state politics and if/how they translate to national is a bit murky, i'd never say you're wrong just that idk. take Scott Walker for example, was a strong multi term governor who only really had competition because of an ill advised and poorly rolled out attack on teacher's unions. otherwise he could have sat more terms. and even when he was falling apart in WI with support he had enough gas in the tank to try for the POTUS in 2016.

Pence would get Scott Walker, Reince Priebus, and Paul Ryan to campaign for him in Wisconsin. and i think he's built similar coalitions in Michigan, Ohio, and of course has the hometown advantage in Indiana.

but really what i meant was that post a Trump removal angry right leaning voters would vote for a pig in lipstick if it made Nanci Pelosi upset. in which case it becomes less about your personal political platform, and more about riding the wave without discouraging support. Pence is uniquely qualified in this regard, one as Trump's right hand man, two as a quiet and reserved person not apt to get over excited, and three as a well known name in national politics that voters dont have to learn about. If in my head Pence is the best case, someone like Lyin' Ted Cruz would be the worst. he's not close to trump, has bad history with trump (therefore not positioned to "enact revenge"), and lastly he's be liable to talk his way out of the support rather than riding the wave.

some irony here is that for years the midterm flop Obama experienced was chalked up to racist backlash, but they then want to oust Trump leading directly up to an election. some people just like pissing repeatedly on electric fences i spose.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Jan 24 2020 01:41pm

You're probably right that Pence would be uniquely qualified to ride out the wave in 2020 after a Trump removal. My point about his reelection and his agenda still stand though.

yes i agree 2024 would be rough

I mean... over the last 70 years, there's only been one instance of a party winning 3 presidential terms in a row. Even Democrats in 2000, coming on the heels of the biggest economic boom in a lifetime, couldnt pull it off.

Well...some would say that the Democrats did pull 2000 off. But to your point, it is difficult to win 3 in a row.

The last two times the Dems had a chance at 3 in a row, they won the popular vote but lost the EC. So very close in that sense.

And of course the instance you're referring to, where Reagan won in 80, cleaned up in 84, and Bush won in 88. Bush probably should have won again in 92, but Clinton was too savvy of a politician.

Daddy Bush was a far better president than his son, but he only has half as many terms to show for it. Shame.

I wonder if anyone ever really tracked which spats Trump shot first, because it seems a rarity. He always punches back when provoked and never lets up, even once they're dead. But seems its always someone taking shots at him first. If you look at the genesis of back and forths with a lot of the RINO figures and other personalities, the original sin is most likely Trumps lack of PC filter and unabashed birtherism in the Obama years. He made himself toxic enough for those who he neither attacked nor offended to take shots at him to distance themselves and save their own skins, and unlike Milo getting stabbed in the back by the GOP, Trump rose again on the third day more powerful than they could imagine. Which led to all those awkward schisms like McCain

But I'm pretty sure at least a few times in his twitter rants he's taken a shot once or twice at folks undeservedly who didnt fire at him first. Id be curious which ones, none come to mind.

Trumps pugilism isnt the same as being a firebrand though. He has indeed been on the receiving end of far worse than he spits out and he generally stays civil with those who stay civil with him. Thats not true of his opposition whos ranks are filled with maniacs. Blaming Trump is like blaming the lightning rod for the storm

I personally feel that in 2016 alot of people sat out or voted for a third party in thinking that Hilary would slaughter Trump. Hindsight 20/20, I think all of those people are going to vote blue simply to stop the nonsense.

Don't be so sure of that. It really depends on the nominee.

Vote totals were similar to 2012. Clinton lost because she was a flawed candidate employing a poor electoral strategy.

Agreed on HW Bush. He just got unlucky, with the ill-timed recession and with running into the magnetic Clinton who just had a much stronger and more likeable personality.
W Bush, on the other hand, got lucky with running into the bland Gore and Kerry.



Didnt Trump once tell a guy at his rally that he's a fat loser and should leave the building, only to find out that the dude was actually an avid supporter, not a heckler?