With Trump At 38% Approval, The Time Is Right For a Progressive President

[DrFunkenstein]

Folks tend to give Trump mythical powers after suffering from PTSD in 2016. In actuality, he won by a fluke roll of the dice - even HE was genuinely shocked that he beat Clinton. And that was as an unknown anti-establishment candidate promising to "drain the swamp;" bring back zillions of jobs to the farmers, miners, and auto workers; and build a wall while getting Mexico to pay for it.

But the reality is that the Orange Emperor has no clothes. He's not a strategic genius. Now independents and soccer mom's know he's an incompetent racist. And he no longer opposes a candidate who the right have demonized for 25 years.

In 2016, he won by one of the slimmest electoral college margins in US history.
Trump would have to get a perfect storm a second time, but this time with a clear record. The extreme right love him, but that's only going to take him so far.

Trump is not the Boogeyman. He's a buffoon who has exposed himself as such time and time again. Now the time has come for Democrats to vote with their hearts, not with their fears. People were afraid that America would never vote for a black man named "Barack Hussein Obama," but they decided to follow their hearts rather than those fears about their neighbors.

Don't choose the one who you think it most palatable to the masses - choose the candidate that you truly believe in.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Choose the one who can beat Trump for sure and by the widest margin,

because with the help of the Russians they're going to cheat. Don't let it be close enough that they can win by cheating, and the peculiarities of the Electoral College make that possible regardless of national popular vote polls. I will support the candidate who is most likely to win and I don't give a rat's ass whether they support Medicare for All or a revised ACA or anything else. All the candidates have policies whose general parameters I agree with, and beyond that I only care about getting rid of Trump so we can fix what he broke and institute progressive policies after that.

[Kahuna7]

8. There will be so much chaos going on that we need to get as many ECs votes as possible.

I can see it now. Votes will disappear. Voting systems will shut down. It may be impossible to determine the true winner and that's what trump and the republicans are counting on. They will say, oh well. Since we can't count all the votes, trump wins.

[happy feet]

22. +1,000

[OKNancy]

2. I believe in my chosen candidate actually

1. Biden 2. Harris 3. Beto

[Kurt V.]

3. warren will be a very good president. way past time this glass ceiling is broken.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

34. Agree 100%... Elizabeth is the most qualified female candidate to ever run for President...

she would CRUSH the Nazi-in-Chief if she wins the nomination.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!! or
Elizabeth & Bernie 2020!!
Either way, welcome to the revolution!!!

[Docreed2003]

36. More qualified than Secretary Clinton??

[Wellstone ruled]

4. As one Dem pundit

said last week,"It's a layup and lets not screw it up".

[Indykatie]

5. I Truly Believe in Joe Biden AND Think He's Most Palatable

to "the masses" but especially that sliver of voters that will decide the election. We shouldn't kid ourselves that people are so sick of Trump ANY Dem can win in a landslide. In the end I still think it will still be a close election.

P.S. - Trump is still in the mid to high 40s in most polls so this 38% poll may be an outlier.

[DrFunkenstein]

9. 538 Has Him Averaging at 41% - Any "Mid to High 40s" Are Outliers

He is the most unpopular President in living memory. Compare his numbers to any of them. Not once did Nixon dip below Trump's numbers. Pretty much EVERY President since Hoover had better numbers than him.

It's time to get over the PTSD. Trump is not to be taken lightly, but he is essentially a weak candidate.

[TwilightZone]

6. Approval and voter intent aren't the same thing.

Plenty of people who disapproved of Trump voted for him in 2016. We would be foolish to believe that the same thing won't happen in 2020.

[DrFunkenstein]

10. Plenty Who Disapproved of Trump Disapproved of Clinton More

These people are dumb. But Clinton's unfavorables were a very real thing at an average of 54.4%.

That's nearly 16% worse than Warren, 12% worse than Biden.

[TwilightZone]

13. Trump's unfavorables were higher than Clinton's.

Your assertion only furthers my point. Many, many people disapproved of him and voted for him anyway, for a variety of reasons (not all of them were anti-Clinton, contrary to the assertions of some).

We ignore that at our peril.

Assuming that favorables translate linearly to votes is misguided, at best.

[DrFunkenstein]

17. Trump beat Clinton by 27 points among women without college degrees, now polling at 42% with them

A lot of people voted for Trump as a "protest" vote, thinking that it couldn't be any worse than what the swamp had produced so far. And many people thought Clinton was such a lock to win, it didn't matter if they "protested."

White women without a college degree broke hard for Trump, particularly in key rust belt states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. After completely cleaning up with that demographic against Clinton, he has devastated his support while in office.

With insecurity about the economy, he can kiss any hope of recovering those women votes goodbye.

[scheming daemons]

7. Disagree. Can't take any chances. Choose the one who will beat Trump by the LARGEST margin.

[Gothmog]

12. If the Democratic only beat trump by a narrow margin, then there will be election contests

I agree that we need to beat trump by a large margin

[Gothmog]

11. Tonight's election results in NC 9 show that we need to nominate an electable candidate

If trump does not destroy the Obama recovery, then 2020 will be a very close election. I reject the concept that we can afford to nominate a weak/far left nominee. trump will beat a far left candidate easily if the economy remains strong

Link to tweet

One wonders whether, at some point, the economic boom will be so huge that it will drive opinions on its own. Once Democrats settle on a nominee, voters will have to make a choice: Do they stick with the guy they’ve got, warts and all, who has contributed to such good times? Or are they willing to take the risk that the next president, even if he or she is a better person, will screw things up with a new agenda?

One election model from Alan Abramowitz, a political scientist at Emory University, suggests the economy will be the winning factor. His “time for change” model has a solid track record in predicting the outcome and direction of presidential races, and data he published last month show that, so long as the economy continues to grow at a 2 percent clip, Trump should be a favorite for reelection even if his job approval rating is as poor as it is now.

Indeed, it’s even better than that for Trump. The model calculates an average gain of 2.5 electoral votes for every one-point Trump shaves off of his net job disapproval. According to the model, even if gross domestic product growth slumps to 1 percent, Trump could win the minimum 270 electoral votes he needs for reelection by lowering his net job disapproval rating to 7 percent. Right now, that number is around 10 percent.

Media attention is focused on the Mueller report and other congressional investigations. But if the economy keeps its momentum, even that or Trump’s failure to trumpet his success might not prevent him from winning a second term.

[Bettie]

23. Or it could mean that

an actual liberal might have done a lot better.

Or it could be just that non-standard elections don't tend to have the turnout that standard November elections have.

Is it your position that if the guy who ran in NC would have been a little more like a Republican, he'd have been elected? Is our 'solution' going to be to run someone who is just barely shy of being a right winger? That the more to the right we run, the better it is?

[Gothmog]

26. Washington Post-It's easy to see how Trump can win reelection

From Larry Sabato https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-economy-got-nixon-reagan-and-bush-reelected-it-could-do-it-for-trump-too/2019/04/23/b8920d34-65e6-11e9-a1b6-b29b90efa879_story.html?utm_term=.a35b315730d2

Ultimately, Trump may turn out to be at the mercy of conventional factors. In 2016, academic predictive models based on fundamentals such as the state of the economy suggested that Trump, or any other Republican candidate, was in position to win the election or come very close. This time, such models (once they become operative next year) could make Trump the early favorite despite his poor approval ratings.

Credit the powers of incumbency and a strong economy, the state of which may matter more to Trump’s odds than nearly anything else. Incumbency and the economy, among other matters, ended up being more than enough for Nixon, Reagan and Bush. Despite Trump’s unprecedented outlandishness, that same combination might work for him, too.

[Bettie]

38. Well I guess the only answer then is

to run on a 'status quo' platform. No change. Ever. No big ideas, just maybe, minor tweaks, if the right agrees with it.

The .01%? Give them what they want and maybe they'll be amenable to a few crumbs for those at the bottom.

[Drunken Irishman]

14. Even with Trump's horrid approval, he's still beating Warren in New Hampshire...

I like Warren. I will fully back her if she's the nominee. But this isn't about Trump's approval. He had pretty pathetic approval/likability numbers in 2016 and he still won because enough voters in three key states were turned off just enough to either not vote, vote third party or vote, sadly, for Trump.

This election will come down to those same three states.

I say this confidently because Trump's approval in other swing states, places like Ohio and Florida and North Carolina, isn't nearly as bad as it is nationally.

In Florida, the latest poll had his approval at 48% and his disapproval at 48%. That's not going to be good enough to swing that state.

In Ohio, his approval is 46%, a bit worse than in Florida, but still significantly higher than it is nationally.

To me, that means 2020 is likely going to start off with those states trending Trump. By no means does that mean a Democrat can't win 'em, but it'll be an uphill battle.

In the most recent Emerson Poll, Warren is the only Democrat who doesn't win New Hampshire versus Trump - and he actually wins a majority of the vote.

The thing is, Hillary won New Hampshire in 2016.

Give Trump those states I mentioned above, minus PA, MI and WI, and he's at 264 electoral votes.

That means, to win, all he has to do is win Wisconsin OR Pennsylvania OR Michigan. Not all three - he just needs ONE of those states.

Even with his awful approval rating.

Right now, I don't feel comfortable saying Warren is there yet. She's not. Until she is, I will have my very valid reservations about his candidacy head-to-head vs Trump.

[Cha]

15. Thanks for the analysis,

DI.

What the hell happened to New Hampshire!?

We need a Large Win in all the Swing States.. All of THEM!

[5starlib]

16. Drunken, you're so dead on as usual

Warren needs to show me she can win in states that matter. I don't give a rat's ass if she had 30,000 at a rally in Portland or L.A. This means nothing to me.

[DrToast]

18. Trump is also running as an incumbent this time

There are incumbent advantages that he didn't have in 2016.

[Gothmog]

28. Economic models point to a Trump blowout in 2020.

I have seen similar studies. It is not a given that trump is beatable in 2020. If the economy is in good shape, then there are models and studies that show that trump can win. Obama left trump with a great economy and trump may not screw up the Obama economy before 2020 and get re-elected.

Link to tweet

I am not counting on the Obama economy faltering and so I am worried. We have to defeat trump

Trump could prove these models wrong by being the biggest asshole in history. Again, historically presidents tend to be re-elected if the economy is in good shape at the time of the re-election and even trump may not e able to screw up the Obama recovery

We need to work even harder to defeat trump

[DrFunkenstein]

19. WI Voted Blue Since '84, PA Since '88, MI Since '88

Trump will need a perfect flush a second time. Not going to happen.

[Drunken Irishman]

20. No. The Democrats need the perfect flush...

Unless they somehow win Ohio or Florida, which is still fairly strong for Trump (at least, compared to his national #s). I'm not one to buy the Dems will pick off Texas, tho, I guess anything is possible. But if the map stays the same as it was in 2016, no, they will need to win all three of those states or they'll lose the election. Trump just needs to win one - and that doesn't include NH. Without counting WI, PA and MI, he's sitting at 260 electoral votes and the Democrats at 228. None of those three states have fewer than ten electoral votes.

Now if the Democrats can flip Iowa back, they'll be better positioned ... but until that happens, it's us who have to get that perfect flush.

[Desert grandma]

31. Totally agree with you.

We cannot lose sight of the way Trump squeaked by in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. That gave him the EC win and the Presidency. These states will go for Biden IMO, but if they would not vote for Clinton, do you REALLY think they will vote for Warren? I like Warren, but I do not think she will win over voters in the rust belt states that we need to win in 2020. And THAT is all I care about. I will vote blue no matter who, but my gut says Biden is the only candidate that will beat Trump in these 3 states that we need to carry in 2020

[NNadir]

21. Thank you. N/t

[BlueMississippi]

24. It is a perfect time for a center-left progressive

If we run an ultra-left revolutionary, we'd lose.

[randr]

25. Given the current state of disfunction of our Government

I hope we are wise enough to put someone in charge who knows how it used to work, has a network of knowledgeable allies available, and has the respect of all the various governing bodies that will need to be restaffed and repaired.
We need the equivalency of the NYFD after 9/11 to come to our rescue.
On edit: Lets drop the labels that are only serving to divide us and offer fodder to the enemy. We are all Democrats and that says all we need to know.

[NYMinute]

27. No. It is time for a center-left liberal

to maintain gains in the suburban college-educated crowd and the working class voters who are leery of socialism.

[Gothmog]

29. Trump can win with 45% of the vote

Link to tweet

And that’s why, as Axios reports, they are planning to hold on to the minority of voters who support the president while working overtime to launch a scorched-Earth campaign against the eventual Democratic nominee.

“The GOP]is going to make whoever the nominee is radioactive well before they get the nomination,” one former Trump campaign aide explained. “That’s Trump’s strategy. Stay at 45-46 percent [in the polls] and just make the other guy radioactive.”

Given Trump’s own unpopularity, the campaign reasons, the only way to get him back into the White House will be to convince swing voters that the Democratic nominee will pack the Supreme Court, end the Electoral College, and grant reparations to black Americans.

Throughout his first term, Trump has consistently posted lower approval ratings than any of his predecessors. FiveThirtyEight’s average of public opinion polls at the moment gives Trump an approval rating of just under 42 percent with a disapproval rating of 53 percent.

[LuvLoogie]

30. Barrack Obama was a pretty solidly Democratic Establishment candidate. He was also progressive.

Hillary Clinton was also progressive. I didn't vote for Barack because of my heart. I voted for Hillary in the Primary. And I enthusiastically voted for Barack in the general. I vote for Democrats who I feel give us the best chance to win. And Barack Obama is a great president.

I am inspired by my general love for humanity and the planet. I am going to support Joe Biden through the primary, likely.

[empedocles]

32. This is not a policy general election. Policy aspirations are for Dem primaries.

We don't need policy labels; we need pragmatists.

Dems as a whole agree trump is the target - not sundry policy aspirations.

[qazplm135]

33. 38 percent today

is not 38 percent a year from now. The election isn't won. He's not done.
Yes 2016 was a bit of a fluke in that he needed an inside straight to win, but he was still close enough for that inside straight to be the winning hand. He could be that close again a year from now.

Plenty of Dems voting with their hearts will vote for a moderate. Progressives are NOT a majority of party. They are probably the largest plurality, but they are not a majority. Dems should vote for whomever they think is the strongest candidate first, ideology second. Now, that doesn't mean that someone like Warren won't be that strongest candidate. She's clearly run the best race to this point, so if I had to pick one right now, it would be her. But I don't think as many people vote ideologically as you and others might think. In fact, a lot of people don't think about or even necessarily have an ideology.

[HeartlandProgressive]

35. Kicked and DU rec

[customerserviceguy]

37. Don't let that 38% fool ya

Some of the drop in Trump support is from right-wingers who were severely disappointed by the potential Camp David meeting involving the Taliban. Yes, they're pissed, but are they really going to vote for a Democratic candidate next year, or even sit this one out by voting for a protest third party candidate? No way.

Also, we've had a month where Democratic candidates for President were not beating each other up on a debate stage. That resumes tomorrow, and continues all the way into the actual voting season. We'll see if that 38% holds or not, my guess is that it doesn't.

This is no time to rely on thinking that the winds are blowing our way. We need to fight our asses off from now until Election Day, like we were 20 points behind.

[Gothmog]

39. The hardest job for the next president may be fixing Trump's mess

This is one of the reasons why I think that Joe Biden is the best candidate. Who ever is the nominee will have to be prepared to fix all of the damage that trump has done to our government.

Link to tweet

Perhaps the most straightforward and least complicated undertaking, since it would be entirely within the next president’s purview, is rebuilding the executive branch from the corrupted ruin Trump will leave behind.

One of the most underreported stories about the Trump administration is its basic incompetence. Perhaps Trump’s biggest con of all was convincing his supporters that he was some sort of business wizard with a genius for management. In truth, the Trump Organization was a mom-and-pop family business that he repeatedly micromanaged to the brink of collapse. He is doing exactly the same with the government of the United States.

The White House itself is less like “The West Wing” than “Game of Thrones.” Courtiers vie for the favor of the Mad King, unable or unwilling to perform normal duties for fear of risking Trump’s ire. Usually, the White House is a place where information from outside sources is synthesized and digested so the president can make the best possible decisions. Under Trump, the flow is reversed — his whims, however ill-informed or contradictory or just plain loopy, are tweeted out and must be made into policy.

Agencies vital to our national security — including the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency — lumber along, month after month, without permanent leadership. “It’s easier to make moves when they’re acting,” Trump has said, but really the situation reflects his own insecurity. By keeping his underlings weak and beholden only to him, he limits their power — and thus hamstrings the departments they nominally lead.

Joe Biden is the best candidate to repair the damage done by trump. I think that the repair of this damage will keep the next Democratic President very busy.