In 2040, will Democrats be glad Clinton lost?

[Peanut]

Will we be happy Clinton lost? Since with this awful Senate map, a veeery unpopular President no matter who won,  an even more energized alt-right, decimation in State Houses... do you think 2016 was a poisoned chalice? Another 1976? Was it better that we lost it, when thinking of the future?

[JG]

Will we be happy Clinton lost? Since with this awful Senate map, a veeery unpopular President no matter who won,  an even more energized alt-right, decimation in State Houses... do you think 2016 was a poisoned chalice? Another 1976? Was it better that we lost it, when thinking of the future?

I think it will a lot of how we see the 2016 election will depend of if Ginsburg and Kennedy end up retiring during Trump's term, especially if the Republicans keep control of the Senate.

[Progressive Pessimist]

It depends on how many terms Trump serves, how repairable Trump's damage to the country (and world) is, and how the GOP adapts (if it does at all) in a post-Trump era.
For now, I can tell you that I still wish Clinton won even if it did mean a disastrous midterm.

[Skill and Chance]

Lean yes, but a lot of it hinges on SCOTUS and R's not holding the Senate for like 20 straight years.  If you are assuming the alternative is a Clinton win so narrow that Democrats never held the senate during her term(s), then the answer is more clearly yes because the SCOTUS situation wouldn't be very different.

Keep in mind that if 2018 was a GOP wave, they would be in range of unilaterally calling a convention of the states (34 states) and passing constitutional amendments (38 states) without any Dem support.  If that happened, a lot of the overturned SCOTUS decisions from 1890-1930 that were utterly hostile to the economic left could have been reinstated by amendment. 

[Sir Mohamed]

I know Dems in my personal circle who are glad today because 2018 would turn out to be a disaster and 2020 a safe loss with a comptent GOPer who has a broad majority in congress repeal much more of the Obama legacy.

[Skill and Chance]

I know Dems in my personal circle who are glad today because 2018 would turn out to be a disaster and 2020 a safe loss with a comptent GOPer who has a broad majority in congress repeal much more of the Obama legacy.

Thing is, if the economy stays this good, 2018 could plausibly end up being a wash.  If that happens for Trump, it could also have happened for Clinton.

[Illini Moderate]

I will never be glad Clinton lost to Donald Trump. His rhetoric is EXTREMELY harmful to the nation. He has over 1/3 of the country convinced that indisputable facts do not matter and that any negative coverage is "fake news". The fact that he was able to go on stage and completely fabricate statistics about minority crime rates and get away with it is sickening. He has outright denied indisputable evidence of foreign attacks on our democratic process, and has on MULTIPLE occasions refused to denounce white supremacy and Nazism, until he was damn near forced to do so. This is NOT normal. He is extremely divisive and has done absolutely nothing to attempt to heal our divided country.

[dw93]

I know Dems in my personal circle who are glad today because 2018 would turn out to be a disaster and 2020 a safe loss with a comptent GOPer who has a broad majority in congress repeal much more of the Obama legacy.

Thing is, if the economy stays this good, 2018 could plausibly end up being a wash.  If that happens for Trump, it could also have happened for Clinton.

I highly doubt 2018 would be a wash with Clinton. Three terms in power doesn't give your party a wash in the midterms, good economy or not. With Trump I think we're looking at a 1982 style midterm.

[Dr. MB]

Yes.

[dw93]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

[Skill and Chance]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

Well, I would say the Dem worst case scenario is that Trump barely loses in 2020 based on his personal scandals and/or foreign policy issues and then the economy finally gives out in 2021 or 22, particularly if Dems don't win big enough to get the senate back.  If that is going to happen, then they would have been clearly better off with Clinton, who might have gotten reelected in that environment and thus appointed something like a 7/2 left wing majority on SCOTUS by 2024.

[dw93]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

Well, I would say the Dem worst case scenario is that Trump barely loses in 2020 based on his personal scandals and/or foreign policy issues and then the economy finally gives out in 2021 or 22, particularly if Dems don't win big enough to get the senate back.  If that is going to happen, then they would have been clearly better off with Clinton, who might have gotten reelected in that environment and thus appointed something like a 7/2 left wing majority on SCOTUS by 2024.

The Dems could still conceivably get a 5-4 liberal majority on the court in the scenario you describe if Kennedy waits out Trump and retires before 2024 on the condition that a Garland like candidate is nominated to replace him. As for Hillary winning, getting re elected and gettin a 7/2 majority by 2024, yea that's not happening.

[Skill and Chance]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

Well, I would say the Dem worst case scenario is that Trump barely loses in 2020 based on his personal scandals and/or foreign policy issues and then the economy finally gives out in 2021 or 22, particularly if Dems don't win big enough to get the senate back.  If that is going to happen, then they would have been clearly better off with Clinton, who might have gotten reelected in that environment and thus appointed something like a 7/2 left wing majority on SCOTUS by 2024.

The Dems could still conceivably get a 5-4 liberal majority on the court in the scenario you describe if Kennedy waits out Trump and retires before 2024 on the condition that a Garland like candidate is nominated to replace him. As for Hillary winning, getting re elected and gettin a 7/2 majority by 2024, yea that's not happening.

Probably true, and more importantly, without an unpredictable Kennedy figure as the swing vote (or a contrarian moderate Dem like JBE?), the opposition party likely packs SCOTUS as soon as they take power anyway, making the whole point of having an overwhelming liberal or conservative majority moot.

[dw93]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

If a Democrat wins in 2020 and at the very least gets to replace Ginsberg and Breyer, then it will have been worth it, even if said Dem loses in 2024. If they win the House with the Presidency in 2020 (something that NEVER would've happened with Hillary), than it will have been worth it, as 2 decades of Republican gerrymandering will be undone. 

[Skill and Chance]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

If a Democrat wins in 2020 and at the very least gets to replace Ginsberg and Breyer, then it will have been worth it, even if said Dem loses in 2024. If they win the House with the Presidency in 2020 (something that NEVER would've happened with Hillary), than it will have been worth it, as 2 decades of Republican gerrymandering will be undone. 

You're assuming they have the Senate in 2021.  That's a big assumption.  Also, the House can actually regulate gerrymandering unilaterally if it really wants to.  Which I think a Dem majority may try if it's Dem House/GOP Senate/Trump in 2021.   

[dw93]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

If a Democrat wins in 2020 and at the very least gets to replace Ginsberg and Breyer, then it will have been worth it, even if said Dem loses in 2024. If they win the House with the Presidency in 2020 (something that NEVER would've happened with Hillary), than it will have been worth it, as 2 decades of Republican gerrymandering will be undone. 

You're assuming they have the Senate in 2021.  That's a big assumption.  Also, the House can actually regulate gerrymandering unilaterally if it really wants to.  Which I think a Dem majority may try if it's Dem House/GOP Senate/Trump in 2021.   

If the vacancies happen before 2023, then even with a Republican Senate, a Democratic President will fill those vacancies. In this scenario they'd have no ground to pull the McConnell shenanigans of 2016, and it would be pointless on their part as it would be liberal justices replacing liberal justices.  Plus, if a Democrat beats Trump, unless in 2000 level close, they're taking the Senate with the Presidency as the Class 2 Senate map is almost as bad for the GOP as Class 1 is for the Democrats this November. I could even see a scenario where Trump is narrowly re elected with a narrow Democratic Majority in the Senate.

[Skill and Chance]

Depends honestly. If Trump really does prove to be a Republican version of Jimmy Carter or Hoover 2.0 (which I think is still very possible), and on top of that the Dems retake the House this fall, then it will have been worth Clinton losing. If Trump is re elected, especially with a Republican house and senate, than it won't be.

What if he turns out to be more Benjamin Harrison and Robert Taft than either of those.


Say he loses in 2020 but Haley wins in 2024 or 2028

If a Democrat wins in 2020 and at the very least gets to replace Ginsberg and Breyer, then it will have been worth it, even if said Dem loses in 2024. If they win the House with the Presidency in 2020 (something that NEVER would've happened with Hillary), than it will have been worth it, as 2 decades of Republican gerrymandering will be undone. 

You're assuming they have the Senate in 2021.  That's a big assumption.  Also, the House can actually regulate gerrymandering unilaterally if it really wants to.  Which I think a Dem majority may try if it's Dem House/GOP Senate/Trump in 2021.   

If the vacancies happen before 2023, then even with a Republican Senate, a Democratic President will fill those vacancies. In this scenario they'd have no ground to pull the McConnell shenanigans of 2016, and it would be pointless on their part as it would be liberal justices replacing liberal justices.  Plus, if a Democrat beats Trump, unless in 2000 level close, they're taking the Senate with the Presidency as the Class 2 Senate map is almost as bad for the GOP as Class 1 is for the Democrats this November. I could even see a scenario where Trump is narrowly re elected with a narrow Democratic Majority in the Senate.

This should eventually be true, but unless it's a fair Dem blowout (flipping GA, getting IA back, etc), then there is limited upside in this class.  Class 3 is where the Dem opportunity currently is, but it should get less favorable with time, just as Class 2 gets more favorable.