Why Clinton Beats Trump…In Pictures
Today, instead of arguing the general election in words, let’s argue it in pictures. (And save me a thousand words.)
For every argument that Donald Trump can beat Hillary Clinton by turning out new, first-time white voters, there’s a picture that says, “No, he can’t.”
Start with the electoral map, where you need 270 to win. Let’s begin with the map 2012 map that gave Obama a 332 electoral vote landslide. But for argument sake, let’s give Trump the states of Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, and North Carolina – nice head start. Now, let’s also throw Ohio, Pennsylvania and Colorado into his column – basically a middle-America sweep. He still doesn’t win.
(click on map to enlarge)
This time, let’s give Trump Florida instead of Pennsylvania – an additional 9 electoral votes. Yet he still falls 2 electoral votes short of a win.
Heck, you could give Trump Ohio, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, AND New Hampshire…AND Maine. Guess what – Clinton still ekes out the win!
For Trump to win, you’d have to give him… are you ready?… Ohio, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Missouri, Colorado, and either Pennsylvania or Wisconsin or New Hampshire to hit or surpass 270.
Why is that unlikely? Because it takes a lot to turn blue states red. When you look at the election by demographic turnout using this FiveThirtyEight.com interactive tool, you see why. Here’s the electorate as it was in 2012.
(click on graphic to enlarge)
Experts say that Trump could win in 2016 by driving up turnout among white, non-college educated voters. But there just aren’t enough of them out there to tip the electoral college. Even if you pushed the white, non-college demo up to a 99% turnout – which of course is impossible – the Dem still gets 272 electoral votes.
But, you may counter, that assumes all the other minority demographic groups turnout and vote exactly the same way as they did for Obama. Fair point. It’s unlikely that Clinton (or Sanders) would do as well with blacks as Obama did.
So let’s drop Clinton’s share of the black vote from 93% to 85% and drop black turnout from 66% to 60% – very conservative estimates. Even then, if white non-college educated voter turnout spiked up from 57% to 90%, Clinton still wins.
In fact, only if you drop both black and Latino turnout by 10% and raise total white turnout by 10%, do you end up with a Trump victory. And those numbers would be unprecedented.
Granted, these are models, and they don’t necessarily prove real world outcomes. But it seems fair to say, that even if Trump over-performs compared to Mitt Romney or John McCain, it is highly unlikely he can shift enough electoral votes to win a general election. That doesn’t mean Democrats should get complacent or Republicans should give up all hope.
But if you are planning on moving to Canada if Trump wins, I wouldn’t put a downpayment on an Alberta condo just yet.