Nearly Half of Trump Voters Would Leave GOP

| February 22, 2021 | 31 Comments

I don’t trust polls, but if even partially true the GOP has some soul-searching to do. And best do it soon.

Poll: 46% Trump Voters Would Ditch Republican Party to Join the ‘Trump Party’

HANNAH BLEAU

Forty-six percent of Trump voters said they would ditch the Republican Party to join the “Trump party” if the former president opted to create one, a Suffolk University/USA TODAY poll released this week found.

The survey, taken February 15-19 among 1,000 Trump voters, found the former president continues to enjoy strong support among the GOP base following the conclusion of the Democrats’ second, failed impeachment trial.

Forty-six percent of those surveyed indicated that they would “abandon the GOP and join the Trump party if the former president decided to create one.” Twenty-seven percent said no, and the remainder indicated that they remain unsure.

According to USA Today, “half of those polled” said the GOP should “become ‘more loyal to Trump,’ even at the cost of losing support among establishment Republicans.”

“We feel like Republicans don’t fight enough for us, and we all see Donald Trump fighting for us as hard as he can, every single day,” Brandon Keidl, one of the respondents, said, taking issue with establishment Republicans who “don’t ever push back.”

Point well taken. The rest of the article with a couple more interesting data points may be viewed here: Breitbart

Category: Republican National Committee, Trump!

Comments (31)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. KoB says:

    Republicrats and Democans…no difference in ANY of them. One thing that President Trump did prove to anyone with half a brain is that the Deep State is a “Clear and Present Danger” to the American Republic and our way of life. They will destroy this Country to maintain their grip on power.

    In the grand scheme of things it is not going to matter who forms what kind of party. “…it matters who counts the votes.”

  2. borderbill says:

    I left those panty-waisted limp-dicked bastards (and bastardettes) some time ago. Particularly here in Arizona they were beaten by the “socialjusticed” wacodemics in the big cities—wimpy weaklings. In summation-Americans and patriots- stay strong or get that way. Fuck biden. Today is General George Washington’s Birthday- Abe’s was 10 days ago. Semper Fi!

  3. You already have three political parties
    1-republican
    2-demoRat
    3-Joseph Goebbels AKA: cnn,msnbc and the smaller nbc cbs etc.
    How about a Patriotic party

  4. penguinman000 says:

    Pretty sure if they polled the left it would be an even uglier split if the squad left the dems.

    We’re overdue for a centrist 3rd party running sane adults for office.

    • AW1 Rod says:

      Not sure it’s a good idea. Our elections are winner-take-all. There is no proportional representation in Congress, the way there is in parliamentary governments. A third-party would very likely doom us to the “Ross Perot effect” forever.

      What we need to do is take the Republican party back from the establishment losers that have destroyed it. Donald Trump was in the process of doing just that, He’d be better off finishing that job, than trying to stand up a third-party.

      • LC says:

        If this crisis -and ideally, one on the Democrat’s side as well- is what pushes us towards voting reform options like ranked choice, I’d be thrilled. Winner-take-all is abysmal in a system where too many of us often select the lesser of two evils.

        Ranked choice isn’t an end to our fairly stupid and damn-near random system, but it’s a good start, in my opinion.

        • Ret_25X says:

          in truth, it would help if the two parties weren’t featuring douche vs turd sandwich candidates.

          • LC says:

            But that’s exactly it – it enables the people to express utter dismay at the stupid options, while still conveying they’d much prefer a conservative douche vs the liberal turd.

            In my opinion, that’s a hell of a start. Let’s get fresh blood in to these fights, instead of picking an asshole people hate just because the alternative is someone from the other party. Kentucky comes to mind. He’s loathed by Democrats and Republicans alike, but he wins his re-election because people are terrified of selecting a less-capable candidate who could lose to a Democrat. In Kentucky, of all damn places.

            Giving the people the ability to say, “I fucking hate Mitch, so I selected Bob Nobody first,… but if Bob doesn’t get enough votes, I’d rather that asshole Mitch than some commie-socialist transgender hippie liberal.” No matter what happens, the Democrat still loses, but either Bob wins, or at the very least, Mitch gets a wake-up call and has to move a little more towards Bob’s policies.

            Now, as someone who thinks Bob could be a raging maniac, that part worries me… but I believe that letting Americans express their choice as more than a selection between douche and turd sandwich is a good thing, and of more importance.

            • penguinman000 says:

              Changing the way votes are tallied and creating a complicated system most of the populace lack the mathematical chops/patience to understand is an answer, just not the right answer.

              Ranked choice voting simply addresses a symptom, not the underlying disease.

              1. Get money out of politics. Money is not speech and corporations are not people. Eliminate cash/goods/services funding of elections. Publicly funded elections with a hard limit on cost is the only solution.

              2. All bills/legislation being voted on at any level of government should be limited to items directly applicable to the topic at hand. No more pork unaffiliated with the bill under any circumstances.

              3. Require every elected official to meet with random citizens at least quarterly. Use a random drawing of the selective service registration to determine who they meet with (and there is the motivation for women to be included).

              4. No more gerrymandering. All elected offices down to the state level will be determined by geographic boundaries at the county/independent city level. No exceptions. Elected officials and bureaucrats are prohibited from participating in setting boundaries. Randomly select citizens from the selective service registration.

              There are some solutions that would actually make a difference. Complicating elections will only incentivize shenanigans.

              • LC says:

                I think most Americans can handle something as simple as, “Rank your choices”. It’s not a whole lot different than asking, “Where do you want to get dinner? Pick your top three, in order, in case one or two are closed.”

                That said, I agree it’s not a full solution, and would absolutely welcome every single one of the other things you point out. I just think that they’re far less likely to pass, given the current people we have in office.

                If you see a viable route for getting the money out of politics, I’m all ears. I think ranked choice is easier to pass, and could in turn simplify passing the other reforms you mention, since it weakens the entrenched politicos.

                • penguinman000 says:

                  Ranked voting will not change the gerrymandering issue. The same clowns will continue to be in power because they’ve stacked the deck to make sure of it.

                  Ranked voting is more complicated to tally votes for. Complication=gray area political machines will exploit.

                  And a viable method of getting money out of politics that doesn’t involve an arena full of lions, political operatives, corrupt politicians and corrupt executives?

                  I’ll go with the average American. Of course this is provided they get off of social media/stop slacktavism/rioting and actually behave in a responsible, productive manner in their communities.

              • USMC Steve says:

                As far as the finding side of it, set up a communal account for all political contributions. No one can send a specific candidate any money at all. Then at a given time all funds are equally distributed to each candidate. And make lying illegal in its entirety. A politician gets caught lying, they get prosecuted for fraud or something similar.

      • 26Limabeans says:

        “Our elections are winner-take-all”

        Not any more.

        We need to combat ranked choice voting.
        It is coming to a state near you.
        Couple that with mail in ballots and it is game over.

        • rgr769 says:

          That is why Progs and D-rats love ranked voting, along with ballot harvesting and mail in ballots.

        • LC says:

          We need to combat ranked choice voting.

          I simply don’t understand this. If the Republican party were to split, with winner-take-all they’re fucked. With ranked-choice, conservatives can choose Trump first, then (to pick a very different Republican) Romney second, or vice-versa, and either way their vote ultimately counts towards one of them, vs. the Democratic opposition.

          If, as I hear often here, Republicans are a ‘silent majority’ of the country, but some vote third-party because they prefer a different conservative, this could only help them. Where does this fear of ranked choice come from? It literally enables people to state their preference, but avoid throwing a vote away on that.

          For example, you hate the entrenched people? But don’t want to vote against them as it might split a ticket and let a Democrat win? No problem with ranked choice. Vote for the long-shot outsider first, with the establishment Republican second. If the long-shot doesn’t get enough votes, your vote still counts towards the establishment, instead of splitting the ticket.

          I’m utterly mystified why you’d be against that.

          • 26Limabeans says:

            “I simply don’t understand this”

            It does not comport with “one person, one vote”.

            It complicates a process that should be so simple
            even the idiots among us can figure it out.
            Idiots have the right to vote and should not be subject
            to a process that requires a diploma in game theory.

            Our elections need to be one person, one vote, in person.
            No mail in, no absentee but depoloyable polling stations
            for military etc.
            In person with an ID.

            If you “don’t understand this” I cannot help you.
            I’ll bet you think Biden won without fraud.

            • LC says:

              It does not comport with “one person, one vote”.

              It absolutely does. Your vote only counts once, it just goes through a ’round’ of where it counts.

              This is like saying that tallying a vote at the precinct level, then tallying it at the county level, then the state level is somehow ‘counting’ a vote three times. That’s ridiculous; it’s still a single vote, it’s just tallied up multiple times.

              Think of this as a single vote for an ideology, vs. a person. Each person votes once, they just get to express their preference more clearly.

              I’ll bet you think Biden won without fraud.

              Oh, that explains it. Get back to me when someone shows real evidence of that fraud. At this point, with over 60 court losses, various conservatives and news sources backpedaling under the threat of litigation for unproven allegations, and the never-ending ridiculous allegations ranging from North Korean ships dropping ballots off to servers in Germany tallying votes, you’re simply living in an alternate reality if you still buy into this nonsense.

              • USMC Steve says:

                Again LC, the evidence has been presented if you had been paying attention. It simply never got to see the light of day in court because the judges in question refused to hear that evidence, in direct violation of their “oaths” they swore.

                • LC says:

                  Respectfully, Steve, the evidence presented is garbage. If you take a look at the vaunted ‘Navarro Report’, for example, most of the citations are utter garbage, and provably wrong.

                  To put it differently, you’ve been told there’s evidence, tons of it, and you believe that. But none of it has stood up to scrutiny.

                  If someone can come out and show proof, I’ll absolutely change my tune on things. What would it take for you to change yours? Where is the proof? Even advocates of that lie, like Fox, have backpedaled and admitted there’s no ‘there’ there.

                  Are they just folding, despite holding an ace up their sleeve of proof? Or is it more likely they don’t have it after all?

                • rgr769 says:

                  You can never convince a Prog of anything that isn’t consistent with the Party Line or narrative.

  5. NHSparky says:

    I’ve said for two decades now I’m not a Republican, I’m a conservative. And the difference between the two major party candidates for even longer than that is shades of statism.

  6. Green Thumb says:

    Yeah.

    Republicans split the vote and Democrats stay on target they will win.

    Saw it with Clinton and Sanders. Hated each other but got on the same page come election time. Still lost, but the objective(s) became clear.

    Curious if the Republicans would do the same?

  7. UpNorth says:

    In a related item buried in the news, new unemployment claims for the last week totaled 861,000. Way to go, Joe!

  8. Poetrooper says:

    Food for thought: If you think the people don’t have power and that politicians don’t deeply fear that power, then ask yourself, “Why there is a high fence around our Capitol Building with National Guardsmen inside protecting these pukes?”

    Then ask yourself, “And why are our Republican Congressional leaders not demanding that fence come down and those troops go home if they don’t share that fear?”

    And lastly, ask yourself, “Why is that the case if they feel they are representing their constituents honestly?”

  9. OWB says:

    This poll just doesn’t track in my neighborhood. The majority of Trump supporters here can’t leave the Republican party because they never were Republicans.

    It was interesting to see so many Trump yard signs sitting beside yard signs for local Democrats in the past two election cycles. Saw bunches of them, for months.

  10. David says:

    Lc – instead of ranked choice, why not split electoral votes proportionally to the popular vote? Eliminates winner-take all without all the voodoo rankings. People squeal about disenfranchisement – if from a million voters 500,001 go one way, under winner take all 499,999 votes didn’t count. THAT is being disenfranchised.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *