Opinion: The Democrats Will Not Win In 2020

Opinion: The Democrats Will Not Win In 2020 & Here's Why

I feel that with the way the Democrats are strategizing for the 2020 election there is no way they can beat Trump and his electorate.

586
views

If you aren't a Trump supporter, I'm sure you remember the shock of Election night in 2016. For me, it was a night that encompassed crying, staying up without my parents in order to see if by some miracle it all changed, and constantly checking every single news source to find some alternative reality. The only thing that helped my frustration with that night was the hope of the 2020 Presidential election and the assurance that the Democrats would be smart enough to beat Trump at their second try. Here we are almost four years later and I have lost my expectation that the Democrats will win the Presidency in 2020.

When the research came out concluding the kind of voter that elected Trump and the mathematical reasons Clinton could not win, it became clear that there were fundamental flaws in the way the Democrats had campaigned. It is no secret that white voters elected Trump. He received a majority of the votes in every class of white Americans regardless of their economic status. Democrats typically rely on non-white votes, which is how Obama was elected in both 2008 and 2012. Hillary's campaign relied on continuing that turnout, but non-white voters simply did not support Hillary in the way that Democrats expected.

Non-white voters face several obstacles when voting in American elections. Between laws against felons voting, ID laws, work hours, and transportation to voting locations, non-white voters have to be particularly inspired to cast their vote. Clinton simply did not provide the motivation that Obama did, and the Democrats could not possibly have legally removed every single roadblock non-white voters experience in placing their vote before the election. These laws are not going to change before 2020 either.

Trump did not actually beat Clinton when it comes to the popular vote, he was just smarter about the distribution of his votes in order to win the electoral college. It's not that Clinton didn't have enough support, it's that she didn't have the right support. Clinton won big states with a lot of electoral college votes and urban areas, while Trump won lots of in between states. Trump also beat Clinton in both suburban and rural areas by significant margins. The urban voter voted for Clinton, but that wasn't enough to win her the middle of the country. Appealing to voters from small towns and rural America is different than to urban voters. The Democrats' message of inclusivity and acceptance does not apply to the problems experienced by people in predominantly white towns in middle America, most of whom have never experienced the diversity of city life.

With the candidates thus far, the Democrats are not in a place to win in 2020. The candidates are still attempting to push boundaries, trying to be the first female or gay President and emphasizing equality. This is not what the Trump voter wants to hear or gets excited by, and we need to win over the Trump voter in order to beat Trump. I am a Democrat through and through and I never advocate for abandoning our platforms and beliefs. However, I feel that some situations are dire and a Trump White House is something that Democrats need to eradicate as quickly as possible. This is not the time to take risks, it is the time to find a safe, traditional candidate who advocates for Democratic ideology but who can relate to middle America. We need some who white working-class voters can trust and someone who goes beyond the reach of the ideal urban Democrat.

Popular Right Now

18 Bible Verses That Prove God Would NOT Be 'Pro-Life'

Stop using the Bible as an excuse to take away women's rights.

6265
views

"Abortion is WRONG because God (the highest authority) says so! Not because I say so, or "religious" people say so or the government says so...because the CREATOR OF ALL HUMAN LIFE SAYS SO."

This argument is bullshit and I'm sick of hearing it, because it just isn't true. All these Christians claim that the Bible and God says that abortion is wrong, and it's clear they've never read the Bible. Have you ever seen them use a biblical verse to validate their claims? Yeah, me neither. And you know why? BECAUSE THE BIBLE IS NOT PRO-LIFE. They pick and choose vague verses to attempt to back up these ridiculous claims, completely ignoring the damning evidence that the Bible, and therefore God, actually supports child murder, infanticide, and abortion.

Unlike pro-lifers, I'll actually provide some evidence:

1. Numbers 31:17 "Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him"

2. Deuteronomy 2:34 "And we took all his cities at that time, and utterly destroyed the men, and the women, and the little ones, of every city, we left none to remain"

3. Deuteronomy 28:53 "And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord thy God hath given thee, in the seige, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee"

4. 1 Samuel 15:3 "Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass"

5. Isaiah 13:16 "Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished"

6. Isaiah 13:18 "Their bows also shall dash the young men to pieces; and they shall have no pity on the fruit of the womb; their eyes shall not spare children"

7. Ezekiel 9:6 "Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house"

8. Hosea 9:14 "Give them, O Lord: what wilt thou give? give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts"

9. Hosea 13:16 "Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up"

10. 2 Kings 2:24 "And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them"

11. Psalm 137:9 "Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones"

12. Numbers 5:21 "-here the priest is to put the woman under his curse- "may the Lord cause you to become a curse among your people when he makes your womb miscarry and your abdomen swell"

13. Hosea 9:16 "Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea, though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb"

14. Psalm 135:8 "He it was who struck down the firstborn of Egypt, both of man and of beast;"

15. Psalm 136:10 "-to him who struck down the firstborn of Egypt His love endures forever"

16. 2 Kings 6:28-29 "And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow.So we boiled by son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son"

17. Leviticus 26:29 "And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat"

18. Jeremiah 11:22 "Therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts, Behold, I will punish them: the young men shall die by the sword; their sons and their daughters shall die by famine:"


Stop using your religion to try and push propoganda that "God says abortion is wrong because it kills innocent children." Clearly your God doesn't care about killing children. There is more than enough proof that the Bible and God are NOT pro-life. Stop acting like you're good Christians upholding the values of God when you clearly haven't picked up the Bible and actually read it. God doesn't agree with your backwards thinking. Maybe try do your research before spewing your religious bullshit to try and take away women's rights.

Related Content

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

US Secretary Of State Mike Pompeo Finds Camaraderie At Texas A&M

"At my alum, we were taught not to lie cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do. Then I was the CIA Director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had entire training courses!"

- Mike Pompeo

396
views

On Monday, April 15, U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, visited Texas A&M; University in College Station. I was fortunate enough to attend and ask him (preselected and edited) questions in front of the audience.

Fair warning, this article may not be your typical journalistic article that reports on political figures. There are plenty of those out there that you can and should read! But for this article, let's spice things up; I want to paint a picture of my first time communicating with a globally authoritative entity, including how Pompeo presented himself and how that presentation was received by my home.

Tone-wise, the situation felt like it had a self-conscious sense of esteem to it - likely stemming from the fact that Pompeo graduated from a military academy and was currently speaking to a few hundred people at a school with similar ties to the military.

Despite the rigid stuffiness and the irrational feeling that I was going to get sniped by the Secret Service if I even looked at the Secretary wrong, I was still excited to get in there and shake things up. Bug-eyed and buzzing with the anticipation that politics gives me, I checked in with the press and media. I was ready to absorb the experience.

Here's a breakdown of all things Pompeo-town.

First impression: as Pompeo, a sizable and stoic former CIA Director, stomped out to the podium, I couldn't help but compare him to other politicians. You see, Pompeo is not known for his glamour or his magnetism. But this seemingly unpolitical quality actually worked for this particular audience.

A strong aspect of the culture at TAMU is our laud of the useful, plain, forthright things, stripped of the glitz and straight to the point. Henceforth, I came to the conclusion that Texas A&M; is the perfect place for the relatively uncharismatic Secretary of State to directly explain diplomacy. Moreover, he urged the mini-versions of him in the crowd to pursue diplomacy and "learn how to shut up" as he did.

Relating to the presence of the Corps of Cadets on our campus, Pompeo contends, "diplomacy and military strike go hand in hand." He furthers his pitch, "the State Department has a long history of hiring people with a military background. And Texas A&M;, with its great military history, could provide many great public service leaders just as West Point has done through the years."

As questions from the audience permitted, he discussed foreign policy. Everywhere from "the crisis in Venezuela" to "coalitions in Turkey" to "sanctions in North Korea" was brought up. For the most part, the audience seemed to be tracking with him, listening intently (with the exception of a couple of folks in the audience who tried to interrupt his lecture in order to inquire about immigration reform and the Muslim ban). A straight-shooter, Pompeo was received well by the university with only a few personal anecdotes and jokes.

He did, however, get some laughs for popping any bubbles of political idealism when he said, "At my alum, we were taught not to lie cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do." (Fun fact: this phrase is also shared by Aggies!) He continues, "Then I was the CIA Director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had entire training courses!"

I don't mean to downplay Secretary Pompeo's charm. He made eye contact with me and every other interviewer, he greeted his listeners well, he skillfully subverted complex topics, and he spoke eloquently. But if today's political commentators argue that modern public servants prioritize style at the expense of substance - he would likely stand as the model antithesis to that statement, valuing substance over style in all matters.

As his time winded down, Pompeo stated that the reason why he does what he does, a laborer in the public sector, is to help the people of the United States, culturally and economically. The State Department currently justifies its existence with its diplomatic mission to aid developing countries in their journeys to becoming stable and democratic players in both the global village and the world market.

His parting words to us were, "I know that you all have a tremendous sense of duty, a tremendous sense of service. I hope that today that you can see that America's State Department is committed to living up to those standards."

Related Content

Facebook Comments