Happy Thanksgiving!

I wish all readers of Progressives Chat a… Happy Thanksgiving! 

(Next blog topic will be published Sunday, December 1, 2019, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

‘Why Bernie Sanders Is Missing the Moment’

A very strong and insightful opinion, on Bernie Sanders’s 2020 presidential campaign, was presented in this video, published Saturday, November 23, 2019, by Status Coup’s Jordan Chariton.

I agree with the overall message.

I hope Progressives Chat readers will give their two-cents as well.

(Next blog topic will be Thursday, November 28, 2019, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

‘He Predicted Both Trump’s Election and Impeachment. What Else Does He Know?’

From time to time comes an expert with a considerable track record of predicting, fairly well in advance, the outcome of an upcoming United States presidential election.

One of those people is Allan Lichtman.

He is known for “The Keys”—which is really a checklist, a guide created by Lichtman, which is used in determining his prediction of a winning candidate and/or political party.

The above screen shot is the article. Just below is the article’s link.

He Predicted Both Trump’s Election and Impeachment. What Else Does He Know?


(The next blog topic will be Sunday, November 24, 2019, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

Aaron Maté Interviews Jimmy Dore

We are used to interview–discussions in which Jimmy Dore welcomes as his guest Aaron Maté.

Now, we get the opposite.

Published to YouTube just yesterday [Sunday, November 17, 2019], and with its video above, is the host of Push Back welcoming as his program’s guest the host of The Jimmy Dore Show.

(The next blog topic will be published Thursday, November 21, 2019, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

‘Millennials earn 20% less than baby boomers did—despite being better educated’

Link to this report:

Millennials earn 20% less than baby boomers did—despite being better educated



I do not normally like to refer to CNBC. But, this is a report worth sharing. I keep in mind that nearly 50 percent of employed U.S. citizens are earning $30,000 or less per year. I also keep in mind nearly 80 percent of employed U.S. citizens are living paycheck to paycheck. Not enough of this is being kept in mind by those who take to elections like they take to team sports. (They should care—meaning, they should care enough to be demanding better from U.S. politicians and government.) This is reality. And this report says what a good amount of us already know: The millennials get screwed the most. Not surprising, as pointed out by political scientist and Brown University professor Mark Blyth, because the young do not routinely turn out their eligible vote as much as the old. And so the beat-down goes on.

‘By trying to Silence Sanders, the Corporate Media De-Legitimizes Themselves’

This insightful piece, from November 7, 2019, was written by Glen Ford for Black Agenda Report:

By trying to Silence Sanders, the Corporate Media De-Legitimize Themselves

The 2020 Democratic Primaries Divide In Two: Bernie Sanders—Followed By Everybody Else

My previous blog topic was a perspective on the 2020 United States presidential election that was both anticipation and prediction.

It keeps in mind that, given the date, I can change my mind.

Election 2020 is an incumbent year. This means the people who will vote in the general election have the option to re-elect the incumbent president of the United States, Republican Donald Trump.

For those who actually wonder whether Trump could get unseated just failing to win re-nomination, the answer is yes. Yes—it is possible. At the same time: No—for such likelihood. Only one elected incumbent president was unseated in his effort to win re-nomination by his party: 1856 Democratic incumbent Franklin Pierce.

I see no problem with a 2020 re-nomination for Donald Trump. States like Minnesota and North Dakota are paving the way, with their primaries, for him to not be challenged. So, that helps.

This leaves it up to the Democrats.

After they failed to hold the presidency in 2016, after two terms of Barack Obama and with nominee Hillary Clinton, they say Trump is dangerous and we need him out of the White House.

Impeach the president? As if impeachment means automatic vote to remove Trump by the Republican-held U.S. Senate. Please!

If the Democrats truly want Trump out, they have to go by way of the general election.

The 2020 Democrats, wanting Trump out, have to unseat 45th U.S. president Donald Trump.

So, who should be the 2020 Democratic nominee for president of the United States?

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

Before answering specifically who, let us keep in mind a few things:


While this nation has had 43 prior individual (counted as 44) presidents, there have been 10 incumbent U.S. presidents who were unseated. Five of them were during the 1800s: Federalist John Adams (1800); National Republican John Quincy Adams (1828); Democrat Martin Van Buren (1840); Democrat Grover Cleveland (1888); and Republican Benjamin Harrison (1892). Five of them were during the 1900s: Republican William Howard Taft (1912); Republican Herbert Hoover (1932); Republican Gerald Ford (1976); Democrat Jimmy Carter (1980); and Republican George Bush (1992).

There was one example, in the 1800s, in which the White House party switched over two consecutive election cycles with the unseating of incumbent presidents. (There were others; but they didn’t come with unseating an incumbent president.) This happened in 1888 and 1892, in which Benjamin Harrison and Grover Cleveland, the only president who did not win two consecutive cycles, unseated each other.

There was one example, in the 1900s, in which the White House party switched over two consecutive election cycles. This happened in 1976 and 1980, in which Jimmy Carter unseated Gerald Ford (who was never elected either president or vice president) and Carter was unseated by Ronald Reagan.

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

“Vote Blue No Matter Who,” which really means Surrender Your Mind, does not jibe with electoral reality because…Any Blue Will Not Do.

I related my observations, on August 29, to Tim Black on his live stream of TBTV.

I mentioned the five occurrences of unseated incumbent presidents from the 20th century.

I noted something similar shared by the opposition-party challengers who unseated those incumbent presidents.

What 1912 Democratic challenger and pickup winner Woodrow Wilson, 1932 Democratic challenger and pickup winner Franklin Roosevelt, 1976 Democratic challenger and pickup winner Jimmy Carter, 1980 Republican challenger and pickup winner Ronald Reagan, and 1992 Democratic challenger and pickup winner Bill Clinton had in common is this: They not only ran on change; they delivered change—not just to the nation, and its people, but also to their respective political parties.

You take the two biggest standout examples—Roosevelt and Reagan—and there is no spinning that their political parties were not the same as before following their first-term election victories.

The last three times the presidency switched White House parties—2000, 2008, and 2016—were term-limited years; meaning, we had to elect a new president. A successor, a Republican or a Democratic pickup winner, can change his party. But, it really happens especially in an incumbent year in which a Republican or a Democratic challenger unseats an incumbent president.

When an incumbent gets unseated, by the nominee of the opposition party, it is the voters rejecting the incumbent’s arguments to stay the course—and it is the nation and its voters insisting the country head in a different direction. That cannot be done without vision. That cannot be done without an agenda. That cannot be done without a change to the very political party of the nominated challenger—and one who is certainly a true leader—who succeeds in unseating the incumbent president.

☆ ☆ ☆ ☆ ☆

The 2020 Democrats who are thinking they need to nominate someone in line with the 1992 period, the previous change to the Democratic Party via the corporatism of Bill Clinton, have it wrong.

I think some of them do not know this.

I think some of them do know this.

There is no one in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries—certainly not the likes of status-quo party-establishment types like Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg and not even the progressive posturing of capitalist-to-her-bones Elizabeth Warren—who represents an individuality that is also a philosophy and form of leadership which can deliver change to how the Democratic Party operates…with the exception of the junior United States senator from Vermont.

The 2020 Democratic Party and their presidential primaries voters, if they actually want to unseat Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump, have one option which speaks to the tide of history and the change in the direction in which their party’s base of young voters are heading.

The 2020 Democrats need to nominate Bernie Sanders.

Anticipating and Predicting Election 2020

I reserved this blog topic’s date, Sunday, November 3, 2019, because it is one year from the scheduled date of the Tuesday, November 3, 2020 United States presidential election.

It will be the 59th presidential election in the history of the United States. The first was in 1789. The second was in 1792. The nation has since held its presidential elections in leap years.

I am, at this point, and with use of the blog title, “anticipating” and “predicting” the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination will go to Massachusetts senior United States senator Elizabeth Warren. The first two contests, Iowa and New Hampshire, I think will go—in that order—to Warren and Vermont junior U.S. senator Bernie Sanders. These two contests, the first two on the calendar, will set the trajectory for most of how the rest of the primaries will play out in terms of the map. I suspect the Democratic Party, which wants to make sure (if they can) the nomination will not go to Sanders, will work their machine to catapult Warren to nomination. To go more deeply into that issue would require me to write a separate blog topic. But, I have listed below, in summary of “predicting” the general election, that the 2020 Democratic challenger and nominee would be Warren.

Onto the general election.

The U.S. Popular Vote has been recorded since 1824. The year 2020 will mark the 50th recording of the U.S. Popular Vote. From the 49 elections of 1824 to 2016, the winner of the U.S. Popular Vote and the Electoral College, which comes first, has aligned to the same person in 44 cycles. That is almost 90 percent. I mention this because, from what I am “anticipating” and “predicting,” this is important to keep in mind. (Except for following subheadings, this is the last I will make use of any quotations around those two words.)

⭑ ⭑ ⭑ ⭑ ⭑

Color Key: ‘Anticipating’ the Map

The above map is a broad anticipation of the potential for a Republican hold or a Democratic pickup. (Meaning, the potential 2016-to-2020 national shift and what results they can yield.) When we get more deeply into 2020, the perceived tossups may narrow. That, at the least, is what the 2020 re-election campaign for Donald Trump will want to see. If it remains broad, to an extent of what appears on the above map, that will indicate a better chance the Democratic challenger will unseat Trump. (Frankly, I could picture this if the 2020 Democratic nomination goes to Bernie Sanders. I will write about this in the next blog topic, on Thursday, November 7, 2019, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

•  Solid Red  and  Solid Blue  are for those I estimate will end up definite Republican or Democratic holds. For the Republican side, the party will carry at least 20 states combining for 125 electoral votes. For the Democratic side, the party will carry at least 17 states, plus District of Columbia, combining for 216 electoral votes.
•  Yellow  are those which I think will back the winner—be it a Republican hold or a Democratic pickup—as they carried Republican in 2016. (Along with Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, Iowa, Ohio, Florida, the Rust Belt trio of tipping-point state Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan were the 2016 Republican pickups. In April 2018, I actually wrote and posted about that here: Election 2020’s Key Bellwethers: The Rust Belt Trio Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.)
•  Light Red  and  Light Blue  allow for a broader possibility; meaning, if Donald Trump wins re-election, and increases his 2016 popular-vote margin from –2.09 (he received 45.93% to the 48.02% for losing Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton), those in Light Blue are susceptible to flip to the 2020 Republican column for re-electing Trump; those in Light Red are for a Democratic challenger and pickup winner who unseats Trump with a popular-vote margin that reaches at least +6. (That Democratic pickup winner would obviously flip those in yellow and, with Georgia, would reach a margin of +5.) Light hues show what I perceive to be the limit for either prevailing party. (At this point, I don’t think a 2020 Democratic pickup winner will exceed +8.)

If you read the color bar, in the upper area, you can total the potential electoral votes.

Republican incumbent Donald Trump can get re-elected with up to 33 states, with 3 of the 4 electoral votes from Maine, and 322 electoral votes. His estimated order of potential pickups:

31. New Hampshire (U.S. Popular Vote margin: –1; cumulative 310 electoral votes)
32. Minnesota (margin: +0; cum. 320)
33. Maine (margin: +1; statewide; cum. 322) 

A Democratic pickup winner can go from 2016 Hillary Clinton’s 20 carried states and their original 232 electoral votes to as much as 30 states, plus District of Columbia and Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District, and 413 electoral votes. The estimated order of potential pickups:

21. Michigan (U.S. Popular Vote margin: +3; cumulative 248 electoral votes)
22. Pennsylvania (margin: +3.25; cum. 268)
23. Wisconsin (margin: +3.75; cum. 278)—Tipping Point State
24. Florida (margin: +4; cum. 307)
— Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District (margin: +4.25; cum. 308)
25. Arizona (margin: +4.50; cum. 319)
26. North Carolina (margin: +4.75; cum. 334)
27. Georgia (margin: +5; cum. 350)
28. Iowa (margin: +6; cum. 356)
— Maine’s 2nd Congressional District (margin: +6.50; cum. 357)
29. Texas (margin: +7; cum. 395)
30. Ohio (margin: +8; cum. 413)

Although I won’t bogged down into details, the estimated target margins for Florida to North Carolina are based on the premise that the mathematically excessive numbers from 2016 California become stabilized—meaning a 2016-to-2020 Republican shift in California—and the Democrats’ national raw-vote and percentage-points margins would get distributed into the pickup states. In 2016, Hillary Clinton carried California by +28 percentage points in excess of her popular-vote margin. Normally, a Democrat—winning or losing—carries California between +15 to +20 in excess of one’s U.S. Popular Vote margin. (Again, I won’t go into too many details. The 2020 Democrats, to flip the presidency, will need a popular-vote margin of approximately +4. Most presidential winners carry at least 50 percent of the nation’s states. I think the next Democratic presidential pickup winner will carry at least 26 states. Those listed as states 28 to 30 include target margins which are in increments of +1, shifted from 2016, in the U.S. Popular Vote. Do you want to see a 2020 Democratic presidential pickup winner flip Texas? He or she would need to win the U.S. Popular Vote by +7.)

⭑ ⭑ ⭑ ⭑ ⭑

The Three Key Levels: ‘Predicting,’ Effective 11.03.2019

I am, at this point, predicting a 2020 re-election for Donald Trump. But, I am also predicting Trump—who recently changed his home state from New York to Florida—will become the first U.S. president elected beyond more than one term who will have never won the U.S. Popular Vote.

Assuming the two-party vote returns from the 2016 outcome of 93.95 percent to the typical range of 97 to 99 percent, Trump needs to receive 48 percent in the U.S. Popular Vote to not get unseated. (He can’t lose the U.S. Popular Vote by a whole-number estimate of –4. He can get by with –3, even –3.50, with losing Michigan and Pennsylvania while holding his 270th electoral vote from 2016, the tipping-point state Wisconsin.)

I think the 2020 Democrats will push through a nominee who isn’t the right candidate to unseat Trump. (I will be touching on this in my next blog topic.) And I anticipate the impeachment potential for Trump will backfire on the Democrats—and that it would send his job approval north to the area that is good enough for re-electing to a second term the 45th U.S. president.


U.S. PRESIDENT
☑ Donald Trump (R–Florida, incumbent) 48%
☐ Elizabeth Warren (D–Massachusetts) 49%
• Winning Party: Republican (Hold)
• U.S. Popular Vote Margin: Democratic +1
• Shift (from 2016): Republican +1
• Electoral Map: Re-election for Trump includes his 2016 map—carriage of 30 states, plus Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, and an original 306 electoral votes—followed by a 2020 Republican pickup of New Hampshire.
• Electoral Summary: Trump, with 31 states and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District, and 310 electoral votes; Warren, with 19 states and District of Columbia, and 228 electoral votes.

U.S. SENATE
☑ Republican (Hold)
☐ Democratic
• Summary: After the midterm elections of 2018, Republicans retained majority with 53 to the 47 for Democrats. The Democrats’ path begins with flipping the presidency. (They have to. Since the 17th Amendment, from the 1910s, every presidential election which flipped one or both houses of Congress to a given party went to the one which also prevailed at the presidential level.) I estimate the 2020 Democrats, if they end up flipping the presidency and, with it the U.S. Senate, will need to win with a popular-vote margin of at least +5, at the presidential level, to make also flipping the U.S. Senate more feasible.
• History: Since the 17th Amendment, from the 1910s, only twice has a presidential election year seen the opposition party’s nominee unseat the incumbent U.S. president and flip the U.S. Senate to that challenger’s party. This occurred in 1932 (Democratic pickups for U.S. President Franklin Roosevelt, having unseated Republican incumbent Herbert Hoover, as well as for U.S. Senate) and 1980 (Republican pickups for U.S. President Ronald Reagan, having unseated Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter, as well as for U.S. Senate).
• Net Gain in Seats: Not Determined
• Potential For the Democrats: To flip the U.S. Senate, the party would likely lose the party-held seat in the normally Republican-aligned Alabama. That reduces them to 46 seats. To win back a 47th seat, the Democrats start with flipping Colorado. The path to winning a new majority pickup of the U.S. Senate, for the 2020 Democrats, would come with net gains as follows: 48. Maine; 49. Arizona (a special election is scheduled); and 50. North Carolina (on a pattern of having carried in presidential elections for the same party for both U.S. President and U.S. Senate since 1972). To reach 51, the tipping point would either be from Georgia (a regular and a special election are scheduled) or Iowa. The win all three would get the 2020 Democrats to a new majority of 53 seats. If Texas were to flip at the presidential level, that could also reap for Democrats a 54th U.S. Senate seat.
• Potential For the Republicans: They are highly likely to lose the Democratic-aligned Colorado and bring their current majority down to 52. But, the Republicans are in position to counter-flip Alabama to return to a start of 53 seats. But, with re-election for Trump, if he increases his 2016-to-2020 popular-vote margin, they would have the potential to go as high as 56 with the following: 54. Michigan; 55 and 56. Minnesota and New Hampshire.

U.S. HOUSE
☐ Republican
☑ Democratic (Hold)
• Summary: The midterm elections of 2018 saw the Democrats go from a 2016 U.S. Popular Vote margin of –1.08 (it was Republican 49.11% vs. Democratic 48.03%) to +8.56 (it was Republican 44.85% vs. Democratic 53.41%). The 2018 Democrats nationally shifted +9.64 percentage points. Historically, since the 1940s, a White House opposition party which flips the U.S. House in a midterm gains an average of about +4 seats with each percentage point nationally shifted in their direction in the U.S. Popular Vote. The 2018 Democrats won a net gain of +40 seats to finish with a new majority of 235 seats to the 200 for the Republicans. Barring any seat changes prior to the general election of 2020, the Republicans will need to win a net gain of +18 to flip the U.S. House.
• History: Since the 17th Amendment, from the 1910s, there has been no U.S. President re-elected to a second term, while the opposition party held majority in the U.S. House, who was able to flip the lower chamber to his party. (Not 1984 Ronald Reagan. In 1948, Harry Truman won a first full term.)
• U.S. Popular Vote: A five-point variation between Democratic +3 to Republican +2
• Shift from 2018: Republican +6 to +11
• Net Gain in Seats: Republican +6 to +15
• Perspective: Since 2000, the U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. President and U.S. House have been close to each other. Often times 3 points or less in margin spread. The 2020 Democrats, to not lose any party-held seats, will have to win by a comparable popular-vote margin to their +8.56 from 2018. To win again at that level would deliver Democratic pickups of both U.S. President and U.S. Senate—a wave election for their political party. Since I am predicting Republican holds at both those levels, likely scenario is the political party which gains seats in the U.S. House, even tough the majority will get retained by the Democrats, are the Republicans.