Guest Post – The 2016 Election Stats The Media and Establishment Republicans Prefer To Ignore….

We have been following the election closely.  One of the key aspects noted by everyone is the intensity of turnout on one specific side, the Republican side.  Some pundits and analysts call this “the Trump Effect” – because Donald Trump has brought more people into the election process than ever before.

trump vegas 2

We have also been predicting a tsunami election not only in ‘primary’ support of candidate Donald Trump, but also with overwhelming participation in the general election which would seemingly crush any Democrat opponent.

However, in an effort to find independent analysis for our own research we reached out with an offer for anyone to compile their own modeling.   A data analyst by trade, Nick H took up our offer and here’s his findings:

Analysis by “Nick H” – Preliminary Notes / Assumptions:

  1. 2008 was a peak year in the Democrat party for voter turnout.  Previous years did not come close to the 38 million voters in the Democrat primary process and the 68 million in the general was a record.  President Obama was a key factor. (2008 turnout exceeded 2012 by roughly 6%)
  2. Current energy on the Republican side in 2016 is statistically higher than ever before. The four  primary elections/caucuses that have taken place so far prove it because the current results smashed 2012’s results. (2012 were previous records).
  3. The primary predictions are hard to do because in previous years, once a nominee was presumed, turn out (regardless of party) drops.  People see their vote will not matter, so they don’t vote.  The current predictions assume (maybe incorrectly) that both parties will fight this out later rather than sooner.
  4. The terms “nomination process” and “primary process” are used interchangeably.  Some of the data (like Iowa) is for caucuses, technically not a primary.  To make absorption easier refer to the whole process as “nomination”, but typing “primary” is so much easier than “nomination process”.  (Both used, they mean the same thing)

The analysis begins by looking at the current rate of Republican turnout and current rate of Democrat turnout, and finding the growth or decline.

Since four states from four regions voted, I bucketed each state into a region: south, north, middle, and west.  For the Republican side, I looked at 2008, 2012, and 2016.  What was the increase in turnout from 2008 to 2016 and 2012 to 2016?  Once found, I took the average of those two and got the following results:

Republican voter turnout currentAt first glance, the % increase is shocking, and seem inflated, however numbers are numbers and they do not lie.  These are the raw voter turnout numbers in 2016 compared to 2008 and 2012.

♦ Currently the trend is 29% more voters in the republican primary process in 2016 as compared to 2012.

Next we look at the Democrat primary voters and see what is the trend for 2016 as compared to 2008.  *Note there wasn’t a primary in 2012, so the comparison is Primary Turnout ’08 -vs Primary Turnout ’16.

The media and punditry have mentioned a down-turn in Democrat turnout, but the numbers are far more revealing than they discuss:

Democrat Voter Turnout 08 vs 16

♦ Currently the trend is a 25.12% DECREASE in voters in the Democrat primary process in 2016 as compared to 2008.

Using the hard data of the first four primary results we switch to a predictive model.

Predicting the primary process turnout is based on the region of each state.  Basing the region in proximity to the states that have already voted.  Some maybe questionable, but most are reasonable assumptions. An example of a questionable one is Oklahoma. This model puts OK in the “middle” region, however,  some could argue it should be included in the “South” region.

Based on the region of each state, I then applied the following to the 2016 estimated primary turnout:

  • Republican – the average growth between “2012 to 2016” and “2008 to 2016”.
  • Democrat – the average decline between 2008 to 2016.

Using these numbers, I multiplied the 2012 (2008 for dems) primary results by the regional change (percent mention above).  An example: in 2012 Georgia had 901,470 votes in the Republican primary.  The % increase in the South is +45%, we add another 405,661 votes to give us a predicted total of 1.3 million votes in Georgia for the 2016 Republican primary vote.  (*note we will be able to verify this prediction, GA, tomorrow)

Based on the model described above, here is a look at previous year actual turnout vs 2016 estimates for the nomination process (click to enlarge):

voter turnout r v d 1

In 2008 slightly less than 22 million voted in the Republican primary.  In 2012 just over 19 million voted in the primary.  The lower 2012 participation was due to everyone except Mitt Romney basically gone after the Florida Primary vote (destroying Newt Gingrich).   Romney coasted to the convention.

[Side Note: The 2012 numbers almost mirror the 2000 numbers when Bush got the nomination against McCain.]

The 29.5 million estimated (projected based on current trend) for 2016 in the Republican process is massive by comparison to ’08 and ’12.  However, the projection is also revealing given the fact that previous nominees where able to achieve the nomination with far fewer votes.  The Republican nominee in 2016 will have a much larger group of voters having supported him to the nomination than Mitt Romney by a factor of almost 50%.

voter turnout r v d 1

On the Democrat side things look much better on the chart than it actually might be for a few reasons:  #1) Hillary had far less support this time around in New Hampshire than in 2008, despite only two people in the race this year. #2) In 2008, the primaries for the Democrats went on till the very end.

The 28.5 million estimated “projection” this year (28,450,721) is based on that long primary race happening again.  However, unfortunately for Sanders, given the size of Clinton’s victories he might be forced to drop out soon, or the Sanders supporters become disenfranchised and stop voting en masse, in effect losing interest.

The 2008 primary voter turnout for the Democrats was huge.   More than half of the Democrat general election voters participated in the primary race in 2008 and also 2012:

turnout dem 2008 and 2012

You can see that Democrats have high turnout operations in primary races.  In 2008 38.1 million Democrats voted in the primary and 66.5 million Democrats voted in the general.  That is a very high participation rate for primary contests in comparison to Republicans.

You can see below Republican turnout in the primaries in the past two presidential elections has been much lower compared to the general election:

voter turnout republican 2

In 2008 21.9 million Republicans voted in the primary and 58.1 million voted in the general election (265% increase).   In 2012 19.2 million primary -vs- 59.2 million in the general (308% increase).

If those increases are even remotely maintained given the scope of the current increase in Republican Primary participation, the general election vote would be through the roof.

And here is where you begin to understand the potential scope of the 2016 primary voter for the Republican nominee, Donald J Trump.  This is the bottom line the media and establishment republicans do not want to see discussed.  This is the potential for the “Trump Effect”:

Republican voter turnout projected

73 million is a lot, but the numbers do not lie.  That’s 7.2 million more potential votes than Barack Obama carried in 2008, and almost 13 million more than Mitt Romney carried in 2012.  That’s YUGE !

The huge boost in Republican primary votes (double in Nevada over 2012), the massive crowds at Donald Trump rallies, and the record number of viewers for the GOP debates (300% – 500%+) confirm a huge interest and support for the frontrunner Donald Trump.

The Democrat turnout is harder to put a number on since there was no primary in 2012 to draw a current trend to.  However, as stated in the assumptions, 2008 was an absolute voter peak for Democrats.  Anyone arguing Hillary will do as well as Obama in 2008 (66 million votes) would be hard pressed to explain that validity.

Even if Republican projection turnout was off by 5 million votes, Trump still wins in a landslide.  Heck, even if the projection turnout was off by a staggering 10 million votes, the republican nominee (Trump) would still gets more votes than President Obama did in 2012 and it is highly doubtful Hillary could turn out that level of support.

SUMMARY:  If the continual primary estimates hold (we’ll know tomorrow), and if these numbers translate to the general election,  Donald Trump wins hands down.  The question is, how many Republicans will stay home (anyone but Trump)  and how many Democrats will stay home (anyone but Clinton)?

While some Republicans may refuse to vote for Trump it’s doubtful they will vote for Hillary.   However, inversely, a fair amount of Democrats who refuse to vote for Clinton will likely cross over and vote for Trump.

Trump thumbs up

trump lion

Nick H.

This entry was posted in Donald Trump, Election 2016, Predictions. Bookmark the permalink.

256 Responses to Guest Post – The 2016 Election Stats The Media and Establishment Republicans Prefer To Ignore….

  1. William says:

    What about the independent voters? What effect do they have on the outcome scenario?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Finalage says:

      Great question. How big a share are independent voters going to be? Romney actually won independent voters by a point in 2012. Trump will likely need to win that group by double digits to prevail.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Gail Combs says:

        A bit more on independent voters from an old 2012 Rasmussen Report

        Please keep in mind that ‘The Third Way’ is facism renamed and comes from the head of the Fabian Founded London School of Economics. The Third Way Think Tank is a Tony Blair (ex -UK prime minister) and Bill Clinton NGO.

        (An Interesting tidbit is the London School of Economics was funded in part by Lord Rothschild.)

        “…Research has demonstrated that, when pressed, independent voters often reveal significant partisan preferences: They lean Democratic or lean Republican. When leaners are reclassified and grouped among their partisan peers the share of pure independents in the electorate falls — by some accounts — to less than 10% of the electorate.”

        This guy found that the study was flawed because it was a snapshot and did not look at independent voter behavior over time. When you look at behavior over time there is a much larger swing.

        “…. I found that weak and independent partisans are less loyal to party in the short term and especially across time. While roughly 90% of strong partisans voted the party line in 2000, approximately a quarter of weak and independent partisans crossed party lines that year. In 2002 and 2004, strong and weak partisans held steady at roughly 90% and 75% loyalty, but independent partisans were more volatile — especially independent Democrats. In 2002, 46% of those who identified as an independent Democrat in 2000 voted Republican. The share was 38% in 2004. I also found that independent partisans were far more likely to switch their partisan identification over time — so 2000’s independent Democrat could well be 2004’s independent Republican. That’s something a non-panel series could not account for.

        The study suggested that during a given election period independent partisans are as loyal to party as their weak partisan peers, but that loyalty wanes over time. To me, a voter who switches his or her partisan vote choice from one election cycle to the next is not a loyal partisan — rather, that voter is an independent voter. My findings have been criticized largely based on my selection of the 2000-2004 data series. Some contend that the events of Sept. 11 and the subsequent War on Terror made that time period unique and therefore unrepresentative. Unfortunately there is no other comparable data set exploring the same respondents across multiple elections….”
        http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_todd_eberly/do_independent_voters_matter

        Liked by 2 people

        • Jacquelyn Ehrlich says:

          Gail,
          I must correct the impression that you have chosen to give to the London School of Economics. It was the home of Hayek(known for the Austrian School of thought) for an important time in his career. A good portion of both professors, lecturers and students are as conservative as could be wished. More importantly, those on the left are willing to respectfully engage in reasoned argument (in the classical sense). I speak with authority having attended and received my MSc. My regard for the institution could not be higher.

          Liked by 4 people

          • Great school-how nice for you!! Did you know that Mick Jagger studied there too? He still loves to talk economics whenever he gets a chance.

            Liked by 2 people

            • Ah, great comment, Wendy! This explains Mr. Jagger’s success for the past 50 years in an industry, music, said to move from one fad to the next at a moment’s notice. Both The Stones and the Beatles were projected by “experts” to expire in a year or two, starting from 1962, er, no, 1966, er, no, um, 1968…
              Now, while the Beatles are fairly moribund, The Stones are still rockin’ on! Could the intellectual discipline and sound teaching of economics at the London School of Economics have had anything to do with that success?
              Do Stones (Mick Jagger) = Trump???

              Liked by 1 person

              • Mick is off-the-charts brilliant and apparently involved in every aspect of the Stones as a successful business and of course an artistic entity. I do believe the combination of a fine mind with LSE training is the reason. It would not surprise me if they (MJ and DT) were at least acquainted. Turns out Mick and Thatcher talked several times and respected each other-of course kept very quiet. The Stones continue to present an amazing product decade after decade.

                Liked by 2 people

                • Love Thatcher, love the Stones, despise the Fabians. Jagger’s ability to subtly project 80’s American reality through the disconnected smog of 80’s academic Marxism, was greatly appreciated by this cowboy, who couldn’t give it away on 7th Avenue.😉

                  Liked by 1 person

              • jengancworld says:

                Bob Dylan Is also Financially savvy as well.Many many properties around the world.
                Also he is much more conservative than you would think.
                TRUMP 2016

                Liked by 1 person

            • markie71 says:

              Yes, I knew. He is very careful about money matters as a result. Savvy businessman.

              Like

      • deanfitz says:

        Trump just needs to get people who don’t normally vote to vote.

        Like

        • conner43 says:

          Many voters thought at the time, that Obama stole the 2012 vote. Ohio was especially disturbing. Imo, this almost guarantees a high turnout in ’16 of people who want the votes for Trump to be too overwhelming to steal..I know of one voter in ’12 who actually watched the voting machine change his vote from Romney to Obama before his eyes. Since both Harry Reid’s son and Soros are connected to the voting machine business, extreme vigilance will still be required, I pray Trump realizes this and is willing to devote funding to poll watchers. Poll workers may not think that Hillary is worth their going to jail. Still, the outdated Electoral College remains a challenge.

          Like

    • lineabirgit says:

      i would think the impact of independent and democrat voters (who will support donald trump in the general) would be a whole different metric. i don’t know if you can extrapolate that from primary data.

      i realize that independents and some “ditch and switch” democrats are participating in their state primary to vote for donald but my feeling is that most trump-supporting democrats are hesitant to get involved in Republican Party primaries.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Gail Combs says:

      Independent voters (like me) generally hate both parties because we can see the corporatist/globalists puppet masters behind them. The chances are good they will swing to Trump. Obama won in 2008 because many of us voted Ron Paul as a protest against the Republican party corruption, not knowing that Obummer was way worse then the mentally deranged Manchurian candidate.

      You would think out of a population of 318.9 million, the parties could find better candidates than the sociopathic cesspool floaters we have been served up for the last several decades.

      Liked by 13 people

      • Maiingankwe says:

        Gail, I agree. I am a proud independent. I enjoy freedom to vote for who I feel is best for the position. However, over the past few decades I have found myself to be a conservative independent, and have been voting republican for some time. It is used to be in local politics I found a democrat to be better for the position, but that hasn’t been for some time either. I’ve never voted democrat for a president either.
        I have the belief that both sides are equally corrupt as the other, and do not wish to be labeled with either party. I have been waiting for some time for someone like Trump. I am tired of only voting so Obama would not become president, and as you can see that didn’t work out very well. I didn’t want to be labeled as one who sat in the sidelines and let him take the presidency. I wouldn’t have been able to live with that type of guilt even though I did not like Romney. I thought he was the lesser of two evils.
        Now I am voting for someone I really believe in, and will stand for me as an American. He makes me proud to be an American. I like feeling that level of pride again. I’ve always been proud, but Trump takes it to a whole new level.

        Liked by 8 people

      • Gail, it is amusing that you ASSUME that Buraq Insane Obama was worse than the mentally deranged Manchurian candidate.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ylem says:

      Independents are with Trump.

      Liked by 3 people

    • joebal says:

      Sounds like 50% of the Dem turnout might vote for Trump..

      *WE GOT THIS

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Very impressive, Nick. Beyond the well-structured analysis and underlying assumptions, you brilliantly unfolded your explanation in a very understandable way. You designed a way to account for the most significant sources of variation, made use of the limited sources of data to-date and avoided over-complicating your approach. That was art on top of science: ELEGANT SOLUTION!

    Liked by 12 people

  3. zephyrbreeze says:

    Thanks to Nick for great work!

    I think the new social media is creating a buzz that would have been impossible on the Republican side in the past since we don’t have Hollywood. Last time Hollywood did the glitzy stuff for Obama.

    But now we have Diamond and Silk, we have the Frogleggs guy, and many, many others. The videos are so great, so compelling, And we have Trump on Twitter. Remember him live troll/blogging the Democrat debate! Trump is inside their heads, inside our heads, inside his opponents heads, inside the media heads, and inside the RNC/GOPe heads. Trump is everywhere.

    Also, so many have learned of the political cartel running the country – the Chamber of Commerce – Wall Street – Political cabal that will defend itself like a cornered raccoon.

    But the people have awakened, and now that we’ve seen the strings on the marionettes, we can’t unsee them. There’s no turning back. The RNC/GOPe know their cover story is blown. They recognize the insurgents and there will be hell to pay from them if we lose – so there is no option other than – All in for America. #WAR Fix Bayonets.

    Liked by 11 people

  4. David says:

    After tomorrow we need to look at Massachusetts and see a breakdown of the voters in the republican primary as that is a very important bell weather to see how this election will go down in Nov

    Liked by 4 people

    • Tparty says:

      To David and all at CTH. Long time first time.

      I can tell you that indepent voters (mostly Pub leaners) are very engaged with crushing the establishment. Not only are we organized to take the primary but (thanks to Rinos like Scott Brown, Gov Baker and his lieutenants), we are determined to win the state for Trump in the general (I know… sounds crazy)

      To this point it has been contemplation between Trump and Cruz in the primary runup, with Cruz losing support as Trump dominates and Cruz has had trouble explaining his position on issues like TTYL fast track and exploding H1B. Now as it has become evident that Trump is riding a wave (and the GOPe turned their gaze at the convention) we turned our attention to the State Republican Committees and what did you think we found? That’s right … a political slush fund designed and operated by GOPe Gov Baker to stack the deck at the convention. A purge if you wish to say.

      For your review and comment.

      http://www.worldtribune.com/revenge-of-the-rinos-as-trump-surges-in-massachusetts/

      Liked by 4 people

      • Millwright says:

        The new reality all american voters, of all allegiances, need to grasp is the “moneyed types” will go to any lengths to insure they have firm hooks into any likely candidate for the Oval Office, regardless of their party affiliation or political philosophy, or gender. To that end they will do anything to accomplish that goal.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Tparty says:

      We are getting the message out not only for the general but we are organizing to prevent a GOPe deligate purge by Gov Baker using a ‘secret’ slush fund.

      http://www.worldtribune.com/revenge-of-the-rinos-as-trump-surges-in-massachusetts/

      Liked by 4 people

    • Tparty says:

      Update: The source of the slush fund has been exposed. Road and bridge contractors (the same ones that ‘tried’ to defeat our ballot initiative to repeal the automatic gas tax increase) have pitched into the fund and will likely receive generous construction projects in the coming years. They didnt learn their lesson the first time? We will defeat them!!

      Liked by 4 people

  5. sDee says:

    Looking at these numbers it is easy to see why the INS and State Department have opened our borders and actively recruit legal and illegal foreign nationals from marxist, communist and islamic countries.

    They are shooting for 50 MILLION! That is 50million people who will show and vote to take what we have, and for the central control that will do it

    Liked by 11 people

  6. Dora says:

    Shouldn’t be a surprise. DJT is a New Yorker. Hillary came in carrying her carpet bag.
    ..

    Hillary could lose to Trump in Democratic New York

    http://nypost.com/2016/02/28/hillary-could-lose-to-trump-in-democratic-new-york/

    Liked by 9 people

  7. Betty says:

    We know Bernies supports are going to lose, I wish our Candidate would start reaching out to them by saying something like:
    I won’t promise you I’ll give you free stuff but I will promise you I will do everything in my power to provide you an oppertunity through hard work and a reasonably priced education to get and keep an exciting, ullfilling, good paying American job.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. susiepuma says:

    This is a great summary but I also question where do Independents fit into the mix?

    Also, fraud has to be considered…….12 million votes were flipped from McCain/Palin in 2008 to the fraud, the same thing happened in 2012 to Romney. When the Democrats control the voting machines, this is what happens. The software, however, cannot flip more than 10-12 million, so the voter turnout in November has to be large enough to overwhelm the Dems, the Gopers, and the rest of the cartel fraud bunch. Remember Nevada – Sharon Engle was leading dingy Harry, oops, a glitch in the voting machines, SEIU came in and somehow the vote totals changed……imagine that – cheating and fraud by the Democrat machine…….the GOP would do it too but they don’t control the voting machines; a company owed by George Soros does……
    Until this year, this election process was all a game to the members of the New World Order cartel because they all believe the same……………………..demean the United States of America and bring it down to equal level to the rest of the countries in the World……no more American exceptionalism, no more pride in being #1, make us serfs and peons to the elite cartel……………….Governor Sarah Palin tried but she didn’t have the funds nor the power that Donald Trump has……..nobody owns him, nobody can buy him, and pray GOD his security is tremendous & loyal because they will do anything to bring him down IF they get the opportunity………….Prayers up for Donald Trump and his family and maybe we can be the generation that brings down these elite ratbastards who want to rule the world……………………..GO TRUMP 2016

    Liked by 17 people

    • webgirlpdx says:

      Yes, Susie! I really do continue to pray for this man. His energy level is mind boggling but I know he is getting his positive energy through the masses he is with each day along the trail. I’m so grateful to him.

      Thanks, Nick H.!

      Liked by 5 people

  9. carolmcd says:

    Byron York, who actually is somewhat fair to Trump, says the thing that will cause Trump to lose support is the daily controversy wearing them out. I think there’s something to this. I know I can’t keep up this level of activation and pumped adrenaline for this whole campaign. I am with Trump for the duration, but some people may be getting worn out.

    Like

    • R-C says:

      Except that Mr. York, who likely doesn’t actually KNOW any rank-and-file Trump supporters, would be predisposed to ignore the ONE aspect that would prove his theory wrong: “Cold Anger”.

      At this point, what on Earth could shake your support for Trump? In my case, that would be “NOTHING”. The harder ‘they’ hit, the harder I become. The more they strike at me, the more furiously I counter-strike.

      There are millions of ‘me’ out there–steely-eyed warriors who have simply had enough of the slick-talking hucksters who inhabit the GOP ‘Establishment’. WE are having none of it anymore. Those days when a slickster like York could double-talk their way into our good graces are OVER.

      The ranks of Trump’s core support is comprised of the millions of us who finally DIVORCED the GOP ‘establishment’ after “a long train of abuses and usurpations”…(hmmm…where have I read THAT before?)*

      WE are simply no longer interested in what the GOPe is ‘selling’; WE seek to ‘crush’ the detestable GOPe, returning Mitch McConnell’s sentiment FIVE-fold, at the very least.

      WE aren’t going anywhere but to the ballot-box to vote TRUMP in 2016.

      And Byron York would do well to realize that.

      Liked by 13 people

    • yy4u says:

      carolmed

      You are right about keeping up this level of adrenaline. I’d add in that the unrelenting negativity against our guy from all sides is wrenching. Wall Street Journal has 2-4 anti Trump articles/news stories/day. I’ve turned off Fox Noise, but before I did, the pounding from them was unrelenting.

      I predict I’ll calm down somewhat after March 1 or March 15, and the energy and adrenaline rush will settle into a cold fury at the establishment who either took down my candidate or tried to.

      So I’m locked in. I am voting for Donald Trump no matter whether he’s on the ballot or not. I’ve held my nose and voted for the lessor of two evils for the last time (2012). This time I’m voting FOR someone.

      Hillary doesn’t scare me as much as Rubio does, so that tactic won’t work.

      Not even Sanders scares me more than Rubio. Another illegal immigrant empty suit will do in the country. (Thankfully I’m old enough not to be too affected unless the smarmy little creep were to pick a fight with Putin).

      So, I’m done. I’ve listened, watched debates, learned all I could, visited the Treehouse, read “Thinker’s” anti Trump opinions, read Drudge, watched MSNBC, turned off Fox Noise, cancelled the WSJ subscription.

      Liked by 3 people

      • I agree with our Trump supporters above, but there is another aspect that York just doesn’t get. I’ve been involved in high tension political campaigns. Yes, there is adrenaline. Yes, there is anger. And yes, that high level of energy STAYS HIGH until after the election! No matter how long the campaign lasts, your energy stays high.
        Of course, you do crash after you WIN, but the energy comes right back for the next step.
        The key to success is that the Team Must Stay On Message and Together With All Team Members. Then, nothing can stop us!
        P.S. This post comes from several campaigns – it’s always the same:
        Conviction Trumps All.

        Liked by 1 person

      • susiepuma says:

        I voted FOR McCain in 2008 because I just fell in love with Governor Palin, in 2012 I voted against the fraud POS even though I loathed Rmoney/Ryan……this year I am happily voting FOR Danald Trump & will be even happier if the Gov is his VP……

        Liked by 4 people

    • Grace says:

      This is one of my main prayer points right now—that the weapons formed against him will not prosper, that the enemy will be tangled in their own snares, and that he will be strengthened with might by the power of God in his inner man.

      I really believe this whole thing is a spiritual battle first and foremost. Trump may not be the kind of man one might expect God to use, but the Lord seems to love choosing unlikely instruments. There have been people crying out to God for decades to turn this country around, and I believe He is using Trump to begin that process. No doubt it will all look far different than we expect, but there it is. For now, I think praying for Donald Trump is extremely important. No man can stand alone against the forces he’s facing. He needs God in every way at every step. May his path be straight and his foot firm upon it. In Jesus’ Name, I pray.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Amen. Yes, this IS a spiritual battle. In my campaigns referenced above, we all prayed but did not share with each other that we were doing that. It was only afterwards, at the victory party, that EVERY ONE of us confessed, we had been praying fervently!

        Liked by 1 person

      • Discerning This Time says:

        Grace, I had prayed the same thing prior to reading your posting — that no weapon formed against Donald Trump would prosper. I also pray several times a day for his safety and the safety of his family and security detail. With many agreeing in prayer, I believe God will move mountains.

        Liked by 3 people

    • Ono says:

      Thanks for another negative reply Carol

      Like

    • Martin says:

      Thank you for your concern.

      Like

    • SharonKinDC says:

      In other years, perhaps. I think the level of disgust, loathing, and anger is such, that if the ‘daily controversy’ is too wearying, people will turn off their squawk box, and still vote. I also think this is very likely to be close to wound up after the 15th.

      Like

    • We stuck on Trump we vote twice.Hows that wearing us out

      Like

  10. KBR says:

    http://nypost.com/2016/02/28/hillary-could-lose-to-trump-in-democratic-new-york/

    Democrats are being “surprised” by “surprisingly strong” Trump in NY!

    Liked by 6 people

  11. kallibella says:

    Great article and very interesting numbers for sure!
    Let’s make these projections a reality by supporting our candidate all the way to Our White House!!!
    Trump 2016

    Liked by 5 people

  12. Voltaire's Crack says:

    Nice job Nick H!

    Thanks for the analysis.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. He needs to clear up the KKK controversy ASAP-it doesn’t help to have early morning Joe ranting.

    Like

  14. Great post. Thank you for the analysis, Nick H. I didn’t see where Nick actually stated the bottom line I was looking for so I went back to his numbers and UN-scientifically arrived at it. If 66.6k ( yikes three sixes) voted for Obama in ’08, and primary turnout for Dems is -25% compared to ’08, I apply the -25% to 66.6k and conclude that 50k Dems will vote in the general compared to 73k for Trump.
    Trump wins the general by 23%, that’s a YUGE landslide.

    Liked by 5 people

  15. Toby Flenderson says:

    Maybe the 25.12% decrease in Dem turnout is due to the perceived inevitibilty of HillBilly. You accounted for it yourself in assumption number 3. It ain’t over ’till it’s over.

    Like

  16. Trent Telenko says:

    Nick H,

    I have some interesting feedback on your post via a naval acquaintance of mine —

    “Just this morning my AUSTRALIAN friend was talking about this. There they are looking for an early election, after the Establishment wing booted the Oz Tea-Party PM.”

    It seems the “Trump Effect” is already spilling across the Anglo-sphere.

    Liked by 8 people

  17. I have to warn about using 2012 Georgia as an example, since it being the home state of Gingrich may have driven up the turnout there.

    Great stuff Nick!

    Folks, this won’t happen unless WE ALL get off our butt and make it happen!

    Liked by 5 people

  18. moogey says:

    Thank you Nick H for taking on the challenge and succeeding. Powerful data, sound analytics.

    Thank you Sundance.

    Liked by 5 people

  19. itswoot says:

    Thank you for your thorough analysis, Nick H. Looks very solid. Much appreciated!

    Am wondering about the possible unknown factor of illegal aliens being allowed to vote in the November general election. The first shot has been fired across the bow in recent days by Loretta Lynch to support illegal aliens in their ‘right’ to vote. I expect more pushing in that direction in the months to come. The issue may ultimately go before the US Supreme Court to decide the matter, in a similiar way that Bush V Gore was decided by a 5 – 4 vote by SCOTUS in the 2000 election. Scalia wrote the majority opinion on that.

    It may all seem far-fetched, but with Scalia now out of the way, I think a SCOTUS decision in favor of the ‘right’ for illegals to vote is now in the realm of possibilities. And with that, millions of extra votes for the Democrat Party nominee. At the very least, I think Democrats are doing some thinking on that.

    Also, there is the unknown factor of how far the Democrats would be willing to go in their cheating, and the effect that may have in a driving up the November vote count in their favor.

    Like

  20. Tparty says:

    Update: The source of the slush fund has been exposed. Road and bridge contractors (the same ones that ‘tried’ to defeat our ballot initiative to repeal the automatic gas tax increase) have pitched into the fund and will likely receive generous construction projects in the coming years. They didnt learn their lesson the first time? We will defeat them!!

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Ma'iingankwe says:

    Nick H.,
    You have done an amazing job. Thank you so much for all of the hours and thought you put into this endeavor. It is job beyond well done, and very much appreciated.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. keebler AC says:

    Outstanding! The best part is the clarity of explanation for Dummies like me. Gazillion thanks for your hard work, Nick!

    Liked by 3 people

  23. Nick H.
    THANK YOU!

    You did a fantastic job. Your work puts the idiots in the press to shame!

    I prayed you’d be given wisdom to come up with precise numbers. We’ll see if that prayer was answered soon!

    Trump supporters are very smart and intelligent people, highly educated, and high information voters, some of us speak multiple foreign languages:)

    That’s a memo O’Really!

    Liked by 5 people

  24. Citizen Kane says:

    Good information; very impressive.

    TCTH is an awesome site………………I use to go to Breitbart, Powerline and The Right Scoop (got banned for pointing out Cruz was a canadian citizen when he ran for the Senate)……no TCTH is my go-to site.

    Thanks

    Liked by 3 people

    • CTH is not only an excellent site with very professional information and a really good atmosphere, it’s so far ahead of any possible competition it’s ridiculous. Just hop over to some of the alternatives and it’s not only like entering a parallel world where facts from our own world don’t apply – Trump is a flip flopper, his defeat is just around the corner, long list of things that “could” defeat him or mean he’s finished, etc. – the sites are also horribly moderated and have awful people as “regulars” – really sad people.

      CTH for the win.

      Liked by 1 person

  25. MSNBC jut did an interview with an election official for a county north of Ft. Worth. County has about 1 million registered voters. Thus far, Republican early voting is up 114% over any previous year. It could be an anomoly because the primary between Trump/Cruz is so highly contested. Yet…
    Wow.

    Liked by 3 people

  26. daughnworks247 says:

    What terrific analysis Nick, thank you.
    If we somehow turnout 1.3 million in the GA Primary tomorrow, Nick is tking over Nate Silver’s job at 538.
    That would be sweet.

    Liked by 2 people

  27. Tparty says:

    Some data from Massachusetts to dream on before super tuesday.

    87,000 total absentee ballots cast
    27,000 republican ballots
    numbers do not include indies which are heavily pub leaning

    In addition, 30,000 democrats have left the party since the last election.

    Liked by 3 people

  28. yakmaster2 says:

    I add my Thanks! to Nick H for the hard work he put into his analysis. Clear on both methodology and results. I’m feeling reassured. I also take some satisfaction in knowing this is info Karl Rove et al would rather take poison than share. Speaking of which, anybody seen Karl and his whiteboard lately?

    Liked by 2 people

  29. kinthenorthwest says:

    This is the group that were in KKK sheets holding signs saying they were for trump. The picture shows how stupid sign holders were.

    Damn KKK members for Trump—hmmm look a bit closer guys

    http://www.youngcons.com/kkk-members-in-viral-picture-supporting-trump-are-actually-black/

    Like

  30. Any chance that some Dems crossed over to vote for Trump, thinking that Hillary would easily beat him? I would imagine there would be some but not enough to change much.

    Like

    • jello333 says:

      I don’t think so. While I’ve heard talk of that online from some Dems, it’s just that… TALK. They’re not actually dumb enough to believe it, they’re just trying to build their hopes up. They KNOW Trump is gonna be very, VERY hard to beat. Now on the other hand, there ARE some Dems who are crossing over for the right reasons… to help get Donald elected.

      Liked by 1 person

  31. jello333 says:

    Okay, it’s been awhile since I’ve given anyone an eCake (mostly because of lost bets:/ ) but I think Nick deserves one.

    Liked by 6 people

  32. Up on Drudge now; “Thousands of MA Democrats quit party.” The link says 20,000 but the article seems to be gone (Boston paper). Oh my…

    Liked by 1 person

  33. R-C says:

    Speaking of “The Trump Effect”, how about this Drudge headline article? WOW!! (But didn’t we just know this was going on?)

    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/02/amid_trump_surge_nearly_20000_mass_voters_quit_democratic_party

    Like

    • Backspin says:

      Democrats switching to Team Trump !!! The BIGGEST news story Everyone , including the tired old Rush , will never, ever even mention. You would think talk radio would be all over this story …… but the NYT article on amnesty shows their silent approval.

      Liked by 2 people

  34. DaveNY says:

    Nick throwing it down!

    Like

  35. rebel53blog says:

    Time for the Old Ditch & Switch. Ditch the RNC/DNC establishment candidates and Switch to TRUMP for the Win….

    Like

  36. Jayne says:

    Thank you, Nick, for crunching these numbers!

    Like

  37. Jeff says:

    NICE JOB Nick !! numbers don’t lie .

    My pet project is to get people to understand just how the ESTABLISHMENT controls the election by growing the SURRENDER VOTER BASE . Registered and eligible voters that DO NOT VOTE for any number of reasons .

    “. if voting mattered they wouldn’t let us ” NO if voting DIDN’T matter they wouldn’t CHEAT and lie so much !! spend so much on TV to lie and manipulate YOU to SURRENDER ~!!!!!!

    The numbers I could put together for 2012 were 93 million . THAT is the single largest group in the electorate . Compared to 66 Million that voted for Obama (D) , Romney (R) with 61 Million and Gary Johnson (L) with 1.3 million votes

    .https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/1936966_801979096580517_1152299025744133750_n.jpg?oh=d9047ad0140798b69cf955be36332ce7&oe=574BC06F

    The MSM and the political parties work together to make sure the “choice ” is one establishment puppet or another by pushing people to SURRENDER .

    Remember the SPLITTER was supposed to be Jeb vs Hillary …lose lose for US …win win for the establishment FLEECING of the taxpayers program .

    This tactic first came as both “blue dog democrats ” and Reagan republicans became disenfranchised with their perspective party and registered as Independents .

    The net effect of that is they don’t get to CHOSE the candidates for the General Elections . And by the time they are paying attention to the General and find out just WHO the choices are …they declare the battle cry of the SURRENDER VOTER …

    ” I’m NOT voting for the lesser of two evils ” !!!

    And ..well , sure enough ….wait for it ……we get evil !! every time . While the SURRENDER VOTER is bragging to his or her friends at work or the local bar ….” AT LEAST ID DIDN’T vote for either of them ” …some even have bumper stickers on their debt laden vehicles !!

    Oh sure there is plenty of voter fraud to go around . Machines changing votes , dead people voting , the IRS attack on TRUE THE VOTE , black panthers intimidation at the polls , and so on .

    ALL of this is designed to do one thing …..KEEP PEOPLE HOME FROM TH POLLS .

    Listen today if you have enough JACK DANIELS on hand , to the MSM attempt at VOTER SUPPRESSION with these stories , The effect is to capture the people just teetering on fining some excuse to STAY HOME from the polls .

    Then change the channels to see them all singing the same tune !! Same stories as if the script is handed down from one single source with little variation .

    DONALD J TRUMP has captured the LION share of the SURRENDER VOTER BASE . People who have never voted , haven’t voted in a long time , all but given up on voting , and TRUMP DEMOCRATS are key to his YUGE turnout !

    These are motivated voters now . The 2012 election saw 129,237,642 votes cast in the General Election . The numbers from Nick show turnout even greater than Obama Hope and Change by potentially 7.2 million votes .

    Now the question turns BACK AGAIN to …how many will SURRENDER their vote in 2016 ?

    We know for sure that a % of Cruz voters will SURRENDER and rush to the base . We just don’t know how many .

    We realize that if the convention is BROKERED and the RNC plants Romney in place that his job will be to merely pull votes from Trump . As the NEW AMERICAN PARTY is already in place . Lion logo and all !!

    The turnout for Hillary will be dismal ! Do they pull her and implant BIDEN ? ( we can only hope )

    remember the VULGARIAN plays 3D chess ….Reagan bankrupted the Soviet Union with his ruse of STAR WARS program . The Soviets went broke trying to play catch up to the made in a TV studio program .

    ” Mr Gorbachev …tear down that wall ” as DT is bankrupting the GOPe donors trying to take him out ……soon he will declare ” Mr Charlie.. Karl Rove ….Brown ” …tear down that GOPe ”

    We’ve built a new GOP party

    https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/12662528_802064719905288_2933709139118937391_n.jpg?oh=42f1499b0a63d6d78a706e2d7f23f8e0&oe=57594FD9

    Like

  38. kevinrexheine says:

    So, here’s my question (assuming that it hasn’t already been answered): How, if at all, do these turnout projections break down on a state-by-state basis?

    Like

  39. MVW says:

    It will be interesting how the delegate count turns out. From the numbers mentioned by the Trump guys, 300 is an impossible number to reach. I’ll take their word for it especially given the absentee ballot factor and early voting which has locked in earlier statistics. I think anything over 250 additional delegates will be a huge win, huge.

    I watched the Melania Trump interview and all I can say is that she is really smart, really, and really levelheaded. I shouldn’t be surprised, but I am delighted. A 21st century 1st lady, indeed.

    Like

  40. JBoons says:

    Can someone share a vote count by state, by candidate? I’m pretty sure I know what it will show but I want some proof. My inkling is that people that support Hillary and/or Bernie are too lazy to get to the polls or they make a half ass effort but see a line and don’t want to wait and turn around and go home.

    Like

  41. Some great work by Nick H. I wonder if it might be worth updating with the latest primary results.

    Like

  42. Cupure says:

    Gread work Nick.

    Like

  43. Presley says:

    Interested in these polls as Berniecrat. Thanks for posting. lI think what’s crucial is that at least 33%
    of dems won’t vote Hillary, probably more in the end as Trump quotes well “crooked Hillary.”
    She gets zero cross over as GOP hates her, and Indpendents go overwhelmingly for Sanders. If I were GOP id be licking my chops to face Clinton. She doesn’t have a braid enough dem base, she’s also ridden with scandal which I’m sure you guys are waiting to unleash on her. She’s terrible. many dems do not know what to do. Thanks for the post.

    Liked by 1 person

  44. politijim says:

    I have long believed that the Democrat participation is largely due to fraud. Here in Texas, when we put in voter ID, toughened penalties for voter registration fraud and tightened computer systems/rolls – DEM participation dropped radically compared to previous off-season to off-season and other cycles. I could never understand how Democrats – that largely have a generally lazier attitude toward life could be MORE diligent in voting. It just didn’t make sense. But when you realize the Democrat machine takes entire nursing homes, forges their names on registration and actual absentee voting – they can impact a local or state race by as much as 7% beyond their actual numbers.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s