I agree that’s the way it should be but it’s not reality. Trump supporters do not believe that way. Only evidence I need is my Thanksgiving week with a family of Trump supporters reciting FoxNews talking points. The reason they love Trump is because they feel that liberals are an existential threat to their culture and way of life and Trump is the only one who has the ability to get away with what needs to be done to reverse the way they believe life has changed in the past 20 years. My grandfather said he would disown anyone in his family who voted for Hillary. I appreciate your opinion here and I truly believe that in their heart they don’t want to be bad hateful people. However you are naive about the FoxNews poison that has completely altered their top of mind stream of thought. Don’t believe me... go ask someone in a MAGA hat this question “Do you believe liberals are an existential threat to our country?” And see what kind of answer you get. On policy you can’t be more wrong about policies that hurt those not like them. Also ask someone with a MAGA hat on how they feel about someone who has to use food stamps. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard “the story” about the fat black lady at the grocery store buying lobster tails with food stamps. I’ve heard that story more than a dozen times. Trump voters absolutely support policies that will hurt liberals knowingly. Then they’ll go work the food pantry at their church at the same time. Again they mostly want to be good people but they have poison in their veins from their politics.
More wonderful than a fictional cartoon character and a go no where third party candidate? That's a hard sell. So the honorable old fool?
I get it bud …. I didn't vote for your guy so no matter what , I was wrong - according to no one but you.
The opposite, you took the cheap, selfish way out and wrote in Mickey Mouse instead of settling like every human has to.
You settle. I refuse to. If more people would support someone other than the D or R …. the two parties wouldn't have a stranglehold on our political system.
The outcome is the same, you just get to pat yourself on the back. I would love a third party to emerge, but that takes some serious, coordinated effort. How about the Libertarian Party or Green Party actually build their respective coalitions in congress or at the state level instead of sending a bunch of joke presidential candidates.
The D or R attached to a candidates name doesn't make the man (or woman). His or her actions , ethics and morals speak for themselves.
This is an incorrect way of evaluating the situation. The reason why the two party system is all we have now is because of the expanded powers of the presidency given over by Congress. Everyone should build coalitions to support independent Congressional candidates but not yet for the presidency. The Republican Party under Trump has consolidated too much power and dark money wealth to be naive in thinking a third party does anything but hurt Democracy by splitting the votes among the non Trump cult voters. Supporting a third party presidential candidate at this point in our nations history is ignorance and is a vote for Trump in the end. If Biden or whoever beat Trump, and sweeping corruption legislation is passed to allow for better infrastructure around controlling the powers of the presidency, I think forming healthy third parties would then be a healthy progression, but right now it would be democratic malpractice.
This is a simple question to answer. I hate to say it, but James Carville had it right. "It's the economy, stupid". The 3 Democrat nominees that have won the Presidency in my lifetime are: Jimmy Carter Bill Clinton Barack Obama (I throw Carter out as an aberration that occurred after Watergate and the country's revulsion to the Nixon years. His job performance was so weak he got steamrolled by Reagan in his attempt at a 2nd term.) That leaves Clinton and Obama. Both were high charisma candidates that were moderate and for the most part governed as moderates too. They also shared one other trait...they were elected in an economic downturn. And even in the case of B. Clinton and Obama, it took weird circumstances to get them elected. In '92 (a 3rd party candidate) running helped split the conservative vote and got Clinton elected. And in Obama's case, being the first black candidate running against a weak opponent coming off 8 years of an unpopular President certainly helped his cause. Also both both were competent enough in their first terms in one important factor they were given a 2nd term. Unless Trump does something monumentally stupid or the economy tanks in the next 10 months....he's getting a 2nd term. History proves it.
Obama’s 2008 win was big enough to gain a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. I get it that W was hated by pretty much everyone but I don’t think that should discount how excited the electorate was for his brand of Change. The “Yes we Can” and Hope slogans were pretty big unifying campaign master strokes. His 2012 re-election is a different story and different political environment cultivated by a very powerful libertarian funded backlash. To your sentiment though yes... it should be very very hard for Trump to lose in Nov because of the economy. Just look at what happened the past month with a good jobs report, the Holidays starting, and Trump avoiding making the news with doing something stupid like praising nazis. His approval rating ticked up to his near ceiling. Of course his ceiling is still a historic low though which tells you everything you need to know. A. No he’s never going to be a popular president B. His base isn’t going anywhere and can get him elected IF Dems don’t turnout their base Trumps ceiling is where he was essentially on Election Day when Hillary was up by 3 points and she won the popular vote by 3 points. Yesterday I saw Biden was up by around 4 points. So basically nothing has changed, and yes Trump can win again if he goes into Nov with the same atmosphere, he continues to hold support with white blue collar workers in the rust belt, and the Dem fails to energize its base. There’s very little reason for each side to feel like they have it in the bag. Also- things like this obviously help Trump as well. We cannot discount the affect of court rulings in his favor to discourage voting.
The American Electorate strongly favor the Presidential incumbent. The Criminal in Chief should be favored to be re-elected. But There appears to be a strong disconnect between the strength of the economy and the President's favorability rating. One national poll went as far stating that more than 50+ of the voters will not vote for Trump in 2020. The electoral math is different though. The Criminal in Chief's re-election strategy may get down to getting a strong turnout for his base (maybe even stronger than normal) and a weak turnout of the Democrat base (Hillary effect), especially in the 6+ swing states. The 2018 off-year Congressional elections was a blue tsunami. The Democrats had a once in a generation turnout in an off-year, which was primarily driven by the Criminal in Chief. I see no reason for that to change in 2020. This all leads to the 2020 Presidential election as a tossup.
And none of that necessarily translates into legislation because the thing you are missing.... is that this third party candidate will still need to convince Ds and Rs to support something. An honorable old fool maybe a great person but a terrible president. Like I implied, third parties need to figure out if they want to be a serious or continually trot out go no where candidates.
Where and when did I say I was a "Dem"? You laugh when I state what I think independents will do, yet with your very next sentence you proceed to tell us what independents will do. Head-scratcher. FYI, I am independent. In any case, independents swung for an alt-right or "fringe" candidate in Trump and you don't think they would swing wide left? He won the Rust Belt with his stance on trade/China. The populist left candidates are even FURTHER to the right on trade/China than Trump. As well, you think any moderate Dem, if they had to choose between a Bernie/Warren/Yang and Trump, would either choose Trump or not vote at all with the spectre of Trump winning re-election? Hell no that ain't happening.
Clinton ran as an economic populist and Obama ran as a generational change agent (both cashed in on popular culture/celebrity status to some degree, but they were decidedly left-of-center in their primaries, Obama significantly so). They both got elected on left leaning promises, and then promptly governed from the center. Your assessment of 92 is correct, your assessment of 08 is way off. Obama's race was a huge liability and question mark. Everyone was unsure if America was "ready" for a black president until the votes were counted. John McCain had very high favorability ratings and was one of the most nationally popular Republicans of the prior 10 years. About the only thing you have correct here is that Bush's trash can fire of a Presidency was a huge factor in putting Obama in office. This would normally be true, but we're in historically unprecedented times economically. GDP, the Stock market, and employment are all at record highs, but people are dying early, going broke (despite working more), and unable to retire. The same problems that got Trump elected in 2016 still exist, and in many cases are actually worse. Re-election is far from assured. It's really up to the Democrats to decide whether they want 4 more years of Trump. Right now I'd say it's a coin flip.
He has done numerous things that are monumentally stupid - like Tariffs for instance - I think he is done, and his crass behavior and basically ignorant policies will have cost him. Candidate DOES matter though. Unfortunately there are still those that won't vote for a woman, or a gay man - and the main candidate Biden is prone to making stupid mistakes. DD
I agree with the 1st part but there are more than a minuscule amount of people who take pleasure in the other losing. It's about 40% of the nation.
More on the Obama-Trump voters. Something like 5 million voters. Brian Leiter comments: More than five million voters supported Obama in 2012 and Trump in 2016 Who are they? Not racists, obviously (hint: racists don't vote for Black people for President). Heavily union members, who felt economically vulnerable, and were less supportive of affirmative action than those who voted Democratic in both 2012 and 2016, but more supportive of it than those who voted Republican in both those elections. https://leiterreports.typepad.com/b...upported-obama-in-2012-and-trump-in-2016.html commenting on this study: https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/n...gBb0PW3jxteZZi9uLlaxJ9DsGzGdwq1DZojkynpQtPVVQ
Just don't agree with this. You put Bernie Sanders out there against Trump, and Trump wins in a landslide. About 10% of the country is fringe left, 10% fringe right (and from what I can tell Trump is not "alt-right" or "fringe right".... I'm not sure he falls in any specific spot on the political spectrum...), the rest of the country is mostly moderate. Sure, they have different opinions about things that move left and right of center, but they're not on the fringes. I don't believe moderates/independents will vote for Bernie, and minorities do not back Warren or Buttigieg. So that basically leaves Joe Biden who has his own issues (and also happens to be the front runner). American's were tired of the same old politician (Clinton, Bush, Obama) and they decided to put someone in that was an outsider (Trump). If they are now regretting that choice, I don't think they swing to Bernie or even Warren (she has tacked pretty far left during the primary), but I can see them feeling safe putting Biden in office. For the Dems, from what I can tell Bernie will be the worst possible candidate to run against Trump.
It sounds like your business owners are also the problem. Send them to jail for tax evasion and hiring illegals, and you'll see demand dry up.
Dems need a moderate candidate and a liberal VP. And more importantly, they need a platform that has a vision for lower-middle class Americans on how to solve their financial distress - that's not easy. People are worried about their economic outlook - even in this strong economy many are not doing well. Dems need to reach out to these folks especially in the rust belt and offer something visionary and yet practical.
