A weekly window on the American political scene hosted by the Monitor's politics editors.

Trump's position in polls isn't pretty – but a small electoral map could help

Susan Walsh/AP
President Donald Trump visits the Shell Pennsylvania ethylene cracker plant on Tuesday, Aug. 13, 2019 in Monaca, Pa. The facility, which critics claim will become the largest air polluter in western Pennsylvania, is being built in an area hungry for investment. Pennsylvania is one of a small number of states likely to decide the 2020 election.

Dear reader:

“In the pre-Trump era, any incumbent with his current math would be treated like a dead man walking.” That’s Axios’s Mike Allen, pointing to an array of warning signs for the president – from a 41% approval rating, to polls showing him trailing all of his top Democratic opponents, to the fact that disapproval of his performance outweighs approval in key swing states.

In fact, President Trump’s position is unprecedented in modern history. “No incumbent president has ever polled this poorly against his likely challengers at this point in the campaign,” writes CNN’s Harry Enten. Looking at incumbents going back to World War II, he finds that 9 of 11 presidents led their prospective challengers at this point in time, while the two who trailed – Presidents Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama – were behind by just four and one points, respectively. By contrast, recent polls show Mr. Trump trailing former Vice President Joe Biden by double digits.

Why We Wrote This

The president is running further behind his likely challengers than any incumbent in modern history. But a historically small number of states likely to be competitive may benefit him.

And yet, despite all this, many journalists and political observers seem to think the president may win. Mr. Allen chalks it up to fighting “the last war” – the chattering class got burned by underestimating Mr. Trump’s strength during the 2016 campaign, the thinking goes, so they’re overestimating it now.

But there’s another factor at work: the Electoral College. After all, Mr. Trump lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million ballots last time around, but won the White House because of narrow victories in a handful of key Rust Belt states. The political analysts sketching out possible Trump victories aren’t ignoring his poll numbers – indeed, some suggest he might lose the popular vote by an even larger margin. But as The Washington Post’s Dan Balz recently put it, the entire election may once again come down to Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida. And there are reasons to believe that Mr. Trump could pull off victories in all of those states, where the electorate tends to be a little older and a little whiter than the nation as a whole.

To be sure, the 2020 election is still more than a year away, and there are a number of factors – from the economy to foreign affairs to things we can’t foresee – that could upend the calculus. But it’s easy to envision a historically weak president benefitting from a historically tiny electoral battleground.

Let us know what you’re thinking at csmpolitics@csmonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Trump's position in polls isn't pretty – but a small electoral map could help
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today