I’m really curious what you think “hard left” looks like. As far as I can see, the best America can muster is a slightly left-of-center candidate; many of the dems are centrist or center-right. You may not agree with political compass, but I throw it out as a starter: they have everyone but Sanders and Crazy Gabbard as right of center; Warren is quite close to center, and O’Rourke and Castro are well to the right.
I agree. Forget the farmers. But I’m really interested in your thoughts on how a “severe economic downturn” would doom FPT*. Would it turn some Trumpniks against him? Or bring out to the polls people who have not voted in the past?
You’ve been saying for a long time that a change for the worse in the economy will be FPT’s* downfall. I tend to agree, but I can’t see specifically how it would play out. (My former work colleagues will tell you I’m aggravatingly literal-minded and detail oriented.) Look in your crystal ball and spell out how it COULD happen without DJT being able to squirm out from under the blame.
Yep. Consider California as having, say 30,000,000 eligible voters. 29,999,951 vote for the Democratic candidate. EVERY OTHER STATE has a voter turnout of 3. The America-hating fuckstick wins each of those by 2 votes to 1. Popular vote is 30,000,000 to 147. Electoral vote count is 483-55 in favor of the America-hating fuckstick.
I think that it really depends on how severe and sudden the downturn is, and if you’re asking whether I believe we need a recession to remove this guy, my answer is unfortunately yes. I think that is our best chance to get him out of power. I think the average voter is too confused and ignorant to understand even blatant corruption and they can’t find Ukraine and Syria on a map. The only sure way that the country turns on him is if they begin to feel the direct consequences of his policies.
So if there’s a significant downturn in the economy, sure, he’ll still have his supporters, but they want be as enthusiastically behind him. Those who want him out of power will be more motivated to show up at the polls. That’s what it comes down to.
Remember that to half the country “not throwing kids in cages” and “not conspiring with an enemy nation to steal a second election” are considered hard-left positions.
Too late to edit: In a world where batshit insane candidates like Paul Ryan and Ted Cruz are considered “moderates,” the ability to make distinctions between the positions on those on the left is clearly lost. By today’s standards, Ronald Reagan would be a hard left liberal. The Overton Window has moved so far to the right it’s now on a house in another neighborhood.
Full disclosure: I haven’t voted yet - because I honestly don’t know. 2020 will be hard to predict, but my prediction is that if the economy is still this good next year, Jesus could run as a Democrat and Trump will find a way to pull off a squeaker. If the economy totally tanks, Antonio Brown or Vontaze Burfict could run as a Democrat and win.
I think nothing matters, no issue matters, economy does not matter, foreign policy does not matter. The only things that matters are the tribes, and whoever can get their tribe out to vote is going to win. Since Republicans always vote, the only thing that matters is will Democrats show up? If they do, he loses and if they don’t, he wins.
Alas, I believe you are correct. The economy could slide into a new depression and FPT* would not be blamed by any of his fans. If they all wound up broke and living on the street, they would still sing his praises and blame everyone but him. Sad but true.
I agree, Dems must show up to vote. But the Republicans are going to do everything they can, legal and illegal, to either keep them from voting or keep their votes from counting. And there’s still the Electoral College. It looks grim. Another five years of… ohgod…
I think, and have always thought, that Trump’s real base - or his floor - is around 20-30%. By that I mean, it doesn’t matter what happens to the economy, or what he does in office: they’re going to show up and vote for the sonofabitch because God wants them to, or because it’s important to stick it to brown people, or because they want oligarchy - or maybe he’s just their idea of a good luck charm. Whatever. I think that the number of people who would vote for Trump under the absolute worst of circumstances is probably around 27%, possibly as high as 30%, or in the low 20s if I’m overestimating.
There’s probably another 10-15% that would really, really like to vote for Trump, and they will unless they have a really good reason not to. And I never felt like Mueller’s investigation into collusion with Russia was that reason. I’m not sure that the quid pro quo is either. In both cases, some people in this softer tier of Trump support would acknowledge that the optics are bad, but they still don’t have a reason not to vote for him on a personal level. This is really not much worse than say some of the most outrageous shit he says on twitter or at his pressers. Some people in this softer tier might find this distasteful, but their tax rates are still low, he’s still gettin’ stuff done on the border, and giving Dems hell.
The difference between the 20-30% who will support him no matter what and that second 15% is that for that softer tier of Trump voters, results matter. Their lives matter. Their welfare matters. And they, like most other voters, will want to hold someone accountable. Now some within this softer tier - those who are closer along the spectrum to those diehards - will stick with the president through an awful lot. But as you get further away from his core, there will be lines of demarcation.
I do believe that Trump has already screwed himself beyond repair with that very small percentage of independents and centrists who frequently switch between parties - I think he’s lost them for good, and this will have an impact in places like Pennsylvania, and perhaps in Florida and Ohio, too. But for Trump’s real support (which now probably stands at around 42%) to crack, the only thing that’ll do it is the economy. And even if they bail on Trump, they won’t necessarily vote for a Democrat. What I’m saying is that you’d just have a very bad turnout. Republicans in GOP-controlled states may try to compensate for that by putting conservative ballot initiatives, but that will only go so far. I think that when Trump tanks, he’ll tank hard, and so will his party. It’s just a question of when that’ll happen, and more importantly, how much damage will be sustained by then.
Remember back when getting college students to vote and care about government was a *good thing? * :dubious:
But the Republicans don’t want those uppity, librul, edumacated stoo-dunts out there telling their elders and betters how to run this here country. College is a bad influence-- it just makes them too big for their britches.
I think this is exactly what will happen. Add in aggressive and shameless Republican tactics to obstruct voting. A dose of Democratic in-fighting and spoiler candidates (who may yet appear). Capped off with Democrats playing mostly by the rules. (Not that I think the Dems should turn into lawless thugs.) Result: Four. More. Years.
God only knows what state the country will be in by then…
Let’s hope. Unfortunately, some suburbs are worth more than others. One of the highest value ones, the ‘burbs of Milwaukee, haven’t shown much sign of blueness, as far as I’m aware. Milwaukee overall is amazingly segregated, and Trump’s messaging plays quite well around there even among more educated whites.
