Could Trump succeed?

Opinion: March 28, 2016 at 12:00a.m.

Hardly a week goes by when an old friend doesn’t contact me with the same question: Could Donald Trump really get elected president?

My standard reply is that, at this point, there are two answers: “Yes,” and “Probably not.” Never say never.

By all logic, the blustery billionaire has antagonized enough voters that, even if he attracts disaffected white Democrats, he’ll have a difficult time winning a general election.

Though Trump’s latest primary victories increased the likelihood he’ll be the nominee, many top Republicans are unconvinced. Some GOP candidates for other offices are already reportedly planning to separate their campaigns from his, afraid he could drag them down to defeat.

On the other hand, much of the electorate clearly feels things are not going well and wants a change. No one represents change more than Trump. As one of two major party nominees, of course he’d have a chance to be elected, especially against a flawed rival who has had difficulty winning primary support from key Democratic groups, especially younger voters.

Low Democratic turnout

Even in winning Ohio primary, for example, Hillary Clinton lost nearly 2-to-1 among voters under 45, and by 15 points among white males, according to exit polls. Once again, the total Democratic turnout was down.

The question is how much this will matter in the fall. General elections are very different from primaries. They attract far more voters, especially among minorities and younger voters, one reason Democrats fare better in presidential than in congressional elections. Trump is winning less than half of the country’s smaller party.

From the start, polls have shown he is weaker against both Clinton and Bernie Sanders than other Republicans. The demographics of recent surveys illustrate his problem against Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee.

Still, three factors could bolster Trump. First, by a substantial margin, Americans think things are going in the wrong direction. That’s hardly a climate for Democrats to win a third consecutive White House term by stressing continuity.

Second is the legal cloud hanging over Clinton because of the Justice Department investigation of whether she mishandled classified information with her private email server. Some conservative news outlets predict an indictment, but columnist Ruth Marcus, who has a Harvard law degree (and was once a student of mine), wrote a persuasive column on why charges against Clinton are unlikely.

Third, Trump is the wildest wild card in recent American political history.

None of us saw his emergence as a political force, and he has demonstrated political skill against an array of experienced Republicans. His simplistic vow to “Make American Great Again” has substantial appeal, though undercut by his rantings against Mexican and Muslims and his negative portrayal of the country. His unpredictability and lack of restraint could make him a far tougher debate foe than Sanders.

In the end, a Trump-Clinton race might depend on whether enough voters are so upset with current conditions they would take a flyer on the inexperienced, mercurial Trump or whether normal voting patterns and respect for Clinton’s experience and stability carry the day.

Carl P. Leubsdorf is the former Washington bureau chief of the Dallas Morning News.