2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[Philjia]

That's an outright false claim.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/243539/americans-maintain-positive-view-bernie-sanders.aspx

Then why did he do so badly in states with large non white populations?

Maybe because Hillary was Obama's preferred successor, more probably because they didn't, or were unable to, vote in the primaries.

[Ifreann]

Yes, good, it's fucking February 2019, leave the 2020 campaigning for 2020 please.

There is, of course, also that.

She should really put this "Shorter election season" policy front and centre, I can see it being enormously popular.

[Philjia]

There is, of course, also that.

She should really put this "Shorter election season" policy front and centre, I can see it being enormously popular.

Also better elections that make it easier and less time consuming to vote and get rid of those stupid voting machines and do away with the electoral college and maybe have preferential voting to limit the excesses of the two party system.

[Trumptonium1]

That is implying that Trump will be re-elected in 2020, of course.

If Sanders wins the Democratic nomination, then at this point, it’s all up for grabs and it could go either way.

The assumption that "the incumbent always wins" as the baseline isn't necessarily a bad one to start from when talking about an average president.

Trump, on the other hand, is almost record-settingly unliked, and that's consistent too. Heck, most Dems don't even care who the nominee is, so long as they can beat Trump (and that's backed by polling data), so I'm of the mind that Trump faces a more difficult campaign in 2020 regardless of who the Democratic nominee is. Not insurmountable, to be sure, but if Dems field more likeable candidates a la Sanders or Biden, then it's less "anyone's game" and more "holy fuck something would have to go disastrously wrong for Trump to win".

Which, granted, is a similar position we were in with 2016, but still.

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

[Trumptonium1]

It's important to remember for all the Harris SJWs and Bernie bros that all the Democrats who chose not to turn out for the 2016 election after voting for Sanders in the primaries were heavily slanted towards socially conservative views. They didn't not-vote because they considered Hillary to be too right-wing.

It shows that while Bernie's fiscally liberal views may go down well in some communities, those communities are mostly socially conservative. They don't want none of that sexism and racism shit.

[Ifreann]

Bernie has fiscally liberal views?

I thought he was some kind of mega-communist...

[Liriena]

Trumptonium unironically using "SJW" in a discussion about presidential candidates is an unexpected delight.

Do "NPC" and "soyboi" next!

[Trumptonium1]

Trumptonium unironically using "SJW" in a discussion about presidential candidates is an unexpected delight.

Do "NPC" and "soyboi" next!

I can't talk about soyboys, I'm sure you've noticed the Democrat Party is devoid of any male candidates under 70, and devoid of white male voters under 30.

[Liriena]

Trumptonium unironically using "SJW" in a discussion about presidential candidates is an unexpected delight.

Do "NPC" and "soyboi" next!

I can't talk about soyboys, I'm sure you've noticed the Democrat Party is devoid of any male candidates under 70

Who the fuck is Cory Booker?

and devoid of white male voters under 30.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-aven ... democrats/

"Devoid" seems like a bit of an exaggeration.

[Valrifell]

The assumption that "the incumbent always wins" as the baseline isn't necessarily a bad one to start from when talking about an average president.

Trump, on the other hand, is almost record-settingly unliked, and that's consistent too. Heck, most Dems don't even care who the nominee is, so long as they can beat Trump (and that's backed by polling data), so I'm of the mind that Trump faces a more difficult campaign in 2020 regardless of who the Democratic nominee is. Not insurmountable, to be sure, but if Dems field more likeable candidates a la Sanders or Biden, then it's less "anyone's game" and more "holy fuck something would have to go disastrously wrong for Trump to win".

Which, granted, is a similar position we were in with 2016, but still.

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

Ignoring the fact that, of course, all candidates listed have enjoyed heights in popularity unseen for Trump. Saying that Trump even has the capacity to get his approvals above water is, as you might say, an "untested hypothesis"

I'll also file this post under "I Hate Democrats But They Should Do This Or Lose Forever"

[Liriena]

I'll also file this post under "I Hate Democrats But They Should Do This Or Lose Forever"

How dare you suggest that Trumptonium might be arguing in bad faith?

[Valrifell]

I'll also file this post under "I Hate Democrats But They Should Do This Or Lose Forever"

How dare you suggest that Trumptonium might be arguing in bad faith?

An audacious claim, I know, but come on, have you seen him hold views that aren't just whatever the liberals aren't doing?

[Liriena]

How dare you suggest that Trumptonium might be arguing in bad faith?

An audacious claim, I know, but come on, have you seen him hold views that aren't just whatever the liberals aren't doing?

You have to understand... libs must be owned, no matter how, at all times. Even if it kills ya.

[San Lumen]

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

Ignoring the fact that, of course, all candidates listed have enjoyed heights in popularity unseen for Trump. Saying that Trump even has the capacity to get his approvals above water is, as you might say, an "untested hypothesis"

I'll also file this post under "I Hate Democrats But They Should Do This Or Lose Forever"

Plus approval rating and share of the vote for incumbents is a fairly good indicator of whether they will win reelection. Someone with a approval rating below 50 percent usually doesn't get reelected

[Hediacrana]

(picture with graphs, snipped to avoid picspam)

I find it funny how even a misleading selection of presidents can't hide how Trump's doing worse in terms of popularity than any of them.

Yes, as your picture shows, he's more unpopular than Obama, Reagan and Clinton - but if you look at the site where that picture seems to originate, you can see that the overall comparison is in fact far worse - that at 763 days in office, Trump is measurably the most unpopular president since WWII. Source

Even Gerald Ford did better than him on that score.

[Valrifell]

(picture with graphs, snipped to avoid picspam)

I find it funny how even a misleading selection of presidents can't hide how Trump's doing worse in terms of popularity than any of them.

Yes, as your picture shows, he's more unpopular than Obama, Reagan and Clinton - but if you look at the site where that picture seems to originate, you can see that the overall comparison is in fact far worse - that at 763 days in office, Trump is measurably the most unpopular president since WWII (and longer). Source

Even Gerald Ford did better than him on that score.

That's a big oof.

[North German Realm]

Bernie has fiscally liberal views?

I thought he was some kind of mega-communist...

The only people I've seen call him socialist unironically are either really really deluded leftists "No, he's totes pretending to be a socdem guys!" or conservatives still beating the political dead horse of socialism. I'm more concerned with his foreign policy (or lackthereof) than anything economic or social tbh.

[Zurkerx]

Ignoring the fact that, of course, all candidates listed have enjoyed heights in popularity unseen for Trump. Saying that Trump even has the capacity to get his approvals above water is, as you might say, an "untested hypothesis"

I'll also file this post under "I Hate Democrats But They Should Do This Or Lose Forever"

Plus approval rating and share of the vote for incumbents is a fairly good indicator of whether they will win reelection. Someone with a approval rating below 50 percent usually doesn't get reelected

It's ultimately going to come down to Independents, which Republicans won in the 2012 and 2016 Presidential Elections (Romney got 50%, Trump got 48%). So, Democrats need to find a way to 1. Get more of their base to turn out, and 2. Chisel away at the Republican advantage over Independents.

Of course, Trump's approval among Independents is in the high 30s to low 40s, lower than most President's at this point, but that means shit, especially if the Democrats nominate a candidate that fails to appeal to Independents.

[Trumptonium1]

(picture with graphs, snipped to avoid picspam)

I find it funny how even a misleading selection of presidents can't hide how Trump's doing worse in terms of popularity than any of them.

Yes, as your picture shows, he's more unpopular than Obama, Reagan and Clinton - but if you look at the site where that picture seems to originate, you can see that the overall comparison is in fact far worse - that at 763 days in office, Trump is measurably the most unpopular president since WWII. Source

Even Gerald Ford did better than him on that score.

No, he's more popular than Reagan, who then went on to win a landslide.

If your eyesight or mathematical aptitude is so bad, please voluntarily choose not to engage in a debate with higher intellectuals.

[Bear Stearns]

The assumption that "the incumbent always wins" as the baseline isn't necessarily a bad one to start from when talking about an average president.

Trump, on the other hand, is almost record-settingly unliked, and that's consistent too. Heck, most Dems don't even care who the nominee is, so long as they can beat Trump (and that's backed by polling data), so I'm of the mind that Trump faces a more difficult campaign in 2020 regardless of who the Democratic nominee is. Not insurmountable, to be sure, but if Dems field more likeable candidates a la Sanders or Biden, then it's less "anyone's game" and more "holy fuck something would have to go disastrously wrong for Trump to win".

Which, granted, is a similar position we were in with 2016, but still.

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

Basically, only a white male swing state Democrat could actually beat Trump.

[Valrifell]

I find it funny how even a misleading selection of presidents can't hide how Trump's doing worse in terms of popularity than any of them.

Yes, as your picture shows, he's more unpopular than Obama, Reagan and Clinton - but if you look at the site where that picture seems to originate, you can see that the overall comparison is in fact far worse - that at 763 days in office, Trump is measurably the most unpopular president since WWII. Source

Even Gerald Ford did better than him on that score.

No, he's more popular than Reagan, who then went on to win a landslide.

If your eyesight or mathematical aptitude is so bad, please voluntarily choose not to engage in a debate with higher intellectuals.

Congrats, you have found one (1) counterexample from a set of twelve (12) examples.

[Valrifell]

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

Basically, only a white male swing state Democrat could actually beat Trump.

Implying, of course, that conservative Democrats, Independents, and Republicans care more about identity than politics.

[Bear Stearns]

Basically, only a white male swing state Democrat could actually beat Trump.

Implying, of course, that conservative Democrats, Independents, and Republicans care more about identity than politics.

They will if they don't already. Welcome to post-1965 America.

[Valrifell]

Implying, of course, that conservative Democrats, Independents, and Republicans care more about identity than politics.

They will if they don't already. Welcome to post-1965 America.

I get the feeling you really wanted to say 1964, but then realized it'd be too on the nose.

[Bear Stearns]

They will if they don't already. Welcome to post-1965 America.

I get the feeling you really wanted to say 1964, but then realized it'd be too on the nose.

Nope. To my knowledge, no legislation in 1964 can logically be see as the future of the two American political coalitions (i.e. white Republicans vs. everybody else).

Now, in 1965, yes we can...

Nice try tho