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!

Pulitzer winner Chris Hedges: These “are the good times—compared to what’s coming next”

Salon has an interesting interview with former New York Times journalist, Pulitzer Prize winner, and Emmy nominee Chris Hedges.

(Thank you, for posting it in the comments section, cathyx!)

Here is the link:

Pulitzer winner Chris Hedges: These “are the good times—compared to what’s coming next”

(Next blog topic will be Friday, May 1, 2020, at 06:00 a.m. ET.)

Sheepdog Alert

Noam Chomsky.

Norman Soloman.

And everybody involved in a 2020 Democratic Party presidential primaries campaign that was—and was not—Joe Biden’s.

It is that time—that time of arrival—that is Sheepdog Season.

Sheepdog Alert!

Democrats ramp up their sheepdogging especially when they know they have a lousy candidate.

Please be advised to remain on alert for those—very much including progressives who one may generally trust (or used to trust)—who will sheepdog for the Democratic Party, and for presumptive 2020 nominee and corporate tool Joe Biden, on the way to Election Day.

The first of May arrives this coming Friday. We may be in for a long six months.


Sources:

• Mehdi Hassan and Noam Chomsky on Biden vs. Trump (includes, within, an embedded video)

• Some Progressives Are in Denial About Trump’s Fascist Momentum

‘Glenn Greenwald on Noam Chomsky Favouring Biden Over Trump & Voting for Lesser of Two Evils’

There was an interview, published to YouTube on April 15, 2020, with Glenn Greenwald on acTVism Munich.

The first clip, baring the title of this blog’s topic, with a running time of 10 minutes, hones in on Greenwald responding to Noam Chomsky trying to get people to vote for Joe Biden in the general election. (My opinion: Chomsky, for all his talk, is a Democrat. And, from one presidential election cycle to the next, he regularly sheepdogs for them.)

The second video is the entire interview with a running time of 52 minutes.

CBS Salutes Prince

CBS is broadcasting a tribute concert to the late Grammy and Oscar winning singer and songwriter Prince (June 7, 1958–April 21, 2016).

It is scheduled for Tuesday, April 21, 2020, at 09:00 p.m. ET.

The special is titled Let’s Go Crazy: The Grammy Salute to Prince.

Here are links to reports on the special:
 • “Let's Go Crazy: The GRAMMY Salute To Prince” To Air April 21 On CBS Featuring John Legend, H.E.R., Usher & More
 • ‘Let's Go Crazy: The Grammy Salute to Prince’ Set to Air on the 4th Anniversary of His Death

(Side note: I am not pleased with the special’s inclusion of John Legend.)


I grew up, during the 1970s and 1980s, with music from Prince. And I don’t feel it is necessary to write about his life when there is plenty of that information, for those in need, on the Internet.

I have, in recent months, grabbed more and more of his music from my Apple Music account. (This is well before the U.S. arrival of COVID–19. I would be out for walks and listed to some music from this master.) I have some hard CDs saved to to my iTunes—albums like the 1984 soundtrack to Purple Rain and the 1987 LP Sign o’ the Times (both Grammy nominees for Album of the Year)—but I have been going for anything that springs to mind by Prince.

Prince was a bold and unique visionary. He was very controversial; mainly, of course, because of the sexual content from numerous songs. But, that is part of the mark of a great artist—being not like others—and letting the squares deal or not deal.

I also have gratitude to Prince for writing one of my favorite songs from the 1980s, “I Feel for You,” which was a phenomenal hit for the luminous R&B legend Chaka Khan (who won the 1984 Grammy for Female R&B Vocal Performance while Prince also won as songwriter for R&B Song).

The following is a selection of music—really a small amount to sample (I don’t want to overload)—that personally delights me. For any Progressives Chat reader with thoughts about Prince—whether it his music or the artist (or both)—please share.

 • “I Wanna Be Your Lover” (1979), from the album Prince, was from the Disco era but did not play like Disco. It stood out as pure R&B—very fresh (even today its sound is fresh)—and showed that Prince, 21 in the year 1979, had a bright future ahead of him.

♯♯♯

 • “1999” (1982), from the album 1999, was an exciting and knockout punch. Extraordinarily joyous—putting it into a category, by an artist not categorized, was silly. It’s a brilliant piece of music.

♯♯♯

 • “Little Red Corvette” (1983), from the album 1999, was a pulsating and thrilling piece. It starts out slowly but kicks into high gear—and it doesn’t let go. It is also, as much of Prince’s music, provocative. It’s a classic.

♯♯♯

 • “Let’s Go Crazy” (1984), from the soundtrack Purple Rain, was a Pop sensation and a thrilling, elaborate song-opener to his feature film.

♯♯♯

 • “Sign o’ the Times” (1987), from Sign o’ the Times, synched R&B and Funk with some Blues. A very interesting album—which includes his duet with Sheena Easton (“U Got the Look”)—but the LP’s title track has really stayed with me after all this time.

♯♯♯

 • BONUS • “Colonized Mind” (2009), from Lotusflow3r, is included in addition to the prior five videos because it is an example why Prince—even though so much of his material was with focuses on sexual nature—was also politically aware: “Upload: a 2 party system | The lesser of 2 dangers | Illusion of choice; Download: a veiled form of fascism | Nothing really ever changes | U never had a voice.” “Colonized Mind” was released one year after the Economic Meltdown of 2008 and in the first year of the presidency of Barack Obama.

‘Obama Gaslights’ … Sanders Urges His Primaries Voters to Back Biden … Rejecting Green Party Candidate Hawkins

A video of 44th U.S. president Barack Obama endorsing 47th U.S. vice president Joe Biden for the presidency of the United States has me, ordinarily, not wanting to give it any of my attention. After all, I have reached the point in which I generally do not want to read about or hear from Obama. (I like that U.S. president Donald Trump, once asked if he heard a speech delivered the night before by Obama, said no—he was not interested because, quite frankly, Trump is bored by Obama.) I made an exception. Jimmy Dore—and wife Stef Zamorano—delivered perceptively and terrifically in their responses to Obama’s bullshit in this segment of The Jimmy Dore Show.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

One week after bowing out of the 2020 Democratic presidential primaries, by “suspending” his campaign, Vermont U.S. senator Bernie Sanders endorsed this week presumptive nominee Joe Biden for the party’s nomination and for the presidency of the United States.

I don’t have as strong a reaction as some.

The reason is because I am not surprised.

Sanders upset his voting-supporters because he pushed the usual corporate Democratic Party Establishment narrative—that Republican incumbent U.S. president Donald Trump is the most dangerous U.S. president ever (or whatever the exact words; and that has to, presumptuously, be the No. 1 general-election motivator for voters)—and Sanders went so far as to take preventive action to scold his primaries voters who will not fall in line in the general election.

One may question what, if anything, is gained by this.

One may also question if Sanders was threatened.

One may as well question whether this is an effort to sheepdog actual progressives—and Bernie Sanders’s primaries voters—into the Democratic Party, in general, for the 2020 United States presidential election (come November 3, 2020).

I have reached the conclusion that, more than anything, Bernie Sanders is propping up a corrupt, corporate, Democratic Party Establishment—for however many reasons specifically explain his actions (the primaries candidates did sign on for promising to endorse the eventual nominee)—and the overall decision, come Election Day, is up to his primaries voters along with the rest of the participating electorate.

Fall in line?

Or…

Fall out?

In the following video is an another perceptive take by The Political Vigilante’s Graham Elwood.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

The below video is MCSC Network’s Niko House covering Green Party candidate Howie Hawkins. Hawkins is considered the frontrunner for that party’s 2020 presidential nomination. (In 2016, I voted in the general election for Green Party nominee Jill Stein. I should have done so as well in 2012. But, I didn’t totally fail. And I won’t fail here.) And, if he succeeds, Hawkins and his party will not receive any of my votes in the general election. House does really well with explaining why Hawkins is unacceptable. (Jimmy Dore has, perhaps a couple times, also mentioned on his program that Hawkins should be rejected.) But, the following video’s clips really capture why a presidential nomination—for what is supposed to be the left-wing Green Party—would be obscene should it go specifically to Howie Hawkins.