Nate Cohn wrote a piece for the NY Times Upshot that while a reality check on the potential closeness of the 2020 election, is also cold comfort for democratic pessimists.
A Trump second term will likely happen if only because the Russians will repeat their subversion of the 2016 election with probably greater efficiency since all they have to do is like most hijackings, reveal their 2016 kompromat on just one GOP politician
However, it appears that Rand Paul and Lindsey Graham are already keeping Republicans in line. Add the reluctance to enforce election security and the willingness to succumb to MSM and social media influence, the usual Democratic party infighting will ensure the end of the experiment.
In 2020, the swing states reinforced by even greater polarization of racism and sexism manifested by Trump could actually increase the Electoral College vote totals with perhaps even less popular vote plurality.
We may be screwed because ‘electability’ proponents trying to triangulate the primary vote to choose (____’moderate’___) as the nominee will give us Gore/Bush and Clinton/Trump yet again. Who will be 2020’s Jill Stein.
Fortunately Cohn doesn’t factor in historical variables like an impeachment inquiry, even more WH incompetence, and wild cards like military adventurism or a terror attack.
OTOH, in 2020 we could vote our principles, hope false consciousness dissipates, GOTV, and reject some far too preliminary pessimism. The suckers bet would be to count on the recession that is sure to come.
It is important to emphasize that it is impossible to nail down the president’s standing in Wisconsin, or any state, with precision. But Wisconsin is the pivotal state in this analysis, and a one-point difference there could potentially be decisive.
One reason that such a small swing in Wisconsin could be so important is that the Democrats do not have an obviously promising alternative if Wisconsin drifts to the right.
In 2016, Florida was that obviously promising alternative: It voted for Mr. Trump by 1.2 percentage points, compared with his 0.8-point victory in Wisconsin.
But all of the measures indicate that Florida has shifted to the right of the nation since 2016, at least among 2018 midterm voters. The president’s approval rating in Florida was essentially even — and by our measure, slightly positive. Republicans narrowly won the Florida fights for Senate and governor,and also the statewide U.S. House vote.
The next tier of Democratic opportunities doesn’t provide an easy backstop to Democratic weakness in Wisconsin either. There’s Arizona, where Democrats had a good midterm cycle, but where the president’s approval rating is plainly stronger than it is nationwide or in Wisconsin. The same is true of Iowa or North Carolina, though the president’s standing in those states is somewhat more uncertain in the absence of an exit poll or a high-profile statewide result.
In the end, these states, particularly Arizona, could prove to be a better opportunity for Democrats than Wisconsin. But at least based on this evidence, it would probably be more a reflection of Democratic weakness in Wisconsin than strength elsewhere.
[...]
...In recent months, analysts have speculated about a 70 percent turnout among eligible voters, up from 60 percent in 2016.
In this kind of high-turnout presidential election, by our estimates, the tipping-point state would drift to the right as people who voted in 2016 but not in 2018 return to the electorate and nudge states like Pennsylvania and Wisconsin toward the president. At the same time, the Sun Belt would drift left. Arizona could overtake Wisconsin as the tipping-point state. But even in this hypothetical high-turnout election, the president’s approval rating in Arizona would be higher than it was in 2018 in Wisconsin. It becomes harder for the Democrats to win the presidency.
www.nytimes.com/...