I actually agree with this assessment/ If you go back since 1952, there has basically been a consistent pattern of people wanting to give an administration 8 years.

I believe another factor will be what happens in the 2018 mid-terms. If they Dems win, I believe there would be more chance that Trump would be re-elected.

Also, another big factor is the economy. A recession or at the very least, minimal growth, in late 2018 into most of 2019 could spell doom.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/tru ... d573dac1f3

727LOVER wrote:

Also, another big factor is the economy. A recession or at the very least, minimal growth, in late 2018 into most of 2019 could spell doom.

I won't predict in terms of percentage of chances, but I strongly suspect that Republicans will pay heavily in the 2018 mid-term elections, and that President Trump is likely to be impeached and found guilty (or to have resigned) prior to the 2020 presidential election.

He's been in office for barely 4 months, can we postpone the election threads for another year or 3? It's not like there is an acute shortage of US political threads on A.net.

petertenthije wrote:

He's been in office for barely 4 months, can we postpone the election threads for another year or 3? It's not like there is an acute shortage of US political threads on A.net.

.... well, he is already campaigning.

Best regards
Thomas

727LOVER wrote:

I actually agree with this assessment/ If you go back since 1952, there has basically been a consistent pattern of people wanting to give an administration 8 years.

Incumbents have a huge advantage in any office.

But attempting to make predictions about 2020 is crazy.

727LOVER wrote:

A recession or at the very least, minimal growth, in late 2018 into most of 2019 could spell doom.

And when that happens, I'll have a stack of cash begging to be invested.

That being said, there's no need for a recession. Remember the claim about 4% growth? 2% growth isn't 4%. Launching a war or escalating the war on Afghanistan isn't "making America great again". Cutting social programs to boost defense or cut taxes for the rich isn't "looking out for the middle class".

BobPatterson wrote:

but I strongly suspect that Republicans will pay heavily in the 2018 mid-term elections

If Trump is indeed reelected (in every metric), I will bet that in 2022 the GOP will surely suffer big losses. New maps would come into play so some seats will be lost and new seats created, but also if his base sees that he has not delivered in 6 years, the House and Senate can easily flip...as it did with Obama and Bush (aka. 6 year itch). No gerrymander would protect lots of districts from flipping if the itch is great...we'll have a chance to gauge if that is so come 2018.

For Trump and Republicans to have any hope to retain Congress:
1. Democrats have to put up such weak challengers in swing districts that they deserve to lose. Naturally, safe D/R districts are excluded.
2. A terrorist attack (a rally-the-base scenario where suddenly people approve of anything Trump does)
3. The Trump Stock Market Bull needs to be given steroids and rush through. It's kinda stagnated and that is not exactly encouraging.
4. Unemployment (not the real one anyway) needs to drop below 3.5% (something not achieved since the 50s)
5. Prices need to come down and/or wages need to go up. No point in an "economic recovery" if that apple I bought today will be worth double next year, but my paycheck is still the same.

Trump has 4 years to deliver on his promises and then I think he will be out. Who really believes that he can deliver a "better" system of health care at "lower prices"? Especially after wanting to jerk almost a Trillion dollars out of health care to give the super rich a big tax break?

Of course there is a need to get through all of the investigations and he is doing a pretty bad job of that. Impeachment, while a long way off, is being discussed these days without any real surprise.

Ken777 wrote:

Impeachment, while a long way off, is being discussed these days without any real surprise.

Democrats should keep the I word quiet for now. Their main campaign promise should be that if they retake Congress, they'll definitely get to the bottom of the investigation. But to say that if they win they'll draw articles of impeachment will be seen as a witch hunt. It's definitely a tool in their arsenal but only to be paraded around when and if they have a majority and the investigation is yielding results that implicate Trump and company.

The main problem will be if GOP Senators decide to not convict. Trump survives, but for something that directly implicates him would mean that Republicans can suffer big even in Republican states. Trump may emerge in a "I was impeached but acquitted" mode which could help rally the base, but may not help him gain supporters. A personal affair (like Clinton's) is different (Clinton didn't use the office to have a relation with Lewinsky); colluding with a foreign power to win the election, using the office for personal gain, obstructing justice, and helping said foreign power is, though. Trump, the individual, can't do all that. Trump, the presidential candidate and president, has all the power.

Let's see if he makes it through his first term since he can barely make it 24 hours without a self inflicted mess

einsteinboricua wrote:

Democrats should keep the I word quiet for now.
Their main campaign promise should be that if they retake Congress, they'll definitely get to the bottom of the investigation.

Democrats are not the only ones talking about the potential of impeachment. You can be sure that there are dome lawyers in the GOP looking into it on the side as a protective measure and the media is more than a little aggressive in following leads. There are also those leaking some painful information because of their disgust with Trump.

I can't even guess how the '18 election will go. In 110 days Trump has totally changed the political world and he has another 620 or so days to go. I don't see that happening and I don't believe the GOP wants to see that happening either.

For sake of American women I hope he will be elected again.

I voted for Trump. It was basically a matter of who I felt I could trust more. I think it's way too early to say if he'll be elected in 2020. I think we'll have a real indication after the midterm elections. You already have some who say he should be impeached (but then again, there were those saying that right after he finished the oath of office). SO FAR, I am not overly encouraged with what I see just with domestic policies, and I'm talking about the flooding in the Carolinas. But even with that, I'm not ready to write him off, or even speculate who's going to run in 2020.

He's been in office less than four months, and doesn't even have a full cabinet. I'm willing to give him a chance, and yes...if Hillary had won, I'd be willing to give her a chance - not that we have much of a choice.

Marc

Re-elected?? I give him a year or two,then he is gone... one way or another. Why don´t bet a $100 on it and you will gett aprox. $101 back

No need to look at complicated political maps or percentage points of this or that.

Some stuff he promised he repeated 1000 times. If there is no big beautiful wall, I doubt he will even be a candidate. It's not like he's enjoying being president anyway.

seb146 wrote:

And that he has been threatening or firing people who do not agree with him is of no concern to you?

Expect a reply along the lines of "Clinton would have been no different with her email scandal".

einsteinboricua wrote:

seb146 wrote:

And that he has been threatening or firing people who do not agree with him is of no concern to you?

Expect a reply along the lines of "Clinton would have been no different with her email scandal".

The situation with Clinton as president is simple - unlike Trump Clinton knows how government works, both at the state and federal levels. First Lady in both Arkansas and DC, plus Senator. Compared to Clinton Trump is more than a Newbie - he's the Fool in the White House. Or, as the Russians say, the Useful Fool.

Maybe your comment should have been: "Trump would have been no different with his lack of experience scandal"

seb146 wrote:

Either he will be removed from office long before then or he will suspend the Constitution to make sure there is no other president after him.

Suspend the Constitution? How?

seb146 wrote:

...... the Russia investigation is going to end since Trump is firing everyone associated with it.

He can't fire any judges, nor anyone in the legislative branch. Nor can he fire "we the people".

He is being "investigated" daily. Without ceasing.

Get some popcorn. It's going to be a GREAT show. HUGE.

Too early to predict if he will get another term. Cuomo is laying the ground work and is a strong candidate. The mid terms will tell us a lot. Not to mention if the middle east or NK tests him how he handles it will also be a huge factor.

NIKV69 wrote:

The mid terms will tell us a lot.

I don't think so. Republicans swept the 2010 midterm in every aspect, yet Obama was reelected by a comfortable margin. It would take a wave even bigger than the Republican 2010 wave (to the point where even Southern states are swept along) for us to consider that Trump's reelection chances are doomed. But if the Democrats retake the House and/or the Senate, it's not gonna tell us much of anything except that people punished the GOP.

So many experts, so many predictions...

... such a terrible track record. Don't think we've forgotten the "92% Hillary" predictions.

Quick question: Does he really want to be re-elected? As I see him, he always wants to become something, not be something. By 2020 he`s probably bored by the whole circus and just wants to leave DC. And he will be 74 by then.

BartSimpson wrote:

Quick question: Does he really want to be re-elected? As I see him, he always wants to become something, not be something. By 2020 he`s probably bored by the whole circus and just wants to leave DC. And he will be 74 by then.

He doesn't want to be President now, it's obvious based on all the leaks of his (lack of) work ethic. However, his fragile little ego couldn't handle being labelled a quitter.

I sometimes can't tell if he really is a megalomaniac dictator wannabe with evil in his heart or just a cocky rich asshole who wants to stir the pot and not have any negative consequences for doing so. Whichever is more true, he is still entirely unfit for the office and a hazard for national security.

seb146 wrote:

BobPatterson wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Either he will be removed from office long before then or he will suspend the Constitution to make sure there is no other president after him.

Suspend the Constitution? How?

He will find a way. He has "great respect" for despots and dictators. He will find a way. And his base will simply say "oh, well... nothing to see here. He is president, so he can do what he wants." That is the messed up part.

BobPatterson wrote:

seb146 wrote:

...... the Russia investigation is going to end since Trump is firing everyone associated with it.

He can't fire any judges, nor anyone in the legislative branch. Nor can he fire "we the people".

He is being "investigated" daily. Without ceasing.

Get some popcorn. It's going to be a GREAT show. HUGE.

He can not be investigated if there is no one to investigate him. He fired everyone in opposition of him. What makes you think he won't stop? Especially, as has been pointed out, with his base. He does all these crazy and illegal things (two separate ideas) and his base just says "yeah, well... whatever. He is the president..."

So much for rational thinking. "He will find a way" is no answer. He has no power by which to suspend our Constitution.

He has not fired a fraction of 1% of those wanting and able to investigate him and his cronies. Just for starters, he cannot fire my Congressman or my two Senators. If he so much as attempts to fire investigators (other than figureheads) deep within the FBI, Justice Department and numerous other intelligence gathering agencies, he will be stopped by legal actions and he will be impeached.

einsteinboricua wrote:

I don't think so. Republicans swept the 2010 midterm in every aspect, yet Obama was reelected by a comfortable margin. It would take a wave even bigger than the Republican 2010 wave (to the point where even Southern states are swept along) for us to consider that Trump's reelection chances are doomed. But if the Democrats retake the House and/or the Senate, it's not gonna tell us much of anything except that people punished the GOP.

Only because Romney was horrible and made every mistake possible. Obama was beatable the GOP just couldn't close. If Trump gets health care right and doesn't have a foreign policy blunder she should cruise in 2020

seb146 wrote:

Word is getting out that Congress serves at the pleasure of the president

https://theintellectualist.co/gop-house ... president/

Two Republicans from the House said this. More baseless claims.

And that being critical is easy and wrong

http://www.npr.org/2017/05/13/528292489 ... nto-action

Except we heard nothing but criticism for eight years and was told how patriotic that was.

I'm not smart enough to unravel your thinking.

What are you trying to say with respect to anything I have posted?

BobPatterson wrote:

I won't predict in terms of percentage of chances, but I strongly suspect that Republicans will pay heavily in the 2018 mid-term elections, and that President Trump is likely to be impeached and found guilty (or to have resigned) prior to the 2020 presidential election.

The GOP will retain control of both houses because of the three g's. God, guns and gays.

NIKV69 wrote:

Only because Romney was horrible and made every mistake possible. Obama was beatable the GOP just couldn't close. If Trump gets health care right and doesn't have a foreign policy blunder she should cruise in 2020

The GOP health care plan is a disaster of epic proportions. Not that it matter though.

opethfan wrote:

So many experts, so many predictions...

... such a terrible track record. Don't think we've forgotten the "92% Hillary" predictions.

... oh, another one that needs to get his head in statistics book and maybe, just maybe realize that 92% chance of one side winning, means there is an 8% chance of the other side winning and 8% chances happen all the time. Most polls stayed within their stated margin of error and got the popular vote right.

But of course Trumps fan club doesn´t want to hear that, because it means that all the polls making him the worst president of all times can also be expected to be right within the margin of error.

best regards
Thomas

Ladbrokes and Paddy Power (UK Bookmakers) are offering odds on Mr. Trump being impeached and leaving office in 2017. Maybe they will be off by a year.

http://www.casinonewsdaily.com/2017/03/ ... ment-odds/

seb146 wrote:

He is surrounding himself with people who stroke his ego and simply say "yes." He tells his followers that opposing him is bad and wrong. He is going insane. And the republic will pay the price.

Or that fail to stop him from giving code word material to the Russians that isn´t his to reveal. And to think that the investigations into the NSA affair here is hampered by the USA being afraid of anything leaking from top secret documents makes this just hilarious.

best regards
Thomas

pvjin wrote:

For sake of American women I hope he will be elected again.

Why for the sake of only American women? Did I miss a proposed policy by Mr. Trump that would make life better for the opposite sex? His law that allow states to de-fund Planned Parenthood is anything but "for the sake of American women".

To the OP: Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter and George H. W. Bush were not reelected. Anything could happen, and if the Democrats manage to muster a strong candidate and if Donald Trump at the same time, fails to deliver, then I wouldn't hold my breath for a reelection.

fallap wrote:

Why for the sake of only American women? Did I miss a proposed policy by Mr. Trump that would make life better for the opposite sex? His law that allow states to de-fund Planned Parenthood is anything but "for the sake of American women".

Mainly because at least here in Europe liberal policies seem to impact women the most. Here in Finland recorded rapes committed by foreign nationals increased by 41.9% in 2016 compared to 2015, and sexual harassment by 153,5%, all thanks to bunch of liberal fools who can't understand the impact of cultural differences. According to the Finnish police the increase is largely explained by actions of Iraqi "refugees", many of whom are now having their asylum applications rejected and thus have no reason to obey the Finnish law anymore.

Thus Trump is doing a favour to all American women by doing his best to restrict migration from certain parts of the world.

fallap wrote:

pvjin wrote:

For sake of American women I hope he will be elected again.

Why for the sake of only American women? Did I miss a proposed policy by Mr. Trump that would make life better for the opposite sex? His law that allow states to de-fund Planned Parenthood is anything but "for the sake of American women".

Well, they just made it legal to deny women coverage that have been raped, because being raped is now a preexisting condition (again).

How is that for doing something for the opposite sex?

Best regards
Thomas

pvjin wrote:

According to the Finnish police the increase is largely explained by actions of Iraqi "refugees", many of whom are now having their asylum applications rejected and thus have no reason to obey the Finnish law anymore.

Are you suggesting that a rapist is dissuaded from raping merely by granting him asylum?

Seems to me that kind of thinking should earn one space in an asylum of some sort.

pvjin wrote:

Thus Trump is doing a favour to all American women by doing his best to restrict migration from certain parts of the world.

Here's the thing, Americans have more to fear from their fellow Americans than immigrants.

WarRI1 wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

They are having a slow start for sure on that slogan.

Actually, that's the front of a t-shirt that's selling well over at InfoWars.com

So now that three days have passed since this thread was posted what do we think of his chances in 2018?

Edit: oops, I meant 2020 of course

treetreeseven wrote:

So now that three days have passed since this thread was posted what do we think of his chances in 2018?

Edit: oops, I meant 2020 of course

See post # 37 for odds given by UK bookies.