# Polls And Surveys - Trump Will Lose In 2020

##### Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
You are forgetting just how good Dems are at snatching defeat out of jaws of victory. [Patooka beat me to it, damn!]
Also, Alternet is not a good source.

And you are forgetting how totally bad Republicans are at actually governing.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
They're still paying normal income tax on those gains.
Isn't it capital gains tax rather than normal income tax?

I'm in favor of repealing His Flatulence's whole tax measure but I'm not in favor of trying to find as many things to tax as possible. There should only be a few taxes.

Agreed.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
And you are forgetting how totally bad Republicans are at actually governing.

Doesn't matter. Dems often find a way to lose anyway. Don't you remember 2004?

##### Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
And you are forgetting how totally bad Republicans are at actually governing.

Doesn't matter. Dems often find a way to lose anyway. Don't you remember 2004?

Yes, I do remember. That was the election where Republicans paid veterans to lie about a Vietnam war hero.

#### Elixir

And you are forgetting how totally bad Republicans are at actually governing.

Doesn't matter. Dems often find a way to lose anyway. Don't you remember 2004?

Yes, I do remember. That was the election where Republicans paid veterans to lie about a Vietnam war hero.

It's not like they can't/won't do something similar again. Trump is the nation's saving grace. Since day one I've been saying he's God's gift to Democrats. An entire armada of Republican swiftboats may not be enough to enable them to retain the Senate or the Whitehouse as long as Trump is the fat orange lying face of the party.

#### southernhybrid

##### Contributor
Considering how the candidates are attacking each other, I am very concerned that we may be looking at a second term for Trump. Maybe it's my age. Maybe it's due to the heartbreaking experience of voting for George McGovern in 1972, then watching him lose in a landslide to Nixon that makes me feel this way. None of the current candidates are very appealing to me. None of them have the type of charisma that is usually required for an American presidential candidate to be able to defeat an incumbent. I hope I am wrong, but if we nominate someone perceived as too far left, that could make it very difficult to win any of the states that are needed to beat Trump. If we do end up with a second term for Trump and the Democrats take back the Senate and keep the House, I feel confident that impeachment will be in order. Deja vu! This is taking me back to the 70s. But, Trump is far more corrupt and harmful than Nixon ever was.

#### Jolly_Penguin

##### Banned
Banned
Everyone was saying Trump had no chance in 2016. Don't be overconfident. Overconfidence is one of the big reasons Hillary lost. Plenty of potential voters thought she would for sure win so didn't bother to show up and vote for her. Repeating this effect is one of the few ways Trump will win again.

#### Jolly_Penguin

##### Banned
Banned
I hope I am wrong, but if we nominate someone perceived as too far left, that could make it very difficult to win any of the states that are needed to beat Trump.

Yang does better than the others in the primary in getting votes from across party lines. Probably because he spun the freedom dividend as a dividend everybody gets and not merely as welfare. Democracy dollars that he supports also has cross party appeal.

#### Harry Bosch

##### Contributor
Everyone was saying Trump had no chance in 2016. Don't be overconfident. Overconfidence is one of the big reasons Hillary lost. Plenty of potential voters thought she would for sure win so didn't bother to show up and vote for her. Repeating this effect is one of the few ways Trump will win again.

Yep. Totally agree with you and Southernhybrid. Republicans win election after election despite being fewer in number because they are so united and willing to rally behind their guy to achieve their goals.

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
I hope I am wrong, but if we nominate someone perceived as too far left, that could make it very difficult to win any of the states that are needed to beat Trump.

Yang does better than the others in the primary in getting votes from across party lines. Probably because he spun the freedom dividend as a dividend everybody gets and not merely as welfare. Democracy dollars that he supports also has cross party appeal.
What a bullshit statement. I don't recall any Democrats calling for a program called Medicare for All Democrats or Public College for All Democrats. You see the Dems divide and conquer statements because of your own bias.

#### Jolly_Penguin

##### Banned
Banned
I hope I am wrong, but if we nominate someone perceived as too far left, that could make it very difficult to win any of the states that are needed to beat Trump.

Yang does better than the others in the primary in getting votes from across party lines. Probably because he spun the freedom dividend as a dividend everybody gets and not merely as welfare. Democracy dollars that he supports also has cross party appeal.
What a bullshit statement. I don't recall any Democrats calling for a program called Medicare for All Democrats or Public College for All Democrats. You see the Dems divide and conquer statements because of your own bias.

WTF are you on about? I didn't say any Democrats called for that.

Conservatives tend to not support welfare programs and tell people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, etc. Yang's freedom dividend is for everyone and can therefore be presented as not being welfare, so can appeal to these conservatives.

Democracy dollars can also appeal to both sides of the aisle, as both sides have money from billionaires supporting them. Just raise the spectre of George Soros to get some conservatives on board.

#### Elixir

Just raise the spectre of George Soros to get some conservatives on board.

Heh - good point. And thanks to Trump, we can also go after Bezos' billions, Gates' billions, Tim Cook's billions - in fact, Trump will eagerly encourage his drooling followers to take money away from all of the actual billionaires who actually made their billions, of whom he is terminally jealous.

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
What a bullshit statement. I don't recall any Democrats calling for a program called Medicare for All Democrats or Public College for All Democrats. You see the Dems divide and conquer statements because of your own bias.

WTF are you on about? I didn't say any Democrats called for that.

Conservatives tend to not support welfare programs and tell people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, etc. Yang's freedom dividend is for everyone and can therefore be presented as not being welfare, so can appeal to these conservatives.
The ACA isn't marketed as welfare. Public education isn't marketed as welfare. UHC isn't marketed as welfare... conservatives hate all of those things... well, at least people that call themselves conservative and vote for Trump. So what Yang is doing isn't any different.

#### Gun Nut

##### Veteran Member
Will Faux Nooz program hosts be committing hari kari on air the day after election day?

No, they'll be following Uncle Vlad's direction and echoing Cheato's outrage at the "rigged election".
Ho hum.

I'd put this into stone. It is guaranteed.

#### Jolly_Penguin

##### Banned
Banned
I agree. So why not head that off at the pass and have the Democrats call for a more open and transparent election. So when Trump tries to play this card, they can throw that in his face?

#### Gun Nut

##### Veteran Member
I agree. So why not head that off at the pass and have the Democrats call for a more open and transparent election. So when Trump tries to play this card, they can throw that in his face?

my response to that is it's too late in the cycle... An impactful enough change to how elections are run likely would take a constitutional amendment. You need full Democratic control over both houses and the cabinet to make a change that would positively help only one team.

I like how my state (Colorado) does its elections. Every registered voter gets an uniquely identifiable balot in the mail (bar code). You have 2 weeks to fill it out and either mail it, drop it off at a ballot box (located at every train station, and other strategic locations to ensure convenience to all), or hand it in at an election office.
Once your ballot is received, it is scanned in and it's status updated throughout it's lifecycle.... "pending", "received", "validated", "counted".
You can track your ballot status online anytime. It will send you notification if there was a problem with the balot (duplicate, conflicting entry, etc....) or you can just see the status by checking it.

That is my idea of being pretty transparent... but in my opinion, the real change is needed on the federal level with respect to the electoral college. It needs to go.

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
I agree. So why not head that off at the pass and have the Democrats call for a more open and transparent election. So when Trump tries to play this card, they can throw that in his face?
The Dems already passed legislation that the GOP is ignoring in the Senate.

##### Contributor
Polls and surveys said the same thing about 2016, no?

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
Polls and surveys said the same thing about 2016, no?
On averages, national polls were ultimately right, statewide polls were right, depending on state (NH, CO, VA, FL were all accurate and IA, OH, NC picked the correct winner if not off by about 5 pts on margin). Oddly enough the "biased" Republican polling helped get some of the states right on the prediction.

Industrial and rural areas were under Trumped in the polls (but it was based on previous results). Aldo, Andrew McCabe's leak surely had an unknown consequence in the election in states like PA and WI which saw deflated Democrat vote totals in areas (PA) and in whole (WI).

#### Koyaanisqatsi

##### Veteran Member
Plus all polls incorporate a +/- error rate, which, in 2016 was larger than what actually ended up happening to put Trump in the WH.

#### Jolly_Penguin

##### Banned
Banned
my response to that is it's too late in the cycle...

To actually get it done, maybe so. But you don't have to actually get it done to counter Trump's election rigging rhetoric. You just have to establish in the psyche of the nation that you are pushing for transparency and the Republicans are blocking it.

##### Contributor
my response to that is it's too late in the cycle...

To actually get it done, maybe so. But you don't have to actually get it done to counter Trump's election rigging rhetoric. You just have to establish in the psyche of the nation that you are pushing for transparency and the Republicans are blocking it.

You just have to overwhelm the polls with so many votes that they can't be rigged away. Play the long game, and go for the next generation of voters (and leaders) instead of the old guard. It's easy for Republicans to rig elections when so many people don't vote because they aren't inspired by any of the candidates.

#### Elixir

my response to that is it's too late in the cycle...

To actually get it done, maybe so. But you don't have to actually get it done to counter Trump's election rigging rhetoric. You just have to establish in the psyche of the nation that you are pushing for transparency and the Republicans are blocking it.

You just have to overwhelm the polls with so many votes that they can't be rigged away. Play the long game, and go for the next generation of voters (and leaders) instead of the old guard. It's easy for Republicans to rig elections when so many people don't vote because they aren't inspired by any of the candidates.

Try though they might, Dem voters will never approach the lemminghood of the Republican electorate. It would take a candidate in a billion to unite them with the fervor with which Republicans will spontaneously rally around whoever they're told to - even a transparently ignorant, cruel, self-interested psychopath who would just as soon shit on them as look at them.

#### Gun Nut

##### Veteran Member
You just have to overwhelm the polls with so many votes that they can't be rigged away. Play the long game, and go for the next generation of voters (and leaders) instead of the old guard. It's easy for Republicans to rig elections when so many people don't vote because they aren't inspired by any of the candidates.

Try though they might, Dem voters will never approach the lemminghood of the Republican electorate. It would take a candidate in a billion to unite them with the fervor with which Republicans will spontaneously rally around whoever they're told to - even a transparently ignorant, cruel, self-interested psychopath who would just as soon shit on them as look at them.

Try? I see no try here. Dems are doing everything they possibly can to do the opposite. As per the usual. In this case, a thousand candidates - all arguing against each other over how unwoke they are and how stupid their policies are, and basically handing the election over to the Reps, who need only play the tapes of the debates to allow the Dems to explain in their own words why no one should vote for any of them. And the Dems have nothing from the "other side" about Trump... except how great he always is about everything...
No.. If they were attempting to be anywhere on the same planet as "trying", then there would be 1 candidate and a thousand voices praising him or her on how totally perfect and awesome they are. And the choice is obvious.

Joe Biden. Vice president for the most popular and highest approved President in US history. <mic drop>
No questions.
best VP ever. That's it.

Q "what's your policy for healthcare"

A "it will be the best you ever seen. I was the VP for Obama, motherfucker!"

Q" what are you going to do about X"

A "I actually know more about X than Trump. It will work out the best with me. Go vote for the VP of the smartest prez ever!"

Q "what do you have to say about....."

A "let me cut you off right there and say, "vote for me... best VP ever! Back to normal for us all!"

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
https://thehill.com/homenews/campai...pproval-takes-hit-in-battleground-states-poll

...
President Trump's economic approval numbers are declining in key battleground states and he trails a generic Democrat in the race for the White House, according to a poll conducted by Priorities USA, the nation’s largest Democratic super PAC.The survey of Florida, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin finds a generic Democrat leading Trump 48 percent to 40 percent, with 11 percent undecided. Thirty-six percent said they would definitely vote for the Democrat, against only 26 percent who said they would definitely vote for Trump.
...

Oozing towards November 6, 2020.

#### Derec

##### Contributor
President Trump's economic approval numbers are declining in key battleground states and he trails a generic Democrat in the race for the White House,

If only Democrats could run that guy!

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
President Trump's economic approval numbers are declining in key battleground states and he trails a generic Democrat in the race for the White House,

If only Democrats could run that guy!

Or maybe that gal. Elizabeth Warren, first female president of the United states? I would love to see conservative heads exploding across this great nation on November 7, 2020!

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.

What new information on any of these topics do you think women have in 2019 that they didn't have in 2016? Any woman who remotely cares about them would, by definition, have never voted for a GOP candidate in the last 20 years at least.

#### Elixir

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.

Yeah, I'm thinking of getting a sex change operation just so I can vote against Cheato as a woman.

"I actually know more about X than Trump."

LULZ! Ya trying to start WWIII?

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.
Ultimately, it matters more state wise, WI, MI, PA. It is hopeful though. Trump likely can't win an election if he losing more than 60% of the women vote. Of course, W was flirting with 50% and beat Kerry. And clearly conservatives are really good at holding their noses in the polls.

#### Keith&Co.

##### Contributor
What new information on any of these topics do you think women have in 2019 that they didn't have in 2016?
Well, the poll specifically says 'how Trump is handling his job.' In 2016, his work experience as a President was zip nada. So the 'new information' they have is 2017, 2018, most of 2019...

Or, Kavanaugh, shutdowns, trade wars, conviction as a charity embezzler....

Any woman who remotely cares about them
I'd have said 'cared' rather than 'cares.' Anyone who has been paying attention to Trump for more than six years is not terribly surprised by anything that's happened in the last three. But it is possible for people who did not care in 2016 to have come to care, now, as his antics get more and more coverage. Or maybe just one issue or item weighs heavily on their individual opinions.

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
In 2020 the GOP will rely on fear mongering. Gun grabbers! Gun grabbers! Socialism! Socialism! But this time will be met by a counter barrage. Women's health issues! Attacks on birth control! More tax cuts for the rich! Repealing ACA! Slashing Social security, Medicare and Medicaid! I predict this will be the most vicious election ever. And loudest and most obnoxious.

What is still unclear is who will eventually win the Democratic nomination. And how that will play out.

##### Contributor
In 2020 the GOP will rely on fear mongering. Gun grabbers! Gun grabbers! Socialism! Socialism! But this time will be met by a counter barrage. Women's health issues! Attacks on birth control! More tax cuts for the rich! Repealing ACA! Slashing Social security, Medicare and Medicaid! I predict this will be the most vicious election ever. And loudest and most obnoxious.
You have just described the last five elections, this isn't new.

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.

What new information on any of these topics do you think women have in 2019 that they didn't have in 2016? Any woman who remotely cares about them would, by definition, have never voted for a GOP candidate in the last 20 years at least.

Trump's utter lies. He claimed he would save Social Security and Medicare, and now tells us slashing both of these programs will be a project after his re-election. He has not spoken out as the GOP has destroyed Planned Parenthood. Or spoken out against the waves of laws from the GOP nationwide attacking Women's health issues. His plans for more tax cuts for the rich despite our already massive deficits. It is now very clear what Trump does and stands for. This was becoming clear in 2018 which was why the Democrats took back Congress in a big blue wave. Kavanaugh. The sorts of people Trump will seat on the supreme court given the chance if re-elected.

Trump won a bare majority of women's votes in 2016. But it is obvious from numerous polls Trump has lost the women's votes big time.
The pressure is on and women will not be voting for Trump and will not be staying home on election day.

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.

What new information on any of these topics do you think women have in 2019 that they didn't have in 2016? Any woman who remotely cares about them would, by definition, have never voted for a GOP candidate in the last 20 years at least.

Trump's utter lies. He claimed he would save Social Security and Medicare, and now tells us slashing both of these programs will be a project after his re-election. He has not spoken out as the GOP has destroyed Planned Parenthood. Or spoken out against the waves of laws from the GOP nationwide attacking Women's health issues. His plans for more tax cuts for the rich despite our already massive deficits. It is now very clear what Trump does and stands for. This was becoming clear in 2018 which was why the Democrats took back Congress in a big blue wave. Kavanaugh. The sorts of people Trump will seat on the supreme court given the chance if re-elected.

Trump won a bare majority of women's votes in 2016. But it is obvious from numerous polls Trump has lost the women's votes big time.
The pressure is on and women will not be voting for Trump and will not be staying home on election day.

I hope you're right, but all those things were pretty predictable behaviors for any Republican. You've described the agenda they've been publicly pushing for decades now. I'm not seeing anything enormously different about Trump in the areas you mentioned when compared to any Republican president or major candidate in recent memory.

What I'm saying is: don't repeat the mistake of 2016, during which time all of the above issues were well within the ability of women to understand, AND Trump's opponent was already popular with women because she would have made history as one if she won, and it still wasn't enough to defeat Trump in the electoral college.

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
http://cnu.edu/wasoncenter/2019/07/01-2020-election-forecast/

Here is an interesting read. Rachel Bitecofer was one of the few analysts who correctly called 2018. She analyzes races based on partisanship.

...
Yet, the media (and the voting public) has turned Trump’s 2016 win into a mythic legend of invincibility. The complacent electorate of 2016, who were convinced Trump would never be president, has been replaced with the terrified electorate of 2020, who are convinced he’s the Terminator and can’t be stopped. Under my model, that distinction is not only important, it is everything.
....

Trump’s second problem is that along with a turnout surge of Democrats that in many states like Virginia is simply larger than the turnout surges of Republicans because of demographics, he is deeply unpopular among Independents because of all the abnormal, norm-breaking and according to the Mueller Report, even illegal things, he does as president. This has left him with an abysmal approval rating of just 34.8% in 2019 among Independents, who largely broke against Republicans in the 2018 midterms as my theory predicted.
...

Final prediction for electoral college in 2020

Trump is losing women and Independents. And is energizing them to turn out and not make the mistakes of 2016.

##### Loony Running The Asylum
Staff member
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.
Ultimately, it matters more state wise, WI, MI, PA. It is hopeful though. Trump likely can't win an election if he losing more than 60% of the women vote. Of course, W was flirting with 50% and beat Kerry. And clearly conservatives are really good at holding their noses in the polls.

Bonespurs just barely squeaked by in Michigan. A lot of union autoworkers voted for him. They now feel very betrayed by him. He won't take michigan this time.

#### Jimmy Higgins

##### Contributor
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...ns-in-views-of-governments-role-and-of-trump/

Pew Research

Currently, 47% of men say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president, with an equal share saying they disapprove (47%). By contrast, 32% of women say they approve of how Trump is handling his job as president; 63% say they disapprove.

Since women voters outnumber male voters, this looks like a problem for the orange fool. Of course it all is a matter of turn out. But I don't see women voters sitting 2020 out. The full scale attack of the GOP on women's health issues, abortion, birth control, defunding planned parenthood, attacking Obamacare and more will almost surely galvanize unhappy women voters.
Ultimately, it matters more state wise, WI, MI, PA. It is hopeful though. Trump likely can't win an election if he losing more than 60% of the women vote. Of course, W was flirting with 50% and beat Kerry. And clearly conservatives are really good at holding their noses in the polls.

Bonespurs just barely squeaked by in Michigan. A lot of union autoworkers voted for him. They now feel very betrayed by him. He won't take michigan this time.
A very reasonable assumption. Of course, so was the assumption Trump would never achieve any of the achievements he did achieve in the primary and general elections.

#### fast

##### Contributor
Is there a relationship between wishful thinking and prediction or what?

All the ‘reasons’ in the world won’t change things. You can despise him, hate him, and bring to the table all the reasons in the world to demonstrate he will not get elected again. Bring it on! Conjure every conceivable thing you think shows that his chances of winning are nearly nil. Yes, your good reasons should ordinarily influence your prediction, but this is Trump we’re dealing with. He has already and continually defied odds that are best barely explainable post hoc.

That said, good reason alone needs be great (and not merely good), for as I see it, persistently winning in the face of growing good reason to fail requires a higher standard for assessment. If he has a heart attack and passes away, I’m going to take a strong pause of hesitancy before responding to someone who says, “well, he’s not gonna win this time.”

Sure, he can fail. It’s possible. And, there are plenty (garboodles) of reasons to think his reign is coming to an end, but I’d caution not to underestimate him—at least not until the curtain has fully been drawn down. It’s not over until it’s over; trivially true, but I say that for emphasis.

Now to my question.

Yes, we can wish for something to occur and refrain from predicting based on that, but with reasons to support our wishes, the prediction is almost guaranteed to be made. There is a poster here that once said there was no way Trump would ever become president, and he was not without good reason as Trump defied odds yet again.

Not all the facts are considered. We are misguided into thinking certain strong facts overwhelm the seemingly innocuous. They are in essence given a lower weight in our overall assessment. Generally, that makes sense to disregard low impact reasons, but (again) in the face of persistent winning against the odds requires a more in depth analysis checking for things that may explain why he is going to win this time.

It’s difficult, I know. The better explanations don’t often surface until after the befuddlement of an unexpected win occurs.

So, with all these reasons for why he won’t win, where’s the wishing thinking connection? It’s in understanding that the reasonings brought forward are insufficient given his track record. Oh please, use your logic and explain to me that the predictions are completely fact dependent.

PS; I wasn’t talking to anyone in particular; I just didn’t feel like using “one”.

#### laughing dog

##### Contributor
There is still a lot of time between now and the actual election for the Democrats to screw this up and/or for Trump to pull this in out.

#### jonatha

##### Veteran Member
Final prediction for electoral college in 2020

Who's getting the other 63 votes?

#### Koyaanisqatsi

##### Veteran Member
http://cnu.edu/wasoncenter/2019/07/01-2020-election-forecast/

Here is an interesting read. Rachel Bitecofer was one of the few analysts who correctly called 2018. She analyzes races based on partisanship.

...
Yet, the media (and the voting public) has turned Trump’s 2016 win into a mythic legend of invincibility. The complacent electorate of 2016, who were convinced Trump would never be president, has been replaced with the terrified electorate of 2020, who are convinced he’s the Terminator and can’t be stopped. Under my model, that distinction is not only important, it is everything.
....

Trump’s second problem is that along with a turnout surge of Democrats that in many states like Virginia is simply larger than the turnout surges of Republicans because of demographics, he is deeply unpopular among Independents because of all the abnormal, norm-breaking and according to the Mueller Report, even illegal things, he does as president. This has left him with an abysmal approval rating of just 34.8% in 2019 among Independents, who largely broke against Republicans in the 2018 midterms as my theory predicted.
...

Final prediction for electoral college in 2020

Trump is losing women and Independents. And is energizing them to turn out and not make the mistakes of 2016.

Pretty much. But he's also losing "strong approvers" among Republicans. Here's the latest YouGov poll:

And here they break it down even further:

That bottom section in particular is revealing. 53% of Republicans approve of "most" things Trump has done, but disapprove of a "few" things. I know that seems a little tame, but consider the level of entrenched support that Trump used to get among Republicans. If 53% are willing to finally concede--in a poll--that some of the things he's done aren't all that kosher with them, then that's actually a very large chink in the armor.

Combine that with only 62% of Republicans "strongly approving" of his job overall and we're looking at a huge potential swing and/or just sit this one out contingent.

And look at the white/male (aged 30-44)/$50-100K contingent, Trump's strongest support demographic. Only 30% across that board "strongly approve." For any incumbent, to have that low of an approval rating among your staunchest supporters is catastrophic to say the least. And among white/male (aged 18-29)/under$50K it's even worse, at something on the order of only 12% of that combined group strongly approving.

Among Indies (in general), only 19% "strongly" approve.

And, again, the reason to focus first on the "strongly approve" category is that they represent the percentage that a candidate can more-or-less safely count on in order to focus their attention on the others who aren't so strong, because those are the wild(er) cards; the fencesitters/potential swing/potential just won't bothers.

So he's got a huge problem to surmount--before he can even get to dealing with the overwhelming numbers of Democrats--particularly since Indies are the largest voting block and Republicans, in general, only make up about 23% of the electorate to begin with. So 62% total "strongly support" is 62% of 23%, or 14% of the total electorate that he can count on.

Even if you include the "somewhat approve" as a solid (and you can't), it's only at 88% approve. Which, again, is 88% of 23%, or 20% up against 35% Dems and 38% Indies total electorate.

So even if every single Republican in America who approves (somewhat or strongly) of Trump actually got off their asses and voted--and every single Independent who approves of Trump (somewhat or strongly) got off their asses and voted--he's still outnumbered by Dems and left-leaning Indies on the order of 20-25%.

Which in turn means he needs to either (or, in combination) suppress at least 25% of both Dems and Indies, or otherwise convince 25% to swing to him. There are only 12% among Indies who are "not sure" and only 1% among Dems.

So at the very least he'd need to convince that 13% to vote for him and suppress 12% Dems/Indies; i.e., to convince them to just not bother to vote the way the Russians did in 2016. They only managed to suppress about 2%-4% (if that) and that almost entirely among blacks.

They haven't stopped running their warfare, of course, but to make up an additional 10% suppression through the same tactics would be a nearly impossible feat, but even more improbable is Trump being able to convince the other 13% Dems/Indies to vote for him, while Russia successfully suppresses the other 10%.

There are other suppression tactics that will be incorporated--as they always are, because Republicans can only win by cheating--but they wouldn't come anywhere near 10%, let alone the full 25% necessary.

And that's just to even the playing field; to get parity of percentages, not necessarily anything to do with winning. That's just to get Trump's numbers up to the level where he can actually compete.

##### Contributor
Final prediction for electoral college in 2020

Who's getting the other 63 votes?

Susan Sarandon

#### Cheerful Charlie

##### Contributor
There is still a lot of time between now and the actual election for the Democrats to screw this up and/or for Trump to pull this in out.

There is still plenty of time for Trump to further screw his chances for re-election. And given his habits of rage tweeting and off the wall antics, I don't see him changing much. The entire nation may very well be suffering a bad case of Trump fatigue by November 6, 2020.

#### Koyaanisqatsi

##### Veteran Member
I'd lay even money he tries (and likely has been trying) to foment a "war." And by that, I of course mean a false pretense to kill a lot of brown people or their cultural equivalent. Iran seems the most likely, but China is also a contender. It all depends on who Putin wants us to attack, so I'd lean more toward Iran. Syria wasn't big enough to do anything for Trump--try as he and Putin did to make it a game-changer--so it would have to be something bigger (like Iran or China, but /China is too big, so maybe it will finally be North Korea with China agreeing--through Putin--to not do anything in retaliation).

Something along these lines. Something monumental as nothing else will do it. But then he's got the "deep state" that ironically formed because of his blatant allegiance to Putin to supposedly stop him.

My additional guess would be that's why Bolton quit. Either he knew of or guessed that was where Trump was heading and even he didn't want any part of it.

He won't have the wall anywhere near up nor will making more promises about it help, even if he did manage to raise the money. Unless Putin pulls something like MidEast peace (or its facade) and that's what the whole Netanyahu bullshit was about.

##### Contributor
Also, the polls are mostly moot if the recession that's been due for over a year hits between now and election day.

#### Loren Pechtel

##### Super Moderator
Staff member
Polls and surveys said the same thing about 2016, no?
On averages, national polls were ultimately right, statewide polls were right, depending on state (NH, CO, VA, FL were all accurate and IA, OH, NC picked the correct winner if not off by about 5 pts on margin). Oddly enough the "biased" Republican polling helped get some of the states right on the prediction.

Industrial and rural areas were under Trumped in the polls (but it was based on previous results). Aldo, Andrew McCabe's leak surely had an unknown consequence in the election in states like PA and WI which saw deflated Democrat vote totals in areas (PA) and in whole (WI).

The polls didn't show the effects of Comey's surprise because the pollsters didn't have time machines.

#### Gun Nut

##### Veteran Member
There is still a lot of time between now and the actual election for the Democrats to screw this up and/or for Trump to pull this in out.

The possibilities are endless...

Most probable cause for a Trump victory?

1) All the Democrats are talking about how all the Democratic Candidates are terrible for the Country... just take any 30 second clip from the debates as an example... the Republicans certainly will.
2) All of the Republicans are talking about how PERFECT the ONE chosen (and incumbent) candidate for President is.

Given only this, who in their right minds would vote for anyone but Trump, who has complete and total consensus, whereas any other candidate has nothing but contention amongst their own people.