The important point is the "red wall" was broken on election day.
That is, the combination for Republicans of the rural vote and the traditional republican suburbs making the GOP even more dependent on these mostly white rural areas to win.
1
Re: Stabenow election
Michigan is a massively gerrymandered state it is amazing that any Democrat gets elected
Please bear in mind that gerrymandered congressional districts have no affect on statewide races. Stabenow’s 6.5 point win was less than the national percentage point win for Democrats. That may imply that in a very tight presidential race, Michigan could go red.
There has clearly been a shift of sorts in party preferences. It seems Democrats traded rural voters for urban and suburban ones. My concern is that Democrat gains are in areas they already do well in, allowing them to run up the score in areas where they already do well. They need to win statewide if they want to win the electoral college, win the senate, and win governors.
Hopefully they understand this and don’t overplay their hand. They must be seen as working for all Americans.
1
hard to argue with nate. well reasoned and researched, as expected. excellent article. it made very important conclusions that are hard to argue with. however, i felt he was (unfairly) comparing presidential election results with mid-term results, both historically different in voter patterns and turnout. in addition, two important factors missing from his analysis that will be influential in 2020. it will be the increasing irrelevancy of trump and the lack of civility he has gotten away with.
his continuous lies and fabrications are a symptom of unreality. most americans live in reality not an alt-state of reality. substantial numbers of americans have already disregarded his volleys of untruths and ignore them. americans are basically civil people. we hold doors for others, we say please and thank you, we avoid hurting others feelings and we outwardly respect others while in public. trump's disregard of civility for many is kind of like living vicariously in a way they would never act themselves. these two facts will impact voters as much and probably more in many cases than traditional voting patterns,
Possibly a quibble, or not. I've noticed that Nate Cohn and some others increasingly include Minnesota in the category of "rust belt states." Minnesota is not part of the rust belt, and never has been, with a strong diversified economy. It is also the state that has the longest streak of voting Democrat in the presidential election; if indeed there are challenges for Democrats here, that is indeed something the party needs to think about.
6
Nobody seems to pick up on three critical factors in the 2016 election. First, Russia launched the most sophisticated information operation and cyber attack ever. Second, the Comey letter right before the election. Third, Hillary Clinton was a deeply flawed, and not particularly appealing candidate. Some people also voted for a change and to shake things up. Trump has a pretty rock solid core of around 35%. They’re not going anywhere. But, the other 13-15% are getting pretty tired of his game. Without Russia, an FBI Director October surprise, and with an appealing candidate, there will be a stronger blue wave in 2020. Trump/Pence will look ludicrous next to Biden/Harris for example. Remember too that many of the older white, working class voters are facing decreasing life expectancies. Baby boomers lived hard. Smoking and drinking are tragicaly taking a toll. The Dems are turning out young voters in large numbers. The gun issue alone is compelling. I’m optimistic.
11
This is spot on post.
What all this means is that the Democrats will probably win the popular vote in the 2020 presidential race by an even greater margin than in 2016 yet still lose the electoral college and thus the presidency.
This is unacceptable and must change. It is the kind of injustice that started this nation on it's path to independence against the British.
10
Yes it must. It must change indeed. You can’t have a country where one vote means less than another persons.
1
@LC What the Democrats have to do is pick the states they need to win and pour all their resources in those states. They didn't do that in 2016. They were all over the map. Nothing will happen to change this electoral college before 2020. The stakes are high. The dems must focus.
Florida added over a million and a half eligible votes to their electorate in this past election. While it's doubtful more than 10% will actually voter that still gives the democrats enough voters to turn florida blue.
5
IMHO. First of all, I don’t think it’s a one issue, educated vs non college educated. For the most part, the more educated and/or trained population live in the cities and suburban areas for that is where most of the jobs are. Living in more populous areas tends to bring more diversity of people. When people work on equal levels with ones that are different than them, “others” tend to not be seen as “others”, but as part of one community. Also, more urban/suburban areas seem to travel more. One doesn’t fear what one knows and understands. Therefore, fear doesn’t necessarily resonate with urban and suburban populations. And I think the differences in urban/suburban and rural areas is more the experiences they have had. I don’t know how to change this, but I do think it should not be educated college vs non college educated because that implies one group might be smarter than the other, when it is really about which group has had the most meaningful experiences with those that are different from themselves.
4
How about a breather.
3
The Minnesota 8th is no longer the Democratic district it was. Population growth in the Twin Cities metro area and redistricting have added strong Republican areas to the south and west of the Duluth/Iron Range counties. The DFL stronghold counties continued to vote for the Democrat in the congressional race as well as in state races. Interestingly, the Minnesota 1st, which until the 1980s was strong Republican, and has swung back and forth since then, was decided by a razor thin margin and could easily tip back to Democratic in the next election.
1
It seems to me for Democrats, pundits, educators and whoever else to keep bringing up "white, uneducated" voters is only making people in the heartland more stern in their stance on supporting Trump. I just don't understand the issue of the press and others to keep pressing on the issue of being "white". Is it not legitimate to have been born white, just as black was not a choice, neither is being white.
2
@Edward Daigle
The Ds are alienating white working class voters with identity politics.
The white working class is suffering because their jobs have permanently disappeared due to robotics and AI.
The Ds must run on a redistributive message of Universal Basic Income.
Jimmy Smits (aka Matt Santos) for President!
Or even better, either of Santos's real-life doppelgangers, Julian or Joaquin Castro.
Very good analysis.
Those claiming that Blue is poised for a landslide win in 2020 are deluded.
Right now we still have recounts and races not called, recounts fights and new congress members that like Ocasio-Cortez did just now, are there to make noise and pick fights and will not get along.
The notion that the DEMS have 2020 in the pocket is nothing more than promotion by the DNC and their allies.
If blue wants the house in 2020 they will have to stop the infighting, the protests outside their leader’s office on Day 1, then come up with a platform that is not ‘get rid of Trump’, and a leader that can unite both sides.
Do all this by 2020?
Not even with blue colored glasses.
2
I can't speak to the realities of Florida's politics, but SC is another story. Here, we got out the Democratic vote, but in a heavily gerrymandered state, we still struggled except in District #1, where Joe Cunningham beat Katie Arrington. After counting the safe Democratic seat filled by James Clyburn, we now have two Dems in the delegation.
It's important to note that national Democrats do not give money to red-state Democrats in most cases. In my county, it was almost entirely the local Democratic Party that got out the vote, bolstered by a first-in-decades advertising campaign toward Democrats on TV, radio, billboards and newspapers. With this under our belts, we will do even better in 2020.
7
The progressive media, and especially the flawed New York Times, continues to make an egregious error that begs pointing out.
The elitist-wanna-be phrase ''well-educated'' is a salute to the college experience ingrained in the American psyche going back generations when those who succeeded eere so often more educated.
This sounds great if you've never visited Earth before. But we have to realize that since the 1970's, when the agitated and hate-filled anti-war crowd came to dominate the American univerity scene. a college diploma REALLY brands the holder as a very solidly inflamed emotion-bot with several fatal flaws.
The college grad of the post-Vietnam era is possibly educated - and possibly NOT - but more likely seriously trained ala Saul Alinsky and Howard Zinn to to have heartfelt hatred for the American nation's founding, its Constitution, and the success the U.S. has had since - well, since Republicans crushed the Democratic Confederacy in the Civil War.
When a northeastern faculty of 600 includes dozens of outright communists, hundreds of dedicated socialists,and not enough conservatives to make four for a game of bridge, that is a fatal flaw intentionally maintained for multiple reasons.
American is decades past the time when simple possession of a university degree meant anything about intellect and more about political training and a bitter attitude toward much that was once valued about the American democratic experimnet.
4
Big buyers remorse here in Wisconsin...school districts mailed out survey material promoting huge budget increases, to home owners, within days of the Democrat winning the Governorship.
The surveys are probing property tax increases of anywhere from 10% to 25%.
Those suburban voters that changed allegiance or going ballistic...but of course, what did they expect!
1
@RobWi Those budget increases were coming no matter who won the election. Blaming Evers winning for those increases is partisan hooey.
10
I am puzzled by this analysis. The other Nate (Silver) has written that if the House mid-term vote were the vote for President, the Democrats would win 314 electoral votes and the presidency (by a rather big margin). https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-2018-map-looked-a-lot-like-2012-and-that-got-me-thinking-about-2020/ A Democrat does not have to win Texas or Florida to be elected president.
9
@Gary Cohen
This Nate predicted a hard fought uphill climb for a moderate win.
The other Nate kept heralding a landslide blue wave.
This Nate got it right.
I'll go with this Nate's take on the state of the elections, he does not seem to be using the other Nate's blue colored glasses.
@AutumLeaff Nate Silver never predicted a "landslide blue wave." His data showed that the Democrats were most likely to take the House, with the average projected gain on election day being 39 seats. As of today, they've picked up 38. He projected that the Republicans would retain the Senate and, while the average pick up was only .5 seats, the actual outcome was always a possibility (there was an 80% chance of between +2 for the Dems and +4 for the Republicans.) As of right now it's +2 for the Republicans. It was only after the election that Silver called it a Blue Wave. Which it definitely was, with turn-out the highest in 100 years, many State Houses flipped, almost all toss-ups going to the Dems, etc.
Interesting analysis, I think you are covering your backside since there are so many cautionary points you make for the democrats and also so many variables one cannot predict.
Botton line if the democrats want to continue to hold the House and take the WH and Senate in 2020 here are some of the things they can do to make it much more likely.
1-Run progressive candidates to fit the district. In NYC you can get away with running wildly liberals candidates but it doesn't work in purple states needed to win. As Reagan said a 70-80% republican is good enough for me.
2-Demagogues like Trump are dangerous, As proven by the last election they can be very alluring. The best way to counter him is to run a dynamic but true progressive unlike him, somebody who can relate to basic progressive ideas that a major of Americans agree upon and not bigotry hatred on the extreme right or social engineering extreme identity politics on the extreme left.
3-Put the above points to work in the newly won House. Don't overextend with impeachment unless a serious crime is agreed upon. Don't push for social engineering, identity obsessed legislation. Pass progressive bills that a majority of Americans need. If if they don't pass the Senate or WH, the democrats will have potent weapons in 2020 to use against the republicans.
6
@Paul
Since Paul knows these Dems as well as most of us, he figures the progessives will indeed make a huge mess of their possibilities over the next two years.
Paul counsels for positive builders, but what people have SAID tells us they simply have a lot of hatred to spew with not a moment of consideration for what the voters will think in 2 years.
2
@L'osservatore- exactly, that is my cautionary tale for the newly empowered House dems and the majority Senate Republicans.
Trump will never change. He is an idea bankrupt ego maniac demagogue that will sell his kids down the river if it made he look good.
3
@Paul
Donald Trump is the answer to millions pf workers' families' prayers. He has employed millions while adding to millions of retirees' IRAs, 403-b's, etc.
He has made our nation's enemies angry and reassured our allies.
You see, he may not be a fun guy, but the changes he is making will imrove our people's lives AND their personal safety.
He represents most Americans.
Why do commentators keep comparing a midterm turnout with that of a presidential election? Comparing these democratic candidates' performances with Hillary's is not an apples-to-apples comparison as we know that democratic voters have historically had a lower turnout than their republican counterparts at the midterms.
They talk about how the rural white votes are slipping away without also mentioning the fact that Arizona, Colorado and Nevada are inching blue.
What the democrats need to win 270 electoral college votes is to take back MI, PA and WI. While it will be nice to win FL, they do not need it, as they don't OH and NC, to wrest back the White House
3
Great piece. But it would be nice - when ancient times like 1980 get mentioned - to bring in population figures. I have to figure that Youngstown has way fewer likely voters every 4 years since 1980.... Women in suburbs probably grew 2% a year! throughout that same span (in Ohio suburbs.)
Even comparing 2020 to 2016, demographics favor the Dems. It probably added a percent to the Dem. edge THIS year. Of course, it also explains why voter suppression is such a big goal for the GOP. But if Elec. Coll. math motivates this piece, ex-wife the Latino softness (it's almost as unfathomable as white women putting Donald over the top in 16!!), this article does overdo the bad news in drilling down.
1
I see many comments that the democrats did well in "highly educated suburbs". I wonder to what extent that is a protest vote against the loss of deductibility of state and local tax under the republican tax legislation. There must certainly be a high correlation between high education areas and high property taxes.
2
@james lowe
I don't think I'd call that a "protest vote." A protest vote is throwing a away a vote on a minor party candidate or one that is hopelessly behind to show your dissatisfaction with the choices offered. Voting against a party that intentionally targeted you in their tax plan is an example of voters deciding which candidate didn't represent their interests and voting to change their representation in Congress.
3
I have to disagree with you on South Texas. Yes, Beto had a lower share of the votes than Hillary, but not by much. And since Democrats tend to vote less during the midterms than Republicans, I would consider Beto's vote share to be actually *higher* than expected. If 2018 turnout on the border matched 2016, I would wager that Beto's share would have *exceeded* Hillary's.
3
How the 2020 election goes depends on who is at the top of the ticket. Notwithstanding the need for the torch to be passed to the next generation, I see none of the successors gaining a great advantage over the other. I fully expect a "draft Clinton" movement to emerge after or late in the primary season.
Orchestrated by you know who.
1
You say: "The overall picture is fairly clear: The states that voted for Mr. Obama and switched to Mr. Trump are still winnable for Democrats, but the party will find it hard to return to its prior levels in the communities that swung most to the current president."
I'm totally fine with that. Why this obsession with "winning back" the communities that swung strongest to Trump? Let them go. Win elsewhere. The anti-immigrant, white nationalist, middle-finger-to-the-world crowd isn't one Democrats should court.
7
@James C
None of the anti-immigrant, white nationalist, middle-finger-to-the-world crowd voted for Obama, and there weren't enough of them to push Trump over the top anyway. Look at the six states (Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa), plus Maine's 2nd congressional district, all of which Obama won twice but which then went for Trump. I'd be willing to bet that in these states, there was a critical mass of independent voters and (esp. in the Rust Belt states) disaffected Democrats who felt like they were being left behind and that their concerns weren't being addressed (including by the Obama Presidency), or who just really disliked Hillary Clinton (the Democratic leadership clearly underestimated how disliked she was). At least some of these voters, probably enough to swing these states back, are persuadable with the right message and an appealing candidate.
1
Ohio has a large share of non-college whites, and many of its collegians went to __ Ohio State. Tough electorate for Dems.
2
I know exactly what you mean. That is a hard-drinking, frat-boy, football-loving party school.
1
Illinois is the only Midwestern state where the urban Chicago Democrat vote can consistently outperform the rural Republican counties. Missouri, Indiana and Iowa are lost. We must strive to make gains in Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.
3
Take it from a resident of Miami that there was almost none of the get out the vote effort I witnessed in 2016.
The real work of registering then engaging the newly enfranchised former felons is essential. No one should assume this will happen without neighborhood by neighborhood community organizing.
Churches, health clinics, food banks and of course the strip clubs are ALL essential to this needed effort.
Now is the time to enlist local partners, develop a strategy, and formulate a plan of logistics.
12
@JohnMcFeely
Is this parody? Strip clubs?
1
The organization Spread the Vote will be crucial in this endeavor. Most felons will not know how to go about restoring their rights. This can be very fulfilling work. I urge those of you who are interested to get involved.
In response to "Strip Clubs, a parody?", absolutely not. Cheetah's Strip Clubs is the largest distributor of free Thanksgiving turkeys in South Florida.
Counting the tribes may be what "political consultants" and New York Times editors do but it is at its core disappointing. I've lived in NYC and NW Iowa. People are pretty much people. I am curious what policies might shift the vote. The vote of suburban women was not surprising. They generally lead on caring for elderly parents. Preexisting conditions were a big deal. What happens if health care and immigration are off the table in 2020?
@Sailboat Captain Every corporate healthcare plan covers preexisting conditions. Even a 20- person organization can offer this affordably. This is a contrived issue.
1
@matt smith While every healthcare plan now carries insurance for pre conditions, they were not made to carry AFFORDABLE insurance for preconditions before Obamacare. Also before Obamacare insurance companies could take people off their policies if they developed a precondition (caused by accidents, heart problems, diabetes, babies born with health problems, and other diseases). So no, this was never a contrived issue: destroying Obamacare would gravely compromise affordable insurance for people with preconditions.
1
@Sailboat Captain Medicare covers preexisting conditions, so why would that be an issue?
Come on. We have two years for Trump actions to have consequences, whether good or bad. We have time for the truth to come out about N. Korea. We have two years for our deficits to explode. We have two years for the Democrats in Congress to push for legislation, which even if not moved into law, will demonstrate their objectives and priorities. We have two years for House hearings, for better or worse, and for more revelations about Trump’s corruption. We have the Mueller probe. We have some Democrats in governorships in States that Trump won with the help of GOP voter suppression, gerrymandered and manipulation. And we have a couple GOP regimes in other states that will try to tilt the 2020 elections in their favor. We will probably have some Supreme Court decisions that will inflame voters on both sides.
But what I hope matters most is having women in office at all levels, actually getting things done, actually working cooperatively and demonstrating that electing more women is a necessity if we want to preserve democracy.
So let’s not think this is a static situation. A lot will happen. Maybe some Trump supporters will actually understand that he couldn’t care less about them and is only in it for himself.
15
@Mike Iker
Yes, what is the truth about North Korea, how several previous administrations have coddled the totalitarian regime, allowing them time to build their weapons. Yes, the deficits are about to explode and who put them there - Democrats and George W Bush. Yes, there will be House hearings on Administration corruption and Senate hearings on Democrats' corruption. Yes, you do have the Mueller probe which more and more people see for what it really is. Yes, political parties do like to gerrymander (both) and, heavens forfend, it's such rank discrimination to ask that voters show an id that proves they are a citizen. And, yes, maybe some Democrat voters will see how they are being used by the party to entrench the power elites in power against their own interests.
4
@steve hotho
I cannot listen to one more guy say why not have an ID to prove they are a citizen. State after state with GOP-controlled legislatures have aimed tosuppress voting by making many photo IDs unacceptable, such as student ID (while allowing Gun-license ID to be accepted). You just show u don't know circumstance of anyone not like yourself. I'm a highly-educated person (worked my way thru university) who never owned a car thus had no driver license. In CT I tried to get one, but the Motor Vehicle Bureau was not accessible by public transportation! My family's been in this country for 390 years, my ancestor fought at Lexington & Concord as a Minute Man, & according to you, I couldn't vote. I finally mailed in my info to get a passport as ID. In PA I now have a nondriver ID. However, PA tried that trick 8 years ago to disenfranchise elderly and persons of color, trying to make elderly Philly people w.o. cars go to only ONE DMV office to get a nondriver ID. We protested at legislature and luckily a GOP Pol was caught on tape bragging about how the ID ruling would "deliver the state to the Republicans." A judge invalidated the law, calling it a blatant attempt at vote suppression. Please do not pretend that laws about photo IDs are anything but a voter-suppression gambit.
3
@steve hotho North Korea has Not stopped building their nuclear under Trump. The deficit comes about by less money coming into the government than going out. With the Republican huge tax breaks for the wealthiest among us, less money came into the government this year, thereby raising the deficit. Also, Republicans try to blame it on Medicare and Social Security and call them “entitlements”. They are NOT entitlements, we pay into these as working Americans and they are our insurance policies in our most vulnerable years. If all of Congress were on the same Medicare and Social Security plans as the rest of us, I think you would NEVER hear anyone say that these social programs were costing the government too much. These plans would then be solvent forever!
2
We have to for the first order of business January 1 dismantle the corrupt electoral college. When our Democratic candidates get the popular vote we get the Presidency. Even with the culture of corruption GOP evil map rearranging we don't have a chance with the electoral college corruption. With the electoral college gone that will help us.
4
@D.j.j.k. Um, eliminating the electoral college would require an amendment which needs way more than a ~230 seat majority in one house of Congress. It needs 290 votes in the House, 67 in the Senate and 38 states.
6
One important difference between 2018 and 2020 will be the economy. A slowdown seems inevitable, so economic concerns could prove to be an important factor in the outcome.
As far as Hispanics in Miami-Dade are concerned, Republicans receive overwhelming support from older Cubans, but younger Latins from all countries tend to favor Democrats. That difference may be small over the next two years as younger voters replace older ones, but it will become more important over time.
Florida overall is a mixed-up purple state, which at this point seems slightly Republican in off years and slightly Democrat during presidential elections, but a strong Democratic candidate would make all the difference in the world. Trump beat Clinton by 1.2% in Florida, but I don't think that would have happened against Joe Biden, for example. Like it or not, Clinton was like a magnet that attracted Republicans to the polls but she didn't appeal to younger voters, who are essential for the Democratic coalition.
8
It might be noted that the road through Florida will have the additional traffic of 1.5 million new voters that will largely vote Democratic. As Florida modernizes it’s voting system they have also realized that rehabilitated felons deserve to vote. Those voters will change the landscape and be a significant obstacle for Republicans.
8
Help those new voters get their rights reinstated with the guidance of an organization called Spread the Vote. They help eligible voters get the documents they need to sustain housing, jobs, transportation and voting rights.
It seems that Trump was big asset for the Democrats in 2018.
Was Pelosi a net asset for the Democrats in 2018?
As is usual in politics, personalities made a big difference.
JFK had an appeal because of his relative youth and vigorous appearance, charm for many, etc.
Relatively youthful candidates did particularly well in 2018, and those who seemed to have special youthful energy, charm and honesty, did well in their political context. As in North Carolina, Virginia, Arizona, Nevada, Texas, California's 49th, and Queens, NY.
There were some special personality problems in Florida and Georgia.
Correct in Wisconsin. The wisconsin border states adjacent to Minnesota figured out Trump, got a huge dose of buyers remorse and flipped quite readily back to the Democrat column. Walker took a walk as well for the same reasons. How long it takes the rest of the state to figure out Trump lied is another story.
3
You have to go back a long time to see the origins of the electoral debacle we call democracy.
The simple fact is that the rural states that possess the most conservative, retrograde people have a tiny fraction of the population of the states that vote Democratic.
And yet, due to the electoral college scam and the fact that each state gets two senators no matter its population, Montana has as much influence in the Senate as does California.
North and South Dakota were created specifically to take advantage of this anti-democratic problem. Who really needs two Dakotas?
Until we do proportional representation and get rid of the electoral college, the Democrats will always struggle.
And it's sad to say that many denizens of flyover country are still living in the 19th century when it comes to political views and intellectual capacity, and yet they wield disproportionate political power that gets people like Trump elected.
12
Trump is going to be too damaged to help the Republicans in 2020,even if he’s still president, which is unlikely.
6
@Ran -- That depends on Mueller. If that flops, it is the Democrats who will be damaged.
4
@Mark Thomason...His campaign manager, National Security Director, and personal lawyer have already been indicted and plead guilty, and that before the report has come out.
3
@W.A. Spitzer -- If those clowns are all he gets, it is a flop, a big time flop, for an investigation meant to remove the President (and faster than this).
The Democrats best strategy for 2020 is to defeat as many GOP senators in blue/purple states as possible--a reverse of Trump's strategy this year.
3
Very informative article but I think you missed something else about florida; the 1.4 million felons who will be eligible to vote in 2020. Hopefully you can shed some light on this large group of potential voters.
6
@Marc -- Guys in prison on average are not the sort who ever voted much, and they include a remarkable number of hard core guys, white power, and otherwise not liberal.
That is not what people assume, people who have not spent much time in prisons.
2
@Mark Thomason....Since a large proportion of them are black, and the margin for Senate and Governor was very small, you would seem to be whistling in the dark.
2
Who said anything about prison? You do realize that you can be a convicted felon and never been to prison right? You assume much.
4
Trump is every day out there on Twitter and TV proclaiming how well we are all doing with his economy and the Supreme Court.
His voter base is highly energized.
Democrats are nowhere to be found.
Their voter base, what is it? Suburban white women? This is not a foundation for a successful party.
The only reliable demographic for the Dems is black women.
I am astounded by their failure to motivate black men and Puerto Ricans.
Puerto Ricans not feeling the urge to vote is unforgivable. (I am a Latino)
The Dems have no program that they care to shout on the airwaves.
-- Immigration, what are they for? (apart from DACA when this was a popular subject) (Abolish ICE is asinine)
-- Health Care, what do they want? They say that ACA should be improved. How? How come we do not know? Medicare for all is asinine, as it will never pass, and the compromises that it would entail would turn off every working American with an employer plan.
-- Economy? Why don't they come out with an infrastructure plan and tell the GOP to put up or shut up?
-- Taxes? Be explicit in saying that you would raise taxes on millionaires, and leave everybody else the same or lower. Go on the airwaves and show every Republican complaining about the deficit while saying that ONLY the entitlements are the problem.
9
Women make up more than half of the population and are reliable voters. The suburbs are largely population with more educated voters who are more likely to see the Trump and GOP lies for what they are. The demographics for our increasingly diverse country are not favoring Trump or the GOP in the short term or long. The new Democratic governors in a number of key states will immediately start undoing the voter suppression and manipulation that helped Trump squeak by in the Electoral College in 2016 despite having a couple million fewer votes than Hillary. So let’s get real about the 2020 election.
But, the real 2020 story is yet to be written. A lot will happen in the next two years. Events may help Trump. Events may doom Trump. And if things continue as they have, it’s very likely that Trump will doom Trump. Some people like jerks and bullies. Most do not. Nobody will be unaware of what they will get from a second Trump term.
2
Time to do the “ make Republicans worry” analysis in detail .
With them losing hundreds of races, some Senate seats, 30 some Congressional seats an aging and shrinking party there’s lots to cover in an analysis.
I think it would be ‘fair and balanced’.
3
@Mike Coleman -- They gained Senate seats.
Losing 30 in the House in a midterm against the party in power is just not a remarkably successful performance. It isn't bad either, but it is far from boasting territory. Mustn't get overconfident from that.
3
Actually losing over 30 in the house in the great economy that Trump keeps touting is a devastating loss. They should have gained not lost!
2
@Mark Thomason Yes they did, and they lost some too.
I'm really not overconfident.
There are numerous examples of articles headlined "Democrats worry or Democrats fear" with very few, in my opinion, that detail a Republican Party in decline and use descriptive verbiage that shroud the articles with emotional images.
Approximately 60% of Democrats are Women and the Headlines used in political articles pertaining to Democrats seem a bit sexist from my point of view.
1
The article acknowledged the importance of Florida. It neglected to bring up the amendment that passed that will allow felons to vote.
There are 1.5 million felons in Florida. Assume that 1 million of these will be eligible to vote. Maybe 300,000 of these would actually vote. Since most are black, I am estimating that about 2/3 of these will vote democratic. So, the democrats will gain more than 100,000 votes statewide.
This number of votes would have allowed democrats to win most of the governor and statewide senate races for the last 12 years. This ammendment alone may change Florida from a purple state to a solid blue state. As long as the democrats don't lose more votes in other populations/areas.
3
@David Eschelbacher -- Have you met those felons? They are not overwhelmingly like liberal suburban women.
2
@Mark Thomason
Have you met them? From your other comments, it’s clear math and facts are not your strong suit. Here’s some help: there’s something called “google”. Use that to find out facts about the demographic makeup and voting tendencies of Florida ex-felons. Here’s a teaser sample I found using this new fangled “google” tool. “It is true that ex-felons register as Democrat over Republican by a five-to-one ratio. It is also true that only one-third of ex-felons register to vote, and only about 20 percent actually vote. The impact is small, but it could be the margin of difference in a close election.”
https://www.tampabay.com/news/perspective/floridas-felon-vote-destroying-lives-and-wasting-taxpayer-dollars/2307853?template=amp
There's a win for Florida which is not mentioned in this article which is that Felons can now vote in Florida. They represent (I think) nearly 3 percent of the voting population. They are (I think) mostly Democrat.
1
I'm not sure if they automatically get their rights reinstated but the organization Spread the Vote can help them.
Trump could win again. I've read that some of the first things our newly elected Democratic house wants to do is make some symbolic votes on social justice warrioring issues. Instead they need to find some sort of common ground on something and do it.
I'm sick of all this tribalism while our streets are full of homeless and wages remain at poverty level.
6
Take Gov. Ed Brendel's advice and legislate and fight Trump on substantive issues. Impeachment is a guaranteed loser with the Senate as Jury in the Trial.
5
Democrats will never win 2020 with a “coastal liberal elite” candidate like Elizabeth Warren, Corey Booker or Kamala Harris
If Joe Biden were 8 years younger he’d be perfect
Not sure if he could appeal to Rust Belt and rural voters but Michael Bloomberg would make the best president
3
@Luciano -- You are right about Kamal Harris, precisely because she is not like Elizabeth Warren.
However, Warren can be expected to do well where Bernie defeated Hillary, which is the Rust Belt.
1
Can I please enjoy this year’s results now? Thank you.
5
More than 30% of latinos and 10% of blacks nationwide voted for Trump in 2016. It doesn't take a PoliSci major to discern the evangelical and Catholic religious conservative minority vote - particularly among anti-abortion tribes of retrograde male voters - can keep a cretin like Trump in office, as well as others like him running in local or state elections.
3
How someone could vote for President Obama and then vote for a thug like Trump is beyond the beyond. It makes no sense at all.
1
@Eugene Debs -- Hillary. You are not examining your own faults, just seeing them in whoever did not agree with you. That is the way to lose again.
6
The despicable, shameless pathological liar Donald Trump will get exponentially worse. Along with the Fox News propaganda foghorn constantly disseminating lies and conspiracy theories. The death toll leading up to the 2020 election, will be shocking. At this point Trump will say ANYTHING, without considering the consequences, then cowardly denying he said them. This will be our world moving to 2020.
2
Just watch the Democrats squander this victory with their usual rhetoric. A resounding defeat would have been better for them, as it would have caused them to look at the map and see the creeping takeover of the country by the GOP. Instead they will try to turn their marginal turnaround in the tossup districts into a mandate to remake the USA in their image. And then they will lose again in 2020.
1
The youngsters who engineered this enormous victory are playing chess while you are playing tic-tac-toe. The future belongs to them.
@missmo Let us now sing a rousing chorus of "Tomorrow belongs to me" from "Cabaret".
Oops, wrong party.
1
Isn't obvious that the Democratic ticket in 2020 should be Sherrod Brown and Amy Klobuchar? If we're serious about winning the Electoral College vote this time, we don't need to nominate whichever candidates get hearts palpitating most rapidly in Boston, Brooklyn, & San Francisco (three cities I'm fond of, but all in very blue states).
9
@Baxter Jon
Decent choice but I'm fairly certain that duo will not excite young voters and minorities... That said, it's certainly better than Bloomberg which some here have floated... IMO, Beto and Tammy Duckworth as running mate would be the best selection.
1
The outcome will heavily depend on the Democratic candidate and how a fractious Democratic Party handles its internal fissures.
We could again find the most competitive candidates for critical states are center left, alienating those wanting a more “progressive” option. As in 2016, this gap is easily exploited by the GOP and its allies in Fox News etc. as well as Internet trolls, foreign and domestic.
Add the old vs. young factor, candidates like Biden, Bloomberg and even Ohio’s Sherrod Brown won’t likely energize younger voters whose engagement is vital. Mixed tickets such as Brown or Warren with O’Rourke or Harris as VP don’t typically bridge the internal divides and often don’t sell to a wider audience.
All in all, some faction of the opposition to Trump will likely have to compromise and focus on the bigger goal: defeating the party of Trump before the Republic evolves into the ugly minority-ruled kleptocracy another four years of Trump would lock in.
@Julie B -- Those you are thinking of were not center left. They were seen by those critical voters as medium right. That was the problem.
1
"Democrats struggled...in the old mining and industrial towns where the party used to dominate. Instead, they won with big margins in the suburbs, and with a healthier performance in rural areas and agricultural communities..."
The old industrial union communities have been decimated and feel betrayed by the Democrats, who under the Clinton formula offered them ineffective lip service while playing footsie under the table with Wall Street financial titans. Only Democratic articulation of a major legislative program to rehabilitate the Rust Belt can win back the disaffected.
Here's what would work: a Democratic commitment to enact to a Rural and Rust Belt New Deal to be funded by proceeds from a carbon tax. Infrastructure would be rebuilt, with investment made into creating green industries and retraining workers now struggling to survive in obsolescent industries. And all this becomes more credible if championed by a candidate from the Midwest working class, not a coastal liberal with only a theoretical experience of the problems.
A comprehensive economic renewal strategy is very doable if Democrats unite behind it. If they do not and continue to operate as an opportunistic collection of identity groups, they will lack a coherent vision and inevitably fall short. We now must surely know that merely being outraged by Trump will not suffice. Inspiration via a positive vision is required. Failure to offer one can only grease the desperate slide toward authoritarianism.
31
@woofer Proceeds from a carbon tax would have to be spread equitably among the states.
2
@woofer
I could not agree more with your sentiments, and would only add that the new Democratic nominee should make a public penance to the communities you described, something to the effect that our party leadership has failed you on numerous occasions over the past 25-30 years or so, but that we are determined to make amends and will do whatever it takes to regain your trust.
@woofer, this has been the central problem since the 1990s. There's no coherent central vision. When you have a group of factions fighting with each other, it's easy for the opposition to use wedge issues and social media against you to fracture alliances.
The DLC better wake up from their afternoon naps and show some youthful energy. The only vision that United this country was the one from FDR era. It's ironic the oldest of the leadership who are likely to have lived in that time are the ones suffering from amnesia.
It seems pretty bad if Trump could win again in 2020.
However, "If things look very very bad, they are usually not that that bad"
Vice versa if things look very very good.
Trump's Base of voters about 1 out of 5 Americans.
Most Americans have a sense of decency.
Even though Trump captures the news, he probably won't be our next president.
Churchill said that we get things right, eventually.
Let's hope that "eventually" is four years, only.
17
All the data analysis is distorted by the overextended, overheated economy that must come to grips with the bankrupted Treasury that was exacerbated by Trump's tax cuts. A downturn is more than likely by 2020. And that will be the end of Trump.
19
@alak -- If you are caught and blamed hoping for a downturn, you can kiss goodbye any chance of winning.
I think we are still seeing the effects of the President taking advantage of the mostly white rural feeling that they have been left behind for the last 2 decades or so. He has profited by creating a "us against them" atmosphere but the economic differences are plain to see if you get out of the urban/suburban areas and take a good look around.
The Democrats will have to find a way to slightly shrink Trump's base as they capture an increasing share of an expanding electorate. They must find a way to give their base a reason to turnout to the polls.
6
"To win the presidency, Democrats will probably need at least one of Florida, Arizona or Michigan, or else they’ll most likely need to win a state where they lost more decisively in 2016 — like North Carolina, Georgia or Texas. Democrats fell short, or seemed on track to fall short, in prominent races in those three states last week."
Trump won North Carolina by only 3.6 points. Among other "purple states" only Florida, New Hampshire, and Virginia were closer. Solid "red" Georgia was over 5 points and Texas was 9 points. Ohio appears less likely to be Democratic than Arizona, North Carolina, or even Georgia with the trends witnessed over the last 3 presidential cycles.
In North Carolina, in 2018, three (very) gerrymandered Congressional districts that the GOP counts on to win by double-digits, Democrat candidates fell short by 0.6, 2 and 2.2 points, in GERRYMANDERED districts;
The states to watch for Democrats are Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, and Arizona. Democrats need to be careful in Maine, New Hampshire, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
11
@Mack
If Dems can't win in Virginia, New Hampshire and the mid-West, Trump is sure to be re-elected.
This is a more honest analysis
4
Didn't the Democrats win virtually everything in Michigan? Governor, Senator, a house seat or three, and anti-gerrymandering initiative? What wold a good night have looked like? Ohio, obviously IS a problem, but Michigan?
2
@DanThey gained seats in the legislature but the GOP still controls both houses in Michigan.
7
@Dan -- Some Democrats did well in Michigan, but they were not the Clinton Democrats. They were the Bernie Democrats.
Which will the party run in two years?
@MJ
Gerrymandering accounts for a good part of that. Won't change till after 2020.
Good grief! Why should one be surprised that the Democrats "struggled" in the old mining and industrial towns of the Rust Belt? Trump promised to bring back coal AND heavy industry in those areas, and many of the folks living there believed him.
They shouldn't be embarrassed by that. They certainly weren't the only people who voted on the hope the con man held out to them.
6
Nate, have you considered the possibility of Republicans miscounting the votes in Miami-Dade? There is no other likely explanation for the anomaly you described, and Florida has a long history of election chicanery by the Republican Party.
There are several ways to accomplish it, and given Scott's criminal business history it is likely that he orchestrated crimes against democracy.
14
Votes are being recounted in Florida, first by machine, then if necessary, by hand. If Rick Scott would just stick a sock in his mouth and stop talking about fraud, we could get through the process.
1
The only reason this is going to be hard is that, two years after Trump's victory, they have yet to decisively address the legitimate economic concerns of these areas. Trump's promises are proving hollow...but Democrats are relying on dissatisfaction without even addressing the problem, much less offering a solution.
20
@Brian -- " Trump's promises are proving hollow"
Yes. As did Democrats' nice words for decade after decade as things got worse and worse.
So, after disappointment, what is a voter to do? Go back to the old liars?
We need something new and different, not a promise to return to the status quo rejected last time.
Not a promise to restore the Democrats, but a promise to restore America to something different.
In 2020, Florida will have up to 1.5-million re-enfranchised former convict voters. The state will also have its share of the approximately 8-9-million 16- and 17-year olds and a further diminution of the white and over 60 part of Trump’s base. It and the rest of the country will also see more Democrats elected to state offices, from governors and down the ballot. And all will come with non fear-based campaigns. I’m not worried.
9
@Alan Chaprack
Prisons full of criminal men now voting. Just what the FL and US systems need - let alone vulnerable women and children.
@Alan Chaprack
You are assuming; 1. that the groups you mention will have very strong turnout--unlike what we saw last week in Florida. 2. that the white population in Florida won't also grow due to migration of retirees--the same people that have the highest turnout of all in Florida elections and 3. that the GOP won't get a good part of the Hispanic vote--didn't DeSantis and Scott both take over 40% of it?
They've served their time and fulfilled their obligation to society. You don't think they deserve their right to vote reinstated?
1
Trump's is vulnerable if even a small number of voters decide that attending a Trump event and being egged on by the President to chant "lock her up" or "CNN Sucks" is no way for a President to behave. Or, perhaps those who support Trump will find it puzzling, that Ms. Abrams and Mr. Gillum are described as crazy left wing types, because on even a cursory examination there is nothing extreme in what they proposed. Or perhaps more Trump fans will recognize that Donald Trump has made sure there is no longer a continuum in American politics. Instead we have reached a very obvious fork in the road and The Republican Party, led by the President, have clearly decided that they are just fine with the bigotry, race baiting, and illegal behavior of Donald Trump. Maybe Trumps fans will say to themselves, 'No longer can the Republican Party truthfully assert they support the ideals of equality and fair elections'. Any fair minded voter listening to the race baiting vitriol used by some Republican candidates will vote for an alternative. Hopefully come 2020 this will be very obvious. The entire Republican party has been infected by the hatred, demagoguery and plain nastiness of Donald Trump. Maybe people will notice.
15
While I agree with the premise of the Electoral College, it’s a seriously flawed system. The country shouldn’t be saddled with a president who lost the popular vote by MILLIONS. Why are the middle-state voters votes worth more than mine? It’s terribly unfair.
37
@Jay
After each presidential election questions are raised about the use of the Electoral College. However as an answer to questions about election outcomes the Electoral College is often off the mark. The Electoral College is a large part of the answer to the question "How can a Midwest vote be worth more?" The Electoral College is not the answer to "Why is a Midwest vote worth more?" Thirty years of Democratic Party decisions about where to focus its message geographically and its strategy generally are a large part of the answer to why a few Midwest states swing presidential elections. The idea of balancing Presidential elections through the use of the Electoral College was to push candidates to represent the nation and to use the College as an impediment to electing a president based on the size of the candidate's party.
1
Because the founding fathers attempted to avoid a tyranny of the majority that eventually became a tyranny of the minority. Only a constitutional amendment would change this.
4
@Jay
The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing. How long do you think the union would last if New York and California were deciding every presidential election?
Hillary won California by 4 million votes and her yet her popular vote win nationwide was just under 3 million. What does that tell you?
If you remove California and New York from the equation, Trump won the popular vote in the other 48 states by 6 million.
Without the Electoral College, most of the country would be disenfranchised.
4
It's guaranteed that the political environment, dominated by Trump, will not stay static between now and 2020. Trump's continued pandering to America's fears, combined with looming criminal indictments of his family, House investigations, and possible impeachment, will shake up politics as never before. All bets are off as of now — get back to us in mid-2019 — and give clairvoyance a rest. We all deserve a respite from elections for a few months.
24
No, the Democrats are perfectly positioned to succeed again in 2020. In 2020, the Republicans will be defending 22 seats where in 2018 they only needed to defend 10. In 2020, Collins of Maine is a sure flip to a Democrat for her Supreme Court vote. Trump himself will be gleefully grown out of office as people will be sick of his entertainment style of hateful politics after four long years. And women will continue to balance the scale and become more liberal in the process. All of the nutty acts of Congress in the last two years, tax cuts healthcare repeal attempts will come to haunt them. No, only good things in 2020. I just worry no wars, stock market crashes, or insane declarations thwart getting these people out of power.
8
Number of seats are unimportant. Many are states that would prefer a ferret to a Democrat. Plus Doug Jones likely loses assuming a child molester is not nominated. It is highly probable the Repubs retain the Senate.
Working class whites are dying at faster rates than minorities. Rising white mortality is the most significant political statistic in America. It reflects white worker obsolescence, and explains white voter anger and their support of Trump's politics of division and hate. Democrats must create a "New Deal" for these Americans or they will continue to represent only a protest vote.
11
@mr isaac
Minorities always have had higher disease and mortality rates, as well as infant and maternal mortality rates. To some extent, life in the U.S. for 3/4 of the population now means earlier death, regardless of race and gender.
3
@mr isaac
You are wrong in the nearer term. Working class whites made up about 40% of the electorate last Tuesday--the largest single group. According to the CNN poll, they gave 61% of their votes to the GOP.
Good insights but the Dem carrying of Pinellas and Hillsborough counties (Tampa and St. Pete's) is something of a surprise and bodes well for 2020.
The irony, so thick you need a spoon, is that Trump won FL in 2016 because of Marco Rubio!!
Rubio ran ~8 points ahead of Trump, carrying a not-insignificant number of Latino voters on his coattails to Trump.
In the primary, Rubio lost every county except Miami-Dade, where he positively crushed Trump by 40 points. These voters and wavering Dems came out in the general to pull the lever for Rubio and took a flyer on Trump.
Without a Latino on the ballot, Trump is going to have to invest in early and strong field operations, not something this man seems inclined to do...
7
@Arturo
The Democratic Party leadership goofed in 2016 by anointing Pat Murphy from the get-go as its chosen candidate to take on Senator Rubio. His Democratic bona fides were and still are quite suspect (he was a registered Republican until not that long ago), and he ultimately inspired no one. Why the Democratic Party, with Barack Obama as its leader and Hillary Clinton as the chosen successor, and with its stated focus on making 2016 the "year of the woman," decided so early on to turn its back on Pam Keith's candidacy continues to mystify and madden me. She could have beaten Senator Rubio and at the very least would have given him a tougher and closer race than Murphy did.
4
This is just silly. The weaknesses Mr. Cohn, all lay on the Republican side of the ledger. To lose the House so overwhelming, lose both the Nevada and Arizona senate races and have a runoff in Mississippi suggests that 2020 will be a real 'weakness' for the Republicans.
I am tired of hearing 'If only the Democrats had done...'. How about a new approach; analyzing just how out-of-touch Trumpism is with the majority of Americans? Now that would be a column which speaks to the reality of the 2018 mid-terms.
64
Thanks Nate. Your analysis and the results match pretty closely with the opening chapter of Robert Kuttner's book, "A Song of Angry Men." (The book is "Can Democracy Survive Global Capitalism?")
"….white working class voters happen to be distributed with great geographical and electoral efficiency. Politicians ignore that reality at their peril. In 2016, all of the key states in the Midwest had voting populations that were at least 50 percent white working class. In Ohio, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, and Wisconsin, the hare exceeded 60 percent. In key counties of western Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Wisconsin, where support for the Democrats collapsed, the white working class percentage of voters exceeded 80 percent.”
And the economic growth after 2010, “the recovery,” was poorly distributed: “Just twenty counties, with only 2 percent of the US population, accounted for half of all the new business growth in the recovery...among the states where new business growth lagged far behind the national rate were Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Iowa, West Virginia, and Wisconsin — the states where Trump exceeded expectations and won the election...
A Brooking Institution study found that every one of America’s wealthiest 493 counties, most of them urban or metropolitan, supported Clinton. Those 493 counties...produced about two-thirds of the national GDP. The remaining 2,623 counties mostly went for Trump.”
All from page 5 - on the "song."
2
This is why Democrats Ned to take a long look at Sherrod Brown, someone who can speak to, show concern for and articulate policies that can help to address the uneven economic growth that our current capitalist structure has created.
Kamala Harris for VP wouldn’t hurt either.
@James
She showed me something when she introduced a bill to enable renters to deduct something from their federal taxes - unheard of, in my experience, in a nation which worships home ownership.
It's way too early to fret about 2020, with Florida undecided and 10 House races still uncalled. Plus there's tons of "granular" data still to be gathered. Now is the time for Democrats to celebrate. Not only did we win the most House seats since Watergate, we did so despite extreme Republican gerrymandering especially in the Midwest and the South. And facing the most disadvantaged Senate map in over a century, we limited GOP wins to just one (or two) seats.
This election was a huge setback for Trump and Republicans. Trump understands that, as shown by his abrupt displacement firing of Jeff Session. Trump is already the least popular President in history. Just think how unpopular he'll be after two years of House Democrats uncovering every corrupt act and practice.
So let's enjoy the win. We've earned it. (We can start beating ourselves up once we get more facts.)
22
@stephen beck
Celebrate strengths, but shore up weaknesses.
2
As several have pointed out here, the vote of the ex-felons will be a factor in Florida. Also, the Dems should hop on organizing the immigrant Puerto Ricans for good turnout.
I have never been able to figure out what makes Ohio tick.
8
@Philip S. Wenz
What makes Ohio tick? Perhaps it's the acceptance of Yankee principles (you know, charity, responsibility, and all that) brought to the north of the state by our Western Reserve founders plus the fact that income for much of the state is generated by either growing things or making things. I'm still working on what makes Oregon tick...(joke).
2
@Ohio Rambler
What makes Oregon tick? Portland is by far it's largest city, and its informal motto — all over the place on bumper stickers, T-shirts and refrigerator magnets — is "Keep Portland Weird."
The former home to the strongest KKK presence north of the Mason-Dixon line, Portland is now left of Left. We're waiting for Ohio to catch up. Maybe by 2020?
4
There are five Ohio's in Ohio, that's part of why it hard to figure out. Each region has its own special flavor.
2
There clearly were some warning signs for the Democrats, and the Democrats ignore them at their peril for 2020:
1. There were some bright spots for the Democrats in Florida (flipping two House seats there) and Ohio (Sherrod Brown, who has stayed more true than perhaps any other Democrat to the core mission of seeking greater economic opportunity for the less fortunate, winning re-election to the Senate), but otherwise both states were disappointing for them. Gillum and Nelson are likely to fall just short in Florida, and the Democrats failed to flip a single House seat in Ohio. These results suggest that beating Trump in either state in 2020 will be quite difficult. Only one candidate (JFK in '60) has ever been elected President despite losing both states.
2. North Carolina was another state where the Democrats failed to flip a single House seat. It will be at the center of the 2020 political storm; in addition to the presidential election, the Republicans will be gunning for Roy Cooper (who was elected governor in 2016 by a razor-thin margin) and the Democrats, in order to win back the Senate majority, simply must beat Thom Tillis. But they must up their game here to do better statewide in 2020.
3. In Minnesota, 4 House seats flipped and 2 of them went to the Republicans. It will be heavily contested in 2020 too; Trump will be on offense here and Tina Smith's Senate seat will be up again. The Democrats must bridge the growing urban-rural divide here to win statewide here.
12
@Rick
"In Minnesota, 4 House seats flipped and 2 of them went to the Republicans. . . . The Democrats must bridge the growing urban-rural divide here to win statewide here."
Democrats swept every statewide office in Minnesota in last week's election: Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, State Auditor, and two U.S. Senate races. And two house seats in the suburbs of Minneapolis and St. Paul flipped from Republican to Democratic.
Collin Peterson held his house seat in the most Republican district held by a Democrat in the country. And Dan Feehan came very close to winning the 1st District race, and could probably win it if he runs again in 2020.
Democrats are doing just fine here in Minnesota, thanks for your concern.
6
The Democrats had a great midterm. At first it seemed just ok, but as the days wore on more close calls fell on the Democrats side. 32 House seats won plus a possible 3 to 8 more as of today. Considering the gerrymandering going on for the last 8 years by the Republicans, that's a rout.
The Senate because of the nature of the beast each State gets 2 is tougher. But the Dems are holding their own right now with the recounts.
So why such a good midterm with a booming economy, in a word, Trump. The Democrats didn't dwell at all on him, spoke to healthcare and the like, but he was the elephant in the room, and he's not liked by the metro areas, and now the suburbs. And soon many rural communities.
2020 will be good to the Democrats for two reasons. First is Trump himself, he alienates everyone but his base, and he won't change. And two, the economy, it's already slowing some and the stock market has been flat for the year. And sometime in the next 2 years, signs point to a recession.
That's my take. And the Democrats will keep their nose to the ground and legislate in the House on infrastructure and the like.
13
@cherrylog754
Democrats gerrymander in states as much as do Republicans. Democrats even gerrymander against each other for the same elected office.
Power corrupts, regardless of political ideology.
4
@Maggie Historically, that may be true, but can you point to the examples of extreme gerrymandering by the present Democratic party in proportion to the obvious gerrymandering by the Republicans recently? The good news is that ballot initiatives have been frequently popping up to move the authority of district assignment to nonpartisan committees; let's hope that this continues.
3
When the popular vote for president exceeds 5 million or higher (which I suspect it will) but red states with small populations and electoral advantage chose Trump again and thus the president; I highly suspect a fracturing of our “United” states and much unease about our country’s future.
16
This president? You're deluded.
1
Given these results, we should give some consideration to the role that the mostly good economy played in maintaining Trump's support in old industrial Midwestern towns or the rural South/Southwest. These areas were either actively helped by Trump's tariff policies or enjoyed the overall economic revival that is finally reaching them. And, conversely, we should consider whether Trump's tariffs and the impact on export agriculture was responsible for the turn away from Trump in rural Midwestern areas. The bottom line is that such electoral factors were more unique to today's economic environment than a permanent electoral realignment.
7
Polls do not matter in today's world. They do not tell the "real" story.
NOTHING will stop Socially Conscious Women from stepping up to take one-half the power in OUR governments - and every segment of society - to bring balance to the processes that have been the social model for centuries.
It's called HIStory - the male power-over model has manged to keep women down for centuries.
No more.
OUR story of inclusion and Social/Economic Equity for ALL Americans begins now. NOTHING will prevent average Americans who love democracy - and realize the danger it is in - from voting for these women.
Ignore the polls and follow your hearts, Good People of America!
4
The wild card in Florida is that in 2020 most ex-felons will be eligible to vote … 1.4 million of them. Most of these are minorities. If even 1/3 of them vote, this could be all the difference.
And, over the next two years a significant number of older white voters will die, replaced by a greater number of young voters.
So the Democrats certainly have a path to win in 2020 … unless they, as they often do, snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
79
Sure, Mr. Graubard, and it was her fault that the most qualified candidate with the most political capital -
Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton - lost because she didn't run a good enough campaign.
It had nothing to do with BILLIONS OF $$$ spent against her for 30+ years. It had nothing to do with the smear campaigns by the big fat liar on hate radio, fox so-called news, national enquirer and other hate subliminal advertising vehicles and the incessant media fixation on her supposed e-mail scandal (which wasn't) instead of the LYING CON DON.
No matter. Socially Conscious Women and men are running on things important to their communities and going out to actually meet people.
That is what will give them victory in 2020.
7
@John Graubard
I don't think you get it. If 1/3 of those former felons who can now vote all live in one district which goes Democrat, that doesn't make up for the rest of the counties that don't go Democrat. Which means Florida could still go Trump.
The point of Cohn's analysis is that Dems have to look at the results of each county/voting district despite feeling good about the overall results in order to be better prepared for 2020.
2
@John Graubard While it is true older voters die, they are being replaced by white older voters from the midwest and northeast (retiring boomers) who come to FL and vote republican. So their share is actually growing.
1
But now that a referendum has passed in Florida returning the franchise to disenfranchised voters convicted of felonies, more than a million people, many of them people of color victimized by the Jim Crow practice, will turn up at the polls next time.
Their voices will be heard, and we will see Republicans pay the price at the polls for decades of uncorrected Jim Crow.
46
@Sean It really is something to see people cheering voting rights for felons.
I'm aware that the worst felons are not covered by prop 4 but it is a fantasy that these people were all leading upstanding lives and thrown into jail as a result of racist police.
All 1M of these felons were convicted, by a jury of their peers, of crimes worthy of being locked up for several years.
We can debate the merits of rehabilitation and re-entrance into society but lets not pretend these people were innocent victims when THEY committed crimes against actual innocent victims.
10
@Arturo
When I lived in Miami-Dade County, I saw police departments devoting all of their efforts to enticing adolescents into crime so that they could be charged, convicted, imprisoned, and forever denied the right to vote.
9
@Arturo I don't think anyone is pretending that this group of voters is composed of innocent victims. The amendment did not include violent offenders or sexual predators/child molesters.
Many of the crimes they committed were the kind where recidivism is an achievable goal: drug offenses and the like.
To punish a person for life despite a mistake they made once is abhorrent. They were locked up for several years. How long must we punish? How long must we assume that they are beyond redemption?
It doesn't really matter what your opinion is of this group of people, what matters is that Florida voters believe that they at least deserve a chance to vote.
37
With regard to Florida, I would add one thought: Over 1 million ex-felons will have the right to vote there in 2020, and that constituency (if they show up) will likely be heavily Democratic.
18
@Arthur Larkin. I do not think ex-felons will vote. There is a reason they were felons. I had hope in the young, the generation of mass shootings would show up. Perhaps they will in the future.
5
@Arthur Larkin
Probably not the strongest Democrat campaign slogan:
"Winning! But only with sociopath drug addled violent felons."
1
I work for Spread the Vote. We help eligible voters get the documents they néed to sustain housing, jobs, transportation, and the right to vote. I promise you that ex-felons will vote.
1
The Democrats need a coordinated policy that advance human and social rights including the right to vote, economic policies that promote technical and cyber education, infrastructure,environment and most of all reduces income inequality.
The latter involves having a fair immigration policy that recognizes the positive role of immigrants, a health care policy that protects existing conditions , reduces drug prices to European levels , finds a way to cover those who are uninsured.
All these policies to be financed by closing personal and corporate loopholes and imposing a 4 percent infrastructure tax on all imports. Reversing Trumps selective tariffs etc. All infrastructure projects must use American material
The House should follow this agenda , present to the Senate for a vote.
This will be an acid test for the Republican Senate and Trump.
It will be the platform for 2020 and if so , with the right candidates Democrats will win all
14
@Carsafrica--While your policy recommendations may be in the best interest of our country they will, if adopted, result in another Republican victory. Not because they are wrong headed, but because a significant (read enough to swing the election) is not with you or the democrats on this.
If you wish to advance your progressive agenda it will need to be one which Trump supporters will get behind.
@Carsafrica Disagree. The Dems need ONE message with a catchy tag line. When peoples' attention are on the tag line, then discuss the rest of the agenda.
The GOP does this with great success, even when they have zero policies behind them. "Jobs Jobs Jobs" (Real world, no policies to improve jobs), "Repeal Obamacare" (with no play, and they did not do it).
You present a long and boring laundry list. I agree with everything you want, but I get tired listening. And a bunch of it does not directly apply to me.
5
Cohn misses the point that the electorate in mid-term elections is typically less than in presidential-year elections. Seasoned election inspectors and political operatives certainly can appreciate the qualitative difference in voters between those two types of elections. Namely, enthusiastic presidential voters often do not return to join the dour voters who turn out for every election decade-after-decade.
10
@5barris
I don't think you read Nate Cohn's article carefully.
The next three paragraphs come directly from the article:
"There’s also a strong generational gap among Cuban voters that may have worked to the G.O.P.’s advantage in a midterm election, when lower-turnout younger voters are more likely to stay home.
But there’s another possibility that should concern Democrats: the prospect that the president is more popular in Miami-Dade County than one might guess.
Upshot/Siena polls of Florida’s 26th and 27th Districts showed President Trump’s net approval rating was about 10 points better than his margin in the 2016 election. The polls nailed the results of the two congressional races there.
In 2016, Mr. Trump’s weakness in Miami-Dade was a big reason the state was so close, despite his gains among white working-class voters in the state. If Democrats can’t count on a big year in 2020 from voters in the county, Florida might slip down the list of battleground states."
Cohn did *not* "Miss the point"
8
@5barris
I don't think so. I think these are clearly areas Democrats need to focus on.
2