Recent American history resonates with one very major fact: Trump is a master of self-emasculation.
If we extrapolate from now in late April to early November, it's odds on that Trump will continue to dishonor himself at best, and incriminate himself at worse.
Even infatuated Trumpites will, I believe, find the president's actions in the months ahead difficult to rationalize.
Say, as we all hope, that he does find a way to induce Kim Jong Un to denuclearize. His pop in the polls from such an achievement is likely to be short-lived, since it was Trump's isolationism, not any claim to diplomatic skills, that helped ease his way into the White House.
Trump does stupid stuff, sexist stuff, racist stuff, corrupt stuff, obscene stuff, narcissistic stuff, idiotic stuff. All this stuff will eventually be noticed by supporters who are struggling to look elsewhere.
But really, by early November, there may be nowhere else to look. And as for any guilt that Trump's supporters might feel for abandoning their leader, of course they needn't do that, since it's not a presidential election. All they have to do is vote Democrat.
56
Midterms, eh. Defeat, jaws, victory, etc.
Steny Hoyer, call your office.
19
Republicans-- old, young, rich, middle-class, poor, sick, educated, and high school dropouts-- will troop to the polls in 2018 and vote Republican. These are not deplorables or anxiety, anger motivated Americans. These are Republicans who have voted Republican for ever and ever. Cohn and the statisticians somehow miss or downplay this. Why don't pollsters and social scientists put these voters under a microscope. 60 million Republicans voted for Trump. He was elected by these voters not the few thousand Dem deserters in a few districts or the good ol' boys wearing MAGA hats interviewed at gun shows. These Republicans vote from habit. Habits are hard to change. Only a great Dem turnout can overcome this habit.
101
I didn't think Trump would be elected unless there was a Muslim terrorist attack just before the election. I was wrong about that, but a terrorist attack like at the Boston marathon or in Orlando or San Bernardino, in the one to two months before a national election, could tip the balance toward the Republicans. Let's hope that doesn't happen. It also means Democrats should be thinking about their campaign speeches if this context. They need a good message here, one that can attract swing voters.
21
How is it possible the president as a 41% approval rating? What am I missing?
91
Simple. Don't believe everything a candidate tells you. Pay attention to incumbents. What did they actually get done in Washington? Get out and vote.
27
After the Donald Trump win in 2016, I'm reluctant to believe polls and analysts. I hope Mr. Cohn is right, but the best thing to do is for Democrats to assume they'll lose and work very hard to make sure it doesn't happen. Run on local issues. Make sure candidates fit well in the district they hope to represent, even if they are not card-carrying progressives. A moderate Democrat is much better than any Republican. If there are arguments about what direction the Democratic Party should go, win the election first and work out solutions afterwards.
156
All of what you say is true and I think you are being a little too cautious re the democrat's chance of winning the house.
If the election was held today I think they would take the house for sure and probably the Senate, although in the Senate it is less clear since so many democrats are up for election. In the Senate they will literally have to sweep the board like they did with Obama's 60 Senate win, if they want even a simple majority, whereas in the House they only need app. 24 to change it and many more republican house seats are in peril.
The key part of the story that was not covered is what can change between now and Nov.
1-The economy could shoot up on the Trump faux high before it implodes.
2-Trump's love child Putin could help Trump by putting pressure on Kim to give Trump a good deal till at at least the election and then change.
3-Last but not least, the democrats could run outside of safe liberal districts, identity obsessed, never met a war, trade agreement, Wall Street banker campaign I did not like, like Hillary did.
10
One thing we can be sure of: a lot of money will be spent.
20
I'm hopeful that we can change the U.S. Congress for the better. I'm also excited about the number of high-quality Democrats running for Congressional seats at the state level. We've got a real chance to create balanced governments in many states, even red states. These elections may not be "sexy," but state governments are responsible for damaging the lives of many, many Americans. Funding public education, providing healthcare, and protecting voting rights are just a few of the policies Democrats can change for the better.
40
Some 'damage', yes. But, also some states are responsible for some of the most progressive changes in the country; changes that we cannot expect from the federal government at this time. Change is happening from the bottom, as always. Note the young people agitating (and voting) for new gun laws, and much more.
In many ways the state and local elections are more important than ever now. So, PLEASE, don't stay home on election day, support progressive local candidates as well as those running for the US House and Senate.
37
If the best Democrats can manage is a "modest edge" over today's Republican party led by Donald Trump and controlled by the Dark Money gang, then they need to either reconsider their approach or just step aside.
50
Not so! We can turn that 'modest edge' into a landslide. But we have to work to accomplish that! So get off your backsides, one and all, to create change. The kids are doing it; so, can us 'oldies'. I'm 76; I believe change can happen.
72
The main thing to keep in mind when thinking about the midterms is "Get out the vote!" Apparently way too many people in Nov. 2016 "assumed" they knew the results beforehand. And now, more than ever, we all know what "assume" does to you and me!
101
"Apparently way too many people in Nov. 2016 "assumed" they knew the results beforehand."
That wouldn't have mattered if the Democrats had a nominee that more voters were passionate for and WANTED to vote for. A great many voters "held their nose" to vote for Hillary, and did so only because the alternative was Trump. But there was a critical mass of voters in key states that couldn't be motivated to do even that. The lesson for Democrats is simple: next time, don't nominate someone that many voters have to hold their nose to vote for. Nominate someone that voters are passionate for and WANT to vote for.
45
I hear you, Rick. But for many, and often most voters, it is ALWAYS "hold your nose and pick the lesser of two evils" in a POTUS election. And no matter what people thought of Hillary (I was holding my nose too, BTW), anybody who presumed Trump would ever be competent to provide anything "good for the country" was completely deluded. As has been proven now time and again...no matter how hard and how many times the non-"mainstream" narratives have tried to equate those two particular candidates. But again, I agree with your argument that we all deserve better choices than these last two!
7
Exactly Rick. Hillary played well in the big liberal states but the dems blew it in Mich., Pa, Wisc. Ohio and Fla. by nominating her.
If the Dems nominated a less identity obsessed, establishment liberal Hillary candidate like Bernie., he would have won the liberal states plus Mich., Wisc., and Pa and probably Ohio and Fla. to put him over the top.
5
If the GOP actually stays even or shows gains, the Dems will really start to wonder what to do.
14
The Dems apparently have yet to gasp the nettle that, unlike their biggest donors, most voters favor government action to remedy the Country’s major problems: infrastructure, rehabilitation, affordable housing, child & elder care, real education. - in general, a bettering of the situation encountered by most Americans.
49
And yet a significant number vote as if they do not care about those issues...
19
Because the elitist DNC only fund right winged centrists and moderates who don't care about those issues. Until the money is out of politics and civil servants actually represent the people which is the core of the progressive democrat, until our voice is represented by the party, they will lose. They back candidates who speak for them, not for the true progressives.
4