Born to Run the Numbers on the question triggered by Biden's entry... will 2020 be a re-enactment of 2016, when an outsider (Sanders) and an establishment candidate (then Clinton) pulled the party apart and created the opening Trump needed to win? If we see it coming, what can we do about it?

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-joes-in-now-how-can-dems-avoid.html

Excerpts: "A few days back, Barack Obama spoke about the danger of rigid philosophical positions and extremist views in the progressive space. He issued a clear warning to the Democratic Party: the danger of ideological litmus tests is that they alienate Democrat from Democrat, and can create the sliver of an opening that is all Donald Trump will need to be re-elected... His message was a warning that the growing rift between ideologically-fixed progressives and centrist pragmatists could rip the party asunder, much as the Tea Party did to the Republican Party, turning the once-proud GOP into a soulless swamp of spineless suck-ups, sycophants, and slime. We have met the enemy, Obama was saying, and he or she may be us. Donald Trump may not be able to beat the Democrats, but internecine warfare could...
"Add to the toxic soup one final dollop of unsavory reality: the younger of these two guys was the one born eleven months after Pearl Harbor. The two front-runners for the Democratic Presidential nomination for most profound election of our lifetime are two aging white guys who each now lead the opposite ends of the ideological split that is rending the Democratic Party. It is a formula for disaster. But if we can see it so much more clearly this time – and so far in advance – can we not take steps to avoid the type of bitter alienation that costs the party the votes it will need to beat Trump?"

Born To Run The Numbers on why the House should initiate the impeachment of Donald Trump now:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-real-reason-to-impeach-donald.html

Excerpts: "All the savvy strategists like Nancy Pelosi think that impeaching Donald Trump is a bad political move. Sure, they say, you could probably pass the motion to impeach Trump in the House, but all that does is trigger a trial in the Senate to determine whether Trump is removed from office. And there, the shrewd pols opine, you will never get seventeen Republicans to vote against Trump... it is just a big waste of time and effort, and in the end it will boomerang and badly damage the Democrats... Trump will scream that he has been vindicated, exonerated, .... impeachment will only serve to damage the chances for the Democrats to win the White House in 2020, as they will look like they are obsessively trying to take Trump down. Just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton ended up damaging the Republicans, so too the Democrats will be the only ones hurt by trying to impeach Trump. Right?"
"There they are, folks... the smoking guns you’ve been asking for. Corroborated testimony from reliable witnesses that Trump made repeated attempts with conscious intent to hinder, thwart, inhibit, and undermine the Mueller investigation, by trying to fire the Special Prosecutor himself, witness tampering, and urging subordinates to lie to the Special Counsel. Trump obstructed justice..."
"Which brings us to the essential issue of the day: if Congressional Democrats are confronted with essentially irrefutable evidence that the President of the United States committed a “high crime or misdemeanor,” do they even have the option to ignore it?"
"Ok, Nancy, let’s play this game on your terms. Allow me to challenge your essential premise: is your approach really all that savvy politically? You seem convinced that if the Senate fails to convict Donald Trump, it will cause a backlash of shame and embarrassment for the Democrats just as the 2020 election nears.Here’s a different take."

Born To Run The Numbers on why the House should initiate the impeachment of Donald Trump now:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-real-reason-to-impeach-donald.html

Excerpts: "All the savvy strategists like Nancy Pelosi think that impeaching Donald Trump is a bad political move. Sure, they say, you could probably pass the motion to impeach Trump in the House, but all that does is trigger a trial in the Senate to determine whether Trump is removed from office. And there, the shrewd pols opine, you will never get seventeen Republicans to vote against Trump... it is just a big waste of time and effort, and in the end it will boomerang and badly damage the Democrats... Trump will scream that he has been vindicated, exonerated, .... impeachment will only serve to damage the chances for the Democrats to win the White House in 2020, as they will look like they are obsessively trying to take Trump down. Just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton ended up damaging the Republicans, so too the Democrats will be the only ones hurt by trying to impeach Trump. Right?"
"There they are, folks... the smoking guns you’ve been asking for. Corroborated testimony from reliable witnesses that Trump made repeated attempts with conscious intent to hinder, thwart, inhibit, and undermine the Mueller investigation, by trying to fire the Special Prosecutor himself, witness tampering, and urging subordinates to lie to the Special Counsel. Trump obstructed justice..."
"Which brings us to the essential issue of the day: if Congressional Democrats are confronted with essentially irrefutable evidence that the President of the United States committed a “high crime or misdemeanor,” do they even have the option to ignore it?"
"Ok, Nancy, let’s play this game on your terms. Allow me to challenge your essential premise: is your approach really all that savvy politically? You seem convinced that if the Senate fails to convict Donald Trump, it will cause a backlash of shame and embarrassment for the Democrats just as the 2020 election nears.Here’s a different take."

Born to Run the Numbers' newest installment of their "2020 Vision" series, summarizing the past month's key developments, changes in polling data, and overall trends in the race for the White House:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-2020-vision-biden-surviving-and.html

Excerpts: "The month was dominated by a gut-check for Biden and the rise of Buttigieg. Biden became embroiled in controversy when a Nevada assemblywomen, Lucy Flores, accused him of inappropriate physical contact with her when he was campaigning in 2014. Video confirmed Biden’s traditional use of an old school, touchy-feely brand of retail politics. Biden was slow to respond, did not get it “right” off the bat, and was clearly reeling from the charges...There is little question that Biden was hurt by the issue, since, at the very least, it hit him in his biggest area of vulnerability, that he is old and out of touch with today’s values...
"Pete Buttigieg, quite simply, has broken through. And while he has a fascinating resume, it is not the resume that is causing the fuss. It is the man himself, how he speaks, his common-sense, straightforward take on the issues, his personal appeal, that is driving the “Mayor Pete” wave...Buttigieg made his formal announcement this past Sunday, and the reaction has been astonishing. The talk is of JFK and Obama, two previous winners who ran, respectively, on “the torch has passed to a new generation” and “hope and change” messaging.
"Buttigieg has jumped into Tier 2, leaping from 0% to 11% in Iowa, and from 0% to 3% nationally. No other candidates showed any similar movement up or down. Amy Klobuchar fell from Tier 2 to Tier 3, her candidacy sinking under the weight of negative press on how she treats her Senate staff, and her moderate message that may be well off the party’s lefty tendencies. Kristen Gillibrand has yet to make a mark..."

Born To Run The Numbers provides perspective on the Pete Buttigieg phenomenon by noting the similarities between 1976 and 2020.

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-pete-buttigieg-jimmy-carter-redux.html

Excerpts:
"A Republican administration is reeling from the stench of unprecedented scandal. The incumbent Republican President is tarnished, widely unpopular, and considered such a buffoon that he is constantly ridiculed and lampooned by late night comedians. Democrats feel they have a clear shot to take back the White House, and a full seventeen candidates announce campaigns for the Presidency. We are not talking about 2020. We are describing 1976..."

"But the most brilliant tactic Carter employed was to market himself precisely on his lack of association with Washington and traditional politics. Carter was so unknown that the newspaper in the biggest city in the state where he has served as governor – the Atlanta Constitution -- ran this headline: “Jimmy Who is Running for What?” Carter intuited that a candidate wholly insulated from the industrial grade waste Americans saw in Washington, D.C. was best positioned to win in 1976..."

"Being the telegenic and media savvy 37-year-old gay mayor of a modest midwestern city alone is a package that seems a million miles from the crusty old farts club in Washington, D.C. If America craves an outsider, Pete Buttigieg is not just outside of geographic proximity of the nation’s capital, he is outside of the typical candidate resume, outside the age norm, and outside of sexual orientation norm. Pete Buttigieg is turning the Democratic party inside out...

Born To Run The Numbers' March-in-review details just how much went wrong in the month that history may view as the finest of his presidency:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-march-2019-month-in-review.html

Excerpts: "Now it is no great accomplishment to avoid being named as an unindicted co-conspirator – it’s not exactly up there with defeating Hitler, creating the Marshall Plan, winning the Cuban Missile Crisis, enacting monumental Civil Rights legislation, landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth, signing the Camp David Accords, bringing down the Soviets, or killing Osama bin Laden. But it is something..."

"Trump can indeed crow for now about the legal validation of his long-repeated “no collusion, no obstruction” mantra, based on Attorney General Barr’s four-page conclusions... None of this may matter much in the long run of history, or even in the balance of Trump’s presidency. The month was chock full of setbacks of all kinds for the Trump Administration, on many of his signature issues...

"Trump’s approval rating ticked up one point to 42%, though the reality is that Trump remained smack in the middle of the same zone he has been in his entire presidency. Trump’s high point for any month was 46% in February, 2017, the first full month of his presidency, and the low was 38%, just six months later in August, 2017. But most of those months Trump has been in the 40-43% range. No president has operated in such a tight band in his first two years, another sign of the polarized world we live in and that Trump has exacerbated."

Born To Run The Numbers' March-in-review details just how much went wrong in the month that history may view as the finest of his presidency:

http://www.borntorunthenumbers.com/2019/04/btrtn-march-2019-month-in-review.html

Excerpts: "Now it is no great accomplishment to avoid being named as an unindicted co-conspirator – it’s not exactly up there with defeating Hitler, creating the Marshall Plan, winning the Cuban Missile Crisis, enacting monumental Civil Rights legislation, landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to Earth, signing the Camp David Accords, bringing down the Soviets, or killing Osama bin Laden. But it is something..."

"Trump can indeed crow for now about the legal validation of his long-repeated “no collusion, no obstruction” mantra, based on Attorney General Barr’s four-page conclusions... None of this may matter much in the long run of history, or even in the balance of Trump’s presidency. The month was chock full of setbacks of all kinds for the Trump Administration, on many of his signature issues...

"Trump’s approval rating ticked up one point to 42%, though the reality is that Trump remained smack in the middle of the same zone he has been in his entire presidency. Trump’s high point for any month was 46% in February, 2017, the first full month of his presidency, and the low was 38%, just six months later in August, 2017. But most of those months Trump has been in the 40-43% range. No president has operated in such a tight band in his first two years, another sign of the polarized world we live in and that Trump has exacerbated."