Gun to your head: Will Trump be reelected?

[Mr. Morden]

No, he will lose to a Democrat. The problem for Trump is that he can't play the outsider anymore and he will actually have a record to defend (so far it's not a good one).

As did Truman in '48...

Because Trump is totally comparable to Harry Truman.

You can't spell either without "tru".

[Horus]

Option 3 (Edgy moderate hero)

[falling apart like the ashes of American flags]

I'm having a tough time thinking of anything Trump has done that would improve his election chances. Like who has he won over?

And yeah he still has over three years, but his style of "governing" has already shown a systematic dysfunction. Look at how many members of his inner circle he's gone through already, and his methods of diplomacy haven't changed any.

[TheLeftwardTide]

Gun to my head? Progressive Democrat defeats Trump in a 1980-style fashion.

American electoral history has almost produced a carbon copy of itself in terms of the New Deal Era (1933-1980) and the Neoliberal Era (1980-present). FDR-Reagan, Truman-Bush, Eisenhower-Clinton, JFK/LBJ-Dubya, Nixon/Ford-Obama, and now Carter-Trump. Down to the party composition, types of candidate, and (with the exception of FDR) number of elected terms, these two eras match perfectly.

Do I actually think this will happen? No, it's way too early to predict. That's the real answer here. For now, I'll just watch what happens and hope for the best.

[dw93]

Time may prove me wrong, but of these options, Trump loses to a Democrat in 2020. Now before I say why, I'd like to point out that I don't think these Russia investigations will go anywhere and Trump will not be impeached or resign. So he'll run in 2020. He'll most likely see a strong primary challenge, but he'll be re nominated none the less.

Anyway, Trump will lose because:

• Trump has thus far proven himself incapable of governing and leading his party. He can't unify his party behind him, and the party itself is divided. They can't even accomplish things that they've (both Trump and the GOP) been campaigning on for years (namely the Obamacare repeal). He has yet to win over very many "Never Trump's" (if he won over any at all) and while the Democrats have divisions to, theirs will be easier to overcome than the GOP's IMHO. Plus, the White House is always in chaos due at least in some part, to Trump and his tweeting. The craziness in the Clinton White House in '93 pales in comparison to the insanity of the Trump White House in 2017
• A Recession is bound to hit sometime between now and 2020. A recession was bound to hit regardless of who won the 2016 election as the recovery we've been in since June of 2009 has been weak and uneven so I doubt this expansion will exceed the one of the 1990s which was the longest of our history at 10 years (1991-2001). In order for it to do that, this recovery would have to go past June 2019 and I don't see that happening. Presidents of the post war era who have had recessions hit in their first term after their first year in office have always lost re election (See Carter in 1980, Bush 41 in 1992). Also, The "good" economic numbers we've been seeing in recent months have nothing to do with Trump. This is still Obama's last Fiscal Year and we won't begin to feel any economic impact of Trump's policies until very late this year or early next year.
• Trump has no coherent Foreign Policy, has thus far alienated our allies and we have increasing problems with North Korea and Russia. I can see either one of them being for Trump what Iran was for Jimmy Carter. With Trump alienating our allies though, we're not going to have very much if any support in dealing with the problems abroad, and Trump is very capable of making things much worse. After four years of Trump, for the first time in the Post Vietnam era, the Republicans could emerge as the party that is "weak" and "soft on defense" while the Democrats emerge as the opposite.

I could be proven wrong (especially if the Democrats nominate that bad of a candidate), but based on what I've seen thus far, Trump will be toast in 2020.

[henster]

I think a recession wrecks his re-election and he loses in a landslide.

[NEW JERSEY FOR MENENDEZ]

I'd say yes. The Democrats can nominate someone logical like Cory Booker or Kamala Harris, but then the far-left will cry and either not vote or vote third party, causing Trump to win, or the Democrats nominate a Justice Dem like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and watch while they crash and burn.

[Pericles]

Donald Trump is unlikely to stay in office for a full 4 years as he lacks the discipline to do what's in his best interests to hold off impeachment. With peace and prosperity he is already at 36% approval rating, and when his ratings continue to sink lower and either Mueller reveals collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia and obstruction of justice or Trump forces a constitutional crisis, the GOP Congress & establishment will knife Trump-who they never respected, liked or truly supported-and Pence will take office. However the economy can't stay in such good shape for the next 4 years(though likely for the next 1 or 2) and the GOP already it cannot govern. By 2020 the Democrats will likely have recovered and the Republicans will be in disarray, President Pence will lose by a big margin.

[tallguy23]

We haven't had a terrorist attack, natural disaster, or recession yet and he's at 36%. God knows how low he'll go if any of those scenarios play out.

[インターネット掲示板ユーザー Punxsutawney Phil]

We can't rule it out completely, but it's very unlikely right now. Option 4.

[GoTfan]

I'd say yes. The Democrats can nominate someone logical like Cory Booker or Kamala Harris, but then the far-left will cry and either not vote or vote third party, causing Trump to win, or the Democrats nominate a Justice Dem like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and watch while they crash and burn.

Oh yes, centrists are always the way to go. You had your chance in 2016, and lost. You failed to address income inequality, wealth inequality and refused to consider a single payer system and then Hillary promptly spat in our faces by picking Tim Kaine for VP.

Sorry, but we owe the Democrats nothing. Furthermore, Booker is in support of charter schools and defended Bain Capital in 2012 when Obama attacked it. Kamala Harris has met with big donors, refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin and later received a $2000 campaign donation from him. They're also horrendously close to Wall Street. Sorry, but we are not supporting someone connected with Wall Street in any way, shape or form.

But of course, I keep forgetting that lefties are your favourite scapegoat. You'll deride, ridicule and block us all the time, yet we're always told to fall in behind whoever is shoved on us. If you want to ridicule us, then you can get stuffed.

[You are responsible]

Option 4 or 5. Voted for 5.

(Would support abolishing the Electoral College even if it means that a Republican occassionally wins who wouldn't have won with the EC in place.)

[JerryArkansas]

I'd say yes. The Democrats can nominate someone logical like Cory Booker or Kamala Harris, but then the far-left will cry and either not vote or vote third party, causing Trump to win, or the Democrats nominate a Justice Dem like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and watch while they crash and burn.

Oh yes, centrists are always the way to go. You had your chance in 2016, and lost. You failed to address income inequality, wealth inequality and refused to consider a single payer system and then Hillary promptly spat in our faces by picking Tim Kaine for VP.

Sorry, but we owe the Democrats nothing. Furthermore, Booker is in support of charter schools and defended Bain Capital in 2012 when Obama attacked it. Kamala Harris has met with big donors, refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin and later received a $2000 campaign donation from him. They're also horrendously close to Wall Street. Sorry, but we are not supporting someone connected with Wall Street in any way, shape or form.

But of course, I keep forgetting that lefties are your favourite scapegoat. You'll deride, ridicule and block us all the time, yet we're always told to fall in behind whoever is shoved on us. If you want to ridicule us, then you can get stuffed.

Dems ran on addressing all of those things, far leftist just ignored it because they were pissed they lost, and then tried to claim the election was stolen from them because they could not accept the loss.  Some even ran racist talking points on how the southern primaries shouldn't count as much as they currently do, even though they hold a large portion of the base. 

And the far leftist wouldn't be criticized if they didn't have the attitude of taking their ball home every time they don't get every little thing that they want.  Sorry but the world doesn't work like it does in those fantasies.  No one can get everything they want, and to expect that from a broadly based party is laughable.

[Don Vito Corleone]

No, he will lose to a Democrat. The problem for Trump is that he can't play the outsider anymore and he will actually have a record to defend (so far it's not a good one).

As did Truman in '48...

Trump had his 1948 moment in 2016, an knowing how 1952 went....

[NEW JERSEY FOR MENENDEZ]

I'd say yes. The Democrats can nominate someone logical like Cory Booker or Kamala Harris, but then the far-left will cry and either not vote or vote third party, causing Trump to win, or the Democrats nominate a Justice Dem like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren, and watch while they crash and burn.

Oh yes, centrists are always the way to go. You had your chance in 2016, and lost.

Actually, Hillary didn't lose because she was a """centrist""", she lost because many people saw her as corrupt and inept. She was once the most popular politician in the country before her email scandal.

You failed to address income inequality, wealth inequality and refused to consider a single payer system and then Hillary promptly spat in our faces by picking Tim Kaine for VP.

I think equal pay is an issue that needs to be confronted, however I've always felt that controlling wealth inequality is pointless. It penalizes those who have become successful. Single payer systems don't usually work well, look at the NHS in the UK. A toddler is now dead because of it, and there are probably thousands more that didn't make waves to the US. Do I think we should have public healthcare for those who are below the poverty line? Absolutely. Do I think we should force everyone onto a government program? No.

Sorry, but we owe the Democrats nothing. Furthermore, Booker is in support of charter schools and defended Bain Capital in 2012 when Obama attacked it.

What's wrong with charter schools?

Kamala Harris has met with big donors, refused to prosecute Steve Mnuchin and later received a $2000 campaign donation from him. They're also horrendously close to Wall Street. Sorry, but we are not supporting someone connected with Wall Street in any way, shape or form.

Well of course she'd meet with donors, campaigns cost a lot of money and if she is to run (99% sure of it), then she'll need the money.

But of course, I keep forgetting that lefties are your favourite scapegoat. You'll deride, ridicule and block us all the time, yet we're always told to fall in behind whoever is shoved on us. If you want to ridicule us, then you can get stuffed.

You're our "scapegoat" (really? this sounds like a victim mentality) because you do the GOP's work for them. You dig up as much dirt as you can on a Democratic candidate who's name isn't Bernard Sanders, then the GOP takes that and uses that info against them. Then, when that Democrat wins the nomination, the GOP nominee can also point out that members of the Democratic Party were using that info and paint a picture that the Democrats are strongly divided.

[heatcharger]

^^ Damn, this guy actually made a good post. Respect.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

It's way too early to say what will happen in 2020 (Assuming Trump isn't impeached/doesn't die in office or something) , but to be safe I went with option number 2. I think Trump is likely to lose the popular vote by even more than he did in 2016, while narrowly winning the Electoral College.

[PragmaticPopulist]

Actually, Hillary didn't lose because she was a """centrist""", she lost because many people saw her as corrupt and inept. She was once the most popular politician in the country before her email scandal.

This.

As long as Democrats nominate someone who doesn't have baggage like Hilary Clinton and is not seen as close the wall street, They should be in good shape if Trump continues on like he is now. With a gun to my head, I'd say a Democrat wins a pretty average victory. Too soon to know if they would pull a Reagan vs Carter landslide.

[For Trump, everything. For immigrants, the law]

Gun to my head, Trump barely wins because Democrats just run an anti-Trump campaign and don't have a message or excite voters. If I had to guess, Michigan and Wisconsin flip, but Trump holds Pennsylvania by a hair.

[AN63093]

Our predictions are almost exactly the same MT; except I think there is the possibility of a small R swing in the national PV.  May not be enough for Trump to win the PV though, that's another story.

MI is my first state to flip D, if any states do, that is.

[MissoulaDem]

I don't personally see it happening as long as the Democrat nominee is at least a credible option, as well as the possibility of him losing re-nomination to a challenger, most likely Kasich, or even declining to run for a second term (which i don't see happening), giving Pence a run.

[HisGrace]

I mean there are possibilities of Trump pulling a Dubya '04 and barely getting over the line, or for him to end up like Franklin Pierce against Kasich [his whole brand and ego won't let him go the way of LBJ or Truman], but these seem to be rather minute atm.

W ended his first year in office with 80 percent approval and was at over 50 percent when he stood for reelection. Democrats who thought he'd have no chance were delusional. Meanwhile, Trump is in the 30's after six months.

I'm not going to vote because I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he isn't standing for reelection due to resignation/impeachment/choosing not to run. But for him to be reelected something has to change in the trajectory of his presidency. He has no legislative achievements to speak of. Health care's not going to happen, tax cuts probably aren't going to happen. If he's going to improve his approval ratings he's going to have to earn it. I don't see any path for him to do that other than him morphing into a different person who is a competent leader and can get things done.

If Trump's not on the ballot for some reason you'd have to assume that's because the sh**t has really hit the fan, in which case the Democrats would still win. Maybe an outsider Republican like Kasich or even Cruz could win depending on the conditions and their opponent.

[Mr. Smith]

I mean there are possibilities of Trump pulling a Dubya '04 and barely getting over the line, or for him to end up like Franklin Pierce against Kasich [his whole brand and ego won't let him go the way of LBJ or Truman], but these seem to be rather minute atm.

W ended his first year in office with 80 percent approval and was at over 50 percent when he stood for reelection. Democrats who thought he'd have no chance were delusional. Meanwhile, Trump is in the 30's after six months.

I'm not going to vote because I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he isn't standing for reelection due to resignation/impeachment/choosing not to run. But for him to be reelected something has to change in the trajectory of his presidency. He has no legislative achievements to speak of. Health care's not going to happen, tax cuts probably aren't going to happen. If he's going to improve his approval ratings he's going to have to earn it. I don't see any path for him to do that other than him morphing into a different person who is a competent leader and can get things done.

If Trump's not on the ballot for some reason you'd have to assume that's because the sh**t has really hit the fan, in which case the Democrats would still win. Maybe an outsider Republican like Kasich or even Cruz could win depending on the conditions and their opponent.

You conveniently forgot the little "rally around the flag" event that would've pole-vaulted ANYONE, even a 30's ratings Jimmy Carter up that high, even a disgraced Richard Nixon would've gone up.

If you look right before that, his approvals were dropping quickly despite a decent start, and in '04, he was like Obama, flickering between 40s and 50s.

And like I said, those seem to be very unlikely possibilities.

[Devout Centrist]

F**k no. If he even makes it that long.

Pence on the other hand...

[henster]

The economy is all that matters if it sucks then it doesn't really matter how flawed the Dem nominee may be. If UE is 7-8% in PA, OH, WI, MI he will lose if its 4-5% he has a decent shot.