Is there any hope for the Democrats in 2020?

Great Debates
1

Liberals are breathing a sigh of relief after Trump’s latest deranged tweets, along with revelations about his past showing him to be a white collar criminal.

But they should be tearing their hair out. HRC is only three points ahead in the latest poll, which has a margin of error of, um, three points.

In other words, Trump is clearly winning on the issues. If he weren’t such a blatantly racist, sexist, lying, cheating, uniformed, uneducated idiot, who compels huge portions of the electorate to vote against him regardless of the issues, he would win this election.

What does that say about the future of the US? Even with the Trump disaster, there is virtually no chance of the Dems getting a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, which means that the Republicans will again adopt a policy of obstruction, and oppose everything HRC tries to do, even if they privately agree that it would help the country. Which means that in 2020, they will again be able to point to the lack of progress in the US, and blame President Clinton for it. And the Fox News viewers and dittoheads will lap it up, as always.

So how hard will it be for the Republicans to run somebody who has spent four years honing Trump’s populist-idiot message, but who doesn’t have all of Trump’s history of lying, cheating, and chiseling; who doesn’t make racist or sexist tweets at 3 AM; and who has heard of the nuclear triad?

Coupled with their voter suppression techniques, I don’t see how they can fail to win in 2020, probably in a landslide, which also means that they will again be in a position to gerrymander the Congressional districts to maintain their majority in Congress for at least another ten years.

Is there any hope that I’m wrong?

2

I don’t really see how you can make this assumption. There are more than a handful of reasons to explain the point differential between Clinton and Trump, with personality and backstory being the primary culprits.

But even if you were granted that a majority of Americans clearly favor Trump’s positions (whatever those would be), why expect 2020 to have the same issues? Healthcare costs and illegal immigration will probably be rearing their heads like they have since, oh, the 1950s or even longer ago than that. But there’ll likely be a whole host of important topics that aren’t even on the radar just now. So I don’t see how any sort of policy trend can be extrapolated from this remarkable election cycle.

3

Way, way too early to make any sort of guess for 2020. The economy could continue to chug along and improve and she’d be easily re-elected. Or there could be major problems and she would have a big struggle. Who knows?

4

I think 2020 will be uphill, but not impossible, for the Democrats. Clinton could plausibly turn out to be a more popular president than she has been as a candidate (this seems to be her usual pattern), and there are some long-term trends that favor Democratic candidates, such as the country becoming less white, less religious, and more LGBT-friendly.

5

LOL

6

Further, the Trump voters aren’t going away. They’re going to either dominate the Republican primary once again or split off in a third party. No one can wrangle that crowd altogether.

7

I’m not too worried at this point. Agree with Fretful Porpentine that changing demographics will make a difference that the Republican party has always failed to appreciate. Moreover, the one thing I do expect to come out of this election, assuming Clinton wins, is a severely bifurcated Republican party. I don’t see the Establishments and the Alt Rights being able to come together ever again.

Now, all bets are off if we suffer another 9/11-type attack. Americans seem to lose their minds for a generation when that happens.

8

I’ve been hearing that since the tea party emerged, but haven’t seen it happen (on any sort large scale) so far. And even if it does, I wouldn’t expect the split to last for more than one or two Presidential election cycles before they realize they are handing the election to their opponents and try for a bigger tent approach again. Unless the same thing happens to the Democrats.

9

Assuming Trump loses, the Republican party will have to decide what to do about the alt-right (aka modern white supremacists). Utterly rejecting them is the only moral choice and the only way for the party to succeed in the long term.

10

The liberal hope is that Hillary’s low favorability is an issue with her personally, as opposed to Dem policy. Given high public approval for Obama and Bernie this seems likely. Hillary engenders strong negative reactions on the right, so one fear is they’ll do everything to bring her admin down and paint her as the cackling anti-Christ. It’ll be a lovely four years of innuendo and conspiracy theories.

11

Really? Gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement laws, courting the Tea Party, misdirecting the electorate… all are symptoms of the much larger underlying problem the Republicans have and have had for quite some time – and the rift gets bigger every election cycle. How can they have a bigger tent approach? That’s the ugly fundamental problem the symptoms belie.

Establishment Republicans know they must work with Democrats and independents of all stripes to get anything done and to popularize their “brand” again. Alt Right Republicans want to trash the entire system and start again… so long as it starts with a white, Christian, homophobic, xenophobic, socially conservative system. What common ground can there be?

12

[quote\ How can they have a bigger tent approach? That’s the ugly fundamental problem the symptoms belie. [/quote]
I know they have the ideological purity tests. But if the party splits, they other guys are getting into power (unless they happen to split at the same time). That might be the ideological shift - bigger tent and fewer RINO accusations. But with the increasingly polarized/idealogically similar voting districts, it may well be that the fear of losing the primary prevents that.

The common ground that if they don’t hold their nose and agree with the other side of their party sometimes, the Democrats (who many like even less) will win it. I also disagree with a bit of your view of establishment Republicans - many are far too afraid of being primaried these days to want to work with Democrats and accomplish things. There isn’t enough personal reward for the risk. Hopefully, it’s better than I think. Hopefully, it won’t be like the obstructionism of the first few months of Obama’s term (though I don’t think it’ll be as bad, myself).

But it’ll definitely take a change in rhetoric from the mainstream and them finding a way to draw the voters into their view via propaganda/radio shows and such. But inflammatory rhetoric gets better ratings, no matter which side you are on.

But if they split, I still don’t think it’ll keep more than a few years - then they either merge or the Democrats start absorbing those that they are willing to have in their tent. But they know that a proper split (new party and all), losing any significant portion of their voters/reps, means Democrats in power.

I’m not saying parties will never split or die. But I don’t expect it to happen in 2016-2017 (it’s been “any day now” for too many years for that). If I’m wrong it won’t be first time, nor will I weep over it (for sure). At least unless a party of some power and scarier than what we have now emerges.

13

They’re already together to stay, IMO. My point, which I see I almost completely omitted in the OP, is that the issues that Trump, the alt-right, and the religious right are for are just fine with the establishment Republicans. The establishment is anti-abortion, anti-LGBT rights, anti-immigration, anti-regulation, and anti-tax. The establishment will go along with any nominee who is anti-tax and anti-regulation; the religious right will go along with any candidate who is anti-abortion and anti-LGBT rights; and the alt-right will go along with any candidate who is anti-immigration. Combined with the total idiots who believe whatever Fox News says, that’s probably a majority, and will continue to be a majority, unless the percentage of traditional Dem voters who actually vote goes up – and the Republicans will do whatever they can to keep that from happening, with their voter suppression techniques.

The only reason Trump won’t win this year is because he has so completely alienated women. The only reason any prominent male establishment Republicans are saying anything negative about Trump is not because of his policies, but because of his crassness. They probably share most of his attitudes about women and minorities; they’re just too smart (i.e., their IQs are over 80) to say so in public.

And note that with very few exceptions, they are going to vote for him. The fact that he has clearly shown that he doesn’t have a clue about foreign, domestic, military, or economic policy doesn’t faze them in the least; the only thing they’re worried about are his racist and sexist tweets. Only the sanest establishment Republicans, like Paul Ryan, will even shake their head and roll their eyes when they vote for him. Many, like Gingrich, Giuliani, and Christie, are actively campaigning for him.

Rubio, Bush, Walker, etc. all saw that they were not far right enough this time around. They and others won’t make that mistake again. And I can’t imagine anyone coming up with anything on them or many other possible candidates, either from their past or because of an inability to control their tweets during the campaign, that could remotely do the damage that Trump has done to himself.

As far as Hillary’s numbers being so low because of a two-decade campaign against her, that doesn’t really matter. Draft-dodger Bush beat war-hero Kerry mainly on the basis of his perceived patriotism and courage, and it only took a few weeks to create the Swift Boat campaign out of nothing. The most damaging attacks on Hillary’s reputation are based on two “scandals” from the last eight years, one of which is completely bogus, and the other almost completely irrelevant. When you have Fox News and talk radio and Drudge continually pushing their BS, it won’t matter whom the Dems run, he will be perceived by half the country as an America-hating dupe of the UN, or whatever other narrative they spin.

14

TonySinclair, I think you’ve made good points, but they all assume a static electorate. I think those demographics are rapidly changing. If we accept as has been repeatedly said in this cycle that Trump’s greatest slice of support comes from older white guys, as they also did for Romney, then aren’t there going to be fewer and fewer of those guys as we go forward? And won’t younger, more secular, more diverse voters replace them?

One thing I do believe you have overlooked is the gender issue in this election. I hate to say it, but there are a lot of people in this country – both men and women – who aren’t truly comfortable with a woman as President. The women who resist are older, usually raised in traditional households and often religious. I know a few like this. They’re just not comfortable with Hillary. But when you drill down with them about why, it’s just a general discomfort they can’t quite articulate. Let the Democrats run a regular white guy, and you might see a massive difference. Consider that Obama beat Romney… and the issue becomes more clear.

I think gender discrimination is one of the most overlooked aspects of this election. I spend time on another forum where a surprisingly large percentage of the membership actually believe it was a mistake to give women the vote. That tells you something. The gender discrimination issue is sub rosa, not much discussed… but it’s there and I believe it’s quite a factor this year. As Fretful Porpentine pointed out upthread, Hillary is always more popular doing the job than running for the job. Always.

I’m not sure she will even try to be more than a one-term president. I hope she is, but I think if she perceives the work has a better chance to continue under younger white male steerage, she may give over. I hate that it’s the case, but it may be the case.

What the Dems will be fighting in 2020 is one of the same things they’re fighting in this election: People want a “change.” They don’t really care if it’s a good or smart change, they just think something should change. If Hillary can make some good things happen, it won’t be so much of a factor in 2020. The Congressional races are so very important this year.

15

I still don’t see how the GOP solves its problem that any candidate that can win the primary is too crazy to win the general.

16

The 12-year rule will probably hold true in 2020. It’s exceptionally hard for a party to hold on to the White House for more than three consecutive full terms.

17

I put the blame squarely on Fox News… Every single person I work with is conservative and gets their “news” from the only channel that tells them what they want to hear. They live in a complete bubble. They tell me I’m getting my news from “the other side”, the “liberal media” when I tell them I usually just get my news from news.google.com which just aggregates from tons of sources. I don’t get it. I’m an introspective person, and sometimes during political discussions I just find myself staring at my coworkers just wondering how their brain thinks the way it does and comes up with the conclusions that it does. And pointing to wikipedia or some other relatively reliable source doesn’t sway but solidifies their beliefs, which is even more infuriating. Hell, they thought the ‘Stand down!’ order in Benghazi came from Obama, but now Hillary gave the order even though it’s been thoroughly proven that no one gave the order. I just don’t get it. Sorry for the off-topic rant, but I can clearly see how 2020 could go to the republicans just because it doesn’t matter what is reality, Fox News et al has figured out how to keep these people watching.

18

I don’t have any smart analysis to base this on - but that’s my bet.
A single term from Clinton, then handover to Kaine who would run as essentially an “incumbent”.
Young, male, clever – and if it is a “good” presidency from Clinton then the right experience.

19

What 12-year rule? Since 1856, the start of the current two party system, the presidency changed parties and stayed that way for twelve years five times. In three of those five cases the incumbent party won a fourth term.

20

I’ve posted this before, but this is a good place to comment on what I think will and should happen. I think that by 2018 it will be obvious that the Republican establishment is going to give up on a clown car approach for the presidential election. The 2020 candidates will have begun to let it be known they are planning to run. I think it will be a more serious and diverse crowd than we had in 2008, 2012, and this year. My guess is it will include a lot of young up and comers. Governors like Brian Sandoval, Nikki Haley, and Matt Bevin. Senators like Ben Sasse and Tom Cotton. Paul Ryan will likely run as well. The only “crazy” that I really see giving it another go is Ted Cruz. I don’t think that the clown car types like Huckabee, Santorum, or Carson will be around to make the 2020 primary a laughing stock.

When it comes to Clinton, there will be the following issues. She will be 73, possibly have had another health issue, and will likely be facing someone 30 years younger than her. I don’t think the email issue in specific and the more general issues of her honesty and trustworthiness are going to go away any time soon. Four years is also plenty of time to have made some unpopular decisions as president that she can be hammered with in 2020. To balance that out, she would have the advantage of being an incumbent.

I think if things are looking at all dicey for her and it’s looking like the Republicans will run the serious people instead of the clown car she should do the following. After the 2018 midterms she should announce that in order to focus on the issues facing the country over the next two years instead of worrying about running a reelection campaign that she will not run again in 2020. I think that’s the best chance the Democrats have in that year.