Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-29-2019, 01:04 PM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 14,017

How 2020 would be different than 2016


Already there are a few things different:
  • Voter turnout will be sky-high. Perhaps the highest-ever in a presidential election.
  • Trump can't run as the new outsider bring change and shakeup; he is the entrenched incumbent this time around and it would be the D candidate who would represent change.
  • Trump already starts out with significant $$$ advantage; he registered for reelection on the very first day of his presidency and already has over $100 million in his campaign war chest. It shouldn't take long at all for the Democratic nominee to accumulate lots of donations, though, given the intense fervor of D supporters.
  • Democrats will for sure play hard for the Upper Midwest and Rust Belt this time around.
  • There's a good chance the mud-slinging in 2016 won't even hold a candle to 2020. I saw a post on Reddit where someone wrote that their desire to see just how chaotic and entertaining the 2020 election will be was one thing that kept them from committing suicide.
  #2  
Old 03-29-2019, 01:12 PM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,065
  • Democrats won't take their candidate winning as a foregone conclusion
  #3  
Old 03-29-2019, 01:59 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
...[*]There's a good chance the mud-slinging in 2016 won't even hold a candle to 2020. I saw a post on Reddit where someone wrote that their desire to see just how chaotic and entertaining the 2020 election will be was one thing that kept them from committing suicide.
....
It will be bad, but people are now aware of the Kremlin and GOP fake news machines. Many Dems have taken the pledge for no negative campaigning.

However, already we can see the tons of Kremlin Krap being thrown at Biden the front-runner in the polls. Dredging up old eulogies for shits sake.
  #4  
Old 03-29-2019, 02:00 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,104
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.

Last edited by septimus; 03-29-2019 at 02:01 PM.
  #5  
Old 03-29-2019, 02:13 PM
The wind of my soul is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It will be bad, but people are now aware of the Kremlin and GOP fake news machines. Many Dems have taken the pledge for no negative campaigning.
Who?
  #6  
Old 03-29-2019, 02:14 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wind of my soul View Post
Who?
Dems= Democrats.
  #7  
Old 03-29-2019, 02:29 PM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It will be bad, but people are now aware of the Kremlin and GOP fake news machines. Many Dems have taken the pledge for no negative campaigning.

However, already we can see the tons of Kremlin Krap being thrown at Biden the front-runner in the polls. Dredging up old eulogies for shits sake.
Honestly, it doesn't take much dredging to come up with much on Biden. Sort of comes with the territory for being in high profile politics for 40+ years.

That might be an advantage for him. Like Trump, most of Biden's baggage is baked into the national conscience. No other contender can really say the same (Liz Warren possibly excepted).
  #8  
Old 03-29-2019, 02:34 PM
The wind of my soul is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Dems= Democrats.
I meant which Democrats have pledged that?
  #9  
Old 03-29-2019, 03:12 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 21,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.
I don't know if people feel good about the economy. Usually that means 'can I find a job easily, and are wages and benefits going up'. Despite gdp growth, low unemployment etc those things aren't true. Wages and benefits aren't budging (and weren't under Obama either) and the low unemployment rate is partly misleading due to a lower labor participation rate.

As far as money, Hillary had far more money than Trump and she still lost. Money isn't everything.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 03-29-2019 at 03:12 PM.
  #10  
Old 03-29-2019, 04:43 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wind of my soul View Post
I meant which Democrats have pledged that?
Many that I know of. People. Members of the party. Not Candidates, afaik.
  #11  
Old 03-29-2019, 05:42 PM
Mr Shine's Avatar
Mr Shine is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 1,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.
44 men over the course of over 2 centuries is just too tiny a sample to make ay kind of stateent like this.
  #12  
Old 03-29-2019, 09:34 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 80,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Honestly, it doesn't take much dredging to come up with much on Biden. Sort of comes with the territory for being in high profile politics for 40+ years.
It's not really an issue.

Nobody is going to make an honest comparison of Biden's record versus Trump's record and decide that Joe Biden is the worse choice. Just as nobody made an honest comparison between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and picked Trump.

The people who "chose" Trump are the diehards who decided to vote for Trump long before the campaign. It doesn't matter who the Democratic candidate was; they would have found a reason to reject them. Any effort to win these people over is wasted.
  #13  
Old 03-30-2019, 10:07 AM
racepug is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
  • Democrats won't take their candidate winning as a foregone conclusion
This. I'm not sure it'll help them. But this.
  #14  
Old 03-30-2019, 10:09 AM
racepug is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.
Yeah, history doesn't bode well for Dems next year. I, for one, certainly hope they can buck that trend, though!
  #15  
Old 03-30-2019, 10:47 AM
racepug is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Snohomish County, WA
Posts: 951
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.
Yeah, history doesn't bode well for Dems next year. I, for one, certainly hope they can buck that trend, though!
  #16  
Old 03-30-2019, 10:59 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
Already there are a few things different:
  • Voter turnout will be sky-high. Perhaps the highest-ever in a presidential election.
  • Trump can't run as the new outsider bring change and shakeup; he is the entrenched incumbent this time around and it would be the D candidate who would represent change.
  • Trump already starts out with significant $$$ advantage; he registered for reelection on the very first day of his presidency and already has over $100 million in his campaign war chest. It shouldn't take long at all for the Democratic nominee to accumulate lots of donations, though, given the intense fervor of D supporters.
  • Democrats will for sure play hard for the Upper Midwest and Rust Belt this time around.
  • There's a good chance the mud-slinging in 2016 won't even hold a candle to 2020. I saw a post on Reddit where someone wrote that their desire to see just how chaotic and entertaining the 2020 election will be was one thing that kept them from committing suicide.
A good list, but I'm not totally convinced about voter turnout. The Democratic party is going to have to decide how progressive they want their nominee to be. It seems far less likely that a moderate like Hillary can get nominated, which makes Biden a long shot, IMO. I also think that's why Sherrod Brown decided against running. Either moderates or progressives are going to feel left out and that could hurt turnout. There are also racial and gender fault lines to be mindful of. Trump's GOP doesn't have these concerns.

In terms of what to expect, I worry that 2020 could be a new and dangerous turning point in terms of the politics of race. The rise of white nationalism and its relentlessness in pursuing more mainstream acceptance and political legitimacy is frightening, and in some ways reminiscent of the Klan's push for similar legitimacy between 1915 and 1925.
  #17  
Old 03-30-2019, 12:47 PM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 14,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
It is quite uncommon for an elected President to fail to win re-election, if he runs for it, if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election.

In fact such a failure has occurred only three times in all of American history: twice in the 19th century (incumbent Cleveland lost to Benj. Harrison who lost to Cleveland 4 years later), and once in the 20th century (Carter lost to Reagan during severe economic and foreign crises).

If people are feeling good about the economy, Trump will be a heavy favorite in 2020.


George H. W. Bush was the incumbent and lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42

Last edited by dalej42; 03-30-2019 at 12:48 PM.
  #18  
Old 03-30-2019, 01:12 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 16,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
George H. W. Bush was the incumbent and lost to Bill Clinton in 1992.
There was an “if his party was NOT the incumbent party at the time of his first election” exception built into the point the poster was making.
  #19  
Old 03-30-2019, 03:03 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
Yeah, history doesn't bode well for Dems next year. I, for one, certainly hope they can buck that trend, though!
You can say that again!
  #20  
Old 03-30-2019, 03:17 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
Yeah, history doesn't bode well for Dems next year. I, for one, certainly hope they can buck that trend, though!
You can say that again!
  #21  
Old 03-30-2019, 04:00 PM
The wind of my soul is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington, D.C.
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
A good list, but I'm not totally convinced about voter turnout. The Democratic party is going to have to decide how progressive they want their nominee to be. It seems far less likely that a moderate like Hillary can get nominated, which makes Biden a long shot, IMO. I also think that's why Sherrod Brown decided against running. Either moderates or progressives are going to feel left out and that could hurt turnout.
I’m intrigued. Have Democrats ever put a “non-moderate” forward as their nominee in recent history? I had thought the standard wisdom was that a moderate would pull in more votes from non-Democrats, and I don’t expect that a progressive Democrat would find a broader base of support than a moderate in the general election.
  #22  
Old 03-31-2019, 01:51 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by The wind of my soul View Post
I’m intrigued. Have Democrats ever put a “non-moderate” forward as their nominee in recent history? I had thought the standard wisdom was that a moderate would pull in more votes from non-Democrats, and I don’t expect that a progressive Democrat would find a broader base of support than a moderate in the general election.
George McGovern, the 1972 candidate, was considered a "non-moderate." That did not work out well for the D's.

With the Rs running on a platform of ignorance, hatred and extreme-right policies. I agree that a moderate Democrat "ought" to be a sure thing, while running a candidate perceived as far-left might be a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. But American politics has become so topsy-turvy I shouldn't offer advice beyond: Please choose very carefully, Dems!
  #23  
Old 03-31-2019, 02:42 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 40,160
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
George McGovern, the 1972 candidate, was considered a "non-moderate." That did not work out well for the D's.

With the Rs running on a platform of ignorance, hatred and extreme-right policies. I agree that a moderate Democrat "ought" to be a sure thing, while running a candidate perceived as far-left might be a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. But American politics has become so topsy-turvy I shouldn't offer advice beyond: Please choose very carefully, Dems!
The way to do this is to put a older moderate guy as prez and a young progressive as Veep.
  #24  
Old 04-01-2019, 08:39 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 80,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by racepug View Post
Yeah, history doesn't bode well for Dems next year. I, for one, certainly hope they can buck that trend, though!
Keep in mind that in over two hundred years no President named Donald has ever been elected to a second term.
  #25  
Old 04-01-2019, 09:14 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 9,118
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
George McGovern, the 1972 candidate, was considered a "non-moderate." That did not work out well for the D's.

With the Rs running on a platform of ignorance, hatred and extreme-right policies. I agree that a moderate Democrat "ought" to be a sure thing, while running a candidate perceived as far-left might be a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. But American politics has become so topsy-turvy I shouldn't offer advice beyond: Please choose very carefully, Dems!
The problem is that politics has become polarized, which makes finding a moderate in either party more challenging. With someone like Donald Trump in charge, the natural inclination among those on the left is to find someone who stands in polar opposition to Donald Trump and his Grand Old Party of Deplorables. That sentiment is certainly understandable, but centrists do exist and a hard-charging candidate risks alienating them. It's going to take a candidate who can establish some street cred as a progressive while not alienating independents who might be willing to defect away from Trump. That's going to be more challenging than it might seem.

That's why we have to be careful about Trump's seemingly low approval rating. He's already proven he can squeeze enough votes in just the right places to make the electoral college vote tally work in his favor, low approval rating and all.

Last edited by asahi; 04-01-2019 at 09:15 PM.
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 03:59 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