|
|
Post by mhbruin on Oct 12, 2020 8:54:01 GMT -8
Here are my thoughts. She would have face a Republican House and Senate, and would have been able to accomplish little in the way of legislation.
She would start out unpopular and the Repubs would launch investigation after investigation.
The 2018 midterms would have been bad for the Democrats.
Meanwhile not even Mitch could block her from appointing two centrist SCOTUS judges. Some of her moderate judicial nominations would be confirmed, but many would be blocked.
Environment regulations would have been moderately improved, but everything would be challenged in court.
When COVID and the recession hit, she would have handled it very well, but with a bad economy, her bad approval ratings would have dropped even further.
Meanwhile Trump would be holding rallies around the country, and would be nominated again in 2020. He would win easily. We would be about to face 4 years of Trump with a Repub House and Senate.
------------------------------
What do you think would have happened?
|
|
|
|
Post by Floppy Johnson on Oct 12, 2020 8:58:26 GMT -8
That's a likely scenario.
You should add that she would have gotten us into a war somewhere. She's super hawky.
|
|
|
|
Post by northbruin40 on Oct 12, 2020 9:44:35 GMT -8
I think Trump has decayed since 2016. I'm not sure he can captivate an audience now like he did 4 years ago. Also, part of his legend is he is a "winner" and that's what is carrying him with so many Reps and conservatives. If he hadn't won in 2016, Republican members of Congress wouldn't feel that they needed to be so beholden to him.
He's still living off his "2016 miracle" - without it, he's just not the same political force.
|
|
|
|
Post by colbybruin on Oct 12, 2020 10:32:33 GMT -8
I too thought that Clinton and Democrats would have handled the COVID better but I don't have that confidence anymore. Remember those dumb covid party? What could Clinton do against it?
|
|
|
|
Post by mhbruin on Oct 12, 2020 11:54:56 GMT -8
I too thought that Clinton and Democrats would have handled the COVID better but I don't have that confidence anymore. Remember those dumb covid party? What could Clinton do against it? She could not have stopped all the idiocy, but: - She could have had a consistent message to the nation about masks and distancing
- She could have used the Defense Production Act to insure we quickly produced enough PPE and other medical supplies.
- She would have put medical professionals front and center in talking to the public.
- She would not have held super-spreader events
- Like Biden has suggested, she could have required masks on all Federal property.
- She would not have wasted resources on stuff like Hydoxychloroquin.
I am sure there is a lot I am not thinking of.
|
|
|
|
Post by colbybruin on Oct 12, 2020 13:05:04 GMT -8
I too thought that Clinton and Democrats would have handled the COVID better but I don't have that confidence anymore. Remember those dumb covid party? What could Clinton do against it? Those policies would be great. And I have suggested #3, which i think is the most important one, at the very beginning of the pandemic. But in reality, Cuomo didn't and Pelosi still occasionally doesn't wear a mask properly. and when It comes to BLM protests, we don't care about distancing. And more importantly, will the public listen if the gov't suggests them? We have the spirit of Anarchism in our culture. It makes our country great but it may be our achilles heel in pandemic.
Clinton would have done a better job but the result would probably be the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Born2BBruin on Oct 12, 2020 13:12:54 GMT -8
Meanwhile Trump would be holding rallies around the country, and would be nominated again in 2020. He would win easily. We would be about to face 4 years of Trump with a Repub House and Senate. trump would've been a loser and his aura would've been greatly diminished. The GOP establishment would consider it a failed experiment and adjust the primary rules to make sure it couldn't happen again. trump's tweets would be rantings of a sore loser and a constant reminder of Republican's failure. But they'd pretty much stop once he was indicted for tax and bank fraud. |
|
|
|
Post by Floppy Johnson on Oct 12, 2020 13:30:27 GMT -8
I don't know if I buy the "losing the election would have hurt Trump." He'd have gone apeshit with his voter fraud stuff. And, the right would have lapped it up. He'd have been in campaign mode from the get-go.
I think the biggest damage to his chances is that he'd be broke if he hadn't been elected. I mean, he's not putting any money into his campaign now - but, based on those NYT articles about his reciprocating political favors for patronage of Trump properties, you wonder if he could have stayed liquid for another few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by mhbruin on Oct 12, 2020 15:54:56 GMT -8
I don't think losing would have hurt Trump. As Floppy says, he would have claimed the election was stolen by millions of illegal immigrants.
And it is pretty clear that his message is closer to the hearts of most Republicans that your typical never-Trumper. Even if he loses, the Repub Party is not the party of Trumpism, and will remain that way. It is the natural extension of the Tea Party movement.
|
|
|
|
Post by northbruin40 on Oct 12, 2020 17:21:33 GMT -8
I don't know if I buy the "losing the election would have hurt Trump." He'd have gone apeshit with his voter fraud stuff. And, the right would have lapped it up. He'd have been in campaign mode from the get-go. I think the biggest damage to his chances is that he'd be broke if he hadn't been elected. I mean, he's not putting any money into his campaign now - but, based on those NYT articles about his reciprocating political favors for patronage of Trump properties, you wonder if he could have stayed liquid for another few years. Not entirely sure about that. There were stories that Trump actually expected to lose and was surprised that he won. I always took his complaining about fraud was more to explain why he lost the popular vote. He won the Electoral College and then the Presidency, but Trump had to explain why he wasn't showed up by losing the popular vote by so much. Since so many West Coast votes came in late for Clinton, it made an even vote turn into a 2.1% deficit. He threw out "fraud" to explain it to his homers. I think you are overestimating Trump to think he had some long-term plan here. And it wasn't until Trump was showing large Republican popularity as President that so many establishment Republicans began to fall in line with him. Many were not on board during November 2016. You underestimating how much the "miracle" buttressed Trump. |
|
|
|
Post by Floppy Johnson on Oct 12, 2020 20:20:32 GMT -8
I don't know if I buy the "losing the election would have hurt Trump." He'd have gone apeshit with his voter fraud stuff. And, the right would have lapped it up. He'd have been in campaign mode from the get-go. I think the biggest damage to his chances is that he'd be broke if he hadn't been elected. I mean, he's not putting any money into his campaign now - but, based on those NYT articles about his reciprocating political favors for patronage of Trump properties, you wonder if he could have stayed liquid for another few years. Not entirely sure about that. There were stories that Trump actually expected to lose and was surprised that he won. I always took his complaining about fraud was more to explain why he lost the popular vote. He won the Electoral College and then the Presidency, but Trump had to explain why he wasn't showed up by losing the popular vote by so much. Since so many West Coast votes came in late for Clinton, it made an even vote turn into a 2.1% deficit. He threw out "fraud" to explain it to his homers. I think you are overestimating Trump to think he had some long-term plan here. And it wasn't until Trump was showing large Republican popularity as President that so many establishment Republicans began to fall in line with him. Many were not on board during November 2016. You underestimating how much the "miracle" buttressed Trump. I've read, too, that he expected to lose. But, he was saying before the election that the election would be rigged. Remember Samantha Bee's segment about "riggers"? I think he expected to lose, but I don't think that meant he planned on rolling over. But, I'm a simpleton, conspiracy theorist - I think he's being strong-armed by Putin. I don't necessarily think he had some long-term plan. I think Vlad did/does. |
|
|
|
Post by Born2BBruin on Oct 12, 2020 21:46:08 GMT -8
I think he's being strong-armed by Putin. I don't necessarily think he had some long-term plan. I think Vlad did/does. This is a reasonable position, especially if you consider Melania's and her family's unlikely rise in economic circumstances in Tito's Yugoslavia -- two story home for her father and a high rise apartment for Melania while she was still in high school; then a modeling contract in Milan after winning a "contest" in Yugoslavia. But, if you believe Putin is pulling the strings, which I think is more likely than others want to admit, then you should also believe that Putin would get rid of any loose ends after they no longer serve any useful purpose. Winning in 2016 is what has kept trump alive the last four years. |
|
|
|
Post by Floppy Johnson on Oct 13, 2020 7:57:34 GMT -8
I think he's being strong-armed by Putin. I don't necessarily think he had some long-term plan. I think Vlad did/does. This is a reasonable position, especially if you consider Melania's and her family's unlikely rise in economic circumstances in Tito's Yugoslavia -- two story home for her father and a high rise apartment for Melania while she was still in high school; then a modeling contract in Milan after winning a "contest" in Yugoslavia. But, if you believe Putin is pulling the strings, which I think is more likely than others want to admit, then you should also believe that Putin would get rid of any loose ends after they no longer serve any useful purpose. Winning in 2016 is what has kept trump alive the last four years. I latched onto his widely known bad/weird finances, his forays into Russia, and then his praise of Putin during the Pub primaries. Then Russia is doing what they can to get him elected, now re-elected. I thought he was Putin's bitch before the election. Then, here's where I go off the rails, I'd bet the ballot box was hacked last time around. There were precincts that had swings from one party to another that have never been seen in history. Not close. And, they were in key precincts. Franklin Graham has referred to the "miraculous 70,000 votes." It was so anomalous that Graham says it was divine intervention. So, ya, I think he's more or less a flunky. Maybe he has some autonomy, maybe not. I hope I'm wrong. |
|
