Reply to a thread of optimism: why do you think Trump will lose in 2020?

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "a thread of optimism: why do you think Trump will lose in 2020?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Because Trump lovers won't stop whining whining "That's why Trump is going to win again in 2020" - let's give our reasons here for why Trump is going to lose in 2020. (Knock wood a million times.)

- Americans are tired of this clown show. It's exhausting and scary, and the people who thought it would be funny to vote for Trump last time don't think it's so funny anymore

- Because he's an impotent fool with no good ideas

- Because Infrastructure Week is such a joke, and such a wasted opportunity

[/quote]

Because in 2020 the Democrats won't ignore Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin[/quote]

+1. People don’t talk about this as much as they should, but in 2016, the Clinton campaign had as much bad polling data as the Romney campaign had in 2012. Romney didn’t even have a concession speech prepared because his polling data showed him winning every swing state except one or two. He was blindsided by his loss.

The Clinton campaign polling data showed them winning PA, MI, and WI for sure. Possibly other swing states that she lost too. However, it also showed them LOSING the popular vote. In the last few weeks of the campaign, she spent too much time in either safe D or safe R states trying to run up the PV score, while ignoring those critical swing states, all of which she lost by a very slim margin. And she wouldn’t have even had to take votes from Trump - just turn out the people who voted for Obama in 2012, but who either stayed home or voted 3rd party in 2016. Seriously, I had friends on the ground with the Clinton campaign in PA in 2016 and they were basically ignored by the campaign in safe D areas (cities and inner-ring suburbs) where it’s important to turn out voters.

The D’s won’t make that mistake again. And Trump is quite unpopular in those three states. Combined with the fact that the other states that Clinton won are increasingly out of reach for R’s and I don’t think Trump will be re-elected. The fact that unemployment is low is the only thing keeping him even remotely afloat right now, and yet he’s still underwater on his approval rating.[/quote]

This is OP - why was Clinton's data so bad? And do you think the Dems will have better data this time?[/quote]

There’s a lot out there about the failures of the Clinton campaign - most of it came out in the days/weeks right after the election and was quickly forgotten as we moved into the Trump administration. But here’s one article: https://theoutline.com/post/1422/shattered-hillary-clinton-campaign?zd=2&zi=e4jepcc5

“ In a telling anecdote, Bill Clinton warned his wife’s campaign headquarters not to underestimate the right-wing populist uprising behind Brexit last June, but Robby Mook insisted that his data ran counter to anecdotal evidence. Nearly all of Clinton’s strategy was derived from Mook’s analytics, which assumed, based on polling and Obama’s two victories, that the Midwest was a Democratic stronghold and thus did not need to be attended to with on-the-ground campaigning. But the analytics were flawed in several ways. They relied too much on obsolete data, as Mook declined to pay for new polls in the last three weeks before the election. They overestimated the final voter turnout after seeing strong early voting numbers. Most crucially, they overestimated how many Midwestern counties that went for Obama would go for Clinton. While Trump concentrated on states where his pro-manufacturing message resonated most, Clinton attempted to expand her presumed bloc of blue states outward into North Carolina and Arizona, both of which she ended up losing.”

I certainly hope the D candidate this time will have better polling data! I guess there’s no telling, but really, we’ve all learned a hard lesson in 2016 that no states can be taken for granted. Obama had a true 50 state strategy and campaigned hard everywhere, in contrast to Gore and Kerry who leaned too hard on Florida, and Clinton who thought she had it in the bag and was just trying to win the PV. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics