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.
If the economy tanks between now and Nov 4 2020. I think trump is finished. His base in the midwest will be the very first to receive pink slips from employers.
There will be some ups and downs between now and Nov 2020, given that how that the economy works.
But there should be no major market meltdowns between Aug-Nov 2020, when it will still be fresh in the voter's minds. If it is climbing steadily, the job numbers are up and consumer confidence index is good, people will rather vote him in once more than take a chance on someone new.
1) Not enough strong candidates to challenge him. Trump is not the kind of President I want. I voted against him and I get disgusted just looking at him. However, until a really strong challenger comes up, that might play a role in him winning again. He won not because he was the best man for the job. He won because Hilary Clinton wasn't very good either.
What to you is a strong challenger? I think Biden and Bernie are the strongest of the bunch before we go into the debate circuit myself and they are the strongest and can beat Trump popularly. Electorally, remains to be seen. The problem I see is similar to the 2012 Republican nominations, the Democratic Party is at a crossroads. Similar to the TEA Party in the 2010 midterms, the Progressives had a good number of gains for formerly Republican seats going Democrat (not all though, like Sinema winning McCain's seat in the US Senate.) Do they stay Clinton-crat or go more Progessive like the Bernie-crats? Even Biden in a way is trying to play all the Democratic bases.
Quote:
2) Culture war. The USA has always been divided. We never really needed someone to sow seeds of division. We're already there. However, there are many people who stick with Trump because it's "Trump versus the World" or "Trump supporters vs The rest of the world". I thought that Trump saying bigoted things and being very crass would cost him. Actually, some people vote for him BECAUSE he is like this. Many people see it as "he sticks it to the PC crowd". Some people see Trump as a reflection of themselves and see him in themselves. Some see Trump as "he says what alot of people are thinking".
The problem I see is the US divided under Obama. A lot of it was policy based, some was bigots (sexists, racists, nationalists, etc.) The issue I see is that in white America, it nearly is taboo to check those with bigotted views. I'm a white male so whether I say bigots are bad or there is no problem, I **** off either group. The main reason this is is because most people are in assimilated groups. It is rare you have truly multi-culture and diverse thought in communities.
Quote:
3) Low voter turnout. Trump didn't get the popular vote but he won the election. Some voters will despair at their choice of candidates and stay home.
I can see this if there isn't a strong Democrat nominee. I think for the most part unless Clinton runs again or we have a Kerry-level character assassination attempt, the Democrat will win the popular vote. Whether they win the swing states, is another story. I don't see Trump winning the popular vote at all.
Quote:
Trump won't win because he's the best man for the job or because they economy is better. There are many who have just given up. Work force participation has not changed much (it's alot lower than in 2004). Blacks are the one group who have seen their rate of EMPLOYMENT drop since 2018. Trump might win beacause many people have an "Us vs the rest of the world" attitude. It is the culture war.
We can't talk about the LFPR, it isn't a number that shows that the economy and employment is improving under Trump. Many of the same people who talk Trump said the numbers were fake under Obama. I can tell you, little changed in that aspect though maybe more people doing gigs and enjoying "being their own boss" (though not really.)
Because this country is chock full of DEPLORABLES. So yes, he likely will win a second term.
^^^ And this is an example of #4 in my OP - the venom that liberals continually spew at anyone who won't fall in line behind the Democrat agenda. People are totally turned off by the disdain the liberals show toward their fellow Americans (while concurrently defending illegal aliens) for no other reason than they don't agree with their far-left policies.
Incumbency is a very powerful force. When the economy is strong the incumbent will probably win. The only President in over 50 years not to get reelected while the economy was healthy was Johnson, who dropped out after the first few primaries. But he was promulgating an unpopular war. Maybe if Weld makes a strong showing Trump is beatable.
Last edited by pvande55; 05-12-2019 at 06:15 PM..
Reason: Speling
2) Priority given to illegal aliens. Tax-paying, law-abiding Americans - particular those in the working and lower-middle classes (which is the majority of voters) - are fed up with liberals caring more about the interests of illegals than American citizens. That became even more painfully obvious with Biden's recent promise to give illegal aliens American medical care, when many middle-income earners can't afford the care they need due to Obama's awful ACA. (Someone needs to tell Biden illegals can't vote, so why is he pandering to them?)
This is spot on; you just have to look at places like Sweden where a far-right party got 18% last year, undoubtedly due to the immigration issue. And LePen is making headway in France.
Article here by moderate conservative longtime gadfly David Frum entitled If liberals won't enforce borders, fascists will.
We can have a large welfare state or we can have lax border enforcement. We can't have both. That lesson should have been learned by progressives from Sweden last year, but evidently wasn't.
Incumbency is a very powerful force. When the economy is strong the incumbent will probably win. The only President in over 50 years not to get reelected while the economy was healthy was Johnson, who dropped out after the first few primaries. But he was promulgating an unpopular war. Maybe if Weld makes a strong showing Trump is beatable.
I posted this before but actually got it slightly wrong first time around. Going back to 1912, only 5 sitting presidents have run for election and lost:
Last time I forgot to include Ford. During that same period, about 12 sitting presidents ran and won, so even with Ford added, it's more than a 2-1 margin.
Hoover and Carter both faced major economic woes. Taft and HW Bush both had 3rd party challengers that split the GOP vote.
Ford lost obviously in the wake of Watergate. That is the only 'model' from the list that might possibly apply to Trump in 2020, and in the wake of the Mueller report, even that seems highly doubtful.
Article here by moderate conservative longtime gadfly David Frum entitled If liberals won't enforce borders, fascists will. We can have a large welfare state or we can have lax border enforcement. We can't have both.
That is the heart of the matter right there.
If we want universal healthcare (like every other First World county) then we are going to have to enforce our borders (like every other first world country).
Unfortunately, the Republicans oppose the former, and Democrats oppose the latter. Which is one of the reasons I despise both parties.
What to you is a strong challenger? I think Biden and Bernie are the strongest of the bunch before we go into the debate circuit....
I can't see Biden or Bernie as strong challengers at this point. Biden has run 3 times in the past and lost every time. He has well-documented corruption issues in his past that will come out, and his 'unwanted touching' issues (probably not significant, however).
Bernie is a self-described socialist. Despite fog around that issue, I once asked a knowledgeable poster (and Bernie fan) if Bernie is an actual socialist, or just a social Democrat (i.e. favors Scandinavian style gov't).
The poster replied that yes, based on past work and affiliations, Bernie deep down is a real socialist, i.e. favors collective ownership of the means of production. //www.city-data.com/forum/54169100-post9.html
Bernie might not get a 49-1 shellacking like McGovern in 1972, but he would be lucky to win more than what Kerry got in 2004--the West coast, the northeast, Illinois and MN. It would still be landslide numbers for Trump.
This is spot on; you just have to look at places like Sweden where a far-right party got 18% last year, undoubtedly due to the immigration issue. And LePen is making headway in France.
Article here by moderate conservative longtime gadfly David Frum entitled If liberals won't enforce borders, fascists will. We can have a large welfare state or we can have lax border enforcement. We can't have both. That lesson should have been learned by progressives from Sweden last year, but evidently wasn't.
I have no problem enforcing the immigration laws that we have. I just don't want fascists doing it. This is what I know about fascists. I've done my research about fascism. While fascists might enforce immigration laws and the border, there are other things that are very unsettling to me about fascists. I've noticed with many fascist movements, ethnic minorities tend to be looked down on in the name of nationalism, especially if those ethnic minorities are of a different race. I understand how it is in the USA. I understand that fascists in America won't stop with enforcing the border laws. History shows me that with many fascist movements, it doesn't end good. Totalitarianism, ultranationalism, etc.
I have no problem enforcing the immigration laws that we have. I just don't want fascists doing it. This is what I know about fascists. I've done my research about fascism. While fascists might enforce immigration laws and the border, there are other things that are very unsettling to me about fascists. I've noticed with many fascist movements, ethnic minorities tend to be looked down on in the name of nationalism, especially if those ethnic minorities are of a different race. I understand how it is in the USA. I understand that fascists in America won't stop with enforcing the border laws. History shows me that with many fascist movements, it doesn't end good. Totalitarianism, ultranationalism, etc.
I don't think many Americans would want fascists (albeit depending on one's definition of fascism, it could be argued that we are already there).
But the point of course is that if Democrats continue to call for lax border enforcement, fascists will seize the advantage handed to them, in order to gain power.
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.
