Jimmy Dore: Trump will lead to Dem majorities in 2018, real progressive in 2020

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv8b33gJ174

Jimmy Dore still thinks Hillary is worse for Democrats, that she will lead to a midterm wipeout in 2018, and an even more conservative Republican winning in 2020.

"If Trump is President, the natural opposition coalesces, we have all the Democrats together, we have the Democrats and purple state Republicans. In 2 years, the House and the Senate flips, we have Democratic majorities in the House, and then in 2 years we get a real frickin Progressive after we get rid of Trump".

Agree or disagree? I think 2018 will be terrible for Democrats no matter what, and it's certainly not worth 4 years of Trump.

[Maxwell]

George W Bush will lead to huge democrat majorities, a true progressive in 2004.

I mean seriously how dumb is this guy!

[heatcharger]

Yes, let's let Trump appoint multiple Scalia-esque conservatives to the SC. Citizens United will surely get overturned with them!

Can't stand progressives who can't see the bigger picture.

And yeah, I think it's very optimistic to think Democrats would win back both chambers in 2018. If the country came to the point where it elected Trump, I'm not so sure they will be willing to throw out Republicans in the middle of his presidency.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

F***wit.

[Mehmentum]

This is a stupid strategy.  Not only does this give the other party control of both Houses of Congress (Democrats probably won't take back the Senate if Trump wins) + the presidency and decides the fate of the supreme court, it also requires electing DONALD FREAKING TRUMP as president.  We'd have four years of this erratic, bigoted man as president, stoking hatred and intolerance, destroying our standing in the world, and setting an example to the next generation.

And there's no guarantee that Democrats would get a majority in 2018 if this is the case.  The Senate map is still stacked ridiculously against them.  The House is still gerrymandered and the Democrats would still have to deal with low turnout.  Yeah, I suppose we could win a bunch of governorships and state legislators back.  But even if it worked, are probably fleeting congressional majorities really worth the damage that a Trump presidency would do to our nation?

How stupid are the people of TYT?

[Joe Republic]

Who?

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Who?

[Nyvin]

I cannot stand Jimmy Dore.   Anytime I find myself watching some TYT clip (for whatever reason) I can manage to listen to him speak for about ~4 seconds before I have to mute it or change videos.

[Lief 🗽]

Very sad to see that TYT weren't rounded up and vince fostered by correct the record thugs after Clinton won the primaries.

[Bojack Horseman]

I think he's right, TBQH. It would be like 2008-present just with the parties reversed. Trump gets elected, hugely unpopular from the getgo, looney base takes over the party, Democrats score huge midterm victory, nominate a "real progressive" in 2020, he loses badly, Democrats win more seats in 2022, Democrats nominate yet another whackjob, he loses, and the establishment (myself included) says "I told you so."

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think he's right, TBQH. It would be like 2008-present just with the parties reversed. Trump gets elected, hugely unpopular from the getgo, looney base takes over the party, Democrats score huge midterm victory, nominate a "real progressive" in 2020, he loses badly, Democrats win more seats in 2022, Democrats nominate yet another whackjob, he loses, and the establishment (myself included) says "I told you so."

You know who vote in mid-terms don't you?

[Pyro]

This theory is certainly not unheard of, and I recall hearing quite a few arguing for a similar strategy in 2012. If Trump should be elected, it is fairly likely Congress would go relatively unchanged in 2018 barring a major event/crisis, but there is no legitimate way to predict who would win in 2020. In all likelihood the Democrats would end up nominating a safe insider a la Kerry or Mondale and end up losing. It's a dangerous game anyway, and the end goal would probably mean disaster along with a conservative court (no way in hell the Democrats block someone as effectively as the GOP had Garland). What the panel argues about the repercussions of a Clinton win is more likely (Senate gains reversed), in my opinion, than their Trump prediction.

Now that Jimmy has his own TYT show, it will be enjoyable to watch Clinton hacks go off the rails in threads like these. Looking forward to it.

[Yank2133]

Nothing is more annoying then privileged white liberals.

[RFayette]

As they say, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.  It's not wise to want to lose an election for the hope of better potential returns in the future. 

[Illiniwek]

F***wit.

[Bojack Horseman]

I think he's right, TBQH. It would be like 2008-present just with the parties reversed. Trump gets elected, hugely unpopular from the getgo, looney base takes over the party, Democrats score huge midterm victory, nominate a "real progressive" in 2020, he loses badly, Democrats win more seats in 2022, Democrats nominate yet another whackjob, he loses, and the establishment (myself included) says "I told you so."

You know who vote in mid-terms don't you?

2006 would have something to say about that argument.

[Yank2133]

Nothing is more annoying then privileged white liberals.

Just to play Devil's advocate, what about Andrew Johnson and the 1866 midterm landslide and Grant's win in 1868?

What about it? I don't think HRC is good comparison to Johnson, who no wing of his party liked at all.

[Yank2133]

Nothing is more annoying then privileged white liberals.

Just to play Devil's advocate, what about Andrew Johnson and the 1866 midterm landslide and Grant's win in 1868?

What about it? I don't think HRC is good comparison to Johnson, who no wing of his party liked at all.

Johnson is supposed to be Trump here, and Grant is supposed to be the FDR 2.0 figure who ushers in a decade of the most progressive policies in US history.

Ah, I see......still no.

Having the GOP in their current state control all three branches of the government is too much of a risk to basically punt this election.

[catographer]

George W Bush will lead to huge democrat majorities, a true progressive in 2004.

I mean seriously how dumb is this guy!

His second term kinda did tho... (2006, 2008)

I don't think Dore is crazy here. I would predict a huge midterm backlash against a President Trump. As for 2020, he probably wouldn't win re-election.

[BlueSwan]

George W Bush will lead to huge democrat majorities, a true progressive in 2004.

I mean seriously how dumb is this guy!

[andrew_c]

Why the hell would you want to lose an election when the other guy would be an existential threat to the country if elected? It sounds absolutely insane.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Somebody should tell this clown that nobody ever won by losing.

[BlueSwan]

Nothing is more annoying then privileged white liberals.

Yes, unfortunately. I consider myself left wing (and I'm white), but by golly there are some deluded people out there.

[Lyin' Steve]

So you want to elect Trump, with a Republican house, a conservative supreme court, and a split Senate, and just hand the far right four years (or two if you're dumb and you think this map is just a treasure trove of pickup opportunities) of major policy victories, just because maybe after it's over you can claw back to a position of policy victories?  The position that we could have had now if you'd just swallowed your damn ego and voted for Hillary?  And why do you think people are going to vote for a #TrueProgressive once you're out of power and the country's spent four years moving right?

By the way these people will never be satisfied because they're just the alt-left, they thrive on neanderthal-brain appeals to outrage and anger, they always find some way to be absolutely furious at the status quo and think the establishment is plotting against them.  If Sanders had won the primary they'd have turned on him in a heartbeat because then he would be the status quo.  I mean sh**t they hate him now.

But hey they saw the f-word a lot on their show so they must be more genuine than the democrats who actually do something to enact policy changes.

[Stranger in a strange land]

This is a stupid strategy.  Not only does this give the other party control of both Houses of Congress (Democrats probably won't take back the Senate if Trump wins) + the presidency and decides the fate of the supreme court, it also requires electing DONALD FREAKING TRUMP as president.  We'd have four years of this erratic, bigoted man as president, stoking hatred and intolerance, destroying our standing in the world, and setting an example to the next generation.

And there's no guarantee that Democrats would get a majority in 2018 if this is the case.  The Senate map is still stacked ridiculously against them.  The House is still gerrymandered and the Democrats would still have to deal with low turnout.  Yeah, I suppose we could win a bunch of governorships and state legislators back.  But even if it worked, are probably fleeting congressional majorities really worth the damage that a Trump presidency would do to our nation?

How stupid are the people of TYT?

This also assumes that the U.S. will actually continue to hold free and fair elections with Trump as president, which is far from a foregone conclusion.