Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-05-2019, 03:12 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385

Trump is in rough shape in battleground states


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-election-odds
Quote:
Itís a grim picture. Wisconsin and Michigan were critical Midwestern pieces of Trumpís Electoral College puzzle and he is now deeply unpopular in both states. Pennsylvania was maybe his most surprising win in 2016, and now he is seven points underwater. Perhaps Trump can take solace in his even job approval rating in Florida, but that is the only swing state where the president looks as strong as he did on Election Day 2016. Everywhere else, his support has deteriorated.
[...]
Maybe the most striking finding is in Iowa, where Trump beat Hillary Clinton by nearly 10 points. Iowans disapprove of his job performance by a 12-point margin now, in a farming state thatís been hit hard by Trumpís trade war.
And this is before factoring in some potentially dark clouds on the economic horizon:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ad...may-2019-06-05

This all reinforces the view I've held for months now, which is that Trump will likely go down fairly easily next year, almost regardless of whom Democrats nominate. But our choice of nominee will still be crucially important, because it will impact our chances of retaking the Senate, and then whether we face a 2010-style wipeout in 2022 and a loss to a less odious Republican presidential nominee in 2024.
  #2  
Old 06-05-2019, 03:21 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,320
I saw similar thinking when Bush II was in the run up to his re-election. You might be right, but I hope the Dems don't decide they can do what they want because Trump is going down regardless. They need to take this election VERY seriously, IMHO, and ensure the stake is squarely through the heart of this guy and his administration. That should be the goal, not worrying about tweaking the candidate because of a Senate race down the road. Worry about that AFTER Trump is gone.
__________________
-XT

That's what happens when you let rednecks play with anti-matter!
  #3  
Old 06-05-2019, 03:27 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by XT View Post
I saw similar thinking when Bush II was in the run up to his re-election. You might be right, but I hope the Dems don't decide they can do what they want because Trump is going down regardless. They need to take this election VERY seriously, IMHO, and ensure the stake is squarely through the heart of this guy and his administration. That should be the goal, not worrying about tweaking the candidate because of a Senate race down the road. Worry about that AFTER Trump is gone.

I don't see those as at cross-purposes with each other. The candidate who most safely puts a stake through Trump's heart is almost surely the same one who puts us in the best position for 2022 and 2024.

The only real conflict I see is between what is the most electorally strong for all three years, vs. who would potentially push the furthest in a progressive direction. Backers of Bernie or Warren (whose ranks do not include me, to say the least) are IMO laughable when they claim their candidates would fare the strongest against Trump. But some of them may secretly realize their preferred candidates may not be electorally strongest, but can still beat Trump because of Trump's weakness, and that this is therefore the chance of a lifetime to get a true progressive into the Oval Office. It is giving into that temptation that would be taking our eyes off the ball, IMO.

ETA: Anyone who thought the ground was as fertile for a Democratic win in 2004 was not operating with a clear-eyed view of the polls, but instead making an unwarranted generalization of their own contempt for Bush, and anger about the Iraq war, to the general population. I didn't make that mistake then, and if Trump had Dubya's May 2003 poll numbers, I'd be sickened, horrified, despondent even, but certainly not overconfident.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-05-2019 at 03:30 PM.
  #4  
Old 06-05-2019, 03:28 PM
Kolak of Twilo's Avatar
Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
...This all reinforces the view I've held for months now, which is that Trump will likely go down fairly easily next year, almost regardless of whom Democrats nominate. But our choice of nominee will still be crucially important, because it will impact our chances of retaking the Senate, and then whether we face a 2010-style wipeout in 2022 and a loss to a less odious Republican presidential nominee in 2024.
A few points.

First, we are way way far out from Election Day. There is plenty of time for approval ratings to improve.

Second, once there is polling in those states showing Trump versus the D nominee or a few of the front runners things will change and no guarantee it will be in favor of the Democrats.

Third, if the nominee is Warren or Bernie, Trump will easily coast to reelection. That is why I bolded that part of the quote above. The thinking that anyone can beat Trump is one of several things that could lead to us losing in 2020.

Finally, I have been saying for months the key to winning back the White House is for the Democrats to nominate someone who can keep all the states Hillary won and bring Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan back to the D column. Iowa would just seal the deal. BUT, forget Florida. 2016 and the midterms in 2018 don't make it look like much of a swing state to me anymore. Spending money or chasing Electoral Votes there is just time and money wasted that could be put to better use in the Upper Midwest/Rust Belt. I honestly feel Ohio would be easier to win than Florida.
  #5  
Old 06-05-2019, 03:33 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
As you can see (we were posting at the same time), my disagreement with you about Bernie and Warren is one of degree, not of kind. I am strongly opposed to nominating either of them.

And you're right that Florida seems to have been moving in a different direction from other swing states. But the reenfranchisement of felons is a wildcard, assuming the FL legislature doesn't scuttle that. There is also the ongoing process of Puerto Ricans moving to the state (which we ought to quietly continue to encourage, any way we can). I think we need a cycle or two to see how that shakes out before we write off that huge electoral prize.

ETA: I disagree with you though about "plenty of time for approval ratings to improve". Trump is not that kind of president. He is in fact sui generis, and the people who disapprove of him are never, EVER, going to come around.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-05-2019 at 03:35 PM.
  #6  
Old 06-05-2019, 04:05 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,247
Not to rain on the parade (well, kind of) but the polls showed President Trump in deep trouble in Wisconsin and Michigan in 2016 as well.
  #7  
Old 06-05-2019, 04:14 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,808
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Not to rain on the parade (well, kind of) but the polls showed President Trump in deep trouble in Wisconsin and Michigan in 2016 as well.
Well ya, but that was before the voters found out that the FBI was investigating Hilary Clinton for kidnapping and raping a child. Or something like that - I saw a thing on the news, but was not paying full attention.

Anyway, she's evil. That's a fact. I saw it on my facebook feed, and it was from a reputable news source. "comrade news" or something.

Last edited by Euphonious Polemic; 06-05-2019 at 04:15 PM.
  #8  
Old 06-05-2019, 04:33 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 708
I lived in Iowa for several years and always felt Iowans had a strong sense of decency and common sense. That notion took a beating in 2016, but if Iowa has truly turned on Trump (even if for purely self-serving reasons) maybe I wasn't wrong all along.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #9  
Old 06-05-2019, 04:36 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,247
The "my neighbors are terrible people when my preferred candidate does not win" thinking has always struck me as silly.
  #10  
Old 06-05-2019, 05:05 PM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The "my neighbors are terrible people when my preferred candidate does not win" thinking has always struck me as silly.
How about, "I'm sure glad my neighbors are smart enough to realize that the policies of the candidate they elected actually had the opposite effect of what he promised"?
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #11  
Old 06-05-2019, 05:09 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. •
Posts: 12,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The "my neighbors are terrible people when my preferred candidate does not win" thinking has always struck me as silly.
Agreed, generally. But voting for someone like Trump is despicable . And that King fellow.
  #12  
Old 06-05-2019, 05:19 PM
Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 81,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
The only real conflict I see is between what is the most electorally strong for all three years, vs. who would potentially push the furthest in a progressive direction. Backers of Bernie or Warren (whose ranks do not include me, to say the least) are IMO laughable when they claim their candidates would fare the strongest against Trump. But some of them may secretly realize their preferred candidates may not be electorally strongest, but can still beat Trump because of Trump's weakness, and that this is therefore the chance of a lifetime to get a true progressive into the Oval Office. It is giving into that temptation that would be taking our eyes off the ball, IMO.
I agree. I see two possible ways Trump can get a second term. One is the one you described; the Democrats shoot themselves in foot by being over-confident and going too far to the left. We don't want another George McGovern.

The second one is Republican shenanigans. Whoever the Democratic nominee is will need around a ten point lead over Trump to make up for the various ways Republicans rig the elections.
  #13  
Old 06-05-2019, 05:55 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
Agreed, generally. But voting for someone like Trump is despicable . And that King fellow.

This. Add in Roy Moore.
  #14  
Old 06-05-2019, 06:09 PM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,787
Approval ratings are not the same thing as vote margins, and so they should not be compared directly. We don't know what Trump's 2020 margins will be yet, so we can't compare those. But we can look at his approval ratings right now, and compare them to his approval ratings in 2016. What does that comparison look like?
  #15  
Old 06-05-2019, 06:33 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
We can also use polls like this: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...-trump-in-2020

28 percent say they will definitely vote for Trump. 14 percent say they will consider it. 55 percent say they definitely will not vote for him.

AFAIK no president has ever had numbers like that and still stood for reelection.
  #16  
Old 06-05-2019, 06:51 PM
Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 11,808
Well ya, but how does Trump stack up one-on-one against herpes?

I betcha he wins that matchup!
  #17  
Old 06-05-2019, 06:53 PM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,401
I feel like we're putting our eggs in the wrong basket if we're hoping Trump's popularity will dip and he'll lose the election.

It's likely, though not overwhelmingly so. And should it happen, we'll be faced with a defeated president who is quoted as saying he only accepts election results if he wins, who almost certainly is facing humiliation, criminal charges, and possibly jail if he isn't re-elected. A guy who alleged voter fraud and challenged the popular vote count of an election that he actually won. A guy who is the leader of a political party, and an administration, who has demonstrated they'll cover absolutely any crime of Trump's in order to keep him afloat, who have backtracked every public statement critical of him.

He's shown motive, ability, and intent to override elections that don't go his way. If we don't take every lawful step possible to ensure he doesn't appear on the ballot in 2020, then that election is pointless.
  #18  
Old 06-05-2019, 06:57 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,885
Win at any cost is not the way of Democrats, traditionally. They booed two DEM candidates that suggested UHC was more realistic than expanded Medicare. I don't know how many of those jeering really understood the difference between the two. But given how much people love the ACA and are afraid to lose it, you'd think they would realize it's a hamstrung version of UHC, not Medicare for all. I understand the desire and importance of reaching for things beyond your grasp, but being unrealistic and ideological given the current administration is beyond dumb. Embrace the realistic, people.

I like Joe Biden. I forgive him his foibles and shortcomings. In an ideal election, I'd like to see someone like Elizabeth Warren or Mayor Pete in the lead. But let's face it, nothing about this election is ideal. So don't fuck this up Joe.

Never underestimate the ability of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 06-05-2019 at 06:58 PM.
  #19  
Old 06-05-2019, 07:05 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMS Irruncible View Post
I feel like we're putting our eggs in the wrong basket if we're hoping Trump's popularity will dip and he'll lose the election.

Why would his popularity need to ďdipĒ?
  #20  
Old 06-05-2019, 07:17 PM
QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 18,885
Because our faith in a certain segment of humanity (~62,984,825) could use a modicum of restoration.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #21  
Old 06-05-2019, 07:35 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,554
Looking at the state by state trends it does not look like he dropping worse in the battlegrounds than he is overall. That would be meaningful ... but that is not the case.

Down 17% in net approval from when he took office in PA; down 19% in WI; down 20% in MI.

But pick other states at random ...down 23 in MA; 17 in MS; down 24 on OR; down 15 in SC; down 17 in TX; down 19 in WV; down 22 in FL, so on.

His net approval across the country is down and is not particularly more or less down in battlegrounds than anywhere else. Reagan had roughly the same approval rating nationally at this point in term one as Trump has now, having dropped much more than Trump has. Mondale still managed to lose to him badly, a landslide loss.

To be sure this point in term one was Reagan's low point and he began his climb back into solid popularity from there. Trump's low net approval has been pretty damn rock solid from several months in on and him suddenly pulling it way up like Reagan did is unlikely. Still, the thesis of the op is faulty.
  #22  
Old 06-05-2019, 08:04 PM
HMS Irruncible is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 8,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Why would his popularity need to ďdipĒ?
Ostensibly you win or lose elections based on popularity (apart from the antiquated electoral college business). But that's not my point. My point is that if Trump loses the election in 2020 he will invent phantom electoral improprieties that would (if true) invalidate the election. Bill Barr will happily invent a pretext for "investigation" into said improprieties. Mitch McConnell will happily refuse to hold an electoral college vote. House Democrats might sue, and it will go to the 5-4 Supreme Court controlled by Bush/Trump toadies who will be more than happy to throw yet another election to Republicans.

That's my prediction, that 2 years from now (give or take) we'll be sitting here inaugurating Trump several months late (after lengthy court challenges) because he delegitimized the election, successfully got the Republicans go to along with it, and the Democrats have no workable playbook on how to deal with such a scenario. (unless he gets removed from office, which isn't happening).

So pardon me if I'm not breathing a sigh of relief about him being down in the polls.
  #23  
Old 06-05-2019, 08:19 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,568
Let us never forget that the Democrats are completely capable of screwing up a Presidential election without Donald Trump or the Russians. How did Al Gore manage to lose enough votes to Ralph Nader in Florida that George Bush could even be in a position to win a contested vote? How did the Democrats allow John Kerry to get swift-boated without firing back? For that matter, how did the Republicans manage to win six Democratic Senate seats in 2010?

In the immortal words of Han Solo, "Don't get cocky."
  #24  
Old 06-05-2019, 09:41 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
I don't see the relevance of whether he is more unpopular in battleground states than elsewhere. It is only important that he be unpopular there, regardless of what is happening in other states (within reason).

More broadly, I also think it's interesting that here, the CW seems to be "don't get cocky". At my local DFL meeting, the sentiment was precisely the opposite: the people there felt that they hear too much doom and gloom talk like that of HMS just upthread, and that this is what is going to discourage Democrats from feeling like they can do anything.

I'm not going to get into all the psychology of what kind of pep talk (or cold water) Democrats need. I'm going to stick to what facts I see, and what inferences I draw from them. And those are:

--Kerry never looked like anything close to a lock to win. He actually did a little better than I expected, personally.

--Reagan was as far down as he was because of a severe recession. Trump has gotten to where he is despite strong economic numbers (until very recently).

--No other president in modern history (certainly not in the past 40 years) has so utterly convinced a majority of Americans that he is unfit for office. So examples of past presidents who have had wildly fluctuating poll numbers (Carter, Reagan, Clinton, both Bushes) do not apply.

An economic downturn could take his numbers down outside of the narrow range they "trade in". But there's a flip side to the "shoot someone on Fifth Avenue" trope: he could walk on water after turning it into wine, and there would still be 55% of the population who would say "no way, never" to the idea of even considering voting for Trump.

That Democratic surge that came out in November 2018 is now Trump's ceiling.
  #25  
Old 06-05-2019, 10:21 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,554
If it is pretty much the same net approval in these states as everywhere else what does it add to the analysis beyond consideration of his national net approval ratings?

Losing more ground in those key states than he has on average? That would be significant! I guess showing that those states are not outliers moving towards more approval says something... but who thought that?

In fact this poll disappoints me. I had thought he would be especially losing ground in those states. He hasnít.

Itís been pointed out already but disapproval of Trump is not the same as votes for the D on Election Day. It isnít even a poll against a generic D. Thereís going to be whole mess of smearing of whoever the Democrats run, first within the context of the race for the nomination and then worse by Trump and ... others ... who will spread blatant lies. Trump may not have a majority who approve of the job he is doing but you still need to run someone who can weather those attacks with more still approving of them. It is not a sure thing is all.
  #26  
Old 06-06-2019, 12:05 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
If it is pretty much the same net approval in these states as everywhere else what does it add to the analysis beyond consideration of his national net approval ratings?

Because if all we have is national numbers, we can always worry that those are hiding pockets of strength in key battleground states, especially the ones he flipped that had gone Democratic for so long. Therefore the poll results in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania are extremely important.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
It is not a sure thing is all.

Of course it's not a sure thing. But let's put it this way. If I didn't actually care who became president, and I were just being a coldly rational wagerer (like a professional sports bettor who doesn't have a favorite team she roots for), what kind of odds would you have to offer me before I'd be willing to put down a C-note on Trump? Honestly, anything under $10K just makes me feel like I'm wasting a hundred bucks. Above there, I start to get a little interested.

So: sure thing? No. A 99% or better chance he'll lose? Yes. That's what I believe to be true based on the information we have.

Last edited by SlackerInc; 06-06-2019 at 12:06 AM.
  #27  
Old 06-06-2019, 06:52 AM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,752
The following are are all my opinions and observations, no hard numbers as cites.

At this point my guess is a generic Democrat is about a 2 to 1 favorite over Trump, favored but not a blowout. In general the problem with Democrats is that when it looks we have the advantage a significant enough proportion to make a difference fall victim to “the good is the enemy of the perfect” mentality. People who voted for Nader in 2000, Stein in 2016, those who support a less electable candidate like Warren, and people who stay home because the Democratic candidate isn’t liberal enough.

Last edited by FlikTheBlue; 06-06-2019 at 06:52 AM.
  #28  
Old 06-06-2019, 07:41 AM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,931
I think I see now why the Trump campaign is reportedly targeting Minnesota (Nevada and New Mexico as well). If he loses Mi/PA/WI, he can flip Minnesota, a very narrow loss for him in '16, and still win 270-268. That would be gruesome. A combination of NV and NM would work for him, too.

This guy has already pulled a horseshoe out of his ass once (and probably targeted his campaigning better than Hilary). He could do it again. This is why I see picking up one of the big southern battleground states as vital for the blues.

Too goddam close again. We should all be terrified and vote.
  #29  
Old 06-06-2019, 07:50 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,787
SlackerInc, 99% is way too confident. Yeah, the numbers look good right now, but numbers can change. Sometimes, all of the numbers can change at once, all in the same direction. What are the odds that there's a terrorist attack between now and the election, and Trump blunders into a response that looks strong? What are the odds that we pick a Democratic nominee, and then it comes up that that person (whoever it is) was in some genuine scandal? These things can happen.
  #30  
Old 06-06-2019, 08:15 AM
BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 21,517
My humble disjointed opinions: Republicans always come home and they always vote. Elections turn on how many Democrats turn out. If Roe v Wade is overturned or appears in imminent danger, this will galvanize Democrats to come out and vote. We can't be afraid of impeachment riling up Republicans, they're always riled up anyway and are reliable voters. 2016 was an aberration, Democrats had the misfortune of nominating someone that too many people found totally unlikable. Not Donald is the unlikable one, the "will not vote for him under any circumstance" numbers are killers.

I think the Dems take back PA, MI, WI, and IA. Ohio and Florida will be tough. Both seem to be trending redder. I don't see DJT flipping any states. The tight MN race in 2016 was an aberration.
  #31  
Old 06-06-2019, 10:56 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
My humble disjointed opinions: Republicans always come home and they always vote. Elections turn on how many Democrats turn out. If Roe v Wade is overturned or appears in imminent danger, this will galvanize Democrats to come out and vote. We can't be afraid of impeachment riling up Republicans, they're always riled up anyway and are reliable voters. 2016 was an aberration, Democrats had the misfortune of nominating someone that too many people found totally unlikable. Not Donald is the unlikable one, the "will not vote for him under any circumstance" numbers are killers.

I think the Dems take back PA, MI, WI, and IA. Ohio and Florida will be tough. Both seem to be trending redder. I don't see DJT flipping any states. The tight MN race in 2016 was an aberration.
If Biden isn't a wounded candidate coming out of the convention, Biden could beat Trump in all of the above-mentioned states - every single one of them. But November 2020 is a long way away.
  #32  
Old 06-06-2019, 11:42 AM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,554
"If" and "could" ...

Chronos's point that numbers can change and when they do they all do, that they are correlated, is the most relevant. Trump did and could again win while having less than 50% of those who vote for for him and way more than less than 50 of% registered voters voting for him.

Trumps floor is solid and his ceiling may also be pretty firm, unfortunately just high enough for him to win. My WAG is that getting closer to the election the 538 scenarios will be not too dissimilar to last time, anything from a D blow out to to a fairly narrow Trump win will be possible, a modest D win most probable but not assured ... 2 to 1 odds on a D win ... like last time. And that is too close to feel secure or to take any chances.

Yes a D blow out would be nice and might bring the Senate along on coat tails. It could happen. And a fairly narrow D loss, even again winning popular but losing the election, could. I'd take equal odds on either of 'em. I'd bet 50/50 on a modestly solid D win but even a way overoptimistic 1 out of 10 chance of a Trump win is way too much.
  #33  
Old 06-06-2019, 12:23 PM
Thing Fish is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago (NL)
Posts: 3,385
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post

ETA: Anyone who thought the ground was as fertile for a Democratic win in 2004 was not operating with a clear-eyed view of the polls, but instead making an unwarranted generalization of their own contempt for Bush, and anger about the Iraq war, to the general population. I didn't make that mistake then, and if Trump had Dubya's May 2003 poll numbers, I'd be sickened, horrified, despondent even, but certainly not overconfident.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
A few points.

First, we are way way far out from Election Day. There is plenty of time for approval ratings to improve.
Yeah, but in 2003 liberals could reasonably console themselves by saying "These approval ratings will come down, because this war is a horrible clusterfuck and that's just going to become more and more obvious as time goes by". And they would have been right, though unfortunately the ratings didn't fall quite far or fast enough.

Where's the reason for Trumpy optimism? He hasn't started any wars yet, and the economy can't get much better than it already is. He's not going to suddenly stop saying stupid shit. Maybe there will be some international crisis which he will respond to in a way people find inspiring and statesmanlike? Yeah, good luck with that. I find it hard to imagine any plausible scenario where he gets more popular than he currently is, and easy to imagine many plausible scenarios where he gets less popular.
  #34  
Old 06-06-2019, 12:51 PM
Unreconstructed Man is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 300
Of the people who turn up to vote on Election Day, about 40% will vote Republican come hell or high water. The Republicans could field a giant scorpion with Hitler’s face and that percentage wouldn’t change. Same for the Democrats. This election, like all US elections will hinge on who the remaining 20% feel is the most “leader like”. If that’s Trump, and if the economy is still doing OK, the election’s as good as his, and all the negatives in the world won’t make a scrap of difference.

Odds are, the economy is still probably going to be chugging along reasonably well next November. Therefore, the only chance the Democrats have is to nominate someone more charismatic than Trump. That should be easy. Trump isn’t particularly charismatic, and what little charisma he does possess is very much of the tawdry carnival barker variety. Unfortunately, the Democrats never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity, and there’s a good chance they’ll nominate someone like Warren because it’s “her turn” rather than someone who can simply connect to people on a gut level like Gabbard or Buttigieg.

Policy wise, that might make good sense, but policy doesn’t matter. Only charisma and the economy matter. Frankly, it’s pointless speculating on Trump’s chances until we know who his opponent is. If it’s someone like Buttigieg or Gabbard the Dems would likely win. If it’s someone less charismatic than Trump then 2020 will be his to lose.
  #35  
Old 06-06-2019, 08:16 PM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,568
Just this afternoon I had an interesting discussion on FB with a friend who flatly stated she WILL NOT vote for Joe Biden because she doesn't trust his position on abortion rights. I'm waiting to hear back from her on what she will do if her choice comes down to Biden v. Trump v. third-party.

Last edited by Kent Clark; 06-06-2019 at 08:16 PM.
  #36  
Old 06-06-2019, 09:25 PM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
Just this afternoon I had an interesting discussion on FB with a friend who flatly stated she WILL NOT vote for Joe Biden because she doesn't trust his position on abortion rights. I'm waiting to hear back from her on what she will do if her choice comes down to Biden v. Trump v. third-party.
I'm a conservative Republican. I did not vote for Trump, mainly because I do not see him as either a conservative or my type of Republican. I voted third party in the last presidential election. Every day when I read the paper I roll my eyes on what this buffoon is doing on the worldwide stage. I guess I'm one of the few "never-Trump" Republicans. It seems like Michael Gerson and George Will (both of whom I read in the Washington Post) hold similar views. Good for them.

I would not shed one tear if this idiot was impeached.

I've never contemplated voting for a Democrat. The fact that they are so beholden to abortion is a no-dealer to me. Even when pro-life Democrats make national news (Louisiana), it's mainly to explain how other democrats want to run the DINOs out of the party.

But this week, I see a window that could allow me to vote for Biden. A small window to be sure, maybe 10% chance, but if he can face down the abortion purists of the Democrat Party and basically say "yeah, go ahead, but don't expect the government to pay for it..." I might be able to swallow that and vote for him if it helped send Trump to the curb. Or the clink. Or to the gulag. Or wherever he might end up.

But Biden seems weak in character, and I expect any day that someone from his team will say he "misspoke" and he indeed is all-in for government-funded abortions.

The jury is still out for me, but at least now he has my attention.
  #37  
Old 06-06-2019, 09:27 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Approval ratings are not the same thing as vote margins, and so they should not be compared directly. We don't know what Trump's 2020 margins will be yet, so we can't compare those. But we can look at his approval ratings right now, and compare them to his approval ratings in 2016. What does that comparison look like?
We donít have approval rating as they start from when started the job. But we do have favorable/unfavorable numbers. https://elections.huffingtonpost.com...vorable-rating

His ratings in October Ď16 and now are about the same. He won while well underwater in those numbers, as underwater as he is now.
__________________
Oy.
  #38  
Old 06-07-2019, 09:16 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is online now
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,787
divemaster, we have one and only one party in the US that is in any way pro-life. The last time we had any major legislation in the works concerning abortion was the Stupak Amendment, which was sponsored by a Democrat, supported by Democrats in both houses, killed unanimously by Senate Republicans just to spite the Democrats, and then the Democratic president did as much as was in his power to patch it up. If opposition to abortion is your key issue, then you should be supporting the Democrats at every opportunity you get, and if they're not strong enough for you on the issue, try to pull the party further in your direction, because that's the only option that exists for that position in current American politics.
  #39  
Old 06-07-2019, 10:30 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
I'm a conservative Republican. I did not vote for Trump, mainly because I do not see him as either a conservative or my type of Republican. I voted third party in the last presidential election. Every day when I read the paper I roll my eyes on what this buffoon is doing on the worldwide stage. I guess I'm one of the few "never-Trump" Republicans. It seems like Michael Gerson and George Will (both of whom I read in the Washington Post) hold similar views. Good for them.

I would not shed one tear if this idiot was impeached.

I've never contemplated voting for a Democrat. The fact that they are so beholden to abortion is a no-dealer to me. Even when pro-life Democrats make national news (Louisiana), it's mainly to explain how other democrats want to run the DINOs out of the party.
Rational conservatives in this day and age interest me. I find your argument regarding not being able to vote for pro-choice Democrats persuasive considering your opinion on the issue; not that I agree with it, just that it's a rational response. I've advocated that the Democrats need to take a less argumentative tone on abortion, and ackowledge that there is a difference between a fetus, at any stage, and a tonsil or some other tissue that can be removed with no moral issues.

I'd like to see a Democrat say something along the lines of, "While I believe that abortion should be safe and legal, there is something to be said about the belief that a fetus is not simply a ball of cells, and we should pursue every policy we can to minimize the number of abortions performed in this country. Furthermore, legislation regarding the legality of abortion should be tailored such that when medical professionals have determined that an otherwise healthy fetus that has developed to the point of possessing distinctly human brain activity, that pose no threat to the mother's health, such human life should be protected."

Is that a Democrat you could vote for? Is that a Democrat that Democrats would vote for?

I realize that nuanced views on abortion are politically challenging because apparently we either need to believe that a fertilized egg is a human or we need to believe that an eight month developed fetus is not a person, and there is not much room in between despite the fact that the "in between" is clearly where this issue lies.
  #40  
Old 06-07-2019, 10:35 AM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
I'm a conservative Republican. I did not vote for Trump, mainly because I do not see him as either a conservative or my type of Republican. I voted third party in the last presidential election. Every day when I read the paper I roll my eyes on what this buffoon is doing on the worldwide stage. I guess I'm one of the few "never-Trump" Republicans. It seems like Michael Gerson and George Will (both of whom I read in the Washington Post) hold similar views. Good for them.

I would not shed one tear if this idiot was impeached.

I've never contemplated voting for a Democrat. The fact that they are so beholden to abortion is a no-dealer to me. Even when pro-life Democrats make national news (Louisiana), it's mainly to explain how other democrats want to run the DINOs out of the party.
You do realize that the surest method of removing Trump from office is defeating him in 2020, right? And the only way that happens if if a Democrat defeats him, right? And the only way that happens is if people, you know, vote for the Democrat?

I hope when next November rolls around you'll weigh your concern for the single issue of abortion against all the other issues being mangled by Trump and his ilk, and not just cast some symbolic protest vote but actually cast a vote that helps remove Trump.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #41  
Old 06-07-2019, 10:41 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
I've never contemplated voting for a Democrat. The fact that they are so beholden to abortion is a no-dealer to me. Even when pro-life Democrats make national news (Louisiana), it's mainly to explain how other democrats want to run the DINOs out of the party.
No, not really; though I'm sure you disagree, we feel that Jon Bel Edawrds received legitimate criticism for signing an atrocious piece of legislation, and the (D) by his name doesn't make him immune to it.

We're never going to agree on abortion, but I will leave you with this. The kinds of laws that you seem to be supporting are exactly the kinds of laws that attract the very worst of the republican party you seem disconcerted with. If more self-identified conservatives would simply nuance their position a little, that would help them reclaim their party. But until then, I hate to say it, but you're stuck with Trump. Donald Trump is your guy and he represents your politics, whether you want to admit it or not.
  #42  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:04 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Near Philadelphia PA, USA
Posts: 12,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
The "my neighbors are terrible people when my preferred candidate does not win" thinking has always struck me as silly.
As a general rule I would agree with you. To think this way in all cases would be silly. But surely you would agree that it depends on the candidates?

As an extreme example, if I support a run of the mill centrist candidate and my neighbors support Jeffrey Dahmer, then I'm going to think that my neighbors are terrible people.

For something closer to the real world; if my neighbors' preferred candidate supports a policy of separating families as a way of discouraging asylum seekers, then I'm not going to think very highly of those neighbors.
__________________
Check out my t-shirt designs in Marketplace. https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb...php?p=21131885
  #43  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:13 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidm View Post
For something closer to the real world; if my neighbors' preferred candidate supports a policy of separating families as a way of discouraging asylum seekers, then I'm not going to think very highly of those neighbors.
Right. When there are so many options, if they continue support a candidate/official who bragged about sexual assault and violating the consent of women, then I'm not going to think that they really value women and girls very highly. If they continue to support a candidate/official who spent years spreading evidence-free racist conspiracy theories, then I'm going to assume they're, at best, tolerant of racism. If they continue to support a candidate/official who flippantly calls for their political opponents to be jailed, then I'm going to assume they don't put much value on a serious and fair justice system. And so on.
  #44  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:28 AM
Kent Clark's Avatar
Kent Clark is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 26,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kent Clark View Post
Just this afternoon I had an interesting discussion on FB with a friend who flatly stated she WILL NOT vote for Joe Biden because she doesn't trust his position on abortion rights. I'm waiting to hear back from her on what she will do if her choice comes down to Biden v. Trump v. third-party.
An update, my friend (and I really do consider her to be a friend) posted her reply that she will be single-issue in 2020, and she wants an alternative to both Trump and Biden. I suggested she go Libertarian. She'll get her pro-choice candidate (although she won't get public funding for any healthcare) and where she lives, a big Libertarian turnout will probably hurt Trump more than Biden.
  #45  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:40 AM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
I'd like to see a Democrat say something along the lines of, "While I believe that abortion should be safe and legal, there is something to be said about the belief that a fetus is not simply a ball of cells, and we should pursue every policy we can to minimize the number of abortions performed in this country. Furthermore, legislation regarding the legality of abortion should be tailored such that when medical professionals have determined that an otherwise healthy fetus that has developed to the point of possessing distinctly human brain activity, that pose no threat to the mother's health, such human life should be protected."

Is that a Democrat you could vote for? Is that a Democrat that Democrats would vote for?
Thank you for your response. To answer your question; yes, I could vote for such a Democrat...against Trump. But in all honesty, up until the Republican Party entered into bizarro world 3 years ago, any "mainstream" Republican would get my vote because I will agree with them on my two main issues (the other being gun rights). Especially with the Democrats taking harder and harder lines and litmus tests on these two issues.

Trump infuriates me, as a conservative Evangelical-style Republican. I can not vote for him; I will not vote for him. The last two or three local elections I did not vote for the Republican, despite their pro-life and pro-gun bona fides. (That's a separate issue and it relates almost 100% to the current Republican Party platform on immigration.) But aside from my opinion of Trump as (pick whatever adjectives you want), a Democrat candidate has to EARN my vote with a position on my two main issues I can look at myself in the mirror and vote for. Used to be there were Democrats who had A ratings from the NRA, and who had pro-life voting records. Where are they now? Today's Democrats obviously don't want my vote. They don't get it by default because the other guy is worse. I vote my conscience. I know this pisses a lot of people off, but that's where I'm at.
  #46  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:53 AM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Donald Trump is your guy and he represents your politics, whether you want to admit it or not.
No he does not. He represents my PARTY (likely my soon to be former Party), but he does NOT represent my politics. You don't know my politics, asahi, except what I've disclosed in these few posts here. My issues with Trump defy simple boxes. I can't even begin to make a list. Even on some issues that I might happen to "agree" with him on...what am I really agreeing with? When the man changes his mind from year to year; from month to month; from day to day. How can I trust him to represent my interests when I don't trust him to have any thought-out political positions or moral center to develop them?

For what it's worth, I have had these conversations with my family. My sister, my mom, my 18-year-old niece. Heck, even my wife (who is an immigrant!). They all voted for Trump. I've told them the are being misled. I've told them they are being conned. I've told them that one day they will wake up and realize who this man really is, and they will be disappointed. I'm especially concerned about my niece, as when you are that age and your heroes fail you, it can be quite devastating.

So I've done my part to try to convince them not to vote for Trump. But that's a long shot away from saying we're all going to vote for some "typical" pro-abortion Democrat. That's just not going to happen.
  #47  
Old 06-07-2019, 11:56 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
No he does not. He represents my PARTY (likely my soon to be former Party), but he does NOT represent my politics. You don't know my politics, asahi, except what I've disclosed in these few posts here. My issues with Trump defy simple boxes. I can't even begin to make a list. Even on some issues that I might happen to "agree" with him on...what am I really agreeing with? When the man changes his mind from year to year; from month to month; from day to day. How can I trust him to represent my interests when I don't trust him to have any thought-out political positions or moral center to develop them?

For what it's worth, I have had these conversations with my family. My sister, my mom, my 18-year-old niece. Heck, even my wife (who is an immigrant!). They all voted for Trump. I've told them the are being misled. I've told them they are being conned. I've told them that one day they will wake up and realize who this man really is, and they will be disappointed. I'm especially concerned about my niece, as when you are that age and your heroes fail you, it can be quite devastating.

So I've done my part to try to convince them not to vote for Trump. But that's a long shot away from saying we're all going to vote for some "typical" pro-abortion Democrat. That's just not going to happen.
The proven way to reduce abortions is a combination of comprehensive sex education and widespread availability of contraception -- i.e. reduce the demand for abortions (unwanted pregnancies). One party is actually pushing for those policies, while the other party generally fights against them.
  #48  
Old 06-07-2019, 12:21 PM
divemaster's Avatar
divemaster is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Gainesville, VA
Posts: 3,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
But Biden seems weak in character, and I expect any day that someone from his team will say he "misspoke" and he indeed is all-in for government-funded abortions.

The jury is still out for me, but at least now he has my attention.
Well, that lasted about as long as I thought it would.

"Biden reverses course. Democratic candidate no longer supports Hyde Amendment..."

(from my phone's Yahoo news feed).

"...bowing to pressure...and abandoning a long and allegedly deeply held point of personal conviction."

(from my phone's CNN news feed)

Last edited by divemaster; 06-07-2019 at 12:24 PM.
  #49  
Old 06-07-2019, 01:41 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 10,695
Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
No he does not. He represents my PARTY (likely my soon to be former Party), but he does NOT represent my politics.
I understand what you're saying, that you disagree with Trump on almost everything else, which is laudable. However...

Quote:
Originally Posted by divemaster View Post
You don't know my politics, asahi, except what I've disclosed in these few posts here. My issues with Trump defy simple boxes.
You are effectively allowing your objection on one issue to effectively cancel out all of your other positions. You can join a third party if you want, but that probably won't help much in terms of keeping Trump out of office.

There's a reason that Trump and the GOP are taking such an extreme, uncompromising, and frankly unreasonable position on abortion. It attracts deplorable people. I commend you for not joining them, but I think a very serious problem this country has - and I think I can say this with regard to some on the left as well - is that ideological purity has blinded us. The only way a society can have good things is to allow some space for compromise. Without that, then we lose the ability to operate in good faith.
  #50  
Old 06-07-2019, 01:43 PM
Snowboarder Bo's Avatar
Snowboarder Bo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 27,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
The only way a society can have good things is to allow some space for compromise. Without that, then we lose the ability to operate in good faith.
There's a whole bunch of people who have not been operating in good faith for a long time now; they aren't gonna want to change eh.
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 06:49 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