The Coming Trump Landslide In The 2020 Presidential Election

[MementoMori_]

There are few presidents that the left despised more than Ronald Reagan. Yet after one of the most successful first terms of any president in history, employing conservative economic, domestic and foreign policies that completely reversed Carter's failed progressive agenda, he was reelected in the biggest landslide in the history of the American presidency to this day: winning 49 out of 50 states. And he went on to an even more successful second term.

In spite of the Democrat's relentless attempt to destroy President Reagan and return to the failed progressive policies of the Carter presidency, Americans could not get enough of Reagan's success. They saw the stark contrast between their pocketbooks under Carter’s leftist economics and Reagan’s conservative economics. They saw the stark contrast in America's strength and status in the world. They saw through the Democrat's radical deceptions and America diminishing agenda. After years of malaise under Carter’s failed Democrat ideas, almost forgetting it was possible, they finally felt proud to be Americans again.

President Trump has done the same thing. He has made America great again after 8 years of failed Obama radical socialism. And it's taken him only 2 years in spite of the vicious attempt by the now even further left socialist Democrats to derail the entire country in order to prevent President Trump from looking so good after defeating them in an election they felt entitled to win. The Democrats are moving further and further in the wrong direction, doubling down on their losing socialist agenda with no indication that they even understand the mistake they are making much less how to correct it.

In spite of the many differences between Presidents Reagan and Trump, there are also many parallels. I think a landslide reelection is going to be one of them.

[kingofthellamas]

Hmmm. My view is Regan united Americans - but trump seems to be ripping Americans apart.

That's not to say he won't win though, just that the loosers will hate him more than those who voted against Reagan.

I don't see a landslide myself. He should win. (I think more presidents do get a second term these days) . I doubt it will be the landslide you hope for.

Tbh I hope I'm wrong because we do need greater unity. As much as I doubt it will happen , greater unity around a president would be good thing for America imho (although I'd prefer it was not a pussy grabbing, disabled hating mysognst)

[MementoMori_]

"trump seems to be ripping Americans apart."

Did you mean to say Obama? Obama ran the country in the wrong direction for 8 years and when half the country was furious he reminded us that "elections have consequences." Hillary Clinton called us the deplorables. Can't blame President Trump for wanting to turn it around. With that kind of 180, naturally some people are going to feel some whiplash. It's not President Trump's fault. I'd rather have half the country pissed off moving in the right direction than 100% unity moving in the wrong.

[kingofthellamas]

No I did mean Trump.

Standing at the edge of my island and looking as an outsider towards the US, Trump appears to be the most polarising president America has had. Much more than any other. Of course, that may well not be the view inside the USA , but it is how he is seen in my country).

And I'm not saying he is wrong or right. Just very polorising.

[patrickjvv]

This is categorically untrue and the picture you posted is false. I don't get why you compare Trump to Reagan when their approach to politics was completely different. Just to give you a little taste, Reagan wanted open borders and free trade. Trump ran on border wall and tariffs.

This whole take is a little embarrassing. There is no "conservative" economics. Carter certainly wasn't a "leftist" as you put it

[MementoMori_]

DUHHHHHH ! That's an electoral college map. The "picture" is about popular vote. You posted oranges and the "picture" is about apples. That's got to feel humiliating. Sorry dude.

[patrickjvv]

Even if you go by the popular vote, it's still false. You can literally google "2016 popular vote by county and vote share" and it shows a very different map than what you posted.

It's got to feel humiliating by getting your ass handed to you by a foreigner.
en.m.wikipedia.org/.../...shaded_by_vote_share.svg

[MementoMori_]

Wow, you really are THICK.

I posted a map showing that President Trump WON the popular vote in the US *HEARTLAND* by a landslide and it is exactly correct. Get it? HEARTLAND, not entire country. Not electoral college, not entire country... *** HEARTLAND ***

Can't have a rational discussion with you because you are so dense.

Better luck next time and some advice... Next time try to get your facts right.

[patrickjvv]

Ah yes. Loving County in Texas with it's 64 voters that voted overwhelmingly for Trump is the same as Los Angeles with it's 2.5 million voters that voted overwhelmingly for Clinton. I guess if you're willing to bend the truth that much, then I guess Trump won the popular vote! (He didn't.) And all this doesn't remove from the fact that you posted an incorrect picture.

Are you really that fucking stupid that you can't even look at a map of voting districts in the US if your aim is to claim Trump won in the "heartlands."

[Kas19]

I kinda feel bad for men losing their dignity for worshiping some dude. Mancard revoked.

[Kas19]

Mind telling me when America was great?

[nightdrot]

Speaking as someone who is a Republican and who has worked in politics since the late 1980s - as a Congressional staffer, for a couple of international organizations and for several trade associations - this is just a wee bit premature. To be sure, Mr. Trump is stronger than he looks, but that is as much a function of the Democrat's weaknesses as his own innate strengths. Moreover, it ignores just how important the differences between Mr. Reagan and Mr. Trump are in practice.

To start, no doubt of it, Mr. Trump's economy is better than Mr. Obama's, but it is hardly by the huge margin you imply. Mr. Obama's recovery from the 2008 recession was below historic norms, averaging about 2%. Mr. Trump has delivered about 3% - at least to the degree that any President is responsible for something as complex as the economy.

To this Mr. Trump may add that wage growth has improved well above what Mr. Obama has accomplished. Moreover, that such growth has been double for the bottom 20% what it has been for the top 20%. Not a minor accomplishment.

However, some perspective is helpful. When Mr. Trump took over from Mr. Obama, the economy was already growing. By contrast, when Mr. Reagan took over from Mr. Carter, the economy was in crisis - with double digit inflation and interest rates and an unemployment rate that was also to rise to double digits. Moreover, Mr. Trump has delivered 3% growth. Mr. Reagan, by contrast, delivered an absolutely eye popping 7.4% growth by 1984.

Put another way, Mr. Trump's accomplishments, in economic terms, are relative. Reagan's were absolute. (This not even taking account of their policy differences. Mr. Trump's approach to trade - to cite one example - would have horrified Mr. Reagan.)

In any case, to focus on the economy is oddly quasi-Marxist. (You were speaking of Obama's socialism. He wasn't because what Americans are now calling socialism is not.) It assumes that the public responds to the economy alone.

In truth, the U. S. at the moment is experiencing the kinds of social upheavals that it went through in the 60's and 70's. We've been here before. Yet Mr. Trump's response to this - not unlike Mr. Obama's interestingly - is to pour salt in the social wounds. (Grant, Mr. Obama was condescending where Trump is bombastic.)

This is in contrast to Reagan, whose style was to calm the social waters. This was captured brilliantly in a cartoon of the period. A pollster is shown asking a voter, "What do you think of Reagan's policies?" The reply: "$%@*!" Next panel - same pollster, same voter, "What do you think of Reagan?" The reply: "Oh great guy. Really like him. Friendly. Affable."

Insofar as social mood pushes votes - more than the economists and superficial analysts think - Trump is his own worst enemy. Not least when it is considered that Mr. Trump carried a minority of the popular vote. In contrast, Reagan won with a majority - twice.

Moreover, Trump's coalition is a wasting asset. It is based on a shrinking demographic of lower middle class and blue collar workers. The Democrats lost this group - which had historically been on their side - through their condescension and indifference and are not apt to gain them back. However, as the economy transitions from manufacturing to service/tech, their numbers are in decline. This means that Trump's base is shrinking.

To be sure, the Democratic party is a train wreck at the moment. When your party is mentioned in the same breath with blackface, anti-Semitism, sexual harassment, infanticide and flatulent cows, you have a problem, to say no more. For that reason - and because the economy is generally good for the moment - Trump is stronger than he looks.

However, the divisions among Democrats cannot be counted upon. Whatever else, Trump's style will unite, and has united, his opponents. Also, the GOP is more divided than it looks, too.

Add it all up - and there is more than I had space to list - and assuming a Trump win is problematic. To say no more.

[MementoMori_]

ALL predictions are "premature." The only thing that counts is the results and you can't know what they are until the election is over.

[nightdrot]

That is a banality. Some predictions are worth more than others and we may make assumptions based on the degree to which they are rooted in data and the logic of the analysis that underpins them.

The point is that question-cum-statement that you posted asserted that Mr. Trump will win in a landslide in 2020 and then you proffered certain propositions to support that assertion. My point to you, in that regard, was that your analysis was thin - rooted mostly in economics.

(That last being somewhat ironically quasi-Marxist. Funny for a fellow who denigrates Mr. Obama's alleged socialism. Socialists, after all, starting from the philosophical assumption that economics is the sole guiding force in human history.)

No, all predictions are not premature. If you predict tomorrow's weather, you are giving people something on which to base their day - the merits of the prediction being then rooted in an analysis of the data and the quality of the prediction being contingent on how well you read the data. If you predict the weather for one particular day in May, 2075, that would be premature as there is no data on which to base the prediction.

As far as the 2020 presidential election is concerned, we are close enough to make some reasonable - though by no means definitive - surmises. That, after all, was the whole point of your question, was it not?

[MementoMori_]

1,000 professional pundits couldn't get the 2016 election right. Tossing a coin would have been just as accurate.

[nightdrot]

Then why did you bother to ask the question. Your prediction of a Trump landslide is as arbitrary as any other.

[MementoMori_]

We agree!

[nightdrot]

Not really. A prediction is just that, a prediction. It is not wrong to make one, only to make one - as you did - absent a full analysis of the data.

By your logic, we ought stop predicting the weather because sometimes the meteorologist gets it wrong.

[Anonymous]

I'd say his reelection is a coinflip due to the declining white demographic within the United States.

Florida has recently had a massive influx of Puerto Ricans, and more importantly they just restored the voting rights for over 1 million felons (who vote Democrat 6-1). So winning Florida will be much harder for Trump.

The other important states would be Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and maybe Nevada.

Trump so far has been polling quite well in Arizona, and although McSally lost in the Midterms that was likely due to a low Republican turnout and I'm pretty sure Trump will take the state.

en.wikipedia.org/.../Statewide_opinion_polling_for_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
As far as the Rustbelt, Pennsylvania is probably most likely to vote for Trump. Pennsylvania has been polling the best for him, and unlike in Michigan and Wisconsin Republicans and Democrats both had a higher turnout than in 2012, and the Republicans still won due to their massive turnout around the region near West Virginia.

Wisconsin is likely his second best bet, he has okay polling in that state, but in 2016 the Democrat turnout was low and the Republican turnout was slightly higher, so it all depends on if Democrats go out and vote. Same with Michigan.

[Dargil]

And he will win in 2020 in spite of the coup attempt. Guessing here Trump is reviled. This is the result of seamless negative propaganda by CBSNBCABCCNNMSNBCNPRWAPONYT. If you actually look by his ego at his accomplishments, you'll see why he will win.

[MementoMori_]

Right you are. Who cares about President Trump's "personality? What counts is that he has accomplished more for the good of the country in 2 years than Obama did in 8 and that any one of the Democrat's candidates for 2020 could in 100.

[0112358]

He might win but there’s absolutely no chance of a landslide. Reagan averaged a 50%+ approval rating in his first term (higher in his second)

Trump is nowhere close.

Trump is not winning over anyone knew. Everything he does is doubling down on his base. He may won again the same way he won last time - by having his base more energized than the Dems and the Dems picking s candidate who repels moderates.

Trump is not a strong candidate. Clinton was a -staggeringly- unpopular candidate who was under FBI investigation and trump -barely- beat her. It was a surprise because trump is -also- a weak candidate. The fact that one extremely unpopular candidate did slightly better than another extremely unpopular candidate does not mean he’s strong.

Reagan faced a recession in 82 but by the 84 election recovery was underway.

The economy is unlike to -improve/ versus now and boost trumps numbers.

[Brutus977]

It doesn't matter at this point. The liberals put all of their eggs into the Russiagate basket and got smoked. Their politics and media have lost all credibility. Add that to the democratic socialism lunacy and they don't have a prayer. The don't have one viable candidate that can match Trump on a stage infront of an audience. I'm pretty sure the last election was a landslide. I really don't think the Dems have anyone near the brand Hillary was.

[0112358]

@Brutus977 the last election was not a landslide. Trump barely won. Reagan 1984 was a landslide.

Trump is incoherent and gets laughed at in front of neutral audiences. His base loves him. He’s shown no ability to grow independent support.

Trump is a historically unpopular president. He may win but an “average” strength democrat would crush him. Obama would have obliterated him. (And Romney would have obliterated Hillary)

[Brutus977]

Trump beat her 5/1 in counties. Remove 4 specific counties from Hillary and she loses the popular vote by a wide margin. The electoral college exists so a handful of big cities can't speak for the rest of the country. He's only "extremely unpopular" in the eyes of the liberally skewed media monolith. Which is obviously what your opinions are shaped through. But hey, it's America. We are afforded the right to believe what we want to believe and say what we want to say. Not even progressive Europe or Canada can still say that. Places that were once considered free that now jail people for saying things that aren't politically correct.

[0112358]

@Brutus977 you can say politically incorrect shit in most of the world.

It’s true that American free speech laws are somewhat stronger than Canadians but the limit on Canadian speech is pretty damn extreme.

I also will never understand why people think votes shouldn’t count for as much if the voters happen to live close together. We could declare all trumps counties one super county and say he lost all but one.

The electoral college reflects states for better and worse. Trump won. But his margin of victory in terms of electoral college votes (putting pop vote aside) was in the bottom fifth of all presidential victories.

And some of those states were close. Ohio and Wisconsin trump won by less then the votes for Jill Stein.

[Anonymous]

I noticed that the only group of people that hate Donald Trump's guts are mostly hardcore White Leftists (especially White Leftists Women), Muslims, and Mexicans. Other than White-American Conservatives, I very rarely ever see any Trump hatred from Blacks or Asians.

[MementoMori_]

True! Black people are too smart. They know he has done much more for them in 2 years than B. Hussein Obama did in 8. Lowest black unemployment EVER under President Trump.

[MarketData]

Gee, I wonder why Muslims and Mexicans would dislike Trump?

[MementoMori_]

If you are talking about Mexican Americans it's a good question since under President Trump Hispanic unemployment is also at the lowest point in history. Many people are too dumb to avoid brainwashing by the massive dose of leftist controlled fake news that they are bombarded with every day. They are so stupid that even though their paychecks are bigger because of President Trump, the fake news reports that they are smaller and they believe it. These people are lemmings and there is no hope for them (I'm not talking just about Mexican Americans but about any Americans who fall for the Democrat controlled fake news).

As far as Muslim Americans go, same thing. Just like every other American they are better off than they were under B. Hussein Obama.

But if Mexicans support ILLEGAL immigration, and Muslims support ISLAMIC TERRORISM, then yes, I guess they WOULD hate President Trump because he is finally doing something to stop both. If you hate SANITY and COMMON SENSE, then you won't like President Trump. TOO DAMN BAD FOR YOU.

[HotJealousy]

Hang on a second "Obama radical socialism" I wouldn't describe him as either radical or a socialist... I'd describe Obama as fairly right wing yet slightly less so than Trump, bur definitely not socialist, couldn't be further from it. Sanders is more of a socialist.

[MementoMori_]

When you mandate that every citizen must purchase a government controlled health care plan, that's socialism. That's exactly what Obamacare did. When you create a mountain of new regulations dictating what virtually every industry can and cannot do, must do, and how they can conduct their business to produce their products that's socialism. That's exactly what Obama did.

[MementoMori_]

The only reason Obama didn't get as far down the road to socialist hell as Sanders wants to is because he couldn't. The Democrats are now fighting it out to see who is going to finish the job that Obama started. Obama didn't get the full socialism he wanted, but he made a hell of a run at it.

[HotJealousy]

socialist =/= bad

The UK NHS is essentially a socialist idea and it's great. I disagree, Obamacare wasn't really at all socialist, it wasn't government controlled because all the doctors, unlike in proper socialised medicine such as in UK, weren't employed by the government. Also Obamacare wasn't forced, providing your plan met requirements it was fine to keep your own.

As for "a mountain of new regulations" he made work places safer, made large companies and corporations more responsible for workers injuries and made things such as the egg industry safer for consumers. I think overall they're reasonable.

Also as someone who does believe/agree with socialist ideas, if I was American Sanders would definitely be my candidate of choice, but Obama does not represent socialist ideas in anyway.

[TadCurious]

I agree with most of your sentiments but here is the huge difference between 1984 and 2020 when it comes to presidential electoral politics: Reagan carried California twice. Because of mass immigration that would never happen again. California is gone and once solid red states like Colorado are close to becoming like California.

[NineBreaker]

I don't know if Trump is going to win or not. I'm no expert, and anything can happen.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if he wins again. I already knew he was going to win the first time. He ran against Hillary Clinton. I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton either, in part because her nomination secured Trump's victory.

Is it possible that Trump could still win against another candidate? Yes. Not impossible.

[buttcrackjoe]

If we get an economic resesh you can count on trump being a one-termer. His budgets are wholly unsustainable you cannot cut taxes yet spend more on the military while maintaining entitlements. His tariffs take money from American companies and gives it to the US treasury when they buy material from the outside. This makes everything more expensive for Americans yet the electorate is mostly moronic and goes along with the MAGA fan club.

[Liam_Hayden]

I think he'll win, but I doubt he will win significantly more than he did in 2016. There are really only a few states that are reasonably able to go either way. I mean, if not for Evan McMullin Trump MIGHT have won Minnesota, but that is the only state where it made a difference. Other than Minnesota, Colorado, and New Hampshire it is hard to see what he could flip unless the Democrats nominate an actual commie.

[Poormanscomedian]

True , media disliked Reagan, but they really hate Trump. I have never seen so many lies told anyone like Trump! The 30 and under are so gullible , it won't be reelection by landslide. Trump will not win California, New York, DC, Hawaii, Michigan, Illinois for sure.

[ManOnFire]

If Americans get their head out of their asses and use their brains next time then hopefully we will be saved from another 4 years of Trump and his Nazi party.

[MementoMori_]

The Nazi's put people in concentration camps, and executed millions of them. They did barbaric "experiments" on living people doing things like cutting off their skin.

Where is your evidence of President Trump doing anything like this.

Your seemingly casual use of such a charge betrays your lack of knowledge, your willingness to convict someone with no evidence whatsoever to back it up, and your apparent mental illness.

[ManOnFire]

The Nazis also participated in sorcery and theft. They hated non-white people as does Trump and wanted to "cleanse" Germany of them, as does Trump with America. Wanting so badly to keep out Hispanics. He is a worse racist old fat white male than the rest of the Republican poop in America's toilet.

[MementoMori_]

You are a hateful, ignorant moron. What President Trump wants to keep out is people who break into our country ILLEAGLLY... get it? ILLEGALLY. Since when is trying to stop ILLEGAL immigration racist?

If you don't see the difference between coming here legally and ILLEGALLY you are part of the PROBLEM, not the solution.

[ManOnFire]

Riiiiiiiiight, because it's not as if there are any illegal Canadians here either. Trump has hatred for people of color which we already know. Anybody who can support a president with values like his is just as bad.

[Anonymous]

Hmm, declining economy, cutting 7billion from education, disastrous trade failures, no healthcare replacement, farmers are screwed, pollution at an all time high, environtmal protections all but gone...

[MementoMori_]

Apparently you are living in an alternate universe somewhere.

[JerryReed]

Well, the Dems are doing everything in their power to get him reelected.

[Rissyanne]

So true

[zagor]

The only way Trump could possibly win is if the Democrats put up someone like... well, like the candidates who have announced so far.

[Logorithim]

I don't see him winning in a landslide in 2020, and the economy needs to hold up for him to win, TBH.

[John_Doesnt]

Member when they said the same thing about Hilary? I member.

[MementoMori_]

I don't remember a single person who compared Hillary Clinton to Ronald Reagan.

I remember several comparisons to the Wicked Witch of the West, but President Reagan? Not one.

[John_Doesnt]

I don't know any sane person who would compare Trump to Reagan. How fucked up is the Republican party now? You've fallen from somebody as great as Lincoln, to George W. Bush and now Trump. Your party is in the crapper.
Who's the next loser candidate for Republicans, Bowser? Clone-Hitler?

[Rissyanne]

Liberals will get Trump elected again

[Someguynamedbob]

Ya they kinda shoot themselves in the feet a lot

[oddwaffle]

Apparently there are only 10mil or so people in USA.

[Iron_Man]

He should destroy Bernie Sanders in the next election or anybody else that there is running against Donald J Trump