Will Trump be re-elected?

[Segnosaur]

But you don't need a widespread revolt against Trump by his supporters to have him lose an election in 2020. You just need him to lose ~1% of his voters to tip the scales against him.

You're quite right but there are a number of things working in Trump's favour. It's quite rare for a president to serve only a single term when it's not the third term of a particular party - the US electorate seems to like giving their presidents a full 8 years.

True... most presidents in recent history have been multi-termers.

But Trump isn't a "normal" president by any stretch of the imagination. He's politically inexperienced and especially combative (to both his opponents and to people who SHOULD be his allies, such as Republicans in the senate.) And his personal popularity has cratered almost immediately (unlike other presidents who have at least a few months of popularity after first getting elected).

Because he is so different, I don't think you can really compare the Trump presidency (and his chance of reelection) to those of earlier presidents.

It's entirely possible that he will lose the popular vote by an even wider margin but the things that made some states unexpectedly turn red, (white) working class dissatisfaction, a feeling that *something* has to change and so on will still be the same.

But after 1 term, if people don't see the supposed changes Trump was to bring in, he won't be able to run on the "I'm an outsider here to fix things" argument anymore.

The GOP will also be working super-hard to get those voter rolls purged and Voter ID implemented to keep hold of those gains.

Yes they will, and voter suppression is very effective in helping the republicans.

The problem is, it had already occurred in 2016, so we know what its effect will be. Its would be unlikely for the situation to get WORSE. (For it to get worse, suppression would have to happen in a swing state, and it would have to be a new law.)

Consider some of the states Trump won by very small margins:
- Wis: Already had a voter ID law in 2016
- Pen: Has a democratic gov, so he's unlikely to support voter suppression
- Florida: Already had a voter ID law in 2016
So, its unlikely that voter suppression will make things worse there.

The only place where things might get worse for the democrats is in Mich, where the republicans are currently in charge. In fact they recently tried to pass stricter voter ID laws, but the bill was abandoned.

 

[The Don]

True... most presidents in recent history have been multi-termers.

But Trump isn't a "normal" president by any stretch of the imagination. He's politically inexperienced and especially combative (to both his opponents and to people who SHOULD be his allies, such as Republicans in the senate.) And his personal popularity has cratered almost immediately (unlike other presidents who have at least a few months of popularity after first getting elected).

Because he is so different, I don't think you can really compare the Trump presidency (and his chance of reelection) to those of earlier presidents.

Then why assume that it won't be greater ?

But after 1 term, if people don't see the supposed changes Trump was to bring in, he won't be able to run on the "I'm an outsider here to fix things" argument anymore.

Yes he can, and he will. His spiel will be that the Washington machine has confounded him at every step, that the Democratic Party candidate is part of the Washington establishment (which, no doubt, (s)he will be unless they're a complete outsider in which case they'll be elitist in some way) and that he can sort things out if only he had a free hand.

The electorate will be at least, if not more desperate, and they'll go back for a second helping IMO.

Yes they will, and voter suppression is very effective in helping the republicans.

The problem is, it had already occurred in 2016, so we know what its effect will be. Its would be unlikely for the situation to get WORSE. (For it to get worse, suppression would have to happen in a swing state, and it would have to be a new law.)

Consider some of the states Trump won by very small margins:
- Wis: Already had a voter ID law in 2016
- Pen: Has a democratic gov, so he's unlikely to support voter suppression
- Florida: Already had a voter ID law in 2016
So, its unlikely that voter suppression will make things worse there.

The only place where things might get worse for the democrats is in Mich, where the republicans are currently in charge. In fact they recently tried to pass stricter voter ID laws, but the bill was abandoned.

...and the other measures:

• Purging the voter rolls among minorities so as to ensure that dead people and felons cannot vote. Make getting back on the roll nigh-on impossible
• Make advance voting and absentee ballots as difficult as possible
• Close polling stations in minority neighbourhoods to ensure long, long lines to dissuade people from voting

Nothing new, but I expect much, much more of the same

 

[MrFliop]

A thread I made I completely forgot. So, yeah if you didn’t already vote in this poll cause we’re gonna know the answer soon!

 

[Venom]

His chance of re-election is below 1/10.

 

[alfaniner]

I'm loving seeing the map projections. It seems that Florida will be the major deciding factor. Not like it hasn't been before.

 

[Upchurch]

His chance of re-election is below 1/10.

Not according to fivethirtyeight.com. His current chances are hovering between 12%-13%.

 

[The Don]

...and the other measures:

• Purging the voter rolls among minorities so as to ensure that dead people and felons cannot vote. Make getting back on the roll nigh-on impossible
• Make advance voting and absentee ballots as difficult as possible
• Close polling stations in minority neighbourhoods to ensure long, long lines to dissuade people from voting

Nothing new, but I expect much, much more of the same

Looks like my concerns from three years ago were pretty much on the money but I didn't foresee him trying to cast doubt on the whole process.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

I'm in for Biden at 295 EVs.

 

[Craig4]

I know it's risky but I'm going to call a Biden win at 357 EVs. Biden will outperform the polls in Texas where he's only down by .5 percent in the aggregate polls. He'll also carry Florida.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

I voted "I don't know, but I hope not". There's just no way to tell with Trump because he's unlike every other POTUS there has been. I suppose it also depends on his defeat margin, because if he loses by a landslide, it'll be far harder for him to steal the election.

If I had to guess an outcome, I'd go with no, though. Partly because the GOP might simply drop him if he loses, and partly because the US is such a powderkeg right now that trying to nullify the election results might be suicidal to the Republicans. Remember the Women's March in 2016? Do you see the widespread protests and police brutality going on right now? I predict they are nothing compared to what's coming if the GOP messes too much with the election results. I predict the GOP knows, too.

 

[Dr. Keith]

There are some interesting post on the first page of this thread.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I know it's risky but I'm going to call a Biden win at 357 EVs. Biden will outperform the polls in Texas where he's only down by .5 percent in the aggregate polls. He'll also carry Florida.

270's Aggregate Poll puts us at safe 290 to 163 with 85 votes (Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Maine District 2) still up for grabs.

But the "Blue Wall" (Penn, Michigan, and Wisconsin) still worry me personally. None of them are "safely blue" and any one or more of them go Red and we're right back where we started in potential paths to victory being within the margins of error.

You could make a fair argument for the early voting surge inflating the numbers in a lot of different ways.

One it could offset the "Red Mirage" that we've been worried about, but on the other hand it could mean most of the blue votes have already been counted in some areas and everything from here on out is going to be red.

 

[Tomboy]

But the "Blue Wall" (Penn, Michigan, and Wisconsin) still worry me personally.

I did my part and voted Biden as a resident of PA. I didn't vote in 2016 and was therefore part of the problem. I don't want to be part of the problem again.

In this thread's poll, I voted "I hope not, but I don't know" because Trump seems like too much of a wild card to make any definitive preductions.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

What comforts me is how much stronger Biden's support is than Trump's. If you look at the snake on FiveThirtyEight, there's a lot more dark blue than dark red. It's worrying that a fair bit of the blue part (such as the aforementioned blue wall) isn't darker, but at least it's a lead over Trump.

I just wish Florida would turn blue. That would be incredibly reassuring.

 

[Distracted1]

270's Aggregate Poll puts us at safe 290 to 163 with 85 votes (Iowa, Ohio, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and Maine District 2) still up for grabs.

But the "Blue Wall" (Penn, Michigan, and Wisconsin) still worry me personally. None of them are "safely blue" and any one or more of them go Red and we're right back where we started in potential paths to victory being within the margins of error. You could make a fair argument for the early voting surge inflating the numbers in a lot of different ways.

One it could offset the "Red Mirage" that we've been worried about, but on the other hand it could mean most of the blue votes have already been counted in some areas and everything from here on out is going to be red.

I find it disconcerting as well.
I am worried the "law and order" message Trump is pushing will play better in the near suburbs of Philly, and Detroit than the polls seem to think.

 

[Upchurch]

I just wish Florida would turn blue. That would be incredibly reassuring.

Fun tool from 538

Basically, if Trump loses any of the the close races, his chances of winning plummet into the low single digits. There are a few exceptions that only put him in the high single digits. Biden has a lot more leeway. He can lose several and still not dip below 50% chance of winning.

I mean, there are still a lot of complexities to it, but Trump is in a tough spot no matter how you look at it.

 

[Armitage72]

I suppose it also depends on his defeat margin, because if he loses by a landslide, it'll be far harder for him to steal the election.

"America loves me. I'm your favorite President. These results clearly show that millions, tens of millions of fraudulent votes were cast against me in a plot to steal the election."

 

[pgwenthold]

Fun tool from 538

Basically, if Trump loses any of the the close races, his chances of winning plummet into the low single digits. There are a few exceptions that only put him in the high single digits. Biden has a lot more leeway. He can lose several and still not dip below 50% chance of winning.

I mean, there are still a lot of complexities to it, but Trump is in a tough spot no matter how you look at it.

It would be fun to have him lose North Dakota.

 

[Bob001]

The issue isn't really whether Trump can win the election. The question is whether he can steal it.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

"America loves me. I'm your favorite President. These results clearly show that millions, tens of millions of fraudulent votes were cast against me in a plot to steal the election."

Well, yeah, but I'm thinking in terms of it being harder for him to steal the election the more votes he has to nullify.