President Donald Trump

[DMT]

Another way of looking at it, is when Hillary was asked what concessions she planned to make to the Bernie wing, and she said "nothing, I think our direction is great", she was cutting off her own nose to spite her stupid face... man, I'd have even accepted a LIE, and then fight her later... but she was even too stupid to lie... consistently! Remember "were gonna put a lot of coal miners out of jobs!"? She's a born loser, and the right wing have perfected vilifying her. Bad combo.

Progressives were given nothing to vote for. I can see why their enthusiasm tamped down, but would place progressives pretty far down the list of reasons why she lost. I think were mostly on the same page, I'm sure we both blame Hillary largely for her own loss.

While I generally agree, there was a contingent of progressives that refused to vote for Clinton that contributed to her losing. Even after Sanders threw his support to Clinton, they refused. Inexcusable IMO, and I was never a big Clinton supporter.

[Teenwolf]

While I generally agree, there was a contingent of progressives that refused to vote for Clinton that contributed to her losing. Even after Sanders threw his support to Clinton, they refused. Inexcusable IMO, and I was never a big Clinton supporter.

I dont blame any "lesser of two evils" voters for staying home... especially when media was predicting an easy Clinton victory. I strongly disagree with their interpretation of the right thing to do, but I understand the choice.

[Teenwolf]

2020 will be very different because Trump has proven to be even worse than most people suspected. Many of those "anyone-but-Hillary" voters will become "anyone-but-Trump".

2016's most crucial voting bloc: evangelicals.

In '16, evangelicals had insane, unrepeatable numbers. 85% turnout, 81% supported Trump (might be reversed, point stands)... you've gotta believe those numbers take a hit.

[Bernie Brewer]

2016's most crucial voting bloc: evangelicals.

In '16, evangelicals had insane, unrepeatable numbers. 85% turnout, 81% supported Trump (might be reversed, point stands)... you've gotta believe those numbers take a hit.

I’m not sure about taking a hit. Many Evangelicals didn’t vote FOR Trump. They voted for conservatives values and SC appointments that will slow down the changes that they find objectionable; Abortion, same sex marriage, the (perceived) war in Christians, etc. Trump is the means to those ends. Many would rather have anyone GOP but Trump, but so far on those issues, he’s done thier bidding well. If RBG retires (or dies) he will get three choices. They will be ecstatic.

[DMT]

I’m not sure about taking a hit. Many Evangelicals didn’t vote FOR Trump. They voted for conservatives values and SC appointments that will slow down the changes that they find objectionable; Abortion, same sex marriage, the (perceived) war in Christians, etc.

Exactly... zero faith in evangelicals not to continue blindly supporting GOP.

[Bernie Brewer]

Exactly... zero faith in evangelicals not to continue blindly supporting GOP.

Now in the real world there any many “evangelicals” that identify as liberals. When mainstream media labels people as evangelicals, they are talking white, very conservative Southern Baptist types.

[DMT]

I dont blame any "lesser of two evils" voters for staying home... especially when media was predicting an easy Clinton victory. I strongly disagree with their interpretation of the right thing to do, but I understand the choice.

Trump was so obviously a far worse candidate from a progressive perspective that I do hold them accountable. Out of petty egotism they have set back the progressive agenda at least a decade.

[Teenwolf]

Exactly... zero faith in evangelicals not to continue blindly supporting GOP.

I dont doubt the large majority will still support him, but not at the rates of '16. Sunlight as a disinfectant and all... if those numbers sink into the low 70's it's a substantial hit.

Trying to be optimistic that evangelicals will "deliver us from evil."

[Bernie Brewer]

I dont doubt the large majority will still support him, but not at the rates of '16. Sunlight as a disinfectant and all... if those numbers sink into the low 70's it's a substantial hit.

Trying to be optimistic that evangelicals will "deliver us from evil."

Define evil. If you are opposed to abortion, same sex marriage, political correctness, etc. Laws that force those things down their throats are what they consider as evil. Not that I agree but evil is all in your individual perspective.

[B-Fly]

I think some conservative female evangelicals, in particular, might be willing to support at least a pro-life GOP challenger to Trump, but I don't think the conservative evangelicals will abandon the GOP in the general election, whether Trump or anyone else is the nominee. (Romney lost some evangelicals who view Mormonism as cultish/dangerous, but I think evangelicals could change horses to a "Christian" challenger.)

[nots]

Would love to see a challenger to Trump, but things would have to be pretty bad in the country economically for a legitimate challenger to surface. Kaisich would do well in a general election, but I can’t see him getting anywhere in a primary. Flake is a poor man’s Kaisich though even less popular.
I do think it’s possible (but not likely) that if the economy is doing well, a 3rd party never -Trump challenger could rise up to help make sure he loses in the general. I could see someone like Flake relishing the role of spoiler (not sure Kaisich would) pushing quite a few slightly red states over to the Democrats by splitting the vote. I think it only happens if Trump is polling above where he is now and the economy is still on fire.

[B-Fly]

Would love to see a challenger to Trump, but things would have to be pretty bad in the country economically for a legitimate challenger to surface. Kaisich would do well in a general election, but I can’t see him getting anywhere in a primary. Flake is a poor man’s Kaisich though even less popular.
I do think it’s possible (but not likely) that if the economy is doing well, a 3rd party never -Trump challenger could rise up to help make sure he loses in the general. I could see someone like Flake relishing the role of spoiler (not sure Kaisich would) pushing quite a few slightly red states over to the Democrats by splitting the vote. I think it only happens if Trump is polling above where he is now and the economy is still on fire.

That would be great if someone with strong conservative credentials would threaten and then follow through on a 3rd party run in 2020 if the GOP re-nominates Trump. A Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney, perhaps.

[Bernie Brewer]

That would be great if someone with strong conservative credentials would threaten and then follow through on a 3rd party run in 2020 if the GOP re-nominates Trump. A Paul Ryan or Mitt Romney, perhaps.

I’d take either in a freaking heartbeat. You’re right about the Mormon thing with Romney though, not that it would sway me in the least. Although I love Ryan, he has too much baggage at this point. He didn’t do enough to call out Trumps bad behavior.

Where’s John McCain when we need him?

[nots]

Maybe Ryan. I think Romney has sort of made his peace with Trump. Maybe Rand Paul? Chris Christie?
It’s a career killing kamikaze mission, so it isn’t going to be a very deep pool of potentional candidates.

[DMT]

Maybe Ryan. I think Romney has sort of made his peace with Trump. Maybe Rand Paul? Chris Christie?
It’s a career killing kamikaze mission, so it isn’t going to be a very deep pool of potentional candidates.

I agree with your last sentence so why would Ryan do it? I think he plans to make a legit run at some point.