Dems in Big Trouble in 2020. Here's Why.

[MarathonMike]

"Of course, Hillary Clinton won the Election in 2016 by nearly 3 million votes, ...."


In America we don't count the votes of the illegal aliens that Hussein told to go and vote...."when you vote, you are a citizen yourself..."

Yawn, still waiting for you guys to prove - not from a crazy right wing website - that there was any significant voting by undocumented immigrants.

Trump caught the electorate by surprise because no one actually thought he could win... now people understand the flaws in the system... and they won't make that mistake again.

Also with the economy slowing down and the scandals of his concentration camps being exposed, Trump is toast.

View attachment 267483
TRUMP 2020!

Nice to see you are posting the tragic picture of the Father and Child drowning victims that you Democrats claim is Trump's fault. Would you like to see a few hundred pictures of immigrants who died in the desert between 1980 and 2010? Were they Trump's fault too?

 

[MarathonMike]

As I said way back in March 2016, the Dems were in big trouble with the upcoming 2016 Presidential Election. I said this when most pollsters had Hillary with a 90% chance or higher of winning the election. You can see my comments here.

Hillary Is Losing the Black Vote


Since only roughly half of the electorate actually votes polls mean very little. What is important is who shows up on election day. There was a marked enthusiasm gap between the GOP and Dem voters in 2016. Specifically, 40% less Dem voters showed up to vote in their primaries versus Republicans. As I said in my post, in every election since 1992 the party with the higher primary turnout won the election.

So that brings us to the 2020 election. The first GOP debate in 2016 drew over 24 million viewers on Fox News. There was a tremendous enthusiasm to see GOP Candidates and that manifested in the subsequent primary voting turnout and in the general election.

The first Dem debate this week on NBC only drew 15 million viewers. That is a 60% ratings decline versus the first GOP debate the last election cycle.

This tells me there is not much enthusiasm among Dem voters or the general public for their candidates. This can be confirmed by Joe Biden rallies that struggle to get 400 voters to show up versus Trump rallies where thousands are turned away.

Admittedly it is early, but voter intensity appears to be much stronger on the GOP side again this election cycle. And yes there is tremendous anger at Trump from the far Left, but it does not seem to be translating to enthusiasm for the Dem candidates on offer.


NBC debate ratings: More than 15 million viewers tuned into the first Democratic debate - CNN


rightwinger

Sherry

Of course, Hillary Clinton won the Election in 2016 by nearly 3 million votes, when looking at the national popular vote. It was only a FLUKE, Trump scraping the barrel in the states of PA, Wisc, and Michigan where Trump barley eaked out victories by a combined 77,000 votes across those three states. Tiny margins! That allowed Trump to achieve an electoral college victory despite losing the popular vote by 3 million votes.

Over 90% of the time, the winner of the popular vote wins the electoral college. There have only been 5 elections in U.S. history where the loser of the popular vote has won the electoral college. No sitting President has EVER been re-elected without winning the popular vote. Trump does not appear capable of winning the popular vote in 2020. He is less popular than he was in November 2016. He will likely be defeated by large margins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan in 2020. Those are the only three States Democrats need to send Trump home in 2020.

The ENTIRE popular vote advantage for Democrats is concentrated in TWO STATES. That is precisely why the Electoral College was invented, so that a couple of states don't decide the election.

 

[JoeB131]

Nice to see you are posting the tragic picture of the Father and Child drowning victims that you Democrats claim is Trump's fault. Would you like to see a few hundred pictures of immigrants who died in the desert between 1980 and 2010? Were they Trump's fault too?

Did any of the presidents at that time throw children into concentration camps like Trump is doing?

OWN IT, BITCHES! YOU DID THIS!

 

[JoeB131]

The ENTIRE popular vote advantage for Democrats is concentrated in TWO STATES. That is precisely why the Electoral College was invented, so that a couple of states don't decide the election.

The EC was invented because the slave rapists who started this country wouldn't be subject to Democracy.

 

[SweetSue92]

There's not a single candidate they have brought forward thus far who could beat Trump--and the Dem leaders know it. I keep saying it: they will go for a celebrity at the last minute. Oprah or Michelle O if they can get either one to run.

 

[JoeB131]

There's not a single candidate they have brought forward thus far who could beat Trump--and the Dem leaders know it. I keep saying it: they will go for a celebrity at the last minute. Oprah or Michelle O if they can get either one to run.

Actually, the polls show most of them could beat Trump, and that's BEFORE the Trump recession starts.

RCP Average- Trump vs. Biden- Biden +8.9%

RealClearPolitics - Election 2020 - General Election: Trump vs. Biden

Trump vs. Commie Bernie - Sanders +6.5%

RealClearPolitics - Election 2020 - General Election: Trump vs. Sanders

 

[Polishprince]

The ENTIRE popular vote advantage for Democrats is concentrated in TWO STATES. That is precisely why the Electoral College was invented, so that a couple of states don't decide the election.

The EC was invented because the slave rapists who started this country wouldn't be subject to Democracy.

Actually, you have it half assed backwards. The idea was to give both less populated states as well as more populated states a say in the federal government. If they had not done the EC, they would have never formed the UNITED States.

BTW, it was a major slave state- Deep Blue Virginia, that was the most populated in the 18th Century and would have benefited most by popular presidential election voting.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually, you have it half assed backwards. The idea was to give both less populated states as well as more populated states a say in the federal government. If they had not done the EC, they would have never formed the UNITED States.

Um, guy, the thing was, the EC as originally conceived usually ended up throwing elections into the Congress. After Geo. Washington won two unchallenged elections, the elections of 1796 and 1800 were both decided by Congress, including the rather absurd moment when Aaron Burr tried to make himself President even though he was Jefferson's running mate.

(Aaron Burr, you scamp!)

After that, they passed the 12th Amendment, that put in the truly awful system we have now. Fortunately, through most of history, it hasn't mattered, because the EC just followed what the popular vote agreed to.

The thing is, we have had 200 years of progress towards one person, one vote... The 15th, 17th, 19th, 24th and 26th Amendments have all been bout expanding voting to as many people as possible, regardless of what the "States" wanted.

 

[Polishprince]

regardless of what the "States" wanted.

I can see you are not impressed with the several, sovereign states, putting the word states into quotes.

As a lib, do you think to make the Senate more balanced that the state boundaries should be redrawn every 10 years too, to assure equitable representation?

 

[JoeB131]

I can see you are not impressed with the several, sovereign states, putting the word states into quotes.

As a lib, do you think to make the Senate more balanced that the state boundaries should be redrawn every 10 years too, to assure equitable representation?

I think we should get rid of the Senate altogether and just have a single house of representatives with about 200 members from districts that are not gerrymandered. We should get rid of the electoral college and replace it with direct election of the President.

And frankly, you'd be in favor of this as well, once demographic changes flip the Southwest from Red to Blue, and you guys are regulated to a permanent minority.

 

[Polishprince]

I can see you are not impressed with the several, sovereign states, putting the word states into quotes.

As a lib, do you think to make the Senate more balanced that the state boundaries should be redrawn every 10 years too, to assure equitable representation?

I think we should get rid of the Senate altogether and just have a single house of representatives with about 200 members from districts that are not gerrymandered. We should get rid of the electoral college and replace it with direct election of the President.

And frankly, you'd be in favor of this as well, once demographic changes flip the Southwest from Red to Blue, and you guys are regulated to a permanent minority.

It would save me the problem of getting off the bar stool and bothering to vote every couple of years.

Little point in casting a vote if you know you are going to lose.

 

[Leo123]

Of course, Hillary Clinton won the Election in 2016 by nearly 3 million votes, when looking at the national popular vote. It was only a FLUKE, Trump scraping the barrel in the states of PA, Wisc, and Michigan where Trump barley eaked out victories by a combined 77,000 votes across those three states. Tiny margins! That allowed Trump to achieve an electoral college victory despite losing the popular vote by 3 million votes.

Over 90% of the time, the winner of the popular vote wins the electoral college. There have only been 5 elections in U.S. history where the loser of the popular vote has won the electoral college. No sitting President has EVER been re-elected without winning the popular vote. Trump does not appear capable of winning the popular vote in 2020. He is less popular than he was in November 2016. He will likely be defeated by large margins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan in 2020. Those are the only three States Democrats need to send Trump home in 2020.

That is the most screwed up analysis of the 2016 election I have ever read. It is amazing how these sore losers twist the facts and want to change our governmental institutions to 'fit' their predetermined results. Trump won a MAJORITY of GEOGRAPHIC America. NY and CA DO NOT comprise all of GEOGRAPHIC America....dufus.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I can see you are not impressed with the several, sovereign states, putting the word states into quotes.

As a lib, do you think to make the Senate more balanced that the state boundaries should be redrawn every 10 years too, to assure equitable representation?

I think we should get rid of the Senate altogether and just have a single house of representatives with about 200 members from districts that are not gerrymandered. We should get rid of the electoral college and replace it with direct election of the President.

And frankly, you'd be in favor of this as well, once demographic changes flip the Southwest from Red to Blue, and you guys are regulated to a permanent minority.

And the mid west is flipped from blue to red. . The electorate is constantly in flux and you guys are almost always wrong. It is sad really.

 

[task0778]

It really is amazing that out more than 2 dozen Dem candidates, not one of them is a moderate, centrist, get something done kinda person. Don't know if such a person could win the nomination, but I do believe that the loud-mouth extremists you see on TV running for president are NOT speaking for the majority of the Democrats out there. Which IMHO means, unless something changes and somebody else comes out of nowhere for the Dems, a lot of Dems are going to stay at home next November. Although, it is also true to say that a lot of Democrats really don't like Trump either, so they might vote for their person to keep Trump from getting re-elected.

 

[MarathonMike]

Nice to see you are posting the tragic picture of the Father and Child drowning victims that you Democrats claim is Trump's fault. Would you like to see a few hundred pictures of immigrants who died in the desert between 1980 and 2010? Were they Trump's fault too?

Did any of the presidents at that time throw children into concentration camps like Trump is doing?

View attachment 267863
OWN IT, BITCHES! YOU DID THIS!

This is what happens when you listen to a former bartender with a nice rack, a small brain and a big mouth.

 

[Polishprince]

It really is amazing that out more than 2 dozen Dem candidates, not one of them is a moderate, centrist, get something done kinda person. Don't know if such a person could win the nomination, but I do believe that the loud-mouth extremists you see on TV running for president are NOT speaking for the majority of the Democrats out there. Which IMHO means, unless something changes and somebody else comes out of nowhere for the Dems, a lot of Dems are going to stay at home next November. Although, it is also true to say that a lot of Democrats really don't like Trump either, so they might vote for their person to keep Trump from getting re-elected.

One of the reasons why Hillary Clinton lost in 2016, was she never talked about the actual Issues.

All that she did was buy a billion dollars worth of hate ads that were broadcasted on every battleground TV station in the country.

Pure, unadulterated, hatred.

On the other hand, Trump always spoke on the issues, mainly his overwhelming theme which was to Make America Great Again.

Sure, on the stump, when he did his Stream of Consciousness type stump speeches, he would definitely counterattack.

But he stuck to his theme, and schlonged the old lady royally.

 

[HenryBHough]

We seem to be overlooking the Democrat Party goal of there being NO states hence no "states rights".

One big "super state" under one dictator with no regional variation. No citizens; only residents. All chanting their love for their fearless leader. Blank (to be considered "happy") expressions as though drugged by chemicals rather than simply by indoctrination.

Now watch the denial begin.

Want that to happen?

Do away with The Electoral College and let California and New York be the only locales to vote as nobody else's vote would count. Note that I didn't call those two "states" because they'd just be administrative areas ruled by appointed Gauleiters.

 

[JoeB131]

That is the most screwed up analysis of the 2016 election I have ever read. It is amazing how these sore losers twist the facts and want to change our governmental institutions to 'fit' their predetermined results. Trump won a MAJORITY of GEOGRAPHIC America. NY and CA DO NOT comprise all of GEOGRAPHIC America....dufus.

In a democracy, land doesn't vote, people do.

More PEOPLE voted for Hillary.

The people realized that Trump was unfit for office and said "No".

 

[Oldstyle]

The Democrats "problem" is that in order for a candidate to win the nomination...it appears they will have to go hard to the left...making totally unrealistic promises to appease the progressive wing of the party. Then to win a general election they're going to have to sell themselves to more moderate voters by posing as centrists. Hard to come through THAT without appearing to be full of shit!

 

[JoeB131]

The Democrats "problem" is that in order for a candidate to win the nomination...it appears they will have to go hard to the left...making totally unrealistic promises to appease the progressive wing of the party. Then to win a general election they're going to have to sell themselves to more moderate voters by posing as centrists. Hard to come through THAT without appearing to be full of shit!

Not really. By that logic, Obama never would have won.

The reality is, moderates lose. Nobody gets all that excited about "moderates". That last time someone won running as a "moderate" was Bill Clinton, and that involved a three way race where the Republican did what Republicans do best, get us into an unnecessary war and wrecking the economy.

End of the day, that mass in the middle will have to ask itself, can we really put up with four more years of a crazy person in the White House.