View Poll Results: Will Trump win in 2020?
Yes 134 49.08%
No 139 50.92%
Voters: 273. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #151  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:28 PM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,430
Did anyone vote based on the economy in 2016? I rather doubt many did and I think it's even less likely this year. It's going to be a referendum on Herr Donald and a personality contest between him and his opponent.
  #152  
Old 06-24-2019, 01:36 PM
D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 4,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I'd say Donald's a piker. The Dow was 7550 when Obama took office, more that doubling during his tenure.
It's up almost 35% since the Inauguration. That's not flat by any reasonable definition of the word.
  #153  
Old 06-24-2019, 02:00 PM
Lightnin' is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Apple Core
Posts: 7,472
I voted "no".

The way I look at it, Trump hasn't exactly gotten any new followers. His base will, of course, vote for him no matter what- he could literally shoot someone and not lose their support- but he really hasn't been making inroads with anyone else. If anything, his non-base support has dropped.

On the other hand, this last election was huge- and it was pretty crushing for the Republicans. Democrats were fired up- and that wasn't a Presidential election. Democrats usually show a lackluster turnout... when it's not for President. When it's a Presidential election, Dems show up.

Furthermore, Trump barely won last time.

Can anyone argue that Trump will get more votes this time? 'Cause that's the only way he's going to do better than insert-Democratic-Politician-here.
__________________
What's the good of Science if nobody gets hurt?
  #154  
Old 06-24-2019, 02:12 PM
Dr. Drake is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 6,295
But there are factors beyond our borders, too. I'm not one who believes Putin is pulling Trump's strings, or that they even communicate all that much, but I *do* believe that Putin is a clever operative making hay while the sun shines. Russia will do better under Trump than any opponent; therefore, Russia will be attempting to enable a Trump victory or, at the very least, cause disruption in such a way that the legitimacy of the Dem victory can be called into question among the debased base. That's a pretty low bar.

I suspect that China, for all the back-and-forth tariffing, is experiencing similar benefits. What better way to quell a restive Hong Kong and influence Taipei than to reduce American power and influence abroad?

These can probably read polling data at least as well as Trump's staff. Remember, they only have to target the swing states, and nudge the electoral college. Trump doesn't have to win the hearts and minds of the American people.

Also, a lot of the candidates are women. Remember last time? Misogyny, internalized, passive, or active, was just one of the many factors that tipped the election away from Clinton, but it was definitely a factor. I don't think that is something the Dems should consider except in their strategy to get Warren, Harris, or whoever elected, but I certainly don't think it should be discounted: society's sexism can work in the favor of even an unremittingly idiotic asshole, as we have seen.

Last edited by Dr. Drake; 06-24-2019 at 02:13 PM.
  #155  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:10 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
...Given that Trump also had his first success on the job (by his own criteria), making Mexico mildly blink a few weeks ago, it is possible that he's finally starting to sober up and do the job.

...
No, no. Don't fall for that. Lucy/Football. Cheeseless tunnel. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Don't go there. One apparently sensible thing doesn't wipe away all the craziness.
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #156  
Old 06-25-2019, 09:29 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
An Electoral Time Machine Helps Republicans Keep Winning

The upshot: "White Christians are no longer the majority in America, but they’re still driving election results."
Quote:
...Much of the early punditry on Trump’s reelection prospects has focused on complex Electoral College scenarios—insights that, while valuable, shed little light on the bigger picture. I’ve come to answer the question this way: Yes, it is possible Trump gets reelected. While Democrats have the long-term demographic winds at their back, Republicans have a time machine: a consistent skew in ethnic and religious voter-turnout patterns that, in national elections, has the effect of turning back the demographic clock eight or more years.

...<snip>...

While white Christians composed only 43 percent of the population in 2016, they constituted an estimated 55 percent of voters. And although white evangelical Protestants composed only 17 percent of the public in 2016, they were 26 percent of voters. In other words, in the electorate, white Christians overall were 12 percentage points overrepresented, and white evangelical Protestants were nine percentage points overrepresented.

...<snip>...

What fuels the Republicans’ political strength, in other words, is not current white Christian population levels, but the fact that white Christians historically turn out to vote at higher rates than nonwhite and non-Christian Americans. These higher turnout rates are driven by a number of factors.
  • Voting is highly correlated with other forms of civic participation, such as church attendance.
  • Voting is also highly correlated to education levels, and white Christians are more likely than nonwhite Christians to hold a four-year-college degree.
  • Finally, voting is a habit that has been strongly emphasized in white Christian churches, especially among white evangelicals since the rise of the Christian right in the 1980s.
...<snip>...

According to current projections, 2024 will be the year that white Christians—already less than half the population—will be a minority in the electorate as well. Between now and then, on the one hand, Republicans will need to expand the base of their party if they want to continue to be competitive nationally.

Democrats, on the other hand, need to take seriously the continued strength of this underappreciated Republican asset.
....
I added bold and bullet points (to break up wall o' text).

In summary: GET OUT THE VOTE!!
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #157  
Old 06-27-2019, 07:39 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Though I remain scared shitless about the '20 election, I would like the people voting that Donald will win to explain where they see him getting votes that he didn't get in '16. We know the newly eligible voters are going against him by 30+ points so who does he pick up? Voters from his demographic base who didn't vote last time? Or Hilary and third party defectors?
  #158  
Old 06-27-2019, 07:59 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
Though I remain scared shitless about the '20 election, I would like the people voting that Donald will win to explain where they see him getting votes that he didn't get in '16. We know the newly eligible voters are going against him by 30+ points so who does he pick up? Voters from his demographic base who didn't vote last time? Or Hilary and third party defectors?
As I see it, there is basically one likely path to a Trump win:

1. Keep the economic numbers where they are

2. Preferably stay out of a foreign policy clusterfuck (Hello, Iran)

3. If you get into a possible clusterfuck with Iran, win convincingly at all costs

4. Keep giving your base the red meat that they crave

5. Number 4 will be an effective strategy if Biden's the nominee because this could radicalize the Democrats and make Biden look weak by comparison; on the flip side, if it drives him to the left, then it potentially takes away his advantage of being a centrist or moderate with appeal to independents.

6. Encourage third party challenges to Biden's left, or at least the talk of a 3rd party challenge

7. Suppress turnout

8. Win the electoral college outright, and if you don't win it...

9. Contest the election in close states by taking the Democrats to court

10. Kick it to the House of Representatives, where Republicans controlling a majority of state caucuses will vote to re-elect him.

It's a complicated, tricky path, but it could happen.
  #159  
Old 06-27-2019, 08:28 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
...6. Encourage third party challenges to Biden's left, or at least the talk of a 3rd party challenge

7. Suppress turnout
I see these two as the key to his reelection.


Quote:
8. Win the electoral college outright, and if you don't win it...

9. Contest the election in close states by taking the Democrats to court

10. Kick it to the House of Representatives, where Republicans controlling a majority of state caucuses will vote to re-elect him.

....
And these three as the coup de grâce/knockout punch.

Even if he loses, he's not going without a fight.
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #160  
Old 06-27-2019, 08:32 AM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 134
In 2016 even the so-called Rs who disliked Trump voted for him because the Supreme Court was on the line. Ben Shapiro for example. With RBG's situation it is quite possible a vacancy will arise soon and Trump will weaponise that to his benefit again while people on the Left are arguing about themselves about something that happened in 1995.
  #161  
Old 06-27-2019, 09:13 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sage Rat View Post
Ben Wittes over at Lawfare also made the same comment:

https://www.lawfareblog.com/praise-p...ts-iran-tweets

Nice, although I can't go with him on the blustery tweets. Just the TV interview.
  #162  
Old 06-27-2019, 09:21 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
As I see it, there is basically one likely path to a Trump win:

1. Keep the economic numbers where they are

2. Preferably stay out of a foreign policy clusterfuck (Hello, Iran)

3. If you get into a possible clusterfuck with Iran, win convincingly at all costs

4. Keep giving your base the red meat that they crave

5. Number 4 will be an effective strategy if Biden's the nominee because this could radicalize the Democrats and make Biden look weak by comparison; on the flip side, if it drives him to the left, then it potentially takes away his advantage of being a centrist or moderate with appeal to independents.

6. Encourage third party challenges to Biden's left, or at least the talk of a 3rd party challenge

7. Suppress turnout

8. Win the electoral college outright, and if you don't win it...

9. Contest the election in close states by taking the Democrats to court

10. Kick it to the House of Representatives, where Republicans controlling a majority of state caucuses will vote to re-elect him.

It's a complicated, tricky path, but it could happen.
Everything listed here could help him retain his base but not many of these suggest where the new voters might be coming from. Although "suppressing turnout" addresses the situation in a way (if you can't increase your votes, eliminate your opponent's). "Third party" could be a factor, I suppose, but we have those all the time anyway. I can't see a centrist of lefty Democrat running as an independent.

Will large numbers of those who voted for his opponents switch to him because of the economy? The economy was pretty good in 2016. Will Hilary and/or third party voters from '16 rally behind him because of war with Iran? We've had small wars going on for over a decade now, it would take a real ratings-buster win to get the country behind him now, imho.

I'm not ready to call it for the Dem candidate yet (for one, we don't know who it will be), the guy has pulled a rabbit out of his ass once before and there're tens of millions who are smitten with him, but for the life of me I don't see where the new votes he needs are coming from.
  #163  
Old 06-27-2019, 10:13 AM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
Here comes help from the Supremes!

Supreme Court says federal courts don’t have a role in deciding partisan gerrymandering claims
https://wapo.st/2FD7ip1
Quote:
The Supreme Court’s conservatives decided Thursday that federal courts do not have a role to play in deciding whether partisan gerrymandering goes too far.

The 5 to 4 decision was written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and joined by the court’s other conservatives.

“We conclude that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions beyond the reach of the federal courts.,” Roberts wrote. “Federal judges have no license to reallocate political power between the two major political parties, with no plausible grant of authority in the Constitution, and no legal standards to limit and direct their decisions.”

Justice Elena Kagan dissented for the court’s liberals. “For the first time ever, this court refuses to remedy a constitutional violation because it thinks the task beyond judicial capabilities,” she wrote.

Kagan underscored her disagreement by reading a lengthy excerpt of her dissent from the bench.
....
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #164  
Old 06-27-2019, 12:54 PM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThelmaLou View Post
Here comes help from the Supremes!

Supreme Court says federal courts don’t have a role in deciding partisan gerrymandering claims
https://wapo.st/2FD7ip1
You may have read that one a bit too quickly. This is the ruling Republicans wanted, delivered by the 5-4 conservative majority. It's bad.
  #165  
Old 06-27-2019, 01:36 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
I think you misread her post.
  #166  
Old 06-27-2019, 02:23 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
You may have read that one a bit too quickly. This is the ruling Republicans wanted, delivered by the 5-4 conservative majority. It's bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
I think you misread her post.
Where's that sarcasm tag! Yeah, I meant the Supremes are coming to aid t---p's re-election, and yes, that's BAD.
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #167  
Old 06-27-2019, 02:35 PM
RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Oakville, Canada
Posts: 41,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott View Post
I believe there is a much larger silent-Trump supporters than the polls suggest. At this moment I'd say his re-election chances are 60-40%. He is in his element on the campaign trail and that can take away the distraction of a dis-functioning White House once election season is in full swing.
There was an election just two and a half years ago that did not bear out the "silent Trump voters" hypothesis.
__________________
Providing useless posts since 1999!
  #168  
Old 06-27-2019, 04:36 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
Everything listed here could help him retain his base but not many of these suggest where the new voters might be coming from. Although "suppressing turnout" addresses the situation in a way (if you can't increase your votes, eliminate your opponent's). "Third party" could be a factor, I suppose, but we have those all the time anyway. I can't see a centrist of lefty Democrat running as an independent.

Will large numbers of those who voted for his opponents switch to him because of the economy? The economy was pretty good in 2016. Will Hilary and/or third party voters from '16 rally behind him because of war with Iran? We've had small wars going on for over a decade now, it would take a real ratings-buster win to get the country behind him now, imho.

I'm not ready to call it for the Dem candidate yet (for one, we don't know who it will be), the guy has pulled a rabbit out of his ass once before and there're tens of millions who are smitten with him, but for the life of me I don't see where the new votes he needs are coming from.
Assuming there isn't a strong third party challenger, he probably needs at least 45% of the general vote to have a chance at a legitimate electoral college reelection. He can lose PA and MI as long as he keeps OH, WI, and FL, all of which are doable. If he loses any of these states by a few thousand votes, the GOP may try to challenge the results, but it wouldn't make sense of the economy's in shambles and Trump gets engaged in a disastrous war
  #169  
Old 06-27-2019, 05:22 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Not sure WI is doable.
  #170  
Old 06-27-2019, 06:37 PM
Boycott is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 134
Silent Trump supporters, not silent Trump voters.

I do not think there is going to be enough people who voted for Trump in 2016 to switch/abstain to make any significance whatsoever unlike what the Obama-Trump switch did.

The way I see it is if you voted for him in 2016 despite him not having any experience, being completely unhinged and so much baggage coming out of his past, then you are going to vote for him again in 2020 because the economy hasn't tanked and so far despite his best efforts the country has not entered a new war.

My worry is he will have gained in the independents, the voters who stayed at home in 2016, which can make a significant difference.
  #171  
Old 06-27-2019, 07:13 PM
ThelmaLou's Avatar
ThelmaLou is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Neither here nor there
Posts: 16,228
This is why he will get reelected.

The Supreme Court's historic day

Quote:
...
  • Roberts effectively gave state legislatures a green light to be as aggressive as they want in redrawing legislative maps to preserve their partisan advantage. After today, no federal court will be able to tell a state it has gone too far.
...

The bottom line: Roberts may have denied Trump a question on the Census, but he’s handed the Republicans in control of most statehouses an incredibly valuable tool to preserve that power.
....
__________________
"If we're not supposed to dance, why all this music?" Gregory Orr
  #172  
Old 06-28-2019, 01:33 AM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
Though I remain scared shitless about the '20 election, I would like the people voting that Donald will win to explain where they see him getting votes that he didn't get in '16. We know the newly eligible voters are going against him by 30+ points so who does he pick up? Voters from his demographic base who didn't vote last time? Or Hilary and third party defectors?
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
As I see it, there is basically one likely path to a Trump win:

...SNIP...

It's a complicated, tricky path, but it could happen.
It's neither complicated or tricky. All he has to do is carry the same states he did in 2016.

Counting on newly eligible voters, in particular young people or felons whose voting rights have been restored, is counting chickens before they've hatched. Neither of those groups have a history of being reliable voters.

Until Democrats select a nominee and that nominee makes inroads in areas that went Obama in '08 and '12 but went DJT in '16, it is cocky and foolhardy to crow about the inevitable win for D's in 2020. If the nominee doesn't motivate those voters, the presidency of DJT will not end on 01/20/21
  #173  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:02 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Carrying the same states requires him to find new voters even if zero percent of college age voters turn out, which seems a tad unlikely. His margins were narrow and many more of his voters than of Hillary’s have died, or will die over the next year.
  #174  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:26 AM
Covfefe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: 100 miles N. of Chicago
Posts: 1,544
This is anecdotal FWIW: I know of people (going off what I'm told by a friend of mine who also fits the description), generally of a Christian conservative orientation and suburb dwelling, who normally would vote Republican in a presidential race yet either voted third party or sat it out in 2016. These people seem primed to vote for Trump in 2020 as a few years ago they did not believe Trump was really a conservative*, so it must be irrelevant to them at this point whether he has any principles or not.
  #175  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:33 AM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Carrying the same states requires him to find new voters even if zero percent of college age voters turn out, which seems a tad unlikely. His margins were narrow and many more of his voters than of Hillary’s have died, or will die over the next year.
I'm going to need to see a couple of cites supporting this before I buy it. Particularly the parts I bolded in your quote.
  #176  
Old 06-28-2019, 05:31 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
As I see it, there is basically one likely path to a Trump win:

1. Keep the economic numbers where they are

2. Preferably stay out of a foreign policy clusterfuck (Hello, Iran)

3. If you get into a possible clusterfuck with Iran, win convincingly at all costs

4. Keep giving your base the red meat that they crave

5. Number 4 will be an effective strategy if Biden's the nominee because this could radicalize the Democrats and make Biden look weak by comparison; on the flip side, if it drives him to the left, then it potentially takes away his advantage of being a centrist or moderate with appeal to independents.

6. Encourage third party challenges to Biden's left, or at least the talk of a 3rd party challenge

7. Suppress turnout

8. Win the electoral college outright, and if you don't win it...

9. Contest the election in close states by taking the Democrats to court

10. Kick it to the House of Representatives, where Republicans controlling a majority of state caucuses will vote to re-elect him.

It's a complicated, tricky path, but it could happen.
I'll just point out that we saw just yesterday, with the intra-party brawl in the House yesterday and with the debates last night, how numbers 4 and 5 could happen. It's not just a hypothetical: polarization will make it increasingly difficult for Joe Biden, who has heretofore been viewed as the most able to bring a coalition in the general, to maintain a coalition if the party is perpetually outraged by migrant deaths and other matters of social justice.

Don't get me wrong: it's necessary to be outraged. We shouldn't be indifferent to what's going on. We should advocate legislative action and keep fighting the good fight with republicans. But as much as hardcore progressives like Mark Pocan don't seem to acknowledge it, they need more than anger; they need a strategy. Trash talking your centrist colleagues isn't a strategy. And that's the real problem with what I'm seeing on twitter, what I'm saying among hard left Democrats in the House, and even with some of the posters here.

What would have the progressives proposed as an alternative to the legislation? Not passing a bill and watching people suffer just so they could fight for something that Mitch McConnell and Republicans themselves weren't in any hurry to pass? The irony of that is that for people who are fighting for migrants, that would actually be using them as political footballs as a means of leveraging the debate, which is just plain sick. No, sign onto the damn bill that guarantees some funding and put the pressure back on to the Senate, and more importantly, put the pressure back onto Donald Trump who keeps threatening to veto it anyway. Even if Trump signs it without controversy, so what? They can still spotlight the plight of migrants and keep making the lack of humanity of the right wing an issue without self-destructing.
  #177  
Old 06-28-2019, 06:14 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
I voted Yes.

I just watched Chris Cuomo interview Bill Maher. At the very end of the interview, beginning about 7:45, Maher talks about political correctness:
Vis-a-vis that and the "silent Trump supporters" comments.

Step 1, suppress public expression of certain viewpoints.
Step 2, run election.
Step 3, be confused more people hold those viewpoints than publicly visible.

What will it take for some people to understand forcing conformity is bad?, you entrench the original target group, make a portion of the bystanders reject you for your methods and those that support them will sooner or later rift and be at each other's throats as a result of the purity testing environment they have created.

Many people would rather not bothered to speak out their support for Trump if there's a good chance they'll be screeched at, so they don't and then they vote and half the population is left blindsided muttering "but but... the polls!"

This was reason #154 why echo chambers are bad.


I don't have a dog in the fight, but I saw a couple interviews with Tulsi Gabbard and she seemed like a switched on, decent candidate; from some of the reactions I saw to the last debate, accusing her of working for Russia... crap like that is why I think Trump will not-lose again.

Last edited by Ale; 06-28-2019 at 06:15 AM.
  #178  
Old 06-28-2019, 07:56 AM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Don't get me wrong: it's necessary to be outraged. We shouldn't be indifferent to what's going on. We should advocate legislative action and keep fighting the good fight with republicans. .. (we) need a strategy. Trash talking your centrist colleagues isn't a strategy. And that's the real problem with what I'm seeing on twitter, what I'm saying among hard left Democrats in the House, and even with some of the posters here. . .
Indeed. The outrage and name calling in some of the later posts in this thread on trans rights is a perfect example of why 'the left' is likely to be left out. Again.
  #179  
Old 06-28-2019, 08:39 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott View Post
My worry is he will have gained in the independents, the voters who stayed at home in 2016, which can make a significant difference.
I don't understand what he has done to win over those particular voters. If '16 stay at home voters showed any tendency in '18, it was to turn out for the Dems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
Counting on newly eligible voters, in particular young people or felons whose voting rights have been restored, is counting chickens before they've hatched. Neither of those groups have a history of being reliable voters.
But new voters did come out in the most recent midterms. They are highly motivated to vote against Donald. From the US Census Bureau:
Quote:
Among 18- to 29-year-olds, voter turnout went from 20 percent in 2014 to 36 percent in 2018, the largest percentage point increase for any age group — a 79 percent jump.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
I'm going to need to see a couple of cites supporting this before I buy it. Particularly the parts I bolded in your quote.
Trump won the over 65 vote by eight points in '16. About ten million of those voters are gone now, or roughly seven million voters. He's lost maybe a half million more votes to Father Time than the Dems might.
  #180  
Old 06-28-2019, 08:45 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ale View Post
Vis-a-vis that and the "silent Trump supporters" comments.

Step 1, suppress public expression of certain viewpoints.
Step 2, run election.
Step 3, be confused more people hold those viewpoints than publicly visible.

What will it take for some people to understand forcing conformity is bad?, you entrench the original target group, make a portion of the bystanders reject you for your methods and those that support them will sooner or later rift and be at each other's throats as a result of the purity testing environment they have created.

Many people would rather not bothered to speak out their support for Trump if there's a good chance they'll be screeched at, so they don't and then they vote and half the population is left blindsided muttering "but but... the polls!"

This was reason #154 why echo chambers are bad.


I don't have a dog in the fight, but I saw a couple interviews with Tulsi Gabbard and she seemed like a switched on, decent candidate; from some of the reactions I saw to the last debate, accusing her of working for Russia... crap like that is why I think Trump will not-lose again.
Old liberals like me don't understand much of this. For much of our political lives, we have been in the minority. It hasn't stopped us from standing up for our principles and our candidates. It would be uncharitable of me to suggest that conservatives are uncomfortable speaking from a minority position but that appears to be the case on the surface.
  #181  
Old 06-28-2019, 09:00 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarlGauss View Post
Indeed. The outrage and name calling in some of the later posts in this thread on trans rights is a perfect example of why 'the left' is likely to be left out. Again.
There's a tendency among a lot of hard-line progressives to point out that political belligerence worked for the Republican party, and they're not necessarily wrong. Where they're wrong is in assuming that they can make it belligerence work for the progressives.

What worked for them, won't necessarily work for us. And that's because progressives are strongest when they work together and build coalition across ethnic, religious, socioeconomic, and even some ideological lines. When they are able to unite under an umbrella and accept some differences with one another, progressives are hard to defeat because they will simply outnumber the conservatives.

Conservatives, by contrast, may be outnumbered, but they are more unified, and they are in no small part unified by strong cultural ties, and they are uniting under the banner of white christian capitalist nationalism. It's a minority of the population that subscribes to their worldview, but those who are bound more tightly than their opposition. This is why the conservatives benefit from political polarization because they can use the progressives' strength, which is diversity, as a way to break them apart along various fault lines.

Progressives will have to tolerate differences of opinion, with centrists having to stomach some of the stinging attacks from progressives and progressives having to accept the need for compromise. If they can't tolerate each other, they will fracture, and it would be a total disaster for the country.
  #182  
Old 06-28-2019, 09:28 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,335
The hard right is large enough with good enough turnout that their choice needs only a little support from anyone else to win, especially given the way the deck is stacked both structurally and by gerrymandering. They ARE the GOP at this particular point in time with very little else still there.

The hard left is both smaller and with lower turnout. They can assure success for the hard right but cannot win without being part of a broad coalition. They are far from a majority of the Democratic side.
  #183  
Old 06-28-2019, 10:46 AM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The hard right is large enough with good enough turnout that their choice needs only a little support from anyone else to win, especially given the way the deck is stacked both structurally and by gerrymandering. They ARE the GOP at this particular point in time with very little else still there.

The hard left is both smaller and with lower turnout. They can assure success for the hard right but cannot win without being part of a broad coalition. They are far from a majority of the Democratic side.
It's like the US has become a nation of parliamentary government. On one side of the aisle.
  #184  
Old 06-28-2019, 11:42 AM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boycott

I believe there is a much larger silent-Trump supporters than the polls suggest. At this moment I'd say his re-election chances are 60-40%. He is in his element on the campaign trail and that can take away the distraction of a dis-functioning White House once election season is in full swing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RickJay View Post
There was an election just two and a half years ago that did not bear out the "silent Trump voters" hypothesis.
This is just one person's observation, but here goes.

A few months ago we (Northern Virginia area) had a primary for sheriff, County DA, stuff like that. The current Republican DA was solid conservative; family man; church guy; tough on crime, etc. His oppenent was a Trump-supporter who sent out flyers railing against the "liberal" incumbant and how he "didn't support Trump," blah blah blah.

Well, I go to vote. It's being held on a Saturday morning. I figure I'll just pop in and vote for the incumbent and be on my way. But damn if I didn't end up standing in line for almost 2 hours. It was like a MAGA party. I felt like if I said I was for the incumbent, I would have been the turd in the punchbowl.

Sure enough, the Trumpista won. Like 63 - 37.

I was not expecting this. Ignore this at your peril. (Again, a data point of "one.")
  #185  
Old 06-28-2019, 11:48 AM
eenerms is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Finally...Wisc...!
Posts: 2,883
Unless the Dems can come up with a viable not pander candidate..don’t see it. I am no Trump fan.
  #186  
Old 06-28-2019, 01:38 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Wiggler View Post
...Trump won the over 65 vote by eight points in '16. About ten million of those voters are gone now, or roughly seven million voters. He's lost maybe a half million more votes to Father Time than the Dems might.
You are making the assumption there aren't people who sat out the last election who love what DJT is doing and are motivated to turnout because all his tough talk appeals to them. Again, all he has to do is keep the states he won in 2016. The Democrats have to come up with a candidate who can change that and get some of those states to flip. Expecting Death to do the job for the Dems is not a smart strategy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
The hard right is large enough with good enough turnout that their choice needs only a little support from anyone else to win, especially given the way the deck is stacked both structurally and by gerrymandering. They ARE the GOP at this particular point in time with very little else still there.

The hard left is both smaller and with lower turnout. They can assure success for the hard right but cannot win without being part of a broad coalition. They are far from a majority of the Democratic side.
Quoted because it bears repeating.
  #187  
Old 06-28-2019, 01:55 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 41,543
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
I'll just point out that we saw just yesterday, with the intra-party brawl in the House yesterday and with the debates last night, how numbers 4 and 5 could happen. It's not just a hypothetical: polarization will make it increasingly difficult for Joe Biden, who has heretofore been viewed as the most able to bring a coalition in the general, to maintain a coalition if the party is perpetually outraged by migrant deaths and other matters of social justice.
...
Yep. Harris's attack on Biden made is very easy for trump to win.

and people wonder why I never trusted her.
  #188  
Old 06-28-2019, 01:58 PM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
You are making the assumption there aren't people who sat out the last election who love what DJT is doing and are motivated to turnout because all his tough talk appeals to them. Again, all he has to do is keep the states he won in 2016. The Democrats have to come up with a candidate who can change that and get some of those states to flip. Expecting Death to do the job for the Dems is not a smart strategy.
And you're making the assumption that there are people who sat out last time and who love what Donald is doing. If they loved it all that much, why weren't they at the polls for him three years ago?

I'm not seeing much evidence either way. The only thing close to resembling evidence is the way Dem turnout in the most recent midterms ratcheted way up from 2014.
  #189  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:02 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yep. Harris's attack on Biden made is very easy for trump to win.

and people wonder why I never trusted her.
It wasn't just that, although it probably helped President Trump. Personally, I think this did him more good than anything else coming out of the debates so far.
  #190  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:12 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,994
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Yep. Harris's attack on Biden made is very easy for trump to win.

and people wonder why I never trusted her.
She's doing the party a favor -- testing Biden. He needs to be tested (as do all the candidates). That's a big part of the purpose of the primary. If he can't handle this, which is pretty mild an "attack", then he sure as hell can't handle the general.

Good for Harris. We need a robust and sharp-edged primary -- our eventual candidate will be stronger for it.
  #191  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:15 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Andy, agreed—within reason. Bernie went too far in ‘16.

Divemaster, how is an unpolled local GOP primary relevant to the accuracy of polls about a presidential general election? Who has claimed that MAGAs have not taken over the GOP primary electorate?

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-28-2019 at 02:18 PM.
  #192  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:22 PM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,561
My observation was just that Trump-type voters were motivated and numerous. Even for an off, off election where typically maybe 10 people a hour wander into the polling venue. It was a packed house. Not sure if that indicates anything at all in a general sense. These people may be silent NOW, but come election day? They will be loud.

Last edited by divemaster; 06-28-2019 at 02:23 PM.
  #193  
Old 06-28-2019, 02:25 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Republicans actually had a surge of turnout in 2018. But that was dwarfed by a bigger surge on the other side.
  #194  
Old 06-28-2019, 03:01 PM
Shodan is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 39,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Personally, I think this did him more good than anything else coming out of the debates so far.
Now that's some funny shit.

Regards,
Shodan
  #195  
Old 06-28-2019, 03:23 PM
Sam Stone is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 28,117
I think some of you may be ignoring something: One of the big problems with Trump in the last election was that the mere thought of him being president seemed ridiculous, and a lot of people likely voted against him because they thought that his being president was just inconceivable, and that they couldn't imagine him doing the job.

But now he's the incumbent president. A certain amount of, "What the hell will happen if TRUMP were elected?" fear is going to be eased by that. And the truth is, once you get away from his poisonous personality and execrable behavior (which has already been discounted, because everyone knows about it), Trump has actually presided over a fairly normal center-right administration. His Supreme Court picks have turned out to be not crazy right-wingers, but thoughtful conservatives within the tradition of moderate conservative justices. Neil Gorsuch just voted with Ruth Bader Ginsberg against the rest of the court, for example.

The economy under Trump is better than it's been for decades. Unemployment is the lowest it's been in 50 years, and personal incomes are rising after a decade of stagnation. It doesn't matter if he didn't have anything to do with it - Presidents always get the credit or the blame for the economy under their watch.

If Trump were a normal president with normal manners and behaviors, the economic situation at this moment would pretty much guarantee his winning in a landslide. But he's not, so all bets are off.

At this point, of course everyone is just guessing. The three big factors to look for are how the economy is doing before the election, whether any major international conflicts occur before the election, and who the Democrats wind up selecting to go up against him.

The first two items are out of the Democrat's control, and on the third they look ready to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The progressive party of young people is currently front-running two septuagenerian white males and one septuagenerian white female. The other rising candidate is an ex-prosecutor who does not exactly have a woke record on enforcement. Almost every candidate seems to have endorsed policies FAR to the left of where the American public is, such as open borders along with free healthcare for illegal immigrants, single payer health care, free college for all, a universal basic income and other policies that are not only to the left of the country, but to the left of the mainstream of the Democratic party.

Finally, it remains to be seen how the Democratic candidates will handle Trump. Trump utterly destroyed his Republican challengers - some so bad (looking at you, little Marco), that it destroyed their status a rising stars in the party.

Trump's party trick is that he seems to be able to get away with obnoxious behavior that others can't. When Rubio tried to go toe-to-toe with him on insults, somehow it made Trump look better and it destroyed Rubio's credibility. I have no idea how he does that, but he did it again and again to every candidate the Republicans threw at him, and it worked every time.

And now that he's been president, count on him throwing that in the faces of his opponents. "Little mayor Pete thinks he can run a country. I was facing down Iran while he was getting owned by grandmothers on the local school board."

This next election is likely to be the craziest one in American history. The stakes are through the roof since the parties have become extremely polarized. We've never seen candidates like these before, and no one knows where the Overton window for candidate behavior is anymore. It's going to be a wild ride, and the outcome is completely up for grabs at this point. But I have to give a slight nod to Trump, just because of the value of incumbency and the fact that he's not going to be nearly as scary to people as he was in the previous election. He's no longer a joke candidate. That's got to work in his favor to some degree.
  #196  
Old 06-28-2019, 03:27 PM
KarlGauss's Avatar
KarlGauss is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Between pole and tropic
Posts: 8,236
Jimmy Carter calls Trump out on his 2016 win - saying Trump 'was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf'.


Maybe some of Trump's older, "Christian" supporters might begin to lose faith.
  #197  
Old 06-28-2019, 03:48 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,684
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarlGauss View Post
Jimmy Carter calls Trump out on his 2016 win - saying Trump 'was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf'.


Maybe some of Trump's older, "Christian" supporters might begin to lose faith.
Nah. They'll quickly pivot to insulting Carter, and telling themselves that Carter is not "A Real Christian" like Trump is.
  #198  
Old 06-28-2019, 04:47 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Stone View Post
I think some of you may be ignoring something: One of the big problems with Trump in the last election was that the mere thought of him being president seemed ridiculous, and a lot of people likely voted against him because they thought that his being president was just inconceivable, and that they couldn't imagine him doing the job.
But now he's the incumbent president. A certain amount of, "What the hell will happen if TRUMP were elected?" fear is going to be eased by that.
Wowww. I see this 180 degrees the opposite way. Namely, that a lot of traditional, well educated Republicans in the suburbs cast an uneasy vote for Trump in 2016. "He is kind of crazy on the campaign trail, but once he gets into the Oval Office I'm sure he'll settle down. And I just can't stomach Hillary, and the FBI is investigating her..." Instead, in marked contrast to the placid picture you paint, which I find utterly unrecognizable, his presidency has been a nonstop parade of grotesques, a complete dumpster fire. They are out on him.

Ron Brownstein knows the numbers better than anyone:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...p-2020/583846/
Quote:
In the key Rust Belt states that Trump captured in 2016, his job-approval rating during 2018 was consistently worse than his national average among whites with and without a college degree, according to detailed figures provided to me by Gallup. This suggests that the most straightforward path for Democrats to recapture these states—particularly Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—may be to find a nominee who can reassure white voters who are cooling on Trump.

And here's a 538 piece from Sept. 2017 that illustrates how quickly this "cooling" happened:


https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...lege-graduate/
Quote:
The most recentNBC/Wall Street Journal national surveyfound that whites with a college degree disapproved of Trump’s job performance 61 percent to 37 percent, with 51 percent strongly disapproving — a remarkable level of intensity for a group that he carried just 10 months ago. By comparison, non-college whites approved of Trump 56 percent to 38 percent, with only 27 percent disapproving strongly.
  #199  
Old 06-28-2019, 05:56 PM
Dr. Drake is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 6,295
What that says to me is that a distressingly large portion of the electorate is changeable with regard to their opinion of Trump. To me, that largely has to mean that they are ill-informed or subject to advertisements and propaganda (domestic or foreign, it doesn't matter).

Which means that neither side can count on their vote; nor can they be counted on to vote sensibly (by my definition of sensible, of course). That means that it's largely going to come down to manipulating the election with regard to voter turnout.

One side seems better at that than others, historically. But 2018 showed us that Democrats could learn.

So it seems that it's still anybody's game at this point. I'm pessimistic, just because the number of people who put up with Trump, though they do not support him, is truly shocking to me. Especially fellow Rs in Congress.

I suspect that 2020 will be much uglier than 2016.

But I'm often wrong about these things, so here's hoping.

Last edited by Dr. Drake; 06-28-2019 at 05:58 PM.
  #200  
Old 06-28-2019, 09:37 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,600
I just figured I'd remind everyone that the American voter...is fucking stupid.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTPbWtbfpdI
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017