In the 1980s and ’90s, Republicans attracted, then locked up, new groups of voters: the anti-abortion movement, the Reagan Democrats, the Christian right, and the pro-gun crowd. More recently, Republicans have won the support of practically everyone associated with the energy industry, especially coal mining.
Most of these voters were stolen from Democrats. But Republicans were oblivious to the existence of another group that Donald Trump has now tapped: unhappy working-class voters, mostly white, who suffer from lost jobs and decades of wage stagnation.
After Republicans lost the popular vote in five of the six presidential elections from 1992 to 2012, the Republican National Committee created a “Growth and Opportunity Project.” Its report was based on an autopsy of the 2012 GOP presidential campaign and focused on its problems with five voting blocs: Hispanics, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, African Americans, women, and youth.
“We need to do a better job connecting people to our policies,” the report said. “Our ideas can sound distant and removed from people’s lives. Instead of connecting with voters’ concerns, we too often sound like bookkeepers.” Though Republicans have failed to connect with disaffected blue-collar voters, their plight was ignored in the report.
As a distinct group, these voters were all but invisible—until Trump spotted them. Even as Trump soared in polls, many Republican activists said they didn’t know a single person who intended to vote for him.
But a major reason for Trump’s emergence as the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination is his appeal to these overlooked voters. While the RNC was concentrating on appealing to its five “demographic partners,” Trump was studying Rick Santorum’s book Blue Collar Conservatives. Trump’s strident opposition to immigration and free trade agreements is aimed directly at working-class and lower-middle-class Americans, as is his resistance to cutting Social Security and Medicare and his criticism of political elites.
Republicans face a dilemma. Party leaders and a majority of Republican voters are hostile to Trump’s presidential bid. But for a Republican to win the general election against either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, winning the votes of Trump’s working-class base is essential. But gaining its support won’t be easy.
If Trump loses the nomination or is somehow denied it at the Republican convention in July, he could run as an independent or third-party candidate. He’s agreed not to do this, but with one caveat. If he thinks the GOP is being “unfair” to him, the agreement is off. This leaves Trump with a lot of leverage.
He knows that if he runs as an independent, the Republican nominee would be doomed to defeat. A Rasmussen poll last week found that 36 percent of Republicans would be “likely” to vote for an independent Trump candidacy. And of those voters, 24 percent said they would be “very likely” to stick with Trump.
He hasn’t declared himself officially a victim of ill treatment, but he’s hinted at it. At least four super-PACs and the Club for Growth have run TV ads attacking him. And Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP Republican nominee, denounced him in a highly publicized speech.
In recent televised debates, Trump came under sharp attack by rivals Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. Rubio dubbed Trump a “con man” and Romney picked up that theme in his speech on March 3. Even so, Rubio and Cruz have said they would back Trump if he becomes the GOP nominee.
But a growing number of prominent Republicans have announced they won’t vote for Trump. This includes Erick Erickson, former CEO of RedState, ex-George W. Bush speechwriter Peter Wehner, and 117 “members of the Republican national security community.”
Despite the anti-Trump sentiment, it’s critical for Republicans to keep Trump from bolting the party or, if he’s the nominee, to persuade him to soften his tone and change some of his views, especially on foreign and national security policy.
But few, if any, Republican leaders have any influence with Trump. Former House speaker Newt Gingrich may come the closest. In January, he wrote in the Washington Times that Trump is “a genuine phenomenon” who “knows a lot, but what is amazing is how rapidly he figures out what he doesn’t know.” On foreign affairs, however, Trump’s learning curve is woefully steep.
What’s more amazing is the consistency of Trump’s hold on blue-collar support. The Michigan primary on March 8 was the latest example. He won 46 percent of non-college graduates and 42 percent of voters with less than $50,000 in annual income—that is, in a nutshell, the working class.
He got nearly as big a percentage (36 percent) of the votes of independents as of Republicans (37). His support was spread evenly along ideological lines with moderates (37 percent), somewhat conservatives (37), and very conservatives (35). And his votes came from the suburbs (39 percent) and rural areas (35).
In Rust Belt states like Michigan, “there is an opportunity for a hidden white vote to come out, especially among less-educated voters,” Brookings Institution demographer William Frey told the Wall Street Journal. It’s a Trump vote.
The Trump explosion is more a “mood” than a set of ideas, says Professor James Ceaser of the University of Virginia. It’s been around for years, only to be triggered in 2016 among those who share it “because they have a leader who can articulate it,” Ceaser told Dan Balz of the Washington Post. It’s this group that Trump has brought out of hiding that Republicans need, not the man himself.
Fred Barnes is an executive editor at The Weekly Standard.
