Between Two Majorities | The Cordray Administration

[The_Doctor]

If the Democrats win the Presidency they're winning the Senate. The recession would be the catalyst along with Trump's impeachment.  

Not really they need 3 seats to win the senate and the number is actually 4 due to the fact that Alabama most certainly will be won by the GOP.


So in the case they win a narrow victory (2016+ MI , PA, WI , AZ) that likely only nets the Democrats 1 seat (They gain CO and AZ and lose AL ) and even if you add NC to the mix of what they will win 2020 that will only net them two seats which isn’t enough for a majority.


They can’t win narrowly and take the senate

I'm going to be respectful. Please take your arguments elsewhere. You repeated yourself twice and are now trying to argue with me after I answered you. Please find another thread to do so. Thank you.

[The_Doctor]

In the event Trump leaves office and Pence succeeds him, how can you see Pence keeping Trump's cronies when most of them are basically crooks ensnared in one or more scandals?  He should fire the lot of them, and have Mitch McConnell confirm his own appointees ASAP before the election. 

That is what Calvin Coolidge did and I suspect we would see an Indianan makeover of the Oval Office. Trump is increasingly looking like Warren Harding.

[The_Doctor]

Quick note on the Democratic battle - Warren takes the place of Sherrod Brown and Biden takes the place of Cuomo. If you'll notice, Warren is the firebrand who is incapable of forming a General election coalition and has the foresight to see the future Democratic majority but not the Rooseveltian-Reagan chops to take it there (much like Sherrod Brown, I guess) and Biden is the aging establishment choice. I think Buttigieg would be a possible realignment choice but at this point, he's too young and inexperienced in forming a major coalition. (Roosevelt and Reagan were former Governors; Lincoln had significant experience in the Illinois state House and the Whig & GOP by the time he was President, Jefferson was part of the Founding Fathers).

I was thinking that Buttigieg could work as an alternative choice as the realigning President as well. Presuming that he loses in the primary this time around, maybe he'll have the experience necessary by 2024 depending on how he spends the next couple of years.

I actually have Mayor Pete in my mind as the confirmation president for some reason or at least close to the characteristics of the confirmation Democratic White House of the 2040s.

I'm not sold he's the realigning President because honestly he's too young and inexperienced to have the job of crafting a decades long new coalition that ushers in a radical period of change. That sort of stuff requires an experienced hand.

(I also believe this is principally why Pence wins the 2020 election)

For the record in related news impeachment of Trump has crossed a critical 50% threshold. I think the odds of Trump taking a deal and resigning is pretty good at this point.

So I think we all should brace for President Michael R. Pence.

[The_Doctor]

No clue on the realigning Presidency at this point since it would need to be someone middle aged, from a similar region as Obama (IL), a decently large state, and has had lost at least once. Preferably a Governor or Senator.

I don't think we'd have answers until 2023 and the 2024 Democratic field takes shape.

The assumption is that the GOP holds onto the White House in 2020. (Which Moody's Analytics Forecast did show them holding, by a decent margin).

I think the impeachment at this point forecloses the GOP nomination to Trump but not another Republican who would go on to win.

[The_Doctor]

As far as I can tell, Warren's the realigner. Interesting parallel to Reagan with the switching parties, and of course both of them are quite old.

It's not her. She's an academic policy wonk untested to the rigors of leading a national coalition. In fact none of the Democrats really appear to be ready like Roosevelt and Reagan.

[The_Doctor]

Sherrod Brown, actually.

He fits all the criteria except 2 losses. He had one (1990). Were he to hit the magic 2, he would have what it's needed. But Jefferson had only 1 (technically, Jefferson is listed as a candidate in 1792, having won Kentucky's electors).

Had Brown run and lost the 2020 Democratic nomination, he would probably be the realigner. He may still be. He would be 70 on January 20, 2025, which would be the same age as Ronald Reagan.

(I'm not sold that any Democrat will win in 2020 because by their profile and what the composition of the Democratic coalition is, I think they come up short.)

(I'm also firmly of the sentiment Pence will emerge the GOP nominee, at a minimum).

[The_Doctor]

Side bar, the fact Millennials and Generation Z will be outvoting Boomers starting in 2022 and beyond will probably be sufficient evidence for a realigning election between 2020 and 2028 to usher in the new Millennial - Generation Z branded politics. Don't forget the 1930s GOP collapsed in large part because of the new wave of immigrant voters that outvoted Protestant and more nativist elements in the 1930s. (There's a great Politico article on this).  Not only that, significant elements of the Trump voter base seems open to voting for a populist Democrat and seems to resist a traditional Republican nominee (cf. Reagan/Bush). I think of all things, it will be the Trump guys who do a volte face and turn on Pence in 2024.

But we're not there, honestly. Here's the reason. The GOP coalition succeeded in turning out in 2018 but fundamentally, people seem angry at Trump NOT the Republican brand. This is distinct from 1976 and 1932, where the entire party was in the toilet. Huge swaths of the country seems prepared to back a Republican, and seems upset more at Trump's antics and behavior than the policies. I think too many Democrats conflate Trump's unpopularity with Republican unpopularity at large.

I see Warren as the foreshadowing Al Smith loser of 2020 who pushes the Democratic Party and the country significantly to the left, while Biden is the final defeat of the Old Democratic Party.

Also, the long 11-13 year economic boom that Obama left behind is probably enough to brand him the foreshadowing White House. Foreshadowing Presidents tend to be successful enough that a realigning President takes their brand and runs with it. (Wilson failed only in foreign policy but he was the first Democrat to win two elections; Nixon was impeached but secured a new GOP coalition. Obama was successful but was succeeded by Trump. ETc).

If the economy doesn't go into recession by April/May I can see Pence eking out a win, and then collapsing 2021-2025.

[The_Doctor]

My impeachment riff - purely to see how wrong/right I am in 2-3 months.

I think first, Trump is now firmly on the path to impeachment/resignation. I think the Bill Taylor testimony was highly detailed and probably has given enough evidence to nail the President on a quid pro quo on the Ukraine matter. The irony, Trump was probably on track to a second term defying BTM before this.

I also think that crucially, the Senate GOP conference will not allow impeachment to get to an actual trial. This isn't 1998 where Clinton was like sitting at 73%. This is more like a confirmed case closer to 1974, where Nixon had large swaths of people against him and his popularity sank. The Senate GOP will not want to be on record saving Trump purely because the revelations will not stop after the trial. There will be ongoing new revelations that wil make their decision look shortsighted and put more vulnerable Republicans in jeopardy. I think this ultimately overrides their fear of the GOP base.

The impeachment vote in the Senate will be remembered as one of the major consequential votes that the Senate Republican conference will cast in 2019-2021. And with the fact this President was elected with just 46%, losing by 2.8 million votes to Hillary Clinton, I think the GOP calculates that this is not a hill they want to die on. I don't think they want to put Republicans like Collins, McSally, and Gardner at risk. Remember, the GOP has more seats up in 2020 than the Democrats. And remember, Trump's popularity is not transitive to purple and blue state Republicans.

Again, as I've said, the question is: "What is the deal cut?" I think that at some point, with the myriad array of investigations into Trump, the big question is how that all goes away and Trump is allowed to become a former president without having to be hounded. As long as he is president, that will never stop (mostly because of his own stupidity). I fully expect McConnell, Pelosi, and Pence to negotiate this one. Remember, the Governor of New York is a Democrat, and so Pelosi has to be involved actively to decide how Trump leaves. Trump needs not only a federal pardon but also the New York Democrats to stand down on investigating him. Ergo, Pelosi's role. I think this deal is cut between the House impeachment and the Senate trial.

I also believe that behind the scenes, there is a growing consensus that Mike Pence has to be the next president. Syria caused a lot of consternation because the intelligence community, the foreign policy community, and everyone saw Trump squandering America's hegemonic power. Trump's erratic behavior is now threatening the geopolitical stance of the United States, a cardinal failure that threatens him far more than his regular domestic foibles.

I also think the Democrats will not nail Pence, for a bunch of reasons. One, were Pence to go down, the Senate GOP will protect Trump at al costs with Pelosi next in line. Two, and this is more important, I think that ultimately, Pelosi makes the decision to look the other way (much as Democrats did in 1986 on Reagan/George H.W. Bush in Iran Contra). I also think that Pelosi will calculate that logically, if the GOP sees her becoming president, they will never cooperate, believing that the Democrats stole the election of 2016 and used their bashing of Trump to take the Presidency.  This is the biggest reason I think that Pence is allowed to become President regardless of anything he did.

Three, I see President Pence as a strong institutional fighter who knows that he has to unite the GOP coalition, put a Trumpian spin on things, and regain the intelligence and national security folks to win in 2020 (and govern as President). I think that he has branded himself as a more stable figure and is intentionally signaling that he would reduce the chaos. This is the third reason I think that Pence is allowed to ascend.

Of course, there is the alternative scenario where the GOP goes balls to the wall and then protects Trump at all costs, and risks an 1860 style situation where everything blows apart. There is that. But I don't think they will risk that.

[The_Doctor]

God I hope you're wrong, but you're probably not at this point

I would like your Trump perspective, as I've been contemplating that I might be too insular. We can get so into the Trump is going down memes that we often miss that a lot of people aren't as politically connected and their issues (cultural, economic, etc) might outweigh other considerations or they may have different political considerations. 

The Left frequently conflates for example disapproval of Trump's behavior with disapproval of GOP policies, which has not (as far as I can tell) been shown to be true (Republican victories in 2010, 2014, 2016 and 2018 being a repudiation of an attempted repeal of ObamaCare and Trump, not the GOP's normal policies).

But here's something that makes me intrigued. The independent bloc that Republicans need to stay allies with seems to be open to an inquiry and I want to see how they behave over the next month and what they view this. (A lot of them are former Republicans, which is why Trump lost moderates but won independents by 6).

We'll see. :-P

[The_Doctor]

God I hope you're wrong, but you're probably not at this point

I hope he is wrong about realignment but not about Trump being impeached . The best way for that to happen in my opinion is for the Democrats to narrowly win in 2020 while they fail to take the senate or if they do , take it with Manchin being the deciding vote.



Then in 2024 the Republicans can come back with Haley or DeSantis

They're not events in isolation. A Trump impeachment is part of the realignment process. The underlying factors in both are the same. There's a reason the Republican Party is weakening and has been so since 2008. (It's like, the entire logical chain of BTM from 2017 to 2025).

In fact, a Trump impeachment is one of the big blinking signs of an realignment election coming. To wit, the poor Republican performance in Trump's time is representative of the GOP's failure to govern fundamentally. We would have seen a stronger GOP if this wasn't the case.

These are not events in isolation. Everything at this point (to me, at least) points to a Pence takeover, the populist-establishment wings fusing, and the GOP reprising their greatest hits 1980-2016 in a last effort to right the ship, which brings them right into the looming crisis.

In fact, Trump has done a great deal to loosen elements of the GOP from the Party and to make them open to the Democratic Party by validating their anger at Ryan, McConnell, and traditional neoliberal elements in the GOP. Many Trump voters will be part of the 2024 realigning election, I believe.

Everything on the Democratic side is showing me that they're not ready for prime time and that there's still a transitional moment that needs to happen in the DNC (which is why I maintain they lose to Pence in 2020).

Oh, also, the pension crisis and the mounting consumer debt is something that's still in the background.

[The_Doctor]

With all due respect and no offense intended, I'm not substantively responding to that because that is not remotely rooted in reality, logic, or anything resembling that in either the way party mechanics work or well, actually, anything in American politics.

[The_Doctor]

Trump's a duly elected President of the United States who was cleared of collusion with Russia. The crimes he'd be resigning is asking a foreign power to investigate Joe Biden. This isn't treason as much abuse of power. Not only that he's the choice of 63 million Americans who chose him to represent them and reflected on some level their values.

His deal will be exceedingly generous in the eyes of the Left but perfectly rational fwhen you you realize we don't jail our presidents and grant them basic immunity. The first president we jail would be the first of many, many presidents we jail.

He's not going to go to jail or be exiled to a foreign country. Most likely any deal has him repairing to Trump Tower in New York City and what Sanchez said is correct about Mar-a-Lago becoming the Graceland of the MAGA crowd.

In fact Sanchez is correct in totality about this issue.

[The_Doctor]

How is it looking?

To own up to it, the two things I got wrong is polarization and how strong the economy remains. But everything else, I'm pretty comfortable with. The impeachment threat happened (except he's actually impeached and hasn't resigned). I remain skeptical however that he will remain President, although it's a pretty tough prediction to stick by.

That said, Trump will go down as a failure as President. His coalition has failed - now twice - to breach 45-46% (2016 and 2018). Unlike Boris Johnson, there is no swath of white working class liberal voters sufficient enough to outweigh the strength of minorities voting as a bloc, which is the key difference between Britain's 2019 election and ours. Trump's Administration and American politics flows a little difference. While both the US and the UK have ongoing stalemates, Boris broke it with winning the white working class in a nation that's 87% white. We're a 70% white nation with a 30% minority bloc that creates a huge difference. He'd need 70% of whites to reach 49% alone and 20% of minorities to reach 55%. (See here). The 70% is impossible to reach because Clinton and Obama carried the college educated white vote.

Do I think Trump breaks that bloc enough to create a Brexit sized win? No. The GOP is not the Tories (who promoted zero carbon emissions and backed the NHS). Trump is held to the GOP's Reagan-era orthodoxy (which he sticks with since it fills his Cabinet, is most of the GOP in Congress, and his donors). The Tories have substantially changed in the 2010s while the GOP has not.

So, what's holding the GOP together, at this point? I think it's the strong economy allowing orthodoxy and polarization. If you notice 2014 and 2018, the Democrats reached 53-45% in 2018 and the GOP 51-45%. The GOP's highs are consistently lower than the Democratic highs in both Presidential and Congress, implying the GOP coalition is much more shaky. I still contend the GOP coalition is on the road to crackup in the next recession. A lot of the GOP is in place because they think the times are good and they can afford to ignore the drama (which they can for now).
But look at Trump's approval and the GOP's GCB standing - 43-53% and 40-47%. These are terrible numbers in the best economy in 50 years.

That said: Trump's fate is pretty much set as a failed President. Either he goes down to defeat next November and is remembered as a failed one term President or presides over a recession which seals his political legacy akin to W in 2008. Or he somehow resigns. There's the three options. There's no 15 year economic boom inbound. The recessions defined the two Bush Presidencies, and Carter - and Trump's misfortune is that there was no mild recession in 2018 to take the pressure off. Trump, also, notably did not do much in his first term that was substantial.  

I've heard the Trump populists say that this is "just the beginning," but I've rarely seen a political movement begin with a failed Presidency. If you know of one, someone, tell me. If you see a path to a successful Trump two terms that isn't succeeded by a Democrat, let me know.

I think the Democrats continue apace to become the new populist liberal party and I also think that they lose 2020. Bernie and Warren are very much symptomatic of the emerging Democratic coalition taking advantage of the populist chaos that is sweeping the world and reconfiguring coalitions.

[The_Doctor]

Not sure if this is THE crisis, but it could go either way? I'm not sure. I was wrong on impeachment but this is something that's fast moving and exposes the weak GOP coalition. We'll see in a month.