Rubin/WaPo: Trump's numbers should change the electability discussion

[BeyondGeography]

Trump may be a lot more vulnerable than you think

President Trump may have had the worst fortnight of his presidency. His most cringe-worthy moments came during his horrific visits to El Paso and Dayton, but his most revealing episodes came this week with his multiple outbursts and head-spinning reversals. He has been at his emotionally and mentally shakiest, and perhaps a growing share of Americans simply cannot ignore it.

The Aug. 15-19 Associated Press/NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that just 36 percent of Americans approve of how Trump is doing his job, and 62 percent disapprove. He’s even in negative territory on the economy (46 percent approve, 51 percent do not), and draws at least 60 percent disapproval on health care, immigration, guns and foreign policy.

With similar findings, the latest Monmouth University poll tells us: “Trump’s overall job rating stands at 40% approve and 53% disapprove, which is similar to his 41% to 50% rating in June. ... The usual demographic clefts remain present — men are divided on the president’s job performance (49% approve and 43% disapprove) while women are decidedly negative (31% approve and 62% disapprove). White Americans without a college degree tend to approve of Trump (55% approve and 37% disapprove), while the reverse is true among white college graduates (38% approve and 57% disapprove).”

...Trump’s atrocious numbers should also inform Democrats’ decision about who is “electable.” The answer might be “anybody but Trump.” And while plenty of Democrats want to take no chances and go with the perceived “safe” candidate, the uptick in suburban women’s disapproval of Trump and their votes in the midterms might shift the definition of “electable.” The question should not necessarily be who is going to win white voters in the Upper Midwest, but rather who is going to win women everywhere. Harboring a karmic dream of a woman nominee ousting Trump, these are among the most engaged and enthusiastic voters. Perhaps the most electable presidential nominee, like so many of those elected Democrats in 2018, would be a woman with strong appeal to suburban women, college-educated voters, nonwhites and younger voters. As a reminder, three of the 10 candidates to qualify for the third debate are women.

More at https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/08/23/trump-may-be-lot-more-vulnerable-than-you-think/

[honest.abe]

1. Perhaps but we can't risk it. Who knows what election day shenanigans are coming.

We need our very best top candidate to counter the cheating and manipulations the GOP, Russia and Trump are planning.

[abqtommy]

2. I agree! Let's protect and secure our voting process as the first step

in beating tRUMP and his corrupt reTHUGS.

[uponit7771]

3. +1, doesn't matter if Trump is at 10% approval he'll win by cheating, he already said he would

[Cryptoad]

6. He has also stated ,,,

that he will not step down if not elected. If that thought doesn't ruin ur weekend , nuttin will!

[SCVDem]

16. When the oath is given to a new president,

Dump is a citizen with no high level access to the White House.

He will be escorted out like a tourist who lost their group.

Look at him and his cabinet. Do you think anyone of them will fight the Secret Service?

Leave with dignity or go viral, whining and kicking while he is dragged out like the garbage him and his family are!

Meanwhile the new POTUS will immediately embark on a repair bridges tour while they burn and rebuild the WH!

[The Mouth]

25. Yep

Once the E.C. speaks, and the swearing in happens, that's it. Anyone disagreeing with that is guilty of Treason and can be considered an enemy of the state and hunted down like a terrorist, as far as I am concerned. nincompoops like the Tea Partiers and 'birthers' who say 'not my president' need to be disenfranchised and deported.

[DownriverDem]

21. Yes we do

That's why Biden running with a strong, progressive, Dem woman (Harris?) would be a formidable ticket. We have never had a woman VP. She would be in a national position to take over if needed. Americans are slow to support women leaders and a woman VP would help to show that women can do it.

[delisen]

28. We already know women can do it.

[delisen]

29. Can't risk what?

[honest.abe]

30. "The answer might be anybody but Trump."

Not sure I agree with that. We need the candidate who matches up best against him especially in the battleground states.

[NNadir]

4. The electability argument consisting of soothsaying...

...is silly in any case.

Neither Obama nor Trump were seen as electable at this point in their campaigns.

This is the time to follow your heart, not pundit's soothsaying.

[honest.abe]

5. Well what is "silly" is comparing Obama 2008 and Trump 2016 to our current situation.

IMHO.

[NNadir]

7. I am referring to the issue of electability and...

...obviously not to the candidates themselves.

Obama was considered historic because of his race in the race. It also established that an academic could accede to the Presidency and make an outstanding President.

The popular idea that we'd become a post racial society, often put out by pundits, has been put to rest by an openly racist in the White House, if only to sell newspapers, but with clearly unanticipated results.

Personally, I actually believed our country could never again be led by a rabid racist after Obama.

I was proved wrong. So much for soothsaying.

[honest.abe]

8. I too thought we were in a post racial society with Obama winning in 2008 and 12.

And as you said we were proved very wrong. But my point is that we cant look back on previous elections to predict anything. We are in uncharted waters here with a lunatic in the WH. I think many voters in the Democratic Party are so freaked out by Trump they simply want the best/safest candidate to win and have already made up their mind who that is. We simply dont have the luxury to fight among ourselves over policy details when there is a monster in the house.

[NNadir]

9. I disagree.

My preferred candidate is big on policy, and I will plainly confess that I suspect that there are many policies I'm sure she has outlined with which I disagree.

I'm supporting her mind and her personality as informed by her personal history not her policies as announced.

What is important in these extraordinary times is the ability to defend and articulate ideas, not for the purpose of getting elected but for the purpose of saving our country after being elected.

It has been America's good fortune to be lead by Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt after disastrous Presidencies, but we have never before had an insane President.

We clearly need this fortune again. Both Lincoln and Roosevelt were highly controversial in their own times.

This is not a time for timidity, for cowering in fear of the nutcase with a gun. We need some courage to disarm this mad terrorist.

Let's test our candidates and ourselves.

[honest.abe]

13. I like this line..

"What is important in these extraordinary times is the ability to defend and articulate ideas, not for the purpose of getting elected but for the purpose of saving our country after being elected."

My concern is that if we do too much "defending and articulating" that we lose focus of winning.

[Andy823]

12. So who exactly do you support

You have a Harris picture, but what you talk about seems to hint you are for Biden, who some here claim is the 'only" chance we have to win against trump, which is a false claim by the way.

[honest.abe]

15. I still think Harris is our best candidate but simply hasn't got traction for whatever reason.

At this point I would be happy if she was VP to Biden which is why I have her as my preferred candidate.

[TwilightZone]

10. We should avoid the mistake of conflating approval with voter intent.

The two are not interchangeable.

Plenty of people who disapproved of Trump voted for him in 2016.

[ancianita]

11. The 2020 electability issue is moot if Electoral College is faithless toward the popular vote. it's

a kind of rigging by the founders that outright favors the original corporate project mission over any democratic "experiment."

No matter how perfect our nominee is for this historical moment, the EC has tended to be faithless toward Republicans over Democrats, and its shadow darkens prospects.

[BeyondGeography]

14. Does this have to come up in every thread about the election?

What is the point, the quality of the nominee doesn’t matter because, Russia? For all their evil genius we only lost by 77k very attainable votes last time. Plus the forces of darkness apparently took a holiday in the midterms. As for the supposedly insurmountable EC, Obama overcame it twice. Maybe the lesson is aim as high as you can when you choose a candidate. Enough with the helplessness either way please.

[ancianita]

26. I'm here every day and haven't seen it once, just when the news broke. Nevermind every thread.

No one, least of all me, says the quality of any candidate doesn't matter because ...

I'm usually the one getting alerted for multiple-linked effort posts that defend Democratic candidates that I haven't even committed to for the primaries.

You don't have to interpret my post as helplessness. If I feel helpless, I say it.

The EC is a factor. Moreso than usual in the current global shift to the right.

If you don't like that pointed out, ignore the post.

Sorry for your dislike of the point; think of it as just another opinion.

[oasis]

17. Trump's Tongue Triggers Titanic Tumble.

[kozar]

18. J Rubin, R Wilson, N Wallace,,,,

and so on,among others. All admitted R's who we tend to now look at as heroes. I still tend to look at all R's as liars,,have any of these "saviors" changed their designation to Democrat? Until then,, I look at articles like this as just another Rethug,trying to cash in on wha they think the public wants to hear.

Koz

[BeyondGeography]

19. Rubin has offered something for everyone lately

She has been very bullish on Biden’s poll numbers and (very unwisely IMO) skewered Warren for her ancestry apology the other day. She makes a basic point about the data here that makes sense.

Wilson thinks we’re nuts to choose anyone from the left.

[kozar]

20. she is still a registered R

and I feel because of that we are giving her too much credit.


Koz

[BeyondGeography]

22. The data is not registered R

Women are twice as likely as men to disapprove of Trump, they helped carry the midterms so an argument can be made to nominate one if a suitable option exists and we have three good ones.

[kozar]

23. I understand your point,

My point would be,, so no Rethugs have ever spread skewed data numbers? I am not trying to argue,,just pointing out who is credited with posting this data and maybe we need to question that. Hope you and yours are well BG.

Koz

[BeyondGeography]

24. Back atcha...Cheers

[Blue Owl]

27. And hopefully the selectability issue

Seeing as how he didn't really win without rigging

[questionseverything]

31. we have to win by so much that if they try and rig the numbers..it shows

[Garrett78]

32. Simply removing Clinton from the equation gives us great odds.

Clinton was victimized by 25 years of ruthless attacks. And many were willing to abstain or give Trump a shot. In addition to all of the deplorables who wouldn't vote Dem no matter what.