Why Trump?

How electoral science explains the new episode of the conservative Renaissance - this time in the USA

At night, before the elections, the absolute majority, if not all surveys and forecasts, with the exception of Los Angeles Times, gave the victory of Hillary. On average, the chances were evaluated as two or three to one. But Trump won, and his victory raised three major questions: what happened to the country and voters? What happened to the forecasters? What happened to the American electoral system?

Let's start with the latter: nothing happened. The vote was organized, if not perfectly, then quite clearly and independently to show the result that few expected and which categorically does not suit the current establishment. All stories from the Soviet crypt about stuffing during early voting, electoral corruption, voting dead and the revolution expected in the event of Trump's victory were blown away. The voters voted, the commissions calculated - and it turned out that the country wanted changes. For good, or for a worse - a separate conversation. As for the elections, they were organized honestly and transparently. I had the opportunity to verify this with my own eyes.

The mistake of forecasts, in my opinion, led to the “Girnovsky effect”, opened by domestic sociology in the 90s. People tend to give sociologists socially approved answers. All over the world. "Will you go to vote?" "Yes, sure!" In fact, no more than 60%will come to the plots of those who answered in Russia. In America, perhaps the ratio is different. Sociologists have long understood this and always introduce an amendment for the survey data for the desire to look good. In the 90s, Zhirinovsky through the Russian media was presented as a dubious personality and marginal. What many actually liked. But from the answer to the question "Will you vote for Zhirinovsky?" They preferred to dodge: “No, hardly ...” until sociologists have not learned how to introduce the correction coefficient “on Zhirinovsky”, its real result was steadily at 3-5 (in 1993, during the “new political year” even on 12-15!) Percentage points above the forecast.

Trump in the American media also played the role of a bad boy with whom his mother does not lead. And, it seems, not all of his sympathizers told the truth to the sociologists. When we are talking about a difference of 2-3 percentage points with an error of the plus minus 3%method, it is easy to make a mistake. To make it clearer: in the American electoral system, the fate of the elections is decided by the States. In 48 out of 50 states, the winner receives all the places that are reserved for the state in the Federal Board of Electors. The number of these places depends on the population: California 55, Texas 38, has 29 Florida. California - a state that votes for democrats. Texas - for Republicans. It doesn’t matter how the final gap will turn out to be there and there: it is clear in advance that the account between the states will be 55:38 in favor of Clinton. And Florida is vibrating the staff. The gap between the winner and the defeated can be less than 1% (the exact numbers have not yet been set), but most of Trump are mostly at Trump. This means that all 29 places of Florida in the Federal College and the account in the three states for Clinton became 55:67.

So with other oscillating states - Trump won them, although with a minimum margin. When it is required to predict the difference within one percent, survey sociology is powerless. Another thing is that she was obliged to catch the trend - one and a half dozen “intermediate” states could not purely accidentally swing in one direction at the last moment. But I did not catch it.

Now about what will happen to the USA. On Monday, November 7, Washington Post wrote that Clinton was equal to Trump in anti -rating - both of both minus 22%. But at the same time, their long -term trend is opposite. In the history of Hillary there were several peaks of popularity, of which the highest in 2013, when she completed his career as a Secretary of State: + 41%. In Trump, the popularity index always remained below zero. The deepest failures, -52% and -51% were in 1999 and 2015. Since then, it can be said to grow. And Clinton is falling. On the eve of the election day, two loneliness met at the level - 22%.

Trump with his slogan "Let's make America the Great again!" He knew where he was aim. Plus, fatigue from a fertilized and corrupt establishment - that blue, red. On the side of Trump was novelty, charisma, the experience of the showman and sympathy of the suddenly awakened American hinterland. Or, as geographers express, inner periphery. She experiences stress and anxiety, feels a threat to the usual way of life. And in a social sense, and in the economy, and mentally - about traditional values. It is correctly experiencing! The large research center Pew has published a forecast according to which by 2065 the share of the White population of the United States will decrease to 46% (now 62%), the share of the Spanish speakers will grow to 24% (now 15%), the share of blacks to 14% (now 12%). It seems to people if you change power, this global process can be expanded back and again the good old days will come. Will not come; This is a delusion. The process in the best can be frozen for a dozen or two years-but at the cost of a significant delay in the pace of development. However, it is also impossible to convince voters of this as stopping the influx of migrants from the poorest lands to the richer or prove to the crazy inventor that the eternal engine is impossible. The elements cannot be opposed, you can only prepare more or less successfully.

Here America is not original: conservative Renaissance is everywhere in the world. About the same anxieties prevent the French (Marin Le Pen), the British (“Brexit”), the Germans and the Russians. Putin and Trump, each in his own way, saddled the general wave of the global revenge-although they go on it in different directions. Satisfied with the lifting with the knees, Russia plunged into a logical pseudo -Soviet stagnation, where it convinces itself that it is pleasant and useful. But wasn't that the majority wanted? American conservatism is the opposite: Trump's reduction, reduction of bureaucracy and extreme liberalism in the model of reigonomics in the Trump program.

For good, or for worse, we will see soon. Trump’s victory is unsteady, the situation is complex, the rating is low. It will be difficult for him to sit in the White House for more than one period. America has an indisputable advantage that she is not afraid to make mistakes - because in her hands there is a lever to correct them. The lever is called honest elections and works fine. The whole world has just been convinced of this.