Quote:
Originally Posted by CodythePATRIOT
I remember Trump was making some more inroads with the Black community this summer, particularly among black men. A cursory search didn't reveal as to whether this trend has continued but it is possible that Republicans could pick up some more of these votes in 2020.
Trump getting less than 10% of the black vote is a lock
He'll roughly mimic his numbers from 2016 there isn't going to be a big swing to or from him among black voters
Your statement about supporting conservative policies being 'good for minorities' is either funny or sad depending how well researched you are on the issues. I assume you have somewhere between no to very few non wealthy minority women you interact with on a regular basis.
...not that Trump actually holds conservative viewpoints, I mean he's gotten the ****ing Republican party to support tariffs. Tariffs! One of the only few things conservatives were always right about on economic issues. lol
Once again this election is going to come down to turnout and whether Republicans have outright compromised voting machines in swing states or not. All indications suggest it'll be a high turnout election and if it is Trump is absolutely gone. The two ways he can win are outright cheat (voter suppression/outright compromising voter machines) or manage to define the Democratic nominee as equally or more unappealing and depress turnout 2016 levels or lower. Don't get me wrong, that is a viable path to victory, but he's certainly at least a +200 underdog to get reelected right now IF voting machines haven't been compromised.
Right now the freest money is to fade Bloomberg and Clinton for the D nomination though there's no reason to get involved in general election odds this far out when there's no way either candidate will be a bigger fav than -200 until at least around when the conventions are, unless I guess Trump's legal issues get a lot worse (more scandal with clear evidence that the public can understand eg he's caught on video using the n word or giving MBS the go ahead to kill Khashoggi or telling Ergodan hes fine with him killing the Kurds etc) and those scenarios while plausible seem fairly unlikely
The public needs audio and video for the scandal to be 'real' to people who lean conservative.
I personally think Trump's best chance is against Bernie, I think he's a dog to everyone but closer to a flip there as there's a LOT of ammo that the right wing media has in the bank to hit Bernie with that they've never used, the Warren/Biden/etc stuff is all old news and nothing really to it. I still don't see a way Buttigieg ever gets nominated, and I think Yang is running 4 or 8 years too soon (he'll continue to rise but won't get there)
I think Buttigieg might win a couple states, but I just don't see a path to the nomination for anyone other than Warren or if Warren/Sanders split the progressive vote by both staying in until after Super Tuesday and the moderate lane gets cleared for Biden he has a chance
Biden is just asking for a low turnout election but he is one of the few Ds who could win without huge turnout due to his appeal to moderates - I still think Ds are better off playing to the base though and just make this a bold big ideas campaign to turn out the base - she isn't traditionally charismatic, but Warren is the right person for that (Bernie would be too, but he's too old and with too much baggage)
Yang would beat Trump most easily in a general election because his policies are very appealing to liberals while his method of communication is very appealing to moderates and conservatives - I just think he might be a few cycles too early to run the campaign on UBI/Automation. I wouldn't be shocked if he doesn't get the nomination if he runs again in say 8-12 years or whenever the next Republican incumbent is up for reelection and has more success if he stays in politics
On the point of 'intersectional credibility' the VP's purpose is to appeal to a particular part of the base the nominee isn't appealing to so they can act as a campaign surrogate. For Trump, Pence shores up support with evangelicals who don't like that he's clearly not religious/a womaniser/crass etc etc
Kaine doesn't do anything for Hillary other than 'win Virginia' which isn't really a swing state anymore anyway
If the nominee is Warren, the VP is probably going to be a moderate black or Hispanic person to appeal to that base and probably male. Someone like Andrew Gillum or Julian Castro depending whether her tactic is to make a play for Florida, or do better in the sunbelt in Arizona/Texas etc - Castro would make sense there.
If it's Bernie, a woman of colour would make sense. Kamala doesn't fit with him ideologically, Stacey Abrams makes a lot of sense
For Biden, it HAS to be a progressive icon to turn out the base. I see no universe in which it can be Warren or Bernie, they wouldn't agree to it and they'll be on record attacking each other. Biden's already trusted by the black community due to his links with Obama, so probably a young progressive hispanic woman who speaks fluent spanish would make the most sense. Basically, someone like AOC who isn't AOC and is ideally from either the midwest or sun belt or Florida.
For Pete he'd probably want a Stacey Abrams type as well, or someone like Michelle Obama not that she'd want to be someone's VP.
If Yang got the nomination I really have no idea who would be ideal other than 'not Tulsi Gabbard' there are some weird YangGang people out there who love Tulsi as well and rant on and on about a Yang/Gabbard ticket on twitter but she's an absolute nightmare to the base (including me). I feel like he'd probably want a young progressive woman, someone ideologically like Warren but more of an unknown figure to the general public.
This is turning into a boring essay rant type post but on the point of conservative empathy, in my experience moderate conservatives show a lot of empathy but MAGA-authoritarian types have very little empathy and if they do it's only for people of their general racial/religious group or economic status.
Have a think about it Cody; how many women of colour who aren't wealthy have you interacted with and what are their views on what policies are good for minorities? I'm guessing your social circle being I assume a younger white male who posts on a poker form is highly libertarian leaning-right wing young white guys. A lot of my close friends fall into that category (i'm not friends with anyone who is authoritarian-right wing, but have some relatives etc who are) and most of the rest are liberal or left-libertarian (i'd personally identify as a left-libertarian)
The poker/sports betting community as a whole here has three main voices - we're mostly young-ish white men of above average intelligence, and there are a ton of liberals, left-libertarians and right-libertarians but very few Authoritarian right type people who are legitimate Trump MAGA fans. Just take a look at unstuckpolitics which used to be the politics forum here - it's a mixture of left-libertarians and liberals, with a small amount of libertarian right
Fox News defines what it means to be a conservative for most of the voter base, the average voter is way, way less engaged than anyone who is reading this thread. A decent chunk of the public wouldn't be able to recognise Mike Pence or Mitch McConnell, let along Andrew Yang or Julian Castro. It's just way too early in the campaign to make real assumptions about anything for the 2020 cycle until we know the nominee. The only assumption that holds true is Trump's base will never abandon him, but Trump also fires up Democrats to vote so by default it's likely to be a high turnout election unless they nominate a historically unpopular nominee among the base.
Trump is going to be unpopular regardless but with a dedicated base who will turn up, the Dems two likely nominees imo (Warren and Biden in that order) have two different paths to victory - for Warren it's engage the electorate and have a huge turnout election by running a positive campaign on big ideas while letting others attack Trump, who people have already made up their mind about and she should win even if she's widely offputting to moderates if the turnout is high enough. If turnout is too low, Trump will win.
For Biden it's take the Rust Belt back from Trump at all costs and nominate a VP who will minimise how depressed the youth and hispanic turnout will be.
Warren has a turnout edge over Biden because she fires up the base, but Biden will have an easier time winning the 'center'. I still think fire up the base is the way to go in 2020 because Ds will almost always win a record high turnout election and it's so hard for this to be a low turnout election with Trump on the ballot and the only way it can happen is have the progressive base be disillusioned in their nominee, but there is a case to be made the other way.