Will Trump be a 1 term President?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Maybe.

The power of Presidential incumbency is immense.  Presidents who have been defeated for re-election were low-key guys who appeared indifferent (Carter, Bush 43, Hoover) during a crisis.  Trump's not low-key, and he's not likely to do nothing in the event of an economic downturn.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Maybe.

The power of Presidential incumbency is immense.  Presidents who have been defeated for re-election were low-key guys who appeared indifferent (Carter, Bush 43, Hoover) during a crisis.  Trump's not low-key, and he's not likely to do nothing in the event of an economic downturn.

Eh, people talk a lot about the power of the presidential incumbency, but most of our recent presidents have had 50%+ approval ratings on election day. My theory is that any president that is below 45% in approval by election day is in trouble, especially if there is a good candidate. People talk about how Bush was reelected, but Bush was around 52% approval rating on election day, and while John Kerry was a fine candidate, he wasn't anything exceptional like Obama in 08.

Another thing to note is that many more presidents in the 19th century lost reelection than the 20th century, but it's hard to compare presidents from so far back especially without any approval rating polls. However, the point still stands that the power of presidential incumbency could be overrated.

Part of the power of incumbency is the ability to generate the kind of buzz through Presidential actions that nudge that approval rating up.  Presidents have the ability to get a favorable jobs report out a day early, or get a bad one out of the way early (or delay it a bit until another event happens) to manipulate public opinion.  They have the power to spin events like Benghazi in order to manipulate narratives.  That's something someone out of power can't do, even when their party is in power. 

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Remember 2004, when Bush lost because everyone hated him and his foreign policy blunders? No way people would've re-elected an idiot like that.

Bush's lowest approval rating at any point in his first term was 46%.

46% is literally Trump's highest number ever on the Gallup tracking poll.

And, yet, Trump sits in the White House, while Hillary pounds salt.

Trump Denial continues.  I say this because folks just don't get it that Trump knows more about winning than anyone else.  He has more grit than any President I've seen in my lifetime, and he's not going to be run out of office.  He has the stones to tell his political enemies that if they're going to stick it to him, they're going to have to do it in full view of the voters.  He doesn't care about the ugliness of the victory; he cares about avoiding defeat, period.

Never underestimate Trump's power to get America to hate his opponent more than they hate him.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Remember 2004, when Bush lost because everyone hated him and his foreign policy blunders? No way people would've re-elected an idiot like that.

Bush's lowest approval rating at any point in his first term was 46%.

46% is literally Trump's highest number ever on the Gallup tracking poll.

And, yet, Trump sits in the White House, while Hillary pounds salt.

Trump Denial continues.  I say this because folks just don't get it that Trump knows more about winning than anyone else.  He has more grit than any President I've seen in my lifetime, and he's not going to be run out of office.  He has the stones to tell his political enemies that if they're going to stick it to him, they're going to have to do it in full view of the voters.  He doesn't care about the ugliness of the victory; he cares about avoiding defeat, period.

Never underestimate Trump's power to get America to hate his opponent more than they hate him.

Not saying he will lose but it's much easier to trash talk when you don't have a record to defend. He will have a lot Tom answer for if economy is not doing well and he does not come through on key promises and continues to fail on major legislation.

I predict that the actual Trump record in 2020 will be much better than the record of Trump's tweets, unscripted remarks, and needless feuds, but the latter hasn't proven to be an obstacle yet.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

One of the fictions of the 2016 campaign was the belief that the GOP Establishment somehow wished for Hillary Clinton to win, somehow, as long as they could (A) not be blamed for her victory and (B) separate the Presidential campaign from the downballot races.  This just wasn't the case.  There were more renegade GOP elected officials refusing to endorse the national ticket in 2016 than those who bailed on Goldwater in 1964.  More Republican elected officials conspicuously bailed on Trump than Democratic elected officials on McGovern. 

The GOP Establishment wanted Trump to win, if only because they viewed him as a Signer-in-Chief who'd sign their bills, and that hasn't changed.  They have come to accept that 2/3 of a Republican is better than no Republican at all.  They are also aware of the fate of political parties that challenge their incumbent Presidents; iit's a no-win situation.  One has to go back to 1856, when James Buchanan challenged Franklin Pierce did a party maintain the White House after their President was significantly challenged for renomination.  They're not going to let this happen; any challenge to Trump's renomination will go no further than Pat Buchanan's challenge to Bush 41.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

One of the fictions of the 2016 campaign was the belief that the GOP Establishment somehow wished for Hillary Clinton to win, somehow, as long as they could (A) not be blamed for her victory and (B) separate the Presidential campaign from the downballot races.  This just wasn't the case.  There were more renegade GOP elected officials refusing to endorse the national ticket in 2016 than those who bailed on Goldwater in 1964.  More Republican elected officials conspicuously bailed on Trump than Democratic elected officials on McGovern. 

The GOP Establishment wanted Trump to win, if only because they viewed him as a Signer-in-Chief who'd sign their bills, and that hasn't changed.  They have come to accept that 2/3 of a Republican is better than no Republican at all.  They are also aware of the fate of political parties that challenge their incumbent Presidents; iit's a no-win situation.  One has to go back to 1856, when James Buchanan challenged Franklin Pierce did a party maintain the White House after their President was significantly challenged for renomination.  They're not going to let this happen; any challenge to Trump's renomination will go no further than Pat Buchanan's challenge to Bush 41.

So you mean it will spawn a far more formidable third party candidate in the general election who'll win close to 20% of the vote?

One thing Paul Ryan did last year was say, over and over, that the election was a "binary choice"; Trump or Hillary.  Nothing else was a viable choice.  Folks got that message; that Johnson-Weld didn't get 5% off the vote is evidence to me that third parties will never score double digits again in my lifetime.

There will be no viable third-party bid in 2020.