Trump vs. Generic Democrat vs. Elizabeth Warren

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/poll-trump-democrats-elizabeth-warren-235026

Despite the public’s increasing misgivings about Trump’s behavior and tactics in the White House, he still beats Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) in a hypothetical matchup, 42 percent to 36 percent — a fairly impressive margin for a less-than-popular president against the prominent senator.


The poll results — from a survey conducted Feb. 9 and Feb. 10, just days after Warren was silenced by the GOP-controlled Senate for her criticism of now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions — plainly show peril for both parties. Trump, for his part, has used the epithet “Pocahontas” to mock Warren, in a reference to her claims of Native American ancestry during her academic career.

There are a couple of things in that Politico piece I find interesting. One is the country's view of Warren, which I find disappointing, because I actually like Warren more than I like most other democrats. It seems a lot of people feel just the opposite.

I also thought this was fascinating:

Asked for whom they would vote if the 2020 election were held today, 43 percent say they would likely vote for the Democrat, while only 35 percent say they would support a second Trump term. Twenty-three percent are undecided.


Eighty-seven percent of voters who say they supported Hillary Clinton in last fall’s election would vote for the Democrat, while only 71 percent of Trump voters say they are likely to support him again.

Eighty-seven percent actually seems low to me. I wouldn't think there are many Clinton voters out there who are liking what they see from Trump.

Thoughts?
 

rugcat

Lost in the Fog
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 27, 2005
Messages
16,339
Reaction score
4,110
Location
East O' The Sun & West O' The Moon
Website
www.jlevitt.com
The numbers on Elizabeth Warren do not surprise me in the least. I have never thought that she was an electable candidate in a national election. She is vitally important as a truth teller and gadfly, but she also comes across to a great many people, not only conservatives, but moderates as well, as an archetypal angry woman feminist.

She is seen as too far left, too progressive for many. But the real issue, I believe, is that her style, which is direct, confrontational, and taking no bullshit, is still for many unacceptable in a woman.
 

Cmalone

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
517
Reaction score
40
There are a couple of things in that Politico piece I find interesting. One is the country's view of Warren, which I find disappointing, because I actually like Warren more than I like most other democrats. It seems a lot of people feel just the opposite.

From my experience as woman in this country, this is not the least bit surprising. I said just recently I hope she doesn't run in 2020 because she's going to suffer the Hillary Clinton experience (it's already started) and then this poll comes out that backs up my theory.

Edit: Someone said it before I posted.

But the real issue, I believe, is that her style, which is direct, confrontational, and taking no bullshit, is still for many unacceptable in a woman.
 
Last edited:

Helix

socially distancing
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
11,695
Reaction score
12,077
Location
Atherton Tablelands
Website
snailseyeview.medium.com
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/poll-trump-democrats-elizabeth-warren-235026

There are a couple of things in that Politico piece I find interesting. One is the country's view of Warren, which I find disappointing, because I actually like Warren more than I like most other democrats. It seems a lot of people feel just the opposite.

Trump has just come off a long presidential campaign with massive media coverage; Warren hasn't.

I also thought this was fascinating:

Eighty-seven percent actually seems low to me. I wouldn't think there are many Clinton voters out there who are liking what they see from Trump.

Thoughts?

I don't know that you could draw much of a conclusion from a poll question about an unnamed candidate asked three years out from an election.

But note in that poll only 642 people identified themselves as Democrats and 689 said they voted for her [Clinton], yet 766 people said they would vote for the Dem candidate in response to that question.
 
Last edited:

ElaineA

All about that action, boss.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
8,555
Reaction score
8,432
Location
The Seattle suburbs
Website
www.reneedominick.com
I'm not a fan of Warren running because I'd like the faces of the party leadership to start skewing younger across the board. (And I'm not young, so I'm not self-interested here.) I don't think it's at all promising that people old enough to retire are all that seem to be on offer at the moment.

The concerns in this country belong far more to the younger demographic. They feel and experience the country's current woes more. We have a generation that will, in all likelihood, be the first to not widely outperform their parents in economic prosperity. I think someone who has been raised in times closer to their experiences than their grandparents' experience will do a lot to energize a populace that would like to feel the leader understands zany things like technology, is fully invested in climate change concerns, understands the crushing burden of student debt and the real fear of a lack of affordable health care. The Cory Bookers, Michelle Obamas, Kamala Harrises of the party.

I love Elizabeth Warren as a gadfly. She does have the weight of leadership and experience behind her for that, and she's a genius at it. IMO, she can do a lot more good in that role than if she had to temper her rhetoric for national consumption.
 

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Apr 24, 2009
Messages
6,902
Reaction score
3,781
Age
50
Location
MA
Website
www.rebeccaburrell.com
Warren would not be my first choice as a presidential candidate either.

Even if she was, I'm not sure why the idea that America hasn't stopped being a backwards racist/misogynist kakistocracy in the past three months would surprise anyone...
 

Cmalone

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
517
Reaction score
40
I'm not a fan of Warren running because I'd like the faces of the party leadership to start skewing younger across the board. (And I'm not young, so I'm not self-interested here.) I don't think it's at all promising that people old enough to retire are all that seem to be on offer at the moment.

The concerns in this country belong far more to the younger demographic. They feel and experience the country's current woes more. We have a generation that will, in all likelihood, be the first to not widely outperform their parents in economic prosperity. I think someone who has been raised in times closer to their experiences than their grandparents' experience will do a lot to energize a populace that would like to feel the leader understands zany things like technology, is fully invested in climate change concerns, understands the crushing burden of student debt and the real fear of a lack of affordable health care. The Cory Bookers, Michelle Obamas, Kamala Harrises of the party.

I love Elizabeth Warren as a gadfly. She does have the weight of leadership and experience behind her for that, and she's a genius at it. IMO, she can do a lot more good in that role than if she had to temper her rhetoric for national consumption.

I agree with all of that. Someone younger (and a PoC) will definitely get more engagement with people who hold progressive values. Young people are more diverse than ever before and their beliefs skew liberal, but they need someone they can be inspired. I feel that was key in Obama's success and I hope we have someone like that who is willing to run in 2020.
 

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,079
Reaction score
10,775
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
It's really hard to say what people will and won't think about a particular candidate in a few months, let alone three-year's time. A couple years back, Hillary Clinton was much more popular than Trump across the board (remember all those times she was voted most admired woman in America), and many people were relieved (even smug) when he got the nomination, because it meant she would "win for certain." And Trump is likely the least popular candidate ever to win a presidential election here, in living memory at least.

I do think, however, that if someone is being groomed for three years as the possible heir apparent of the Democratic party because it's "finally their turn," there will be more opportunity for the right-wing propaganda machine to dig up (or manufacture) dirt on that person, and for more members of the general public to end up with strong and hard-to-shake conceptions about her (or him).

Consider that the last two Democratic Presidents we've had were not all that well known nationally prior to their candidacy. And being a long-time known quantity hasn't exactly been that helpful for many GOP would-be presidents either. Just ask Jeb Bush and other GOP "stars" who have tried in vain (repeatedly in some cases) to glean their party's nomination, (or to win the presidency once he finally got the nomination in Romney's case).

I like Elizabeth Warren and think she could be a good POTUS, but it might be better to have a younger, less "historied" candidate (female or male) that more moderate or flighty voters would have less pre-existing conceptions about. HRC was probably the most experienced, the most qualified candidate for POTUS we've had in any of our lifetimes, at least, and in the end it appeared to work against her. I don't think the whole party favorite thing has been playing out very well for candidates in recent years.
 
Last edited:

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
Consider that the last two Democratic Presidents we've had were not all that well known nationally prior to their candidacy. And being a long-time known quantity hasn't exactly been that helpful for many GOP would-be presidents either. Just ask Jeb Bush and other GOP "stars" who have tried in vain (repeatedly in some cases) to glean their party's nomination, (or to win the presidency once he finally got the nomination in Romney's case).

Yep. Same goes for John McCain, too.
 

MaeZe

Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Messages
12,772
Reaction score
6,476
Location
Ralph's side of the island.
The next step is 2018, to get Progressive control of Congress, or at least the Senate. Who the Democrats run for POTUS in 2020 isn't relevant at the moment.

In addition, another key goal is to get control of state governments in order to have an impact on gerrymandering after the 2020 census.
 
Last edited:

Roxxsmom

Beastly Fido
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
23,079
Reaction score
10,775
Location
Where faults collide
Website
doggedlywriting.blogspot.com
The next step is 2018, to get Progressive control of Congress, or at least the Senate. Who the Democrats run for POTUS in 2020 isn't relevant at the moment.

In addition, another key goal is to get control of state governments in order to have an impact on gerrymandering after the 2020 census.

Agreed.

And those of us who live in blue states shouldn't sleep at the switch either. There's no guarantee that a liberal-leaning state won't trend more conservative if the economy tanks again. CA has had Republican governors in the not-too-distant past, for instance, and we've passed our share of conservative propositions too.
 

Kjbartolotta

Potentially has/is dog
Super Member
Registered
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
4,197
Reaction score
1,049
Location
Los Angeles
Generic democrat= Gillibrand IMHO. She's running for reelection in 2018 and says she doesn't want to be prez, if she changes her mind after that I'm sure I know someone who can keep her senate seat warm. My guess, anyways.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
Eighty-seven percent actually seems low to me. I wouldn't think there are many Clinton voters out there who are liking what they see from Trump.

Can we infer that the 13% who wouldn't vote Democrat again would necessarily vote Republican? Some of those could be people who see themselves as being third-party supporters.
 

Lyv

I meant to do that.
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Messages
4,958
Reaction score
1,934
Location
Outside Boston
I agree with those focused on 2018. There is a lot of work in many different areas to win some seats (including protecting Sen. Warren's). That's crucial.
 

frimble3

Heckuva good sport
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
11,574
Reaction score
6,396
Location
west coast, canada
But the real issue, I believe, is that her style, which is direct, confrontational, and taking no bullshit, is still for many unacceptable in a woman.
And, let's face it, is annoying in a man, as well. The shouty, 'every issue is a big, honkin' deal' attitude gets old real fast, and people tend to just tune it all out.
 

TCnKC

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 20, 2010
Messages
192
Reaction score
8
Location
On the edge of Imagination
What's sad is that when we do have people who could really make a huge difference(progressively) in our nation they're labeled as 'too old' or to 'hostile for a lady' etc to get elected. That's not a knock on people's comments here, that's a knock on the entire nation at large. The fact that an African American president was elected(in a nation with obvious racism in a number of place) before a woman says it all. And let's not kid ourselves that Warren just isn't 'the right woman.' They said the same thing about Clinton. They'll say the same thing about another woman other than Warren(young or not.)

/rant
 

Michael Wolfe

Jambo Bwana
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 17, 2010
Messages
4,097
Reaction score
382
Can we infer that the 13% who wouldn't vote Democrat again would necessarily vote Republican? Some of those could be people who see themselves as being third-party supporters.

Fair point. That's certainly possible.

I just figured that would be unlikely. People who voted for Clinton in 2016 could have voted third party, but obviously chose not to. And that was an election cycle where third party candidates got a decent amount of attention, IMO. Plus, all the possible reasons not to vote democrat were laid out before the election; I'm not sure there's anything new under the sun, so to speak, as far as the democrats go. The only new information since the election is what we've seen from Trump so far.

If there are Clinton voters out there who are already thinking about voting third party in 2020, I'd be curious to know why.
 

DancingMaenid

New kid...seven years ago!
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
5,058
Reaction score
460
Location
United States
Fair point. That's certainly possible.

I just figured that would be unlikely. People who voted for Clinton in 2016 could have voted third party, but obviously chose not to. And that was an election cycle where third party candidates got a decent amount of attention, IMO. Plus, all the possible reasons not to vote democrat were laid out before the election; I'm not sure there's anything new under the sun, so to speak, as far as the democrats go. The only new information since the election is what we've seen from Trump so far.

If there are Clinton voters out there who are already thinking about voting third party in 2020, I'd be curious to know why.

Yeah, I don't know. I think it's a good question. There's a contingent of voters who call themselves, say, Libertarian or Independent but who are willing to vote for a Democrat or Republican depending on who's running. And how people end up voting vs. how they say they want to vote isn't always entirely predictable. I think most people are pretty stable in their political views and which party they're most likely to support at the polls, but there are people who talk about wanting to vote for a third party candidate but don't necessarily do so when it comes time to vote. And with Clinton in particular, I think there are some liberal-leaning people who are still engaging in speculation about how things would have turned out if Bernie had been the candidate or if another Democrat had run, and that might inspire some "what-if" scenarios where they think about voting for someone else.