The Democrats

start to perceive the debacle they face:

<blockquote>All Americans, even the president’s most strenuous supporters, should be comforted that the majority of Democrats can still think and count. It is a party infested with lunatics, but not controlled by them. This is in the same reassuring category as the Mueller investigation’s conclusion that no one in the United States colluded with Russians to influence the result of the 2016 election.

Beneath the initial success of the Biden campaign, the Democrats are sharply divided between those who are still trying to place their bets on the presidential unsuitability of the incumbent, those who seek a radical démarche to the left and over the political cliff, and those trying to get back to essentially the old slightly-left-of-center coalition of Franklin Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson.

President Clinton, and even, with a stretch, Mrs. Clinton, were also in that tradition, but the ominous approaching clouds of investigative curiosity about the Clinton Foundation and the malodorous ethics of the 2016 Clinton campaign have caused the Clintons’ party to stampede from under them.

Even Barack Obama, who was cozily settling into a good 30 years as a respected ex-president, is already in the crosshairs of the investigation, conducted against the Clinton campaign, of illegal espionage on the Trump campaign through fraudulently obtained FISA warrants and planted agents and sting operations. The rabidly Trumpophobic texting between former FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page reveals that “the White House” was closely monitoring the investigation of the Trump campaign, which raises the question of the involvement of the former president in illegal surveillance.
Mr. Obama’s name is still bandied about with respect by most of the Democratic candidates, especially Mr. Biden (“Barack and I . . .”), and he is still better esteemed by most Americans than the other ex-presidents. But apart from the admirable and necessary shattering of the bar of color, his entire legacy has been discredited: the mad obsession with unproved climate alarmism, the foolhardy Iranian nuclear treaty, and the Obamacare shambles.</blockquote>

Trump should win handily.

[Sunday-morning update]

Link was wrong, fixed now. In response to a comment about Trump’s approval, it may be that the polls are wrong because people are afraid to be honest with the Woke Warriors.

As an example, there was another surprise, in Australia, which should give Biden pause.

And maybe there is starting to be a pattern to these wrong polls.

8 thoughts on “The Democrats”

  1. Old news now, but I don’t think the link in this posting goes where you intended it to go.

    1. Trump’s national approval rating is meaningless (it’s probably about where it was at the time of his election). Those numbers are overwhelmed by states like California, New York, and Illinois (i.e., big cities). Thanks to the Electoral College, what matters is how he’s doing in key states (and I don’t approve of Trump, but I’m sure as hell not going to vote for any of his Democrat opponents).

    2. Those polls are diluted by adult and registered voter samples that tend to overly favor democrats.

      Large likely voter samples like Rasmussen has him doing much better.

      And he is still polling ahead of Obama at this point in 2011. In spite of the fluff press Obama got vs Trumps onslaught. Wait till Trump starts running issue ads touting his accomplishments and attacking the dims lack thereof.

  2. “Thanks to the Electoral College, what matters is how he’s doing in key states”

    Not counting the movement(s) in various states to pass laws to allocate their state’s electoral votes to the winner of the national popular vote. If that takes off (and I hope it doesn’t) the electoral college as we understand it is toast.

    1. Yes, that’s a concern long term, but not 2020. I suspect that Colorado may end up its reversing the decision to enter the pact. The voters there certainly never agreed to it.

Comments are closed.