The US 2020 Presidential Election

[tantalus]

How Trump could pull off another upset

It feels like August of 2016 all over again. Polls show Donald Trump losing big. Pundits proclaim he can't win. Reporters sneer at Trump voters on Twitter and cable.

Why it matters: There are several signs that should give the Trump-is-toast self-assured pause.

• He’s doing better in some swing-state polls than he was at this point in 2016. And his floor of support holds strong, regardless of what he says or does.
• Not only is the stock market on fire, but a lot of blue-collar workers in building, plumbing and other manual crafts are doing quite well, too.

Trump’s big bet is that there are a lot of working class voters, especially in rural areas, who did not vote in 2016 but will this time.

• His other bet is that months of dumping on Joe Biden, often with lies or wild hyperbole, will do what he did to Hillary Clinton: Make the Democratic nominee seem slightly more unpalatable than himself.

The New York Times profiled a swath of Trump's steadfast supporters who "outlined myriad reasons for wanting to re-elect him, ranging from the pragmatic ... to a gut-level attraction to his hard-nosed personality."

• And the "social desirability" factor in polling — do we tell the blunt truth? — is a huge unknown this year because of the new attention to racial issues.

Behind the scenes: People in Trump’s orbit feel much better about the race than they did in mid-June.

• These officials feel the operation is becoming more disciplined, and is more centered around a message — that Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris embrace leftist policies, and won’t stand up to the violent excesses of the far left.

A few caveats: Biden has some strengths that Clinton didn’t. He's viewed more favorably — and is stronger among seniors, eating into Trump’s sweet spot.

• Women and college-educated whites have continued drifting away from Trump.
• And Trump now has a record to defend, so he doesn’t have the outsider factor that he exploited last time.

Although Biden isn’t as polarizing as Clinton inside or outside the Democratic Party, the Black Lives Matter movement and calls for social justice and progressive changes are tugging Biden to the left.

• President Obama recently told The New Yorker's Evan Osnos: "If you look at Joe Biden’s goals and Bernie Sanders’s goals, they’re not that different, from a forty-thousand-foot level."

Remember: A recent Wall Street Journal/NBC poll found 13% of voters remain "in play," enough to tip the election.

• It also found Trump’s standing with Hispanics is as good if not better than 2016 — and had improved his image by 20 points among whites, who are more than 70% of the electorate.

_____________

Not only are Trump's poll numbers improving, but between relentless voter suppression by the GOP, aided and abetted by Louis DeJoy and the probability of COVID-19 keeping people away from polling centers and of course the Electoral College once again rescuing Trump from a multi-million popular vote deficit, it is entirely possible that he will obtain another four years.

Should biden target the working class more given how badly affected they are by covid?

[tbm3fan]

Feels like an opportunity missed for sanders and biden to have placed out contrasting visions for a different society post covid.

It's not clear to me how much better the economy would have been. The health situation drastically so, iam guessing over the long run that would have paid itself back in the economy but it would have required a more economically damaging lockdown initially.

It seems that many americans are more comfortable with a higher death toll in exchange for more individual freedoms and the prospect of more economic activity.

People have said they are Ok with taxes as long as it is the other guy paying them. It can also be applied to death...

[DOR]

tantalus,

I'm fresh out of examples of sane, rational, competent, empathic, sympathetic, pro-science leadership from a GOPer holding high office, let alone “a respectable person with a different world view.”

The “world view” between Democrats and Republicans isn't all that different.
It's the tactics, and the total lack of loyalty to nation over party, that is the main divide between us.

As for front runner vs. best choice, that's outside the realm of American politics in the last 40-50 years. The best possible candidate, as determined by the GOPers and reluctantly adopted by the Democrats, is the one who will win. Not a lot that matters after that, given the stakes.

Values candidates are the ones that voters identify as being more in favor of Mom, baseball, and apple pie. People with values that are considered representative of the best America has to offer.

Jimmy Carter was the top of the class in American history in that particular category, regardless of your politics. Two guesses who's on the bottom of the pile.

[TopHatter]

Unprecedented wave of GOP defections as Trump re-nominated

What started as a trickle of "Never Trumpers" has turned into a historic wave of defections from high-profile Republicans.

By the close of the 2020 Republican National Convention, nearly 500 current and former GOP officials have gone public opposing a second term for the president of their own party.

"Absolutely unprecedented; nothing remotely like it," said presidential historian Mark Updegrove.

The divide over President Donald Trump and Trumpism has raised existential questions for Republicans both about party identity and loyalty.

"It's become the party of Donald Trump and any whim he has," Updegrove said. "It's about personality and not political party or platform."

While nine in 10 Republican voters approve of Trump as president, opposition to his leadership inside the party establishment has mushroomed.

The protests span the ideological and generational spectrum on the political right -- from former Ohio Gov. John Kasich and one-time GOP presidential nominee Sen. Mitt Romney to former Trump national security adviser John Bolton and Defense Secretary James Mattis.

"He is going to hear from more people who served in his administration and hear more of them give the same testimony I gave, which is that he's ill-equipped to hold the office that he has," 33-year-old former Trump Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor told ABC's "Good Morning America" last week.

Already ex-Trump communications director Anthony Scaramucci and former Navy Secretary Richard Spencer have been loudly warning against the reelection of their former boss.

"Internal party conflicts have certainly happened before," said Princeton University political historian Kevin Kruse, "but we’ve never really seen anything of this size and scope. In all, the avalanche of criticism from Republican officials, past and present, against a sitting Republican president is stunning."

A group of 73 veteran Republican national security officials is running newspaper ads calling Trump a "danger." The GOP activist group The Lincoln Project is spending millions attacking the president in TV ads airing on Fox News.

On Monday, former Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, who's never voted for a Democrat, joined more than two dozen Republican former members of Congress to publicly endorse Joe Biden.

"It is because of my conservatism and because of my belief in the Constitution and in the separation of powers, and because I'm gravely concerned about the conduct and behavior of our current president," Flake said.

Four Republicans last week -- including former Secretary of State Colin Powell -- went even further, speaking out against the president at the Democrats' convention in prime time.

"An avalanche like this -- and not just of low-level aides -- has certainly never happened in modern history," said political historian Allan Lichtman of American University. "It's a sign that at least at the ideological level, that this is a major rift within the Republican Party."

It's an extraordinary political family feud that many in the party's rank-and-file seem to be shrugging off.

"Donald Trump is going to win in November, and the reason he's going to win is because of the results of the last four years," said Republican congressional candidate Jake LaTurner of Kansas.

The president retains sky-high approval ratings from his base, drawing enthusiastic crowds and raising record-setting cash -- more than $165 million in July alone.

National party leaders insist the values of Republicanism remain unchanged, and that intraparty rebellions and high-profile defections are nothing new.

In 2004, Democratic Sen. Zell Miller of Georgia made waves when he delivered the RNC keynote address endorsing George W. Bush., and in 2008, Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman crossed the aisle to endorse his friend Republican John McCain.

"Endorsements don't matter much," said Lichtman. "For thoughtful persons they may be significant, but there's not a correlation historically between endorsements and election results."

But never have aisle-crossing endorsements reached this scale or had such vigor, giving some of the president's most loyal supporters reason for concern.

Evangelical pastor Bart Barber of Farmersville, Texas, a loyal Republican who plans to vote for Trump in November, told ABC News he's worried about what impact the president's behavior will have on the future of the party.

"I wouldn't hold up the president as an example of the kind of moral or religious perspective that I preach and that our church believes in and represents," Barber said. "I absolutely think the Republican Party has lost ground morally."

There's also tension over Trump's embrace of the political fringe, from birtherism and white nationalism to baseless online conspiracy theories like QAnon, which the FBI calls a domestic terror threat.

"The president often talks about how he gets a lot of ratings, but at the end of the day, people want problems solved -- not ratings or personal popularity," said former Virginia GOP congresswoman Barbara Comstock. "That's why some of our Republican governors are the most loyal people, whether or not they are loyal to this president."

Whether or not Trump wins in November, many in the party are resigned to the belief that Trumpism will be part of Republicanism for the foreseeable future.

"There's no question: this is Donald Trump's Republican party. But politics is often an exercise in addition, and certainly winning a campaign requires you to reach out to other people," said Sara Fagen, a former political adviser to President George W. Bush and ABC News contributor.

"We're in a place now where Donald Trump is behind," Fagen said, "and there's about 12% of the electorate who are soft Republicans. They like Donald Trump's policies, but they don't like him. But guess who they do like? They like President Bush; they like Mitt Romney. And (Trump is) going to have to appeal to that piece of Republican Party."
_________________

That "pastor" from Texas doesn't "hold up the president as an example of the kind of moral or religious perspective that he preaches and that his church believes in and represents"....but he's still going to vote for him.

Wow...

[Albany Rifles]

Tantalus


Feels like an opportunity missed for sanders and biden to have placed out contrasting visions for a different society post covid.

They did have different views...and Bernie's view lost out to Joe's once mainstream Democrats started voting in elections beyond Iowa & New Hampshire.

And post-covid world....in February?!?!?

In February Covid was seen as an isolated outbreak, serious but not what it became because of a disastrous federal response.

And to DOR's response....if you have a Bush/McCain/Romney Republican in the White House there would have been a scientific based response to COVID. All believe in science and its practical applications. One of George W. Bush's positive legacies was his administrations hard work on the reduction and treatment of AIDS/HIV in Africa. They made some great contributions based on solid science.

[astralis]

^ yes, Bernie couldn't sell his vision/leadership to Dem primary supporters, let alone the general electorate.

and this is the -second- time he's gotten beat. everyone knows what Bernie stands for, and to the burning anger of the Bernie-bros, people are just not on-board.

things might be different if this was Mitt Romney and not Donald Trump that the Dems are trying to unseat, but if "ifs, ands, or buts" were candied nuts, we'd all be fat.

[DOR]

Tantalus


Feels like an opportunity missed for sanders and biden to have placed out contrasting visions for a different society post covid.

They did have different views...and Bernie's view lost out to Joe's once mainstream Democrats started voting in elections beyond Iowa & New Hampshire.

And post-covid world....in February?!?!?

In February Covid was seen as an isolated outbreak, serious but not what it became because of a disastrous federal response.

And to DOR's response....if you have a Bush/McCain/Romney Republican in the White House there would have been a scientific based response to COVID. All believe in science and its practical applications. One of George W. Bush's positive legacies was his administrations hard work on the reduction and treatment of AIDS/HIV in Africa. They made some great contributions based on solid science.

"sane, rational, competent, empathic, sympathetic, pro-science leadership..."

It isn't multiple choice; you don't get to choose "pro-science" and then conclude there's no difference among the various people being discussed.

[Albany Rifles]

"sane, rational, competent, empathic, sympathetic, pro-science leadership..."

It isn't multiple choice; you don't get to choose "pro-science" and then conclude there's no difference among the various people being discussed.

Not sure exactly what you are referring to here...are you disagreeing with me on the characterization of Bush/McCain/Romney? I may disagree with them on policies and execution of some programs but all three proved themselves as mainstream American politicians.

[snapper]

Never seen such a carnival of lies as this Trumpian worship RNC. I thought it said it all when they had no agenda but now they claim they have one - one that is all lies.

[Albany Rifles]

^^^^^^^^^
THIS all day!

[tbm3fan]

Never seen such a carnival of lies as this Trumpian worship RNC. I thought it said it all when they had no agenda but now they claim they have one - one that is all lies.

Snapper, what is an RNC? What I saw was the new Trumpian National Convention (TNC) of the Trumpian National Party.

Boy, could I ever come up with an anacronym for this new party.

[Dazed]

[QUOTE=DOR;1068158]

Is this a trick question?
The last Democratic VP is almost always going to be the front runner when going up against a GOPer-held White House.
Truman.
Humphrey.
Mondale.
Gore.
Biden.
See the pattern?

Yes, except for Truman they all lost. Mondale winning only Minnesota and D.C.. Humphrey tried again in 72 but lost the nomination to McGovern. McGovern who would win Massachusetts in the election and well that was it.

[astralis]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...ianism/615640/

The Platform the GOP Is Too Scared to Publish

What the Republican Party actually stands for, in 13 points
August 25, 2020

David Frum

Republicans have decided not to publish a party platform for 2020.

This omission has led some to conclude that the GOP lacks ideas, that it stands for nothing, that it has shriveled to little more than a Trump cult.

This conclusion is wrong. The Republican Party of 2020 has lots of ideas. I’m about to list 13 ideas that command almost universal assent within the Trump administration, within the Republican caucuses of the U.S. House and Senate, among governors and state legislators, on Fox News, and among rank-and-file Republicans.

Once you read the list, I think you’ll agree that these are authentic ideas with meaningful policy consequences, and that they are broadly shared. The question is not why Republicans lack a coherent platform; it’s why they’re so reluctant to publish the one on which they’re running.

1) The most important mechanism of economic policy—not the only tool, but the most important—is adjusting the burden of taxation on society’s richest citizens. Lower this level, as Republicans did in 2017, and prosperity will follow. The economy has had a temporary setback, but thanks to the tax cut of 2017, recovery is ready to follow strongly. No further policy change is required, except possibly lower taxes still.

2) The coronavirus is a much-overhyped problem. It’s not that dangerous and will soon burn itself out. States should reopen their economies as rapidly as possible, and accept the ensuing casualties as a cost worth paying—and certainly a better trade-off than saving every last life by shutting down state economies. Masking is useless and theatrical, if not outright counterproductive.

3) Climate change is a much-overhyped problem. It’s probably not happening. If it is happening, it’s not worth worrying about. If it’s worth worrying about, it’s certainly not worth paying trillions of dollars to amend. To the extent it is real, it will be dealt with in the fullness of time by the technologies of tomorrow. Regulations to protect the environment unnecessarily impede economic growth.

4) China has become an economic and geopolitical adversary of the United States. Military spending should be invested with an eye to defeating China on the seas, in space, and in the cyberrealm. U.S. economic policy should recognize that relations with China are zero-sum: When China wins, the U.S. loses, and vice versa.

5) The trade and alliance structures built after World War II are outdated. America still needs partners, of course, especially Israel and maybe Russia. But the days of NATO and the World Trade Organization are over. The European Union should be treated as a rival, the United Kingdom and Japan should be treated as subordinates, and Canada, Australia, and Mexico should be treated as dependencies. If America acts decisively, allies will have to follow whether they like it or not—as they will have to follow U.S. policy on Iran.

6) Health care is a purchase like any other. Individuals should make their own best deals in the insurance market with minimal government supervision. Those who pay more should get more. Those who cannot pay must rely on Medicaid, accept charity, or go without.

7) Voting is a privilege. States should have wide latitude to regulate that privilege in such a way as to minimize voting fraud, which is rife among Black Americans and new immigrant communities. The federal role in voting oversight should be limited to preventing Democrats from abusing the U.S. Postal Service to enable fraud by their voters.

8) Anti-Black racism has ceased to be an important problem in American life. At this point, the people most likely to be targets of adverse discrimination are whites, Christians, and Asian university applicants. Federal civil-rights-enforcement resources should concentrate on protecting them.

9) The courts should move gradually and carefully toward eliminating the mistake made in 1965, when women’s sexual privacy was elevated into a constitutional right.

10) The post-Watergate ethics reforms overreached. We should welcome the trend toward unrestricted and secret campaign donations. Overly strict conflict-of-interest rules will only bar wealthy and successful businesspeople from public service. Without endorsing every particular action by the president and his family, the Trump administration has met all reasonable ethical standards.

11) Trump’s border wall is the right policy to slow illegal immigration; the task of enforcing immigration rules should not fall on business operators. Some deal on illegal immigration must be found. The most important Republican priority in any such deal is to delay as long as possible full citizenship, voting rights, and health-care benefits for people who entered the country illegally.

12) The country is gripped by a surge of crime and lawlessness as a result of the Black Lives Matter movement and its criticism of police. Police misconduct, such as that in the George Floyd case, should be punished. But the priority now should be to stop crime by empowering police.

13) Civility and respect are cherished ideals. But in the face of the overwhelming and unfair onslaught against President Donald Trump by the media and the “deep state,” his occasional excesses on Twitter and at his rallies should be understood as pardonable reactions to much more severe misconduct by others.

So there’s the platform. Why not publish it?

There are two answers to that question, one simple, one more complicated.

The simple answer is that President Trump’s impulsive management style has cast his convention into chaos. The location, the speaking program, the arrangements—all were decided at the last minute. Managing the rollout of a platform as well was just one task too many.
The more complicated answer is that the platform I’ve just described, like so much of the Trump-Republican program, commands support among only a minority of the American people. The platform works (to the extent it does work) by exciting enthusiastic support among Trump supporters; but when stated too explicitly, it invites a backlash among the American majority. This is a platform for a party that talks to itself, not to the rest of the country. And for those purposes, the platform will succeed most to the extent that it is communicated only implicitly, to those receptive to its message.

The challenge for Republicans in the week ahead is to hope that President Trump can remember, night after night, to speak only the things he’s supposed to speak—not to blurt the things his party wants its supporters to absorb unspoken.

[tbm3fan]

Question? Should Biden debate Trump?

We heard what Pelosi said. We have heard what Biden said. Today I have heard what Willie Brown said. For those who don't know he was Speaker of the House in California for quite some time. I wasn't a fan of his but I did admire the fact that he was the prototype for the consummate politician who knew politics inside and out. On news radio this morning he was saying Biden shouldn't debate Trump. One, Biden was not a natural debater. Two, Trump is a natural antagonizer. Three, Trump needs the debates far, far more than Biden. Fourth, when in the lead don't give the other guy a platform to attack.

Opinions?

[astralis]

frankly, does it matter at this stage? I mean...who's undecided anymore?

I can't see anyone defecting to the other party, no matter how brilliantly either candidate does.

it's an enormous waste of time, and it has been for quite a while. it's all about sticking to your script and trying to fit in a viral quote. HRC humiliated Trump over and over again, as evidenced by her poll numbers pre/post debate, but in the end it didn't save her.