While I agree the Democrats could blow it in 2020, the fact that no clear favourite for the Presidential nomination has emerged 2.5 years in advance is absolutely normal.
The only exception I can think of who was not a sitting President or Vice President was… Hillary Clinton.
This. I don’t know why people think that Trump supporters will EVER care about the President doing anything personal in his past. Hell, they wouldn’t care now. I can’t believe some people are surprised. He did exactly what rich, white guys did back then. Some people can get their hopes up everytime “Trump slept with a pornstar, OMG!!!” if they want, but just seems like a waste of time.
I agree, but…It may not lose him any supporters but it will make it hard to recruit new ones. He’s got his faithful, but with a good turnout that won’t be enough (hopefully)
What’s going to do him in at the polls isn’t that he sticks his dick in every hole he encounters or that he has obstructed justice or that he has cheated people and laundered money. What’s going to doom him at the polls is that he isn’t going to be running against Hillary. There were many 2016 voters who would have crawled over hot coals and barbed wire in the nude to vote against Hillary, there simply won’t be as much motivation to cast anti-Democratic votes in 2020 as there will be to cast anti-Republican votes. All the Mueller investigation is going to do is determine whether he will even be in office in 2020 to run against a non-terrible Democrat.
Virtually no one is acting like 2020 is already won, but they are realizing the Republicans can’t help but shoot themselves in the feet over and over again. Every time I see someone mention a “blue wave”, there’s repeated reminders to “VOTE!” every time. The Parkland kids is the biggest movement at this moment. Remember the Women’s March last year? The numbers were even greater than “March For Our Lives”. The Democratic Party is seeing an insane amount of women run for positions at the local and state levels. Scientists are getting involved in races. Millennials are becoming more politically aware and devising ways to use the technology they’ve grown up with to affect change, at the same time that they’ve become the largest generation in the country.
I haven’t seen an air of complacency a la 2016. I’ve seen (at least a portion) a population that has realized what complacency can bring. Younger voters have spent a large segment of their lives with a President that tried - usually - to accomplish the things they found important: environmental protection, work-life balance, and fair pay, while being stymied by a recalcitrant Congress. Now they see a President that virtually STARTED under investigation by a special prosecutor, while destroying American credit abroad, and hell-bent on repeating the fantastic job loss numbers of his party predecessor.
Indeed. Going back over the past few decades, and looking at people who were eventually the Democratic or Republican nominee, and what they were doing 2.5 years before that election (but weren’t a sitting President or VP, or Hillary):
1966 (pre-1968 election): Nixon hadn’t held office since losing the race for California governor in 1962, but he was still active as a party voice, while practicing law. And, of course, he’d been vice-president for eight years in the 1950s, and had lost the 1960 election to JFK.
1970 (pre-1972): McGovern was a Senator from South Dakota; he was apparently not considered a favorite when he entered the race.
1974 (pre-1976): Carter was governor of Georgia, and he, too, would start out as a dark horse candidate in a very crowded field.
1978 (pre-1980): Reagan was a private citizen at that point, three years removed from being California governor. He’d barely lost the GOP nomination in 1976 to Ford, and was active as a political commentator (clearly setting the stage for running again).
1982 (pre-1984): Mondale was practicing law, after having been Carter’s VP, and on the losing ticket in 1980. It looks like Mondale was seen as one of the leading candidates going into the primaries.
1986 (pre-1988): Dukakis was governor of Massachusetts, and had just been named the most effective governor by the National Governors Association, thanks to the “Massachusetts Miracle.” I don’t remember if he was seen as a frontrunner for the presidency at that time, however.
1990 (pre-1992): Clinton was governor of Arkansas. When Gary Hart had dropped out of the 1988 race, there’d been speculation that Clinton would enter that race, but he stayed out of it.
1994 (pre-1996): Dole was Senate Majority Leader. He’d run for the GOP nomination twice before (1980 and 1988), and had been Ford’s VP pick for the 1976 election.
1998 (pre-2000) GW Bush was governor of Texas.
2002 (pre-2004): Kerry was a Senator from Massachusetts.
2006 (pre-2008): Obama had been a Senator from Illinois for a year. McCain had been a Senator from Arizona for years, and had run in the GOP primaries in 2000.
2010 (pre-2012): Romney was a private citizen at that time, though politically active, and laying the groundwork for running. He’d been a candidate in the 2008 GOP primaries, had been considered for McCain’s VP slot, and had been governor of Massachusetts.
2014 (pre-2016): Some dude was a private businessman and media personality, who had flirted with running for president on several previous occasions.
So, from that list, the ones who stand out to me as being seen as likely frontrunners 2.5 years out are probably Reagan, Mondale, Dole, and Romney (and maybe Nixon and McCain). And, in every one of those cases, they were people who had previously held, or run for, either the presidency or vice-presidency.
I don’t think that will be true. Whoever the Democratic candidate is in 2020 will be every bit as vilified as Hillary Clinton was in 2016.
Barack Obama was accused of faking his own birth. John Kerry was accused of murdering babies. Al Gore was accused of working for the Chinese. Bill Clinton was accused of being a drug lord.
And it’s going to happen again in 2020. The only reason the Republicans haven’t started laying the groundwork already is they don’t know who their target is yet.
What’s going to hurt Trump in 2020 will be Trump. He’s not going to be able to run on empty promises again. He’s going to have to run on his record as President.
In 2016, Trump was opposed by the people who thought his wall was a dumb idea. In 2020, Trump will still be opposed by the people who think his wall is a dumb idea - and he’ll also be opposed by the people who think the wall is a great idea and are mad because he hasn’t built it. Sure, those people aren’t going to go out and vote for a Democrat. But they’ll hurt Trump by not voting for him again.
Doubtful.
“I wanted to build a really big YUGE wall, but the Democrats wouldn’t let me. Vote for me again, and we will really stick it to those filthy Democrats and Liberals!”
Trump Supporter - “Yeah!! Stupid snowflake cuck liberals!” *votes for Trump
I don’t think the hatred for Hillary is fully transferable. By 2016 Repubs had had 24 years to work up an insane loathing for her and I’d like to have a nickle for every voter I’ve encountered who said they pulled the trigger for Trump *only *because of Hillary. Anecdote, not evidence, to be sure, but unless Louis Farrakhan and Nancy Pelosi somehow conjoin into a single human entity, I can’t see oodles of Trump thumpers frothing at the mouth at the thought of the Dem candidate in '20.
Maybe. But he also ran on his ability to work with Democrats and get the deal done. Besides, his biggest failure is Mexico’s refusal to fund.
Yay, Eric’s off the hook!
White male evangelicals will never leave Trump. Their stated reason may be ‘he picks good judges and Justices,’ but the real reason is that they identify with his philandering–that’s what the Lord’s chosen alpha males do. Many of them will have bought abortions for their own mistresses.
White female evangelicals are a slightly different kettle of fish. This is the group that could potentially see some erosion around the true-to-Trump edges; these are people who might well go on telling their husbands that they have dutifully voted for Trump, but who might actually be doing…something else. Some of these women identify more with Melania than with Donald–and they’ll vote accordingly.
Yep. And this is where mail in ballots could hurt Dems. “Let me see your ballot honey, just want to make sure you filled it out correctly.”
True. But many homes, today, have printers that are also copiers. Just make a color-copy on similar paper stock, and show that one to hubby.
Of course if he seals it up and takes it to the post office, things get more complicated. In my state it’s possible to vote on Election Day even if you filled out an absentee ballot; you just have to check a box that says you don’t want the absentee one to count.
Right, but every town that has a Walmart in it also has a motel with a plethora of pornography available for your viewing pleasure for $4.99.
$4.99? I wish.
Gotta keep the prices low when you’re competing with the Walmart magazine section. :D. Actually meant to type $14.99.
“Fuck off hubby, it’s my vote, not a second cycle of yours!”
Because such upstanding Christians would never do such a thing as punish their wives for not agreeing with them, right?
Or even, “Don’t worry your little head, I already filled it out for you.”
Yeah, I’m not very optimistic. These people voted for Trump in the first place.
If he tells them what they want to hear, his track record will be completely forgotten. “It’s all the Democrats fault, we’ve made so much progress, we can’t stop now”. That’s all it would take IMHO.