It's like this account was made by a bot which just googles political terms and then astroturfs the opposing viewpoint. It's so irrelevant to the rest of the conversation. lol
The cycle thing needs at LEAST 50% approval ratings. I am not seeing Trump getting that unless something drastic happens.
Bernie has two problems, he is too old (by 2020), and he is too extreme for most Democrats. Sure 45% of Democrats really really really love Bernie, but to win president you need a bit more than that, and to pull a few swing voters in. I cannot imagine the people who want to dismantle the ACA would swing over and vote for "free education for all" Bernie.
> Bernie has two problems, he is too old (by 2020), and he is too extreme for most Democrats.
Age is a problem, yes; Bernie's other problem, though, is that he is seen as too unorthodox (moderate, rather than the extreme, to reduce things to a linear scale) on key issues for much of the Democratic base. He's too progressive on economic issues for the neoliberal elites, but that's mostly a problem in getting resources too build a national following if you don't already have that, and while it was a drag in the runup to the 2016 primaries when Bernie wasn't a national household name and the most popular politician in the country, but it's not much of an issue for 2020.
> Sure 45% of Democrats really really really love Bernie
As of April (the most recent I can find) Sanders had 57% favorability nationally (not just among Democrats.)
> I cannot imagine the people who want to dismantle the ACA would swing over and vote for "free education for all" Bernie.
There's two kinds of people who want to dismantle the ACA; those who are ideologically opposed to government programs, and those who aren't but think then subsidy and mandate approach simply doesn't work.
The former aren't even remotely swing voters, and the latter seems to be a good fit for Sanders, who, after all, is one of them.
Agreed. Universal for healthcare is one thing, because it's about people's lives. However college in my opinion is mostly a waste of money. You can learn the same thing on YouTube for free. It would be a terrible misallocation of resources to make college free for everyone. I hope college degrees go out of fashion, not that everybody gets one.
George HW Bush. Jimmy Carter. LBJ. Hoover, if you don't mind going back nearly a century. And before you say "well that's just three examples!" there have only been 45 presidents in 250 years. Just about the only presidential thing you can get dozens of examples of is white men.
I'm not sure how "Well Trump got elected" is any proof of your "parties alternate 2-term presidents" thesis. I doubt Sanders will run in 2020, but I don't pretend to know what will happen in the future.
You should add Nixon to that list, since they said two full terms, and Nixon's example may well be followed again. Gerald Ford belongs on that list too. In fact, only four of the ten most recent former Presidents served two full terms. (JFK is something of a different category, of course.)
Carter and Bush both lost because the economy was in a recession during their final years. Bush might have won if the economy had pulled out quicker. LBJ did not run for reelection.
If the economy is doing well, it is quite possible for Trump to be reelected.
