What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2020 Republican Primary: Will Trump be challenged? (1 Viewer)

toshiba

Footballguy
I can't imagine there won't be challengers but will any get traction?  In order for them to get traction they obviously need to be opposed to Trump and have shown where they differ. 

Ohio Gov. John Kasich: Probably a very decent general election candidate and a very vocal opponent for Trump, but does he have support of enough conservatives?

Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake:  If you want a very vocal opponent of trump this is your guy, but what else besides that does he offer?

Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse: Taking the fight to Trump online, but does he have enough name recogniztion?

New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez: Another person not know to many on the East Coast, but a huge digital thorn to trump.

Former Utah Gov. / Presidential Candidate Mitt Romney:  He has recently seemed to embrace Trump, has his past fights with him enough to be anti-Trump?  Do the Republicans have the stomach for Mitt 2020 or more binders full of women?

I am sure there are others, who are on your list?

Does any of this matter?  Is it true that the republicans are now The Trump Party and they will run him in 2020?

Full disclosure the chance I vote against the Republicans is 100%, so I don't have my finger on the pulse of the Republicans.  But I know more people who have moved away from Trump than have moved towards him.  But I also knew more Hillary voters than Trump, so there's that...

 
Several states have open primaries, right? Where independents and Democrats can vote for the Republican? 

Given that I suspect that he will be challenged. But not seriously in the end. 

 
The answer to this question is 'NO'. Even if one of these candidates challenge Trump, unless his approval rating is under 30%, he will not be seriously challenged in any primary.

 
Isn't Flake getting destroyed in his own district? The only reason he is being getting so much media play is because he's one of the only Republicans who doesn't publicly support Trump. 
He runs statewide. He said he wasn’t running some time ago so I’m not sure polling existed at that point. But yeah actually the GOP fear of a split base was always real and a good number of those retiring are Gopers who it just so happens feel free to speak out on principle. It’s a primary reason Trump has been so destructive to the Republican Party.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Doesn't have to be "serious" (in terms of a winning bid) to do damage.  All of the recent one termers faced primary challenges.

  • Buchanan primaried Bush I
  • Kennedy primaried Carter
  • Reagan primaried Ford
  • LBJ withdrew after McCarthy almost won NH and Kennedy jumped into the primary race.
I suspect someone will run against Trump not expecting to win, but hoping to damage him.

 
I had thought about starting this thread some time ago, but then I remembered there were people who thought he was actually doing a good job, so I decided against starting the thread.  This seems like a layup way for the party to reject Trump and keep the blood on their hands to a minimum.  If he's not primaried, I think it's pretty much the end of the credibility of the party as a whole.  It will all be gone at that point. 

ETA:  Wouldn't the shark move here to be for an actual conservative with traditional GOP views to run as an "independent" in the general?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bigger question is whether a McMullen or an even more prominent name (ie Flake) run as a third party with enough juice to all but assure a trump defeat in the general election.

 
I looked at declared candidates on Wiki, and it is a pretty eclectic bunch of other candidates so far, including a professional wrestler who seems to wear Game of Thrones-styled garb and a spy thriller novelist.

...Among contenders with more resonance, in addition to those in the OP, maybe Bob Corker or Justin Amash.  Hard to beat an incumbent in a primary, but I think there's space for someone who could coalesce conservatives who never rallied around, or are tired of, Trump's antics.  Trump's primary support was always in the plurality range; a smaller field may give him more trouble than 2016 did.

I'm still not sold that Trump hangs all the way through--I could see him pulling an LBJ with a "you can't fire me, I choose not to run again" type of thing.

 
I doubt anyone runs against him.Personally I hope Rand Paul runs as an independent he would get my vote.That would probably help the Dem cause in 2020.If people on the conservative side would actually check into his voting record he would probably draw quite a few Republican,independent,and Libertarian voters.Which would help the Dems .I have seen some misinformation on Paul on this board he is anti Patriot act and he was one of the few who voted against this past budget.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Dems have to be chomping at the bit for him to be primaried....can you imagine all the dems turning out in the open primary states to vote for anyone besides Donnie Two Scoops?

 
Bigger question is whether a McMullen or an even more prominent name (ie Flake) run as a third party with enough juice to all but assure a trump defeat in the general election.
I fear this could backfire.  Mike Bloomberg  considered running independent in 2016 but decided against it when his private polling indicated that it would basically throw the election to Trump.  

 
Dinsy Ejotuz said:
Doesn't have to be "serious" (in terms of a winning bid) to do damage.  All of the recent one termers faced primary challenges.

  • Buchanan primaried Bush I
  • Kennedy primaried Carter
  • Reagan primaried Ford
  • LBJ withdrew after McCarthy almost won NH and Kennedy jumped into the primary race.
I suspect someone will run against Trump not expecting to win, but hoping to damage him.
This is true. Buchanan is the one I remember the most. He damaged him in NH and Iowa, IIRC. I'm not a horse race guy, but I remember the damage.  

 
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I fear this could backfire.  Mike Bloomberg  considered running independent in 2016 but decided against it when his private polling indicated that it would basically throw the election to Trump.  
Yeah, because Michael Bloomberg appeals to people in the center, to people on the left, but is not at all embraced by the red meat MAGA crowd, nor many traditional conservatives. While I'd have gladly voted for him, his nanny state love (the bans on soda etc) always bothered me, but that's a pimple on an elephant's ### in terms of magnitude of issues we are now facing.

If you had someone truly from the right, the traditional, conservative, right, I don't believe you would siphon off many democrats, but would give many in the middle and the right a "viable alternative" as opposed to last go around where many felt it was Trump or Clinton only, and Trump is the only protest vote for not Clinton. 

 
This is true. Buchanan is the one I remember the most. He damaged him in NH and Iowa, IIRC. I'm not a horse race guy, but I remember the damage.  
Someone like Buchanan, who would attract some who's ideology is right and far right, and even tap into the nationalist side of the equation, could do quite a bit of damage. Wouldn't get any votes of significance from the left, not that many moderates would likely go his way (unless the Dems run Hillary again - hey, they are just dumb enough to do it! Nows her chance! Really!) so even a few percentage points, especially in key battleground states, could make it all but impossible for Trump to win again.

 
Yeah, because Michael Bloomberg appeals to people in the center, to people on the left, but is not at all embraced by the red meat MAGA crowd, nor many traditional conservatives. While I'd have gladly voted for him, his nanny state love (the bans on soda etc) always bothered me, but that's a pimple on an elephant's ### in terms of magnitude of issues we are now facing.

If you had someone truly from the right, the traditional, conservative, right, I don't believe you would siphon off many democrats, but would give many in the middle and the right a "viable alternative" as opposed to last go around where many felt it was Trump or Clinton only, and Trump is the only protest vote for not Clinton. 
I get the idea but I would prefer that those independents and never-Trump Republicans vote for the Democrat.  Trump won by such a small margin last time against Hillary, it seems like the Dem wins easily by getting some of the "screw it I guess I'll vote for Trump even though he's terrible" crowd.  Making it a three candidate race is dangerous because actual Trump supporters are very loyal.  He could win some states with just the hardcore 35% Trump supporters.

 
Someone like Buchanan, who would attract some who's ideology is right and far right, and even tap into the nationalist side of the equation, could do quite a bit of damage. Wouldn't get any votes of significance from the left, not that many moderates would likely go his way (unless the Dems run Hillary again - hey, they are just dumb enough to do it! Nows her chance! Really!) so even a few percentage points, especially in key battleground states, could make it all but impossible for Trump to win again.
Stop it! Stop that talk right now! This goes no further,  ya hear?

 
rustycolts said:
I doubt anyone runs against him.Personally I hope Rand Paul runs as an independent he would get my vote.That would probably help the Dem cause in 2020.If people on the conservative side would actually check into his voting record he would probably draw quite a few Republican,independent,and Libertarian voters.Which would help the Dems .I have seen some misinformation on Paul on this board he is anti Patriot act and he was one of the few who voted against this past budget.
I've seen you mention Rand a few times in different threads. Do you mind expanding on what you like about him?

The reason I'm asking is because to me he seems like a guy who likes to say he is a libertarian minded Republican who likes small government - but his voting record doesn't support that at all. He's basically Ted Cruz.

 
I've seen you mention Rand a few times in different threads. Do you mind expanding on what you like about him?

The reason I'm asking is because to me he seems like a guy who likes to say he is a libertarian minded Republican who likes small government - but his voting record doesn't support that at all. He's basically Ted Cruz.
I've pretty much lost most respect for Rand (and moreso his father, who's a loon... although his dad was also my first presidential political contribution).  To your point, his message and his voting seem disparate. 

 
Someone like Buchanan, who would attract some who's ideology is right and far right, and even tap into the nationalist side of the equation, could do quite a bit of damage. Wouldn't get any votes of significance from the left, not that many moderates would likely go his way (unless the Dems run Hillary again - hey, they are just dumb enough to do it! Nows her chance! Really!) so even a few percentage points, especially in key battleground states, could make it all but impossible for Trump to win again.


Stop it! Stop that talk right now! This goes no further,  ya hear?
But she's the most qualified candidate to ever run in the history of forever!

 
I've seen you mention Rand a few times in different threads. Do you mind expanding on what you like about him?

The reason I'm asking is because to me he seems like a guy who likes to say he is a libertarian minded Republican who likes small government - but his voting record doesn't support that at all. He's basically Ted Cruz.
Both are conservative so they will vote similar the majority of the time.I think Paul is more likely to reach across the aisle to reach much needed bi-partisan legislation than Cruz.Votes on confirmation are a major difference in the two.During the Obama admin Paul voted for confirmation of John Kerry Sec of State  Heather Higginbottom for deputy secretary of state; Jacob Lew for Treasury secretary; Chuck Hagel for Defense secretary; and Peter Kadzik for assistant attorney general. The exception is James Comey’s confirmation vote for FBI director – he earned a “yea” vote from Cruz and a “nay” from Paul.Just recently Paul voted against Gina Haspel for Director of the CIA while Cruz voted for her.

There are other differences Paul voted against the Budget act,Cruz voted for it.Paul is 100% against the Patriot act,while Cruz does support some forms of spying on American Citizens.Cruz is much more of a Hawk than Paul is.Paul is well known for his stance of policing the world.Cruz kind of proved this when he voted to table  the Removal of United States Armed Forces from Hostilities in the Republic of Yemen that have not been Authorized by Congress while Paul voted not to table it.Paul is for legalization of medical marijuana while Cruz is not.Medicare for all is something I like but Paul is too Republican/Libertarian for that but no one is perfect.

There are similarities between the two because both are conservative but Paul is different from Cruz in many ways that I approve of.These are just my opinions though.If you would like to see the voting records of the two you can go here.https://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/117285/rand-paul/?p=1#.WxnadkgvzIU

 
Last edited by a moderator:
fatguyinalittlecoat said:
I fear this could backfire.  Mike Bloomberg  considered running independent in 2016 but decided against it when his private polling indicated that it would basically throw the election to Trump.  
That would have been horrible 

 
SoBeDad said:
Nikki Haley would poll better than any on your list. She's also ambitious.
She actually has one of the higher approval ratings of anyone in involved in politics at over 60%.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rustycolts said:
I doubt anyone runs against him.Personally I hope Rand Paul runs as an independent he would get my vote.That would probably help the Dem cause in 2020.If people on the conservative side would actually check into his voting record he would probably draw quite a few Republican,independent,and Libertarian voters.Which would help the Dems .I have seen some misinformation on Paul on this board he is anti Patriot act and he was one of the few who voted against this past budget.
I like Paul a lot, but the massive majority of people just don't care about voting for someone unless the D or R is next to their name. I'm honestly not sure that is ever going to change.

 
SoBeDad said:
Nikki Haley would poll better than any on your list. She's also ambitious.
But I don't think she is vocally enough anti-Trump to challenge him that way.  But would be a great option if Trump doesn't run.

 
The Commish said:
The Dems have to be chomping at the bit for him to be primaried....can you imagine all the dems turning out in the open primary states to vote for anyone besides Donnie Two Scoops?
Democrats should just all register as Republicans if this happens so they can vote for his challenger in every state.

 
Someone like Buchanan, who would attract some who's ideology is right and far right, and even tap into the nationalist side of the equation, could do quite a bit of damage. Wouldn't get any votes of significance from the left, not that many moderates would likely go his way (unless the Dems run Hillary again - hey, they are just dumb enough to do it! Nows her chance! Really!) so even a few percentage points, especially in key battleground states, could make it all but impossible for Trump to win again.
While I hope HRC doesn’t run in 2020, folks who didn’t support her in 2016 have zero credibility to call Democrats “dumb”, at this point.  

In retrospect, anyone with a brain should have not only been voting for HRC, but actively campaigning for her in 2016. 

 
Trump won't even be challenged by a democrat in the November 2020 election.

The libs will put up an empty suit (skirt) knowing that whoever's in it won't stand a chance unless they come up with a platform.

"Impeach 45 pt II" and "MS13 are people too" isn't much a platform to run on during a booming economy and the lowest unemployment in history.

(my 1000th pearl of wisdom)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish said:
I had thought about starting this thread some time ago, but then I remembered there were people who thought he was actually doing a good job, so I decided against starting the thread.  This seems like a layup way for the party to reject Trump and keep the blood on their hands to a minimum.  If he's not primaried, I think it's pretty much the end of the credibility of the party as a whole.  It will all be gone at that point. 

ETA:  Wouldn't the shark move here to be for an actual conservative with traditional GOP views to run as an "independent" in the general?
What would be the point of challenging him with a primary opponent? He is likely to crush anyone within the party who runs against him and it would likely seem as a symbolic run vs. anything credible. The media would play it up, but I don't think this would hurt Trump.

Question - Why are actual conservatives that upset with Trump if, from a policy perspective, he is enacting most of their agenda? I am under the impression that 85% of Republicans support the President. Is that number much different than past Presidents? If a traditional GOP candidate were to oppose Trump in the general, one could argue that losing power is worse than the current President (for the party) if he's enacting most of what you want.

 
Someone like Buchanan, who would attract some who's ideology is right and far right, and even tap into the nationalist side of the equation, could do quite a bit of damage. Wouldn't get any votes of significance from the left, not that many moderates would likely go his way (unless the Dems run Hillary again - hey, they are just dumb enough to do it! Nows her chance! Really!) so even a few percentage points, especially in key battleground states, could make it all but impossible for Trump to win again.
She wouldn't do any damage. Trump would destroy her in a primary. In a general, nobody is going to back her.

 
What would be the point of challenging him with a primary opponent? He is likely to crush anyone within the party who runs against him and it would likely seem as a symbolic run vs. anything credible. The media would play it up, but I don't think this would hurt Trump.

Question - Why are actual conservatives that upset with Trump if, from a policy perspective, he is enacting most of their agenda? I am under the impression that 85% of Republicans support the President. Is that number much different than past Presidents? If a traditional GOP candidate were to oppose Trump in the general, one could argue that losing power is worse than the current President (for the party) if he's enacting most of what you want.
Well a few things are at play here, but the primary thing is that "conservative" is no longer analogous with "Republican".  There's a laundry list of why this conservative"ish" guy is upset with Trump.  Plenty from a policy perspective and a #### ton from a morality/ethics perspective.  It's probably true that 85% of Republicans support him....this goes back to my very first sentence in this reply.  

From a policy perspective, the tax bill was an abomination.  That's the only thing of consequence he's actually gotten passed legislatively.  What good is "having the power" if they are completely inept at taking advantage of it.  Healthcare remains unsolved.  DACA remains unsolved.  Spending remains unsolved.  Our name on the world stage is now mud.  I could go down the list for days.

 
Let's consider some who might be lining up challenge Trump:

  • Flake - IMO the Kavanaugh equivocation was all about this. I think he blew it with his final decision but his book and his tone has been all about running.
  • Haley - just resigned, possibly on principle.
  • Murkowski - The opposite of Flake.
  • Kasich - he's certainly been giving the sense that he will run.
  • Sasse - He's out there holding the line from time to time but when push meets shove he rarely makes much noise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top