Professional risk takers are saying that Trump will win in 2020. Here are reasons why they might think that.
People are seeing that being called a Russian spy, like Trump has been, is very easy to do, and does not require real proof. The accusation is losing its relevance.
The fact that the Mueller investigation has gone on for more than a year and produced no proof that Trump consciously worked with a foreign government is destroying the story-line that Trump is backed by Russia.
Recently, the same stations that hate on Trump the most; CNN, MSNBC, claimed that a liberal politician (Gabbard) and critics of Kamala Harris (ADOS) were also secretly sponsored by Russia. There was no real proof of this, but the news agencies claimed it could “possibly” be true.
Angela Rye, a CNN political commentator and board member of the Congressional Black Caucus PAC, has said she believes that some ADOS arguments are not organic, but were “paid for by Russia.” She added that she’s “not saying everyone who uses the hashtag is a Russian bot,” but she does believe “it originated from Russian bots.
NBC NEWS PUBLISHED a predictably viral story Friday, claiming that “experts who track websites and social media linked to Russia have seen stirrings of a possible campaign of support for Hawaii Democrat Tulsi Gabbard.”
The same people who said Trump is backed by Russian robots are now saying that other liberals are backed by Russian robots and therefore must also be under the control of Russia.
The public is beginning to notice how easy it is to accuse people of being backed by a foreign government, without any proof. Other people being accused of horrible actions with no evidence, and no evidence appearing so far against Trump that he is working for a foreign government, are collectively destroying the strength of this narrative against Trump.
Because the accusation that Trump is a spy working for Russia is the main criticism of him, the fact that it is losing its impact, means that Trump might be able to fight against this criticism effectively during the campaign for 200.
Even if the economy falters before the election, if Trump shows that he is a strong moral leader against the fight on terrorism, it won’t matter.
Experts have predicted that the economy will not continue to climb to the 2020 election. They are saying that there will be a recession before the election, which traditionally — is not good for the incumbent who is running for re-election. However, even if a recession — occurs before 2020, it is likely Trump can still swing enough voters to choose him if he stays strong on being seen as a leader against terrorism.
In 2004, President George W Bush was outed as lying to the American people for the reasons to get into a war, having the war go on longer than he promised, and damaging the reputation of his country by leading America into that war — and he still won re-election. He won re-election because Americans WERE MORE SCARED ABOUT ANOTHER TERRORIST ATTACK than concerned about anything else. People were upset they were lied to, and saw the war was not being handled well, but they still believed that Bush would be TOUGHER THAN ALL OTHER CANDIDATES and choose him over everyone else.
Trump has shown that he is stronger on terrorism than any democrats have been. He bombed entire cities to quickly finish off ISIS, which he will be able to claim as a victory. Obama never ended the ISIS threat, but Trump at least ended the ISIS hold on Iraq/ Syria. He will be able to say that because he is tough on terrorist — that is why ISIS was defeated during his time as President and not during the previous administration. This is not an accurate telling of why ISIS was defeated not during Obama, but during Trump’s administration. However, Trump should be able to spin the land being taken away from ISIS’s caliphate as proof that he is a “successful — tough-on-terrorism” candidate.
In the 2000 election, only 13 percent of voters leaving the polls said that the nation’s economy was not good or poor. In 2004, more than half of voters (52 percent) rated the economy not good or poor, giving the Kerry campaign an important opening. To counter the Kerry campaign’s expected focus on these two issues, the Bush campaign’s strategy was twofold. The primary goal for Mr. Bush was to emphasize another major new issue arising from the events of 9/11 — the issue of the war on terrorism. Specifically, the Bush campaign sought to convince the public that unlike Sen. Kerry, Mr. Bush possessed the personal qualities of strength and decisiveness necessary to fight the war on terrorism.
“Trump’s biggest strengths on the terror issue are that he is a member of the more hawkish party, he uses more aggressive rhetoric, and he may be perceived as a “stronger leader.” “Whenever terrorism is in the news, one way people cope with their anxiety and anger is to look for a leader to protect them — and, in a crisis context, to rescue them,” Merolla said.
And the ECONOMY MAY NOT FALTER … ensuring his election.
…if America’s economy remains robust he may well win again in 2020, according to Wall Street.According to Politico, a basket of Wall Street’s finest eggheads have concluded that economics is the final arbiter of election victories and, if current trends continue, odds are Trump will romp home in 2020.
The investigation against Trump, (A) won’t be enough to get him impeached, and (B) BECAUSE OF that — will allow him to claim he was personally attacked, and the Russian investigation was just about destroying his name and hurting his re-election chances.
Trump has said that the investigation of him working with a foreign government is a “witch hunt”, — and if there is no SMOKING GUN at the end of the trial (that conclusively PROVES HE DID what the news says he did) he will be able to convince his followers that his interpretation of events — is more accurate than the media’s interpretation. It appears as though the look into if Trump worked with a foreign government will not prove conclusively that Trump consciously worked with Russia to ruin America.
The media has made such a long running and bold claim that Trump is definitely working with Russia against the interest of Americans — that if the investigation can’t provide evidence that is as strong as the media’s narrative, it could turn voters against believing the news and instead believing that Trump was right-all-along.
Page’s comments also mean FBI and Justice officials likely leaked a barrage of media stories just before and after Mueller’s appointment that made the evidence of collusion look far stronger than the frontline investigators knew it to be. Text messages show contacts between key FBI and DOJ players and The Washington Post, The Associated Press and The New York Times during the ramp-up to Mueller’s probe.
Mueller has so far not showed the public proof that speaks to the central question he was hired to answer: Whether Trump or any of his associates actively conspired with the effort by Russian intelligence officers to hack, leak and otherwise interfere in the 2016 election. None of the criminal charges filed to date have addressed that issue. That stubborn fact, which could change any day or remain fixed for eternity, is what fuels Trump allies who echo the president’s assertion that the investigation is illegitimate.
President Donald Trump’s critics have spent the past 17 months anticipating what some expect will be among the most thrilling events of their lives: special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report on Russian 2016 election interference. They may be in for a disappointment.That’s the word POLITICO got from defense lawyers working on the Russia probe and more than 15 former government officials with investigation experience spanning Watergate to the 2016 election case.
Scenario 5: The findings are made public, and neither the president nor any of his close associates are implicated in further wrong doing. If that happens, Trump will likely claim that he has been exonerated.
But it is also possible that Mueller will not find evidence that Trump conspired with Russia, and that Mueller or federal prosecutors in New York’s Southern District will find evidence for some other charge unrelated to a conspiracy with Russia. Impeaching him over pre-presidential conduct unrelated to Russia would be seen by Trump voters as an effort to invalidate their votes. It would be received in Trump country as nothing short of an attempted coup. That could provoke a massive backlash.
Because if Mr. Trump were removed from office by Congress, a significant portion of this country would see this as a coup, and it would drive those people farther from the common center of American life, more deeply fracturing our country. — James Comey, FBI director
The third and most troubling possibility is that, as the Mueller investigation has proceeded, fatigue and acceptance have set in. Trump’s supporters and opponents alike may have more or less come to think that there was some sort of collusion with Russia. The supporters, arguably, don’t much care. The opponents increasingly think that no matter what Mueller finds, it won’t be enough to convict and remove Trump from office in impeachment proceedings.
Two years into the investigation that Trump is a spy, and after he has said so many ignorant things — his popularity is still remaining strong. The fact is his popularity — while low, is still within the range than President’s win re-election. The other fact of American political life — incumbent’s almost always win.
Believe what you want — but it appears that Trump hasn’t lost his base, and IS STILL POPULAR IN AMERICA enough to win re-election. He isn’t that much more unpopular that previous American presidents who also won re-election.
Among the wider public, Trump remains unpopular — but not dramatically more so than many other modern presidents. While his dismal approval rating was an outlier on the day he took office, it is now — while still in the low 40s — more or less within a typical range for a president at this point in a term. President Barack Obama, whose first-day approval bested Trump’s by more than 20 percentage points, was less than 5 percentage points more popular than Trump 712 days in.
JAN 2019 — Assuming Donald Trump runs for reelection, he is the favorite to win — despite recent polls. Even the bookmakers are currently in agreement. The reason is simple: incumbency has its privileges.
In October 2004 — George W had an approval rating of 48% — AND HE WON RE-ELECTION, after the America found out he lied to them about WMD.
All the experts said that Trump will not win the election in 2020, and they also said he would not win the election in 2016. ALL OF THE EXPERTS WERE WRONG IN 2016 — so why believe these rational people now.
There are a lot of good points to consider when believing that Trump definitely will lose the election in 2020. Consider this though, there were many good reasons to believe Trump would not win in 2016. Trump defied the odds, and showed that all of the experts were missing things when they came to their universal conclusion. How do we know, the experts have figured out what they missed, and are seeing things correctly now?