Showing posts with label Politics-USA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics-USA. Show all posts

June 29, 2020

Mississippi to Drop Confederate Image on Flag and Trump Retweets "Trump 2020 White Power"

By Mike Allen
The "Stennis flag" is a proposed alternative to Mississippi's current state flag. Photo: Brandon Dill for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Both chambers of Mississippi's legislature passed the biggest hurdle toward removing the Confederate Stars and Bars from the state flag, The (Jackson) Clarion-Ledger reports.

  • The legislation, expected to pass soon in final form, "would immediately take down the flag and set up a nine-member commission to design a new one."
  • "That design would include the words 'In God We Trust' and no Confederate symbols," and would go to voters in November.

Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves (R), who had long refused to wade into the flag debate, tweeted yesterday: 

Mike Allen
Trump’s superpower turns to kryptonite 
Screenshot from CNN

No president in our lifetime has enjoyed a more mesmerizing, seemingly unbendable hold on his political base than Donald Trump. He shifts their views on big topics like the FBI or Vladimir Putin and retains their support regardless of what he says or does. 

  • Why it matters: This connection is turning fast into a liability for Trump and the entire GOP because the president and his mostly white, mostly male base are on the opposite side of most Americans on the epic topics of our day — wearing masks, combating coronavirus, and condemning racial inequality and police brutality. 
  • They are now basically egging each other on. 

Breaking ... President Trump this morning retweeted (then deleted) a video of a man in a golf cart with a "TRUMP 2020" sign who yelled "White power!" at Trump critics. 

  • Trump added the note: "Thank you to the great people of The Villages," a retirement community in Florida. "The Radical Left Do Nothing Democrats will Fall in the Fall."
  • White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere told reporters: "President Trump is a big fan of The Villages. He did not hear the one statement made on the video. What he did see was tremendous enthusiasm from his many supporters."

When the tweet was still up, Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), the only Black Republican senator, told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union": 

  • "[Y]ou can't play it because it was so profanity laced. The entire thing was offensive. ... I think it's indefensible."

The context: Advisers both inside and outside the White House have urged the president to tone down his violent rhetoric, which many worry could escalate racial tensions and hurt him politically, Jonathan Swan reported.

The big picture: Top Republicans have told us for five years that Trump’s base will ultimately cost the party power. 

  • The nation is growing too diverse and too progressive.
  • These Republicans warned that tough-guy, non-inclusive action and talk would backfire — first with minorities, then with educated whites.

The polls suggest strongly this is unfolding in real time.

  • In addition to the N.Y. Times polls above, which showed Joe Biden with strong leads in the six top battlegrounds (subscription), the Fox News Poll this week showed Biden up 9 points in Florida, and tossups in Georgia and Texas — Republican strongholds — and North Carolina.

Between the lines ... N.Y. Times columnist Ross Douthat writes (subscription): "[W]hat was likely to be a slow-motion leftward shift, as the less-married, less-religious, more ethnically diverse younger generation gained more power, is being accelerated nationally by the catastrophes of the Trump administration, which is putting states in play for Democrats five or 10 years early."

March 2, 2020

Amy and Pete Endorse Biden~ Need Warren and Bloomberg to Show Guts and Be Patriots Now

Pete Buttigieg will endorse Joe Biden at a rally in Dallas Monday night, further narrowing the Democratic field's group of moderates in the former vice president's favor, according to a source close to the Biden campaign.
The state of play: The two spoke on the phone Sunday evening after the former South Bend, Ind., the mayor announced his departure from the race. With Amy Klobuchar also dropping out and planning to endorse Biden at Monday's rally, the race is now down to four major candidates — Biden, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Mike Bloomberg.
 The big picture: Biden's team also wants to use its own momentum via a post-South Carolina fundraising boost to score significant victories on Super Tuesday.
  • The Biden team feels like "a clear choice" is emerging between him and Bernie Sanders, according to another campaign aide.
  • His closing argument ahead of Super Tuesday will focus on the idea that voters don't desire a political revolution — a key refrain of the Sanders campaign — and instead want results.
  • People close to Biden's team think he should keep pushing a message that "progressive" means progress, centering the campaign's argument ahead of Super Tuesday on the idea that Biden can get things done while Bernie can't.
The bottom line: This development isn't a total surprise, as Buttigieg's speech after dropping out sounded a lot like what Biden has been saying — and signaled a desire for the party to coalesce around a more moderate candidate.

A Day Before Super Tuesday and Beyond}} Suburban Women Are Wary Of Sanders

Image result for bernie sanders and trump
 Trump privately praises Bernie Sanders (Daily Beast)

Thoughts by AF at the bottom of page

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — In the Trump era, the suburbs have been Democrats’ surprising superpower.

A revolt by college-educated voters, largely women, in suburbs from Virginia Beach to Oklahoma City, from Houston to Southern California, delivered the House majority to Democrats in 2018. Driven by anxiety over guns, health care, and the environment, and recoiling from President Trump’s caustic leadership, suburban voters are widely seen as a critical bloc for any Democratic victory in 2020.

But there are some early signs that the rise of Senator Bernie Sanders, by far the most liberal Democratic front-runner since George McGovern in 1972, is causing stress with the party’s suburban coalition and especially its core of college-educated white women and older voters, many of whom are politically moderate.

And after Saturday night’s big win Joseph R. Biden Jr. in South Carolina, Mr. Sanders will face an invigorated former vice president as well as other moderates, like former Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, in Tuesday’s primaries in Virginia, Texas, and other states with swaths of suburban voters.

Anne Poague, a retired nurse who lives in Virginia Beach, in a House district that a Democrat wrestled from a Republican incumbent in 2018, noted that Mr. Trump’s top argument for re-election would be the economy — with Mr. Sanders as a perfect foil. 

“People are going to say, do you want him or do you want a socialist?” she said of the prospect of Mr. Sanders as the nominee. It was “kind of scary” to see Mr. Trump congratulating Mr. Sanders on his primary wins, she said. “What does that tell you?”

In Hampton Roads — which includes Virginia Beach, Norfolk and Newport News — Democrats also picked up four Statehouse seats in November. One of those 2019 victors, Shelly Simonds, said suburban women “really generated the enthusiasm that created the blue wave.”

While some women, including many teachers, “are all about Sanders,” Ms. Simonds said, others recoil from his sweeping proposals such as a government takeover of health care. “There are a lot of women who are very protective over health care and the current status quo,” she said.

Suburban women are especially important in battleground states like Virginia, which is seen as essential to any Electoral College majority for the party in 2020. Virginia has turned sharply toward moderate Democratic candidates in recent years; the losses of Republican candidates up and down the ballot in suburbia have produced more political change than arguably any other state.

Mr. Biden’s victory in South Carolina may reset the field going into Super Tuesday on March 3, when 16 states and territories vote. Until recently, Mr. Biden and Mr. Sanders have jostled for the polling lead in Virginia, with Mr. Bloomberg also contending. In his victory speech on Saturday night, Mr. Biden took aim at Mr. Sanders as a divisive figure. 

“If Democrats want a nominee who’s a Democrat, a lifelong Democrat, a proud Democrat, an Obama-Biden Democrat, join us,” Mr. Biden said.

No matter who the party’s presidential nominee is, Democrats feel confident at this point about winning Virginia in November. Mr. Sanders had a nine-point lead over Mr. Trump in the state in a recent poll by Roanoke College.

In a poll of likely Virginia primary voters released on Friday by Christopher Newport University, Mr. Biden, with 22 percent, narrowly edged Mr. Sanders with 17 percent and Mr. Bloomberg at 13 percent.

In a sign of Mr. Sanders’s vulnerability, a plurality of Democrats polled disagreed with some of his key positions: 44 percent said the private insurance system should be kept as it is, and only one in five supported canceling all student debt.

“It’s clear that the path to the majority for us in Virginia in 2017, 2018 and 2019 was Democrats picking candidates in the primary who could talk to independents and bring them to our side in the general election,” said former Gov. Terry McAuliffe, who on Saturday endorsed Mr. Biden after his commanding South Carolina win. “In order to beat Trump, we need a nominee who is inclusive and can build a broad coalition.”

In this month’s Nevada caucuses, which Mr. Sanders won easily, white women who were college graduates were his weakest supporters (though he won them narrowly), according to entrance polls.

In a head-to-head matchup between Mr. Trump and the top Democrats in a recent Washington Post/ABC News Poll, Mr. Sanders performed the worst with college-educated white women. The Vermont senator, who calls himself a democratic socialist, edged Mr. Trump by just two points, a statistical tie, among white women with a college degree. The more moderate candidates, Mr. Biden, Pete Buttigieg, Mr. Bloomberg, and Amy Klobuchar, all outstripped Mr. Trump by 10 points or more with the same group of voters.
However, a Fox News Poll released on Thursday showed Mr. Sanders leading among suburban Democratic voters nationally, as he was with all Democrats. He was the top choice of 28 percent of Democrats in the suburbs, ahead of Mr. Biden with 20 percent and Mr. Bloomberg at 19 percent.

There were potential warning signs for Democrats in the poll should Mr. Sanders become the nominee: Nearly one in five suburban Democrats said they would not support him against Mr. Trump in November.

“I don’t think Bernie can win,” said Pat Barner, a retiree here in Virginia Beach, the southern point in a crescent of suburbs running through Richmond to Northern Virginia, which have politically transformed the state. The State Legislature, where Democrats won control in November for the first time in a generation, is swiftly moving to enact Democratic priorities on guns, abortion, minimum wage, and L.G.B.T.Q. rights.

Ms. Barner is weighing Ms. Klobuchar and Mr. Buttigieg. Though she would vote for Mr. Sanders if he were the nominee, she feared he could not carry the state. “We’re not that liberal in Virginia,” she said.

Mr. Sanders campaigned aggressively in the state on Saturday and earlier on Thursday, when a rally in Richmond drew a large throng of passionate supporters, mainly young people who exemplified the intensity of his support, but also its potentially limited breadth.

Glen Besa, a suburbanite from Chesterfield County, who stood out from the many college students because of his age, said his first vote was for George McGovern, the Democratic nominee who lost in a landslide in 1972 — but he rejected any analogy to Mr. Sanders. “Times have changed and we have fundamental issues that haven’t been addressed since ’72,” he said. 

A state delegate from the Northern Virginia suburbs who introduced Mr. Sanders, Elizabeth Guzman, hammered an electability argument. “I was inspired by the senator and his message to run for office,” said Ms. Guzman, who was born in Peru and flipped a Republican-held seat in Prince William County in 2017. “When they told me Virginia wasn’t ready for a brown person, or an immigrant woman, you came out and proved them wrong,” she told the crowd of several thousand. 

Mr. Sanders speaks to supporters during a rally in Richmond, Va., on Thursday. Some question whether he will appeal to suburban moderates, a key Democratic constituency in Virginia.
But Mark Keam, a Korean-American Democrat in the House of Delegates from Northern Virginia, offered a different perspective of immigrant voters, who have played as crucial a role in Virginia’s tilt to Democrats as have white college-educated women. Mr. Keam, a Buttigieg supporter, said many immigrants recoil from Mr. Sanders’s embrace of big-government socialism because it reminds them of homelands they fled.

“If you’re an immigrant from Asia and you came to this country from a country that was socialist, or you’re from Africa that has dictators or South America where you got your arm chopped off if you said anything wrong about the government — you’re thinking, I thought America is not this way,” Mr. Keam said.

A Sanders candidacy might threaten the 2020 prospects of two vulnerable Democratic congresswomen in Virginia who won Republican-held seats in the 2018 midterms: Representative Abigail Spanberger, a former C.I.A. officer who won a suburban district outside Richmond; and Representative Elaine Luria, a retired Navy commander who won in Virginia Beach.

Ms. Luria, who has endorsed Mr. Biden, condemned Mr. Sanders recently for saying he would skip the conference of a pro-Israel group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Ms. Spanberger is keeping her head down, not wanting to nationalize her tough re-election race this year in a district Mr. Trump comfortably won.

“Both Luria and Spanberger would not be eager to have to be running down-ballot with Bernie,” said Bob Holsworth, a longtime political analyst in the state. “They’re very concerned about the socialist label.”

Democrats’ historic wave in Virginia, which has surged in three election years starting in 2017, began with grass-roots suburban groups like the Liberal Women of Chesterfield County, which was once a Republican stronghold.

Kim Drew Wright, a founder of the group, said in recent days it has been an effort to keep the peace on the private Facebook page for members, where clashing views of Mr. Sanders have broken out.

“There are different various opinions all the way from ‘there’s no way he could win’ to ‘he’s awesome,’” said Ms. Drew Wright, who favors Senator Elizabeth Warren for the nomination. She said Mr. Sanders triggers fierce opinions. “He’s at the top of the page right now,” she said.

I just don't understand for a man who has no permanent friends and does not seem to like anyone except a daughter, He seems to like Bern Sanders. He has not said a negative thing about him. Even have congratulated him on wins. Why? My readers are smart of coarse and know why. In Trump's mind he thinks he could beat Sanders, Why to knock him?. Going back to 2016 we all thought Hillary was going to kick his butt. But it turned out the opposite and it all fairness she won the popular vote and spoke real numbers and quotes when she disputed Trump at the debates but, Say you are very smart and well-spoken. You' re given an individual to debate politics. You will have double-check numbers and quotes. This other guy will play by ear and he does not think he needs to tell the truth or even sound smart(by the time people check, the moment passed and he won the moment). He needs to sound powerful and overwhelming. Isn't that what happened with Hillary? You tell me🦊

February 28, 2020

Nobody Likes Bernie ? Many Do But It is Not That Important Anymore~ Judging The Ideas Is What Counts

I know Frank Bruni and respect his opinions when he comes on TV and mainly speaks about our political situation. This particular posting appeared in the New York Times. Frank is a handsome correspondent in my opinion, with lots of experience.
Frank Bruni

This article is part of Frank Bruni’s newsletter. 
(You can sign up here to receive it every Wednesday).

“Nobody likes him.” “Nobody wants to work with him.” When Hillary Clinton’s withering statements about Bernie Sanders were reported last month, many people interpreted them as sour grapes — as the fruit of her resentment that he bruised her during the 2016 Democratic primary and didn’t do more to help her in the general election.

But while her words were uncharitable and unnecessary, they spoke to a wider truth about Sanders that didn’t get all that much attention four years ago and hasn’t been widely discussed this time around, either: He isn’t and has never been popular with his Democratic colleagues in the Senate. Clinton would know that firsthand because she served with him there. I know that because I’ve heard some of those colleagues talk about him, describing him as arrogant, uncooperative, unyielding, even mean. One of them once joked that he was the Democrats’, Ted Cruz.

I mention that not in the interest of reviewing his legislative career or assessing his personality. I’m intrigued by the way in which his political success — he is indisputably the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination — contradicts bromides about the importance, professionally, of making friends and using honey instead of vinegar. Sanders didn’t do that. And neither did Donald Trump on his path to the presidency.

They’re very different men with very different values, and my reservations about Sanders are nothing like my revulsion to Trump. But they both demonstrate that personal charm, kindness and the regard of your peers matter less in politics than does the power of your pitch or, to use the lingo that my fellow Times columnist David Brooks did recently, the resonance of your myth.

If you’re telling a story and making a case that enough voters strongly connect with, you can be abrasive. You can have many episodes in your past that don’t square with most Americans’ sensibilities. You can be a thrice-married, trash-talking showman with bankruptcies, lawsuits and all manner of other messiness in your wake. Or you can be a 78-year-old who honeymooned in the Soviet Union, had a heart attack just last year and has not been as forthcoming with your medical records as you pledged to be.

Again, I’m not equating Trump and Sanders, to whom that would be grossly unfair. I’m noting how flawed conventional wisdom is and how Trump first and then Sanders exposed that. We journalists should never again write that someone is too old, too young, too polarizing, too petty, too cranky or too whatever to win an election. We should listen to what he or she is saying and then analyze, with an open mind, how it’s being heard.

Trump told voters that arrogant elites were ignoring their struggles and even contemptuous of them, and while many of those voters didn’t admire him personally, they thrilled to that message and how he delivered it. Sanders is telling voters that America has become a sort of oligarchy in which affluent citizens exploit poorer ones, and while many voters aren’t lining up to have a beer with him, they’re thirsty for — and sated by — that narrative.

We in the media too often cover politics as if it’s all about personality, but the ascents of Trump and Sanders have more to do with ideas — with arguments, perspectives, lenses for looking at America. If you have a seductive one, you needn’t be a storybook seducer. You can even be more ogre than a prince. 

  You can follow me on Twitter (@FrankBruni). 
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: 
Frank Bruni has been with The Times since 1995 and held a variety of jobs — including White House reporter, Rome bureau chief, and chief restaurant critic — before becoming a columnist in 2011. He is the author of three best-selling books.  @FrankBruni • Facebook

October 2, 2019

Mark Zuckerberg Thinks Elizabeth Warren Would Be Bad For Him, He Said Us but

Image result for arab spring birth
 Tahir Square, Egypt
    "What would really ‘suck’ is if we don’t fix a corrupt system that lets giant companies like Facebook engage in illegal anticompetitive practices"  E.Warren                 
 The guy that accepted all those Million dollars and billion rubbles knowing It was Russian helping Trump, I mean He would not know they are Russians if the money is coming from Russians and some paying in Russian currency...What? Yeap.  That is what I mean when I say Dear Mark see us like as himself because that is who he has been battling for. because it is easy to see that what Facebook does it does for itself and to help those that it believes it will help FB corporate culture. Facebook is been a big dissapoitment for me. I thought in those early days that Facebook was good for the world because on those days of the Arab Spring the exchange of information was critical for people to check what their governments were selling to them. Yes, we had an exchange of many ideas and a lot of information but I think the misinformation and bad ideas have been greater (as in worse).  I find it funny he now speaks about who is bad for the Us. He has not mentioned anything about a President that is being impeached but he helped him get elected so I don't blame him.
Adam Gonzalez         (I am not Pro Elizabeth but pro-American Companies which keeps our economy going.  (My vote for President is not important) Of all people to be critical of a presidential candidate Zuckenberg should be at the end of the row.)
The following was written by By David Uberti on
Mark Zuckerberg sees how antitrust enforcement might look under an Elizabeth Warren presidency, and he’s ready for a legal battle if she wants to break up his company.
“I mean, if she gets elected president, then I would bet that we will have a legal challenge, and I would bet that we will win the legal challenge,” the Facebook CEO told employees in July meetings, of which transcripts were just published by The Verge. “And does that still suck for us? Yeah.”  
The Facebook co-founder and CEO made the comments during a pair of staff meetings, where he fielded questions from employees on the troubled rollout of the Facebook cryptocurrency Libra, a rising competitor in TikTok, and his own unchecked power within the company.
But the executive’s comments on a leading 2020 Democratic candidate stand out at a time when Washington has dialed up the heat. As Congress ramped up a web of inquiries into Big Tech in recent months, Warren has surged in the polls in part by arguing for new checks on corporate power. That includes a plan to break up Silicon Valley giants like Facebook.
Warren doesn’t appear fazed by the prospect of a huge legal battle. Soon after The Verge reported Zuckerberg’s remarks Tuesday, the Massachusetts Democrat took aim at his company on Twitter. 
“What would really ‘suck’ is if we don’t fix a corrupt system that lets giant companies like Facebook engage in illegal anti-competitive practices, stomp on consumer privacy rights, and repeatedly fumble their responsibility to protect our democracy,” she wrote, linking to her campaign website and fundraising page. 
Many Silicon Valley honchos have argued that breaking up tech companies would make problems like user privacy harder to solve. Zuckerberg, whose company acquired Instagram and WhatsApp in moves that are now being scrutinized by federal regulators, panned the idea in his July meetings.  “It’s just that breaking up these companies, whether it’s Facebook or Google or Amazon, is not actually going to solve the issues,” he said. “And, you know, it doesn’t make election interference less likely. It makes it more likely because now the companies can’t coordinate and work together. It doesn’t make any of the hate speech or issues like that less likely. It makes it more likely because now ... all the processes that we’re putting in place and investing in, now we’re more fragmented.” 
“It’s why Twitter can’t do as good of a job as we can,” he added. “Our investment on safety is bigger than the whole revenue of their company.”
Facebook, Amazon, Alphabet, and Apple have already spent more than $26 million this year to shape potential regulations, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Zuckerberg himself went to Washington last month to add his personal touch to this lobbying push. 
And for all the talk of antitrust enforcement by Warren and other lawmakers, Facebook may have a larger warchest for any legal battle than federal agencies. Zuckerberg doesn’t appear afraid to use it. 
“I mean, I don’t want to have a major lawsuit against our own government,” he told employees in July. “I mean, that’s not the position that you want to be in when you’re, you know, I mean … it’s like, we care about our country and want to work with our government and do good things. But look, at the end of the day, if someone’s going to try to threaten something that existential, you go to the mat and you fight.”

September 6, 2019

Will Trump Win? Let's Apply Math Without Love Because if You Love a Politician, U Will Make It Loose

As a Store Manager in several stores, in different areas, my mantra came from my first DM. "Love them Adam, but Check Them!" The stores in which I was a superstar I had followed that Mantra. In the ones I could have done so much better, I didn't check because I love them and from that came to trust (bad). This rule applies to politicians as well. {Adam}

Editorial, Adam Gonzalez
Many heads got scratched this week when President Trump doubled down on his erroneous claim that Alabama had been in the path of Hurricane Dorian.
Apparently relying on a map that warned of high winds, or another showing hypothetical path for the storm, the president over the weekend insisted Alabama was "in the crosshairs." At midweek, sitting in the Oval Office, he held up a map on which someone using a marking pen had ballooned the area of actual hurricane threat to include Alabama.
The question had to be asked: Wouldn't it be enough to be worried about Florida, Georgia and the rest of the Southeastern coast without dragging in Alabama — a state outside the current danger zone?
Perhaps. But in seeking to understand the moment it was tempting to observe that Alabama is arguably the cornerstone of the president's base of support in seeking a second term.  
While 17 states have consistently shown the president at 50% job approval or better, according to Gallup, Alabama is one of just three states where Trump's approval has often topped 60% since Inauguration Day. According to the Morning Consult tracking poll, Trump's approval is 18 points positive in West Virginia and 21 in Wyoming. In Alabama, it is 26, and Alabama has more votes in the Electoral College than those two other states combined.
Do such things matter to a president seeking reelection? They just might, especially when that president is struggling to raise his public approval nationwide.
The president is setting his course on issues, from guns and trade to immigration and abortion, and his stances on those make it clear he is playing to his base. All politicians want as many voters as they can get, and all begin their calculations by relying on a core of support. But in American presidential politics, the ultimate question is not just how many voters one has but where they live, because in American presidential politics, the Electoral College rules. While much time and attention is devoted to tracking the president's approval rating nationwide, and his supporters can be found in any part of the country, all that matters in the end is the president's standing state by state. Examining trends in individual states offers a clearer picture of Trump's reelection prospects a little more than a year from now — and a rationale for his strategy. It also highlights the degree to which the country's issue conflicts and partisan rivalries are defined by differences in population density.
Where the urban- and inner-suburban metro areas are politically dominant, Democrats prevail; otherwise, the president and the Republican Party hold sway. And where the city-country balance is closer to even, we have a swing state.
That sets the landscape for 2020 — with President Trump hoping to again win the 30 states he won in 2016 with 306 votes in the Electoral College. That gives him a margin of 36 Electoral College votes, because it takes 270 to win for a majority 538 electors who make up the Electoral College.
So how's he faring in the effort to do it again?
When being "popular" isn't the answer
It's nice to win the popular vote, and the popular vote usually underscores the final decision. Not always, though. See 2000 and 2016. In reality, the national popular vote has no role in the choice of the president.
That choice is determined by the Electoral College, guided by the popular vote in each state. (Note: If no one gets a majority in the Electoral College, the choice is made in the House of Representatives, where, for just this one decision, each state gets one vote.)
With this in mind, defining Trump's base requires both defining his voters and counting the states where they will cast at least a plurality of the 2020 vote.
In 2016, Trump won those 30 states with 306 electoral votes, though there were two "faithless electors" in Texas who voted for Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, leaving Trump, technically, with 304.
Looking ahead to 2020, though, Trump looks to only be able to count on a little more than half of those states to continue backing him, come what may. Trump's approval rating averaged just 40% nationwide in 2018, according to Gallup, and his approval rating was above 50% in 17 states — all of which he had carried in 2016.
The Trump 17 are: Tennessee, Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Kentucky, Oklahoma, Utah, Arkansas, Mississippi, Kansas, West Virginia, Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Alaska and Wyoming.
These numbers are based on the Gallup tracking poll that takes soundings 350 times a year. It is generally corroborated by the readings done by Morning Consult. Although Morning Consult had sub-50 readings for Trump in Utah at several points in the first two years, it was above 50% this summer, as are Texas and Missouri.
In the first weeks of 2019, during the government shutdown, both Gallup and Morning Consult found Trump dipping below 50% by a point or two in some of the larger states in this core. But in each, the rating quickly snapped back above 50% when the shutdown ended and has remained there since.
These 17 states then would have to be regarded as the purest definition of Trump's geographic base, the firmest foundation for his reelection. Beyond that, they easily provide most of the senators who make Republican Mitch McConnell the Senate majority leader. The current Senate has 53 Republican members, 31 of whom hail from those same 17 states.
As a measure of how American politics has changed, consider that there were 15 Democrats from these states when Bill Clinton became president. One Democrat from that era, Richard Shelby of Alabama, is still around, but he switched to the GOP in 1994 right after that party became the Senate majority. He symbolizes how populists from largely rural states in the South and West have migrated from one party to the other and become the hard base for Trump.
It has long been noted that Trump, a former Manhattan socialite and billionaire, makes an odd champion for these voters and these regions of the country. But his willingness to take up their causes has largely won them over. And in 2016, his emergence from a field of 17 candidates to win the Republican Party nomination installed him atop a party that now commands the loyalty of rural America as never before.
The more rural, the more pro-Trump
Within the states, and across the national map, party loyalties can be perceived as a function of population density.
"All the social changes that have pulled cities and rural areas apart since the 1930s have come to be expressed in the party system," writes Jonathan Rodden, a political scientist at Stanford University. "American geographic polarization has emerged in large part because our political institutions have created a strict two-party system that has gradually come to reflect a set of social cleavages that are highly correlated with population density."
And Will Wilkinson, vice president for research at the Niskanen Center, a Washington think tank, has added: "The filtering/sorting dynamic of urbanization has produced a lower-density, mainly white [rural] population that is increasingly uniform in socially conservative personality, aversion to diversity, relative disinclination to migrate and seek higher education, and Republican Party loyalty." 
Trump's most loyal 17 states have in common a relatively low population. The two largest, Tennessee and Missouri, rank just 16th and 18th among all states in the Census Bureau estimates for 2018. Each has two major cities that vote Democratic, but the urban characteristics of Nashville and Memphis, and St. Louis and Kansas City, are not enough to counterbalance the exurban and rural characteristics of those states overall.
More typical of the group in the population in Kansas. With a little under 3 million residents last year, and ranking 35th nationally, Kansas is still more populous than half the rest of the 17 states. Next in size is West Virginia with 1.8 million. Five states among the 17 qualify for only a single seat in the U.S. House: Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota, Alaska, and Wyoming.
A glance at these 17 pro-Trump states on a map makes them appear to dominate the landscape, and indeed they do in a strictly geographic sense. They comprise some of the largest expanses of sparsely inhabited land America has to offer. That impression only strengthens when you add Texas, a megastate where Trump has not always been above 50% approval in the Gallup but has never been far from it. While the state is becoming more competitive, few doubt it will be in the president's column again in 2020.
Tacking on Texas also greatly expands the footprint of Trump's hardcore states in the Electoral College. Without Texas, their collective contribution is only 102 electoral votes. With Texas, they reach 140, just over half of what Trump will need to secure a second term.
On the contrary
The other side of the coin in the Gallup approval map is the group of 16 (plus the District of Columbia) states where Trump's approval was below 40% in his first two years in office. Here again, the Morning Consult tracking data generally corroborate these findings and extend them into 2019.
Not surprisingly, these 16 have a lot more people than the core Trump 17, as the below-40 states include three of the nation's most populous five (California, New York, and Illinois) and nine of the top 22. That translates to 201 electoral votes or nearly three-fourths of what a Democrat might need to win.
It is tempting to say this is the built-in base of Trump's opponent, whoever that may be.
But that still leaves a whopping 235 electoral votes in the 17 states that are not distinctly pro-Trump or con, the states where he has been at 40% to 49% approval (again, relying primarily on the Gallup tracking).
In 2016, Trump was able to pick off just enough states in the Great Lakes region — starting with pivotal Ohio — to win despite losing the popular vote by 2.9 million votes. He could win again, even losing by millions in the popular vote, if he can reassemble the same bloc of states — or close to it.
There seems little point in campaigning at all in the deeper blue states such as California, New York and Illinois. While millions of voters live there, the president has little or no chance of translating their votes into the electoral votes he needs to supplement his base in the rest of the country.
The president will campaign in the states where he has been polling in the 40s, including previously reliable blue states he shocked the world by winning in 2016 (Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin). He won those three by fractions of a percentage point each (just under 78,000 votes aggregate total).
All three states elected Democratic governors in 2018. But the president maintains a loyal Republican base in each and will again appeal to non-Republicans who found him the better choice in 2016. He hopes they hold and lift him again next year.
Short Center Editorial by the Publisher, Adam Gonzalez:

 One of the problems with our voting system is One the Electoral vote and Second, the voters falling in love with politicians like if they were movie stars. These politicians are as honest as the best or worse actor in reading their lines and presenting something very far from what they are. However, our system is political and we have to vote for politicians but does not say you have to love them? I think it started with FDR and it got cemented with the short life of President John Kennedy. But because 17 states fell for Trump, a good for nothing New Yorker who never worked a day in his life but he hit the right tone with the people in 17 states that thought he was better than Hillary who only the ones closest to her loved her ( all 12 of them) and that was not many. Now we have people infatuated with the man least likely to run and win against a sleeky snake-like Trump. That is Biden of coarse. He never got the message that the time with Obama was going to be the end of the White House career and he had a lot of accomplishments and many loving fans. But loving Biden means you' re not thinking straight. Why is that? Simple! Most of us ignore the shortcoming of the people we love.
 On the other hand that is not the way, Trump is going to be feeling and treating him as such, which means Trump again might win. Even with a good candidate that knows how to take it but better yet to dish it out without looking hateful this person will have a tough time not because they won't be millions of voters ahead like Hillary(over 3million over Trump yet she lost) but is the College Electoral system in which states with 3 thousand people have more say than NYC, California or Washington state with its millions of residents and the drivers of the economy of this country. 
My point is simple: Please don't fall in love for Biden, He will loose and don't fall in love with any of the other. You need to get to know the strong political points of Trump, which is simple to see and not many and try to find someone to kick those on this bold head (sorry for the bold head comment guys, I like them very much). 
                                  Image result for I like you but don't love you

 Needless to say, the president will emphasize that strategic handful of "purple states" that have swung back and forth in recent presidential cycles. Most important are the ones he captured last time: Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, Arizona and Iowa. But he will also be looking to compete in swing states he lost to Hillary Clinton: Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire.
With all this predictable effort, however, Trump will not neglect the 17 base states that have stood by him most loyally so far. And he should find it natural enough to enlarge this group with the states that have at least kept him near 50% approval through his first 32 months in office.
These include the megastates of Texas and Georgia (No. 2 and No. 8), plus Louisiana and Indiana. He has held rallies in these states and stressed their issues and concerns from Inauguration Day forward. And he knows that without all these states on board, all other strategies and outreach will not be enough to ensure a second inauguration.

Featured Posts

Staten Island and The US Looses One of Its Fighters to COVID-19 {Jim Smith}

                             Jim Smith helped organize Staten Island's first pride parade in 2005. He served as its...