Why I Think Trump is the Best Democratic Asset

Zardnaar

Deity
Joined
Nov 16, 2003
Messages
20,040
Location
Dunedin, New Zealand
Just to be clear I am not an American but from the outsider looking in the Republicans are in deep trouble. I think Trump is partly right in terms of the mainstream media being out to get him (but he makes it so easy), but he is wrong in terms of them making stuff up.

If you like Fox News that is fair enough, I read the website myself occasionally. More to get a sense of what they're saying but here is a hint its - entertainment trash. If you want some better news and don't trust mainstream USA media try Reuters or the BBC. Even if you don't like what you read you need to find out what people are saying or whats going on.

Anyway short of the Democrats shooting themselves in the foot with a circular firing squad perhaps by nominating Hilary again (or Elizabeth Warrens perhaps) the 2020 elections are theirs to lose. Trump won 2016 by a very narrow victory if 40 000 people in 3 states changed their minds he would have lost. Based on the 2018 mid terms more than that have changed their minds.

Trump is the guy who turned a 20 odd point lead in Texas to 3 points. They elected a Democratic senator in Alabama of all places. The 2018 senate map was bad for the Democrats as they were defending in lots of red states that are quite red. This was part of the 6 year cycle that Obama carried in 2012. In 2020 the situation is reversed with the Republicans on the defensive with a blue tide from 2018. The main advantage they have is they are defending red states but a few are purple or are well within the margin of losses of the 2018 mid terms.

This is also compounded by Americans skewing left on virtually all of the main topics but the red states use social issues to drive turnout. But overall America is getting more liberal with Texas being tipped to go blue or purple in 2032. Trump seems to have brought that forward by a decade or so. I don't think Texas will flip blue in 2020 but what about states like Ohio and Florida let alone the other mid western states Trump would have seemed to have lost already. If he is driving voters into the arms of the Democrats in 2020 odds are they will win again in 2024 (its really hard to beat a sitting president). By 2028 it won't matter to much.

Even with gerrymandering that in effect gains the Republicans about a 7 point advantage that makes it hard to beat in swing states. However once again a lot of those stats showed gains equal to or larger than that in the 2018 mid terms. If the Democrats carry some of them in 2020 long term Gerrymandering will likely hurt the Republicans as it will make winning them back that much harder when combined with more liberal trends overall in the US electorate. When millennial start hitting their 30's and 40's in numbers they don't seem to be voting Republican combined with normal population die off. Basically older conservative voters die off and are not replaced. Note that President Reagan and other Republican candidates used to win the popular vote as well, its just been since Bush II that they have struggled (except 2004?). Also note the popular vote doesn't matter that much but it does reveal longer term trends in the US electorate.

By any objective means Trump is not a good president. He is a dead duck and cannot pass any of his legislative agenda (such as it was) so even if you are a Republican/like him just thought I would point that out. I would do further and use words like "disaster" and "calamity". Not for America but for the GoP. Last time you had a president this bad (Hoover) the Democrats basically got a pass for the next 20 years. In reverse after the 60's the Democrats were effectively locked out of executive power for 20+ years.

So yeah at this point I think the Democrats have already won 2020 and they ave a decent chance of getting the senate and can lock this in for potentially decades to come. If you have a large democratic field that is in indicator that a lot of them think they can beat Trump in 2020. However the 2018 elections revealed that despite all the noise the progressive wing of the Democrats party makes they failed hard and the ones that won are the more blue dog types. Nominating a progressive fruitcake might let the GoP win in 2020 as getting more votes in the west and east coast won't win you the election they need it in the Mid West/Ohio, Florida, and potentially Texas and some other red states that are starting to trend purple.
 
Basically agreed, although

Nominating a progressive fruitcake might let the GoP win in 2020 as getting more votes in the west and east coast won't win you the election they need it in the Mid West/Ohio, Florida, and potentially Texas and some other red states that are starting to trend purple.

another danger is nominating a blue-dog and having the progressive wing of the party therefore stay home the way Bernie voters did last time.

So it's not a cakewalk.
 
The Dems need a socially progressive, fiscally rational, youngish, charismatic person who can talk about the future. Pairing them with an opposite gender running mate who has a depth of knowledge about how things work would be good.
 
So who comes closest, Bird? Beto?
 
The Dems need a socially progressive, fiscally rational, youngish, charismatic person who can talk about the future. Pairing them with an opposite gender running mate who has a depth of knowledge about how things work would be good.

Beto 2020.
 
Dems better hope Mueller comes up with something more than 'collusion' or they risk losing the center.

By any objective means Trump is not a good president. He is a dead duck and cannot pass any of his legislative agenda

Criminal justice reform got passed overwhelmingly and that effort was led by Kushner, and given Trump's lack of ideology he's capable of signing legislation that would be taboo for a regular Republican like Pence. I suggest the Dems take advantage of that and send him a replacement for Obamacare... Hooray for Trumpcare!
 
Dems better hope Mueller comes up with something more than 'collusion' or they risk losing the center.
It'll be "Conspiracy to Defraud the United States of America." "Collusion" was just a shorthand term that caught on.

If the "center" of America isn't concerned about a conspiracy with a hostile foreign power to defraud America, we can just go ahead and shut out the lights now. It was a good run.
 
How was the USA defrauded by Americans learning about Hillary's dirty laundry? The center already knows Trump got help from Putin.

If someone hacked Trump's taxes and published them, would they be defrauding the USA?
 
How was the USA defrauded by Americans learning about Hillary's dirty laundry?
Please don't.
despite all the noise the progressive wing of the Democrats party makes they failed hard and the ones that won are the more blue dog types.
How did you take this away from the results? Serious question, because progressives did really good while centrists like McCaskill got voted out.

I agree with the thesis of the OP but not the conclusion. 2020 is going to be a blowout but they won't get 20 years of control. They'll be lucky if they have Congress (both houses) and the Presidency for more than 2 years. The Supreme Court is shot for a decade and the federal appeals courts forever as far as we are concerned with. They have at best a 4 year window to undo a huge mess against an activist judiciary before Republicans take back one house or the other or even the Presidency.

And that's leaving aside the huge uphill battle at state level districts, the new tendency for Republican legislatures to effectively neuter incoming Democratic administrations and the potential for the 2020 census to purposely undercount urban people.

We are past the tipping point for a healthy political system and are in for a descent into de facto one-party rule at the Federal level.
 
Last edited:
If someone hacked Trump's taxes and published them, would they be defrauding the USA?
If a foreign power hacked Trump's taxes, and a presidential candidate conspired with that power in the release of those hacked documents, then yes, the charge would be conspiracy to defraud the United States. You're focusing on whether the specifics of the released documents are fraudulent rather than whether the act of conspiring to release them is conspiracy. It's one of the charges for which Manafort was found guilty.
 
I'm not entirely sure time is on the Democrats side. The new generation coming after millennials tend to be nowhere near as liberal as we are.
 
Beto's a billionaire?
 
Trump's a billionaire?
 
If a foreign power hacked Trump's taxes, and a presidential candidate conspired with that power in the release of those hacked documents, then yes, the charge would be conspiracy to defraud the United States. You're focusing on whether the specifics of the released documents are fraudulent rather than whether the act of conspiring to release them is conspiracy. It's one of the charges for which Manafort was found guilty.

In Manafort’s plea deal, the special counsel specifies that Manafort defrauded the government by “impeding, impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful governmental functions of a government agency, namely the Department of Justice and the Department of the Treasury.”

This is a reference to his alleged money laundering (which obstructs the functioning of the IRS, a subsidiary of the Treasury), his failure to disclose foreign financial transactions (also within the purview of the Treasury), his failure to adequately disclose their lobbying under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (which is enforced by the National Security Division of the Department of Justice), and his obstruction of the investigation through witness tampering, which obstructs the operations of the special counsel’s office, part of the Justice Department.

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/14/17860410/conspiracy-against-the-united-states-paul-manafort-plea

They got him for his personal shenanigans going back years, not a conspiracy to release DNC emails.
 
I'm not entirely sure time is on the Democrats side. The new generation coming after millennials tend to be nowhere near as liberal as we are.

That's just teenage angst, delayed because people are getting (kind of) adult later in life. Don't assume they'll be that way even in a couple of years.

As for Beto, he's not a billionaire. But he's married into a lot of money, he was raised an elite brat, and he'll be perceived and attacked as such.
 
Top Bottom