Should dems skip the 2020 election?

If the economy keeps roaring and we're not attacked by foreign enemies, they may as well not run anyone in 2020. They are just so out of touch with the average american, they are becoming strongly disliked.

 

Economists predict that GDP growth will begin to decline after 2019 and many are even predicting a recession. Even with the economy booming Trump's approval is at only 42% thanks to constant dumb stuff he keeps doing and constant attacks from the left-leaning media.

 

SInce he's so "dangerous" and all, my life is still the same as it was under any other president. In fact, I see hiring signs everywhere.

 

If all the Democrats have to run on are social issues, then yes skipping 2020 would be ok. Economics will always trump social issues.

 

On the contrary I fully expect the DNC to double down on Identity Politics and run a transgendered female Brown Hispanic lesbian adopted into a family with mixed White and Black parents. It should be a hoot.

 

Two days ago Trump's popularity surpassed both Reagan's and Obama's at the same point in their presidency. Enjoy . . . reality.

 

What if they run Caitlyn Jenner? Oh man I have to get the popcorn for this LOL.

 

That would be sweet! Perhaps Stormy Daniels could be the v.p. running mate.

 

Toys R Us closing all stores.

Sears closing more stores.

 

Let me guess, according to Rammussen a single poll with a 5 point Republican lean and a C+ rating, and the most Pro-Trump poll you could find.

 

Let me guess, the pollings that anti-Trumpers use are the companies that contributed heavily to the DNC in 2016 but almost not at all to the RNC. Go figure.

 

Actually the polling used is a combination of both left-wing and right wing pulls that are then averaged out.

RealClearPolitics
Obama: 46.9%
Trump: 42.9%
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

FiveThirtyEight
Obama: 47.4%
Reagan: 45%
Trump: 42.7%
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

 

Trump won with a lower approval rating you know.

And I don't know what economists you are reading but you should try different ones.

Consumer confidence is at an all time high and not predicted to fall.

I believe its at the highest in 30 something years.

Sure, all that could change tomorrow but C'mon, its not going to.

And its funny how the left says this was all Obama but every chart I've looked at has serious spikes right after election day.

It wasn't Obama, everything was stagnant under him for years and they want us to believe that after one day in November that everything suddenly kicked in?

lol

 

538 gave Trump a 2% chance of winning the nomination.

Nate Silver even came out and apologized for their flaw.

You sure you want to be quoting them?

 

The Democrats will be running on "MS-13 aren't that bad, MS-13 aren't that bad, MS-13 aren't that bad."

 

And don't forget that those of us who aren't deplorable should have empathy with terrorists.

According to Hillary that is.

Though to be fair, she only said that between her episodes of freezing on stage or falling down so she might have been ill.

God bless our 58 states!

 

That may be likely, but these economists you speak of are predicting a recession based on the wrong reasons.
Thus I'm inferring we can't really trust their predictions, even though I'm not saying their predictions will not come true.

 

Yes, Trump did beat Hillary with a lower approval rating. So if he runs against a candidate with a 40% approval rating like Clinton again he has a good shot of winning. If he runs against someone who isn't unpopular then all bets are off.

 

Its really hard to predict the future and its a lot easier to predict approval in the current. The Trump win was a surprise to even many conservatives and nobody expected Trump would win the election by taking democratic states while losing the popular vote.

 

This was for the nomination, not the general and 538, specifically Nate Silver, was promoting his new method of prediction off of previous successes.

It failed miserably.

He did also get the general election wrong however showing that his method wasn't better than what everyone else uses.

In fact, its much worse.

When it hits it has about a 99% accuracy rate but getting it to hit relies on so many variables that its not reliable.

Its like game theory.

It can predict an outcome with 100% accuracy but only if you know every detail involved in the equation.

If you know all those details already you don't actually need a prediction model do you?

 

Again, its really hard to predict the future. The Trump election was really unusual and its extremely rare for someone to win the election while losing by as many votes as Trump did. Plus, Trump had a last-minute surge in the swing states that helped him win the election. And if you look, 538 gave Hillary a 71% chance of winning and Trump a 29% chance. That is not confident at all, and a lot of smart people overestimate their ability to predict the future when understanding the present is a lot more doable. Its often hard to predict what will happen in the next election, where the stock market is going, or what economic growth will be. Very smart people can be very wrong about this stuff.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

 

Dems....the Dodos of American politics.

 

And economists have successfully predicted 12 of the last 5 recessions.

 

Thanks for the negativity. I'm getting used to it from you folks.

 

Anyone who thinks that Trump is to credit for the current economic trends is just out of touch with . . . being able to read a graph. Still, yes, a strong economy will work out in the favor of the party in power even if it is completely irrational. However, when a single party is in control of the Executive and both houses of Congress, the opposite party normally gets a bump.