Former Obama administration official Steven Rattner
undoubtedly shook fellow left-wingers to the core in his recent New York Times
commentary. In his piece entitled
“Trump’s Formidable 2020 Tailwind,” Rattner does the unthinkable: he pointed to
three different presidential election modelers and noted how Trump won
re-election in every single one.
It’s the economy, stupid.
That seemed to be the still-relevant message decades after a different
president with a penchant for moral failings made it famous. According to the summary on Axios:
Economists predict that the tailwind is large.
Ray Fair, a professor at Yale, “found that the growth rates of gross domestic product and inflation have been the two most important economic predictors — but he also found that incumbency was also an important determinant of presidential election outcomes.”
“Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, has looked at 12 models, and Mr. Trump wins in all of them.”
“Donald Luskin of Trend Macrolytics has reached the same conclusion in his examination of the Electoral College.”
I certainly don’t intend to question the accuracy of presidential computer models – particularly if they’re as accurate as what global warming computer models have turned out to be. But frankly I’ve never been of the belief that Trump had much of a chance in 2020. What happened in 2016 was a perfect storm, allowing him to squeak out a win in the key states needed to secure the Electoral College majority. I still believe those states will shift back to their previous affiliation and deal Trump a defeat next year. I don’t think he wins Wisconsin again, I don’t think he wins Michigan again, I don’t think he wins Pennsylvania again (all else remaining the same, those three states give his opponent the victory), and I’m not convinced he can hold North Carolina or even Florida.
But two things that might convince me otherwise? The economy and the incendiary hatefulness of the opposition. As long as lefties continue their unchecked disdain for middle America, they’re only making the case so much easier for Trump. For instance, when former Indianapolis Star, now freelance journalist Dan Carpenter tweeted recently,
“Being a liberal in a red state is like being sober during happy hour in a Kentucky Avenue tavern with a band in camouflage gear and dirt floor.”
First of all, it’s a confusing sentence structure and
bizarre attempt at an insult in the first place. Secondly, what exactly is the point? That a liberal feels like a stranger when
surrounded by conservatives? Gee,
there’s a groundbreaking observation.
One wonders if Dan has ever talked to conservative college kids about
their experiences. Curiously, it remains
the sole practice of cities run by leftists to silence political speech of
their opposition, economically bully business owners for not acquiescing to
liberal values, and forbid travel to conservative cities. Let me assure you, Dan doesn’t have to deal
with things like that as a liberal in Indiana.
But as this tweet made its way into my timeline after being
retweeted by sports writer (also formerly of the Indy Star) and avowed leftist
Bob Kravitz, it dawned on me that they don’t even see the bigotry or elitist
snobbery in these kinds of remarks.
Content to strut around virtue-signaling their compassion and good
hearts, they willfully show their contempt for people who don’t think like them
without even realizing it.
It’s the Hillary Clinton “deplorable” thing. They don’t see it. And that has me wondering if maybe I’m wrong
After all, this is the very type of elite, liberal condescension
that led to Trump the first time. The
modelers are now saying what I just can’t find myself believing. But if there’s one thing maybe I need to
learn in politics is to never discount the left from radicalizing themselves so
far out of the mainstream that it costs them everything. Time will tell.