It seems to me that there may be two key things that will be determine if Democrats are to be successful this November.
First: Lower than expected turnout by Trump supporters.
Second: Higher than expected turnout among women.
Let’s start with the first.
We’re not talking about Trumpistas not showing up at all. We’re talking about lower turnout than expected. There’s a difference. And by lower than expected, that means less turnout by Trumpistas than what the pollsters expect.
While some of you might think this is implausible in this year’s heated campaign season, where there appears to be a lot of turmoil and angst, keep in mind one thing: A lot of Trump’s supporters are hot heads. To them, what we’re seeing in the campaign is milque toast. And here’s another thing to keep in mind: current polling reflects pollsters’ best guess as to who will turn out in November. Their best guess is almost always predicated on...turnout in recent previous elections.
But there is one phenomenon that may upend pollster’s projections about turnout by Trump supporters this year: Trumpsters do not always actually go to the polls when their overlord is not on the ballot. A fair number of Trump supporters had little interest in voting at all until he came along. Voting is not necessarily a part of their normal pattern of behavior.
What percentage of Trump supporters are only motivated to vote when he’s on the ballot? It doesn’t have to be a huge number to impact the results of a midterm election, especially if overall turnout is lower than during a presidential election, which is almost always the case.
So...follow me here, for a minute: If pollsters are basing their current polling results on turnout by key constituents, such as Trump supporters, in past elections, but five or 10 percent fewer Trump supporters actually turn out to vote, that could result in a big benefit for Democrats, especially in close elections, of which there appear to be many this year.
That’s not to say that will necessarily happen. However, it seems to me that if Democrats do better than expected this year, that could well be a big reason why.
The other key to Democratic victory could be turnout among women. Why? Because, generally speaking, when turnout among women is higher, it usually benefits Democrats. And this year, with the Supreme Court’s recent anti-abortion dictate, if key groups of women are motivated to vote who might otherwise not be inclined to do so, that, too, could make a big difference.
Once again, it doesn’t necessarily have to involve a large number of women voters. If turnout among women is higher than pollsters expect by just five or six percent, it could make the difference between winning and losing key, close races.
Having said all that, is there anything we can do to try to help lower the enthusiasm of Trump supporters and increase the number of women voters?
When it comes to “de-motivating” Trumpsters, there’s probably not a lot we can do. But there may be some things that could help, especially in terms of messaging. For instance, if Democrats use populist messaging that might be enough to assuage some Trump voters and make them less inclined to see the urgency of voting, especially if we also cast the Republican candidates as being unelectable, moderate or out of step.
We can probably do more to impact higher turnout among women than to lower turnout among MAGATs. It seems quite possible that many women who might not usually vote during “off-year” elections might this year due to the Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. While this has been a key part of messaging by many Democrats already, the question now is whether the momentum from that decision will be sustained, or at least sustained enough to make a difference.
In other words, this will likely be what some people call a “turnout” election. But it doesn’t feel to me to be your typical, garden variety turnout election. It could well come down to simply beating the expectations of the pollsters.
Every day there is new information that makes me simultaneously less optimistic and more optimistic about our chances. One minute, you’ll see polling showing Senators Charles Grassley or Marco Rubio in trouble and then the next, you’ll see a poll allegedly showing a “tightening” of the race, like in Pennsylvania.
(One thing that bothers me each election year is how the so-called “tightening” of the races isn’t really so much races getting closer as it is pollsters changing their polling model from registered to likely voters all of a sudden. They usually do that in September. It seems to me that if they are going to compare polling it should be apples-to-apples throughout the entire campaign season.
But, then again, a lot of people have a lot of money riding on ensuring that they do everything they possibly can to try to make races seem as competitive as possible.)
Meanwhile, with all of the ups and downs & twists and turns of this year’s elections, my plan is to prepare myself by bracing for the worst while doing everything possible in my power to help get Democrats to the polls, exceed pollster’s expectations and...hope for the best.
