ABC/WaPo: 55% "Definitely Not Vote for Trump" in 2020

[wbrocks67]

28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/04/29/National-Politics/Polling/release_549.xml?tid=a_inl_manual

[User155815470020]

28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/04/29/National-Politics/Polling/release_549.xml?tid=a_inl_manual

2020 is all about turnout (as is every election). Trump's base is motivated. Will the Democrats be as motivated?

[ajc0918]

28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/04/29/National-Politics/Polling/release_549.xml?tid=a_inl_manual

2020 is all about turnout (as is every election). Trump's base is motivated. Will the Democrats be as motivated?

Yes as we saw in 2018

[Gass3268]

This is a horrendous number for Trump compared to Obama 2012 and Bush 2004.

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1122884016158445568

[ElectionsGuy]

Well folks, its a landslide. At maximum, Trump can only receive 45% of the vote because a Washington post poll told me so a year and a half away from an election.

[Xing]

Definitely Not Trump/Someone New 2020!

[Mr. Smith]

28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/04/29/National-Politics/Polling/release_549.xml?tid=a_inl_manual

2020 is all about turnout (as is every election). Trump's base is motivated. Will the Democrats be as motivated?

Yes as we saw in 2018

Because that's totes how 2012 went after 2010 for the GOP huh?

That's how 1996 went after '94 too.

Oh wait.

[Gustaf]

28% definitely vote for Trump
14% consider voting for Trump
55% will definitely not vote for Trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2019/04/29/National-Politics/Polling/release_549.xml?tid=a_inl_manual

2020 is all about turnout (as is every election). Trump's base is motivated. Will the Democrats be as motivated?

Yes as we saw in 2018

Because that's totes how 2012 went after 2010 for the GOP huh?

That's how 1996 went after '94 too.

Oh wait.

While it's true we can't assume midterm enthusiasm translates into mobilization for the next presidential election, there are a couple of distinctions. Firstly, 2018 was pretty unprecedented (highest turnout in a Century or something IIRC) and secondly, 1994 and 2010 were backlashes against perceived overreach from a party with unified Control, rather than a rejection of the president. 2018 on the other hand was much more clearly a rejection of Trump himself.

[Annatar]

I wouldn’t say 2018 was anymore a rejection of the President then 1994 or 2010 at least if we go by approval ratings, Clinton’s approval rating was 44% in the 1994 exit polls, Obama was at 45% in 2010, Trump at 45% in 2018.
1994, 2010 and 2018 is basically what happens when an incumbent President is at a 45% approval rating.
Bush by the way was 43/57 in approval in 2006 exit polls, -14, worse then 1994, 2010 or 2018 and the beating the GOP got was pretty big as a result.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Biden will be the 46th Prez

[pbrower2a]

Well folks, its a landslide. At maximum, Trump can only receive 45% of the vote because a Washington post poll told me so a year and a half away from an election.

Trump needs to shake up the reality of his low approval polls if he is to be re-elected. It is that sumple.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Biden will be the 46th Prez

That's still a very premature assumption. He definitely is in a strong position to be the nominee, there's no doubt about that, even though it's still early. But I fear that Biden is being overestimated for the general election.

[I Can Now Die Happy]

Earlier today I said that I definitely wouldn't eat anything sweet today, but right now after a series of unexpected events, here I am munching on an ice cream sandwich. Delicious. There can very well be people who claim they "definitely won't" vote Trump in 2020 who will change their minds.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/21/the-bad-news-for-trump-more-than-60-percent-of-the-country-wouldnt-consider-voting-for-him/?utm_term=.de8bf90fb1f9

From 2015: "A lot of voters -- 61 percent of them, in fact -- say they would never consider voting for him for president. And 39 percent of the vote is not enough to be elected president. "

...and yet he got at least 46% in 2016. He's arguably doing better in 2019 than he was in 2015.

Trump can win in 2020. In fact, getting to 50% isn't out of the question. Get over it.

[The Mikado]

Earlier today I said that I definitely wouldn't eat anything sweet today, but right now after a series of unexpected events, here I am munching on an ice cream sandwich. Delicious. There can very well be people who claim they "definitely won't" vote Trump in 2020 who will change their minds.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/21/the-bad-news-for-trump-more-than-60-percent-of-the-country-wouldnt-consider-voting-for-him/?utm_term=.de8bf90fb1f9

From 2015: "A lot of voters -- 61 percent of them, in fact -- say they would never consider voting for him for president. And 39 percent of the vote is not enough to be elected president. "

...and yet he got at least 46% in 2016. He's arguably doing better in 2019 than he was in 2015.

Trump can win in 2020. In fact, getting to 50% isn't out of the question. Get over it.

He's been president for two and a half years now and his approval ratings have never broken even 45% on average the entire time. For him to hit 50% he's 100% going to have to convince people who voted against him last time and haven't been convinced by him 2 1/2 years in. What is he doing that in any way reaches out to the people who didn't vote for him? Nothing.

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

Flashback from 12 April 2016

https://elections.ap.org/themessenger/content/tensions-fray-both-parties-ahead-new-york-primary-0

Among all registered voters, 63 percent say they wouldn't consider voting for Trump and half say the same about Clinton.

In the reality, 75% didn't vote for Trump, because 45% didn't turnout.

[Progressive Pessimist]

Earlier today I said that I definitely wouldn't eat anything sweet today, but right now after a series of unexpected events, here I am munching on an ice cream sandwich. Delicious. There can very well be people who claim they "definitely won't" vote Trump in 2020 who will change their minds.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/21/the-bad-news-for-trump-more-than-60-percent-of-the-country-wouldnt-consider-voting-for-him/?utm_term=.de8bf90fb1f9

From 2015: "A lot of voters -- 61 percent of them, in fact -- say they would never consider voting for him for president. And 39 percent of the vote is not enough to be elected president. "

...and yet he got at least 46% in 2016. He's arguably doing better in 2019 than he was in 2015.

Trump can win in 2020. In fact, getting to 50% isn't out of the question. Get over it.

Him winning again is definitely a possibility, but I really don't see how he gains 4% in the popular vote.

[I Can Now Die Happy]

He's been president for two and a half years now and his approval ratings have never broken even 45% on average the entire time. For him to hit 50% he's 100% going to have to convince people who voted against him last time and haven't been convinced by him 2 1/2 years in. What is he doing that in any way reaches out to the people who didn't vote for him? Nothing.

According to 2018 CNN Exit Polls, his approval among that electorate was 45%. In 2016, it was 38%.

In 2018, 62% of the electorate either thought of their vote as "in support of Trump" or that "Trump is not a factor."

Not everyone who voted for Hillary, Gary Johnson, etc thought of their vote as a "vote against Trump." There are a great deal of 2016 'not-Trump' voters who aren't frothing at the mouth Trump haters and would be open to voting for him.

"What is he doing that in any way reaches out to the people who didn't vote for him? Nothing."

He hasn't wrecked the country or ended the world like he was framed to be. Easily exceeds low expectations. It doesn't just end there.

[Adam Griffin]

Because that's totes how 2012 went after 2010 for the GOP huh?

That's how 1996 went after '94 too.

Oh wait.

A key difference here is the size of each of the two parties: every major measurement and metric suggests that the GOP is a substantially smaller movement (with or without leaners; Dems outnumber GOP by ~10m RVs or more) and has been for the entire history of polling. The modern GOP coalition can be pumped up and win in situations where turnout is relatively low, but even if they are mobilized and engaged (as they were in 2012), there's no viable pathway to victory beyond an EC fluke and/or the smallest of PV wins for them in higher-turnout situations.

Basically, in any situation where Democratic enthusiasm is at, above or near that of the GOP's, it's going to take a special convergence of factors to hand the latter a victory. A strong Democratic midterm is much more likely to translate into a strong Democratic presidential performance than a strong GOP midterm will translate into a strong GOP presidential performance.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Because that's totes how 2012 went after 2010 for the GOP huh?

That's how 1996 went after '94 too.

Oh wait.

A key difference here is the size of each of the two parties: every major measurement and metric suggests that the GOP is a substantially smaller movement (with or without leaners; Dems outnumber GOP by ~10m RVs or more) and has been for the entire history of polling. The modern GOP coalition can be pumped up and win in situations where turnout is relatively low, but even if they are mobilized and engaged (as they were in 2012), there's no viable pathway to victory beyond an EC fluke and/or the smallest of PV wins for them in higher-turnout situations.

Basically, in any situation where Democratic enthusiasm is at, above or near that of the GOP's, it's going to take a special convergence of factors to hand the latter a victory. A strong Democratic midterm is much more likely to translate into a strong Democratic presidential performance than a strong GOP midterm will translate into a strong GOP presidential performance.

[Person Man]

It all depends on whether Trump can turn a "don't kill the golden goose" argument into a "don't change horses in mid stream" argument.

Reagan had the Recession of '82 to handle.
W had the Iraq War to handle.
Obama had the Great Recession still to handle.
I guess Clinton was the only one who was able to do well without really anything to show for it but he was moderate and was already pretty isolated in Washington at this point. He was simply able to cast the Republicans as too conservative because the United States wasn't ready to give a Republican Administration  a blank check without a crisis. Then again, that could be how the Democratic Party is seen now. Maybe Trump wins like how Clinton did. Maybe Trump finally wins a convincing majority of the PV and wins 2016 + NV,MN,NH,ME-AL but maybe Republicans slip a little in the senate and have only minimal gains in the House. Maybe they lose a seat or two in the Senate and gain a half dozen in the house. Maybe if actually did something as president or had a problem he could ask for patience on, he could get one of the most conservative senates ever and maybe make the House competitive (but still losing it).

[Progressive Pessimist]

Because that's totes how 2012 went after 2010 for the GOP huh?

That's how 1996 went after '94 too.

Oh wait.

A key difference here is the size of each of the two parties: every major measurement and metric suggests that the GOP is a substantially smaller movement (with or without leaners; Dems outnumber GOP by ~10m RVs or more) and has been for the entire history of polling. The modern GOP coalition can be pumped up and win in situations where turnout is relatively low, but even if they are mobilized and engaged (as they were in 2012), there's no viable pathway to victory beyond an EC fluke and/or the smallest of PV wins for them in higher-turnout situations.

Basically, in any situation where Democratic enthusiasm is at, above or near that of the GOP's, it's going to take a special convergence of factors to hand the latter a victory. A strong Democratic midterm is much more likely to translate into a strong Democratic presidential performance than a strong GOP midterm will translate into a strong GOP presidential performance.

I sure hope that's all true.