CNN Poll: Over Half of Americans Believe Trump Will Win in 2020

[DonViejo]

By Morgan Phillips June 5th, 2019, 1:50 pm

Over half of Americans think Donald Trump will win re-election in 2020 according to a CNN poll conducted by research firm SSRS, despite growing discussions of impeachment proceedings.

Out of over 1,000 respondents, 54% say they believe Trump will win the 2020 election, while 41% believe he will lose. In a December 2018 poll only 49% of Americans believed he would win re-election.

The shift has come mostly from anti-Trumpers who have taken a more pessimistic view- in December, 81% of those who do not approve of Donald Trump believed he would lose. Today, only 67% of this demographic believes he’ll lose.

A poll taken at the same point during Obama’s first term (and just after the death of Osama Bin Laden) showed that only 50% at that time believed Obama would win re-election.

more
https://www.mediaite.com/trump/cnn-poll-over-half-of-americans-believe-trump-will-win-in-2020/

[unblock]

1. this is the non-indictment, non-impeachment effect.

there's still time on the impeachment effort, well on both actually, time will tell....

[gldstwmn]

9. Exactly. This is not

good news for us.

[Tipperary]

19. This.

And it has to change.

[uponit7771]

59. +1

[Locutusofborg]

2. That's the power of incumbency for you.

[customerserviceguy]

57. It is a powerful force

And Trump won without it in 2016. This is why we have to have the very best candidate to go up against him next year.

[ScratchCat]

3. No

Half the 1,000 people they asked think this. Half of America doesn't.

God, I'm tired of this bullshit from the MSM.

[Butterflylady]

32. They're trying to keep it a horse race

They are going bulls**t where ever they can just to keep the ratings high so they keep the advertising dollars flowing in to their pockets. So your right over half of America doesn't.

[forgotmylogin]

53. Over half of Americans thought Hillary would win in 2016. (n/t)

[Guilded Lilly]

39. Exactly. Polls with "all Americans" in their claims are ...baloney.

[Fullduplexxx]

4. Incumbents usually do win

[LiberalFighter]

30. But they haven't always won.

Ford lost
Carter lost
Bush I lost

During my voting life 3 out of 7 Presidents lost. Beat DT and it will be 4 out of 8.

I didn't include Nixon because it wasn't until his 2nd term I could vote and couldn't run again.

[Butterflylady]

34. Only incumbents that do a decent job

Dotard doesn't even come close. Wait till next year when the primaries start and folks pay attention. Our candidates will make him look like the moron that he is.

[Fullduplexxx]

37. G w bush

[Celerity]

46. +10000

IF the economy (at lest the perception that it is fine or even strong, which is rot) holds, IF we cock-up even a basic impeachment enquiry (NOT even talking about actual impeachment) as thus look feckless and calculating, IF the border apprehension numbers continue to increase (they are at a 13 year high now, and tracking to over 3 million between now and November 2020) thus feeding into the Trumpian big lie and racist push for xenophobia and a wall, IF the systemic RW voter suppression methodology (and foreign interference) is not sorted, and IF we nominate a weakened, damaged candidate who has a base-depressing (turn-out wise) effect, I rate Trump as 55-60% likely to be re-elected.

[misanthrope]

61. If the Katrina debacle had happened one year earlier

Bush would have lost re-election.

But funny thing about 2004, Florida was strafed by four powerful hurricanes -- Charley, Frances, Ivan, Jeanne -- from Aug. 13 to Sept. 26 and FEMA did a bang-up job with all of it. There were little to none of the problems seen just a year later.

Was it because the POTUS' brother was governor, because Florida had delivered the 2000 election to GWB, because it was a presidential election year in an expected tight race?

Funny how all that competence and concern disappeared in 12 months' time when one of the few Democratic cities in the Deep South was in dire straits.

[qazplm135]

52. Bush?

Reagan? Bush after Reagan?

No, most incumbents get re-elected. It's not automatic, and Trump is particularly bad, then again he inexplicably thanks to Obama has a very strong economy with historically low unemployment. Lot of winds are blowing against each other.

[Shell_Seas]

5. This is depressing.

[BeckyDem]

6. Gee, MAYBE if M$M reported more honestly about the "great" economy, his numbers would poll

lower. Maybe if they spoke non stop about his pro-pollution stances and FRINGE climate change beliefs, his numbers would be lower.

Just sayin.

[guillaumeb]

8. Good luck with that wish.

The US corporate media is concerned with ratings and profits. Nothing else.

[NewJeffCT]

31. The media normally reports the unemployment rates, GDP growth,

job creation and the stock market. Anything more than that is too complex for many.

1) unemployment rate is low
2) GDP growth has been solid
3) job creation has been okay
4) and the stock market has been up

As Dick Cheney said years back, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter" - people look at the huge annual budget deficit, mounting long term debt and increasing trade deficits and don't quite understand - $2 trillion deficit is so big of a number that it's really hard to comprehend.

People gasp that Avengers Endgame has made $2.7 billion at the box office because they have a small concept that it's 1,000 times bigger than the average salary of a football player in the NFL. However, the annual deficit is spiraling towards $2 trillion this year and that's another 750x bigger than what Avengers Endgame has made to date, or 750,000 NFL players.

[BeckyDem]

50. They distort the meaning because they believe their audience is too stupid?

I'm not sure what you're saying.

It’s No Accident Americans Are Still Broke in a Booming Economy
A new study shows exactly how badly you're getting screwed, and why.
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ev8gyz/its-no-accident-americans-are-still-broke-in-a-booming-economy

CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, pundits don't spend time parroting Robert Reich, if they did, Trump's numbers would be lower. Reich doesn't get a lot of time to spread his knowledge about the economy.

The Truth About Trump’s Economy

I keep hearing that although Trump may be a scoundrel or worse, he’s done a great job for the economy.

Baloney. Yes, the stock market is great, but 84 percent of it is owned by the richest 10 percent of Americans
https://robertreich.org/post/179595944410

[NewJeffCT]

54. No, they're not distorting the meaning

They're numbers - unemployment was low the last few years under Obama and gotten lower under Trump. Did the numbers suddenly become suspect under Trump? No - he's been lucky to have inherited an economy that was moving in the right direction and his policies will have long-term consequences that aren't showing up yet.

The GDP is growing because we're borrowing more than we spend by $2 trillion this fiscal year.

Job creation has been decent, but nothing special, but Trump drives the narrative saying it's great and the media runs with it...


The article from vice points out that a lot of workers have been left behind over the course of decades - so, while Trump has made the problems worse, it's not visibly all that much worse than it was 5-10-15 years ago. Again, as above, the worst consequences are going to be felt in the longer-term as these workers lose health benefits, have lower wages and then will have less gutted Social Security and Medicare benefits to fall back on in the future.

And, you will need to explain your "bad economy" position to 90% of the Democratic pundits out there - almost every time I turn on the TV and there is a Democrat and Trumpster debating, it goes like this:

Trumpster talking head: "Democrats are making up scandals to distract from the great economy!"
Democrat: "Yes, the economy is doing well, but..."

and, nobody hears anything past the "but..." - Democrats have not been able to get in front of the narrative on the economy and have let Trump write the story on the economy.

[BeckyDem]

55. They're not giving context.

M$M is terrible, Dem pundits included. Pundits helped him win, unwilling accomplices or not, they own the ratings war they ran during 2016. They're not much better now.

[NewJeffCT]

65. The media hasn't been giving context since before Reagan

you deal with what you have and then try to effect change once you win.

The economy under George HW Bush was gaining 150,000 jobs/month, which is the minimum needed with a growing population to accommodate new people entering the workforce (estimates say 150,000 to 175,000/month). Bill Clinton and his surrogates were able to bash Bush Sr on the economy because it was essentially zero job growth. Nothing beyond accommodating the population growth.

Now, under Trump, job creation that is only slightly better than George HW Bush (and worse than the last 4-5 years under Obama) is being touted as being awesome and the sign of a great economy, despite the US have nearly 75 million more people in it than it did in 1992 (250 million then, 325 million now) - why is it being touted as so good? Because Trump is driving the narrative. So, essentially a tiny bit better than zero job growth is now sold as great.

[BeckyDem]

68. Consolidation of media has only grown worse too.

Enjoyed the chat, thank you, NewJeffCT.

[dameatball]

7. My son-in-law has been "guaranteeing it" for months. Glad I don't see him much.

[BlueStater]

10. It could be that this fucker's existence in general puts everyone in a pessimistic mood.

I certainly know that's the case for me at least. He's a despicable vacuum that sucks up all hope.

[The River]

11. Bullsh*t

more self serving bullshit from a
Corporate News Network

[USALiberal]

21. SSRS was the pollster, not CNN. A- rated by Nate Silver! Nt

[ego_nation]

12. If Trump wins again, the Presidency is effectively meaningless.

If Trump is qualified, anyone and everyone is qualified. We might as well put names in a fish bowl and pick one. Would save a lot of time and money.

[Locutusofborg]

13. Expecting that the incumbent will wn

Is not the same thing as voting for the incumbent.

[former9thward]

45. It isn't but people like to vote for a winner.

Incumbents usually get about 10% more votes than the did the first time around. Yes you find exceptions. Carter in 1980. Bush in 1992. But in those years there were highly unusual events going on. Carter had the never ending Iran hostages and Bush had Perot running as an indie and split Bush's normal voters.

[Turin_C3PO]

48. Trump as President IS a highly unusual event.

Lol. I think if Democrats turn out like they did in 2018 and Trump‘s approval stays under 45%, then he’ll have a tough time getting re-elected.

[G_j]

14. a more pessimistic view?

why? pray tell!

[Bengus81]

15. Boy...bet all of a sudden CNN won't be Trump's FAKE NEWS whipping boy..........

For a few days.

[triron]

16. When I briefly switch to CNN, seems they are doing distortions to normalize this traitorous monster.

I am beyond bewilderment.

[llmart]

17. Democrats and Du'ers who poo-poo this are not being realistic.

If you think this can't happen, you are kidding yourself about the American public. What we read, talk about and discuss on DU is not what most Americans think or do.

[Tipperary]

20. Agree.

I have already seen posters here talk about this candidate or that being a done-deal. Very stupid to think that way.

I remember those who were afraid he would win the first time. They were shouted down as concern trolls. I was afraid he would win too, but kept my views to myself. I still remember several posters gleefully exclaiming how they planned to rub Hillary’s win into the faces of rump supporters. Never good to count your chickens before they hatch.

[RelativelyJones]

27. +1000

[Chin music]

28. WTF? RUSSIA installed this guy. Why is that always ignored in these 'polls'?. Buncha shit.

Let's not all fall for the "Half of all voters" horse race bull crap. Most voters can't stand him, and russia cheated on his behalf. There hasn't been a bigger loon in office in my lifetime, and , that's saying something.
Hand wringing and letting the MSM dictate the vote isn't a good look.
CNN can stick it where the sun don't shine. Never is there a (+-) that involves russian interference.
EVEN MUELLER SAID DEFINITIVELY, 'the russians intervened on dons behalf, MAJORLY."
Why is that ALWAYS just forgotten? CNN acts like "All things being equal...trump is the incumbent, so he has a good chance of being re elected."
DO STORIES ON RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE, AND VOTING SECURITY CNN.

[former9thward]

47. Mueller did not say what you said he did.

In fact in the indictments of the Russians he said they did not work with any Americans and he said no votes were changed.

[NewJeffCT]

33. that's how Trump keeps "winning"

15 Republican candidates underestimated him and didn't attack him in the primaries until it was too late.

After her initial speech attacking Trump, she kind of took the "don't interrupt your opponent when he's making a mistake" strategy, and he kept making them.

Also remember, that during the campaign he got upwards of $5 billion in free media coverage. Clinton's "free" media coverage time paled in comparison, and it was almost all focused on her emails and the DNC emails. Do you think the media is going to suddenly stop covering Trump - they're addicted. Every day is a possible new train wreck, or multiple train wrecks.

[sarisataka]

18. As it stands today

I would agree. I am hearing too many things that were said in 2017 being repeated in 2019

[Thekaspervote]

22. Okay... then why do his state by state polls keep sinking

This is an older post.. couldn’t find one including all the states

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210340873

Here’s one also by morning consult, you can also choose polls by state

https://morningconsult.com/tracking-trump/

[Turin_C3PO]

23. I certainly believe he could win.

But I think if Democrats turn out and we have the right nominee that his chances aren’t good.

[rockfordfile]

24. This is all propaganda. The House needs to continue to investigate.

[tgards79]

25. We're missing the point here

No one is going to give this election to the Dems. We have to work for it. We have to work for ANY candidate we nominate, whether we like that candidate or not, Biden or Bernie, Kamala or Pete, or whomever. I don't care if it is Andrew Yang. I'm going to work my ass off for the Democratic candidate to beat Trump.

[marylandblue]

26. Better to fight as if you are 7 points down and 20 yards to go

than to assume you will win easily.

[tgards79]

29. Yessss!!!!!!!

[YOHABLO]

35. Who did CNN poll? It certainly wasn't me. Anyone else get polled? Hmm like to know.

[DonViejo]

40. Your answer is in the first sentence of the OP...

then follow the link to CNN, also in the first sentence

[Captain Stern]

36. That's not surprising at all.

Here are the current betting odds on who will win the Presidency.

Donald Trump +110
Joe Biden +450
Bernie Sanders +700
Kamala Harris +1200
Pete Buttgieg +1200
Elizabeth Warren +2000
Andrew Yang +2200
Beto O’Rourke +3000
Tulsi Gabbard +3300
Amy Klobuchar +7000
Cory Booker +5500
Mike Pence +7500
Kirsten Gillibrand +8000
Nikki Haley +10000
John Hickenlooper +10000
John Kasich +10000
Julian Castro +10000
Howard Schultz +10000
Andrew Cuomo +15000
Ted Cruz +15000

Those are the current betting odds for individuals. That means that if you were to bet $100 right now on trump to win the election, you would get $110 if he won (and you would keep the $100 that you bet) If you were to bet on Joe Biden to win, you would keep your $100, and get $450.

The odds by party are:

Democratic Party -125
Republican Party -105

That's good news for us, because that it means that right now, you'd have to bet more on the nameless Democratic candidate to win to get $100 than you would have to bet on the nameless republican candidate....but it's still close.

It's still early, and things can change fast.

But anyone that thinks this is going to be an easy election, and that it's ours to lose, hasn't been paying attention. There's a very good chance trump wins in 2020.

[nini]

38. Define 'WIN'

If people think suspicious things will happen that makes more sense.

[doc03]

41. As long as the economy doesn't crash they may be right nt

[NightWatcher]

42. Well, he hasn't been impeached, so maybe he isn't doing anything wrong...

Is the reason why they need to impeach or prepare for a dynasty of trump spawn.

He cheats, has cheated, and WILL CHEAT AGAIN!!! Why is this so hard for the Dems to understand. If he is around on Election Day in 2020, he will hold the office for 4 more years.

[treestar]

43. Meh, way too early

[spanone]

44. Horseshit.

If anything that should get every person with a functioning brain to the polls

[EffieBlack]

49. A poll 17 months before an election is practically meaningless

There will be a Democratic primary campaign, Democratic primaries, a Democratic nominee ad a general election campaign between now and then.

A poll of "all Americans" in June 2019 means nothing to me.

[Doreen]

51. He will never WIN.

He did not WIN last time either. He got in by cheating and if he gets in again it will be by cheating again. If he gets in again we are going to be screwed.

[bdamomma]

56. Kiss the country good bye

if that happens. We will continue to be isolated from our allies the UK has already said it, we cannot be trusted.

Also did you hear from Rachel that tRump wants to change the 4th of July to a salute to America. Shows how he doesn't give a shit about how America gained independence, he clearly wants to take away.

How much more will he take away from us???

[ecstatic]

58. Good. Let the trumpers think he has it in the bag.

I'm dragging my people out to vote, rain, sleet, or snow!

[lunatica]

60. That's one of the stupidest comments I've heard

They act like their sample polling of a few people is a reflection of all Americans, Jesus!

[Norbert]

62. After the Persian Golf War George H W Bush was supposed to win a second term easily

How did that work out?

We have 17 months to go. ADP employment figures are sub par. Gold is trading at prices not seen in many years. We are due an economic downturn as we are near that part of the cycle. If we get another great recession, or worse, the idiot won't be able to carry inhabitance of the trump towers much less the EC.

[Vinca]

63. Of course half of those who believe he will win also believe the election will be stolen for him.

And there's a very good chance that will happen.

[Liberal In Texas]

64. All of the TV people want a horse race. It's ratings, man.

They want a horse race in the Dem primary and then the general. And they will skew coverage to make it so.

[NewJeffCT]

66. In 1991

I'm guessing 80% to 90% of Americans thought George HW Bush would win. Weren't the Democratic candidates for president called "The Seven Dwarves" ?

How did that turn out?

In 1999, how many thought Al Gore would win the election in 2000? I'm guessing a majority.

[sarabelle]

67. If only 50% believed that Obama would be re-elected after the death of Osama-bin Laden,

this tells you a lot about who was covered in this poll.

Don't worry. Blacks will be out in force to vote this time.