Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Half of what you said about the Democratic Party is opinion.
And honestly, I think Andrew Cuomo would have a shot nationally (laugh if you want, I stand behind this statement)
They are going broke and may not even be able to fund all their races next year. That is a fact. It is also a fact that not many White People still vote Democrat. Those two things do massive damage to the party.
Not really. He actually has higher approval ratings then when he won the election. Plus the Democrats arent a major party anymore. They have completely collapsed. Even if they would somehow get their affairs in order and then scrounge up enough money to actually run a candidate who are they going to run? No one they have now is better then Hillary Clinton.
At the end of the day candidates matter.
Clinton was loathed by 100% of the right, a sizeable chunk of the middle and even a small chunk of the left. These groups..especially the right would vote for the devil himself over clinton. I have an aunt who voted democrat for president in every election since she could vote (except Reagan in 1984 only) and she just couldn't bring herself to vote for Clinton. Trump will not have that advantage in 2016. Trump also can't run on "Her e-mails" "Crooked Hillary" "Benghazi" or its the fault of my predecessor.
Me personally think a mid-western presidential candidate (sen. brown-oh, Sen-Klouchbar mn, gov-hickenlooper CO gov Bullock-mt) with a coastal progressive (Sen harris CA, Sen Warren MA, LA-mayor whose name escapes me, gov Cuomo NY) would make a solid ticket and untie the factions (at least on paper). The coastal progressive should have the #2 spot IMO
He'll lose them by even more next time. You guys don't get it. He is losing support every day he governs, not gaining it
How silly. We already addressed who you guys have been 100% wrong about Trump's support since 2015.
BTW the topic is about the Democrat's chances. You just demonstrated, yet again, exactly why the Democrat party is facing even bigger losses in 2018 & 2020. Bigly.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,552 posts, read 16,542,682 times
Reputation: 6039
Quote:
Originally Posted by nsgjdennis
They are going broke and may not even be able to fund all their races next year. That is a fact. It is also a fact that not many White People still vote Democrat. Those two things do massive damage to the party.
Lets clarify some things here.
The DNC is broke, not Democrats in general. Democrats tend to support the candidates themselves and not the party, that has been true for decades on the national level.
It takes 2 seconds of searching on Opensecrets to see that plenty of Democrats have warchests and many of them like Warren are going to spend it to help get other Democrats elected.
it doesnt matter how much he focused on it, He was still more focused on it than Clinton, which was indeed your point.
Also, New Hampshire was always in play.
You judge this by personal visits? That isn't the campaign that Clinton ran. We were told, maybe even by you, that Hillary had a big ground game that Trump couldn't match.
So you can't tell us how much Clinton focused on each state unless you are saying the much ballyhooed ground game was nothing but smoke. Your choice.
I'd say there's a very good chance MN is going to be Red in 2020.
NH is definitely up for grabs. It's leaning Red
Virginia is unreliable for Democrats. It's leaning Blue but a lot can change in NoVa after 4 years of total control by the GOP.
IMO, Trump could have taken MN if he had tried.
That's 27 more electoral votes the Democrats could easily lose in 2020. They have nowhere to make that back up. They have lost the industrial mid-west for good with their war against the working class. They won't get it back.
Kind of sounds like the Clinton people before the election last year. No problem, it's a lock. And we know how that turned out. Lots of time to go before the 2020 election. If Trump is serious about running again, he needs to get to work on expanding his base. Because he just might have a primary problem if he isn't careful
The Democrats are far too extreme and their progressive policies are a disaster for the middle class, not to mention the fact that they have no bench of moderate Democrats who aren't eligible for Medicare or SS age-wise.
They're all as extreme as Hillary, Obama, Reid, Schumer, Warren & Pelosi are.
It’s hard to make a case that 2020 is a lock for Trump and/or the GOP, given that:
1. He’s the least popular President at this point in office since the advent of polling 67 years ago.
2. The base groups that the GOP overly depends upon (non-college non-Hispanic whites and white evangelicals) make up less of total registered voters nationally and in every state with each POTUS election due to demographic change.
3. Unless Trump can expand his appeal beyond his base, and he has shown no intention of even trying, he must depend on those same core groups of support. With universally fewer voters in those groups with the passage of time just due to demographics, he’ll have to increase either voting percentage or turnout in those groups just to keep up with 2016. Unless the coalition expands, over the course of time, chances of victory depends more on more on Democratic leaning groups not showing up, because eventually the base isn’t large enough to win by either turnout or percentage on its own without Democratic leaning voters staying home.
4. Assuming the same turnout and voting percentages as 2016, just the projected decline in white non-college vote registration would be enough to flip Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin and thus the election. Without expanding the base, it gets tougher winning with the current coalition with each 4 year cycle.
Not to say that that is a lock to happen, but it does illustrate why the GOP autopsy of the 2012 election focused on the necessity of expanding the base of the Party in growing portions of the electorate.
Quote:
Therefore, all else equal, Trump or another Republican candidate will have to continue to increase white working-class margins or white working-class turnout (or both) to be successful in future cycles. But that will be a difficult task, to say the least, given just how high support from that population was for Trump in 2016.
Last edited by Bureaucat; 12-03-2017 at 05:03 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
