Don’t count Trump supporters out on Election Day.

Those who have knowledge, don’t predict. Those who predict, don’t have knowledge.    Lao Tzu

Old mantra: Donald Trump will implode.
New mantra: Donald Trump’s supporters won’t show up at the polls.

Who knows what will happen on February 1st, February 9th, February 20th, or in March. I can’t predict who will win the Republican nomination. I also can’t say with certainty that Donald Trump’s supporters will turn out to vote, but I believe they will. Why would they not see this through? Why wouldn’t they send the ultimate message on Election Day to show they mean this for real? Because they haven’t in the past? Do we think they will suddenly lose interest on Election Day? In most polls, Trump’s supporters are, by far, the most committed.

Let’s take a look at a recent Franklin Pierce U/Boston Herald GOP primary poll out of New Hampshire:

Asked after the initial GOP presidential ballot: Is that a firm choice or could you change your mind between now and the primary election?

26% support Trump and 71% of them are firm. 12% support Rubio and 30% of them are firm. 12% support Cruz and 44% of them are firm. 11% support Christie and 31% of them are firm.

Do we not believe Trump’s supporters when they say they are committed to him? Nothing he has said — insane and outrageous as it may be — has eroded his support.

Well, they typically don’t vote, so they won’t vote. Really? Donald Trump is precisely why they will vote and typical politicians are precisely why they have not voted.

It’s a little hard to write this, but have you listened to Donald Trump supporters? To them, he represents “hope” in much the same way that Barack Obama represented hope to his supporters. Obviously, the messages are very different (some would say they are like black and white) but what Trump is saying is a siren song to people accustomed to tuning out political rhetoric.

In 2008, Barack Obama’s campaign brought in new voters — 57% of Democratic caucus goers in Iowa reported that the 2008 caucus was their first. The final Des Moines Register poll a week out predicted a dramatic influx of first time and non traditional caucus goers. Conventional thinkers could not comprehend.

Clinton strategist Mark Penn was dismissive, “So they are depicting an unprecedented departure from historically established turnout patterns in the caucus.”

Yes. That is exactly what the poll was predicting and exactly what happened.

But Obama had an organization and Trump doesn’t. He can’t turn these people out. He doesn’t have a ground game.

He doesn’t need to. Unconventional candidate, unconventional election cycle. Infrastructure and money does not equal support, just ask Jeb Bush.

You can only predict things after they happen.
Eugene Ionesco

No sitting majority leader had ever lost a primary election.

Until June, 2014.

Former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor might still be in Congress if only typical Republican primary voters had turned out in his 2014 primary election. Instead, less reliable conservative voters showed up to send an anti-establishment message. That was a flare.

Donald Trump is an explosion.

Eric Cantor raised over 5 million dollars, had abundant staff, and the counsel of numerous political consulting firms. Dave Brat raised under $300,000 and his campaign was spearheaded by a 23 year-old who had just graduated from college viagra without a doctor prescription.

When people are motivated, change occurs.

We keep insisting that historical precedent will inform us about this election when nothing about this election cycle lends itself to this type of analysis.

What has precedent predicted about this election so far? Very little.

Originally posted: