PDA

View Full Version : Trump owns the GOP



John Smith
08-30-2017, 07:30 AM
Some overly simplistic math.

Let's say there are 100 Americans.

34% of them support Trump. That's 34 people.

Let's say 20 people are independent, 40 are dems, and 40 are republicans.

34 is 85% of 40. That aligns with the polls that show 80 plus % of Republicans still support Trump.

That is more than enough support to control the outcome of primaries, as it did in the GOP primary for president. This is why he wiped out his competition. This is why the Republicans will NOT impeach him, and don't care what he does.

They fear losing their seats to primary opponents.

Rich Jones
08-30-2017, 07:53 AM
Yep. They view their jobs as more important then saving America from this orange tyrant. True heroes...

Rich Jones
08-30-2017, 07:57 AM
If the Republicans stood up to Trump and impeached him, I don't believe there's another nut job out there with the charisma to rally the base to the present level of nuttiness. Once this freak of politics is gone, things can return to sanity.

P.I. Stazzer-Newt
08-30-2017, 08:31 AM
Return to.....

When was the last time US politics was sane?

peb
08-30-2017, 09:18 AM
John, your math is almost correct. The numbers for self identifying Republicans or Democrats is not 40%. It is around 28. 40% identify as independents. These numbers become important in midterms as they make up many if the voters. I suspect that Trump's diehard support base is likely the same group of people who voted for him in the early primaries, when it was still competitive. This was 20-25% of GOP primary voters, probably 10 % of the population. They likely didn't identify as reps prior to this election. The rest of the approval does come from people who identify as Republicans. Most people who self-identity with a party would be loath to say they don't approve of a president. But they don't necessarily like him. I know lots of ling term Republicans, very few wanted Trump to be the nominee, almost all voted for him in the general election. But even now, they all say, he's better than a liberal democrat. But the support is actually weak. He knows this, which is why he keeps holding campaign style rallies to keep the original Trumpists excited. His support is much weaker than your math would indicate. Republicans in Congress are not afraid if him politically.

Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk

oznabrag
08-30-2017, 10:02 AM
John, your math is almost correct. The numbers for self identifying Republicans or Democrats is not 40%. It is around 28. 40% identify as independents. These numbers become important in midterms as they make up many if the voters. I suspect that Trump's diehard support base is likely the same group of people who voted for him in the early primaries, when it was still competitive. This was 20-25% of GOP primary voters, probably 10 % of the population. They likely didn't identify as reps prior to this election. The rest of the approval does come from people who identify as Republicans. Most people who self-identity with a party would be loath to say they don't approve of a president. But they don't necessarily like him. I know lots of ling term Republicans, very few wanted Trump to be the nominee, almost all voted for him in the general election. But even now, they all say, he's better than a liberal democrat. But the support is actually weak. He knows this, which is why he keeps holding campaign style rallies to keep the original Trumpists excited. His support is much weaker than your math would indicate. Republicans in Congress are not afraid if him politically.

Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk

Not to challenge your analysis, I think you are spot on, but it's interesting to note that they are actual campaign rallies.

He is running for President in the 2020 election right now.

Norman Bernstein
08-30-2017, 10:12 AM
John, your math is almost correct. The numbers for self identifying Republicans or Democrats is not 40%. It is around 28. 40% identify as independents. These numbers become important in midterms as they make up many if the voters. I suspect that Trump's diehard support base is likely the same group of people who voted for him in the early primaries, when it was still competitive. This was 20-25% of GOP primary voters, probably 10 % of the population. They likely didn't identify as reps prior to this election. The rest of the approval does come from people who identify as Republicans. Most people who self-identity with a party would be loath to say they don't approve of a president. But they don't necessarily like him. I know lots of ling term Republicans, very few wanted Trump to be the nominee, almost all voted for him in the general election. But even now, they all say, he's better than a liberal democrat. But the support is actually weak. He knows this, which is why he keeps holding campaign style rallies to keep the original Trumpists excited. His support is much weaker than your math would indicate. Republicans in Congress are not afraid if him politically.


Who knows what will happen in 2018 and 2020... we've seen enough upsets and surprises to know that there are no 'safe' predictions.

Of course, fools rush in... and since I'm no exception, I'd say that the 2018 mid-terms are unlikely to unseat Republican domination... but then again, the Republicans in Congress are shown to have an inability to govern, since they are as heavily fractionalized as the Democrats. This could mean essentially NO legislative progress through to the Presidential election.

The 2020 Presidential election, on the other hand, is the Democrats' to lose. The big issue is pretty simple: who is right about it? Is the problem that we don't nominate and run candidates who are sufficiently 'left'? Or is the problem that we have no candidates who are able to 'hold' the left, as well as draw from the center?

My sense is that it's the latter. In retrospect, it's easy to see why Hillary Clinton was a doomed candidate... but it had NOTHING to do with how liberal, or how moderate, she was.... she simply had too much baggage, and too much of an ingrained image, to be able to succeed.

There are, however, fresh faces which have not accumulated any substantive baggage: Seth Moulton and Kamala Harris come to mind. The real question is how well they, or any other Democratic candidate, can 'straddle the line' by holding the traditional Democratic base, while attracting independents disenchanted with the fool we currently have in the White House.

amish rob
08-30-2017, 10:16 AM
Yep. They view their jobs as more important then saving America from this orange tyrant. True heroes...
A politician's job is to get elected.

Peace,
Robert

oznabrag
08-30-2017, 10:31 AM
Who knows what will happen in 2018 and 2020... we've seen enough upsets and surprises to know that there are no 'safe' predictions.

Of course, fools rush in... and since I'm no exception, I'd say that the 2018 mid-terms are unlikely to unseat Republican domination... but then again, the Republicans in Congress are shown to have an inability to govern, since they are as heavily fractionalized as the Democrats. This could mean essentially NO legislative progress through to the Presidential election.

The 2020 Presidential election, on the other hand, is the Democrats' to lose. The big issue is pretty simple: who is right about it? Is the problem that we don't nominate and run candidates who are sufficiently 'left'? Or is the problem that we have no candidates who are able to 'hold' the left, as well as draw from the center?

My sense is that it's the latter. In retrospect, it's easy to see why Hillary Clinton was a doomed candidate... but it had NOTHING to do with how liberal, or how moderate, she was.... she simply had too much baggage, and too much of an ingrained image, to be able to succeed.

There are, however, fresh faces which have not accumulated any substantive baggage: Seth Moulton and Kamala Harris come to mind. The real question is how well they, or any other Democratic candidate, can 'straddle the line' by holding the traditional Democratic base, while attracting independents disenchanted with the fool we currently have in the White House.

Sally Yates.

peb
08-30-2017, 11:01 AM
Not to challenge your analysis, I think you are spot on, but it's interesting to note that they are actual campaign rallies.

He is running for President in the 2020 election right now.
Beyond a doubt he is. Their is no reason to think Trump does not have very good political pollsters and analyst working for him at this point, and they have a very good picture of the lay of the land. He cannot afford to let that initial 10% base lose interest. One think about populist candidates, from either side of the political spectrum, their base support rarely exceeds a minor proportion of the overall electorate. That's why they typically don't last.

Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk

peb
08-30-2017, 11:02 AM
I will add that further evidence of this is Trump's attacks on GOP congressmen and senators. He has to keep up the anti- establishment mantra to keep that base enthused.

Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk

Norman Bernstein
08-30-2017, 11:03 AM
One think about populist candidates, from either side of the political spectrum, their base support rarely exceeds a minor proportion of the overall electorate. That's why they typically don't last.


From your lips, to God's ear! :):)

oznabrag
08-30-2017, 11:17 AM
Beyond a doubt he is.
Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk

Beyond a doubt.


JOHN YANG (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/president-already-running-re-election-spending-campaign-cash-trump-businesses/): The day President Trump took the oath of office, he did something no chief executive before him had ever done on Inauguration Day, filed the paperwork to be an official candidate for reelection.

The move allows him to raise, money more than $13 million in the first three months of the year, and hold rallies paid for by his campaign,

John Smith
08-30-2017, 01:06 PM
I am merely trying to make a point that the polls reflect a large majority of registered Republicans continue to support Trump, and that 34% of all voters is a large majority of Republican voters.

Do not think for a moment they are not concerned with primary opponents if they buck Trump, unless they do so in some sort of everyone does it.

This is why none have signed on to censure him, IMO.

A 34% base is a lot stronger than most seem to think.

peb
08-30-2017, 04:48 PM
I am merely trying to make a point that the polls reflect a large majority of registered Republicans continue to support Trump, and that 34% of all voters is a large majority of Republican voters.

Do not think for a moment they are not concerned with primary opponents if they buck Trump, unless they do so in some sort of everyone does it.

This is why none have signed on to censure him, IMO.

A 34% base is a lot stronger than most seem to think.
I do not believe many of them are worried about a primary opponent if they buck Trump. I read the numbers differently. I see no 34%base. I see a much smaller base and many if that base are not traditionally midterm type of voters. And who will run for all these seats as Trumpists? With how much capability?
No, congressmen and senators are not scared of Trump in the least.


Sent from my BLN-L24 using Tapatalk