Interesting perspectives. Most interesting to me is that both liberals and conservatives have exactly the same impression of the opposite party. Tell me again which side tries to "isolate and demonize" the other party. Who colluded with Russia? Who unduly influenced Ukraine? See what I mean?
While I'd love to inform you of information you don't hear from the networks, it wouldn't matter and it's not the purpose of this thread. Someone said we can't nail down strategy until we know the candidate. Chicken or egg? Do we think the candidate really defines the message, or the party? I'm not so sure. But all of what I considered reasonable proposals by Dem candidates are gone because those candidates are gone. The candidates that remain seem extreme to me, and I think they seem extreme to most of the country. Not just normal liberal, but extreme. And that is why I think Trump has already won.
As much as people may hate him, and us, the hate is all they have. Everything he does is within the law, much of which was defined by Democrats. A lot of what he does was supported by Democrats until he did it. Did you know his call to Ukraine was completely within the law AND INTENT of a treaty Obama signed with Ukraine guaranteeing each side would help the other investigate suspected corruption within their government?
I think Trump wins 2020 because most of America sees him taking actions, in spite of repeated, contradictory and fabricated sour-grapes roadblocks set by Democrats. I get it's a tough time for Democrats. We have the Supreme Court, and will likely have it for the next 20 years. This means Democrats will have to change law by actually changing the law, instead of having liberal judges do it from the court. There is a lot at stake. And I think Democrats have painted themselves into a corner, with no way out other than dirty tricks and fabrications.
You say that because the economy is doing great, the Democrats can't use that against Trump? Well, wait and see what all the new tariffs will do over the next few months.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/perspectives/china-tariffs-trade-war-trump/index.html
And, in breaking news, the WTO just approved US tariffs on European goods in retaliation for subsidies to Airbus. I wonder how that will affect American aerospace companies who supply 40% of Airbus' components? And, how long do you think it will take before counter-tariffs are brought in because of subsidies to Boeing? It's a rare occurrence when tariffs aren't counterproductive.
As for Ukraine issue, did you read the article I linked? Here let me help you - here's a quote:
"The Republican belief that their opposition is inherently illegitimate is one reason it does not matter to many Republicans that Trump’s allegations that Biden sought to get a Ukrainian prosecutor fired to prevent his son from being investigated are baseless. As CNN’s Daniel Dale has documented, there is no public evidence that Hunter Biden was ever himself under investigation; the prosecutor whose firing Biden called for as vice president was widely considered corrupt; the investigation Biden supposedly shut down was “dormant” at the time Biden expressed the view of the Obama administration that the prosecutor should be fired; and the reason world leaders, including Barack Obama, were demanding his firing in the first place was that he was failing to investigate corruption in Ukraine, not that he was being prevented from doing so. As my colleague David Graham writes, “Biden’s pressure to install a tougher prosecutor probably made it more likely, not less, that Burisma would be in the cross hairs.” Attempting to use one’s official powers for private gain is the most basic definition of corruption."
Blocking funds that had already been approved by Congress, unless Ukraine started an investigation of Biden, amounts to extortion. Allowing the funds to be paid on condition that the investigation proceeds, would amount to bribery - with public funds, no less. Of course, when the whistleblower submitted the complaint, the funds were released.
