One of the most perplexing aspects of the White House strategy over the last two years is the total focus on Trump’s base with little apparent concerns for independents and moderate Republicans who have reacting poorly to the confrontational politics. A recent poll shows just how precarious this is becoming for 2020. A new ABC News/Washington Post poll this week shows that 56 percent of Americans said they would definitely not vote to re-elect Trump in 2020. Only 28 percent said they definitely will vote for him. Thia mirrors a previous NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll which found that 57 percent of voters will not back Trump in 2020. Citing the President’s polling numbers, the Texas Republican Party is reportedly now concerned that they could lose the state in 2020.
The Washington Post poll shows a hardening opposition to Trump with 56 percent of voters saying that they will not consider voting for Trump.
Polling has uniformly shown Trump around 37 percent in terms of favorability.
This does not mean that the Democrats cannot still supply the answer as they did in 2016. Trump was the most unpopular Republican nominee in history, but the Democrats picked the most unpopular Democratic nominee in history. The result was an upset.
Nevertheless, the approach of the last two years and continued controversies is clearly taking its toll on both Trump and the Republicans in looking toward 2020.
ABCNews/Washington Post Poll. That pretty much sums it up. They could poll Trump against Attila, trump losing by forty points. It’s all about selecting the right sample.
You know, if they actually did a poll between Trumpy v Attila, Attila would certainly win, because respondents would know there’s no real chance that Attila would run for president, so answering a poll to favor Attila would present a marvelous opportunity for mass virtue signalling. I suspect trump would also lose to O.J. Simpson and Bernie Madoff as well, for precisely the same reason. I mean, O.J. is simply an acquitted murder suspect and a convicted armed robber, whereas Trump is “literally Hitler.”
A lot of republicans didn’t vote for Trumpy in 2016 and he won anyway. I’ve never voted for a republican in my life. I’m a liberal, but the Democratic Party has marched completely away from me. I’m a liberal, not a communist. I may not vote for Trumpy, but I also won’t vote for Kamala Harris or that preening moron Cory Booker or any other democrat who’s likely to run in . My guess is that 56% won’t be so sure about it when they see what their alternatives are.
Jay, maybe you are a classical liberal and not a Liberal at all. The fascist progressives and now baby killers stole the word Liberal from the classical liberal because the smell of progressivism became too intense. Classical liberalism has a long and cherished history.
“Jay, maybe you are a classical liberal and not a Liberal at all.”
I think I’m both. I would point out that it didn’t help that certain types of conservatives spent the 90’s and 00’s demonizing the word “liberal”. But, hey, water under the bridge. Nowadays, precisely BECAUSE I’m a liberal and cling stubbornly to liberal values, I simply cannot now vote for democrats. Plus, I simply am offended by the racist and sexist suggestions that my flesh tone makes me a bigot and and my penis makes me a misogynist.
I encourage all republicans to seize the opportunity to become the party of the big tent. At least until we defeat the neo-totalitarian loons on the left.
“it didn’t help that certain types of conservatives spent the 90’s and 00’s demonizing the word “liberal”.”
Jay, maybe they weren’t demonizing the world ‘liberal, rather they were demonizing the word ‘Liberal’.
” I’m a liberal and cling stubbornly to liberal values”
Are those values liberal or ‘Liberal’?
The name ‘liberal’ was hyjacked when the word ‘Progressive’ smelled too much so one has to define their terms carefully. Today with many former ‘Liberals’ giving up on the word they are now calling themselves ‘Progressives’ so some assume the word ‘liberal’ returns to its classical meaning, ‘classical liberal’.
The often called libertarian Milton Friedman referred to himself as a ‘classical liberal’ and espoused a philosophy that ‘Progressives’ and ‘Liberals’ despise.
“I simply cannot now vote for democrats. Plus, I simply am offended by the racist and sexist suggestions that my flesh tone makes me a bigot and and my penis makes me a misogynist.”
That type of craziness comes from Progressives and Liberals. We have a few on this list and most of them sound brain dead.
When thinking about 2020 think of this:
Trump and the Latino Vote By Victor Davis Hanson
Posted By on January 31st, 2019
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/donald-trump-and-the-latino-vote/
Trump would not have to change his policies to capture 40 to 50 percent of the Latino vote (which is quite different from “Latino” spokespeople on television and the Jorge Ramos crowd), as opposed to simply articulating them:
1) The “new” Democratic party not only show signs of a new more insidious anti-Semitism — as we’ve seen from comments by Senator Feinstein, Harris, and Hirono, and the surreal and barbarous statements coming out of Virginia and New York on third-trimester abortion (and near infanticide). But it is now becoming anti-Catholic to a degree not seen in decades in America. Why would a devout Catholic wish to side with such bigotry? Trump is on the right side of the abortion and the religious-discrimination issues.
2) Hispanic unemployment is at record low levels in a growing economy. One can see the realities by simply driving around small towns in Central California where the flurry of activity and demand for labor are unprecedented, and workers have a range of options and leverage not seen in the 21st century. Even slight decreases in border crossings are force multipliers in the empowerment of Mexican-American and other Hispanic citizens in efforts to boost wages and gain options in employment. Trump’s policies did much of that, visible even in highly regulated and less dynamic California. Few middle-class commuters wish to endorse the New Green Deal that would mandate soon ending chain saws, leaf blowers and the workers’ daily commute.
3) Open borders falls most heavily on the Latino communities. Schools cannot easily offer advanced placement and competitive courses when huge influxes of non-citizens without English facility enroll in mass. Social services become swamped with thousands of arrivals from impoverished Central America and southern Mexico that impair the quality of attention for U.S. citizens. Gangs do not go to Palos Verdes, Carmel, or Atherton to bully teens, but target Latinos who do not speak Spanish or speak it poorly and are accused of acting “white.” For all the talk of the new demography and tribal solidarity, most U.S. citizens of Latino descent are, like all Americans, terrified of gangs, and they suffer inordinately from identity theft and grow irate when hit by drivers who leave the scene of the accident, given that the downside of illegal immigration falls more on those who often live closer to illegal aliens. Unspoken but also alarming is that the new waves of illegal aliens are largely from Central America, and do commensurately resonate Latino solidarity within Mexican-American communities who see sanctuary cities as green-lighting crime so often aimed at themselves.
It is surreal how Republicans have allowed an open-borders, boutique-green, static- and regulated-economy, anti-Catholic, pro-radical-abortion party to pose as the friend of Hispanic-American voters.
I don’t believe this numbe,r we don’t habve that many stupid people do we? Socialism has never succeeded more than 50 yrears without bankrupting the country embarcing it. Just look at the EU countries and their poor growth compared to the U.S. and look at Greece, Cuba , Russsia and Venezuela would you like to live in one of those countries. If the EU countries had to pay the full price for their own defense, then they could not afford their socialist policies. DUH! Time to explain that to our ignorant dem friends.
This is worth a look, Daniel. I don’t believe we have “that many stupid people,” unfortunately I think we do have many, many [more] ignorant people. I went to undergrad school (graduating in 1973) and, at that time, Socialism was part of the syllabus in my Political Science, Sociology, History and Economics courses I took in pursuit of a BS (bovine scatology, hmm?) liberal arts degree from Miami of Ohio. I would imagine, today, the subject of Socialism if taught is not presented fully; rather I would think it is presented as an “ideal” something that could be worth striving for. How in the wide-wide-world of sports did AOC get a degree from Boston College (which ain’t cheap) with a minor in Economics and come away thinking “Democratic” Socialism would be good for the US?
AOC, I have to assume, isn’t stupid. At this point, however, I have to assume she is about as ignorant as can be about Socialism (at least what was taught about it in the ’70’s.) It is scary, mortifying, and outrageous that the number of “pro-Socialist” pols, pundits, and cheerleaders continues to grow. But, so far, it is gaining a base of “true believers.” Even if these folks are wacky due to their lack of information, they can vote. If enough of them vote, we know what will happen: There will be more and more AOC’s every time there is an election. Eventually, even if there are voices of reason (like the former mayor of NY and the former CEO of Starbucks who, at least, are smart enough to be scared about the increasing number of pols and wanna be candidates who profess socialism (free medical care, free tuition, and free lunches for all I know.)
Check this out: https://stoppingsocialism.com/the-moral-case-against-socialism/?fbclid=IwAR1L5BSLaMnGxO4eioHyaTxeDI5_1SbtHimN4Jh-eE41xmLV-hnuHPy-f_w
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jan30 Read em and weep Turley. Good Lord man, can’t you get out of the mainstream NPR/Marist/PBS/WAPO bubble? Compare to Ex -Pres (I love that prefix) Zero who I believe won re-election rather handily. Why do you think thes “pollsters do not publish Zip Codes? Let me control the zip codes and it makes no difference how many so called “independents”, democrats or republicans you poll I’ll get you the results you want.
“The employment figures were trending that way already,” NOT TRUE.
That’s another one of Obama’s lies. If he says it often enough, the people will believe it. Obama actually said when in office, “don’t look for manufacturing jobs to return. This economy is the NEW NORM.”
Obama is suffering from “I did it” disease along with John Kasich now that Trump brought our economy back. Watch the State of the Union next week and take notes.
TURLEY PERPLEXED THAT TRUMP PANDERS TO ONLY BASE
The professor begins this column with:
“One of the most perplexing aspects of the White House strategy over the last two years is the total focus on Trump’s base with little apparent concerns for independent and moderate Republicans who have reacting poorly to the confrontational politics”.
On the surface this is quite perplexing indeed. Savvy politicians work constantly to ‘expand’ their base. Even savvy businessmen work constantly to expand their clientele. But Donald Trump is ‘not’ a savvy politician. Trump, in fact, promotes himself as the ‘Anti-Poltician’.
As an Anti-Politicican Trump makes no effort whatsoever to expand his base. He only knows what he knows and cares very little about what he doesn’t know. Columnist David Brooks pointed this out months before Trump got the White House. ‘Trump completely lacks intellectual curiosity’.
Therefore Trump has no interest in what the other 60% of America thinks of ‘him’ or his policies. All Trump knows is what he sees on Fox News. And Trump will be the first to tell you that. His dependency on Fox is well-established by now. It has been described as a “Closed Information Loop”. Trump’s entire administration is driven by a propaganda source.
Trump’s dependency on Fox would be darkly comical if his administration was only a movie script. The plot-line would read: “An eccentric billionaire bumbles into the White House where his only information source is ‘one’ cable news network”.
There was, in fact, a movie that partially foreshadowed Trump’s administration. “Network”, 1976, concerned a doomsday prophet who becomes a network news anchorman. In said movie that one TV network places it own ratings above the national interest. That plot-line feels eerily familiar to ‘all’ Americans now.
Speaking primarily of “the economy stupid,” the Clinton years were the best years of my life. I didn’t vote for Clinton, twice. The Bush and Obama years were a huge economic disappointment. Obama’s tenure was (in hindsight) about as bad as Carter’s and the Great Recession was (one man’s perspective) poorly handled.
Trump, against major MSM headwinds has accomplished much for the country (even if he is regularly overbearing and misspeaks), more than any president in my lifetime. Again, I am speaking of the economy, but not exclusively the economy. Two SCOTUS justices leap to mind as well as his corporate tax reforms that have made the US more competitive globally. Several “center” or “slightly right of center” publications have listed Trump’s accomplishments, but they are rarely, if ever, presented anywhere other than on Fox. Of course, it is possible to research what is claimed, but that requires reading, and it seems the number of “readers” shrinks every day, so what you have is information that has to be transmitted in 140 characters (or less.) It’s ironic we’re awash with data and information but our population often appears to be ignorant but cock-sure.
In support of this notion here’s a thought provoking quote: “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’” – Isaac Asimov
Trump & Fox – Hand-in-Hand?
The President may watch Fox as he says. For all I know, he may watch Fox exclusively. That could be since ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and PBS seem hell-bent on tearing him down not just when he stumbles or is clumsy in something he says or does. If the MSM could be, instead of 90%+ negative re Trump, perhaps 70% negative and 30% positive, I might lend credence to their “reporting.”
When I watch either MSNBC or Fox, I often google what is being presented as my own way of fact checking what is being said. The differences are that Fox regularly presents more than one side of a story and they do have pols from both sides represented. MSNBC doesn’t even appear to try to find “the rest of the story” when they put something on air. It is extremely frustrating to watch ALL of the news sources, but at least I get some exposure to “the other side” when I watch Fox.
Who can blame Trump for not wanting to be constantly hammered. What I have not seen (and I DVR “both sides”) on the MSM, for example, is a full (as neutral as can be) discussion of Socialism.
It appears that the MSM almost is encouraging (and maybe even supportive) of the notion of Socialism. What secondary and higher education did these talking heads receive? My high-school “civics” class discussed Socialism and Communism; my university — both undergraduate and graduate school — classes in Political Science, Economics, and Sociology all covered the three “isms” without overt bias, perhaps other than (at the time, the mid-70’s) some favoritism of Capitalism.
How it is that AOC, for instance, claims to have a minor in economics yet professes her support for many of the (failed) socialist programs that virtually every non-partisan think tank claims would literally bankrupt the US economy? Then, one by one, Elizabeth and Kamala pile on joining Bernie in offering proposals for “free everything,” which is even more disturbing.
I wonder how much more Trump would have gotten accomplished had he not had to fight some members of his own party and almost all of the media. At this point, I am one of the 44% (apparently) that plan to vote for Trump based on what I know, today.
Based on what I know TODAY.
Mark, you seem to be saying that Trump is a truly great president but MSM refuses to recognize his greatness. So Trump has no choice but to get all his information from Fox News. So if we ‘all’ watched Fox News, and ignored MSM, America would be great again, as MAGA hats proclaim.
Mark, I’d like to discuss this further but I’m due back on planet earth.
“Mark, you seem to be saying that Trump is a truly great president but MSM refuses to recognize his greatness.”
*************************
No, what I’m saying is that the loyal opposition in this country is neither loyal nor opposition. They are anarchists willing to sink the country to get rid of the captain. The MSM is, by and large, either a group of disaffected corporate sensationalists or closet Neo-Maoists chanting the latest left wing mantra whenever the left deigns to publish it to them.
As for your imminent return to Planet Earth, don’t bother. You can stick around with the rest of the aliens on whatever parsec of the universe you please. We’ll just print your talking points out for dissemination to your posse.
MESPO ANSWERS WITH AN ALIAS
“No, what I’m saying is that the loyal opposition in this country is neither loyal nor opposition”.
What you’re saying, Mespo..??? Then why didn’t you use your usual name? Am I supposed to think a calvary of new Trump supporters has charged onto this thread?
No, it’s just Mespo with an alias!
I tell you why I use a nom de plume. Because lawyers can lose their license for saying the same things that you have freedom to enjoy saying to others. But we do not. Plain and simple.
RPC 8.4
https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3513&context=flr
and in the 20 years since that article it has got a lot worse
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=10987d1f-d31f-449b-bbcd-b3e064554ea3
How far is it from Hollyweird to Planet Earth?
Peter is now pretending to be an astronaut. Maybe he is that seven year old that many of us have considered.
Contrary to what you, your ilk, and the other gullible rubes, dupes, klan wannabees, pocket-traitors and grifters on the make believe or “feel in your gut,” authentic and impartial journalists report facts. From this, a reasoned observer could readily foresee that when the facts reported are bad, the media coverage reflecting those fact would be bad as well. Simple, see? Thanks for presenting a teaching moment.
This is to “but in my universe the facts are always good” fuller
“As the bidding war for the affection of the Democratic left spirals into inanity — “Abolish ICE!”; “70 percent marginal tax rate!”; “Impeach the president!”; “Pack the Supreme Court!”; “Medicare-for-all!”; “Free college!”; “Free other stuff!”
Waiting for Amy.
Trump is a brand manager above everything. A very successful one even more so that then a developer. Observe that we are amateurs criticizing a consummate professional. I try and be humble when I do that. I notice other people think they are experts and Trump is a fool. Actually results indicate he is about what he says he is: a very stable genius.
Some of this crud reminds me of the incessant criticism of Obama as incompetent. Actually Obama was a lot more competent than the constant naysayers made him out to be. Oh I can say a lot of bad about him but he was never quite as bad as some made him out to be.
This is the nature of political discourse