If We Are, Indeed, in a Realigning Period Favoring the Democratic Party…

My last topic, “Realigning Elections for U.S. President,” addressed past periods in which the presidency became realigned to a given political party for 32 to 36 years.

I mentioned that Election 2020, if it switches the White House party from the Republican to the Democratic column, will confirm that we are indeed in a period, favoring the Democrats, which began in 2008. (That the party will have won three of four cycles and, come Election 2024, will move up from four to five—a parallel with the 1968 Republicans going from at least 1968 to 1984.)

In the past realigning periods, there were a few special states that performed like bellwethers during these realigning periods. I will take a moment to cite the ones which applied.

☑ 1860–1892—Republican: No state voted with the winner in all 9 cycles. The closest was Indiana. It voted with the winner in 8 of 9 cycles and backed 1876 U.S. Popular Vote winner Samuel Tilden. So, without fully penalizing states which sided with popular-vote winners, Indiana was good for 8.50 of 9.

☑ 1896–1928—Republican: New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Ohio were carried in all 9 cycles. (The latter two have, so far in history, carried for all Republican winners.)

☑ 1932–1964—Democratic: Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Texas backed all winners. (At the time, Texas had carried for all Democratic winners.)

☑ 1968–2004—Republican: Two states with impeccable reputations as bellwethers, Ohio and Missouri, carried in all. So did neighboring states Tennessee and Kentucky.

If we can count 2008, to an unknown point, this period can look for possibilities in six states for being the most reliably carried.

☑ 2008–20xx—Democratic: Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin were carried in 2008 and 2012 (for Democrat Barack Obama) and in 2016 (for Republican Donald Trump). Election 2020 is pending. So are future elections which, if we are indeed in a period in which the presidency is realigned to the Democrats, this can go to, say, 2040 or 2044.

Congratulations to these states’ records! (And to those going forward. My home state is on the list.)


Going on the premise that Election 2008 ushered in a presidential realigning period favoring the Democrats, I ask, “Who will they help?”

The parties do realign.

The 1896 Republicans realigned into a Party for Big Business. (They courted business for elections.)

The 1932 Democrats realigned into what was considered a Party for the People—delivering during that period on Social Security, Medicare, and the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The 1968 Republicans realigned by combining their servitude to Big Business with overhauling the tax system that is now weighing down the have-nots here in this new decade of the 2020s.

What are the 2008 Democrats going to do?

What would the Democrats become known for, especially with and following the coronavirus pandemic, during this realigning period that would be so favorable for their party?

Today’s Democrats who hold any meaningful power—presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden; the party’s leader in the U.S. Senate, Chuck Schumer; and U.S. House speaker Nancy Pelosi—are influenced by the 1968 Republican realigning period of the presidency and its biggest standout, Ronald Reagan. (They are corporatists!)

Given the fact that I cannot answer what will actually happen…a conclusion that may be made is that the United States, with whatever it will get in leadership, but most especially in policies, will finally move in a healthier direction (for the nation and its people)—or it will get taken apart more and more with each coming and passing year.

I supposed the one thing guaranteed is that this will be interesting.

Realigning Elections for U.S. President

If Election 2020 switches the White House from Republican to Democratic, it will mark the third of four United States presidential election cycles which was won by that party.

Walter Dean Burnham, a professor, political scientist, and author who was born in 1930, came up with a theory on Realigning Elections dealing with critical elections especially in United States history. (Source: Wikipedia — Walter Dean Burnham.)

There have been particular points, typically spaced out between 30- to 40-year periods, in which some event—I will use the word catalyst—caused the incumbent party to lose, I shall say faith, in the voting electorate. A given presidential election that marked the turning point. A critical election. A new realigning election. (Source: Wikipedia — Realigning election.)

What a realigning election does, at the level of U.S. President, is usher in a new period in which the party that benefits becomes dominant for an outstanding majority of election cycles. This has certainly applied to the United States’s current two-party system—the Republican and Democratic political parties—since the former first prevailed in the realigning presidential election of 1860.



Realigning Elections for the Republicans and Democrats

☑ 1860–1892—Republican: Noted by Wikipedia as being the election that was the catalyst of the American Civil War, the Republicans won their first United States presidential election, with Abraham Lincoln, in 1860. The party won 7 of 9 cycles (1860, 1864, 1868, 1872, 1876, 1880, and 1888). The out party, the Democratic Party, won 2 of 9 with non-consecutive wins in 1884 and 1892 by Grover Cleveland.

☑ 1896–1928—Republican: The Panic of 1893 struck on the watch of Democrat Grover Cleveland, delivering Congress in the 1894 midterm elections to the Republicans. The 1896 election, with William McKinley, saw the beginning of the party eventually having won 7 of  9 cycles (1896, 1900, 1904, 1908, 1920, 1924, and 1928). The out party, the Democratic Party, won 2 of 9 cycles with wins in 1912 and 1916 by Woodrow Wilson.

☑ 1932–1964—Democratic: The stock market crash and the Great Depression struck on the watch of Republican Herbert Hoover, who clearly did not know how to deal with it. This delivered a blow to his re-election as the nation shifted 35 percentage points, from 1928 to 1932, and turned 34 states blue to deliver 42 (of a then-48) states to Franklin Roosevelt. He ushered in a New Deal and a Democratic realignment covering the 1930s and 1940s and the first two cycles of the 1960s. The party won the 7 of 9 cycles of 1932, 1936, 1940, 1944, 1948, 1960, and 1964. The out party, the Republican Party, won 2 of 9 cycles in 1952 and 1956 by Dwight Eisenhower.

☑ 1968–2004—Republican: The Vietnam War—with its increasing unpopularity and its dividing the party—took its toll on Democrat Lyndon Johnson. Early primaries states showed he was weak. And on March 31, 1968, Johnson announced his decision to not run for possible re-election. The party’s crackup at the 1968 Democratic National Convention, in Chicago, Illinois, eventually led to their defeat in November. A Republican pickup of the presidency for Richard Nixon was the start of the party winning 7 of 10 cycles. It was a matter of timing which extended the number of cycles by one. The Republicans won in 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004. The out party, the Democratic Party, won the remaining 3 cycles with a sole term won in 1976 by Jimmy Carter and the two terms won in 1992 and 1996 by Bill Clinton.

Those are not a complete list. I did not cite 1800 and 1828 because, in this current period, we have the exact two political parties—Republican and Democratic—which dates back to that example of 1860. And from 1860 to the previous election cycle, 2016, were a period of 156 years and 40 election cycles. The previous, presidential realigning election period cutoff may have been 2004. And this had many, back when we approaching and into Election 2008, thinking that that year’s election would move to a new period of realigning the presidency to the Democrats. So, let us further consider:

☑ 2008–20xx—Democratic: The Iraq War and the Economic Meltdown of 2008 were on the watch of the term-limited Republican-affiliated U.S. president George W. Bush. There was no doubt, by anyone with a sense of history, the presidency was going to switch in 2008 from Republican to Democratic. Barack Obama became the first person who is black to get elected U.S. president. In 2012, he won re-election. 2016 was a Republican pickup for Donald Trump. And, as we are five-plus months from Election Day, Trump is vulnerable to becoming the 11th president who, in his efforts to win re-election, may become unseated. What would be the catalyst is the coronavirus pandemic having struck on the watch of Trump. On the watch of U.S. president who is affiliated with the Republican Party. COVID–19 is devastating. Devastating with fatalities. Devastating with the lives in continues to put at risk. It is also devastating on the economy, at least here in the United States, which includes massive unemployment. Can Trump recover from job-approval numbers suggesting he is good for the 43- to 46-percent range—when the two-party vote for U.S. President typically combines for 97 to 99 percent—and suggests he could lose the U.S. Popular Vote by the range of –5 to –13 percentage points? That would suggest a 2020 Democratic pickup of the presidency, for presumptive nominee Joe Biden, of 27 to 35 states which means, for Trump, carrying between 15 to 23 states. If Trump does not win re-election, it would be hard to make the argument that Election 2008 did not mark the beginning of a new period of realigning the presidency to the Democrats.


When reading the topic of Realigning Elections, it does not cover only United States presidential elections. But, where are at right now—in late-May 2020—cannot be answered factually as to whether we are in a Democratic presidential realignment until the arrival and passing of Election Day, November 3, 2020.

My sense is this: If Election 2020 ends up switching U.S. President from Republican to Democratic, you can look back to a 40-year parallel. 1968 to 1980 saw three of four cycles won by the Republicans. 2008 to 2020 would become three of four cycles won by the Democrats.

Also worth considering: Election 1984 was a Republican hold, for Ronald Reagan. If Election 2020 becomes a Democratic pickup, it is more likely than not that Election 2024 would end up a Democratic hold. So, take those five cycles of 1968 to 1984, and note that four were won by the Republicans. Run a 40-year parallel, and consider the cycles of 2008 to 2024, and note that four of five would become won by the Democrats.

If what I am pointing out here, in this period of time, manifests...I would have to reach the conclusion that, beginning in 2008, we are in a presidential realigning period favoring the Democratic Party.

Electoral Sports

The blog topics to be published next week have to do with electoral history.

As I had previously written, I intend to post a few electoral topics—but not excessively in their numbers or their frequency—in each of the six consecutive months leading up to the general election scheduled for November 3, 2020. (This covers the months May to October.)

One thing to keep in mind is this: Neither the United States’s Republican or Democratic political parties represent us—the have-nots—and that is intentional.

I cannot muster excitement over a 2020 general-election matchup of Trump-vs.-Biden.

At this point, the United States presidential election is merely Electoral Sports.

Historical voting pattern can be referenced, when making arguments for why Team Red or Team Blue will likely have the better year, but this may as well be, say, baseball.

A batter [for a team] steps up to the plate, is about to perform, but before he does the viewer is given historical and statistical information [about the batter and/or his team] which renders human beings like that batter to be, ultimately, less human and unimportant.

The United States presidential election of 2020 promises will be no different.

‘The Democrats never learn’

Since 2016, just after Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton lost the United States presidential election to a Republican pickup winning Donald Trump, there has been a phrase often repeated.

The Democrats never learn.

This is about corporate Democrats rejecting progressivism—and some progressives, actual progressives, thinking the corporate Democrats are wrong in their understanding of the electorate and the period in which we are living.

This comes from those who voted the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination not to Hillary Clinton but to Bernie Sanders.

The Democrats never learn.

The progressives have it wrong.

Who hasn’t learned—at least not yet—are those progressives who are still being a part of the Democratic Party.

Being a part of the Democratic Party involves not just running for office in the Democratic Party. It also includes voting for the Democratic Party.

The Democrats—the corporate Democrats—do not have “their blinders on,” which are words used in the above Hard Lens Media video. (That video commentary is about the party’s recent loss, in a Republican pickup, of the special U.S. House election in California’s 25th Congressional District.)

The corporate Democrats have the party they, for the most part, want.

What the corporate Democrats really want, if they could get it to work out for them, was revealed and explained in 2014 by New York U.S. senator and minority leader Chuck Schumer.

“For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia—and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

I will re-post the quote with the emphasis (in bold) which allows one to accurately read between the lines of that important message.

“For every blue-collar Democrat we lose in western Pennsylvania, we will pick up two moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia—and you can repeat that in Ohio and Illinois and Wisconsin.”

Chuck Schumer, and the rest of his fellow corporate Democrats, would like to choose—if they can—for their voters to be Republicans.

[Republicans] are who and what Chuck Schumer and his fellow corporate Democrats want.

It’s who they are.

‘Leftists Jump the Corporate Democratic Ship, Leaving Sanders Behind’

Black Agenda Report’s Glen Ford has a marvelous piece about numerous of the people who supported—and who voted—the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination to Bernie Sanders being unwilling to Vote Blue No Matter Who.

Link:

Leftists Jump the Corporate Democratic Ship, Leaving Sanders Behind

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

I also recommend the following by Black Agenda Report’s Quetzal Cáceres:

Link:

The Sheepdog Caucus and So-Called “Democratic” Socialists

Obamagate

Jimmy Dore welcomed as his guest Max Blumenthal to discuss Obamagate.

‘Ray McGovern: New House Documents Sow Further Doubt That Russia Hacked the DNC’

Last weekend, Consortium News published  this latest by former CIA analyst Ray McGovern about the falseness of Russia-gate.

Link:

Ray McGovern: New House Documents Sow Further Doubt That Russia Hacked the DNC


I want to share the following readers comment:

For two and a half years the House Intelligence Committee knew CrowdStrike didn’t have the goods on Russia. Now the public knows too.

Twin Pillars of Russiagate Crumble

Maybe so. I sure that this is correct. But, so what. Everyone ‘knows’ those devious Russians hacked the DNC. I would love this silly assertion not to be the case but this is how propaganda and manipulation works. It’s all about inference, and associationist thinking which slowly seeps into the popular consciousness and is taken to be objective ‘truth’.

“The typical citizen drops down to a lower level of mental performace as soon as he enters the political field. He argues and analyses in a way in which he would recognise as infantile withing the sphere of his own interests. He becomes a primitive again. His thinking becomes associative and affective … Information is plentiful and readily available. But this does not seem to make any difference … he is impatient of long complicated arguments. All of which goes to show that without the initiative which comes from immediate responsibility, ignorance will persist in the face of masses of information however complete and correct.”  

[Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, by Joseph Schumpeter, 1942]

Sorry, I have to call it like I see it.

—Francis Lee, May 10, 2020

‘In the People’s War against COVID-19, Socialism Offers Victory while Capitalism Spells Defeat’

Danny Haiphong—who has recently appeared as a guest on The Jimmy Dore Show—wrote a really good piece on Black Agenda Report.

Here is the link:

In the People’s War against COVID-19, Socialism Offers Victory while Capitalism Spells Defeat

‘Corporate Media Largely Decide Which Black Lives Matter’

Margaret Kimberley · Corporate Media Largely Decide Which Black Lives Matter

If what I had embedded does not work, here is the link directly to the site:

Corporate Media Largely Decide Which Black Lives Matter



(The next blog topic will be posted Friday, May 8, 2020, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

Polling, Six Months from Election Day, Looks Good for the Ds

Dear Progressives Chat Readers,

The date of this blog topic is timed six months from the scheduled date of the general election—the United States presidential election (with even more elections)—on November 3, 2020. 

What you are about to read is not me making predictions. 

What you are about to read is me referring to poll reports.

This blog topic is, for the hell of it, supposing that what the polls say now is what they will say six months from now with the general-election matchup of Donald Trump vs. Joe Biden. 

I do keep in mind they may change, from what they say now, and they may not change.

What will play out over the next six months may be harder to predict. 

This is one of those things in which I realize my opinion isn’t of importance; it isn’t about whether I do have an opinion.

It is about trying to be aware, as much as one can ask of himself/herself, of what can play out.

—Candy83 

✪ ✪ ✪ ✪ ✪

If the poll reports that are current, and most recent, are reflective of what will play out in the general election—scheduled for Tuesday, November 3, 2020—then the White House will flip from the Republican to the Democratic column.

If these polls reports are what plays out on Election Day, the 2020 Democrats will be positioned to flip not only the presidency of the United States but also the United States Senate.

What would do it, in reality, is not just the low-approval job percentage polls of Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump. That is part of it. Trump has been consistently in the negatives since his presidency began.

For Trump to win re-election: He can get by with about 48 percent in the U.S. Popular Vote and lose there with a margin of –3. (An outcome of 48 to 51 percent.) He would, in that scenario, carry 2016 tipping-point state Wisconsin, with its 270th electoral vote, and surrender Pennsylvania and Michigan. That would yield a re-election outcome of 270 to 268 electoral votes. (Refer to the list in “Mapping It Out: U.S. President.”) Those whisker-like results, very appealing to Electoral College Scenario Geeks, are more susceptible when the presidency flips to the opposition party which reached that minimum 270. That was the case with 2000 Republican pickup winner George W. Bush and his 271 electoral votes, up from 1996 losing nominee Bob Dole and his 159. But, for a 2016 Republican pickup winning Donald Trump, he finished with an original electoral-vote score of 306.

What would do it—to serve as the catalyst—is COVID–19. 

It would be COVID–19 having struck on Trump’s watch. 

It would be what COVID–19, in this pandemic crisis, for what it will have done to The People—the voting electorate—in terms of their economics and other matters heading into the general election.

This, and the following, is to keep in mind the date that we are six months from the general election. What these poll numbers are now may or may not be the case come November.



RCP on U.S. President: Democratic +5.3

Real Clear Politics has the average polling margin of the 2020 general-election matchup—Trump vs. Biden—as D+5.3.

If that were to turn out to be the results in the U.S. Popular Vote margin, it would suggest a Democratic pickup of the presidency with carriage of 27 states. (Refer, once again, to the list in “Mapping It Out: U.S. President.”) 

The range, from the most recently listed polls, is between Tie and D+10. Since 10 points is too wide a range, I would eliminated the highest, D+10, and the lowest, Tie, for perhaps a better balance. But, it moves up to just D+5.4.

That margin also suggests carriage of 27 states. (Formula: Add +28 to a winning Republican’s and +22 to a winning Democrat’s whole-number margin in the U.S. Popular Vote to estimate the number of carried states. A margin of +5 would yield 33 states for winning Republican and 27 states for a winning Democrat. From 1992 to 2016, winning Rs averaged 9 and 10 electoral votes per carried state; winning Ds have averaged overall 12 electoral votes per carried state.) That carriage of 27 states—for those specially estimated for where they would come in (see list, below)—would deliver an electoral map for 2020 Democratic presidential pickup up to Georgia and a cumulative 350 electoral votes.

Looking ahead to the next subheading, this is close—within 2 percentage points—to the average margin I write about regarding Real Clear Politics’s “2020 Generic Congressional Ballot.” 

RCP: Ds’ U.S. Popular Vote Margin Lead for U.S. House, +7.4

Since the year 2000, there has been a close alignment for U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. President vs. U.S. House.

The last two Republican presidential pickup winners—2000 George W. Bush and 2016 Donald Trump—did not flip the U.S. Popular Vote; but, had they, their margins would have been +2 (I explain, later), which were very close to the margins for U.S. House.

Since 2000, the party which won the U.S. Popular Vote for U.S. House also won for U.S. President.

The results:

ELECTION 2000
• U.S. President: R–0.51 (George W. Bush, pickup)
• U.S. House: R+0.41

ELECTION 2004
• U.S. President: R+2.46 (Bush, re-elected with an increased +2.97)
• U.S. House: R+2.64

ELECTION 2008
• U.S. President: D+7.26 (Barack Obama, pickup)
• U.S. House: D+10.60 (Ds flipped the U.S. House in 2006)

ELECTION 2012
• U.S. President: D+3.86 (Obama, re-elected with a decreased –3.40)
• U.S. House: D+1.16 (Ds lost the U.S. House in 2010)

ELECTION 2016
• U.S. President: R–2.09 (Donald Trump, pickup)
• U.S. House: R+1.08

From 2000 to 2016, which were the two previous decades of five election cycles, the margins spreads were: 0.92, 0.18, 3.34, 2.70, and 3.17. They averaged 2.06. The worst in spread was 3.34. So, as one sees with those numbers, there was been a close alignment.

Report from Real Clear Politics on the polls, for “2020 Generic Congressional Vote,” for U.S. House, reports a preference average of Democratic +7.4. The Ds have been up +5 (Politico/Morning Consult), +8 (Economist/YouGov), and +9 (Grinnell/Selzer). 

(Source: 2020 Generic Congressional Vote.)

Now, I don’t know how reliable such polling is, at this point, for what will actually play out over the next six months. They did measure up, at this time in 2018, for what were the midterm elections six months later. The 2018 Democrats, with having flipped the U.S. House, won with a U.S. Popular Vote margin of +8.56. 

This is something I would choose to not ignore.

I am sensing, whatever the U.S. Popular Vote margin for U.S. President, there will be, once again, a closely aligned result for U.S. House.

✪ ✪ ✪ ✪ ✪

Not Good—Six Months Out—for Trump, Republicans

The polls are not good, right now, for Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump.

They are also not good for the Republican majority in the United States Senate.

There are some people who are thinking the 2020 Democrats can win a pickup of the presidency but not a likewise majority-control pickup of the U.S. Senate.

The history suggests otherwise.

The United States has seen, so far, ten incumbent presidents unseated with their efforts to win re-elections. Five of them occurred during the 20th century. The opposition-party challengers who unseated incumbent presidents were: 1912 Democratic challenger Woodrow Wilson unseated Republican incumbent William Howard Taft; 1932 Democratic challenger Franklin Roosevelt unseated Republican incumbent Herbert Hoover; 1976 Democratic challenger Jimmy Carter unseated Republican incumbent Gerald Ford; 1980 Republican challenger Ronald Reagan unseated Democratic incumbent Jimmy Carter; and 1992 Democratic challenger Bill Clinton unseated Republican incumbent George Bush.

What all five of them had in common is that their national margin shift, from the previous election cycle, was at least +10 percentage points in their direction of the results for U.S. Popular Vote. (I wrote about this here: The 2020 Democrats Who Are Wanting to Unseat Trump May Also Want A 10-Point National Shift.)

What should also be mentioned is this: When all five of them took office, they established same-party control of the United State Senate. Three of them—Wilson, Roosevelt, and Reagan—saw their party pickups of the presidency followed with likewise majority-control pickups of the U.S. Senate. (The 1912 Democrats prevailed, as majority pickup winners, just before the 17th Amendment.)

✪ ✪ ✪ ✪ ✪

Mapping It Out: U.S. President

The 2016 Democrats won the U.S. Popular Vote, for U.S. President, by +2.09. (It was: Donald Trump 45.93% vs. Hillary Clinton 48.02%.) It should have been a margin of Republican +2/Democratic –2. That is because, in presidential elections which flip party occupancy, the pickup winning Republican or Democrat tends to win a net gain of +1 to +1.5 (closer to +1) states with each percentage point nationally shifted in their direction. 

2016 Donald Trump, working from 2012 Mitt Romney’s margin of –3.86 (it was Romney 47.15% vs. Obama 51.01%), flipped the following: Top 10 populous states Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan; No. 20 Wisconsin; No. 32 Iowa; and Maine’s 2nd Congressional District (roughly one-half its statewide vote). So, Trump’s national shift, had it lived up to normal historical voting pattern, would have been between +6 to +6.5, for an estimated U.S. Popular Vote margin between +2.15 to +2.64. (Trump and Hillary Clinton shifted some base states normally aligned to each other’s party. After the two previous cycles were won by the Democrats, Republican pickup winner Trump won over the electoral map. Hillary won a compromise in the form of a setup for the Democrats’ future with key emerging states—Arizona, Georgia, and Texas—by getting them to conspicuously underperform their Republican-level margins for Trump.)

The 2020 Democrats are starting at an adjusted U.S. Popular Vote margin of –2. Their 2016 map consisted of 20 states, plus District of Columbia, and an original 232 electoral votes.

If 2020 results in a Democratic pickup of the presidency, the Ds will have won the U.S. Popular Vote by no less than +4 (the level of 2012 Obama). If the U.S. Senate also flips, the U.S. Popular Vote will be no less than D+5. (The Ds are favored to lose Alabama because it is heavily aligned to the Rs. A Democratic presidential pickup winner would have to reduce Alabama to a single-digit margin, in a Republican hold, while their party’s incumbent U.S. senator, Doug Jones, would outperform his party’s presidential nominee by about 10 points so Jones can narrowly hold that seat.)

Here is my estimate (beginning with the 2016 Ds’ map of 20 states, plus D.C., with a starting point of 232 electoral votes) followed by these pickups (* were 2016 Republican pickups):

21. * Michigan (–0.22; cumulative 248 electoral votes)
22. * Pennsylvania (–0.72; cum. 268)
23. * Wisconsin (–0.76; cum. 278—Tipping-point state)
24. * Florida (–1.19; cum. 307)
— Nebraska’s 2nd Congressional District (–2.23; cum. 308)
25. Arizona (–3.50; cum. 319)
26. North Carolina (–3.66; cum. 334)

Listing up to the Tar Heel State is the 2020 U.S. Senate Democrats having reached 50 seats. To win more, a new majority with having flipped the U.S. Senate, involve the following for U.S. President:

27. Georgia (–5.10; cum. 350; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +5)
28. * Iowa (–9.41; cum. 356; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +6)
— * Maine’s 2nd Congressional District (–10.28; cum. 357; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +6.50)
29. Texas (–8.98; cum. 395; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +7)
30. * Ohio (–8.07; cum. 413; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +8)

Numbers 31 and 32 may come in as listed…or deliver in opposite order:

31. Montana (–20.24; cum. 416; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +9)
32. South Carolina (–14.27; cum. 425; U.S. Popular Vote margin: +10)

I cut off at 32 states. (Going higher would include states like Kansas and Nebraska—with its statewide and 1st Congressional District—as well as Utah and Alaska, and Missouri and Indiana.) This would be in the range, established since 1992, of presidential winners having carried between 26 and 32 states. Barack Obama, with re-election in 2012, won 26 states. Bill Clinton, with his first-term election in 1992, won 32 states. The average, from those 24 years and 7 election cycles, were 29 carried states.

Refer to map above. It is a best-case scenario for a 2020 Democratic pickup of the presidency.

✪ ✪ ✪ ✪ ✪

Mapping It Out: U.S. Senate

Looking at this from the perspective of a likewise 2020 Democratic majority-control pickup for the U.S. Senate: The Ds start with 47 and will likely lose Alabama. So, they begin with an adjusted 46. The following are an estimated order of pickups if they reach a new majority (and, perhaps, go a few seats beyond 51):

47. Colorado
48. Maine
49. Arizona
50. North Carolina (same-party—U.S. President and U.S. Senate—carriage results since 1972)

Tipping-point state (one of the following):

51. Georgia (special, first, then regular—a U.S. Popular Vote margin of +5 and +5.50)
53. Iowa (U.S. Popular Vote margin: +6)

Some people disagree on the orders of 51 to 53. For the 2020 Democrats to reach a majority-control pickup of the U.S. Senate, I don’t think any other state would become the tipping-point state.

If the numbers climb:

54. Texas (U.S. Popular Vote margin: +7)
55. Montana (U.S. Popular Vote margin: +8; Steve Bullock would run better than presumptive nominee Joe Biden with margins in Montana)
56. South Carolina (U.S. Popular Vote margin: +9)

To reach a supermajority of 60 seats, the 2020 Democrats would need to win pickups in four of the following five states: Alaska, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, and Tennessee.

Refer to map above for the best-case scenario for not only a 2020 Democratic majority-control pickup but also a supermajority-control pickup of the Untied States Senate. (Solid shades are party holds. Light shades are party pickups. Those in neutral are currently with the incumbent majority party, the Republican Party.)

‘D’-enied!

During the 2000s, I used to watch on CNBC the financial expert Suzy Orman.

Her program was broadcast on Saturday nights.

Orman had a segment titled “Can I Afford It?”

Orman would take calls from viewers who would tell the host: on what exactly they were interested in their spending money; give their financial information (status); and wait for Orman to tell the viewer whether that viewer has been approved or denied.

It was obviously much more memorable when Orman would say, “Denied!”

Orman did not always deny based on financials. She had some in-betweens. Orman would then draw the viewer’s attention to using judgment. Sure, something could be approved. But, sometimes, even with initial approval, it wasn’t wise for such viewer to buy.

I am reminded of the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries being effectively over, that the presumptive nominee is Joe Biden, and that runner-up Bernie Sanders has not only “suspended” his campaign but also endorsed Biden—and is even urging his primaries voters to vote in the general election for Biden.

That brings the decision, for the general election, to the would-be voter. It is especially of importance to a person who voted in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries and who did not vote the nomination to Joe Biden.

The majority of primaries voters will vote in the general election for Joe Biden. Those individuals may explain why. But, not the full 100 percent of those who did not vote the nomination to Biden will turn around and vote the 47th U.S. president to get elected in the general election to become the 46th president of the United States.

In a way, I feel like I am my own version of Suzy Orman.

The information has been submitted to me. I, as a citizen and voter, have been asked whether I will approve or deny. After all, I did participate by voting in the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries from my home state Michigan. And, even though the general election is not for another six months, I am prepared to give my answer.

Based on the party apparatchik still embracing the Clinton era of neoliberalism, which delivered the presidencies of George W. Bush and Donald Trump, and based on their corruption—in many forms—dating back to at least 2016, I am going to reveal my answer in the following (and last) paragraph.

My answer, to the 2020 Democratic Party, and to presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden, is—are you ready for it?—D-enied!