28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010...inl_manual
Bad news for Trump. He has done nothing to reassure voters who did not vote for him, and he cannot hemorrhage any support that he had in 2016 and still win. 55% voting against him means that at the most he gets 45% of the vote. At an analogous times in 2003 and 2011:
Even if all of those who do not say that they will definitely not vote for Trump end up voting for him, Trump is getting a maximum of 45% of the vote. Not since 1988 has any Democratic nominee for President gotten less than 45.65% of the vote (that was Dukakis in 1988) in a basically two-way race for President.
I do not predict a Democratic landslide. I project instead that someone other than Donald Trump will pickup a huge number of conservative votes as an independent or third-party nominee. Not even Obama could breach 53% in 2008 in the backdrop of a foreign war starting to go badly and an economic meltdown that had many Americans in fear of another Great Depression. I can not imagine America in a similar predicament in 2020. I see conservatives getting about 48% of the popular vote in 2020, which would be enough to defeat the Democratic nominee for President in 2020 with an electorate like that of 2016. But Trump will need at least 45% of the popular vote to win re-election even if the Democratic gets a majority by simply running up the vote in a few states of medium-to gigantic states like California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.
Dubya barely got re-elected in both the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2004, and Obama was close to bare re-election in the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2012. A shift of 74K votes in Florida from Obama to Romney makes the 2012 Presidential election close in the Electoral College.
I see no reason to believe that the rules of 2004 and 2012 do not apply this time. Neither Dubya nor Obama relied upon a last-minute surge in support to get him over the top and take his re-election bid out of the jaws of defeat. Trump is far behind both Dubya and Obama at analogous times. The last time that an incumbent President seemed to snatch victory out of the jaws of defeat was Harry S. Truman in 1948. The war started going better in Korea, and Dewey ran a complacent campaign against Truman. But that is already 71 years ago.
Trump must undo much of the disapproval that he already faces just to get a chance of getting re-elected. The good news for him is that he has enough time if he does everything right. The bad news for him is that he seems unlikely to do so due to flaws of his personal character. He is old and rigid, and that bodes ill for him learning from his mistakes.
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010...inl_manual
Bad news for Trump. He has done nothing to reassure voters who did not vote for him, and he cannot hemorrhage any support that he had in 2016 and still win. 55% voting against him means that at the most he gets 45% of the vote. At an analogous times in 2003 and 2011:
Quote:55% of respondents to a Washington Post / ABC poll said they "definitely would not" vote not re-elect Trump next year. At this point in 2011, 38% of voters said they'd definitely vote against Obama; in May 2003, 31% were definitely opposed to Bush. https://www.langerresearch.com/wp-conten...mp2020.pdf …
Even if all of those who do not say that they will definitely not vote for Trump end up voting for him, Trump is getting a maximum of 45% of the vote. Not since 1988 has any Democratic nominee for President gotten less than 45.65% of the vote (that was Dukakis in 1988) in a basically two-way race for President.
I do not predict a Democratic landslide. I project instead that someone other than Donald Trump will pickup a huge number of conservative votes as an independent or third-party nominee. Not even Obama could breach 53% in 2008 in the backdrop of a foreign war starting to go badly and an economic meltdown that had many Americans in fear of another Great Depression. I can not imagine America in a similar predicament in 2020. I see conservatives getting about 48% of the popular vote in 2020, which would be enough to defeat the Democratic nominee for President in 2020 with an electorate like that of 2016. But Trump will need at least 45% of the popular vote to win re-election even if the Democratic gets a majority by simply running up the vote in a few states of medium-to gigantic states like California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York.
Dubya barely got re-elected in both the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2004, and Obama was close to bare re-election in the popular vote and the Electoral College in 2012. A shift of 74K votes in Florida from Obama to Romney makes the 2012 Presidential election close in the Electoral College.
I see no reason to believe that the rules of 2004 and 2012 do not apply this time. Neither Dubya nor Obama relied upon a last-minute surge in support to get him over the top and take his re-election bid out of the jaws of defeat. Trump is far behind both Dubya and Obama at analogous times. The last time that an incumbent President seemed to snatch victory out of the jaws of defeat was Harry S. Truman in 1948. The war started going better in Korea, and Dewey ran a complacent campaign against Truman. But that is already 71 years ago.
Trump must undo much of the disapproval that he already faces just to get a chance of getting re-elected. The good news for him is that he has enough time if he does everything right. The bad news for him is that he seems unlikely to do so due to flaws of his personal character. He is old and rigid, and that bodes ill for him learning from his mistakes.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.