The worst Democrats are leading in the polls

Switch to vote for Trump? Why should anyone? Trump has made it very clear that he is going to govern for his "base" and NOBODY else. If that means we are all prosperous he is the first to take credit. If there is a downturn, the non-base will be the first under the Greyhound.

Trump is rather clearly an authoritarian tyrant who means to turn America into a repressive autocracy and end the way of life we all grew up under and which many of our ancestors died to perpetuate over the last two and a half centuries. Make no mistake there is really very little difference between him and the ideology we defeated in 1945, he is just not as well-developed in many of the more totalitarian aspects, yet.

 

What are you talking about? I never said that anyone was going to switch to vote for Trump.

 

And as long as nobody does, that's good. At this point I don't really care who the Dems make President in 2020, just so long as it's not Trump.

 

Michael Moore admits that none of the DP presidential candidates can win the next election.
He is already calling for a ringer to enter the race.

"“In my humble opinion, four of these candidates running could beat Trump: Bernie [Sanders], [Joe] Biden, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren,” he said. “They could beat him. But Hillary beat him. It’s not enough just to beat Trump. The only way to remove Trump is to crush Trump.”

Moore, who championed Sanders in the 2016 Democratic primaries, said he remains a supporter of the Vermont senator but that neither Sanders nor his top Democratic rivals are in Obama’s league as a candidate. “They’re not as strong,” he told Deadline today."
DEADLINE, Michael Moore Doubles Down On Michelle Obama Running For President: She Would “Crush” Donald Trump, By Matthew Carey, August 1, 2019.

That is abject capitulation.

 

"“In my humble opinion, four of these candidates running could beat Trump: Bernie [Sanders], [Joe] Biden, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren,” he said. “They could beat him. But Hillary beat him. It’s not enough just to beat Trump. The only way to remove Trump is to crush Trump.”

That is what the overwhelming blue victory will be next year: crushing, out of the WH to the court house.

 

Trump has always managed to confuse the best DP thinkers, but they do seem to be united in favor of keeping Greenland Danish. Baby steps.

 

Well the Dems did help make Trump President in 2016 so we'll see if they've learned their lesson.

 

I think Biden can win if he keeps his mouth shut. But that's hard to do in a debate.

I think Warren can win, too. Not that I like it.

Bernie, I don't know about.

 

I mean here by "politics" the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government.

I mean by "policy" a course of action by a government or corporation, like "We don't negotiate with terrorists" or "No refunds without a receipt."

I guess "honesty is the best policy" and "Bros before h----" sorta qualify as individual policy.

 

What do you call a slaughter?

Mondale winning one state in 1980(?) was a slaughter. That kind of thing cant happen any more since there are dozens of hard blue and dozens of hard red states.

 

Trump may well not get 138 EVs, Le Chef. The hard red states like TX, OH, FL, IA, NC, AZ show Trump behind. Purple states show him behind by double digits. If he has no serious victories this fall, it's all downhill for him. If he starts a war, the Joint Chiefs will remove him.

 

Delaney has detailed policy proposals too but the media doesn't report it because he hasn't gotten into a mud slinging contest with Trump, and so it's not as exciting as Booker's Spartacus moment or Pocahontas calling Trump a racist. If it bleeds, it leads.

Now another problem Delaney has is that he's bald. Who's the last bald president we had? LBJ? There was Gerald Ford, but he wasn't elected, plus he had more hair than Delaney

Three Chef rules about Presidential politics: you can't win if you're bald, and you can't win if you're short. You also can't win if you have a small head.

 

So basically he'll get 0 electoral votes? That would indeed be a landslide. But I won't make predictions.

Starting a war? I've been hearing that since 2015 and see not the slightest evidence for it.

 

I think Biden has been cagy here. He is feigning weakness to draw his opponents out. He has been around longer than some of them have been alive. I do think he has learned a trick or two in that time.

 

JakeStarkey said: ↑rump may well not get 138 EVs, Le Chef. The hard red states like TX, OH, FL, IA, NC, AZ show Trump behind.

How you came up with 0 EVs is interesting, but we can let it go.

The Trumpers are worried that best Dem candidates would easily beat Trump, so that is why they are "the worst Democrats".

 

"The worst Democrats are leading in the polls"

the worst Republican is President.. any dem would be better then Trump

 

What states will he win if he is underwater in Texas, Arizona, and all the purple states?

Wyoming and Oklahoma? Should be good for 10 votes in the electoral college.

 

I think Trump will recover in FL, and can count on GA, NC, SC, GA., AL, MS, LA, KY, TN, SD, ND, OK, KS, NE, WY, MT, ID, UT.

About 200, so I am off about 65 or so, but you know he could go gobbler wild crazy, and lose everything but MS and AL and LA.

 

How so?

 

Then why do you keep on posting insults like those highlighted below?

Given your prior failures to engage in civil discourse I will pass since the outcome will be the same old predictable substanceless insults.

Have a nice day!

 

Cherry picking again?

Moore's criticism of the Dem Establishment is valid but he is assuming that they will do a repeat performance of 2016 and impose another lackluster Establishment candidate that won't excite enough voters to defeat the BLOTUS.

The MATH tells us a different story. Your BLOTUS stole the election with a mere 70,000 votes spread across 3 states. In the 4 years between 2016 and 2020 there is going to a demographic swing of millions of voters AWAY from the GOP.



Bear in mind that for every Boomer and Silent generation member that reaches their Sell By date there are BOTH Millennials and Gen X'ers becoming active voters. That is a 2 vote gain for the Dems

We have already seen that impact in 2018 and in 2020 it will be even larger because an average of 1.7 million Boomers are expected to check out each year between 2016 and 2050. That means that there will be 6 million fewer Boomers voting in 2020 and 6 million more Millennials and Gen X'ers.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/01/millennials-overtake-baby-boomers/

That swing of 12 million voters is not homogenous so let's assume that 25% of them support the GOP. That still means a net GAIN of 6 million voters nationwide for the Dems. Let's get back to your BLOTUS's 70k margin of victory and since it happened in PA, MI and WI the demographic swing shrinks that margin to the point where it vanishes.

Moore pointed out that it is a waste of time for the Dem Establishment to try and bleed off BLOTUS supporters. The Progressives have taken note of this fact and are focused on ENGAGING both disaffected and new voters in ALL constituencies across the nation. That strategy was exceptionally successful in 2017 and 2018 and it will be just as successful in 2020.

So to sum up the math doesn't lie and the demographic shift is draining the GOP base of millions of voters and they are doing NOTHING to recruit new voters. The Progressives have the demographic tide working in their favor and they are working hard to make the best use of it.

The economy is slowing down into recession territory which means layoffs and 59% of the electorate are staunchly opposed to the BLOTUS regardless of the state of the economy. That is a 19 point deficit that your BLOTUS has to overcome to "win" in 2020. Granted there is an 8% GOP voter suppression bias that the Progressives must overcome but they have the MOTIVATION to make that happen. The BLOTUS supporters appear to sitting back in expectation of 2016 repeat performance.

 

EC delegates are not bound by the popular vote.

 

I used to think that until Obama got elected. Obama was all show-biz and no substance. If he had run on his policy positions, he wouldn't have gotten more than 35% of the vote.

 

Good luck with that.