Makes sense, thanks.

What I wonder, however, is whether a majority of the Trump coalition really wants the DACA recipients to stay.

That 99.9% of Democrats and a healthy chunk of moderates, even moderate Republicans, want DACA to continue is obvious. But what about the right-most ~30% of the electorate who form the power- and energy-center of Trump's constituency? It wouldnt surprise me if most of those would want DACA to end and many, if not all, Dreamers to leave.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 5 2018 02:19pm

The core you reference will vote for him regardless, and will ignore and rationalize whatever his decision happens to be, so I doubt they really enter into the calculus.

I could be totally wrong on that. I'm not sure. That's just my guess.

I don't really understand the justification for the judge to extend the program, though. They said that Trump's argument to let the program end was "arbitrary and capricious." The Trump adminstation's argument was basically this: DACA sends the wrong message to potential illegal immigrants because they could take advantage of the program.

That argument in itself doesn't make much sense to me, either, seeing new DACA recipients can't join the program since it applies to the original 798,980 people. Actually, I think another federal court said that the Trump administration had to take new DACA applications. I'm not sure where that went, though. So maybe the Trump administration's argument is actually sound based on that DC court ruling on making them take new DACA applications. Maybe the federal courts played themselves.

In any case, I also don't see how it's illegal for the Trump administration to just let the program expire regardless of what the Trump administration's explanation was for it. Obama's original memo had an expiration date. Obama gave these kids a temporary solution. If the legislative branch can't figure their shit out and give the President a bill to sign, that's on them. I think Trump should be able let this expire if he wants.

This post was edited by ThatAlex on Aug 5 2018 02:48pm

Wrong. If his core supporters turn their back on him, he is done for politically. If his base is no longer enthusiastic about him, then the congressional republicans will no longer have to fear getting primaried if they turn on Trump's agenda. And let's be honest: a clear majority of republicans on capitol hill dont actually believe in Trump or his agenda, they just go along with it because the republican base leaves them no other choice. If congressional republicans had the option to impeach Trump and replace him with Pence without electoral repercussions in their own congressional races, they wouldnt hesitate one second to do it.

Moreover, the presidential race is also about turnout. If Trump disappoints his base on one of their core issues, they would of course still not vote for the democratic candidate in 2020. But they might stay at home instead of turning out to vote for Trump, which would spell doom for his reelection bid.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 5 2018 02:55pm

You misunderstand how Republicans act in elections. Republicans have had a constant national turnout for more than twenty years. Even if Trump disappoints his voters they will still turn out for him.

National elections are won or lost for the president by how Democrats engage turnout (their raw number) and where the turnouts happen (what states). Clinton lost this by turning out large numbers in highly liberal states, and by not turning out numbers in places she thought were locked down. But Trump had the same turnout as every Republican for twenty years.

Similarly, congressional elections are where the president gets turnout. If you're going to turn out for the president, you're going to vote for their congressman as well. This is also the reason why Republicans have a strong advantage in off-years. Their base is highly reliable.

It is true that approval rating is one thing and voter enthusiasm is another. They often go hand-in-hand, but Trump could theoretically have a fantastic approval rating with his Republican base but also not get enough people excited to go to the polls. We saw something similar with Clinton in 2016. High approval rating with Democrats (in large part due to partisanship, ie disdain for Trump) but low enthusiasm.

It's also worth noting that Republicans have a more consistent voting base in general so he'd probably receive a reliable turnout regardless.

That said I think Trump has done an excellent job inspiring and rallying his GOP base behind him. He's essentially been completely fine with being President of one half of America. He's actually done a pretty good job of keeping some of his big campaign promises, even if they were controversial and it resulted in negative coverage. One example is moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, which many previous Presidential candidates said they would do but never pulled the trigger once in the Oval Office.

For better or worse, I also think that Trump doesn't care much about pleasing voters just for the sake of pleasing them, even his fellow Republicans. I think Trump does what he thinks is best for America and doesn't really listen to anyone else. I think that's part of his appeal. That's been especially true in his second year. He's been his own man.

Afaik, Trump won the key states by increasing rural turnout. Take a look at the following tables and graphics:

Pennsylvania in 2012:

2016:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania,_2012


Clinton got almost the same number of votes as Obamda did in 2012, but Trump increased on Romney's performance by a 300k votes. The maps really show that those additional votes came mostly from the rural parts of the state.

tbc

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Aug 5 2018 03:26pm

Same story for florida:

2012:

2016:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2012

Trump had 500k more votes than Romney, and he got them by higher turnout in the rural parts of the state, which - as a byproduct - increased his margins in the rural counties.

Stable genius at it again. Now he's channeling yoda.

This post was edited by Arsenic_Touch on Aug 5 2018 04:36pm

been clearing and control burning for many many years

it's just too dry from the climate change that they deny

he's pandering to the people already on his side like the state actually got broken up into 3 or some shit

should keep it neutral and show support for the thousands of fighters out there risking it all to help and save and the thousands that have lost everything