Donald Trump may win the battle for Republican nomination, but he can only lose the war

If Mr Trump can continue his record of overturning the prophesies of analysts, the juggernaut will be very difficult to stop

In a new bombshell book, Mr Trump allegedly called his generals "p****ies" (Getty )

Predictions of Donald Trump’s demise come and go, and come and go again. And yet here he is. Up 20 points on his nearest competitor, Ted Cruz, in the latest poll from CNN/ORC; eyeing victory in the early primaries in Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina; mocking Jewish people at a fundraiser, to complete the set of minorities, from Hispanics to the disabled, who have thus far been jabbed in the ribs (or slandered outright) by the Teflon property tycoon. Can it last?

There can now be no question that Mr Trump is a serious contender for the Republican nomination. GOP strategists fear that his recovery from a slight dip points to a durability in support that other maverick candidates (remember Herman Cain?) failed to demonstrate. Polling expert Nate Silver suggests that Mr Trump’s momentum rests on less-than-sturdy surveys, and will probably come up short once the caucuses begin. But any complacency within the Republican Party would be deeply unwise, for if Mr Trump can continue his record of overturning the prophesies of analysts and stay ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire, the juggernaut will become very difficult to stop.

Already, Mr Trump has had a damaging effect on the Republican Party brand. He sows fear and division, with a chuckle. Attacks on Muslim Americans (from a proposed “database” to flagrant lies about “thousands and thousands” cheering the destruction of the Twin Towers) may have boosted Mr Trump’s poll numbers, but will cost the party come 2016. So will attempts to exploit the San Bernardino shooting. The “Muslim vote” swung Florida to George W Bush in 2000, winning him the election, according to the totemic GOP activist Grover Norquist (and, indeed, voting data). Even if a moderate candidate wins the nomination, it will prove difficult to rebuild bridges so gleefully burned by “the Donald”. The Hispanic vote, at about 17 per cent of the electorate, is more crucial still; association with Mr Trump – who backs building a “great wall” on the Mexican border – can only diminish the GOP’s chances.

Mr Trump has taken the politician’s characteristic fudging of facts to new heights of mendacity. He is the first candidate to render journalists – those who attempt to hold the powerful to account – close to irrelevant, in so far as he can spout demonstrable nonsense (and be challenged on it) and gain all the while. This bespeaks a part of the US body politic that has simply lost all faith with traditional media, and now finds itself unmoored from any kind of objective “truth”, floating instead through the unsourced wildernesses of the internet.

America has a tradition of favouring glossy mavericks for president, even at the risk of self-harm. It elected the actor Ronald Reagan in 1980, at the height of the Cold War, despite a number of trigger-happy pronouncements. But Mr Trump leans closest to fascism of any, and his entertainment value should not distract from the deplorable centre of his politics. Mitt Romney proved unable in 2012 to steer himself back to the centre, after he saw off extremist competitors in the primaries. Mr Trump’s real rivals, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, should refuse to play Mr Trump at his own game rather than court the “angry white” vote that guarantees only defeat.

For that is the silver lining to the Trump story. If he does win the Republican primary, Hillary Clinton will be president in 2016. America may have a large extreme fringe, but it remains a fringe – one attached to a mainstream that is gloriously varied, but modern and moderate enough to reject categorically fear-mongering and macho tomfoolery. To trump it, in fact.