There have been a lot of recent statements essentially making claims about base consolidation on the Republican side of the aisle. Almost all of the claims I've reviewed are inaccurate, incorrect, demonstrably false.
We've been tracking Trump or Bust voters alongside normal gauges pertaining to base consolidation for each candidate, for months. At the heart of these false claims is a lack of understanding RE: proportionality.
In order to better illustrate proportionality, I created the chart for "Republican Candidate-Specific Support (December 2023)" based on the survey question bearing the same name asked of 1,339 eligible Republican primary voters (and caucus-goers) interviewed for the National Poll in December.
It very much demonstrates and supports what Harry Enten attempted to argue in a recent column, which is that Donald Trump is by far the most likely to 1) consolidate the Republican primary coalition in a general election and 2) drive out the largest number of voters.
Take, for instance, the claim from Haley supporters that her voters could very well back Joe Biden in a general election. Indeed, 20.7% of her voters indicated in our poll that they would consider doing just that—and other polls mirror our findings. However, while "1 in 5 Haley voters would consider backing Biden" sounds like an alarming headline for the eventual nominee, the actual number of voters (27) is less than the 3.8% of Trump's voters (32) who indicated they would consider doing the same.
The 21.2% of Haley voters who would consider voting for a third party candidate is far less real votes (28) than the seemingly smaller 7.8% share of Trump voters who said the same (66). That's the impact of proportionality.
Put simply, Trump share of the vote is far larger, thus it is far more difficult (less likely even) for non-Trump candidates to consolidate his support if he is the nominee than visa-versa, and certainly they are more risky.
Further consider, the 1.7% of DeSantis supporters who said they would not vote at all if their candidate was not the nominee was derived from just TWO interviews. Two, that's it. By comparison, the 3.7% of Trump supporters who said the same represents interviews from 31 people.
Of course, the real risk and potential serious damage to any non-Trump coalition comes from the 39.7% of Trump voters who say they'll write-in his name if he's not the nominee. That means of the 1,339 total primary voters we interviewed, 334 explicitly stated they'd opt for Trump as a write-in protest vote.
Most conclusive, the total number of voters who indicated primary support for another candidate other than Trump and also indicated they might not vote for the party's nominee (149) is less than half the number of voters who simply say they would write-in Trump (334), and dwarfed further by the total number of Trump supporters (463) who indicated they might not vote for the party's nominee.
Hopefully, the colored columns demonstrate the impact of proportionality better than I, or anyone, can explain it.
https://www.datawrapper.de/_/PWwza/
I feel like tearing off my clothes and dancing in the rain (snow on Tuesday). Ofc I'm entirely too old to do that. But...
We were SO right.
Here's Snoop, who rapped "F--K Donald Trump" in 2017, now performing at a Trump supporting inauguration party.
Watch Live 3:00 PM EST — Robert Barnes and Rich Baris discuss in detail bombshell results within the Public Polling Project for Early Spring 2021, and more civil unrest amid the trial of Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd.
Support the Public Polling Project
https://www.bigdatapoll.com/public-polling-project/
Locals Communities
https://peoplespundit.locals.com/
https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/
Like on Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesPunditDaily
Follow on Twitter
https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit
https://twitter.com/Barnes_Law
Theme Song: "Highway" By Grammy Considered Bowen Band
https://www.chrisbowenband.com/
Andrew was right. Let's go with this guys. From here we will look more into the "crisis politics" angle that led to the creation of the national security state and world we now live in.
https://x.com/barnes_law/status/1984671873968513502?t=dQUBv0zDVvJIi9Bdttg9Lg&s=19
Barnes is right about how they will burn down the big tent in order to save their golden Calf. It just drives me crazy that they will go after people who hold 80 percent of their views in a higher magnitude than leftists who don't even think Isreal should exist.
in terms of a long-term strategy, im seriously trying to think of what their end game is. Aipac gives both to high profile Democrats and Republicans. But rather than discuss the actual issue, its always about silencing the opposition.
I always thought it was supposed to be about free speech on the right. But as soon as you have any criticism of Isreal you aren't a true Scottsman.
I matched most of the tucker-Nick interview and while I don't know much about Nick, I don't see the reason for calling Tucker the next leader of the Hitler youth.
Trump started out strong by focusing on domestic issues. But ever since Bombing Iran, Isreal and Gaza have ...
Watching people attempt to "unskew" polls conducted by all walks of this industry—ranging from Nate Cohn at The New York Times to Spencer Kimball at Emerson College to Tim Malloy at Quinnipiac—all to deny Donald Trump's gains against Joe Biden with various voting blocs, is more than a little sad.
The slew of recent polls over two weeks—to include no less than four today alone—have simply confirmed prior findings published from other pollsters who have previously been "unskewed". That includes your's truly and our work at BIG DATA POLL, Mark Penn at Harvard University, Patrick Ruffini at Echelon Insights, and many others.
I'm temped to equate this with an Occam's razor-like situation. But this debate is more about likelihood than simplicity.
Here's the Presidential Vote Preference Trend for Biden v. Trump going back to August 2020. The Public Polling Project did not begin asking the Rematch Question for 2024 until September 2021. However, we can still make some pretty important and interesting observations.