Trump approval ratings thread 1.6

[pbrower2a]

A couple of new PPP polls:

Arizona: PPP, March 2-3, 666 RV

Trump approval: 45/51

Biden 48, Trump 47
Trump 47, Sanders 46


Maine: PPP, March 2-3, 672 RV

Trump approval: 42/56

Biden 52, Trump 42
Sanders 52, Trump 42

Arizona is a must-win for Trump. With 51% disapproval he is on the margin of electability there. Between Arizona and North Carolina, Wisconsin might be a "Does Not Matter" state for Democrats in 2020. 

 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

The strongest asset that President Trump has is "the economy" which in his terms (and he has defined those terms) means the valuation of securities prices.  Those seem to have peaked at 29,568 on the DJIA, and those have since fallen by almost 4000. That is about a 12% fall from the peak.

There are warning signs that an eleven-year bull market is nearing an end (and may have reached its end). There is no magic number. But -- volatility is high (a warning sign near the top of the market). The inverted yield curve (which means that short-term borrowing at the same quality is at a higher rate than long-term borrowing) ordinarily indicates a Bull becoming a Bear. An inverted yield curve means that a credit crunch is imminent; dying businesses are going to get their credit cut off, and over-leveraged firms end up with the economic equivalent of compound fractures or third-degree burns. Add to this, consumer spending on big-ticket purchases (remodeling, cars, furniture, and appliances) find that the credit for such purposes dries up. Meanwhile price-earnings ratios are in the stratosphere while inequality of income is in the usual zone that precedes a market crash in which everything goes bad all at once.   

As an example, the Midwestern furniture chain Art Van went under this week. Sure, that retailer has been operating in one of the most distressed parts of America (heavily Indiana, Michigan, and Ohio -- ouch!). After its founder died last year, vulture capitalists bought it out and may have gutted its desirability as a retailer while saddling it with debt. So guess what happens when credit isn't available to finance profitable sales to a middle-class clientele, and the company needs more money with which to operate? Chapter 11.

OK, Art Van isn't quite Toys 'R' Us. Furniture isn't toys (although Toys 'R' Us had rather expensive toys and was one of the few retailers to sell without discounting as do its competitors such as Wal*Mart, Target, K-Mart, and -- yes -- Dollar General and Amazon.com. But if customers can't buy and debt service eats operating revenue, then what else can happen? Lenders shut the business down.

I am not saying that this is 2008 or 1929 again (both were remarkably similar at the start). It could be something worse than a correction -- a nasty bear market. Nobody knows yet. I certainly wouldn't buy in until dividends are close to the interest rate and what remains in operation is quality, at least in Big Business.

[pbrower2a]

The strongest asset that President Trump has is "the economy" which in his terms (and he has defined those terms) means the valuation of securities prices.  Those seem to have peaked at 29,568 on the DJIA, and those have since fallen by almost 4000. That is about a 12% fall from the peak.

There are warning signs that an eleven-year bull market is nearing an end (and may have reached its end). There is no magic number. But -- volatility is high (a warning sign near the top of the market). The inverted yield curve (which means that short-term borrowing at the same quality is at a higher rate than long-term borrowing) ordinarily indicates a Bull becoming a Bear. An inverted yield curve means that a credit crunch is imminent; dying businesses are going to get their credit cut off, and over-leveraged firms end up with the economic equivalent of compound fractures or third-degree burns. Add to this, consumer spending on big-ticket purchases (remodeling, cars, furniture, and appliances) find that the credit for such purposes dries up. Meanwhile price-earnings ratios are in the stratosphere while inequality of income is in the usual zone that precedes a market crash in which everything goes bad all at once.    

SARS-CoV-2 is likely to help Trump politically. An economic downturn this year was already looking likely before it became a factor and Caronavirus (sic) gives him something other than him to blame that helps him lower expectations.

Why would that help Trump?

People will tend to blame the virus and not the Republicans for the poor economy. Granted, he'd be even better off if the economy had remained good, but there was little chance of that happening even before the virus cropped up.

If the economy should tank, then it wouldn't be due to the coronavirus, although such could serve as a pretext. The warning signs are already there -- overpriced securities whose valuation depends upon optimism that can be shattered without notice, an inverted yield curve that makes high-profile failures possible, economic inequality of the sort that exists only before market crashes... and above all, incompetent people  in charge of political and economic institutions.

Speculative frenzy is typically the last act of a bull market approaching its end. There is simply no other game in town, so to speak. When that game is over, then everything collapses.

 

[pbrower2a]

Interestingly enough, Trump's favorability is even worse (43-56) in the battleground states versus nationally (43-53) in new CNN poll

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2020/images/03/09/rel2a.-.2020.pdf

One cannot win, except against splintered opposition, when one has an unfavorability rating of 56%. To be sure, favorability is not approval, but the two generally relate.

I do not know what the "battleground states" are as defined in this poll.  My definition would be any state that Trump won or lost by 10% or less in 2016.

[pbrower2a]

YouGov Approvals

Michigan: 45/52 (-7)
Pennsylvania: 43/54 (-11)
Wisconsin: 43/53 (-10)

https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/fwvdnnbigm/20200308_yahoo_primary_crosstabs.pdf

It does not change the map, but it does establish that Trump is in deep trouble in three states of which he must win at least one (and two should he lose Arizona or North Carolina. 

 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

Iowa, Selzer, Des Moines Register: Trump just above 50% approval in its poll for the first time since the 2016 election

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/03/11/trump-approval-favorable-ratings-break-even-iowa-poll/5000775002/

Trump 51, Biden 41
Trump 53, Sanders 41

Maybe 2016 wasn't so big a freak as it seemed at first, and 2018 is not a reversion to the norm.

Still, the 51% (which is obviously enough to win the state) is likely a ceiling.  

50 A 47 D. Lean R.

Pbrower, I need to ask you the same question I asked you four years ago.
What about Michigan?

Polling is always a snapshot of the reality of the time. Reality is dynamic, and in politics that encompasses foreign policy, economic results, and the personality of the Leadership and those around that person.

I can see Trump winning nationwide if he succeeds at doing what he did in 2016 again -- grinding down the will of his opposition to vote against him because they increasingly see politics as a sordid, soiled activity. I expect him to try that again because it is his character, which really is stable. (I got a tip-off from a therapist: narcissistic people show extreme rigidity of thought, and Donald Trump is one of the most blatant examples of narcissism to have ever existed). Narcissists are nasty people with whom to deal; I would not want one as a spouse, teacher, preacher, or boss.  The question: will it work this time?

Iowa is one of the biggest agribusiness states, and it has a large portion of its population in rural areas. It could be that farmers see few pathological narcissists in real life (can you imagine a very narcissistic person staying on the family farm to do dirty, hard work?) and see them only from a safe distance, as with politicians and Hollywood celebrities.

Iowa is much more rural than Michigan and has a much-smaller minority population as a share.

It is regrettable that I cannot import the graph, Note well that approval results for Iowa have been all over the place:

Trump’s latest numbers overshadow his lowest approval rating of 35% — about a year into his presidency, in December 2017 — then coupled with a 60% disapproval. That Iowa Poll also showed just 29% of respondents felt the country was moving in the right direction, while 60% felt it wasn't.

Trump has done some things to assuage voters that he once scared. Will he continue to succeed at that? If he does, then he will win re-election. If you must do terrible things to shape the zone of election get elected, then do them early and get them over with.

(deleted because everyone knows what I think of the President)

After they flopped with the caucus and then declined to release the poll, I'm not sure how trustworthy they are. Trump could win Iowa, but I'm not sure how trustworthy Selzer is anymore.

One possible explanation. This will become irrelevant by convention time. Other things, such as the valuation of the DJIA, will matter far more.  But let those 401k's hurt, and a change of President could look very good again in Iowa.

Besides -- the binary campaign between Biden and Trump has yet to begin, and the verbal sparring is a couple months off. But for now -- I move Iowa to Lean R. 

 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[/quote]

[pbrower2a]

I was right the IA poll confirmed that it's a 278 to 260 election,  but MT, AZ, CO and ME are Senate takeovers and NC will remain in D Gov hands

Even so, there have been lots of polls suggesting that Iowa could swing back D. It may be that some of those horrid polls for Trump (including one that had him down 35-60) happened at the time in which President Trump threatened a trade war. Maybe he promised to buy back the surplus that farmers produce.  That may be a waste of the Treasury, but if it buys votes it is good politics.

It's the economy stupid -- one's personal economy.   

[pbrower2a]

Kansas, PPP

Trump -- approve/disapprove: 52/44.

Tepid, considering that Kansas is usually rock-solid R.

Biden 40, Trump 52.

Weak enough that Trump loses Kansas if the economy melts down -- but high securities valuations that he has touted seem to have faded some.

Trump handling the economy: 55-37 sort of OK of something getting shaky.

Governor Laura Kelly (D) 44-27. Pretty good, considering that the state is Kansas. Warning: 44 could be close to her ceiling. It is Kansas (R).

Mike Pompeo 36-39 favorable/unfavorable. (Nothing to do with the economy!)

Senator Pat Roberts (R) 33-30 approval. (Oh-oh) not seeking re-election.
Senator Jerry Moran (R) 33-39 approval (Oh-oh!) up for re-election in 2022.

https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/KansasResults.pdf

Wisconsin, PPP

Trump approval 45-51.
Biden 48, Trump 45. Not decisive yet.

Trump on the economy 47-45 (Trump's alleged strength)

Governor Tony Evers (D) 43-37. Not bad for a newcomer recently elected in a swing state.

Senator Tammy Baldwin (D) 43-37 recently re-elected, not up for re-election until 2024.
Senator Ron Johnson (R) 35-40. Up in 2022, and apparently retiring.

This sample voted 47-45 for Trump in 2016, which is slightly more R than the state was in 2016. This is a good poll for what could be the tipping-point state.

https://www.publicpolicypolling.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/WisconsinGeneralResults.pdf






 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

Arizona, Arizona State y Noticias Univision:

Trump approval 46, disapproval 54.

https://st1.uvnimg.com/07/2e/d0d9a91c4000996d8bcc95b85319/univisionpolling-march-arizona.pdf

Washington State, Survey USA. No approval poll, but you can imagine how unpopular Trump is in the Evergreen State if one gets these matchups:

   In a head-to-head contest with President Donald Trump today, on the eve of the Washington State primary and 34 weeks till votes are counted in the 11/03/20 general election, the contest at this hour among registered voters statewide stands:

* Biden defeats Trump by 23 points, 57% to 34%.
* Sanders defeats Trump by 21 points, 56% to 35%.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=617c3b33-8fa1-472b-84b6-a8f35f8da814

Note that I have made my model fit what I see as a "likely result" model, usually with disapproval as a kill against Trump. It is extremely hard to undo disapproval. 

 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

Marist/NBC News, Arizona and Ohio:

Turning to the general election in Arizona, President Donald Trump’s job rating among registered voters in the state is 48 percent approve, 46 percent disapprove.

In a hypothetical general election matchup in the state, Biden leads Trump by 1 point among registered voters, 47 percent to 46 percent — which is in within the poll’s margin of error.


In Ohio, Trump’s approval rating among registered voters is 46 percent approve, 48 percent disapprove.

And Biden leads the president by 4 points in the Buckeye State, 49 percent to 45 percent, while Sanders is ahead by 2 points, 48 percent to 46 percent.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/nbc-news-marist-polls-biden-holds-big-leads-over-sanders-n1160536


 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

In both Arizona and Ohio, the registered voters would be enough to dump Trump. Newer voters are likely to be younger -- largely under 40. Such will hurt Trump.

[pbrower2a]

Montana: PPP, March 12-13, 903 voters

Approve 50
Disapprove 46

The Senate race between Bullock and Daines is tied 47-47.

This is weak for the President, and it could be a portent of 'strange things happening' in the event of a Democratic landslide in November. I do not predict any dynamic. Montana implies more than 400 electoral votes for Biden in 2020. If this polling is true and not an outlier, then Montana will be closer to a D victory than at any time since the near-landslide of Barack Obama in 2008.

Much more significant is the Senate race which I must now put in the toss-up category. Montana is a tough state to poll accurately; with only three electoral votes it is highly unlikely to make the difference in the Electoral College. Trump probably wins Montqana barring an epic collapse of credibility nationwide, and if he does lose Montana, then the Democrats win a Senate seat. Daines did vote to not remove Donald Trump.

 

Trump approval:

40% or less or disapproval over 52%
41-44% or disapproval over  or over 50%
45-49% and negative

tie (white)

45-49% and positive
50-54%
55% or higher

[pbrower2a]

Trump is definitely not gonna crater to 35 percent, there isnt gonna be a Biden slide. Biden is still sleepy Joe

Hoover got 39% in 1932 and Carter got 41% in 1980. Trump gets into that area only if the economy tanks.

[pbrower2a]

Morning Consult has his approval of the coronavirus at 53/39. *****+14****

WTF is going on?!

I am just as horrified as you are. This country is just gullible and easily manipulated in times of crisis, I really can't think of another explanation.

As evidence, albeit the anecdotal kind, my mom's boyfriend and my neighbor are both now more upset at the Chinese than at our government's own messy response to this crisis. Trump's dangling of shiny objects in front of so many peoples' faces has yet to fail him it seems. Perhaps he is actually getting a rally-around-the-flag effect too, which is completely unearned.

At the same time though, in that Emerson poll above, Trump is still losing to both Biden and Sanders though. Are people somehow giving him credit for the response, yet wanting to vote against him anyway? I mean, I'll take it, but I don't understand it, and find it fairly oxymoronic (emphasis on the "moronic" part) if it pans out in reality.

One thing after another horrifies me about this President. Sometimes the President who does not fully know what he is doing (let us say Dubya with the financial crisis of 2008) becomes an effective follower when all else fails, goes along, and does right.  President Trump had a chance to do that, which would have been the best thing to do. After all, state governors such as Whitmer in Michigan, Newsom in California, and now Pritzker in Illinois (sure, they are Democrats, but does that matter? Some times the good ideas come from the Other Side, and when that happens you can consider yourself lucky) have practically shut down big chunks of their states' economies to save thousands of lives. Such is drastic. It may also be necessary.

So the President does something incredibly dishonest --  he states that the medical profession has a vaccine for the virus that will be available in a few days. No, medical science goes through testing for safety and effectiveness, and that takes months at the least. There is just too little known about it so far. Heck, we do not yet have an effective and reliable treatment for HIV/AIDS which has been making its deadly rounds for about forty years. Medical science knows far less about CORVID-19.

Just when you think that the President has run out of whoppers, he comes up with that one. I could say that I have had it with him, but that, I regret, is nothing new. He knows more than the senior military officers, the spy chiefs, diplomats, physical scientists, and now physicians and medical researchers. What's next? Is he going to claim to know more about linguistics than Noam Chomsky or about Christianity than the Pope?

If you remember the Deepwater Horizon explosion in the Gulf of Mexico under Barack Obama, the President at that time admitted early that, not being a trained engineer, he could give no technical advice on how to deal with the disaster. Obama is a smart and wise person, but like other genuinely wise and smart people he knows where his knowledge stops, and gut-feelings and his power of reasoning are simply inadequate for answering big questions best left to experts in the field. Obama took some heat for that... but he did not show himself to be a pathological liar or an abject fool.

To spoof Mark Twain -- there are lies, d@mn lies... and Trump lies!      

[pbrower2a]

As a strict rule I do not predict polling or the stock market. I can say this: the DJIA had an impressive rally early today and then took another beating. Maybe it wasn't as severe as on some other days, but it is 911 points, and 4.55%, which is a very bad day except in contrast to the very worst ones.

The DJIA is down to where it was after the Great Fool was elected but Obama was still President.

Can the stock market make a quick rebound after a falling-knife? If there was no speculative boom before the collapse, such can happen -- as in 1987. Even after the 2008 crash, the DJIA had strong potential for an upswing because market valuations weren't crazy high. In 2007 (the real peak, with 2008 having the real crash) the real value of the DJIA had barely caught up with the peak of the Tech Boom of eight years later... and adjusted for inflation it was still lower than in 2000.

...the current rise in the stock market since 2009 is now entirely from the Obama era.

Here's the scary thing, and 1929 may be more relevant than 2008. The securities circus in 2020 as in 1929 had become the only game in town, the last area of speculative activity. The high was higher (by standards of the time in 1929) than in 2008. One could blame fraudulent lending and shady practices in real estate that had nothing to do with the valuation of Disney, GM, Exxon-Mobil, Wal*Mart, or IBM.

The falling-knife drop leaves people little indication of any potential of a quick recovery except if one looks backward. I can't say how a falling-knife ends in a bottoming-out... but if I had money available to invest in stocks, then I would find patience very tempting for a while. I have no idea where the bottom will be.

Much of Trump's appeal has been that high prices for securities are proof of his competent stewardship of the economy. What happens now?

If I am to make a general prediction, then it is that the DJIA will bottom out, after which it will rise slowly from a much-lower level. It was not so long ago that people were talking about the prospect of the Dow at 30K. Figuring

(1) that people once burned in the markets will be leery of investing in them
(2) that after 2021 the favorable treatment of stocks that has been in effect for about 40 years will be over. so the dividend yield will not be so attractive
(3) if we end up in an honest-to-Hoover depression, a comparatively liberal government will put the emphasis on the recovery of the welfare of the working class before investors. The working class generally puts its spare change into savings and not into the securities markets.

There will be bargains. A $1.00 a share dividend for a price of $20 stock looks better than a $1.50 a share dividend on a $60 stock. OK, the $60-a-share stock might be from early 2020 and the $20-a-share stock is the one that one can buy in 2024 after the economy has stabilized some.      
      

      

[pbrower2a]

Trump approvals are at 45% to 54% and Biden's is 48 to 50%. FL, OH, and AZ are statistically within the margin of error and Trump hasn't campaigned yet. Pundits are still saying Trump is in the worst position and his polls haven't even slipped under 40, where they thought they would be, when coronavirus began. We might not even have conventions this summer, this isn't a normal election.

He always is campaigning though

I was about to say that -- something like Castro's Cuba, where Fidel was always in campaign mode.

[pbrower2a]

It makes me profoundly sad and deeply pessimistic about the country's future that a majority of Americans approve of the President's response to COVID-19. We're on a trajectory for thousands of deaths, a trajectory that could and should have been prevented. A majority of people think it is OK that the President decried the virus as a hoax for months and admitted to keeping sick Americans stuck on a cruise ship so that the number of sick people stayed artificially low.

It just goes to show that as bad as he is, the real problem is with the electorate.

America is split between modernists and primitives on issues of culture and politics. It is as if some people are living in the Jacksonian era and others are living in the Obama era. Such ensures conflicts. Maybe we are not as split as the Spanish were in the 1930's with people thinking in the age of Velasquez and others in the age of Picasso.  The ultimate winner was of course the Franco synthesis of medieval social values and modern technologies of war, repression, and production.

It was a fine synthesis for tourists, but not for the people of Spain.

 

[pbrower2a]

Guys, its gonna be a cruel few weeks for democrats in terms of polling, without question. Whether it continues is still an open question.

History tells us it won't.

Generally, I would agree, but we also have to recognize the unprecedented moment we are in right now. I do NOT think it would be wise to extrapolate previous circumstances, however similar in appearance, to this.

While pandemics are unprecedented, economic crises are not.

Absolutely, but there is still the question of whether people will blame Trump for the recession as intensely as they might otherwise due to the virus causing it, whether polarization will allow him to maintain even approvals, etc etc.

I feel like I am let down by the American public enough by now to know for a fact that Trump won't bear the brunt of a recession as much as he should, especially considering how he gets credit when the economy is good. This nation is demented and warped in the way it perceives things, and it will doom us all.

Democrats have been rough (and they think rightly so) about Trump. Should something go terribly wrong with the American economy, Republicans will fault Democrats for not giving the Republicans full authority to establish their full agenda without qualification.

 

[pbrower2a]

Mail-in voting would put Indiana in play. Polls close at 6 PM local time

[pbrower2a]

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1242660315990495232

OMG. The CNN so-called analysts actually are postulating trumps relocating His official residence to Florida was for electoral reasons rather than taxes, and more importantly that it actually might make some impact on the race. As if more than one undecided voter in a million down there is going to care that his official home is now Mar-A-Lago instead of Trump Tower. What complete and utter maroons.

Did you expect anything even half intelligent from CNN's "analysts"?

CNN reporting news events is reliable, but its analysis looks like collecting the cranks of both sides and making sure that the chairs are locked down so that the Jerry Springer Show doesn't break out. 

[pbrower2a]

Why havent bprower responded in this thread with his maps?

Good question. Things are going wild. This virus is a confirmed killer. Assuming close splitting of the electorate, how this virus ravages the population will shape the election. If it should kill poor non-whites selectively then it could put such states as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin  back within the range of Trump victories. If it should selectively kill low-information white voters in rural areas then it favors Joe Biden. Unlike HIV/AIDS (the most infamous "new" lethal infectious disease of the last fifty years before this one that has killed tens of thousands of Americans)  it kills fast, so many people generally considered likely voters might not be voting. One has no ability to cast a ballot from six feet under.  Someone with HIV/AIDS could be voting for several years after diagnosis. Someone with COVID-19 could die in a week.

So far people most at risk are those who have done recent traveling, and that tends to skew toward well-heeled, well-educated, urban and suburban voters. But how do we know that it will not spread to rural areas with poor, ill-educated people with bad habits such as smoking, physical inactivity, and alcohol abuse -- maybe some oxy and meth on the side?

Assumptions about the 2020 electorate can be rendered completely absurd! If people in large numbers are undergoing medical treatment then they might not be reachable by pollsters at the time.

Add to this -- the securities markets are in chaos at or after the end of an extended bull market, and Americans are  being laid off in large numbers. To be sure most Americans own no stock even through a 401K plan, but any reduction in consumer demand will result in mass layoffs. If your retail choices get reduced to Dollar General, Family Dollar, Wal*Mart, Aldi, Kroger, Big Lots, Target, Walgreen's, CVS, Rite-Aid, Home Depot, gas station-convenience stores, auto parts stores, and maybe some regional box stores then you have lost much choice of what you can buy. As a group those are not high-end marketers, to put it lightly. So let us suppose that you are in the business of manufacturing high-end audio equipment. People just do not buy that sight-unseen...or sound unheard.

Maybe you buy books, audio recordings, or recorded video sight-unseen from the Big A, who should be doing well enough now. But such people know what they are looking for. (Closure of public libraries might be a boon for the Big A, but that is likely to be short-lived). Much marketing depends upon bored people going into a store and finding something to pique their interests. That is over for a while.  Need I go into a long discourse on how reduced sales lead to reduced production and that higher unemployment leads to a less sympathetic view of the leaders most influential at the time?

I may have expected the long bull market to come to an end, but I could not say when. COVID-19? Nobody predicted that until it happened, and nobody can predict how it will shape the electorate.

I have made assumptions on how approval and especially disapproval ratings either ensure re-election of an incumbent President (Obama 2012 is obvious), make it shaky (Dubya in 2004), or doom any re-election bid (Carter in 1980). COVID-19 is the wild card not supposed to be in the deck  that somehow found its way into the deck and is now in play.    

Contrary to what you may have learned in high-school civics in the 1990's or earlier, electoral politics is not so much about politicians convincing people to vote for them, but instead (in most states) the ratification of the demographics of the time. Thus states similar in economics but not ethnic mix (let us say Arkansas and New Mexico) can vote very differently. COVID-19 can change the demographic mix depending on who it kills. Not since 2001 have so many Americans died of the same cause in one day, and I do not see that ending soon. One month of such deaths can give a death toll higher in one month alone as the total number of combat deaths in the wars in Korea or Vietnam in a much shorter time.

COVID-19 has shattered some of my core assumptions about this Presidential election.  I might hold off on new maps unless some poll is 'juicy'.

[pbrower2a]

[pbrower2a]

Also, the infatuation of impeachment of Trump was a Chris Matthew's infatuation, whom got banned from moderating debates, Guliani said this and that's why he is no longer getting paid for his pro Biden biased opinion on impeachment, that's why Trump was acquitted

Democrats had no viable option other than impeachment of the President after the attempt to blackmail the President of Ukraine. Republicans have typically accused Democrats of being soft on national security, and Trump put it at risk for a hare-brained effort to get a partisan advantage. There are legitimate means  of seeking political gain -- but never at the expense of an ally.

[pbrower2a]

The only thing about 2008, was that the Great Recession happened at the end of the campaign not March of 2008, had the Recession started earlier, McCain would have had time to recover. Trump has 6 mnths to recover not 2

John McCain did not lose for a lack of integrity. He went fro standing with the economic policies that led to the 2008 crash to having to renounce them. He did the latter awkwardly. McCain then got the rap for flip-flopping. But the economic meltdown of 2008 was not a consequence of McCain policies; those were the result of several years of the policies of a troubled Presidency.

To be sure, Barack Obama showed himself as one of the most adept politicians in American history, which did not help McCain. Trump has done everything possible to shove Obama to the sideline, but we can all expect Obama back on the scene. Obama is going to be the best campaign asset that the Democrats have in 2020. He can fire people up without being an embarrassment. He is no demagogue, so he will not be a loose cannon as was Sarah Palin.

Every incumbent either runs on his record as the only chance of winning re-election or awkwardly runs from his record. If he repudiates too much he gives his opponents unwitting aid in their campaign. Trump will run from the consequences, which will include the consequences of an economic meltdown, a diplomatic mess, and mostly-unforeseen consequences of his botched handling (admit it -- it is botched) of COVID-19.

Trump eminently deserves to lose the 2020 election, and those politicians who enabled him also deserve to go into the political quicksand with him. That is not to say definitively that such will happen. The death toll of COVID-19 is already high -- and it offers us an ominous interpretation of the phrase "You ain't seen nuthin' yet!"      

[pbrower2a]

McCain lost because of Bush. The economic crisis is what made it a rout.

To the extent that one can blame the lame-duck President, yes. John McCain was essentially a promise of the status quo, which works when things go well (think of the elder Bush in 1992). Still, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had become quagmires, and the mess in real-estate financing was tearing everything else apart.

It is far easier to change Parties of the President after two terms than after one; even the 1940 Presidential election was decidedly closer than that of the 1936 blow-out. So it is with the difference  between open-seat elections and those involving an incumbent. To be sure we have not seen an incumbent President lose a re-election bid since Bill Clinton defeated the elder Bush in 1992 -- twenty-eight years ago. That does not say that Trump has no advantage in incumbency. He had one and he lost much of it. The elder Bush lost more because people got tired of his agenda (a stale iteration of Ronald Reagan) than out of some glaring faults of him as President.

Trump does not have the disadvantage of staleness for his agenda, so he is not in the situation in which the elder Bush was in 1992.  Trump's ideological stance is still new, and I can easily imagine it being a success had it not been for scandals and an erratic foreign policy -- and Trump's singular vileness as a person that has become increasingly evident. He could have succeeded with tax reforms that practically exempt the rich from income taxes while imposing heavy federal sales taxes on consumer goods, eviscerating unions, gutting all environmental protections, and privatizing the Interstate Highway System to monopolistic profiteers. Such would lead to the funneling of huge amounts of money into a re-election campaign that would utterly dominate the media. America would then be about as plutocratic as Saudi Arabia, and the common man could do nothing about it.

Trump threw away his opportunity, perhaps the last, to establish a pure plutocracy with a veneer of Christian piety as the sole reward to the common man (pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die-if-you-suffer-adequately-for-your-exploiter), a Christian-fascist version of a new and permanent Gilded Age.  Instead he is fighting for his political life, and he may be reducing the Republican Party to a regional party whose support comes largely from the most backward parts of America.