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.
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.
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.”
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.
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 hasn’t.
It’s been pointed out already but disapproval of Trump is not the same as votes for the D on Election Day. It isn’t even a poll against a generic D. There’s 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.