The University of Mary Washington has released a poll of Virginia voters revealing a starkly anti-establishment mood among the Republican electorate.
Among those voters self-identified as “Republicans/Leans Republican,” only 10 percent of respondents backed the visibly “establishment” or moderate candidates Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, or John Kasich. By contrast, those voters backing explicitly anti-establishment candidates Ben Carson, Donald Trump, or Ted Cruz account for 63 percent of all respondents.
The results are below:
| Carson | 29% |
| Trump | 24% |
| Rubio | 11% |
| Cruz | 10% |
| Fiorina | 5% |
| Bush | 5% |
| Paul | 4% |
| Christie | 4% |
| Huckabee | 4% |
| Kasich | 1% |
| Gilmore | 0% |
So, what does this mean? First, it means Virginia Republicans are not that different from the rest of the country in sharing an anti-establishment mood. People are looking for leaders who mean what they say, and won’t back down from a fight when it comes to carrying out their promises (e.g., enforcing our immigration laws, to name but one prominent example). It also means bad news for those folks at the local level who’ve decided to hitch their wagons to the national guy with the big name and all the big donors. And, Governor Gilmore? Not registering at all in his home state should send a pretty strong message about what should come next.
It’s probably a very good sign for Marco Rubio, as the distance that Jeb Bush has helped Rubio place between himself and the epitome of the establishment candidate (Bush) has made him attractive to mainstream Republicans, and the safest bet for disaffected establishment-types looking to place their bets on a horse with a chance to win. It’s also good news for Cruz. As the campaign continues, he is positioned well to pick up Trump or Carson supporters looking for an “outsider” with better rhetorical and political skills, should one or the other of the current frontrunners stumble.
Finally, it’s really, really good news for TV networks that will be covering the Republican National Convention in Cleveland next year. Why? Because the conventional wisdom that the GOP electorate is going to grow tired of Trump and Carson, et al, keeps proving to be wrong. They’re not going away, and they’re both probably going to win some winner-take-all primaries, and do well in the proportional allocation states as well. The rest of the top tier candidates will also likely, in the end, outperform this polling. Together, this means that we are looking at the greatest possibility in modern times of a truly brokered convention to select our nominee, which will make for gripping television and record ratings as the public tunes into the floor battle.
More on that as we get closer. In the meantime, full results of the poll can be found here.
14 comments
I knew how angry the party grassroots was at the GOP-E, and wasn’t surprised at Trump’s ability to capitalize on that in the early days of the campaign. What’s surprising me now is how many normally non-political folks — people who aren’t party members and are too busy working and raising families to read political blogs or opinion magazines — are telling me they are beginning to warm to Trump. I’m talking about professional people — doctors, veterinarians, academics (!), etc.
The shame of this is that much of their support for Trump can be traced to their seeing our party do nothing significant with the Congressional majority we were given last year. People are desperate for someone, anyone, to aggressively stop the country’s “transformation.” I think this Syrian refugee crisis may well decide the election. If Obama makes Congress blink on an issue this important to a vast majority of the electorate, the GOP nominee will definitely be Trump.
Yes, Trump is the Establishment’s Frankenstein. Given life by their condescending “You just don’t understand why I voted against everything I said I stood for” attitude towards their constituents and their inability to fight against Democrats. He’s their creation and he’s coming back to his creators with a vengeance. It would be amusing if the rest of the Conservative movement wasn’t caught in the crossfire.
How stupid can my party possibly be? If Trump were to win the nomination, the very next day he would move back hard to the left. The guy hadn’t spent 1 day in his 7 decades prior to running for the GOP nomination advocating for conservative principles or reforms.
The Republican State Central Committee stuck us with a primary where many Democrats will cross over and vote for Trump. That’s one of the problems with polls in Virginia when they only poll likely REPUBLICAN voters. Sanders will be out of the running my March so Democrats will go to the polls to vote for Trump. Remember to thank your State Central Committee members who voted for a primary when Carson and Trump carry the day in Virginia.
I’m a Carson supporter so I’d be pleased if he won. On the other hand, I’m not a Trump supporter but if he won because of the Establishment’s stupid demands for an open primary, if the guy they hate the most won because of their own actions, I’d be laughing my guts out at the irony.
As far as I’m aware Mr. Dickinson everything is in place and the gotcha this year will be Rule 40, which was originally meant I believe as a rule to limit discord, but no one was predicting this size this field. Rule 40 requires a Republican candidate for president to demonstrate support from a majority of delegates in eight (8) states before he or she can be formally nominated. Current Party rules also require any state holding its nominating contest before March 15 to award delegates on a proportional basis, rather than a winner take all. In 2016 I believe at least 18 states and Puerto Rico are holding caucuses or primaries before March 15. If a candidate is going to win the majority of delegates in these early states they would have to crush the competition early which I find highly unlikely. All the contests held after March 15, super Tuesday, may be awarded on a winner-take-all basis, though they are not required to do so. So what has happened regarding Rule 40 is that the fewer the majority delegate wins on a winner-take-all basis, the less likely any candidate garners enough delegates to reach the eight required. This could be a mess and watch out for convention modifications reducing the number required for Rule 40, especially if this provides a leg up for Marco Rubio in a contested event. If I were a campaign strategist for a candidate I would be laser focused on small, winner take all states the easiest path in my opinion to meeting Rule 40. They turnout to be more important majority wins then simply a proportional delegate piece of the larger states this convention go around. Doesn’t seem intuitive but those are the rules. For the professionals out there if I’ve misstated something please correct.
LW, thank you for that insight. As they say, the plot thickens. Sounds like it will be a raucous party indeed. With Rule 40, statistically, we can’t have more than 6 nominations at the convention. Of course, you know ahead of time if you made the cutoff or not. Someone could motion to change the rules too. This has all the concomitants of a 1960s-era convention brew-ha-ha. As Steve said, “Finally, it’s really, really good news for TV networks that will be covering the Republican National Convention in Cleveland next year.” Sure will be.
“I would be laser focused on small, winner take all states,” Absolutely. The rules really favor that approach. A candidate could win a big state like Texas and still never make it to the ballot because they don’t win 8 states up front. I’m looking at the primary list on Wikipedia and see that the territories have representation too. I wonder if Rule 40 includes them? If so, previous political non-entities like America Samoa and the Virginia Islands (which haven’t picked a primary date yet) could actually have some clout. 26 of the states/territories have primaries before March 15 (Virginia included), which diminishes their importance.
I’m really seeing a reason for candidates NOT to drop out. If 26 “states” are decided proportionally, then it is very likely that NOBODY wins a single one of those to get to the 8 threshold, or any other “proportional” state for that matter. In the end, we could end up with only 2-3 candidates eligible for nomination (and then all @#$@# will break loose).
In 2012 they put this Rule 40 modification in place as cover for President Romney in 2016 and as a bulwark against that evil Ron Paul. Talk about looking in the crystal ball and seeing NOTHING but it does confirm my opinion that the RNC is the gang that can’t shoot straight and their leader Chairman Priebus is an idiot.
I found this delegate allocation tool pretty awesome. Have fun with it.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/11/17/the_gop_race_for_delegates_an_interactive_tool.html
Donald Trump’s egomaniacal, trash talking, traveling circus continues to amaze. One can but hope that Republicans will awake to the fact that Donald-the-Great has sky high negatives (among Democrats, Independents, and Republican) that will make him a less than attractive candidate to oppose the scandal-plagued Hillary.
Blah blah blah!!! No one give a rats behind what you squawk about!
Faye, thanks for reading my post. Your eloquence astounds.
You have nothing to say, then why say anything? Is that eloquent enough for ya?
“Together, this means that we are looking at the greatest possibility in modern times of a truly brokered convention to select our nominee…”
I agree and predict a very long convention.
Who is on the RNC committee writing the convention rules? Does any one know?