"Democrats worried that economic recovery could lead to Trump reelection

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

The general election scenario that Democrats are dreading

In early April, Jason Furman, a top economist in the Obama administration and now a professor at Harvard, was speaking via Zoom to a large bipartisan group of top officials from both parties. The economy had just been shut down, unemployment was spiking and some policymakers were predicting an era worse than the Great Depression. The economic carnage seemed likely to doom President Donald Trump’s chances at reelection.

Furman, tapped to give the opening presentation, looked into his screen of poorly lit boxes of frightened wonks and made a startling claim.



“We are about to see the best economic data we’ve seen in the history of this country,” he said.

The former Cabinet secretaries and Federal Reserve chairs in the Zoom boxes were confused, though some of the Republicans may have been newly relieved and some of the Democrats suddenly concerned.

It seems as though a crashing economy and high death toll was the best chance for the Democrats winning the White House.

This article brought up a question to mind. If you had to choose between: an economic recovery and an end to the pandemic if it would mean another four years of Trump bragging about how he solved the world's problems?; Or would you rather see the country burn just to ensure he is removed from office?

 

[redleghunter]

I think you know the answer to the posed question.

 

[prodromos]

Honestly?
I would prefer Trump over anyone the Dem's have to offer.

 

[Silmarien]

Yeah, as a Democrat, there's absolutely nothing I like more than being traumatized by a never-ending global pandemic.

 

[Hank77]

Or would you rather see the country burn just to ensure he is removed from office?

 

[disciple Clint]

The general election scenario that Democrats are dreading

It seems as though a crashing economy and high death toll was the best chance for the Democrats winning the White House.

This article brought up a question to mind. If you had to choose between: an economic recovery and an end to the pandemic if it would mean another four years of Trump bragging about how he solved the world's problems?; Or would you rather see the country burn just to ensure he is removed from office?

This would seem to support Trump's statement that blue states are not opening because they want Trump to run on a bad economy.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

No vote? Don't blame you. It seems like more Democrats voted for AOC's Green New Deal than they are voting on this thread.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

This would seem to support Trump's statement that blue states are not opening because they want Trump to run on a bad economy.

Yes. I won't go as far as to say that all Democrats feel this way. But it does appear that there are a number of them who actually look at a crashing economy and large death tolls politically favorable. Ironically, these are the same people who will shame the president (and others) for not wearing a mask.

Update: As of right now we have one vote in favor of burning the country. Thus proving that these people actually exist. Therefore increasing the likelihood that a progressive state governor would feel the same. Thus points to the possibility that Trump's statement are plausible.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Honestly?
I would prefer Trump over anyone the Dem's have to offer.

To be fair, I did find Tulsi Gabbard to be probably the most electable nominee.

 

[The Barbarian]

In other words, you think democrats are happy that Trump bungled the pandemic response resulting in the deaths of over 100,000 people? Well, to be fair, an analysis says that only about 35,000 deaths are due to Trump's incompetence.

That's the same kind of hysteria that republicans were accusing democrats of doing. It remains true, anything Trump accuses anyone of doing, he almost certainly has been doing it himself.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Yeah, as a Democrat, there's absolutely nothing I like more than being traumatized by a never-ending global pandemic.

I do appreciate the sarcasm but we are not talking about anyone wanting a "never-ending global pandemic". We are talking about people who would like to see this thing stretch on until election for political reason. You are using the head scratching emoji to suggest that the thought is absurd. However, you obviously didn't read the article where leaders and high ranking officials in the democratic party are confessing to this very thing. Furthermore, looking at the polls, there is at least one person who fits into this category. I am pleasantly surprised that the number is so small. However, it goes to show that there are people who genuinely hate Trump more than they love the country. So much so that they would gladly see more deaths and poverty if it could better the odds of Trump being removed from office. Look no further than the thread poll to see that these people actually exist.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

In other words, you think democrats are happy that Trump bungled the pandemic response resulting in the deaths of over 100,000 people?

I think that there are democrats who look favorably to a failing economy and high death rates because it better the odds of Trump being removed from office. Would you mind going on the record and telling us where you stand on the OP question?

 

[Silmarien]

I do appreciate the sarcasm but we are not talking about anyone wanting a "never-ending global pandemic". We are talking about people who would like to see this thing stretch on until election for political reason. You are using the head scratching emoji to suggest that the thought is absurd. However, you obviously didn't read the article where leaders and high ranking officials in the democratic party are confessing to this very thing. Furthermore, looking at the polls, there is at least one person who fits into this category. I am pleasantly surprised that the number is so small. However, it goes to show that there are people who genuinely hate Trump more than they love the country. So much so that they would gladly see more deaths and poverty if it could better the odds of Trump being removed from office. Look no further than the thread poll to see that these people actually exist.

You are twisting what was said in the article. Nobody in the article said that they were hoping that the catastrophe continued until November--Sen. Coons in fact said the opposite, that he hoped there would be a robust recovery in the next few months.

The article says that Democrats are concerned that any sort of recovery will favor Trump come election time, which is a valid concern. I would share it if I were more optimistic about our chances of avoiding a second wave before the election which will probably wipe out any good will Trump manages to build in the intervening months.

I will deconstruct this for you:

I am a Democrat. I think that economic recovery will favor Trump. I am not thrilled with the idea that economic recovery will favor Trump. I also think a second wave will hurt Trump.

According to the logic that you've applied to the article, this means that I must desire a second wave. The reality is that I don't. The possibility of a second wave makes me a little bit hysterical.

If there were some bargain available whereby the pandemic would disappear entirely with no economic consequences in exchange for four more years of Trump, I would make it. I think many other Democrats would also, but that deal doesn't exist, so yes. Democrats are aware that economic recovery will favor Trump, but this doesn't mean we want to cut off our nose to spite our face. It's just a political reality that needs to be recognized.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You are twisting what was said in the article. Nobody in the article said that they were hoping that the catastrophe continued until November--Sen. Coons in fact said the opposite, that he hoped there would be a robust recovery in the next few months.

The article says that Democrats are concerned that any sort of recovery will favor Trump come election time, which is a valid concern. I would share it if I were more optimistic about our chances of avoiding a second wave before the election which will probably wipe out any good will Trump manages to build in the intervening months.

I will deconstruct this for you:

I am a Democrat. I think that economic recovery will favor Trump. I am not thrilled with the idea that economic recovery will favor Trump. I also think a second wave will hurt Trump.

According to the logic that you've applied to the article, this means that I must desire a second wave. The reality is that I don't. The possibility of a second wave makes me a little bit hysterical.

If there were some bargain available whereby the pandemic would disappear entirely with no economic consequences in exchange for four more years of Trump, I would make it. I think many other Democrats would also, but that deal doesn't exist, so yes. Democrats are aware that economic recovery will favor Trump, but this doesn't mean we want to cut off our nose to spite our face. It's just a political reality that needs to be recognized.

Thank you for sharing your opinion. However, there is at least one person on this thread who voted otherwise. So what are the odds that the one and only person who wants to capitalize of the pandemic for political gain just so happens to be on this forum.

Btw...there will be a second wave....and a third...and a fourth.

 

[Silmarien]

Thank you for sharing your opinion. However, there is at least one person on this thread who voted otherwise. So what are the odds that the one and only person who wants to capitalize of the pandemic for political gain just so happens to be on this forum.

Btw...there will be a second wave....and a third...and a fourth.

Eh... there is at least one person on this thread who thought it would be funny to vote otherwise. Or who didn't like the two possible poll options. We don't know why they voted that way unless they turn up and explain it.

The problem with the notion of "political gain" in this situation is that Democrats would not come out to vote in November if the party were cynical enough to play that sort of game. It would be a total dereliction of duty for the party to intentionally sabotage the country (including its own voters).

 

[The Barbarian]

Would you mind going on the record and telling us where you stand on the OP question?

Since we have 100,000 deaths and a crashed economy precisely because Trump bungled the COVID-19 crisis, it's kind of a distraction attempt.

For the record, would I kill 100,000 people to prevent Trump from being re-elected? No, I wouldn't. Would Trump kill 100,000 people in order to be re-elected? You know he would. That's what the "open it up now" and "So, in a way, by doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad" talk is all about.

He's not concerned that more people are now being infected and dying because the country is opening up prematurely; he's concerned that if things don't improve rapidly, he's going to be a one-term president. So he's rolling the dice with our lives.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Since we have 100,000 deaths and a crashed economy precisely because Trump bungled the COVID-19 crisis, it's kind of a distraction attempt.

For the record, would I kill 100,000 people to prevent Trump from being re-elected? No, I wouldn't. Would Trump kill 100,000 people in order to be re-elected? You know he would. That's what the "open it up now" and "So, in a way, by doing all of this testing, we make ourselves look bad" talk is all about.

He's not concerned that more people are now being infected and dying because the country is opening up prematurely; he's concerned that if things don't improve rapidly, he's going to be a one-term president. So he's rolling the dice with our lives.

Oh no. Trump can't take all the credit for bafoonery. It turns out that there is a possibility that over 10,000 deaths were from Cuomo's bafoonery that he attempted to cover up "Chineese Style". (By "Chineese Style", I am referring to the country's government. Not all people from China.

Betsy McCaughey: Cuomo nursing home scandal – Deaths likely closer to 10,000 and it gets worse

 

[The Barbarian]

Oh no. Trump can't take all the credit for bafoonery.

Just most of it. About 35,000 deaths, which would not have happened if he had acted at once, instead of denying the pandemic and calling it a "hoax."

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Just most of it. About 35,000 deaths, which would not have happened if he had acted at once, instead of denying the pandemic and calling it a "hoax."

So you are saying Trump wasn't acting xenophobic when he wanted to close all travel coming in from China? Btw...where are you getting your numbers? The same people who has been wrong on EVERY modeling prediction thus far?

 

[The Barbarian]

So you are saying Trump wasn't acting xenophobic when he wanted to close all travel coming in from China?

It's not xenophobia. He wants someone to shift the blame to. China was his first impulse. Sometimes, people do the right thing, even if it's the wrong reason.

Btw...where are you getting your numbers?

Columbia University study.

The same people who has been wrong on EVERY modeling prediction thus far?

You mean when Trump said it was going to go away in April like a miracle? No, the guys who were saying it would be between 60,000 to 180,000 dead, depending on what kinds of controls we implemented. They turned out to be right, as you know.