Quote:
|
Originally Posted by QuikSand
I think back to 2016. Why on earth was that race even competitive at all?
Because there's a natural inclination to keep horse races as horse races, and not runaways. You fall behind, you shift tactics, you try to change the subject, etc.
|
1. Evangelicals for most of the race were split, with about half saying no way are we voting for Trump. Then fear of Hillary winning had them flipping on that about six weeks out. As has been said, SHAME on them for doing that - and I'm an evangelical. Let's just say that many people who I respected before, I no longer do. There were prominent voices urging them to do the right thing, but too many who followed the 'lesser of two evils' logic.
2. Most importantly, Hillary was the most unliked candidate in modern history this side of Trump. That was true at the beginning at the campaign so it wasn't primarily based on any strategic adjustments, has been for almost her entire political career, and had little to do with Trump's attacks. The hard right would still never have voted for her but if she hadn't been viewed the way she was, she would have done much better with the rest of the country.
3. All the rust belt, anti-trade, preserving coal BS econ populism that's been discussed to death.
So my perspective is still that all you need is someone significantly better than Hillary. Aka, anyone comparable to the nominees by either party in the 40 or so years previous. Trump's approval has not significantly risen and has been consistently the lowest of any incumbent over his first couple of year - it's now above where Carter was at this point but we know what happened to him. And this is in a good economy.