Effect Of Best Case Scenario On Trump's Reelection Chances? (2 Viewers)

[Ilov80s]

no effect...lines are drawn and they are getting carved in more and more every day.

I mostly agree. It is hard to imagine someone at this point still being unsure of how they feel about Trump. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

That’s exactly what I was trying to say (apparently very badly)

Thank you. 

What did you vote on the choices above?

 

[parasaurolophus]

I disagree with most of the folks here. If things go great, ESPECIALLY if hydroxychloroquine is an effective treatment, and we have a full recovery by November, I think the public rewards Trump with re-election. 

Agree 100%. If what Joe lays out were to occur people would be thrilled. 

 

[roadkill1292]

I agree completely with Rachel Bitecofer -- negative partisanship rules these days and Dem voters have been chomping at the bit to get at The Donald for over three years. The only thing that might save him is successful voter suppression efforts in Georgia, Wisconsin and North Carolina. And even if he holds Wisconsin, Arizona will flip along with Michigan and Pennsylvania and that's enough.

That's not the Hilldog running this time. It's somebody that centrist voters don't hate. And Trump's second biggest demographic win -- white women -- has turned against him.

There's a reason long time GOP legislators have been retiring in surprising numbers. They don't want to go down with the ship and they smell it coming. It's also why Mitch and the boyos are busy busy busy packing the courts. It's their last stand.

This pandemic isn't changing anyone's mind. And neither will whatever kind of recovery we have.

 

[mrip541]

All Trump needs is for 3-4% of voters in a couple states to change their minds, and I imagine he'd get at least that much of a bump in a best case best timing scenario.

 

[timschochet]

Certainly it flies.  Dan Quayle was a bumbling idiot because of a misspelled word.  Sarah Palin was an idiot bumbling idiot for a couple of her responses to Katie Couric.  People base broad opinions on very small data points.   

Sure. And Biden already had that reputation; he’s had it for decades. 

But this is something different. The suggestion is that he’s got Alzheimer’s or mental deterioration. That’s what won’t fly, IMO

 

[Joe Bryant]

I know threads wander off, but this question has zero to do with Biden.

Assume Biden is constant from here till November.

What I'm asking is how a best case scenario for the COVID-19 Crisis and the US Economy would affect Trump's chances in November. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

What I'm asking is how a best case scenario for the COVID-19 Crisis and the US Economy would affect Trump's chances in November. 

Ultimately it will hurt Trump's chances - as a complete recovery would make it more difficult to suppress votes.

Covid-19 is not a long-term threat.  Its kind of like a rain storm - you know it will end eventually - so you don't give credit for the rain stopping.  But, you still hold people accountable for not being prepared for the rain.

Trump and/or his administration, has really made a mess of the entire situation - that will not be forgotten by November.  And, if the stock market bounces back - that will widen the chasm between the labor class and the owner class - because the people who are losing wages now - won't recover those wages, even if employment bounces back.

 

[mrip541]

Ultimately it will hurt Trump's chances - as a complete recovery would make it more difficult to suppress votes.

Covid-19 is not a long-term threat.  Its kind of like a rain storm - you know it will end eventually - so you don't give credit for the rain stopping.  But, you still hold people accountable for not being prepared for the rain.

Trump and/or his administration, has really made a mess of the entire situation - that will not be forgotten by November.  And, if the stock market bounces back - that will widen the chasm between the labor class and the owner class - because the people who are losing wages now - won't recover those wages, even if employment bounces back.

I feel like people forgetting the unforgettable has become a pattern and I'm not convinced this time will be any different. I mean the guy was literally named in a felony indictment and no one cares.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ultimately it will hurt Trump's chances - as a complete recovery would make it more difficult to suppress votes.

Covid-19 is not a long-term threat.  Its kind of like a rain storm - you know it will end eventually - so you don't give credit for the rain stopping.  But, you still hold people accountable for not being prepared for the rain.

Trump and/or his administration, has really made a mess of the entire situation - that will not be forgotten by November.  And, if the stock market bounces back - that will widen the chasm between the labor class and the owner class - because the people who are losing wages now - won't recover those wages, even if employment bounces back.

Thanks.

So of the choices above. "no effect" is probably closest to your position and if there was a spot to vote "Negative effect" you would?

 

[roadkill1292]

Ultimately it will hurt Trump's chances - as a complete recovery would make it more difficult to suppress votes.

A lingering mess will indeed make it easier for Republicans in swing states to make it harder for already marginalized voters to cast ballots. OTOH, the clamor for voting by mail may swell so much that Republicans won't be able to hold it off, maybe in just enough states to carry the day.

 

[The Commish]

So thinking about this question as I read a bunch of different things on upcoming primaries and the election, it got me thinking.  I think I can make the argument that things NOT being better would be the better outcome than things being better  

 

[Joe Bryant]

So thinking about this question as I read a bunch of different things on upcoming primaries and the election, it got me thinking.  I think I can make the argument that things NOT being better would be the better outcome than things being better  

Thanks. Can you elaborate in detail? 

 

[Thunderlips]

Certainly it flies.  Dan Quayle was a bumbling idiot because of a misspelled word.  Sarah Palin was an idiot bumbling idiot for a couple of her responses to Katie Couric.  People base broad opinions on very small data points.   

 In these pressers....I see a guy who can't read as well as my 9 year old.  If Biden is taking a  % hit because of some incoherence......Trumps giving it right back with his similar inability at incoherence.  

 

[Ilov80s]

Certainly it flies.  Dan Quayle was a bumbling idiot because of a misspelled word.  Sarah Palin was an idiot bumbling idiot for a couple of her responses to Katie Couric.  People base broad opinions on very small data points.   

That just shows how low the bar is from when Quayle was in office to now. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Thanks. So you'd vote "No effect" and if there was a spot to vote "Negative effect" you would?

I voted "no effect" yesterday.  But upon reflection, and watching the GOP in Wisconsin, and in general with vote by mail initiatives, its clear they want/need chaos at the ballot box to have a chance in November.

So if the virus is contained, and stocks are back to 90% of highs - then you will see high participation in November, and a stock market that is essentially flat for the last 3 years.  Both of those things hurt Trump.

Trump would do better where turn-out is suppressed in Urban areas, and active in rural areas.  He would also have better messaging if the markets were still a mess - as he tends to do better at talking about things that might happen, versus things that have happened.  "A bad economy can only be fixed by me" v.  "We are back to where we were in January 2018."

 

[The Commish]

So thinking about this question as I read a bunch of different things on upcoming primaries and the election, it got me thinking.  I think I can make the argument that things NOT being better would be the better outcome than things being better  

Thanks. Can you elaborate in detail? 

Well, this is a new theory...not completely thought through yet, so bear with me.  If time comes and this virus still isn't under control, which is a real possibility and not a stretch with what we know at the moment, alternate options are going to have to be provided or the "Wisconsin approach" will prevail.  The only real, feasible option as an alternate at this point is "vote by mail".  They aren't going to set up websites and the like in this short amount of time and if they did, they'd certainly be disasters waiting to happen.  If people were asked to vote by mail, I don't think there'd be any question that voter turnout would be through the roof.  Statistics tell us, without question, the higher the voter turnout the better it is for Democrats.  So, in all these states with GOP lead legislatures, I am pretty confident they will go the "Wisconsin approach" and successfully suppress the vote.  You'll get millions more voting for the candidate not Trump, but because of the EC, it won't matter all that much.

 

[Joe Bryant]

I voted "no effect" yesterday.  But upon reflection, and watching the GOP in Wisconsin, and in general with vote by mail initiatives, its clear they want/need chaos at the ballot box to have a chance in November.

So if the virus is contained, and stocks are back to 90% of highs - then you will see high participation in November, and a stock market that is essentially flat for the last 3 years.  Both of those things hurt Trump.

Trump would do better where turn-out is suppressed in Urban areas, and active in rural areas.  He would also have better messaging if the markets were still a mess - as he tends to do better at talking about things that might happen, versus things that have happened.  "A bad economy can only be fixed by me" v.  "We are back to where we were in January 2018."

Thanks.

One point for clarity: when you say, if "stocks are back to 90% of highs - then you will see high participation in November, and a stock market that is essentially flat for the last 3 years" what measure are you using for the stock market?

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Basically, a best case scenario from this point forward for ending Covid-19 and the for the US Economy.

I thought in January that Trump was more likely to win than not.  That the electoral college head start that the GOP candidate gets over whatever the popular vote might be would be hard to overcome with a descent economy and not too many issues that direct people day to day.   I think that under most presidencies this crisis would have boosted the presidents chance of re-election as we rally behind him and don't change leadership in the middle of the crisis.

But Trump is such a wild card!  While I think we see some of that rallying around Trump that is happening now,  I'm not sure that it last very long.  While I think the economy bouncing back is part of any best case, I think the reality will be the determining factor as to whether or not Trump has a chance is what percentages of the nation lose someone that they are close to.  And what percentage knows of someone who knew someone.   Versus those where this all remains in abstract.  

I think in a best case scenario that Trump still has a coin flip chance.  Not as strong as in January but the same "no way in hell" chance he had in 2016.  Once the death toll, or even the scariness of someone that one cares about testing positive starts to touch more and more Americans and not just those "liberal elite city dwellers that weren't voting for him anyway" I think the chances of those that could vote for him losing confidence to either stay home or getting angry and voting for anyone that get rid of him goes up.  I don't know where that threshold might be and whether or not 100K deaths crosses it or not.   Hopefully we never find out where it was.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Thanks.

One point for clarity: when you say, if "stocks are back to 90% of highs - then you will see high participation in November, and a stock market that is essentially flat for the last 3 years" what measure are you using for the stock market?

The high was 29,551 on 2/12/20 - so 90% = ~ 26,596

On January 26, 2018, about 1 year into the presidency - dow closed at 26,467

So, if we are at 26,500ish in November - then we are roughly flat for the last 3 years.

 

[Zegras11]

Just a quick note on this; I know this meme is popular with the pro-Trump crowd (and Trump himself tried it out the other day) but I listened to another interview with Biden tonight and it’s just not gonna fly. At all. Dude is sharp, totally gets it, no sign of incoherence at all. You guys might want to move on to something else, this dog won’t hunt. 

You really need to stop this. I've seen dozens of times where he can't complete a thought.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

The high was 29,551 on 2/12/20 - so 90% = ~ 26,596

On January 26, 2018, about 1 year into the presidency - dow closed at 26,467

So, if we are at 26,500ish in November - then we are roughly flat for the last 3 years.

Gee, I wonder why?  :doy:

 

[Joe Bryant]

The high was 29,551 on 2/12/20 - so 90% = ~ 26,596

On January 26, 2018, about 1 year into the presidency - dow closed at 26,467

So, if we are at 26,500ish in November - then we are roughly flat for the last 3 years.

Thanks. 

I think most people will look more to the election 4 years ago in November of 2016 when it was 18,259 and compare as the start. But if one did want to make the gains smaller and pick the 3 year window, it probably would make sense to look back to November 2017 where it was 23,563. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Thanks for the replies folks. This thread was a perfect example of me getting to use the forum for a sounding board.

Even for the incredibly small sample size, I was super surprised at the results. That's always interesting to me. Thanks. 

 

[Sinn Fein]

Thanks. 

I think most people will look more to the election 4 years ago in November of 2016 when it was 18,259 and compare as the start. But if one did want to make the gains smaller and pick the 3 year window, it probably would make sense to look back to November 2017 where it was 23,563. 

I wasn't make any real time comparison - just looking back to when the market would have been at the same level - that corresponded to January 2018 - just a little over 1 year post inauguration.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Gee, I wonder why?  :doy:

I have no idea what you even mean by this.

 

[squistion]

Thanks for the replies folks. This thread was a perfect example of me getting to use the forum for a sounding board.

Even for the incredibly small sample size, I was super surprised at the results. That's always interesting to me. Thanks. 

I didn't participate in this discussion outside of responding to an attack on Biden, as I don't see the best case scenario happening by election day, because I foresee the country going into a serious recession that will take at least 2 years IMO to recover from.

Perhaps a better thread discussion would be, what scenario do people here see playing out by election day, ranking from the best case to worst case? 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I didn't participate in this discussion outside of responding to an attack on Biden, as I don't see the best case scenario happening by election day, because I foresee the country going into a serious recession that will take at least 2 years IMO to recover from.

Perhaps a better thread discussion would be, what scenario do people here see playing out by election day, ranking from the best case to worst case? 

Could well be. That's a totally different question than what I was asking but very well could be of interest. I got what I was looking for here so feel free to start a new thread with the focus you mentioned.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

I have no idea what you even mean by this.

If come November 3rd the market is back up to 26,500 which matches where it was Jan 26, 2018, I don't think people are going to get very far calling it flat and leaving it there. For some, 26,500 will represent a recovery. For some, they'll speculate where we'd be had an epidemic not struck the planet. No one is going to wake up from a coma on the morning of November 3rd, look at the Dow Jones prior to heading to the polls, and say "look at that flat economy Trump has captained since I dug my way under a rock nearly 3 years ago".

 

[Sinn Fein]

If come November 3rd the market is back up to 26,500 which matches where it was Jan 26, 2018, I don't think people are going to get very far calling it flat and leaving it there. For some, 26,500 will represent a recovery. For some, they'll speculate where we'd be had an epidemic not struck the planet. No one is going to wake up from a coma on the morning of November 3rd, look at the Dow Jones prior to heading to the polls, and say "look at that flat economy Trump has captained since I dug my way under a rock nearly 3 years ago".

Ok.  Does not really matter what people call it.  stocks will, in fact, have been at the same level in November 2020, as they were in January 2018.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

I got what I was looking for here

While I replied I haven't answered to poll question yet.  Do you mean would Trump's chance better or worst than today?  Or what they were in January?

They are worst than what they were in January pretty much no matter what happens from here on out (assuming conditions are such that there can be an election day.)

They would be slightly better than they are right now.  Only slightly better because I think we are still in rally around the president mode but if we can isolate out that bump then the best case would be significantly better than right now.   

 

[Steve Tasker]

No effect; he'll be re-elected regardless of well or how poorly this goes.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Ok.  Does not really matter what people call it.  stocks will, in fact, have been at the same level in November 2020, as they were in January 2018.

Right, and no one will understand why or have recollection of the events that transpired in those 34 months. That's certainly one way to guess how minds work. I'd love to see the accuracy of predictive models that take a beginning point and an end point and draw conclusions without factoring what happened in between. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

While I replied I haven't answered to poll question yet.  Do you mean would Trump's chance better or worst than today?  Or what they were in January?

They are worst than what they were in January pretty much no matter what happens from here on out (assuming conditions are such that there can be an election day.)

They would be slightly better than they are right now.  Only slightly better because I think we are still in rally around the president mode but if we can isolate out that bump then the best case would be significantly better than right now.   

Thanks. I meant his chances in how they compared to today.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Right, and no one will understand why or have recollection of the events that transpired in those 34 months. That's certainly one way to guess how minds work. I'd love to see the accuracy of predictive models that take a beginning point and an end point and draw conclusions without factoring what happened in between. 

Alrighty then.  Good talk, Russ.

 

[Mr Anonymous]

Alrighty then.  Good talk, Russ.

Hopefully you gained more from it than I did.

 

[timschochet]

I want to add that I don’t think Trump is helping himself with these daily press conferences. At first he was, IMO; they were good for him and they inspired a “rally round the flag” effect, which has been reflected in rising poll numbers. 

But in the last week or so...it’s too much. There’s very little real news. Trump tends to ramble and pass the buck a lot and argues with reporters. I’m sure his base loves it but I can’t see it adding too much to his chances. 

 

[NutterButter]

Pretty significant effect but really why stop at 90% for unemployment?   That percentage is pure fantasy.  

 

[Joe Bryant]

Ok.  Does not really matter what people call it.  stocks will, in fact, have been at the same level in November 2020, as they were in January 2018.

As an alternative, when we say "look back" three years from November 2020, one could actually, look back three years from November of 2020.

That would mean early November of 2017 where stocks were some 3,000 points lower than the peak in late January of 2018. But actually measuring three years back when you say three years back isn't as good for making the point. #funwithnumbers. All good. 

It's probably a moot point anyway as a November 2020 stock market that's 90% of what it was in January 2020 seems like a pipe dream. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

Pretty significant effect but really why stop at 90% for unemployment?   That percentage is pure fantasy.  

Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant 90% back to where it was in January 2020. That may be total fantasy too. And maybe that's what you meant. 

 

[James Daulton]

Something I find interesting is that from I've seen, Trump supporters are convinced he's going to be re-elected.  And this pandemic helps him as well as having Biden as an opponent.

Trump non-supporters (like myself) seem pretty convinced that there's no way anyone who gave him the benefit of the doubt the first time around, or who just hated Hillary, will vote for him again.  And the handling of this pandemic just underscores why.

Either way, there's going to be a bunch of shocked people in this country November 4th. 

 

[NutterButter]

Sorry I wasn't clear. I meant 90% back to where it was in January 2020. That may be total fantasy too. And maybe that's what you meant. 

I understood.   So say around 5%?  We'll be lucky if we're at 10%.    

 

[NutterButter]

Something I find interesting is that from I've seen, Trump supporters are convinced he's going to be re-elected.  And this pandemic helps him as well as having Biden as an opponent.

Trump non-supporters (like myself) seem pretty convinced that there's no way anyone who gave him the benefit of the doubt the first time around, or who just hated Hillary, will vote for him again.  And the handling of this pandemic just underscores why.

Either way, there's going to be a bunch of shocked people in this country November 4th. 

I'm a Trump hater, but I know so much rides on a few states.   Last election came down to like a 100k votes between 3 states. Provided there's not some miraculous turnaround in the economy by election night, I'd only be shocked if Trump won convincingly.    Another nailbiter in a couple of states is the best he can hope for.   

 

[Joe Bryant]

Something I find interesting is that from I've seen, Trump supporters are convinced he's going to be re-elected.  And this pandemic helps him as well as having Biden as an opponent.

Trump non-supporters (like myself) seem pretty convinced that there's no way anyone who gave him the benefit of the doubt the first time around, or who just hated Hillary, will vote for him again.  And the handling of this pandemic just underscores why.

Either way, there's going to be a bunch of shocked people in this country November 4th. 

I don't disagree. The contrasts I see on both sides are pretty striking. 

My father and my younger brother had an incredibly difficult time communicating with each other. My brother would say or do something that I knew was ok but my dad would interpret it as much worse. Or my dad would say something to my brother I knew wasn't that bad but my brother would hear it completely wrong and worse than he meant it. 

I sometimes felt like a translator in between. 

As someone who's voted for the Democratic nominee since Bill Clinton, with mostly Republican real life friends, I sometimes feel like that now. I feel like I understand both sides. But neither side understands the other. 

 

[Joe Bryant]

I understood.   So say around 5%?  We'll be lucky if we're at 10%.    

Ok. I was just proposing a possible best case scenario and while certainly not likely (as best case scenarios rarely are) I didn't see it as "pure fantasy". 

 

[Joe Bryant]

As someone who's voted for the Democratic nominee since Bill Clinton, with mostly Republican real life friends, I sometimes feel like that now. I feel like I understand both sides. But neither side understands the other. 

Even worse, both sides almost seem proud they don't understand the other.

And yeah, I quoted myself.  

 

[NutterButter]

Ok. I was just proposing a possible best case scenario and while certainly not likely (as best case scenarios rarely are) I didn't see it as "pure fantasy". 

Can you really imagine a case where we don't have social distancing come August at least in the states that are taking this seriously?   With that in place, you're still talking entire industries that are gonna be dramatically affected.    You're talking 5% unemployment which historically speaking is low to begin with.

 

[Thunderlips]

Even worse, both sides almost seem proud they don't understand the other.

And yeah, I quoted myself.  

I think there's only a subset of the Trump supporters that most Democrats/Anti-Trump Americans don't understand.

Most of us understand pushing traditional Republican agendas; judges/taxes/2nd Amendment/Pro-Life etc.  The demographic of the  Trump supporter is the one that almost deifies him personally.  I'm pretty much convinced every person on this board that shills for him is simply happy he's promoting the Republican narrative, but is just trolling in regards to their adoration for the man and really think him to be a clown...… because I absolutely don't see a leader, a man worthy of following or a man I'd want my son to become or my daughter to marry.  I just don't get "it" in regards to him.   

 

[ren hoek]

I think polling is pretty clear....his actions don't matter at this point.  Those who hate him hate him and won't vote for him regardless of what he does.  Those who love him love him and will vote for him regardless of what he does.  This is shown in the remarkably consistent approval/disapproval ratings.  It doesn't matter what he's doing.  His disapproval number is the one that changes, but even then it's for a few days and goes back into the 50's.  Approval hovers right around 40%.  I think it might be 45% right now?  I think I saw that.  I see no reason to believe that approval shoots through the roof at any point between now and August.

One of Trump's most important voting blocs was people who disapproved of him.  Trump did well with voters who disapprove of both candidates. 

Behold, the genius of 'holding your nose' and picking the least worst every time.  

 

[The Commish]

One of Trump's most important voting blocs was people who disapproved of him.  Trump did well with voters who disapprove of both candidates. 

Behold, the genius of 'holding your nose' and picking the least worst every time.  

Sorta....they wanted to see what would happen because he had ZERO meaningful political record.  They didn't like Hillary's track record and were willing to go with the unknown.  Now, they know what they'll get with him.  He doesn't have lack of evidence to help him anymore.  It's there for all to see.