. Youngkin has done a remarkable job as Governor and the commonwealth is showing his coalition is coming out to vote. Harris will win Virginia, but if it’s narrow, that should indicate good news for Trump in states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, but maybe just maybe states are starting to Balkanize and not identify with other states of similar demographics. COVID and inflation could be the key reasons why that’s happening.

 

Final Factors and Where to Look on Tuesday Night

 

U.S. Census

In 2022, the Census Bureau admitted it over counted in 8 states and undercounted in 6 (guess which way it mostly was too!). In Minnesota, had 26 fewer people not responded to the survey, it would have lost a House seat and thus an Electoral College vote (although that one would have gone to New York). The bigger ones are Rhode Island and Connecticut. If both lost theirs, they would have gone to Florida and Texas. 

 

This means for the 2024 and 2028 elections (had the Census count been proper), Republicans could win the Presidency by 270 without taking a single Rust Belt swing state and instead only need the Sun Belt of NC, GA, and Arizona (assumes Maine and Nebraska evenly split as they did in 2016 and 2020). 

 

The Establishment Republican Factor (Bush/Cheney/McCain/Haley)

To my surprise, I have not seen one poll that (internal or external) that tries to pinpoint and predict this type of voter. The evidence is there in 2020 in Arizona that they voted and voted Democrat. The state was R+8, however, Trump lost. This is because Independents went nearly 2 to 1 to Biden and a significant portion of McCain Republicans refused to back the MAGA candidates.

 

While Republicans made great gains in voter registration over the past 8 years, were those mostly blue collar Democrats finally updating their voter registration? Are Republicans now facing a similar issue where they have Republicans in their registration profile but flipped to Democrats and just haven’t updated their party affiliation? 


In Virginia, Fairfax County has essentially a 75-25 split between Democrats and Republicans, yet in the 2024 primary, more people voted for Republicans (Haley and Trump) than in the Democrat primary. Virginia is an open primary state so it’s safe to assume a significant portion of Haley voters are Democrats who never vote Republican anyway. 

 

In Pennsylvania, that’s not the case as the state is a closed primary system. In the PA Primary, 157,228 (or 16.50%) voted for Haley after she already withdrew. That’s not insignificant. Trump needs to gain at least 2/3s of those protest votes back to win the Keystone State.

 

Bellwether Counties to Watch

 

Vigo and Pike Counties in Indiana are classics.

 

The state closes first (with Kentucky) so go there first. For 68 years, Vigo County correctly predicted the winner of the Presidential election up until 2020. Maybe not as accurate as in the past, but demographics wise it’s now about the margins for white working class voters. Trump needs to win Vigo by at least 15.5 points to give a trend for the rest of the nation if he wants to win the Rust Belt compared to 2020.  

 

Pike County, you want roughly a 53.5 point margin for Trump to see how the Rust Belt performs. 

 

North Carolina

It should come in early as data is mostly released shortly after polls close. Nash County is the one to watch, just northeast of Raleigh and Research Triangle. It’s always been super close since 2004, but is perhaps going to left due to the jobs in the area. It’s demographically diverse as well and can show shifts in minorities and Anglos. In 2020, Biden won it by about 100 votes, but lost the state overall. 

 

Cabarrus County just northeast of Charlotte is another to watch. Trump won it by 20 points in 2016 but only 9.5 in 2020 as people move near Charlotte for the growing economy there. If it halves again (Trump by 5 points or fewer) then Harris has a good chance to win the state. 

 

Georgia's Baldwin County

Another state that should report nearly all of its vote shortly after polls close. It’s a more rural county but has colleges within it. Clinton and Biden barely won there. If Trump wants to win the state as Atlanta metro trends to the left, then he must win here. It’s probably the swing county for Georgia now.  

 

Pennsylvania's Erie, Northampton, and Luzerne Counties

Erie and Northampton probably go with the winner. Luzerne (Wilkes-Barre) would need better margins than 2020 of roughly 15 points to Trump in order to counteract the Democrat gains in “The Collar” counties where with them plus Philadelphia counts for about 60% of the statewide vote. Trump does not need to win Luzerne (Scranton) or Alleghany (Pittsburgh) but the margins need to be tighter than 8.5 and 20 point margins respectively four years ago to win the state.

 

Closing Remarks

In September 1787 during the Constitutional Convention, Ben Franklin stated:

 

“I have often and often, in the course of the session, and the vicissitudes of my hopes and fears as to its issue, looked at that behind the President, without being able to tell whether it was rising or setting…”

 

…it was also the same month he told a citizen the Founding Fathers gave us a Republic, if you can keep it. 

 

This election is tight. It’s not much of a swing from a comfortable Harris victory to Trump’s strongest showing in three elections. To quote U2: “The more you see the less you know, the less you find out as you go. I knew much more then, than I do now.”  States with the lightest of shades I would not be surprised if they flipped the other way. The medium shades are states I am looking for trends in, even if they should easily go to the favored candidate. 

 

In 2016: Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan had Republican governors while Pennsylvania was the only one with a Democrat governor. By 2024, all have Democrat governors with the exception of Georgia. Take that information and make of it what you will for why I wanted to mention that. 

 

If Governor Shapiro was on the ticket, Democrats would win much more easily. If this was a DeSantis/Youngkin ticket for the GOP, you probably have a Republican victory over Harris/Shapiro. Those are all hypotheticals though. Are we back to a Grover Cleveland era or are we back to Democrats dominating federal elections as the GOP splits between Establishment, Conservative, and MAGA wings? 

 

People moving since COVID may create a wasted voter issue for Republicans. Florida no longer being a toss-up due to conservatives moving from the Rust Belt may be the difference alone. It’s possible a reversal of 2016 happens where Trump wins the popular vote but loses the Electoral College. It’s doubtful, but not irrational. 

 




There are whacky scenarios of NC, AZ, Wisconsin, and Nevada going Democrat, but PA, Georgia, and Michigan must go Republican to get to 269-269 tie. 


Outside of my map, the next most logical path to me for Democrats is: PA and Wisconsin to Trump, Michigan Arabs vote the way they normally do (Harris) meaning she wins that state. Arizona and Nevada to Trump, but Georgia and North Carolina to Harris with the changing trends and demographics of those states. That gives Harris a 272-266 victory. Oh, and the final campaign stops of the Harris campaign are Michigan, Georgia, and North Carolina with none planned for PA and Wisconsin at the time of writing this article. 

 

I say this with a broad stroke of the brush, but of these four categories, who is most likely to talk to a pollster in the final week before an election:


    1.        A MAGA Republican

    2.        Moderate/Undecided

    3.        Working Class

    4.        Progressives

Even the New York Times/Sienna final poll hints at this: 

“Across these final polls, white Democrats were 16 percent likelier to respond than white Republicans. That’s a larger disparity than our earlier polls this year, and it’s not much better than our final polls in 2020 — even with the pandemic over. It raises the possibility that the polls could underestimate Mr. Trump yet again.”


Another narrow path is Nevada, Wisconsin, Michigan, and North Carolina to Harris, but Georgia, AZ, and PA to Trump (that’s 273-265 Harris). Those are in the less than 10% scenarios compared to the intro. Don’t sleep on New Hampshire either, but that one is a stretch when Trump’s best chance was in 2016 for it.


In 6 of the 7 Battleground states, Republicans are ahead or essentially tied in the early vote meaning whoever and gets out and votes more on Election Day, wins. Pennsylvania is the only one they are behind on by about 400,000 votes. That means it should be close. Historically, the GOP wins that head-to-head on Election Day except for Michigan. Independents likely decide the election.


What only matters is you go vote if you haven’t done so already.

 4 November Update 8:45 PM EST

Pennsylvania Update November 4, 2024 (Election Eve Evening):

The final report of Pennsylvania mail ballots came out before the election. More mail votes can still be counted, but this is the final one we will have before Election Day votes are counted and revealed.

 

As of yesterday evening (November 3rd):

1,790,310 total votes by mail returned. The breakdown is as follows:

997,450 Democrat

587,546 Republican

205,323 Other

This means as of yesterday there was 409,804 more Democrat ballots than Republican ones.

As of 4 November's Update:

 

1,830,246 total votes by mail returned. The breakdown is as follows:

1,014,744 Democrat

602,601 Republican

212,901 Other

So just under 40,000 additional ballots were submitted today. Of that, the Democrats only netted 2,239 ballots over the Republicans. In other words: This is a disaster for Democrats with only a 412,143 advantage between the parties going into tomorrow. In 2020, it was over 1 million.

 

Granted, this is a different election. I do not expect voter turnout total overall to surpass 2020, but I do expect it to surpass 2016. Compared to 2016: Roughly 30% of the vote is already in. Compared to 2020: Roughly 26% of the vote is in. Split the difference and assume about 28% of the vote is in for 2020.

 

Others/Independents vote more liberal in the mail but vote more conservative in person on Election Day. Before the mail returns came back, the "general consensus" was the Democrat firewall in Pennsylvania needed to be roughly 500,000 for them to win the Keystone State.

 

48 hours ago there was a pathway to that. After the last two updates, it's an uphill climb (but not impossible).

 

Trump needs 54% of the remaining votes to win or ~R+10 on Election Day. In 2022, Election Day margin was +13; in 2020 it was R+19. 

 

R+19 will not happen this cycle due to COVID. I suspect it will be slightly less than R+13 as well, but the window is absolutely there between R+10 and R+13.

 

With this information, make of it what you will. 

 

Source for data above: Early Voting Tracker

Friday, June 24, 2016

Why the U.K. Voted for a "Brexit" From the E.U.

The E.U. Referendum is a clear message on the current state of world affairs. There is insanity, inaction by world leaders, the West has failed with regards to security, and people are begging for the madness to stop. Euroscepticism was a taboo word on Wednesday June 22, 2016; as the sun rose on the old continent on June 24, it suddenly was mainstream.

There are many impacts this vote has on the current state of affairs such in the near future such as trade agreements, sovereignty, immigration, unification and could create a chain reaction across Europe. It can also bring about a new era of prosperity and gains in liberty, individual freedom, and improvement for the quality of life for many. But if tensions rise too high, it can also become as bloody as the French Revolution.

With regards to the politics of Great Britain, the Labour party has some significant soul searching to do. The party has gone far-left after Jeremy Corbyn took over following the 2015 UK Parliamentary election. Yet Corbyn himself was an early Eurosceptic and often critical of the EU despite his party’s politicians (and himself included) almost unanimously endorsed to stay in the European Union. The sole reason this referendum passed for leave the E.U. was the base of Labour party---blue collar workers---in the Labour heartland voted against their party’s wishes and policies.  

While every region in Scotland reported healthy numbers for stay in the E.U., voter turnout was much lower than the Scottish Independence vote and immediately Labour blamed SNP over this loss. Labour is quite arrogant since it now only controls one parliamentary seat in Scotland and is the reason why the Conservatives have a sole majority. The Labour base is furious at the party for not helping their constituents.

This leads to the biggest miscalculation in economics and believers of the constructivism policy over realism. Yes, the overall net gains are beneficial to both sides in free trade agreements and a pact mentality, however, the miscalculation is in adaptability and whom it benefits and hurts. Simply put, a fisherman or manufacturer cannot simply leave their profession (after most likely years or decades in that field) to become the next computer expert or wind turbine engineer via job training or returning to school for a new degree. In the United States, a blue-collar worker cannot simply become the next Silicon Valley expert.

Despite amazing progress in connecting the world in seconds via e-mail and Skype. We can also be connected very quickly in-person via aviation. Yet, a vast majority of people’s future is largely determined by their birthplace in the world and the environment they grow up in. Most people in America---where Americans have a rather high rate of movability---will live approximately only 18 miles away from their mother largely because of economic opportunity.

The greatest political challenge going forward for the United Kingdom will be to remain united. Wales and England clearly voted to leave the E.U. while Scotland voted to remain and the SNP wants to remain in the E.U. while leaving the U.K. Low energy prices pretty much proves Scotland cannot be more prosperous as an independent nation. Oil will not go back to glory day prices that are needed to make Scotland prosperous because drilling in the North Sea is more expensive than many other places around the world. Yet, Scotland is probably the most likely candidate to leave the U.K. and the E.U. may just want that to get revenge and serve as the “punishment” for this vote.

Northern Ireland is a more complicated issue. The vote was 55/45 to remain, however, there appears to be another divide within the once very fragmented country. The DUP region of Northern Ireland (mostly protestant areas) voted to leave the E.U. while the more Catholic regions and border areas to the Republic of Ireland voted to remain. Most likely Northern Ireland will remain in the U.K. yet there are significant questions that need answers should this become an “E.U./non-E.U.” border.


There is another element the world forgot before this vote and perhaps this is why people are most surprised by the result. The land of the birthplace for liberalism pioneered by great philosophers such as John Locke, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill voted to essentially say to the European Union: No taxation without representation. Lest we forget the real reason why the 13 colonies declared Independence from the Crown and Parliament was because the colonialists felt they did not have the proper rights as Englishmen as they were being taxed without a seat in Parliament. The U.K. voted on June 23 to tell the European Union it did not have a right to make laws over their sovereign land without proper representation.

Sunday, January 31, 2016

How Each Presidential Candidate Can Win The Primaries

The first caucus in the United States takes place on February 1 in Iowa followed by the New Hampshire primary on February 9. After that, the parties make the system a little more confusing as Democrats have their Nevada caucus while Republicans host their South Carolina Caucus on February 20 while a few days later the parties do the reverse as the Republican Nevada Caucasus and the Democratic South Carolina primary takes place on February 27. The candidates win delegates based of a proportional system in the early states and the candidate with a majority of the pledged delegates officially becomes the party’s nominee for president at the party convention in the late summer.  

Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada are the four states the system have allowed to go early in the primaries because of their geographical location, size in population (rather small compared to most states in an attempt to provide stronger voices than in highly populated states), and different demographics, values, and economies. Tuesday March 1 is regarded as “Super Tuesday” because it is the earliest day the Democrat and Republican parties allow other states to choose to host their primary/caucus and they do not have to proportionally align delegates meaning a candidate who wins a plurality of the vote within the state can take all of the delegates for the convention. Most of the time, the frontrunner of the party essentially secures the nomination on the evening of Super Tuesday by winning enough delegates.  Mitt Romney in 2012 and John McCain in 2008 essentially secured the Republican nomination for President because of Super Tuesday. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama went until the end of the primaries in June 2008 before Obama secured enough delegates to win the party’s nomination.

15 primaries/caucuses occur on Super Tuesday—meaning 19 states/territories will vote in the primaries by the end of March 1—with 11 more contests taking place by March 8. Because there are so many states in such a short period of time occurring all across the country, only the best-financed and well-polled candidates can win the nomination.

Hence for Republicans, while there are still over ten candidates running for President, only three appear to have a realistic chance of winning: Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Marco Rubio because of their fundraising and polling. While Jeb Bush has raised over $133 million for his campaign and via Super Pacs, he can stay in the race until the end of the primaries, but his poll numbers suggest he will not do well.

For Democrats, three candidates remain in the race, however, it will come down to two individuals: Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. Now we will analyze who has the best chance to win the party’s nomination and how each legitimate contender can win it.

Republicans

1) Donald Trump

Yes, the unthinkable one-year ago is most likely happening. Trump is dominating in the polls doing well in the early states of Iowa and South Carolina, while crushing in New Hampshire.  He has virtually spent no many on advertisements electing to let his mouth garner media attention for free advertising. Republican voters feel betrayed by their party for not challenging Obama’s policies domestically (such as healthcare and the national debt) and abroad from Iran and ISIL. There are still two realistic paths for Trump to lose the nomination, however, he is the clear front-runner.

The first way Trump loses the nomination is if the Republican Party presidential candidate field drops from 12 to 2 candidates. A majority of the party still supports candidates not named Donald Trump and they would most likely unify to vote for the Trump alternative candidate. If Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush remain in the race past the first four states and run on Super Tuesday, Trump will most likely be the nominee as the “Establishment vote” is split between the opposition candidates.

The second one is a theory I have stated for months. A significant portion of Trump’s base is blue-collar and union affiliated Democrat registered voters. Yes, much of his support comes outside of the Republican Party. The New York Times has an excellent summary on his supporter base here. At least 27 states/territories have a closed primary meaning voters can only vote in the primary they are registered with. So many Democrats may be shocked when they go to vote than they cannot actually support Donald Trump in the primary. So while poll numbers may be accurate, this won’t necessarily reflect his actual support in primaries. Of the first 19 primaries/caucuses, 7 are closed primaries.

2) Ted Cruz

The Texas Senator is now leading in polls in Iowa and will probably win the first contest. Recent history shows the Republican winner in Iowa does not usually win the nomination.  The anti-establishment Republican base that does not like Donald Trump is supporting Ted Cruz. His base is essentially the Evangelical and Tea Party vote the campaign has dubbed grassroots conservatism. As the establishment/more moderate wing of the party remains divided on Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, or John Kasich, this has allowed Ted Cruz to be comfortable in second place and lead in Iowa.

His best path to victory is winning Iowa, skipping New Hampshire, and then using momentum/same campaign style to win South Carolina. Since 1980 (with the exception of 2012), the winner of the South Carolina Republican primary has won the nomination of the party for president. If Cruz wins South Carolina, he is in great position on Super Tuesday because seven of the fourteen states on Super Tuesday take place in the South and southern states historically tend to vote for the candidate that represents on of their states.  It is possible for Ted Cruz to win 9 of the first 18 states, which would most likely help him secure the nomination, especially if there are at least three/four candidates still competing on Super Tuesday. The Cruz campaign is gaining momentum and is most likely the candidate that can win over a portion of Trump supporters that are not the most loyal to Trump because Cruz is also viewed as an outside to D.C. politics and is also anti-establishment. Should Dr. Ben Carson drop out of the race early, most likely much of his support will go over to Cruz.

3) Marco Rubio

Heavyweight donors, influential members of the Republican Party (the “establishment”) are shifting their support to Rubio. He is young, refreshing, and shares the story of the average American taking on student loans and coming from a middle class family. His background and support does show the stars aligning for a Rubio nomination, however, there are still significant obstacles in his way, mainly a plurality of candidates still in the race.

If the race were Rubio versus Trump or Rubio versus Cruz, Marco Rubio wins the nomination. The problem is his base of supporters is split amongst many candidates, including Jeb Bush who is also from Florida. Many Bush supporters and donors have Rubio has their second choice, however, they are loyal to the Bush family. They will most likely not switch their vote (which could provide Rubio a boost of 5 to 10 percent more in support, which would be critical in certain states) until Jeb Bush officially drops out. Thus the nomination could come down to how long Jeb Bush stays in the race even though Bush’s odds of winning are now slim to none.

Rubio’s other obstacle is performing well in early states. Nationally, he is considered in third or fourth place, but in the early states he is at least twenty points behind the frontrunner. Rubio must place at least third in Iowa and win New Hampshire or be in a close second in order to have a clear path for the nomination as that boost could help him do well in South Carolina and Nevada (where he does have family ties in that state) to place himself in a great position for Super Tuesday. Unless he pulls off a semi-miracle in New Hampshire or the field shirks to three or four candidates after Iowa, Rubio faces challenges for the nomination despite a well run and funded campaign with prominent supporters.

Jeb Bush

Not much should be said about Bush except that how poor his campaign has performed despite raising the most money. His last name is a liability, as voters do not want another political dynasty. His record in Florida qualifies him as a great candidate, but there is zero momentum behind Jeb! The two ways he can win are via a miracle in New Hampshire and then using his money for Super Tuesday or if there is a broken convention where delegates are split between Trump, Cruz, Rubio, and Bush in a distant fourth where none have a majority. After the first ballot, delegates are no longer bound to their candidate and can vote for anyone. This would be the only slim chance Jeb has for the nomination. The last brokered convention for Republicans was in 1948 where it went three ballots before choosing the front-runner Governor Thomas Dewey who lost to FDR.


Democrats

1) Virtual Tie Between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders

While this may come as a surprise, Bernie Sanders path toward the nomination is becoming more realistic by the day. The polls are tightening in Iowa and he will most likely win New Hampshire. If he wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, he will be the favored candidate to win the nomination.


Hillary’s national support is falling faster in 2016 than 2008 as shown in the graph.


The email scandal, her trustworthiness, plus the FBI criminal investigation into the emails is now turning into a public corruption investigation where it appears donations to her non-profit Clinton Foundation by authoritarian regimes were given preferential treatment by Secretary Clinton’s State Department.  This investigation is now very serious and Michael Bay’s 13 Hours movie about the Benghazi incident that was just released will not help her. Clinton’s campaign of simply stating, “vote for me because I’m a woman” is not resonating with all the voters, as they want more substance on the issues that are affecting Americans. Her “Mi Abuela” campaign effort to attract Hispanic voters has backfired when a massive social media movement occurred under the hashtags #NotMiAbuela and #NotMyAbuela.  Clinton has also failed to go on the offensive against Bernie Sanders such as his horrible “rape fantasies” essay he claimed women enjoy the thought/imagining they are being raped. Instead, she just chooses to adopt most of his positions after he states them in a debate. Meanwhile, Sanders is able to attack her with regards to Wall Street reform and speaking fees she has accepted from Goldman Sachs.

Bernie Sanders has run a clear message about his socialist policies and college students, the same base that gave Obama the nomination against Clinton in 2008, love his message. Millennials (including Women Millennials) support Sanders over Clinton. If other minority voters jump on to the #FeelTheBern bandwagon, 2008 may be déjà vu for Clinton in 2016. Clinton still has the lead for minority support though against Sanders. There are two main factors in the race that can still secure Clinton the nomination.

The first is Southern states are voting early and Clinton is much more likely to win those states on Super Tuesday because southerners do not like the appeal of socialism Bernie Sanders is campaigning on and the Clintons are from Arkansas.  The second reason is the likelihood of Sanders winning the nomination. Many Democrat voters I’ve talked to (especially Millennials) like the message and are more politically aligned with Sanders, however, they do not think he can win against the Republican nominee. If Democrats are more concerned about winning in November versus voting for who they like the most, then Clinton will win. If Sanders can convince voters he is a movement similar to Obama, then Bernie will have the edge. If Sanders wins Iowa, New Hampshire, and either Nevada or South Carolina, it is most likely over for Hillary Clinton’s campaign.