Steve Bullock Would Crush Trump in 2020

[iuwclurker]

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

 

[toastedbread]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

The biggest problem for the democratic party is that they don't talk about jobs and the economy. Way too much focus on social issues and not enough on the pocketbook. Trump's slogans play better to the average folk than Hillary's 400 page policy papers.

 

[Hoosier_Hack]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

I agree with this. But what Americans know all to well is the Obama told us the old economy was the new norm. That was the Democrats message. The issues of kids not doing better than their parents was a Republican issue during the Obama rein.

What you are pointing at as a winning platform is a Republican platform. You are right it did win.... it could be a winning platform for everyone now. Give it a shot

 

[Hoosier_Hack]

The biggest problem for the democratic party is that they don't talk about jobs and the economy. Way too much focus on social issues and not enough on the pocketbook. Trump's slogans play better to the average folk than Hillary's 400 page policy papers.

The average folk.... the above average understood it just fine.... eye roll .... this is what the “average” folk see and hear. You guys really have a lot of work to do.

 

[stollcpa]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

Enjoyed this. This gentlemen has zero chance with the left wing nuts running the democrat party. They’re much more interested in Spartacus, Pocahontas, Bernie and Cortez. Guys like him and Kasich have no chance in either party right now.

 

[stollcpa]

The biggest problem for the democratic party is that they don't talk about jobs and the economy. Way too much focus on social issues and not enough on the pocketbook. Trump's slogans play better to the average folk than Hillary's 400 page policy papers.

Plus 1000%

 

[stollcpa]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

Serious question. You think he would have any chance to be nominated by democrats?

 

[iuwclurker]

The biggest problem for the democratic party is that they don't talk about jobs and the economy. Way too much focus on social issues and not enough on the pocketbook. Trump's slogans play better to the average folk than Hillary's 400 page policy papers.

Did you read the article?

“Anybody who won ... in a state Trump won by 20 has something to say that Democrats need to be listening to,” said Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress.

On that score, Bullock’s advice is typically practical and pithy: Show up. Listen as much as you talk. Emphasize pocketbook issues. Winning is not about litmus tests or micro-targeting: If you write off everyone who disagrees with you, you lose the capacity to govern. Turning out the base and persuading the unconvinced are not mutually exclusive. Every issue Democrats care about relates to people’s lives – campaigns are about expressing them so that this gets through.
​

and

However much it should concern us, he sees the Russia investigation as page six in the minds of average voters – they want to know how Democrats can improve their lives in the day-to-day. It’s not nearly enough, Bullock said, for candidates to rail against Trump. Americans look to politics for relief, and for hope.
​

and this quote in the OP:

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs....
​

 

[iuwclurker]

Enjoyed this. This gentlemen has zero chance with the left wing nuts running the democrat party. They’re much more interested in Spartacus, Pocahontas, Bernie and Cortez. Guys like him and Kasich have no chance in either party right now.

That thought crossed my mind first when I read about him. Maybe his best chance is to steal the Reagan Democrats back from Trump. That should be a piece of cake for him... ...Bullock is real whereas Trump is poppycock.

 

[Morrison]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

Trump will take a beating in 2020 on a Jimmy Carter level. Hell, Jimmy Carter himself would beat Trump in 2020. Trump is currently at least 8 points under water for where an incumbent President needs to be to get re-elected, and this is while riding a booming economy. Yes, two years is an eternity in politics, but Trump will most likely have trouble passing legislation if the democrats win the house, people will tire even more from the constant drama and vile attacks on decency and institutions, and the economy could start a downward cycle.

Trump’s supporters don’t realize they’re winning on some things now, only because they have the numbers on their side in Congress, with an experienced parliamentarian pushing things through the senate. The majority of Americans don’t support these things.

Trump has a core support of about 34-35% of the electorate-the shooting someone on 5th Avenue crowd. He won’t have swing voters that thought his act was just an act in 2016. No, once he showed that he really is who he appeared to be, the voters will correct this enormous mistake next time around. Trust that.

 

[Chester Fried]

Trump will take a beating in 2020 on a Jimmy Carter level. Hell, Jimmy Carter himself would beat Trump in 2020. Trump is currently at least 8 points under water for where an incumbent President needs to be to get re-elected, and this is while riding a booming economy. Yes, two years is an eternity in politics, but Trump will most likely have trouble passing legislation if the democrats win the house, people will tire even more from the constant drama and vile attacks on decency and institutions, and the economy could start a downward cycle.

Trump’s supporters don’t realize they’re winning on some things now, only because they have the numbers on their side in Congress, with an experienced parliamentarian pushing things through the senate. The majority of Americans don’t support these things.

Trump has a core support of about 34-35% of the electorate-the shooting someone on 5th Avenue crowd. He won’t have swing voters that thought his act was just an act in 2016. No, once he showed that he really is who he appeared to be, the voters will correct this enormous mistake next time around. Trust that.

People made the same arguments two years ago.

I think there is a not insignificant number of people who voted for trump but would never say so to a pollster. Logic would dictate you are right and Trump will get his ass kicked in 2020, but I don’t know if logic holds up in this instance.

 

[Chester Fried]

View embedded media

Huffington post:

So what should a candidate emphasize in 2020?

Democrats, Bullock told me, must run on issues that cut across our social divisions. Central to this is our economy. 50 years ago, 90 percent of kids in a family could expect to do better than their parents. Now only half of young people will – or believe that they will. Throughout America, too many people are working hard without making gains.

Given that, Bullock insists that Democrats must stress improving the lives of Americans in all regions of the country. If they only talk to people on the coasts, they won’t win – or, if they do, won’t be able to deliver a better life to those who need one.

To win and govern, Democrats must emphasize their common values and goals. Here Bullock cites health care. Democrats agree that health care must be affordable, accessible and comprehensive. But internecine warfare pitting one rigid formula against the other may defeat the party’s ability to give Americans the quality health care they deserve.

Tone, Bullock insists, is also critical. Democrats should talk in a way that bridges our differences, and that our young people can admire. Where Trump has exploited our divisions for political gain, Democrats should embrace the humanity and aspirations Americans share in common ― whatever their ethnicity and wherever they live.

For Bullock, a persistent opponent of big money in politics, that means making our broken political system work for Americans writ large. In his view, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) gave the game away by admitting that the Republican tax bill was passed to please the party’s donors. Laws should serve the common good, not the privileged few.

“It’s not about identity politics, “Bullock said.” It’s about lifting everybody up.”
​

His qualifications?

Unlike Trump, Bullock came up the way many people do – as the son of a single mom who worked his way through college, took out loans to finish law school, then worked to pay them off. For those who still think experience in office counts for something, he’s a one-term attorney general and two-term governor.

To get there, he campaigned hard across his state to reach voters where they live. Then, as now, he ran on issues of practical concern to people across the political spectrum: creating jobs, keeping big money out of Montana politics, pay equity for women, investing in education from preschool to college and preserving the state’s public lands.

Once elected, Bullock governed as he campaigned. Despite a legislature that was two-thirds Republican, he enacted a bill to disclose campaign contributions, increased the budget for education at all levels and advanced equal pay for women. He expanded Medicaid to cover 100,000 more Montanans and protected public lands from exploitation by private interests. Six years later, Bullock is one of America’s most popular chief executives.
​

What nickname would Trump give Bullock? How about Orange Crush.

Thank you for sharing this. I’d vote for him.

 

[stollcpa]

People made the same arguments two years ago.

I think there is a not insignificant number of people who voted for trump but would never say so to a pollster. Logic would dictate you are right and Trump will get his ass kicked in 2020, but I don’t know if logic holds up in this instance.

I had people on here tell me no way people would lie to pollsters. I knew many people who planned on voting for Trump but never admitted it around strangers. Dems still don’t understand that most of those same despicable, deplorable people and more going to vote for him again. They watch these crazies during the Kavanuagh hearings and the protesters today and say no way I want those nuts in power. They watch unhinged people like the Zeke like women screaming at the sky and think OMG we can’t put those people in charge.

 

[Morrison]

People made the same arguments two years ago.

I think there is a not insignificant number of people who voted for trump but would never say so to a pollster. Logic would dictate you are right and Trump will get his ass kicked in 2020, but I don’t know if logic holds up in this instance.

I can see that. You may very well be right, but it begs the question of why are there so many people willing to vote for someone that they’re too embarrassed to admit to voting for?

 

[stollcpa]

I can see that. You may very well be right, but it begs the question of why are there so many people willing to vote for someone that they’re too embarrassed to admit to voting for?

Because of the zealots running around shouting insults at them.

 

[Chester Fried]

I can see that. You may very well be right, but it begs the question of why are there so many people willing to vote for someone that they’re too embarrassed to admit to voting for?

It’s a pretty simple reason to understand right? There’s a sizable section of people on the left who are so unhinged by Trump that it’s not worth being forthcoming about. Personally I think that makes the person a huge chickenshit but understand it.

 

[iuwclurker]

People made the same arguments two years ago.

I think there is a not insignificant number of people who voted for trump but would never say so to a pollster. Logic would dictate you are right and Trump will get his ass kicked in 2020, but I don’t know if logic holds up in this instance.

Fair argument. I'd counter with fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I think Trump fairly well maxed out on his voter turnout in 2016. I doubt Hillary maxed out on the Democratic potential. There are many, many Never Again! voters waiting for their chance, in addition to a lot of betrayed Trump voters. That's on top of the fact Trump won the swing states by fairly small margins. Time will tell. I've already gone on record as predicting Trump will resign by January 1, 2020, making it moot.

 

[iuwclurker]

I had people on here tell me no way people would lie to pollsters. I knew many people who planned on voting for Trump but never admitted it around strangers. Dems still don’t understand that most of those same despicable, deplorable people and more going to vote for him again.

It's called the Bradley Effect, though Trump's not black of course. People were surprised then but aren't anymore. You're showing your arrogant condescension here.

 

[Hoosier_Hack]

Trump will take a beating in 2020 on a Jimmy Carter level. Hell, Jimmy Carter himself would beat Trump in 2020. Trump is currently at least 8 points under water for where an incumbent President needs to be to get re-elected, and this is while riding a booming economy. Yes, two years is an eternity in politics, but Trump will most likely have trouble passing legislation if the democrats win the house, people will tire even more from the constant drama and vile attacks on decency and institutions, and the economy could start a downward cycle.

Trump’s supporters don’t realize they’re winning on some things now, only because they have the numbers on their side in Congress, with an experienced parliamentarian pushing things through the senate. The majority of Americans don’t support these things.

Trump has a core support of about 34-35% of the electorate-the shooting someone on 5th Avenue crowd. He won’t have swing voters that thought his act was just an act in 2016. No, once he showed that he really is who he appeared to be, the voters will correct this enormous mistake next time around. Trust that.

Yes I’m sure all that voted for him because they liked his policies he laid out in 2016, will look at the score card in 2020 and say, “ he achieved 85% of everything he said he would do, but he is an ass so I’m voting no.”

There are better odds provided in Vegas than there are of that happening. Good luck

 

[Chester Fried]

Fair argument. I'd counter with fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. I think Trump fairly well maxed out on his voter turnout in 2016. I doubt Hillary maxed out on the Democratic potential. There are many, many Never Again! voters waiting for their chance, in addition to a lot of betrayed Trump voters. That's on top of the fact Trump won the swing states by fairly small margins. Time will tell. I've already gone on record as predicting Trump will resign by January 1, 2020, making it moot.

Yep, that’s the other side of the coin and the one id put money on if I had to. It’s hard sometimes to consider that many people really don’t care and are not locked into politics in a day to day basis like we are here. The economy is generally doing well and if it is in 2 years (big assumption) then things could break for trump again if he’s running against Warren or Harris or Booker.

I also agree that it will be moot. I think Trump will see the writing on the wall and will say he’s not running for a second term and that he’s MAGA’d more in one term than any other person could do in 10 terms and that he sees no reason to run again.

 

[iuwclurker]

Yep, that’s the other side of the coin and the one id put money on if I had to. It’s hard sometimes to consider that many people really don’t care and are not locked into politics in a day to day basis like we are here. The economy is generally doing well and if it is in 2 years (big assumption) then things could break for trump again if he’s running against Warren or Harris or Booker.

I also agree that it will be moot. I think Trump will see the writing on the wall and will say he’s not running for a second term and that he’s MAGA’d more in one term than any other person could do in 10 terms and that he sees no reason to run again.

I saw a county-wide breakdown for Monroe County after the 2016 election. Turnout of registered voters was around 70% in the rural parts of the county, just over 50% in the Bloomington sections. Of course, Bloomington's a liberal outlier, perfused with Bernheads, many probably butthurt, but it's still suggestive of the degree of Trump turnout. 70% is stunning. How much higher can he push that up? This November will be interesting from a turnout standpoint because in between turnout is said to be very low. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trumpsters turn out in their 70% numbers again and Republicans could easily dominate and not even lose the House.

My prediction on Trump resigning by Jan 1, 2020 is based on the assumptionn that Democrats take the House and subpoena his taxes (they're saying they will). He might be forced (in his own mind) to resign to protect himself from that.

 

[iuwclurker]

Bullock's the kind of person who might have the necessary legitimacy to actually get a ban on assault rifles without paralyzing panic-stricken gun owners with the fear of losing all their guns and ammo.

 

[stollcpa]

I saw a county-wide breakdown for Monroe County after the 2016 election. Turnout of registered voters was around 70% in the rural parts of the county, just over 50% in the Bloomington sections. Of course, Bloomington's a liberal outlier, perfused with Bernheads, many probably butthurt, but it's still suggestive of the degree of Trump turnout. 70% is stunning. How much higher can he push that up? This November will be interesting from a turnout standpoint because in between turnout is said to be very low. I wouldn't be surprised to see Trumpsters turn out in their 70% numbers again and Republicans could easily dominate and not even lose the House.

My prediction on Trump resigning by Jan 1, 2020 is based on the assumptionn that Democrats take the House and subpoena his taxes (they're saying they will). He might be forced (in his own mind) to resign to protect himself from that.

Besides political pot shots, what is the house going to do with his tax returns that the IRS hasn’t?

 

[UncleMark]

I can see that. You may very well be right, but it begs the question of why are there so many people willing to vote for someone that they’re too embarrassed to admit to voting for?

Shame.

 

[UncleMark]

My prediction on Trump resigning by Jan 1, 2020 is based on the assumptionn that Democrats take the House and subpoena his taxes (they're saying they will). He might be forced (in his own mind) to resign to protect himself from that.

Resigning wouldn't protect him from that. It would in fact make him more vulnerable.

 

[iuwclurker]

Besides political pot shots, what is the house going to do with his tax returns that the IRS hasn’t?

LOL

 

[iuwclurker]

Resigning wouldn't protect him from that. It would in fact make him more vulnerable.

You sure? I don't know under what circumstances prosecutors or non-congressional investigators can subpoena his taxes.

 

[UncleMark]

You sure? I don't know under what circumstances prosecutors or non-congressional investigators can subpoena his taxes.

IANAL, but I can't see how him not being President would make him less subject to subpoena. The opposite makes much more sense to me.

 

[Hoosier_Hack]

Bullock's the kind of person who might have the necessary legitimacy to actually get a ban on assault rifles without paralyzing panic-stricken gun owners with the fear of losing all their guns and ammo.

The dem party isn’t trusted enough for that....

 

[iuwclurker]

IANAL, but I can't see how him not being President would make him less subject to subpoena. The opposite makes much more sense to me.

My thinking was that Congress wouldn't investigate him once he's not in office. ALso IANAL but it seems the criminal/civil justice system is more circumscribed than COngress.

 

[UncleMark]

My thinking was that Congress wouldn't investigate him once he's not in office. ALso IANAL but it seems the criminal/civil justice system is more circumscribed than COngress.

Maybe they wouldn't, but they certainly could. If he resigned rather than allow his taxes to be turned over, that would be part of some kind of deal. It wouldn't be done to "protect" him from a legal/constitutional standpoint.

 

[mikewoodson2]

Trump will take a beating in 2020 on a Jimmy Carter level. Hell, Jimmy Carter himself would beat Trump in 2020. Trump is currently at least 8 points under water for where an incumbent President needs to be to get re-elected, and this is while riding a booming economy. Yes, two years is an eternity in politics, but Trump will most likely have trouble passing legislation if the democrats win the house, people will tire even more from the constant drama and vile attacks on decency and institutions, and the economy could start a downward cycle.

Trump’s supporters don’t realize they’re winning on some things now, only because they have the numbers on their side in Congress, with an experienced parliamentarian pushing things through the senate. The majority of Americans don’t support these things.

Trump has a core support of about 34-35% of the electorate-the shooting someone on 5th Avenue crowd. He won’t have swing voters that thought his act was just an act in 2016. No, once he showed that he really is who he appeared to be, the voters will correct this enormous mistake next time around. Trust that.

You need to read more outside your echo chamber Morrison.

Trump is at 51% approval in the Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll.

This is the only national daily tracking poll conducted. Gallup no longer does one.

Rasmussen was the MOST accurate poll in 2016 -- predicting Clinton at 47% and Trump at 46% on election day.

Here is the link...

 

[Morrison]

You need to read more outside your echo chamber Morrison.

Trump is at 51% approval in the Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll.

This is the only national daily tracking poll conducted. Gallup no longer does one.

Rasmussen was the MOST accurate poll in 2016 -- predicting Clinton at 47% and Trump at 46% on election day.

Here is the link...

If I’m in an echo chamber, it’s not by design. I seek the truth no matter where it leads. Appreciate the link, and wasn’t aware that Rasmussen was the only daily tracking poll available these days.

 

[Ladoga]

If I’m in an echo chamber, it’s not by design. I seek the truth no matter where it leads. Appreciate the link, and wasn’t aware that Rasmussen was the only daily tracking poll available these days.

Gallup obtains polling responses daily, but they aggregate the entire week getting 1500 responses and reporting the result weekly. They made the change last January.

 

[iuwclurker]

Maybe they wouldn't, but they certainly could. If he resigned rather than allow his taxes to be turned over, that would be part of some kind of deal. It wouldn't be done to "protect" him from a legal/constitutional standpoint.

Sorry, I didn't get the memo this was an iANAL discussion. I stand by my prediction.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Maybe they wouldn't, but they certainly could. If he resigned rather than allow his taxes to be turned over, that would be part of some kind of deal. It wouldn't be done to "protect" him from a legal/constitutional standpoint.

I don't think there's any legal argument for Trump to withhold his taxes based on any sort of executive privilege. So if Congress wants them as part of some legitimate investigation, it's probably irrelevant whether or not he's still in office.

 

[iuwclurker]

I don't think there's any legal argument for Trump to withhold his taxes based on any sort of executive privilege. So if Congress wants them as part of some legitimate investigation, it's probably irrelevant whether or not he's still in office.

Legitimate or not, I think the majority of people would view a Congressional investigation after he leaves office as vengeful. I can't see that realistically happening, whereas they are now openly talking about doing it come January.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Legitimate or not, I think the majority of people would view a Congressional investigation after he leaves office as vengeful. I can't see that realistically happening, whereas they are now openly talking about doing it come January.

This is probably correct, only because congressional democrats possess some level of decorum lacking on the other side.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

This is probably correct, only because congressional democrats possess some level of decorum lacking on the other side.

Right . . . . . .

 

[stollcpa]

LOL

How about answering?