I just stated a few minutes ago on a different thread that I think there are not enough swing votes to be had to make any difference in this election. is election has been decided. We just don't know for whom.
I agree with you about emergencies. But I do think that it makes a difference if you want the president to be proactive and actually working on policies, plans, and positions rather than just reacting to situations that are brought to him if they are important enough to interrupt his leisure activities.
Yes - she really would. There are a number of moderate democrats that would have voted for her as well.
I also think with our current president, that those who you surround yourself with is more important than I had thought in the past. I'm not going to sit here and say that Biden has been out of it all the time this year, but I suspect that many policies that were moved forward were a byproduct of those Biden had under him and that's OK if the right people are in the right position. Hey President Biden or Harris or Trump. We have your pen and table in the Rose Garden. We will see you after makeup. Trump of course takes the longest in makeup.
Which moderate Democrats? I highly doubt Haley will do as good as Trump will come 11/5. She also would not be having rallies in MSG or California drawing tens of thousands. Blacks and men would not be going towards Haley. The Republican party would not be doing as well with minorities overall with Haley. The missing are the never trumpers who NBC is now saying are going back to Trump.
so if they inherit a great economy from the previous administrations, then Presidents don't have to do anything. ok - the problem with that is it leads to a slow down in their 3rd year which is then masked by a failure during a pandemic.
Which moderate Democrats? For one, a number of women - many of which are turned off by Trump being a misogynist and would otherwise be open to supporting a Republican candidate. If we assume the Democrats still pick Harris - then Republican men are certainly not voting for Harris. Trump is a liability for Republicans. In 2024 - coming off a pandemic, with inflation post pandemic, with housing issues - brewing wars in the Middle East and Ukraine and aging baby boomers, the party NOT in the White House should be coasting into office this election cycle and that is not what has happened at all. The election is a toss-up.... and that is because Trump has a lot of baggage and has alienated a lot of voters, including a large part of an entire gender. It doesn't matter if Trump draws a big crowd in California - it is the most populous state in the Union, and Trump has a strong subset of people that will go and see him, especially when he isn't often available in California.... doesn't really mean anything at the ballot box. I also don't agree that the Haley wouldn't be doing as well with minorities - she may not be doing as well with black male voters, but she would be doing well with other minority groups and minority women as well. The Democrats shouldn't even really be in the running for the White House in 2024 - yet they are, with a 50/50 chance of winning.
Public dissatisfaction with the current conditions in the USA. There are a lot of people - in general that are not happy or concerned about the current conditions in the USA. I don't think a lot of that is the fault of the President - but that is how a lot of people vote, and have voted for over 60 years now.
Probably because having rallies in MSG and California are a waste of time and money. 2 states the GOP definintely ain't winning.
Yes. I agree with this a great deal. I always knew it was important, but I didn't know how important. I also think that different presidents delegate more or less than some others.
You say inheriting a strong economy means a president doesn't have to do much, but that's oversimplifying it. Trump introduced tax cuts (still going on), deregulation, and renegotiated several trade deals. All of this helped fuel the economy. The slowdown you mention was due to the global pandemic, not Trump’s policies. Unemployment was at 3.5% in February 2020 and the stock market was surging. Crypto too. The pandemic triggered a worldwide recession, and Trump's administration passed the CARES Act to cushion the impact and the economy started to ramp back up again towards the very end of his term. The point is down ballot, plus Trump will do better numbers percentage wise in both of those states than any Republican has since Reagan.
Nah Trump is only a liability for neocon Republicans. Him not winning in 2020 allowed the Republican party to be reshaped in those 4 years. It is not a much more diverse and populist party. Increasingly a anti-war party. Increasingly the party now worried about health when that used to be Democrats. Your line about "Dems shouldn't even be in the running" sounds more like cope and a defense mechanism. No matter who it was against, the Dems would have 45% of the vote. Even in 1980, there were similar issues with the Carter presidency, and Reagan just barely eclipsed 50% of the PV. Trump will reach that number this election cycle proving your point wrong. National elections are almost always competitive.
No I don't agree with this. This is a Presidential cycle that the incumbent party should lose - and I said so leading into 2020, there were lots of red flags and issues that were going to come up in 2020-2024, and that whoever won in 2020 was losing in 2024. Reagan won by nearly 20% in 1984, Bush Sr. won by 8% in 1988.... Clinton won his first term by 6%.... Clinton won his second term by almost 10% ... Obama won his first term by 7% and Biden won his election by very close to 5%.......... so yes, I believe that a good Republican candidate would win this election by 5% or more. As for a "cope and a defense mechanism" - I don't need a cope and defense mechanism - I don't live and die by Presidential politics, I have felt that the White House would change hands for 4 years and I have repeatedly said that I expect Trump to narrowly beat Harris. With the level of inflation we have had over the last 4 years, the international turmoil, gas prices increasing, COVID recovery - there is really ZERO reason for the incumbent party to be within 5% of the Republicans - other than who the Republicans nominated as their candidate. Also - "National Elections are almost always competitive" - define competitive, because with the Electoral College that isn't the case, and really outside of Bush v. Gore, and elections with Trump as a candidate - that really hasn't been the case. Even with Obama's second election, no one thought Romney would actually win. Trump has received 46% and 47% the last two times he has ran.
Ive never heard of this person, but I’m going to spend as much time fact checking as our “conservative” posters here. big if true.
