November 9, 2017 at 12:19 pm #32902
History shows that unpopular presidents running for re-election are usually primaried. Think Pat Buchanan in 1992 against George H. W. Bush, Ted Kennedy against Carter in 1980, Reagan against Ford in 1976 (though Ford was not running for “re-election”). None of these have been successful, though LBJ in 1968 might have opted out before he could lose. And Reagan came really close in 1976 to pushing out Ford for the nomination.
I’m guessing Trump isn’t going to see a surge in popularity before 2020 and that some Republican will primary him.
So who will it be?
I’m thinking it would have to be a mainstream Republican with some national stature – like Mitt Romney. I must confess, even I’d be tempted to vote for Romney in 2020 – it would partly depend who the Democrats pick. I’m not sure who I’d vote for between Romney and say Bernie Sanders…November 9, 2017 at 3:20 pm #32910
I believe that one way or the other Trump will not be running in 2020. I lean heavily toward his personal choice. The thrill is gone.November 9, 2017 at 3:27 pm #32911
It may happen but so much can happen between now and then, it’s difficult to know how low in approval drumpf will fall to. Beating him in a primary could be tough, and Romney would probably be unable to do it because of several reasons:
1. He’s got ‘loser’ status.
2. He’s just another white bread faux religioid that does not pull strong numbers with minorities and women, especially after (shudder) four years of drumpf. Sure, the upper middle class and upper class Republicans would vote for him in a national election but the GOP base is not them and that base would in part still be behind drumpf in a primary. It really depends on how bad the next year is for the drumpfster.
3. Someone like Rubio would be a better national candidate since he could to some degree split the minority/female vote, but in a primary against drumpf he’s not rich enough and not as big a pariah as drumpf or not as big an elitist as Romney. The more down to earth candidate would have a shot, though, no matter who.
4. Energizing the Republicans in 2020 may not be easy, depending on how much they lose in 2018. The reverse would be true for the Democrats. The better they do next year will only build energy for taking back the White House in 2020.
5. The Democrats may nominate someone so upbeat and potentially popular that who the GOP picks may be moot. I hope the Democrats will field a relative newcomer, shed all the talk of the old guard folks (Biden, Clinton, Gore), and get behind the eventual nominee early. If they’re smart.
6. Charisma. Real charisma. It’s something most Republicans have none of. Certainly not Mitt.November 9, 2017 at 3:48 pm #32912
Agreed about Romney. Repeating history with a retread wold likely not end well for the GOP. However, Nixon virtually was in the same circumstance in 1968, losing 8 years earlier to JFK, only to win eventually.
But on the dem side, Cory Booker seems like a good choice. He might be able to reinvigorate younger Whites and the African American vote.November 9, 2017 at 3:48 pm #32913
News from the Mueller investigation, with the recent interview of (inner circle aide) Stephen Miller about the firing of Jame Comey, indicate that he’s looking seriously into obstruction of justice.
All of the (by now obvious to anyone who is not delusional) collusion with Russia aside, Trump’s biggest threats are obstruction (which is what got Nixon) and his past financial shenanigans.November 9, 2017 at 3:52 pm #32914
I think Trump has made a lot of Republicans respect Mitt Romney a lot more than they did in 2012. Even *I* respect Romney a lot more. Trump has warped the political spectrum so much that Romney actually seems like a really good guy, even to me.
I hope a really good Democrat emerges for the 2020 nomination and I don’t have to worry about a difficult choice in the general. I’d vote for anyone against Trump, but as I said, a Romney vs. Sanders would not be a easy choice.
Yes, a whole lot can happen between now and 2020. I’m not making predictions per se, but it would be surprising if no one primaries Trump, even if it’s not a successful bid. Defeating an incumbent president in the primaries is very difficult, true, but Trump has had unprecedented low approval ratings, so all bets are off.November 9, 2017 at 3:55 pm #32915
It’s unprecedented how unprecedented it is!November 9, 2017 at 5:26 pm #32917
Romney does not appeal to me personally, purely on his business dealings, but different than Trump’s biz. Romney’s businesses come in and buy up a floundering or even a decent company, say they’ll not change anything, then they do, sell it off, people lose jobs and Romney makes money. It’s known as “The Economic Hitman,” (read John Perkin’s book of the same name).
If it were Sanders vs Romney…It would be Sanders in a heartbeat for me.
But, I too, want new blood. Elizabeth Warrens and Cory Booker are the two I’d put my vote behind…BUT…as everyone has stated, that’s still too far out to even consider and maybe there’ll be another lesser known, like Obama, that just energizes the Dems…and us left leaning Indies.November 9, 2017 at 5:41 pm #32918
IMHO, Sanders will be too old to be a viable choice in 2020… I really think that he and Hillary and Trump were actually too old in 2016, but at least Sanders and Hillary exhibited decent brain function.November 9, 2017 at 5:55 pm #32919
Something to consider here is that the 2016 campaign was well underway in early 2015. This translates to early 2019, just over a year away! Our political system for all its warts, still moves quite quickly and that is good thing. Especially with this POTUS.November 9, 2017 at 6:18 pm #32920
I don’t think Trump will be around to be primaried. But, I’d put money on Kasich being in the mix.
Romney will probably run for Hatch’s senate seat from what I’ve heard.
As for the Dems, nominate Elizabeth Warren at your own risk. I think she carries a lot of the same baggage Hillary did.November 9, 2017 at 6:45 pm #32922
Kasich is good, and would be a nice breather from Trump.
Rubio is also strong but don’t know if he could win a national election.
On the other side, Warren would need to tone down her rheteroic to have any chance. Don’t see that happening.
Bottom line here in late ’17:
Trump, Ryan, Kasich, Rubio (disclaimer, none of these rivals have given any hint of challenging Trump)
Booker, Biden, Warren (in that order)November 9, 2017 at 7:09 pm #32924
The candidates who want to run in 2020 have no doubt already begun the process, even if not overtly. They are appearing at events and quietly lining up support. Of course, the process will be a bit more tricky for Republicans trying to primary their own president.
I have mentioned Corey Booker more than once (maybe not on this forum) as a potential candidate for 2020. Being African-American will be a big asset in attracting minority voters, yet like Obama he seems to have an appeal to white voters too. But I don’t know much about Booker, and some who do claim he is a paper tiger, without much substance. I followed Booker on Facebook for about ten minutes until I could no longer stand the feel-good platitudes he (or his staff) seemed inclined to post much of the time. I guess we’d have to see how he holds up under the spotlight of a national campaign; many weak candidate wither under it. Joe Biden may be too old, but he’s also been in the arena a long time, so his chances should be more predictable.
I don’t care for Elizabeth Warren’s populism and her harsh rhetoric. She may not quite have Hillary’s baggage, but she has some of the same lack of mainstream appeal (or having the “unappeal”) that Hillary suffered from.
I never thought Mitt Romney was a bad guy, but against Obama there was not even a consideration. I like Bernie Sanders as an advocate, but I don’t see him as an effective president. Romney showed in Massachusetts that he could work with Democrats. I’d be much more comfortable with him if he had a Democratic Congress.
Kasich and Rubio won almost no primaries in 2016. I don’t see how they are more viable now than in 2016. Romney won the nomination and ran a national campaign – that means something.November 9, 2017 at 7:23 pm #32926
That is a good summary Andrew. I somehow feel there may be another Republican candidate to come into play, but certainly can’t name him/her at this point.
This will continue to get more interesting over the next 12-18 months. But for now, I’m going back to my Seahawks game.November 9, 2017 at 10:14 pm #32932
With that dumpster fire still raging, I don’t want to burn my hands just yet.
As far as the Democrats, how about Franken? Merkley? Inslee? Hmm?
My first choice is the same first choice I made in 2008 — Joe Biden. I don’t care how old he is, but he can slide right in and undo all of Trump’s gaffes in a minimumal about of time than just about any other candidate. We only need 4 years from Joe, then turn it over to VP Jeff Merkley.
Besides, 80 is the new 50. 🙂
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.