Quote (Black XistenZ @ 1 Nov 2019 18:46)
The Syria thing was a disaster, no one can deny that.
About your other point: what's really making things complicated is that Trump ran on a platform which resonated very well with a sizable share of the population (push back on globalization, free trade, immigration, foreign wars, SJWs) and that no other major candidate in a generation has offered. A lot of his voters know that if he fails or falls, there's a high chance that they wont find another candidate, Republican or Democrat, who's offering them this specific platform which they like. They see that the Democrats have ostensibly moved in the other direction, and they know that the GOP establishment doesnt like this agenda and would happily use Trump's downfall as an argument to prevent similar candidates from finding success in the future.
To complicate things even further, Democrats have shifted hard left since Trump's election, going even further away from the things Trump's base wants. For a voter who supports the things I listed above, the current Democratic agenda is so horrible that Trump is basically fool proof, he can fail and break promises and lie and be incompetent as much as he wants, he will still easily be the lesser of two evils compared to the 2020 Dem platform.
I think I've said this before: the radicalization of the Democrats since 2016 is the major reason why Trump's presidency hasnt disintegrated yet. If they had pivoted slightly to the center after 2016 (as is the normal reaction after losing an election...), he'd already be toast because all independents and even some Republicans would have broken with him. Hyperpolarization is what got him across the finish line in 2016, and it's what has kept him in the race ever since.
Quote (Black XistenZ @ 1 Nov 2019 19:35)
Bullshit. I'm not talking about Republicans becoming Democrats, I'm talking about some (not: all) Republican voters being willing to break with a Republican president who's unreliable, incompetent and underachieving in a one-off.
But this is obviously only an option if the Democratic candidates and platform are remotely acceptable to them, surely not when the Dems are unabashedly advocating for tax hikes, socialism, gun grabbing and open borders. :rolleyes:
that is only true if they, just like you, go by the right wing propaganda spin of leftist policies. some examples:
- what you describe as 'tax hikes' is in reality the lefty democrat's way of financing measures that will result in a net INCREASE in disposable income by making healthcare and college affordable.
- what you simplisticly label 'socialism' (obviously in order to fearmonger with a term that americans have been brainwashed for decades to associate with starvation / failure / lack of choice...) are measures to protect and benefit the vast majority of trump's base, the working class. literally no one is advocating for a planned economy and pure socialism, but rather the kind of model that many of the western / central / northern european countries have implemented, resulting in some of the wealthiest, happiest, healthiest, and most secure and free societies.
- there is exactly ONE of the few dozen candidates whose rhetoric at least somewhat justifies the old 'gun grabbing' talking point - which republicans have accused literally every single democratic candidate they ran against of, regardless of their actual stance on the matter. do democrats want to research the issue of gun violence without the NRA undermining it, and do they want to implement measures in order to stop those senseless killings? of course, but so does an overwhelming majority of the population, and any honest and serious person, who was genuinely interested in finding a constitutional way to get there, would certainly not subscribe to your decades old 'gun grabbing' fear monger tactic.
- same with the 'open border' stuff. one person said it, so it's now officially the dems platform for propagandists like yourself. a pathway to citizenship and a reasonable border and immigration policy could actually decrease the pressure on america's southern border - especially if combined with a new approach towards domestic and foreign policies that fuel the conflicts in central america, which create those refugees in the first place. but hey, i guess that's just too nuanced for trump supporters, huh?
so sure, if you assume that every voter on the right uncritically accepts those worst possible, FOX news spins of democrats policy, then you're right - there is no amount of corruption / incompetence / cronyism / international embarrassment / deficit / lying / empty promises / disregard for the constitution, laws, and checks and balances... that could make such a cultist question their leader - but despite what pard might indicate, i doubt that's much more than perhaps 25% of voters...