General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDamage control? He's 1 point above approval needed
to win (MSNBC daily tracking). He can win with 45% Unless he's below in ALL the states that are swing/purple..
We are f u c k e d
Perhaps he will kill someone on 5th Ave.?
Just be realistic. What can we do to mitigate? Can we instead of concentrating on WH, concentrate on Senate?
Quixote1818
(28,918 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)jcgoldie
(11,612 posts)He's barely broken 42% over the entire span of his presidency and his high water mark over that period has been about 43%.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)jcgoldie
(11,612 posts)Why panic on the basis of outlier polls? The point is for 3 years hes never polled near 46% which you referenced. His numbers have been amazingly static compared to every other president in the modern polling era. That has kept him from nosediving into the 30s when it was warranted but it will also very likely keep him from picking up the 4-5% he would need even to duplicate the electoral college win of 2016.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)is under Impeachment, and bribed a foreign govt to dig up dirt on a personal rival. Yet his approvals are NOT going down. And we have not been able to protect the election, 3 years after the Russians got their hands in the last one. What Mueller warned was most important.
To bury our head in the sand even more and act like it's all ok is probably the biggest mistake we can make.
dawg day
(7,947 posts)He hired a thug who speculated about paying to have her "dealt with".
We need to keep saying, "No president should do this. No PERSON should do this. These people are thugs. Trump is a mob boss."
a kennedy
(29,617 posts)I ABSOLUTELY DESPISE THIS ORANGE PIECE OF SHIT.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Quixote1818
(28,918 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Interference.
We are fucked. Think we should create a plan/strategy for IF he wins- how do we stop him but other means, then.
Sugarcoated
(7,716 posts)Cicada
(4,533 posts)The youngest 40% of those eligible to vote favor Dems by almost two to one, a huge unprecedented mismatch. Pew tracking shows they are not getting more conservative with age. That tidal wave will soon drown the Republican Party. It will cease to be a national political party. Trump is fifty fifty to be re-elected but he will be followed by Republican ruin. I saw this before. California Governor Pete Wilson, behind for re-election adopted a horrible strategy, demeaning the undocumented. He ran TV ads showing them crossing a highway into California like roaches scurrying when you turn the kitchen light on (for those who like me lived in east coast cities before coming to California). National Republican wise men begged him to not do that. Because they knew it would end up killing the Republicans.It worked for Wilson. But it was the death of Republicans in CA. The new electorate hates Republicans in the big California populations. Now we see it nationally. Trump will destroy the national Republican Party. In 20 years his grandchildren will be in court houses petitioning to legally change their last names.
UniteFightBack
(8,231 posts)NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)the GOP is doing all they can to protect Trump and implement a nationalist authoritarian regime that will override democracy and the rule of law.
Cicada
(4,533 posts)Two to one party ID advantage can not be stopped. The harm Trumpsters do will be undone, for the most part.
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)I'd love to see an old fashioned landslide win for the Democrats with a reverse of the 2014 Senate GOP sweep (Republicans picked up a net NINE seats in 2014 in the 100 seat Senate!!!) and hefty gains in the House and at the State level.
dawg day
(7,947 posts)He's alienating a few of the ones who voted for him in 2016, but I doubt he's getting new voters. And the news is getting worse. Now we have the Trumpers stalking an ambassador at the same time Trump is saying she's "going to go through some things"?
I am deeply pessimistic all the time ... but I just can't see it absent actual vote changing at the ballot box (which is possible, of course). No one who doesn't already want him is going to switch and vote for him after spring and summer.
Cicada
(4,533 posts)It makes me sad when people are pessimistic. For your consideration think about recent big medical breakthroughs. Jimmy Carter had a brain tumor that I believe had previously killed every human with it in about four months. A new treatment which trained his immune cells to kill that cancer cured him. A researcher at Penn developed a similar treatment which cures the children who get it (only children because no one lived out of childhood) 83% of the time with one treatment. Many others are cured with additional treatments. A drug now stops cystic fibrosis in 90%. A gene editing technique is cutting sickle cell anemia. Melanoma is now curable. I bought my business from a lady in the final stages of melanoma. Today she would be cured instead of dead. George Church, a genius scientist, thinks he or someone elses can probably use genetic engineering to cure natural death. Really. A cancer researcher at UCLA in 1981, who lived next to me, mentioned in 1981 that he expected that unless the degradation of dna as cells replace themselves is due to cosmic rays instead of a built in life process. No death, no evolution, so that degradation is probably built into our genetic code. As long as they still have cable TV I am ok with not dying. My cancer researcher neighbor had calculated that if we cured natural death, now a real possibility, in LA back then we would live about 800 years. Murder, car crash etc. He howled with laughter that his calculation matched the life span mentioned in the Bible for methuselah. Electric cars will get super cheap to own and operate. Energy will get cheap. And dont even get me started about the implications of unlimited free energy if we can invent workable fusion power plants. Be happy!
dawg day
(7,947 posts)And I should try not to expect the worst.
tman
(983 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Think it is a far better and safer strategy to concentrate on getting control of the Senate.
Phoenix61
(16,993 posts)would you be willing to share some winning lotto numbers?
uponit7771
(90,302 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)What the hell are you really doing? I know a DUer would not be that defeatist. Is this satire? A poke at an infiltrator?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Not suggesting giving up. But all signs are pointing toward him sneaking in again. If we operate as business as usual he surely will.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)"We are f u c k e d
Just be realistic. What can we do to mitigate? Can we instead of concentrating on WH, concentrate on Senate?
No, he will "win"...and what will we do about that?
Think it is a far better and safer strategy to concentrate on getting control of the Senate."
There is no other way of interpreting that than "give up on the White House".
So, I'm not disparaging you. I'm demanding you explain yourself. You didn't ask to stop "business as usual"; you said he'll win, and we should therefore concentrate on the Senate.
Rather than you denying your words in this thread, why not come clean? What's this thread for?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)uncalled for. Don't really wish to discuss any ideas with you. Thank you very much.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)If you have found out your call to give up on the presidential race is unpopular on DU, then forget it. We can dismiss it as a moment of panic.
You wanted an idea. You asked "what can we do to mitigate?" If you're saying you were serious, then you desperately need an idea. And a clue.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Democrat.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)against the ambassador to Ukraine, that had her under surveillance, by a Republican candidate for the House (Robert F Hyde) and Lev Parnas, both of whom are close supporters and funders of Trump. You can't just say "Trump is at 42.3% approval - we should give up now!".
Expose the criminality of Trump and the Republicans. Make Republican senators either public support his corruption, or vote to remove him.
You told us to stop trying to get Trump out of the White House. Stop feeling sorry for yourself. Get a grip.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)and "stop feeling sorry for yourself". Not needed and not true.
The reality is that yes, of course, we will keep on trying to expose his malfeasance. And work hard and GOTV. But all signs point to him stealing it again. And, nothing HAS stuck to him so far. He actually never even has to acknowledge anything because he just lies it away in a tweet. And his highest ace is that he doesnt face the press because he dismantled that apparatus. He's even hinting he might not debate. Case in point, Russians co-signed his debt?? Whaaa? Then he threw other balls up in the air so we wouldn't notice that one.
My point is that what we are doing and how we proceed needs to be completely outside the box.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)by acknowledging "the reality" that we'll ignore your earlier message. You're no longer telling people to do less work to get a Democratic president elected.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)than telling someone else what THEY mean.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,268 posts)That's in the OP, so that's the message everyone read from you. And you repeated, in the thread, "Think it is a far better and safer strategy to concentrate on getting control of the Senate."
I've quoted those back at you before. Why are you ignoring your own words?
Their zombie base is going to hit the poles hard.
It really has to be a WW1 trench warfare effort to win the day, ANY AND EVERY American of good conscience has to vote like their lives depend on it
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)and hopfully offset. But, then there's the wild card - the Russians.
uponit7771
(90,302 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)brooklynite
(94,352 posts)uponit7771
(90,302 posts)SKKY
(11,794 posts)...do you really think ALL of the 8 million Obama 2012 voters who voted for Trump in 2016 are going to do it again? Has Trump expanded his base? No, and no. It will be close, for sure, but not that close.
greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)Wow.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)double down?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)so you spewed more FUD. Color me unimpressed.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)at the reality we are in. The MF will be reelected unless we seriously rethink, and strategize and create a plan with experts from every related field including psychiatry to defeat the monster.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Thank you so much!
Codeine
(25,586 posts)which is more than can be said of your string of defeatist nonsense.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)If you realistically look at everything - we are screwed unless we totally stop and rethink and take an educated path. If you don't - appreciate your vote!
Amishman
(5,554 posts)Do what you can and be at peace.
Time makes fools (and dust) of us all
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)A planning session. Invite psychologists, pollsters, Dem strategists, admen and big $$ donors. Come up with the absolute best strategy to get rid of him and implement.
I have seen several times when his approvals dipped significantly..but could not trace to specific malfeasance. But a poll of what trump people DON'T like about him would be very helpful. Then drum away on those things.
Also think the regulations he has overturned is probably a gold mine of horrors that could sway opinion. More apolitical in nature. Affects everyday person.
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)The media likes to portray the aggregate approval and disapproval because it fits a "horse race" narrative that's required to keep viewers' attention.
Don't fall into this trap.
It's much more important to look at the strongly approve and strongly disapprove numbers rather than including the mushy middle of "somewhat" approve/disapprove. I'm sure plenty of people like the tax cuts or looser regulations on business, so they might "somewhat approve". The strongly approvers are Trump's base and it is less than 30%. The strongly disapprovers have consistently been about double that number.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Since day 1. But I did hear a statistician/analyst say one time that trump has a hidden group of voters who will come out and vote and he can win with 45. Just something I always keep in the back of my mind.
Swing state approvals will tell it all. Once we have a candidate and a running mate.
DeminPennswoods
(15,265 posts)of how a person will vote. IIRC, the rate was 80% for the party of the voter's registration.
I don't believe in this "hidden" Trump voter. In fact, all indications are that Trump voters are loud and proud in their support of him. I suppose the "hidden" voter theory is based on anecdotal stories of survey respondents being too embarrassed to tell a live poll interviewer that they support Trump. But, that probably doesn't apply to the automated/IVR/online polling where there's no reason for a respondent to lie about their preference.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Need to try and research more about why experts think he outperforms polls.
Anecdotally, when I worked polls in 2016, it gave me a very bad feeling. Trump supporters were pulling up in their trucks with trump signs in them all day long. The way they acted was like they had never voted before. Living in a red state, you could see the cultist enthusiasm. It was cool to vote.
rockfordfile
(8,695 posts)Trump will lose at 45%. WE vote all republicans out.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)All people that think this is business as usual..we will lose unless we stop thinking that those who see the need to shake it up are somehow the enemy. We ALL want to remove the monster.
Turin_C3PO
(13,909 posts)Help!!!
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,422 posts)greenjar_01
(6,477 posts)elleng
(130,732 posts)and we help by doing NOTHING to prevent it.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Vogon_Glory
(9,109 posts)People dont actually start voting until October. I see no reason to start panicking yet.
I dont think that the orange creature will have the same electoral advantages he had last time. Weve seen his BS in action. Hes stomped on a lot of people. Hes not only continued to alienate good-hearted people, but hes also alienated members of the coalition who put him in office.
Hes also aroused us. A lot of us were complacent back in 2016 (I was). We couldnt imagine that Trump could actually become President. We do now, and a lot of us Effing hate the results. Were still angry and frightened and motivated.
I would point out that while the Trump coalition was enough to blow the Blue Wall sky-high in 2016, Trump only won by slivers. Hes been losing supporters by slivers since then. You and I and Whats-his-name would eventually bleed out by the death of a thousand cuts, if there are enough cuts.
This election will be hard, but I believe that its winnable for the good guys (Thats us, in case you havent figured that out).
Sit down, brew and drink some herbal tea, then get a good nights rest. Youll feel better.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Mueller pleaded to fix and prevent Russian intervention. If we want to implement election fraud protection software...we are on the cusp of being too late. There's selection, analysis, customization, installation and testing.
Vogon_Glory
(9,109 posts)Considering the various potential storm-clouds about to cut loose, Donnie would need Ferdinand Marcos-level vote-rigging to come in first next November.
Assuming that hes compos mentos enough to make an acceptance speech, which he very well might not be.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)tenderfoot
(8,425 posts)eom
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)tenderfoot
(8,425 posts)you were planting seeds of doubt.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)what we do all the time...work hard registering people and GOTV? Think headwinds stronger than ever this time.
Tipperary
(6,930 posts)But I think it might be a bit early to give up already. As for solutions- I truly cannot bring myself to imagine him in our house for longer, so I got nothing.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Remember an analyst saying after debate one or two...you have to show who you would be running against. Yes, teach people about yourself but spend 1/2 time acting like you will be ultimately running against someone. And not just "someone"..a monster.
ProfessorGAC
(64,852 posts)A popular opponent can have a real effect on the number you're sweating.
And, I don't believe the 46% number.
Most pollsters who have the dolt above 41% are using old, or questionable methodology. (Yeah, Rasmussen, I'm talking to you.)
Too soon to panic.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)soon to strategize and look at trends and constraints (i.e. atypical opponent, lies with no recourse, tRussia, etc.). If we can't force his numbers down with all the malfeasance now, long past time to unify efforts and employ experts to figure something out. That's what a thriving business would do. But we are in a political word which means we have to break out of tradition to do something big.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)and a bunch of right-leaning indies to rush to defend him against the evil Democrats. This was expected. But at that it's much lower than Nixon's, and don't they know it.
ProfessorGAC makes an important point also that Trump has no opposition yet.
In another respect, though, that's completely wrong. Trump's his own greatest opponent. If he isn't removed, there will be many months of self sabotage to come with the nation's cameras pointed at him. In addition, almost every week another shoe is dropping for him and the Republicans. If he isn't dropping huge ones on his own feet, they're being thrown at him by high-minded and outraged public servants or others of the criminal circles he operates in.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)to pissed off republican trump supporters? I had guessed that any of that would be offset by newfound opposition who hear new bad things about him. Guess I was wrong about that.
It's almost like we need to focus on the top three worst things he's done. Least political in nature the better. Yet kind of hamstrung by Impeachment which focuses only on Ukraine.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to fight off OUR attack. I'm guessing you're not overestimating their ability to react like us so much as vastly underestimating their fear and resentment of us and loyalty to their group and leader. At least, according to what I've read.
For a long time now, their dominant ideology has been opposition to liberalism and Democrats. Or how about Shia socialists as some have started calling us?! Whatever our label, the more conservative, generally the more they know we're the giant internal threat who replaced the commie threat of the Cold War era. That demonization justifies everything they do. Most aren't all that crazy, of course, but caught up in all this. Nixon and W were abandoned by some increasingly over time but only by the whole group when they finally were seen as "losers," unable to validate them and defeat us.
My best guess is that those "three top things" would work on some who've already become wobbly but still need to decide we're the lesser problem. So I'm wondering if the most effective three top things wouldn't actually be about us. If only we could.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)listening to talk radio out of Austin (KLBJ - think only one liberal show left). A guy from PA called in, and wasn't militant at all. Very affable, he just genuinely loved trump. Thought he was for the little guy, in everything he does. the push today was how dumb it was for Dems to spend months talking about a single phone call to the Ukraine instead of working the campaign against trump. Anyway, the guy said - "trump knows Washington's corrupt and he's the only one who cares about rooting out corruption. He saw it in Ukraine and just acted on it." Nothing to see here.
The host asked him what Dems running would be a challenge. The guy said none - they are all a bunch of whacko socialists who want to take their rights away. "Just like trump says." There is probably very little if anything we can do to change this guys mind.
This is VERY true !! We need a "Wobbler Plan"
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)not to appear sinisterly different. I seldom wear scarves over my head that might be taken for signs of a Sharia law takeover, but how not to appear socialist? I just googled "how do socialists dress" for clues and actually got hits. Those dated after the 1950s seem dismayingly similar to "how to appear liberal," though, and that's definitely sinister.
I do know how to look conservative, a style seen everywhere here in the south. I'm surrounded by older women with age-appropriate short haircuts who you just know, like an aura of conservative value, would never, ever go out looking liberal in tshirts and straight, unfeminine bobs after 50, much less without their makeup and earrings. And that's the problem. They just try harder, all the time.
Maybe, until a Wobbler Plan comes together to join, my personal contribution could focus on a less tiresome way of seeming less frightening. Whatever that is. ?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)have such a unique slant to things that is very interesting!!
For some reason, Democrats, on a whole, have stopped evoking emotion on issues a la Ted Kennedy and Mario Cuomo. Never even heard anyone declare that Republicans don't care if your children can see a doctor when they are sick with extraordinary passion. Think Republicans filled the void - saying "you work hard and take care of yourself. The others are just takers and don't work hard".
Democrats stopped unabashedly declaring their liberalism, and the whole point of it.
Funny, I am now in a red state...and know exactly what you described about the conservative women here. However I see more teased up curled bleached hair and extra long painted nails. Can visualize them tapping on phones, posting a "one-up" Facebook post. Typically rooted in 'my family is greater and I have more friends than you do.' And you are so right..they would absolutely die if anyone saw them with wet straight hair and no makeup. Here, they have zero clue about anything worldly or political. They vote as their husbands tell them to vote.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)as god instructs, here and California. Been a long time since I've had to hide my shock. If they're happy, whatever works for them, etc. Humanity may have advanced to the age of reason and humanism, but a lot of people just aren't wired for it. Reminds me that a local children's science museum pimps fantasy and mysticism to lure visitors.
I've often thought of what you describe happening among the liberal left. We're emotionally bunkered and overloaded with guilt over problems we're currently helpless to stop. The confident idealism older people grew up with in the New Deal era, that liberalism and progressive government will always be the American way, has been smashed. Communications advances have been harnessed to erase understanding of liberalism from the American psyche and redefine us as the problem to be defeated, universal design, adjustable for any illiberal ideology.
Extraordinary passion was alive, though, when we Democrats elected America's first black president and finally passed national healthcare after 70 years of intense conservative and business opposition. Opponents are still trying to erase the legacy of the Obama era, including the ACA as a corrupt continuation of the healthcare holocaust, and they've all failed.
Oh, well. Tie another knot, elect more Democrats! I really do believe those advances heralded the beginning of our nation's next long liberal era and that, in spite of enormous, unprecedented forces against causing delays and backslides, the turning of that wheel can't be stopped. So, 9 months until we finally plant our flag solidly in the next era of liberal progress and our kids start learning how realistic great ideals can be.
MFM008
(19,803 posts)Depress our own voter base...its what they want.
FBaggins
(26,721 posts)What makes you think that a certain approval number is what he needs to win?
What was his approval number in November of 2016?
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)Reading from a pollster or analyst. I need to see if I can track it down again. Just remember that magic approval # plus the hidden voter factor (those unpolled that come out and vote) gives him a victory.
Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)LiberalFighter
(50,783 posts)Those numbers don't represent his real support. Understand that pollsters go with a set breakdown of Republican, Democratic, and Independent voters. When was the last time they updated to what should be the current model? Likely been a while. The breakdown of what they used 10, 20 years ago is not the same as it is now. And they likely haven't changed it since 2008.
UCmeNdc
(9,600 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)life so disposable over there? Why? When you can just move her to another assignment? Fire her, whatever. I suppose I didn't hear 100% of her testimony but she just seemed so mild mannered. Not the demeanor of someone you'd be afraid of. Not the type to cause tidal wave.