And this is before factoring in some potentially dark clouds on the economic horizon:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”?
Agreed, generally. But voting for someone like Trump is despicable . And that King fellow.
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.
This. Add in Roy Moore.
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 can also use polls like this: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/441103-poll-55-say-they-wouldnt-vote-for-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.
Well ya, but how does Trump stack up one-on-one against herpes?
I betcha he wins that matchup!
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.
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.
Why would his popularity need to “dip”?
Because our faith in a certain segment of humanity (~62,984,825) could use a modicum of restoration.