I DON’T ENDORSE, I ONLY OBSERVE….

Ten Reasons Donald Trump Will Be Re-elected in 2020:

10) The Democrats have assembled a group of candidates who make the field of 17 Republicans Trump mowed through in 2016 look like the Founding Fathers.

9) On a related note, we’ve now had a good look at all the 2020 Dem contenders–none will be as good a candidate as Hillary Clinton, who was, in fact, a very strong candidate. (it was only after Election Day that she fell apart–getting back in this time will prove she’s the hardcore masochist I’ve always said Bill Clinton’s wife had to be.) There was a reason Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren didn’t get in last time. It wasn’t because they were the brave souls they’d need to be to take down Trump.

8) Trump was outspent at least 2 to 1 in the 2016 general. This time, he will probably outspend his opponent by that much.

7) It’s almost impossible to see even one state that went for Trump last time flipping against him, while several states he lost (Minnesota and New Hampshire chief among them) are in serious play, even according to anti-Trump pollsters. The Dem candidate probably won’t even contest traditional swing states like Ohio and Iowa, which will give Trump more time in states he thinks are winnable.

6) By this time, Trump has avoided at least seven attempts by the Swamp to draw him/us into, or further into, a foreign war (Syria and Hong Kong cooled off just this week, following attempted ramp-ups in/with Venezuela, Yemen, North Korea, and at least two serious attempts to engage Iran). It’s unlikely he will be drawn at this point and his voting base will see that as a promise delivered–it will make up for any lack of a border wall, which I thought he needed more progress on (progress he may well get by election day anyway).

5) The mountains of anecdotal evidence the media ignored in 2016 are being ignored again (attendance and enthusiasm at Trump’s tent revival-style rallies, the uselessness of traditional polling in gauging his appeal, his unique persuasion skills, etc.), which means he will yet again have the advantage of being underestimated.

4) Every attempt to bring him down has made him stronger. The internet is flooded with commentors who either sat out the last election or supported Trump very reluctantly and now say they will crawl over broken glass to vote for him. The reason cited is almost always some version of “Dems gone crazy.” More anecdotal evidence perhaps, but this wasn’t an observable phenomena last time. Partisan loathing has turned into that much more powerful emotion: Fear.

3) Delivering record low unemployment numbers to Black, Hispanic and Asian Americans month-after-month-after-month-after-month, is bound to win him a few percentage points in those demographics. A three point swing in his favor will equate to a landslide. It’s not improbable.

2) “I have fought for you” is a stronger message than “I will fight for you.”

1)  There’s an 80 percent chance he will not be impeached. If he is impeached there’s a good chance he won’t stand trial. If he does stand trial he won’t be removed and he’ll use it as a showcase for his strengths. You would think by now his opponents would have realized that Trump loves to fight–he loves doing what they hate doing and he holds their weakness and collegiality in contempt.

As do his voters.

Best guess? Trump will win more convincingly in the Electoral College while losing the popular vote more closely.

We can all check back in Nov. 2020 and see how I did. Lots of folks are predicting one way or the other, but I haven’t seen anyone put all their reasons in one basket so the exercise seemed useful, to clarify my own thinking if nothing else.

I’ll get to where Trump stands in history (world and U.S.), later on.

Won’t that be fun.

TO ELIZABETH WARREN (Late Night Dedication)

Today Warren announced she had taken a DNA test that failed to prove she had any Native American DNA but did “strongly” suggest she had somewhere between 1/64 and 1/1204 Latino DNA (which is now used in DNA samples seeking Native American bloodlines because North American tribes, for any number of good reasons, provide few samples of the genuine article).

Naturally her side proclaimed triumph and the other side mocked her.

I’ll never understand why these people don’t consult with me first. They won’t even have to pay me. I’m like Dustin Hoffman in Wag the Dog. I’d just do it for the fun of it. For a story to tell.

If wannabe President Warren had put herself in my hands, I would have dressed her in the costume Cher is wearing here, rolled out the smoke machines and had her lip-synch the hell out of it.

Crazy you say?

Front runner by Friday I say.

Laugh all you want. Family lore has it I’m either 1/32 or 1/64 Cherokee myself. Never considered myself anything but an American…and I know my people. They’re the ones providing the thunderous applause at the end…

[UPDATE: Some folks are confused by my first sentence. My apologies, as I some times forget I have WAY too much time to follow this stuff. Hence, I make assumptions about what everybody knows that I shouldn’t.

Here’s the nutshell:  Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has been dogged for years by her insistence that she had Native American heritage (and the idea that she used this claim to further her career by registering as a “minority” when, and only when, it would give her a leg up in applying for various positions). In what is probably preparation for a presidential run in 2020, she commissioned a DNA test which ended up in the hands of a famous expert at Stanford University. He assured her she has a Native American ancestor somewhere between six (1/64) and ten (1/1024) generations back (Initial media reports had it between 1/32 and 1/512). If true, this means she has less Native American heritage than the average European American. However, headlines from many Warren-friendly media outlets insisted she had proven her claim. Even most of the stories under those headlines, including this one, acknowledged testing for Native American heritage that far back does NOT produce definitive results. The key graph is here (buried deep here, and in most other, stories):

To make up for the dearth of Native American DNA, Bustamante used samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia to stand in for Native American. That’s because scientists believe that the groups Americans refer to as Native American came to this land via the Bering Strait about 12,000 years ago and settled in what’s now America but also migrated further south. His report explained that the use of reference populations whose genetic material has been fully sequenced was designed “for maximal accuracy.”

In other words the “Native American” ancestry Warren claims is just as–if not more–likely to have been Latin American. Had she known, maybe she could have checked Hispanic on all those application forms. Perhaps not surprisingly, the leadership of the Cherokee Nation has rejected Warren’s kinship claims in the strongest possible terms (as they have for decades, this is just the first time most people are hearing about it).

For the record I do not care about Warren’s politics one way or the other. I seek the comedy. Always the comedy!

Cher for President!