Rust Belt 2020

[jamestroll]

I may be missing something, but could someone explain to me why there is so much confidence of places like Pennsylvania and Michigan being safe Republican 2020?

The entire rust belt is economically distressed, and the region is prone to heavy wild swings.  Just in 2008, most rust belt states were called very quickly for Obama, and Obama carried Indiana and nearly carried Missouri. In 2016, Minnesota and Illinois were the only two rust belt states Clinton could win.

Trump kept pushing protectionism, and promises of those manufacturing jobs to return. (Spoiler: they will not return, technology is shifting the labor market).

If Trump can not keep his promise, I could see the rust belt swing back to the Democrats and MO and IN within ten points again.

To me, this is different from the lost of West Virginia in 2000.. most of these rust belt states do have Democratic bases, and Trump won them on a traditionally liberal issue, Protectionism.


Oh, and I just read this article: http://www.salon.com/2016/11/20/trumps-big-talk-about-trade-with-rust-belt-voters-will-come-back-to-haunt-him_partner/

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

I may be missing something, but could someone explain to me why there is so much confidence of places like Pennsylvania and Michigan being safe Republican 2020?

Because Atlas overreacts to everything. This election showed us that the 272 Freiwall was dead/never existed; therefore, Republicans are guaranteed to win every election into perpetuity.

[jamestroll]

I may be missing something, but could someone explain to me why there is so much confidence of places like Pennsylvania and Michigan being safe Republican 2020?

Because Atlas overreacts to everything. This election showed us that the 272 Freiwall was dead/never existed; therefore, Republicans are guaranteed to win every election into perpetuity.

True...

It wasn't like Kerry won the upper Midwest in a massive landslide at all.

Thing about the Rust Belt is, all those states have big city Democratic bases, save Iowa. All it will take is an unpopular Republican administration to swing some voters outside the cities back to the Democrats, and thus having a Democrat win those states again.

[Beet]

It doesn't matter if the jobs return or not. If anything, continued decline only entrenches the bitterness of the region and their receptivity to populist messages. If voters perceive Trump as giving more respect and attention to the concerns of blue collar workers in the region, he is in good shape. The Dems don't have any high profile candidates who can really challenge this at the moment. And Trump is no fool, the man has political instincts. Right now he has a huge reservoir of trust with these people, because he took on the whole political establishment of both parties, defeated them, and got everyone to sit up and notice them. Notice, this is post-election. He has more political capital than he did on Nov. 8, when he won PA, MI, OH, IA and WI. He will be very, very tough to beat.

The Democrats think they can win back WWC by going populist in 2020. That indeed, would help them relative to 2016. However, going against them will be the fact that Trump will have incumbency advantage. The argument that he lacks the temperament to be CIC won't be available any more. Hence, even if Democrats do everything right (big if), the net result is a wash.

We got whupped this year and a little humility will be in order.

[ApatheticAustrian]

i think there has been a major mistake regarding both thories.

cause there are only 2 major parties in the US, the chance of fracturing is much smaller....which means, parties are able to experiment more and...ofc...are build out of maaaaaaaaanny different interest groups to start with, especially since the US is such a big country.

if the "permanent firewall" would have prevailed this time and the generational/minority demographics change would really have kicked in, this wouldn't have secured endless democratic victories....it would just have forced the national republican party to really change its approach to SOME questions.

the same with the democrats now...if trump republicanism (whatever that even means) prevails in 2020, then are going to chance their platform on SOME points....there is no permanent majority possible in a country with only 2 competetive parties and the EC.

[jamestroll]

Beet,

Even if most states that Trump won in the rust belt, his favor-ability ratings are quite low.

Which region swings the most? The Rustbelt and Midwest. There is  heavy potential for Democrats to do very well in the Rust Belt in the 2018 Midterms and even the 2020 Presidential Election.

This is not like when Gore lost West Virginia in 2000. The Democratic base there was largely yellow dogs. Quite honestly, many of those voters are dead.  The states that Trump won this year, such as Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania do have Democratic and Liberal bases.

But we should all remember that things can change so much. Back in 2008, Hillary Clinton was winning many of those same Trump 16 voters in the primaries and was seen as the Democratic candidate of the White Working Class. Eight years later, she was clobbered.

On another note, Republicans seem to campaign on "small government" too much to become a fully populist party.

[ApatheticAustrian]

We got whupped this year and a little humility will be in order.

you are absolutely correct but that should and could never ever mean to disrespect the silent (meaning = unrepresented in terms of power) majority who stood up for trump and voted democratic and is the heart of the democratic party right now.

[BuckeyeNut]

No state in the midwest is anchored to a big city like Illinois is to Chicago. It doesn't play out when you look at population trends. You can't carry, Ohio, for example, on Columbus, Cincinnati, and Cleveland alone. Nor can you carry Pennsylvania on Pittsburgh and Philidelphia.

Democrats (and Republicans) also need to seriously reconsider the term "rust belt." It offends those hard working folks who lost their jobs, and that's exactly what can't happen going forward.

[Ljube]

I was pretty confident Pennsylvania would go Trump in 2016, while I thought Michigan would be the ultimate battleground.

I erroneously thought Trump was going to lose Florida, based on biased polls.

No longer trusting any biased polls!

[jamestroll]

No state in the midwest is anchored to a big city like Illinois is to Chicago. It doesn't play out when you look at population trends. You can't carry, Ohio, for example, on Columbus, Cincinnati, and Cleveland alone. Nor can you carry Pennsylvania on Pittsburgh and Philidelphia.

It would likely just take an unpopular Republican Administration to at least swing some of the rural voters back to the Democrats. I have agreed that the rust belt was never the "freiwall" Democrats made it out to be. It is a swing region.

I do expect at least a decent performance by Democrats in 2018 in the Midwest.

Democrats (and Republicans) also need to seriously reconsider the term "rust belt." It offends those hard working folks who lost their jobs, and that's exactly what can't happen going forward.

Most of those jobs are not coming back, unfortunately. The job market is shifting.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I may be missing something, but could someone explain to me why there is so much confidence of places like Pennsylvania and Michigan being safe Republican 2020?

We're talking about two very close states. There is no way they can be "Safe Republican". Democrats should have plenty of time to regain the ground there.

I mean, it's like declaring Indiana "Safe D" after 2008.

[Figueira]

Most of those jobs are not coming back, unfortunately. The job market is shifting.

That doesn't address Buckeye's point, which I think is a good one.

[jamestroll]

Most of those jobs are not coming back, unfortunately. The job market is shifting.

That doesn't address Buckeye's point, which I think is a good one.

You are correct, my apologies. I just do not see how it could be that offensive. But I will stick to the term Midwest.

[I’m not Stu]

What would things look like in the Rust Belt if Trump becomes unpopular and breaks his promises by signing TPP and turning Medicare into a voucher program?

[henster]

Most of these voters are expecting Trump to bring back all the factory jobs which no longer exist because of automation. Of course there will still be resentment and racial politics but people still do expect results.

[I’m not Stu]

Most of these voters are expecting Trump to bring back all the factory jobs which no longer exist because of automation. Of course there will still be resentment and racial politics but people still do expect results.

I know Trump can't bring all jobs back, but what if he breaks all the promises that he can keep and privatizes New Deal and Great Society programs he promised not to? How will that affect the outcome in the Rust Belt? Trump said he would stop TPP, and he can. What if he doesn't stop TPP? He can veto Paul Ryan's phaseout of New Deal and Great Society programs. What if he doesn't?

[Cashew]

What would things look like in the Rust Belt if Trump becomes unpopular and breaks his promises by signing TPP and turning Medicare into a voucher program?

The TPP is already dead, and he will veto Ryan's medicare plan if he wants to keep the populist image.

[I’m not Stu]

Look at this here: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/21/news/economy/kfile-trump-social-security/
Trump might not keep his populist image.

[pbrower2a]

This election shows, if anything, how white people in mass are so naive about politics.

[Cashew]

Look at this here: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/21/news/economy/kfile-trump-social-security/
Trump might not keep his populist image.

Gasp. But he was supposed to be the working class hero!

[pbrower2a]

Look at this here: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/21/news/economy/kfile-trump-social-security/
Trump might not keep his populist image.

Gasp. But he was supposed to be the working class hero!

A man cannot serve two masters -- in this case the working man and the economic elites. Donald Trump or his successor will find millions of disgruntled Trump voters. Democrats will need only find the closest thing to the Second Coming of Barack Obama to win big in 2020 even with mediocre economic conditions.

[Figueira]

Most of those jobs are not coming back, unfortunately. The job market is shifting.

That doesn't address Buckeye's point, which I think is a good one.

You are correct, my apologies. I just do not see how it could be that offensive. But I will stick to the term Midwest.

The Midwest and the Rust Belt overlap, but are not the same region.

[I’m not Stu]

PA is in the Rust Belt, but not the Midwest.

[publicunofficial]

PA is in the Rust Belt, but not the Midwest.

And Wisconsin is in the Midwest, not the Rust Belt.

[Xing]

It's too soon to make any conclusions about states like WI/MI/PA, especially since their fate in 2020 depends not only on Trump, but who the Democrats nominate, and how they rebuild their party over the next four years. It's certainly foolish to call any of them Safe R (or even Lean R, for that matter), though IA/OH are looking much worse for Democrats. At the very least, those states will be harder for Democrats to win back.