全 6 件のコメント

[–]TheNastyWomanI voted! 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Historically, sitting incumbents have been challenged. I think Teddy Roosevelt did it. But I don't think anyone has been successful

[–]HuckleberryFN2187[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Even then, it terminally weakened Gerald Ford when Reagan tried it.

[–]NotATroll71106I voted! 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

It all depends on what he actually does.

[–]Pwrbttmng 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The repubs will be happy he's signing all their bills

[–]PyongyangSilvers [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It all depends on how Trump governs and what effects his policies have. If his presidency as monumentally disastrous as people like us (I'm also a Kasich supporter) expect and this has enough of a negative effect on the economy to disillusion a significant fraction of the people who voted for him in 2016, then I do think a primary challenge might be viable.

That being said, I'm not optimistic. Trump's rhetoric and behavior have set the bar so low that it will be easy for him to exceed expectations. A primary challenger will be even easier for the Trump camp to paint as a traitor/Democratic plant/élitist pawn than the principled Republicans that stood up to him this year. It would be a risky move for most career politicians to make, meaning that we would likely end up seeing someone like Evan McMullin (whom I also support) going up against a sitting president with little institutional support and few friends in Washington to call upon.

I absolutely want there to be a primary challenge, and I'd almost certainly vote for the opposition candidate, but at this point I think it's far too early to tell whether it can happen.

[–]brownwithpink -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

No I don't think so. What I'm really hoping for is if a real progressive gets nominated in the Democratic primary & the Dems learn from their mistakes in this election. If they let another establishment Democrat run against Trump we'll be stuck with 8 years of him.