Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Osterich wrote:

Keep your head in the sand.

And yet...that doesn't respond to anything, does it? It's not a refutation of what was previously posted.

I realize you folks aren't big on "facts" and "logic," but didn't it strike you as--at the least--odd that a story about tens of thousands of illegal voters, in a single state, wasn't the biggest thing in this country's news, eclipsing even the Trump Shutdown? Didn't it make you think that, just possibly, there was a little more to the story than was in that snippet from Fox?

It didn't? Really? That says more about you than it does about the story itself, or about Fox for that matter.

Good morning! How are all you LRC stable geniuses doing this fine am?

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/07/12/trump-speaks-after-nato-summit-stable-genius-newday-vpx.cnn

Something to think about...

How do you think Trump will act as a former president? Most keep pretty quiet.

Assuming he loses in 2020 he could run again in 2024....although he would be remarkably old.

Who runs with the Trump wing of the GOP once he’s done? Alex Jones? Who’s he next “public figure” to successfully run for president?

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

Something to think about...

How do you think Trump will act as a former president? Most keep pretty quiet.

Assuming he loses in 2020 he could run again in 2024....although he would be remarkably old.

Who runs with the Trump wing of the GOP once he’s done? Alex Jones? Who’s he next “public figure” to successfully run for president?

Alan

These are all good questions. First, let us just hope he loses in 2020. Four years of this chaos with no reality based strategy for anything is bad enough. Eight years and we may never recover as a nation.

If he does lose in 2020 I doubt he will go quietly. Part of Trump’s negative impact on US politics will be others who will try and emulate his approach. In other words, more Trump-like politicians who will appeal to the 25-30% of the population that evidently crave authoritarian / one party rule.

I am not sure how we get away from this corrosive style of politics which is antithetical to democracy but I hope we can.

Flagpole wrote:

SAlly V wrote:

You are the DS who guaranteed Trump would not win. You have guaranteed Trump was done for two years now. You look like a clown more than anyone who has every been here. Give it a rest.

1) I said Trump would not win unless he or is campaign cheated or if aliens from space came down here and made us vote for him. His staff has clearly cheated, but again (I've told you this already), if you'd like to wait until it is official, I'm willing to wait. Bottom line is that I was right about the election and I will be proven right.

Funny thing is that you have never showed proof that you said it with exceptions and no one has ever backed you up.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Something to think about...

How do you think Trump will act as a former president? Most keep pretty quiet.

Assuming he loses in 2020 he could run again in 2024....although he would be remarkably old.

Who runs with the Trump wing of the GOP once he’s done? Alex Jones? Who’s he next “public figure” to successfully run for president?

Alan

If he loses in 2020, there is a good chance that he will resign before the inauguration, so that Pence could pardon him. Or he will make a last minute visit to Moscow and stay there .

If not, the chances are that all the indictments are unsealed on the inauguration day. And anything the next president does will be overshadowed by the news of "trial of the century."

hiui wrote:

Osterich wrote:

Keep your head in the sand.

And yet...that doesn't respond to anything, does it? It's not a refutation of what was previously posted.

I realize you folks aren't big on "facts" and "logic," but didn't it strike you as--at the least--odd that a story about tens of thousands of illegal voters, in a single state, wasn't the biggest thing in this country's news, eclipsing even the Trump Shutdown? Didn't it make you think that, just possibly, there was a little more to the story than was in that snippet from Fox?

It didn't? Really? That says more about you than it does about the story itself, or about Fox for that matter.

Of course it’s not front page news. It doesn’t fit the narrative.

Keep your head in the sand.

It depends on the economy and the Mueller probe and the Dem candidate. If the economy is still humming along and Mueller is still making everyone guess then Trump easily stays around 40% approval. If the Dem candidate then turns off half of the base like Clinton then there’s a greater than 50/50 chance Trump is re-elected.

Trump won with only 46% of the vote. He probably can’t get 46% again, but history has shown us a president can win with a popular vote in the low 40s. And since turnout is typically only 50-60% it all comes down to mobilization.

Alan

Osterich wrote:

hiui wrote:

And yet...that doesn't respond to anything, does it? It's not a refutation of what was previously posted.

I realize you folks aren't big on "facts" and "logic," but didn't it strike you as--at the least--odd that a story about tens of thousands of illegal voters, in a single state, wasn't the biggest thing in this country's news, eclipsing even the Trump Shutdown? Didn't it make you think that, just possibly, there was a little more to the story than was in that snippet from Fox?

It didn't? Really? That says more about you than it does about the story itself, or about Fox for that matter.

Of course it’s not front page news. It doesn’t fit the narrative.

Keep your head in the sand.

Yep, definitely says more about you.

I think Beto can mobilize like no other but I have doubts about him in a national campaign.

Harris and Booker also would have problems in a national campaign unless they can reach back and grab that Obama magic. We will see. If Harris or Booker take Iowa in the primary then they can be taken seriously.

Biden has name recognition and nostalgia and has already shown to not be scared to fight Trump at his own game of verbal attacks.

It’s really all about momentum. Once the debates start we will see who has the gift of gab and can actually debate and carry momentum. Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Bush Jr all had it. They could sling the jive better than others on stage.

Alan

In a "change" election, voters are gravitated toward the candidate more different from the incumbent. Advantage Harris.

I would like Harris or Booker to Ben the nominee.

They both would be good in debates and have a lot of charisma.

And I think either would be good once they got the job.

Booker is a moderate. His agenda would make him more electable in the general election.

Harris would be good if the country strongly rebels against the path Republicans have lead us.

Beto would be a good running mate for either.

I really wanted Biden and or Warren to participate in 2016 instead of letting Hillary go unchallenged by Democrats.

They missed the boat, to me.

The Republicans will be left with Pence as their only option if they don’t jump on the impeach and convict bandwagon real soon.

If Trump steps down or simply announces he’s not running again late into the election process, it would be too late for a real primary competition.

They need a competitive Republican primary.

I know that’s not normal with an incumbent that can run again.

But these times are not normal.

Osterich wrote:

hiui wrote:

And yet...that doesn't respond to anything, does it? It's not a refutation of what was previously posted.

I realize you folks aren't big on "facts" and "logic," but didn't it strike you as--at the least--odd that a story about tens of thousands of illegal voters, in a single state, wasn't the biggest thing in this country's news, eclipsing even the Trump Shutdown? Didn't it make you think that, just possibly, there was a little more to the story than was in that snippet from Fox?

It didn't? Really? That says more about you than it does about the story itself, or about Fox for that matter.

Of course it’s not front page news. It doesn’t fit the narrative.

Keep your head in the sand.

It fits Fox News' narrative like a glove. Why aren't they talking about it 24/7?

Runningart2004 wrote:

I think Beto can mobilize like no other but I have doubts about him in a national campaign.

Harris and Booker also would have problems in a national campaign unless they can reach back and grab that Obama magic. We will see. If Harris or Booker take Iowa in the primary then they can be taken seriously.

Biden has name recognition and nostalgia and has already shown to not be scared to fight Trump at his own game of verbal attacks.

It’s really all about momentum. Once the debates start we will see who has the gift of gab and can actually debate and carry momentum. Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Bush Jr all had it. They could sling the jive better than others on stage.

Alan

I think you underestimate how popular President Trump is. Even though it is a minuscule sample size; when called, Republicans I know either decline to do a poll or they tell them they are Democrat and say they disapprove. I firmly believe Trumps in the 40’s because of NYC, California, and Illinois where he is extremely unpopular. No poll including Rasmussen give any clear indication or direction.

Trump will always have a good chance as long as the electoral college is still around which it looks like it will be. He beat Clinton with 52.1 in Ohio, 49 in Florida, 49.8 in North Carolina, and 51.5 in Iowa. I don’t see him taking Nevada, Virginia, and Colorado. My question is which of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin can he hold onto? I don’t see him winning all 3 unless he goes up against Warren.

I don’t know how you feel but Flagpole disagrees with me that Biden would more then likely be a lock to beat Trump. As a Trump supporter I would be very comfortable with the election if he went up against Warren, Sanders, or any other “socialist” far left candidate.

I'm not sure about your math. He's not going to win with a low 40's vote unless Ross Perot is running.

Runningart2004 wrote:

I think Beto can mobilize like no other but I have doubts about him in a national campaign.

Harris and Booker also would have problems in a national campaign unless they can reach back and grab that Obama magic. We will see. If Harris or Booker take Iowa in the primary then they can be taken seriously.

Biden has name recognition and nostalgia and has already shown to not be scared to fight Trump at his own game of verbal attacks.

It’s really all about momentum. Once the debates start we will see who has the gift of gab and can actually debate and carry momentum. Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Bush Jr all had it. They could sling the jive better than others on stage.

Alan

It is still very unclear to me— and probably everyone—which Dem would have the best shot against Trump.

I don’t think Booker, Harris, or Warren would win.

Honestly, Beto seems to have the most momentum and energy surrounding him right now. I think things could become a lot more interesting depending on how this next round of border security/ shutdown part II talks go. If Trump decides to shutdown the government again I think he’s done and it might not really matter who the Dems run(as long as it’s not Clinton, Warren, or Sanders).

If Trump invokes a state of emergency and tries to take land from Texas ranchers—then I think Beto would be a great choice at that point.

Beto is from the Texas border and there are many Texas Republicans who oppose a wall AND who would be even more pissed if Trump tries a federal land grab. If that plays out and Beto runs—I think Texas could be at play. Could you imagine a Dem winning Texas? That would change the entire electoral college map / math.

I think Trump is going to have problems holding Wisconsin (especially after tax season when WI residents are going to get hit hard by repeal of SALT deductions in Trump/Ryan/McConnell tax plan), Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Florida will be a toss up as usual. So if a Beto / Texas problem also arose I don’t see a path to winning for Trump in that scenario.

One big question out there right now is—will Trump have any GOP challengers in 2020? The Republican Party / RNC is doing all it can to prevent this from happening but....

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/26/us/politics/trump-rnc-2020.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

I know at least half of LRC readers will dismiss this as fake news since it’s from the “failing New York Times. Fake News!!!!” But it is an interesting read.

If Trump faces a primary challenge I think he’ll be down before the general election.

I agree with the above poster—Beto seems to be the most exciting potential candidate right now. Julian Castro is also a very interesting candidate who I personally think would do well—he’s also from Texas. Harris, Booker, Biden, Oprah, George Clooney, Bloomberg, Hickenlooper, and Brown are all interesting and have potential. I do not think HR Clinton, Warren, or Bernie are electable.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

It depends on the economy and the Mueller probe and the Dem candidate. If the economy is still humming along and Mueller is still making everyone guess then Trump easily stays around 40% approval. If the Dem candidate then turns off half of the base like Clinton then there’s a greater than 50/50 chance Trump is re-elected.

Trump won with only 46% of the vote. He probably can’t get 46% again, but history has shown us a president can win with a popular vote in the low 40s. And since turnout is typically only 50-60% it all comes down to mobilization.

Alan

I'm not sure about your math. He's not going to win with a low 40's vote unless Ross Perot is running.

No, he just needs more 3rd party candidates to run and steal votes.

He won with 46%

He can win with 43% if another candidate gets 3% on top of the usual 3rd party nobodies.

He definitely doesn’t win WI or MI again. They won’t be fooled twice. The tariffs have hurt those states bad. Same with PA.

AZ could flip. FL could flip. Even NC could flip.

I just don’t see the same extraordinary situation play out where he doesn’t win at least a plurality if votes.

The inability to secure wall funding will be his deathnail. He will attempt executive order/state of emergency and it will be stuck in litigation limbo. Rush and Ann Coulter are already killing him. His base lives by their breath. I’m not sure his popularity will recover from the high 30s.

The most likely scenario is that many voters who voted for him in 2016 simply stay home. Similar to what happened to Clinton as dejected Sanders voters stayed home.

Alan