It won’t happen of course, but I found this to be an interesting “what-if” read.
I’m getting deja vu from 2016. We have
-Assurance that Trump will lose based on polls
-Fears that Trump won’t accept the results once he loses
-Talk about some sort of right-wing power coup
I’m legitimately concerned for liberals. When Trump wins (as is looking more and more likely), I foresee many of them having massive mental breakdowns possibly even worse than last time.
I really hope you’re right.
But I fear for Pres. Trump.
I think that Vice Pres. Biden will not actually make decisions as President, but will be controlled by a crew of ultra-liberals who will uphold policies that are so abhorent and anti-Christian that even those who absolutely despise Trump will be horrified that they actually voted for Joseph Biden.
If Biden won he’d be lucky to be president for 6 months before having to resign.
I don’t see the similarities…
Other than we should never “count our chickens before they hatch” - I cannot agree more. I did not like how the Press was all but counting the days to Hilary’s Inauguration. However, the truth is that Trump caught “lightening in a bottle” with the 2016 election. Less than thirty percent of eligible voters participated in primaries. Trump not being a Republican did not have the support of the party.
If you remember just some of the commons made by known conservatives:
- Ted Cruz Stated that Trump was a pathological liar, a moral.
- Rick Perry called him a cancer on conservatism that must be discarded.
- Rand Paul An Orange face wind-bag, a speck of dirt is more qualified.
- Marco Rubio Warn that Trump is dangerous and that we should not hand over the nuclear codes to him.
- Mike Pence Stated to former Bush Advisor; Dan Senor - that Trump was “unacceptable”…than signed on as his Vice President
The result was that each one of them endorsed Trump; after November they will be singing another tune.
In summation, 2020 will be nothing like 2016. We only knew Trump as a Reality Show Host and apparently that was enough for a plurality of voters? He didn’t build his wall, we have a pandemic that has killed over a hundred and fifty thousand souls and years of embarrassing footage of lies and incoherent speeches.
We need the more educated among to step up.
True, we should “Never say never” …but it is apparent that even Trump knowns he needs a Hail Mary pass at this point in the game.
I still don’t quite follow why the situation is worse for Trump now compared to 2016. His overall approval rating during the last election was something like 30% according to some metrics; they now report that he is at 41-43%. Among his base and a sizable chunk of independents, his approval has stably increased over the last few years, which indicates that his support should be stronger this election.
Similarly look at the polls. They tend to show Biden as being ahead, but also look at these same polls in the Trump/Hillary battle; in almost all cases, the gap is smaller now than in the last election. These polls have shown to be a very poor metric since around 2012 due to changing demographics of the voting public (e.g. more people without degrees vote, and more blue collar workers are willing to vote Republican). So if we make the assumption that the polls are off by the same amount this year, Trump is looking like he will win by a landslide.
From personal experience, “educated” people (having at least a Bachelor’s) are some of the most conformist members of society. They don’t necessarily have much skill at critical thinking, but they do know what decisions to make in order to appear acceptable. As such, it isn’t surprising that most of them default to Democrat politics. However, since their party preference is merely perfunctory, they are also the least likely people to take the time to vote.
Because he’s not running against Hillary.
Very well said.
Yeah, he’s running against Joe “Nurses breathe into my nostrils” Biden.
Keep in mind Biden doesn’t have the star power of being possibly the first female president. At best he’s just Mr. Obama’s VP.
Doesn’t matter. A lot of people hated Clinton so Trump’s attacks on her motivated them. Biden doesn’t cause that sort of vitriol. And this election, like any election with a sitting President is a referendum on that President and less than 50% approval is bad news for that sitting President. 50% strongly disapprove is very bad.
I recall before the election, many outlets were fawning over Clinton as being the “Most Qualified Candidate in History,” and then suddenly after her loss, there was immediate talk about how unlikable she was. Biden doesn’t cause any public disgust (or any emotion really), but as he would be a vehicle for democrat policies, he vicariously carries baggage into the election.
As for Trump’s approval rating, his numbers are still better than when he was elected. The main predictor of incumbent performance remains the economy, which was unbelievably healthy before the pandemic. Despite the downturn, the market fundamentals still seem strong given the circumstances, and Trump’s approval has not really dipped that much in terms of economic performance.
She was qualified, but she was only very hated by a segment of the population. Biden doesn’t elicit that response.
Yep, a Democratic President would have Democratic policies. That isn’t a problem for a large portion of the population though.
Doesn’t matter, his approval ratings are poor for an incumbent president.
It’s not healthy now though and it won’t be healthy for a good 6 months before the election. Any good will for the pre-pandemic economy will be gone by the election if not already.
The stock market doesn’t matter to the vast majority of voters that have nothing or very little in the stock market.
From personal experience, “educated” people (having at least a Bachelor’s) are some of the most conformist members of society. They don’t necessarily have much skill at critical thinking, but they do know what decisions to make in order to appear acceptable. As such, it isn’t surprising that most of them default to Democrat politics.
I agree with this broadly, however…
However, since their party preference is merely perfunctory, they are also the least likely people to take the time to vote.
Is this true? It was my understanding that it was generally those on a lower income and with less of an education that don’t vote at all. Even if your politics are “perfunctory”, voting is a big part of that performance. That’s mostly all that voting is, especially in America where the winning candidate can be known in a lot of states just by looking at historical voting patterns.
As an aside, I would say that not voting at all is probably more “non-conformist” than voting for the current president of the United States (or the vice-president of the previous one).
I’m more concerned for liberals if the progressive left wins.
What should the more educated do? Call for Pres .Trump to resign and call for VP Pence to run for President in his place? Sadly, I believe that VP Pence would get totally, absolutely slaughtered in the election because of his Evangelical Protestant Christianity–I LOVE it, but many Americans are offended by and afraid of what they consider fanaticism.
Call for another Republican to step up and run against Pres. Trump? That is not going to happen. It’s just not.
Or do you think that the more educated should vote for VP Biden and whoever he selects as his VP running mate? I don’t see how that is an intelligent choice for those of us who are opposed to the anti-life, high tax, pro-government regulation of all aspects of life policies of the current Democratic Party, and who believe that Joesph Biden will be controlled by others (more radical and not known to the public) if he wins the election.
Or do you think that the more educated should call for BOTH candidates to step down so they can be replaced by “intellectual” candidates? Who?! Anyone who has any brains at all would never, ever choose to run for political office! I’m being tongue-in-cheek here, but not totally–most intelligent people are more likely to devote themselves to a career or a vocation that requires intellect, and to look out for themselves and their families, friends, churches, clubs, towns, and all other things that they hold dear.
Or do you think that the more educated should get involved behind-the-scenes by becoming active in a PAC or lobbying or in an organization that attempts to influence politicians? I can go along with this, and I also think that we all need to be involved as much as we can with our local governments and issues.
I’m just not sure what you think “the more educated among us” should be doing.
One other thing that I know some will disagree with–often the “more educated” do not have the “social skills” to be able to converse with a variety of fellow human beings, to joke around, speak at a level that people understand, appeal to strangers, etc.
My brother-in-law is like this–he has earned two PhD.s in totally different subjects, and started a successful company in Silicon Valley–a highly-intelligent man who also happens to be a rock-solid political conservative and a lawyer–so he should be excellent at influencing people in political issues, right?
No. He’s awkward around others, and he has a way of appearing "snobbish"when he’s discussing the issues. People get the feeling that he looks down on them, and it makes them uncomfortable. And when he tries to be “just one of the guys,” it doesn’t come across well at all. Also, he’s totally impractical, and his health and personal life are a hot mess because he doesn’t relate well to even his close family. He’s tried dozens of churches over the last few years, BTW–just can’t find a place where he “can be fed.”
Again, I realize that there are intellectual people who are very good at relating to others, but I think they’re the exception. Interesting stat–medical laboratories (like where I work!) have a high percentage of staff members who have been diagnosed with Asperger’s–a syndrome that makes it challenging to relate to others!
This is wacko conspiracy theory stuff.
For what reason would he have to resign? Given his age I guess there is a possibility that health issues could sideline him, but Trump’s not that much younger. For what other reason would he have to resign?
I don’t think he has the mental capacity to be president. My father is pretty late into Alzheimer’s and see a lot of parallels with joe. Add in the stress of the job or president and I just don’t see how he can hold up to it.
Honestly I think we need some kind of age limit on the upper end for political office same as we have a minimum requirement.
I found this interesting, maybe he’s setting up the conditions to bow out and save face.
Maybe, but I got it from a liberal-turned-conservative (lived in NYC=Queens–the 'epicenter" during the COVID-19 crisis).
So what gave liberals the idea that VP Biden would be “President in Name Only”?
The liberal-turned-conservative plans to vote for Pres. Trump.