Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped?

[Winstonm]

This is a good explanation of the reasons behind the government shutdown.

[Winstonm]

Curious about the WC group: What do each of you think would be a reasonable guess as to the size of Fredo's base compared to all voters? Personally, I think is is quite small, somewhere in the 15-20% range. You?

[kenberg]

Curious about the WC group: What do each of you think would be a reasonable guess as to the size of Fredo's base compared to all voters? Personally, I think is is quite small, somewhere in the 15-20% range. You?

 

 

I suppose various numbers work depending on definitions. For example. Take a person with a very busy life, say someone heading a one person household with several kids,a parent with a full time job, reads about politics close to never, has little time or inclination to worry about what happens to dreamers, thinks Dems are a whining pain in the butt, and likes seeing Trump drive them nuts. Is such a person in the Trump base? Probably there are quite a few such people. Doesn't go to trump rallies, or to any rallies. No time, no interest. In the Trump base?

[Winstonm]

I suppose various numbers work depending on definitions. For example. Take a person with a very busy life, say someone heading a one person household with several kids,a parent with a full time job, reads about politics close to never, has little time or inclination to worry about what happens to dreamers, thinks Dems are a whining pain in the butt, and likes seeing Trump drive them nuts. Is such a person in the Trump base? Probably there are quite a few such people. Doesn't go to trump rallies, or to any rallies. No time, no interest. In the Trump base?

 

I view Fredo's base as those who either: A) support him unequivocally or B) who always vote, regardless, and always vote Republican.

 

IMO, the type of person you describe is the type who can be as easily uninspired as inspired and is as apt to stay home on election day as fight the lines to vote.

[kenberg]

I view Fredo's base as those who either: A) support him unequivocally or B) who always vote, regardless, and always vote Republican.

 

IMO, the type of person you describe is the type who can be as easily uninspired as inspired and is as apt to stay home on election day as fight the lines to vote.

 

Yes, there are many who voted for Trump but we should not assume they will vote for Trump, or vote at all, again.

 

Now, let's look at the group "who either: A) support him unequivocally or B) who always vote, regardless, and always vote Republican."

 

Thought experiment: Let X be any candidate for anything. What percentage of people support X unequivocally? Similarly with "Republican" replaced by "Democrat". For example, a lot of the usual Democrat voters voted for Reagan in 1980, a lot of the usual Republican voters voted for Johnson in 1964. I usually vote for Democrats but I voted for Larry Hogan for governor, as did many others since he is now in office in this rather blue state.

 

 

So with your criterion for "base", no doubt the percentage of voters in his base would be small. It would be for anyone.15 to 20 percent seems on the high side.

[Winstonm]

Yes, there are many who voted for Trump but we should not assume they will vote for Trump, or vote at all, again.

 

Now, let's look at the group "who either: A) support him unequivocally or B) who always vote, regardless, and always vote Republican."

 

Thought experiment: Let X be any candidate for anything. What percentage of people support X unequivocally? Similarly with "Republican" replaced by "Democrat". For example, a lot of the usual Democrat voters voted for Reagan in 1980, a lot of the usual Republican voters voted for Johnson in 1964. I usually vote for Democrats but I voted for Larry Hogan for governor, as did many others since he is now in office in this rather blue state.

 

 

So with your criterion for "base", no doubt the percentage of voters in his base would be small. It would be for anyone.15 to 20 percent seems on the high side.

 

I know it seems high...but. I think that is the most troubling aspect of this entire presidency - that the racist (alternative) right is not only shown itself to be larger than thought but that so many who are not overtly alt right are OK with a lot of their ideas.

[ldrews]

U.S. economy to grow nearly 3 percent in 2018 because of Trump tax cuts, IMF says

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/01/22/u-s-economy-to-grow-nearly-3-percent-in-2018-because-of-trump-tax-cuts-imf-says/?utm_term=.0007feb732bb

[ldrews]

Interesting development: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aa95jLxZfc4

[ggwhiz]

U.S. economy to grow nearly 3 percent in 2018 because of Trump tax cuts, IMF says

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/01/22/u-s-economy-to-grow-nearly-3-percent-in-2018-because-of-trump-tax-cuts-imf-says/?utm_term=.0007feb732bb

 

Read the whole thing.

 

"Of the 29 countries the World Economic Forum assessed, the United States ranked 10th for economic growth but dropped near the bottom 28th place for ensuring everyone benefits from growth."

 

That's like bragging about coming 2nd in a chess match.

[rmnka447]

I view Fredo's base as those who either: A) support him unequivocally or B) who always vote, regardless, and always vote Republican.

 

IMO, the type of person you describe is the type who can be as easily uninspired as inspired and is as apt to stay home on election day as fight the lines to vote.

This is anecdotal, but in a way telling.

 

MSNBC (I couldn't believe it) had a piece on the other day where they followed up with three Dems who had voted for Trump. They were a waitress from FL, a union member from MI, and another 29 YO first time voter. They all said they still supported Trump because he has done what he said he would do and the economy has gotten much better. The waitress said that as disposable income goes up that was good for her. The union member noted that Trump hadn't done much on trade yet, but otherwise had carried through on his promises. The 29 YO said he'd still vote for Trump, but probably "wouldn't buy his jersey." All thought he should twitter less. All didn't think Trump was racist and felt the Russia investigation wasn't worthwhile because they didn't think the Russians had meaningfully affected the election.

 

Sorry, but if the people most likely to flip back and support the Dems are maintaining their support for President Trump, that doesn't augur well for the Dems.

[cherdano]

This is anecdotal, but in a way telling.

 

MSNBC (I couldn't believe it) had a piece on the other day where they followed up with three Dems who had voted for Trump. They were a waitress from FL, a union member from MI, and another 29 YO first time voter. They all said they still supported Trump because he has done what he said he would do and the economy has gotten much better. The waitress said that as disposable income goes up that was good for her. The union member noted that Trump hadn't done much on trade yet, but otherwise had carried through on his promises. The 29 YO said he'd still vote for Trump, but probably "wouldn't buy his jersey." All thought he should twitter less. All didn't think Trump was racist and felt the Russia investigation wasn't worthwhile because they didn't think the Russians had meaningfully affected the election.

 

Sorry, but if the people most likely to flip back and support the Dems are maintaining their support for President Trump, that doesn't augur well for the Dems.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

[Winstonm]

This is anecdotal, but in a way telling.

 

MSNBC (I couldn't believe it) had a piece on the other day where they followed up with three Dems who had voted for Trump. They were a waitress from FL, a union member from MI, and another 29 YO first time voter. They all said they still supported Trump because he has done what he said he would do and the economy has gotten much better. The waitress said that as disposable income goes up that was good for her. The union member noted that Trump hadn't done much on trade yet, but otherwise had carried through on his promises. The 29 YO said he'd still vote for Trump, but probably "wouldn't buy his jersey." All thought he should twitter less. All didn't think Trump was racist and felt the Russia investigation wasn't worthwhile because they didn't think the Russians had meaningfully affected the election.

 

Sorry, but if the people most likely to flip back and support the Dems are maintaining their support for President Trump, that doesn't augur well for the Dems.

 

This populist narrative doesn't hold water. Fredo has proven himself no populist and his polling support numbers go down while strong disapproval goes up. Many dems and independents voted against Hillary and for change but have since regretted that choice was Fredo. They will not make the same mistake if the dems can find a reasonable alternative.

[ldrews]

Read the whole thing.

 

"Of the 29 countries the World Economic Forum assessed, the United States ranked 10th for economic growth but dropped near the bottom — 28th place — for ensuring everyone benefits from growth."

 

That's like bragging about coming 2nd in a chess match.

 

After 8 years of sub 3% growth, 3+% growth looks pretty good, don't you think?

[helene_t]

This populist narrative doesn't hold water. Fredo has proven himself no populist and his polling support numbers go down while strong disapproval goes up. Many dems and independents voted against Hillary and for change but have since regretted that choice was Fredo. They will not make the same mistake if the dems can find a reasonable alternative.

Are you sure? Trump got an election boost and is now down about the same level as he was before the election. He has increased his ratings slightly recently although the government shutdown might have been a setback. This is the normal pattern: almost every president has been significantly less popular after one year than immediately after his election. Trump had a lower baseline and still he has low approval. There's also a long term trend that presidents get less and less popular. Here in New Zealand, everybody loves our PM because she is our PM, just like Danish people love their queen (OK, I exaggerate a little bit). This is probably how USA was a generation ago but nowadays the climate is so partisan that appr. half of the electorate is bound to dislike the president.

 

But of course you are right, the democrats will have to field a pretty bad-looking candidate to lose next time. Unless Trump does something to unify the nation behind him, such as starting a nuclear war. He must be tempted. Another possibility is that the democrats actually find a very reasonable candidates but that the facebook trolls manage to make him/her toxic. We have seen that happening before .....

[rmnka447]

This populist narrative doesn't hold water. Fredo has proven himself no populist and his polling support numbers go down while strong disapproval goes up. Many dems and independents voted against Hillary and for change but have since regretted that choice was Fredo. They will not make the same mistake if the dems can find a reasonable alternative.

Winnie, the problem might be finding and NOMINATING a "reasonable alternative". If the Dems go much further left, they'll have to replace donkey as a party symbol with a hammer and sickle.

 

Assuming MSNBC didn't pack the piece with Trump diehards (which is highly unlikely), the surprising thing was none had flipped because of Trump's flaws. So while progressive zealots are myopic about how unacceptable Trump is and Russian collusion, they may be a lot less of an issue for most everyday people. They're more worried about living paycheck to paycheck than anything else.

 

But then again there was a Dem President whose mantra was "It's about the economy, stupid." President Trump has certainly kept his word and concentrated on jobs and the economy. It'll be interesting to see where his approval ratings go when the full effect of the tax cuts kick in.

[cherdano]

If Trump goes from 46% to 44%, he would lose in something close to a land slide. But if you polled 10 Trump voters, you wouldn't expect to find anyone who wouldn't vote for him again. (And that doesn't even account for that fact that people don't like to admit that they are changing their mind.)

 

Edit: even if Trump gets the exact same number of votes in 2020 as in 2016, he would likely lose, as more Democrats may turn out, and some of the Ron Johnson/Jill Stein voters will reconsider their stance of promoting liberty/advancing leftist causes by not doing anything against electing an authoritarian racist to be president.

[y66]

From Pennsylvania’s gerrymandered House map was just struck down — with huge implications for 2018 by Andrew Prokop at Vox:

 

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled Monday that the state’s US House maps were based on a Republican partisan gerrymander that violated the state’s constitution — and struck them down.

 

If the ruling holds, it will be an enormous help to Democrats’ efforts to regain control of the House of Representatives in 2018 — because Pennsylvania’s House map was one of the most wildly biased toward Republicans in the country.

 

The ruling states that Pennsylvania’s government has until February 15 to get a new map through the legislature and signed into law. If they fail to do so — a likely prospect, since the state has a Republican-controlled legislature and Democratic governor — the Pennsylvania Supreme Court will take over the process and institute a new map. (The court has a Democratic majority.)

 

Republicans have appealed the ruling to the US Supreme Court, but it is unclear whether the justices will get involved with a matter of state law.

[y66]

From Democrats didn't cave on the shutdown by Ezra Klein at Vox:

 

There’s a rollicking debate on Twitter over whether Democrats “caved.” I’ll confess that I’m mystified by this argument. For the moment, this seems like a good deal — but it’s impossible to say anything definitive without knowing what happens over the next three weeks.

 

The central political problem in American life, for years now, has been that the Republican Party is a dysfunctional institution that has abandoned principles of decent governance in order to please an ever more extreme base. I don’t have an answer for fixing that. But it would be doubly bad if their outrageous behavior drives Democrats to use the same tactics in response. American politics is, hopefully, an infinite game, not a finite game, and that means doing everything possible to steer away from retaliatory loops that clearly lead to the system crumbling.

Caved schmaved. The NYT Editorial Board gets this exactly right: "Shutdowns may make good partisan theater, but they don’t make any winners". This is about "putting the spotlight where it should be: on the failure of President Trump and Republicans in Congress to protect 700,000 so-called Dreamers, immigrants who were brought to this country illegally as children — legislation that almost nine in 10 Americans support".

[Winstonm]

Are you sure? Trump got an election boost and is now down about the same level as he was before the election. He has increased his ratings slightly recently although the government shutdown might have been a setback. This is the normal pattern: almost every president has been significantly less popular after one year than immediately after his election. Trump had a lower baseline and still he has low approval. There's also a long term trend that presidents get less and less popular. Here in New Zealand, everybody loves our PM because she is our PM, just like Danish people love their queen (OK, I exaggerate a little bit). This is probably how USA was a generation ago but nowadays the climate is so partisan that appr. half of the electorate is bound to dislike the president.

 

But of course you are right, the democrats will have to field a pretty bad-looking candidate to lose next time. Unless Trump does something to unify the nation behind him, such as starting a nuclear war. He must be tempted. Another possibility is that the democrats actually find a very reasonable candidates but that the facebook trolls manage to make him/her toxic. We have seen that happening before .....

 

Although presidents typically drop in popularity, Fredo started below historical norms and has continued to plummet to new historical lows. Women and minorities have thus far shown themselves to be activated to participate, and that is bad news for Fredo and his family business.

 

The odd thing is that a healthy economy may actually be Fredo's undoing, as the wind will come out of the sails of many angry voters. Once the anger subsides, reality strikes - what the hell have we done! - and then we shall see who is right or wrong about the true Fredo base.

[Winstonm]

Winnie, the problem might be finding and NOMINATING a "reasonable alternative". If the Dems go much further left, they'll have to replace donkey as a party symbol with a hammer and sickle.

 

Assuming MSNBC didn't pack the piece with Trump diehards (which is highly unlikely), the surprising thing was none had flipped because of Trump's flaws. So while progressive zealots are myopic about how unacceptable Trump is and Russian collusion, they may be a lot less of an issue for most everyday people. They're more worried about living paycheck to paycheck than anything else.

 

But then again there was a Dem President whose mantra was "It's about the economy, stupid." President Trump has certainly kept his word and concentrated on jobs and the economy. It'll be interesting to see where his approval ratings go when the full effect of the tax cuts kick in.

 

The only thing Fredo has concentrated on is his family business and his tv ratings.

[ldrews]

The only thing Fredo has concentrated on is his family business and his tv ratings.

 

Do you have any actual evidence to back up your assertion?

[hrothgar]

Do you have any actual evidence to back up your assertion?

 

1. "Executive time"

 

2. The fact that Trump doesn't actually know any of the specifics of the policy discussions happening around him

 

3. The fact that he is spending a quarter of his time golfing

[ldrews]

1. "Executive time"

 

2. The fact that Trump doesn't actually know any of the specifics of the policy discussions happening around him

 

3. The fact that he is spending a quarter of his time golfing

 

so, no actual evidence. That is what I thought.

[RedSpawn]

so, no actual evidence. That is what I thought.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/apr/17/who-plays-more-golf-donald-trump-or-barack-obama/

 

Trump made an issue of how much time Obama golfed while in office but remains woefully quiet about his own golf time relative to Obama. This doesn't prove President Trump's motives, but highlights his short sightedness and hypocrisy.

 

Is Trump's excessive amount of golf time while in office a non-issue because of moral superiority or executive privilege? Trump pointed the guilty finger at Obama and forgot there are three fingers pointing back at him for similar offenses.

 

Fair is foul and foul is fair in our alternative Macbeth universe.

[ldrews]

More bonuses:

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/23/125000-disney-employees-to-receive-1000-cash-bonus-company-launches-new-50-million-education-program.html