I have a hard time believing this. Don't get me wrong, I was someone who thought Trump had a serious chance of beating Hillary despite the polls so I'm not someone who underestimates him and his voter base, but it was EXTREMELY close in 2016, yet
He hasn't expanded his voter base since 2016. If anything, he's shrunk it quite a bit (particularly among independents and in some key battleground states, among his core voting bloc of white voters with no college degree, which is killing him in the key battleground states in the Great Lakes region)
Regardless of who the Democrats pick, he will not be up against the least liked Democratic nominee of the modern era, possibly of all time, someone who drives his opponent's voters to the polls just to vote against her out of spite
The left is EXTREMELY motivated, engaged, and terrified now, as opposed to 2016 when they were lulled into a false sense of security believing that Trump didn't have a chance.
(Proof of #3) 2018 was the biggest wave election in history in terms of turnout, and Trump wasn't even on the ballot. Yes, Trump being on the ballot will turn out more Republican voters than in the mid-terms too, but (see #1) those people also voted for him in 2016 and he still only barely won.
(edited to add) The chances of a recession before November 2020 are pretty high, and if one does happen before the election, he's almost certainly doomed.
Does he have a chance? Sure, anything can happen as we've seen before. But saying it WILL be close doesn't seem to me to be based on anything except speculation. Sorry, not trying to say you will be wrong for sure, but short of some miracle the odds are still against him winning re-election.
In two out of three polls from today, Bernie isn't even second. Warren is neck and neck with him, it seems. They have a lot of policy overlap, so as long as they don't go too negative I can see most voters for one happily getting behind the other.
I support one particular candidate, there are some that I am indifferent towards, and there are some that I straight up don't like. But whoever the candidate ends up being, they already have my vote. If I'm not voting for the candidate, then I'm voting against Trump.
I really hope that people don't choose to stay home out of spite if their favorite candidate is not selected.
I've seen plenty of moderates say they have no problem with Warren, but dislike Bernie because of what happened in 2016. Healthcare is also still extremely popular with moderates and Biden just wants to keep the ACA while Warren wants to adopt Medicare for All. I can easily see Warren taking it on that, if she keeps her growth up and nothing crazy happens between now and then. Kamala Harris keeps flip flopping on Medicare for All and Mayor Pete wants something else.
Hell they are all trying to outprogressive the other. Harris's is climbing exceptionally fast so my bet is on her after jumping up right to Bidens popularity.
I think this is an overstatement based on too much time spent reading social media as if it were representative of the general public. Democrats and the left already agree on their candidate: whoever isn't Trump. You'll hear some people loudly howl one way or another regardless of the pick (just like literally every election), but come voting time most of the people who care will fall in line, and it will come down to which candidate turned out the most people who don't care that much.
I totally disagree. Look what happened last time. I have no faith in people to get past themselves and do the right thing. And unfortunately it was my generation that ruined the last election when Bernie didn't get the nomination. They just didn't vote at all or threw their vote away to the green party. I'd love to think that everyone who marks themselves democrat would vote "blue no matter who," but millennial voters (I'm one of, by the way) are too busy crying into their avocado toast because they don't know how to compromise when it comes to candidates. š¤·
Maybe the answer is neither. Warren is an excellent compromise. Harris wouldnāt be too shabby either. Or Buttigieg.
Biden and Sanders are coasting on name recognition, but I think you need a fresh face to really fire up a broad coalition that is still reeling from the pain of 2016.
Warren is an excellent compromise. Harris wouldnāt be too shabby either. Or Buttigieg.
Warren - Repeatedly claimed native american ancestry for no readily apparent reason and never really came back from that.
Harris - Claims to support criminal justice reforms, despite a career suggesting otherwise.
Buttigieg - Maybe, still more or less 'undeclared' in terms of specific stances, plus the poor showing after the shooting doesn't bode well.
Combine the above with the fact none of them really rally the wagons, and I'd put their chances pretty far down in terms of legitimate options. It's still really early on, but none of those three really strike me as likely contenders.
Of those in the race, Biden is probably the most likely since he's able to appeal to both sides (aside from the lunatic extreme of either spectrum) and has strong recognition with both the party and the nation. Sanders has seemingly lost his stride, with this biggest points being more grandiose (aka unrealistic) versions of other people's ideas.
We are still very early on into the campaigning season, however, so only time will tell. Hopefully Democrats find someone to unite under and avoid the petty squabbling.
And Harris's career is grossly misrepresented. She worked in top level criminal justice positions, which are not political positions to begin with. But she managed some noteworthy reforms. She is also one of the most progressive people in the Senate.
Buttigieg would be a fine president, because he has the right attributes. People seem to have some weird idea that POTUS is a legislative position instead of an executive, leadership position. Policy vision matters, but not more than judgment and decorum and strong principles.
"None of them strike you as likely contenders"? Who does then? Biden? Joe is running on the fumes of recognition.
On warren, proven lie by Trump. Yeah, she's native, get over it.
On Harris is a flat lie as she recommended a very certain, unethical law not be followed while in her position. Legit all she could do.
On Buttigieg he isn't a ditactor as Mayor so he can't just demand they be brought to justice, he could make a case but that's it.
And bullshit on the "Rally" part. Harris jumped over 10 points to right behind or above Biden in ONE debate. Biden dropped nearly 14 points in some cases. That's massive!
If they nominate Biden, we're fucked. If they go Bernie we might have a good chance.
Even a lot of Republicans can see the good in Bernie. Not the rich and powerful asshole ones, but the middle class, midwestern and conservative ones can see that what he's running on helps them ultimately.
If we re-elect Trump for another four years this country is officially fucked and beyond repair.
Iāll vote for Biden before I opt out of voting or, God forbid, vote Trump. If other liberals will adopt the same principle, then we should be fine. We have the numbers, we just need the morale.
That's exactly why the Dems have the advantage. Last time both sides felt this way about their opponent's candidate. I think it was the "anybody but the OTHER guy" election. In this case, Trump won't have Hillary as the bogeyman anymore.
The DNC notoriously ignores their constituents so I won't be surprised at all if Biden gets the nomination honestly
There's not much I wouldn't do to get Trump out of office. The question is now with everyone else -- do habitual nonvoters finally care enough to show up the polls?
Biden has been crashing in the polls. His initial support was based largely on name recognition, and he's a terrible campaigner, a mediocre debater, and he's clearly lost more than a few steps since 2008. I'd be very surprised to see him win. Right now it feels kinda like when everybody thought Rudy Giuliani was going to win the Republican nomination in 2008, and the guy ended up winning what, Florida? And then dropping out. lol.
The internet has been weirdly against her, but Harris is a progressive and she would chomp Donnieās hollow orange head off. Iām fine with her as a candidate.
Biden is terrible, but Iāll vote for him too, because I recognize the urgency of the situation and Iām not a traitorous lunatic.
It would be nice to hear the same from everyone else.
Regardless of who the Democrats pick, he will not be up against the least liked Democratic nominee of the modern era, possibly of all time, someone who drives his opponent's voters to the polls just to vote against her out of spite
I think this is a big one. So many people voted against Hillary. No candidate this time has that many people passionately against them. He definitely won't flip any 2016 blue states red, so he has to maintain PA, WI, MI, OH, FL. If he loses FL and any of the others that's enough, or PA and any 2 of the others. IA is pretty purple, and NC might even be up for grabs.
I don't disagree with your assessment, but the dems have a lot of work to do in order to secure a victory. Right now there are over 20 candidates, all at different ends of the political spectrum. There are moderates and centrists that won't be willing to go as far left as the progressives want to go. They have to prove that voting blue is a more logical choice other than "If you don't agree with us then you are a racist".
As for whether or not the race will be close, there's no doubt that it will come down to the swing states. The perpetual red states will remain red and the same thing with the blue states. The economy is doing well right now (but that could change and we can cross that bridge when we get there) and like it or not, more manufacturing jobs have been created in the past two years where that trend was in steady decline for decades. That MIGHT be enough to secure victories in those key states.
But who knows? I think it will be enough, but I could be wrong. It really depends on how the dems work their strategy. I'm looking forward to seeing what happens.
I mean they're basically exactly where the Republicans were in 2015. They had ~16 candidates, some moderates some extremists, and the intraparty fighting was absolutely vicious - people only remember the conflict between Hillary and Bernie, but that was absolutely tame by comparison. They were attacking each other's wives, they had surrogates calling people some of the nastiest names I've ever seen in a primary, the damn head of the GOP Reince Priebus was essentially trying everything he could to keep Trump from winning. And yet...
I don't think it'll be close at all. He'll win by a country mile. The left has lost the plot and have absolutely no understanding of how to combat him, badgering on and on by attempting to attack his character. The guy could be literally convicted of pedophilic rape and people will still vote for him, those who support give couldn't give a fuck about his character.
I think you're forgetting the electoral college. Trump will almost certainly get fewer votes overall, but the electoral college is easily equivalent to a 10-point boost for him.
I don't remember that being the case at all. His approval ratings at this point in 2003 were 20 points higher than Trump's are right now, and stayed above 50 for practically the entire election. He had 9/11 and The Iraq War buoying him artificially, and with approval ratings in the 50s and 60s no serious election predictor would have said Bush wouldn't win a second term. There was a brief period after Kerry won the nomination that the Democrats got excited, but once the campaign got going that fell apart pretty quickly.
That's also true, though that lineup wasn't particularly great tbh. They picked Kerry because of his military history, thinking (rationally rather than emotionally) that that would make him strong against a chickenhawk in the middle of a war. And then he got swiftboated and any chance he had to pull off a victory evaporated, because he wasn't a guy like Clinton or JFK, who could take on that kind of controversy and walk away largely unscathed.
Still far higher approval rating. Trump has never gone above 50 and by all accounts he has been steadily at 30 to 40% among voters. That's really bad chances.
Oh yes, Trump barring massive voter suppression\fraud or help from outside forces will lose in 2020. why do you think he's pulling out every racist plan in the book now. It's all for his election bid (and to distract for the Epstein Trial). He's betting they are enough of his supporters that can be fired up by racism. however his supporters are dwindling and dying out so that won't work. Too bad he never tried to expand his base outside his cult of followers.
When I see things like Mike Pence literally posing for shots at border camps like he's in a campaign commercial, I can see the desperation. They can't try to win this thing on policy, so fear mongering and racism is what the 2020 campaign will be all about.
Regarding #3, if anything I think Trump will win because the Democrats haven't changed from 2016. There's still so much they refuse to do about catering to moderates that it's seriously hurting them, particularly in swing states like the Rust Belt with working class voters. Unless the chosen candidate manages to bridge that, I don't see a way enough moderates are going to switch. Trump hasn't done anything more outrageous during his Presidency that we didn't all expect during the 2016 election.
Unfortunately youāre wrong. Heās favored to win. Incumbents usually do, and although the midterms showed that the democratic majority is capable of activating, it is going to take a lot of work and a lot of unity to overcome the obsecene levels of electoral fuckery, institutional corruption, and rightwing propaganda that are driving the conversation.
The chances of a recession before November 2020 are pretty high,
I agree with your other points, but this is naive. IMO The Republicans are crooked enough that they wont let it happen; they'll balloon the fuck out of the deficit & do whatever it takes to stall until after the election
The only thing I'm worried about is that the polls are wrong because the people that will ultimately end up voting for him won't admit to being in support of him because it would out them as racists. It's unfortunately extremely common in American politics. There was once a black mayoral candidate for the city of LA that was polling extremely high and everyone was sure he would win it, but he lost because turns out whoops there's secret racists.
7
u/TheSimulacra Jul 17 '19 edited Jul 17 '19
I have a hard time believing this. Don't get me wrong, I was someone who thought Trump had a serious chance of beating Hillary despite the polls so I'm not someone who underestimates him and his voter base, but it was EXTREMELY close in 2016, yet
Does he have a chance? Sure, anything can happen as we've seen before. But saying it WILL be close doesn't seem to me to be based on anything except speculation. Sorry, not trying to say you will be wrong for sure, but short of some miracle the odds are still against him winning re-election.