What if Donald Trump loses?

The case for an upset.

(Donald Trump)

I first got to know Joe Trippi when he was managing Howard Dean’s 2004 Democratic primary campaign for president — still one of the most fascinating rises (and falls) in modern politics.

What I admired about Joe then (and still do now) is that he wasn’t afraid to go against conventional wisdom, to break from the crowd, to come up with a totally original theory of the case.

Joe is at it again! I have been following him — on X and elsewhere — as he continues to insist that Donald Trump is a weaker candidate (in the primary and general election) than many people currently believe or polling suggests.

I reached out to Joe to get him to explain his views on Trump in more detail. Our conversation — conducted via email and only lightly edited for content — is below.

Cillizza: You are a big believer that Donald Trump is weaker as a candidate — in the primary and the general election — than the conventional wisdom. Can you explain why, exactly?

Trippi: My experience is that the early states expose weakness in frontrunners.   Everyone looks at the winnowing effect of Iowa and New Hampshire to reduce the number of candidates down to two or three candidates.  That certainly is one function but people often miss what the early states are signaling about the frontrunner. Trump is well over 60% nationally, yet he is averaging just above 50% in Iowa and averaging just 46% in polls in New Hampshire.   What it tells me is that nearly half the voters in the Iowa GOP Caucus and over half the primary voters in New Hampshire are open and looking for someone else.

So what we know is that when voters are seeing alternatives to Trump a lot of them are liking the alternatives. Iowa and New Hampshire are up first and are ahead of the rest of the country.

I have been saying for a long time that 2nd place in Iowa is really going to matter.   I lived through a very similar dynamic on the Democratic side of the aisle with former Vice President Walter Mondale in 1984. For two years everyone knew that Mondale would win Iowa.  I was his Iowa State Director.   People were so bored with the rest of the field and the debates in which no one really emerged as a prominent challenger that by the time Caucus night came around no one cared when Mondale won by 32 points.  The only question the press, pundits, activists and donors wanted to know was please just tell us the name of who the hell is going to be the challenger.   Gary Hart with something like 17% eked out a second place finish and the world had its answer.

I think that dynamic is in play in Iowa on the GOP side this time.   No one will care when Trump wins Iowa, the only thing we all want to know is will it be Ron DeSantis or Nikki Haley who gets the ticket out of Iowa and emerges as the prominent challenger to Trump.  If Haley ekes out a second place finish of even a tenth of a point over DeSantis that will be a surprise finish that will carry her into NH with some heavy momentum. 

Cillizza: You’ve said you think that Trump will lose to Nikki Haley in New Hampshire. How?

Trippi: Right now everyone expects a one two three finish in Iowa of Trump, DeSantis and Haley, and in that order.  If the status quo holds it’s possible Haley can still win NH.   Trump is at 46% there.  Again from experience, I would warn Chris Christie and all other candidates not named Trump, DeSantis and Haley that they are going to see all their support in New Hampshire evaporate to nearly zero in the first few days after Iowa. Haley would not have the same burst of momentum that she would if she surprised with a second in Iowa.  I would be very confident that she would consolidate enough support in NH to defeat Trump with that kind of an Iowa finish, but I would not bet against DeSantis drawing enough votes from Trump to make a Haley victory in New Hampshire still a real possibility.   Very few frontrunners, including Ronald Reagan, have ever sustained back-to-back wins in both states.   If Trump does, the nomination fight is over.   If Haley defeats him in NH she will have pierced the "invincibility" of Trump within the party.  Trump will likely still go on to be the nominee but he will be even weaker nationally than he already is today.

Cillizza: What does race look like if Trump loses NH?  Are we talking about Haley vs Trump for the long haul?

Trippi: If Trump loses New Hampshire it definitely means at least a month long extension of the GOP primary.  It’s far more likely with the Republican party's "winner take all" system of awarding delegates that no matter how spirited the debate is during that month Donald Trump will emerge as the nominee. A lot can happen during the month after New Hampshire, and while its possible that Trump could be in a tough race for the nomination — I don't see that happening, but I do see him being a weakened nominee.   Trump's predictable attacks on Haley after he suffers a loss to her could cost him in the general election among some GOP and independent women who already have concerns about him, as just one example.

Cillizza: Who’s a more worrisome nominee for Democrats: Trump or Haley?

Trippi:  Trump is by far the most worrisome nominee of the two.   Trump returning to the White House is a threat to democracy.   Trump has a low ceiling, he received 46% of the vote in 2016 and 46.7% of the vote in 2020.  That ceiling may be lower in 2024 but it won't be higher than 46% in my view.  So how does he win the general election in a two-way race with Biden?  Trump needs third party candidates -- the more, the better to make it possible to win with 46% or less of the vote in key states.   The biggest threat to democracy in 2024 if Trump is the GOP nominee will be spoiler third party candidates that wittingly or not will only be making it more likely that Trump returns to the White House.

Haley would not bother me at all if she were to emerge and defeat Trump for the nomination.  My Democratic friends and the pundits will all scream “but Joe she beats Biden by 17 points is that poll!” Yeah, right.   To fear Nikki Haley as the GOP nominee after she defeats Donald Trump you would have to believe that for the first time in his life Donald J. Trump would be gracious in defeat.  You have to be able to imagine Trump going to the GOP convention — raising Nikki Haley's hand in the air with his and shouting to the heavens “my fellow MAGA friends, for the good of our party and for the good of our country please join me in supporting Nikki Haley for President!”  That isn't going to happen -- and if it did some percentage of Trump's MAGA base would puke and stay home.  More likely he will decry her as part of the “rigged deep state RINO establishment that is not only out to stop me -- she and Joe Biden and the elites are trying to stop you!” Look there could be a lot of things in this Q & A that I get wrong.   But if I only get one thing right it will be this:  I am not worried at all if Haley is the GOP nominee.

Cillizza: Do you buy the polling that shows both Trump and Haley leading Joe Biden? Why or why not?

Trippi: No I don't buy any of the polling showing Biden, or Trump or Haley leading a poll today.   It is such a waste of time.   President Ronald Reagan was 7 points behind Ohio Senator John Glenn and 1 point ahead of former Vice President Walter Mondale at this point in his reelection campaign.  Only 37% of Americans wanted Reagan to even run for reelection.  A year later it was “morning in America” and Reagan won a 49 state landslide.   President Obama was behind Mitt Romney by 4 points at this stage in his 2012 reelection campaign.   All the polls going into the 1992 presidential election showed President George Herbert Walker Bush so strong that all the leading Democrats skipped the race; Bill Clinton defeated him.   Polls are meaningless -- it’s going to be a close race decided in 6 or 7 states. Period.   We know this.  We all know it.   This entire race is probably going to come down to a fewer than 500,000 voters total in 4 or 5 states.  Yet the talking heads obsess over the latest poll almost daily.  Its an addiction.    

In top Senate, gubernatorial and presidential campaigns we have nightly tracking polls.  We literally start to track night to night polling every single night for the last 4 to 6 weeks of the campaign.  We don't do it for a year and a half.  Why?  Because it doesn't matter a year out or a year and a half out.   I and others have called those nightly tracking polls “the crack cocaine” of politics.  They become addictive -- you cannot wait to get up in the morning to see the latest numbers.  I think that's what has happened to cable, pundits and activists.  We have some poll from a different pollster several times a week, even nearly daily, and we can't wait to obsess over the meaningless numbers.  Call me when it matters.  It doesn't today.   And BTW I have no ideas on how to end everyone's addiction to the meaningless numbers.   I have admitted I have a problem.  That's a good start for the rest of you.