Obviously, it depends if he is adequately fed.
Posted on 08/07/2018 7:13:05 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
There is a saying attributed to various wise men: “Never make predictions, especially about the future.” Allow me to tempt fate and offer some musings about the 2020 election and America’s democratic future:
The Republicans. I will be amazed if Donald Trump is the Republican nominee. The water around him is rising fast, and he is likely to be long gone by 2020, either via impeachment or resignation in a deal that spares him prosecution.
Trump’s Sunday morning tweet admitted that a June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between campaign aides and a Kremlin-linked lawyer was designed to “get information on an opponent.”
(TWEET-AT-LINK)
The tweet undercut a lie that Donald Trump Jr. told in July 2017 saying that the meeting had been primarily about the adoption of Russian children. The lie was cooked up in close consultation with Trump Senior.
In a recent New Yorker post, Adam Davidson details just how Trump’s “no collusion” story has fallen apart, in part due to his own impulsive failure to keep his lies straight.
As Davidson summarizes it:
•The president’s son and top advisers knowingly met with individuals connected to the Russian government, hoping to obtain dirt on their political opponent.
•Documents stolen from the Democratic National Committee and members of the Clinton campaign were later used in an overt effort to sway the election.
•When the Trump Tower meeting was uncovered, the president instructed his son and staff to lie about the meeting, and told them precisely which lies to use.
•The president is attempting to end the investigation into this meeting and other instances of attempted collusion between his campaign staff and representatives of the Russian government.
All of this is more than enough to justify an obstruction of justice charge, a prime ground for impeachment. It should be more than enough to cause Republican defenders to distance themselves from Trump. As Special Counsel Robert Mueller ferrets out more and more detail, a panicky Trump gets crazier and crazier. He will likely do himself in.
When Trump goes, don’t expect Vice President Mike Pence to be the 2020 nominee either. Pence is a famously inept politician, who was on track to be defeated for re-election as the Republican governor of Indiana—quite a trick.
The hardcore Trump base will be furious if (when) Trump is forced out. If Pence succeeds Trump, there will be a free-for-all, with some candidates running as the true successor to Trump and others trying to reclaim a sane Republican Party.
The latter could include moderates John Kasich, governor of Ohio, who is already positioning himself for a run; Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, and Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker. Their claim to success is that they get elected as Republicans in normally Democratic states. Their problem is that the electorate in Republican primaries is far to their right.
The former could include any number of frothing-at-the-mouth members of the House Freedom Caucus, plus of course Pence. So my bet is that the Republican nominee will be someone other than Trump, and will be presiding over a badly fractured party. What a gift to Democrats!
The Democrats. The entire Democratic pack is running to the left, because that’s where the grassroots energy is. Even Kirsten Gillibrand is trying to position herself to the left of Elizabeth Warren. One can debate whether the formerly centrist Gillibrand has had a sincere conversion or whether she is an opportunistic weathervane. But her stances say a lot about where the Democratic weather is.
Nobody has officially declared, of course, but as a splendid profile of Warren in New York magazine explains, Warren is increasingly the favorite of the activist party base and a front-runner to be the nominee.
Another likely finalist is Corey Booker. If Bernie Sanders goes again, he could be a third finalist.
Joe Biden is prominently mentioned, but I don’t buy it. He is almost as old as Bernie. Biden will turn 78 in November 2020, when Sanders will be 79. Biden is loved by the pundit class, but in two previous primary runs, he lost badly.
If I had to place money on it, I’d bet that Warren will be the nominee, and that Sanders won’t run. If Sanders and Warren get into a slugfest and divide the left, a more centrist economic candidate who is left on social issues, like Booker, could win.
As I’ve repeatedly written, Warren is the most effective leader the Dems have had in decades at narrating the lived experience of regular working people—as progressive politics. Some say she won’t do well with white males, that she is great in person, but too preachy and shrill on TV.
We’ll soon find out. I think she will blow the opposition away in the Midwestern primaries and caucuses.
What about Nancy Pelosi? Should Democrats take back control of the House in this year’s midterms, there is movement among backbenchers in the House Democratic Caucus to replace Pelosi as prospective speaker with a younger leader who is less of a lightning rod for Republican caricature. There are three problems.
First, the other members of the senior Democratic leadership are of Pelosi’s generation. The whip, Steny Hoyer, at 79, is older then Pelosi. Joe Crowley, the caucus chair, was knocked off in a primary by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
Second, even though some Democratic candidates have pledged not to vote for Pelosi for speaker in order to take that issue off the table, she has been a very effective leader and there is a great deal of loyalty to her. When Ohio Democrat Tim Ryan challenged Pelosi for leader in 2017, Pelosi won overwhelmingly, 134 to 63.
Third, there is no consensus candidate among back-benchers to succeed Pelosi. Ryan would not do much better if he challenged Pelosi again. She might lose a couple of dozen votes from newly elected Democrats, but that’s not sufficient to topple her. And many newly elected Democrats will be women and progressives—like Pelosi.
My bet is that there will be an agreement in the caucus to give Pelosi one more term as speaker in exchange for her agreement to step down after 2020. And then her successor will be someone not in the current top leadership ranks, but a committee chair or other second-tier leadership figure in their forties or fifties.
As for the midterms? A year ago, I bet that Democrats would pick up 54 House seats. They may not gain quite that many, but they should comfortably take back the House.
A Close Run Thing. After the Battle of Waterloo, the victorious Duke of Wellington described his victory as “the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life.” The remark has often been rendered as “a close run thing.”
The appointment and survival of Robert Mueller has been a close run thing. Had Attorney General Jeff Sessions not recused himself, had Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein not been committed to the rule of law, had Sessions not refused to buckle under Trump’s taunts and threats, and had just enough senior Republican Trump allies in Congress not warned Trump to keep his hands off Sessions and Rosenstein, Mueller would have been done for.
If American democracy survives President Donald Trump, it will have been a close run thing. At the risk of making the most out-on-a limb prediction of all, I think that it will.
So, who actually said, “Never make predictions, especially about the future”? The expression has been attributed to figures as varied as Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, Mark Twain, Yogi Berra, and Casey Stengel. Alas, the original is lost to the mists of time.
It turns out that getting the past right is almost as hard as getting the future right.
“The RINOs would just nominate another Romney, McCain or Bob Dole and lose to a left wing Democrat who will continue the wrecking of the country started by Obama while the RINOs sit back and whimper”
...and collect those fat donations. How many times did.the RINOs in the house pass the bill to repeal Obamacare while Obama was in the WH?
Of considerably greater import, however, is what happens if (when?) Trump releases the unredacted FISA papers. The article itself is written in a political vacuum where the only things that happen are what the hard-core left wants to happen. Not what will happen. (Democrats have embraced that deficiency since early in the Obama years, if not before that.)
As written, this article is nothing more than a fully verbalized Liberal wet dream. It has no basis in fact. As such, it cannot be viewed as a serious prognostication of any sort.
We have 3 months till mid-terms, a veritable eternity in politics, and a time frame more than generous enough for an earthquake or two to rip through, scorching the landscape severely enough so that not even the media can ignore it.
Given that the Left’s, and hence, the Deep State's opponent is Donald Trump, the future does not look too good. Even with a press that tilts in it's favor more than the Leaning Tower of Pisa, these guys have looked lost. Not only do they have great difficulty figuring out the Man Who Is Like No Other President, they still haven't gotten over their last electoral loss.
How can they plan this kind of future when they can't even grasp the present?
Look at it his way.
They have the press.
They have the universities.
They have the educational establishment (teachers, professors, etc.). And they have the Unions.
And after that, it starts to dwindle quite rapidly.
Do you notice anything about the things the Left has?
They're all in decline, with their influence waning.
They're all increasingly unpopular.
They're all aging.
And they all live in the past.
These can be considered their base. In the Age of the Internet, how can they build on this? Given the long-term decline of the party's electoral fortunes, what's left for them to be politically viable, especially given their current mad dash for Socialist nirvana?
If the left continues to believe the likes of this dogmatic claptrap, they'll find themselves being shoved inexorably towards the exit by the voters, with ever-increasing chances of never being shown back in.
CA....
Nope.
I am simply pointing out that China is a BIG problem
Trump seems to get that. But he has not yet really done much about that yet.
Last year we ran the worst trade deficit with China, ever.
THIS YEAR it is even worse.
Every. Single. Month.
Trump is correctly, saying this is a problem
But he hasn’t acted yet. It is getting even worse, this year.
I wonder actually, whether those complaining, are on China’s side on trade.
Frankly.
Who knew? Chris CrispyCream Cristie has a FR account.
I will spring for a box of Dunkin Donuts Bismarcks if the rest of you want to feed the elephant seal by tossing them at Mr. Puffy.
McStain and Lynch conspired to have a special visa issued for the female Russian lawyer who met with Trump Jr. She could not have gotten into the country otherwise. The meeting was a set-up from the word "go". McStain and Lynch are facing racketeering charges in this matter, at a minimum.
Monmouth, huh? I live in Ocean County, NJ.
I have no doubt that Trump will win reelection in 2020 but My hope is that MIKE POMPEO succeeds Trump, not Pence! I like Pence, and he is a wonderful Godly man, but he would be eaten alive in our current political climate.
For one day, about 30 years ago, Kuttner made sense. Since then, it’s been “Wackoville” in his mind. Old leftists never learn except how to fool their followers.
Flake or Kasich? Those two have all the charisma of wet cardboard. When Kasich speaks his eyes glaze over like a lizard, bad visual. Plus he is a bore. Flake. That winning name sums him up.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....
*deep breath*
AAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....
*snort snort snort*
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
The article author is a long-time commie leftist. Nothing he says matters.
Obviously, it depends if he is adequately fed.
I am American.
I am currently posting from Vietnam (a very nice place, I might add), where I currently am.
However, I have been a Trump supporter since before he even announced his candidacy.
I was back in the States and voted for Trump in Michigan, one of the 10,000 or 20,000 votes which put Trump over the top
How long have you supported Trump’s candidacy?
It will be Trump in 2020. If he wants to duck out (highly doubtful), then Pence is the one he trained to take his place. That’s why he gave Pence a more active job to do as Vice President. A man’s positions on the issues are what counts. Either way, President Trump’s successor will be the man chosen by him.
So the left has no way out of this.
Yes, liberals and socialists win almost all the elections in NJ.
I am not a liberal as well.
Perhaps you're a scoialist or a communist.
I’m a run the mill conservative.
In the same way that Cankles is conservative.
Please.
Yes, you please the socialists and communists with your posts on FR.
I know the pulse of all American suburbs and exurbs.
I live in the suburbs, I know suburban politics, I know what I am talking about.
You know the rat infested areas of NJ, also known as the People's Republic of Jersey, and mistakenly believe that all the USA is rat infested and dominated by socialist ideology.
Please. Let’s stay focused on the goal.
You must be talking to your fellow trolls, because FReepers don't pursue socialist or SJW goals.
Another AntiTrump BS article...
Sadly, I’m in the prissy Northeast when all too many Republicans are of the country club/RINO variety. They would at least publicly go for Kasich, but I think they like what Trump is doing for the economy, so when it comes to the privacy of the voting booth they might be able to resist Kasich.
And it is good to read the other side. Otherwise all too easy to get lost in our own echo chamber and miss the full picture.
Ugh. No Pence please. I can’t believe the country would make him president.
Kasich 2020!
Jeb 2020!
Oh hell no.
Trump will be the nominee.
Trump will win.
The idiot fake news media do not know the difference between words - “purpose” or “intent” and “subject” or “content”.
The earlier statement of Trump Jr. was not about the purpose or intent of the meeting, but the subject or content. The subject or content was as he said about the Magnitsky Act. That Trump Jr. now or at any time admits his intention fpr the meeting was that dirt on Hillary was being offered does not make his earlier statement a lie - all that was discussed was the Magnitsky Act and no dirt on Hillary was offered.
Worse, the Dims peddle their nothing burger as they and the sheeple they lead do not know, or do not admit, any understanding of perjery, which completely involves OFFICIAL testimony made in court; and has no bearing on public statements not made in court.
Additionally, they are ignorant of or fail to admit that even with any intent to find dirt on Hillary, no law was broken by Trump Jr.
Maybe just as badly, the sheeple have been denied so much Truth from the Dims for so long now, they are unaware that all the huffing and puffing senior Dims and the media are making about the Trump Jr. meeting is really a story that is nearly a year old, and the Dims have trumped up an excuse to replay it. And why? One, its a diversion from all the positive news and two, they got nothing else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.