Why pundits (still) don't expect Trump to win GOP nomination

Donald Trump continues to be a force in the 2016 presidential race dominated by 'outsiders,' but political observers predict a more traditional candidate will carry the Republican Party's bid to the White House. Why?

Steven Senne/AP
Republican presidential candidate, businessman Donald Trump talks during a campaign stop in New Hampshire. Mr. Trump is doing well in polls, but analysts suggest he won't make the Republican nomination.

Many people didn't think Donald Trump would get this far. A lot of people are saying he won't go any further.

Mr. Trump still holds the lead in most polls, but someone with more traditionally recognized political acumen will win the Republican nomination, say pundits.

"Businessman Donald Trump may be leading in opinion polls for the Republican presidential nomination, but bettors say someone else will be nominated next year," wrote Washington correspondent Jonathan Salant for NJ Advance Media. Mr. Salant was referring to British bookmakers.

Thus far, the race has been dominated by "outsiders," as both the Republican and Democratic side have seen thus-far successful candidates without the usual partisan stripes and accolades, The Christian Science Monitor reported. Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is an independent, is considered by some as the Democratic "outsider." 

Ben Carson is another outsider candidate - a doctor who has not held political office - but Trump is the quintessential non-politician candidate. Trump is also the one analysts insist the Republican Party would not actually let take the nomination.

"You had better believe that GOP leaders will do everything in their power, mainly behind the scenes, to ensure that Trump is not their standard-bearer," wrote Larry Sabato, Kyle Kondik, and Geoffrey Skelley in the Crystal Ball blog. Turning to Carson's campaign, they added, "Can he be surgeon general in a Republican administration? Sure. But presidential nominee? No."

Trump has capitalized on the movement of disgust with the political status quo, but now other, less "weird and confusing" campaigns have arrived to finish the job, columnist Daniel Henninger wrote for The Wall Street Journal. 

"Mr. Trump’s singular personality is simply at odds with the political skills necessary to carry that mood any further than his mere arrival accomplished," Mr. Henninger wrote. "When the primaries arrive early next year, the Trump vote will subdivide further among the other Republican tortoises."

Trump's current success is based largely on his TV success on the show, "The Apprentice," claimed CNN political commentator Daniel Axelrod. He cites an AMG poll among Republicans days after the first Republican debate that asked whether self-identified Republicans watched "The Apprentice" as well as their political opinions - and the show appeared to make a difference.

"Trump's support among "Apprentice" viewers was 38%; among nonviewers, he was at 21%, barely ahead of the pack," Mr. Axelrod wrote.

The CNN analyst says that is no foundation for nomination.

"It doesn't mean Trump will be the Republican nominee or president," he wrote. "His mixed overall ratings among Republicans suggest that there is a cap on his poll numbers, which generally have stalled or diminished since the CNN debate at the Reagan Library earlier this month."

Pollster James Zogby says that who will get the Republican nomination is still in the realm of speculation.

"It's way, way, way too early," he told New Jersey Advance Media. "An informed 'I don't know' is worth just as much as an uninformed 'I don't know.'"

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.