Trump wants to win Colorado and Minnesota in 2020. One is more likely than the other.

The Washington Post ^ | May 15, 2018 | Philip Bump

[2ndDivisionVet]

Shortly before the 2016 presidential election, Donald Trump’s communications adviser Jason Miller proclaimed that both Michigan and New Mexico were in play. In both states, Miller said, internal polls showed a “dead heat,” and he predicted that campaigning in both places would spike.

In Michigan, of course, that prediction was borne out. Trump won the state by the skin of his teeth, 11,000 votes. In New Mexico, though, he got blown out, losing by eight percentage points.

This story seems pertinent now because of another prediction by another Trump campaign staff member focused on a different election. According to Axios, Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, Brad Parscale, is targeting two other blue states for victory in the next election: Minnesota and Colorado. As with Michigan and New Mexico, one of those seems more likely than the other to go in Trump’s favor....

[Williams]

Ok which one, cause I ain’t subscribing.

[2ndDivisionVet]

How did I go there and post an article without subscribing? Do you think I give money to these sites?

[SmokingJoe]

I’d have thought Trump would go for Nevada in 2020, given that Trump lost by only 47.92% to 45.50% in 2016.

[Flavious_Maximus]

If not for the illegal alien voters in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico, Trump would have won those states.

He also got ripped off in New Hampshire with all the democrats from Masshole getting bused in across state lines.

[Zhang Fei]

Of course MN, which has very few Hispanics.

[Zhang Fei]

Trump lost MN by ~1.5% and CO by ~5%. The writer futzes around throughout the article without mentioning the most pertinent facts.

[CodeToad]

Colorado is a lost cause. The Republican party in Colorado is anti-Trump. Doulas county commissioners are openly hostile towards Trump, and their appointed officials are openly hostile to Trump too.

[CodeToad]

“If not for the illegal alien voters in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico, Trump would have won those states.”

Not Colorado. It is a very liberal State and even the Republican party in the State hates him. I’d say maybe 20% of the voters are pro-Trump.

[Beernoser]

If I would pick three states Trump would win in 2020 that he lost in 2016 they would be New Hampshire, Minnesota and Maine.

[SMGFan]

Possibly you have not reached your limit? I have for nytimes and Washingtonpost

[SmokingJoe]

You could very well be right. Trump lost those three by the closest of margins.

[Zhang Fei]

“Not Colorado. It is a very liberal State and even the Republican party in the State hates him. I’d say maybe 20% of the voters are pro-Trump.”

---

Trump only lost by 5% in CO. He could pick it up. His biggest problem is that in 2020, CO will have many more Hispanic voters.

[CodeToad]

“Trump only lost by 5% in CO. He could pick it up.”

Not likely. He’s lost a lot of voters here as liberalism and their Hate-Trump crowd continue to poison everyone. Even the Republican party in Colorado has been vocally against him.

Of course, the rest of us that aren’t led around by liberals love Trump!

[catnipman]

“Colorado is a lost cause. The Republican party in Colorado is anti-Trump. Doulas county commissioners are openly hostile towards Trump, and their appointed officials are openly hostile to Trump too.”

not to mention that the Republican Party is basically a joke in Colorado ...

[Williams]

Likewise

[Teacher317]

In both states, Miller said, internal polls showed a “dead heat,” and he predicted that campaigning in both places would spike. In Michigan, of course, that prediction was borne out. Trump won the state by the skin of his teeth, 11,000 votes. In New Mexico, though, he got blown out, losing by eight percentage points.

Strange that the article fails to note that, even during the weekend before the election, almost every polling outfit was predicting a significant Hillary victory, and Trump reversed that by taking 6 major states that he was not expected to take.

[Teacher317]

NOV 7 2016 Time Magazine:

NOV 8 2016 actual results:

WI, MI, PA, NC, and FL all flipped to red... that's 90 of 538 (almost exactly 1 out of 6, or 16.7%).

Also... Time had Alaska as merely "likely"... it went 51-36...
and they had Utah as merely "likely"... and Hillary almost finished third (45-27-21)

And let us not forget that Maine (47-44), Minnesota (46-45), and Nevada (47-45) were all in play... and New Hampshire (46-46) was a toss-up. Even Virginia (49-44) and Colorado (48-43) were in range.

Hillary got less than 28.95% in six states. Trump was not that low in any state (worst was 30.03% in HI... although he got only 4% in DC, of course).

Hillary could have been under 190 EVs without much of a change. 270,000 votes was the difference, total, for ME, MN, NV, NH, and CO... VA was 220,000 more. A half million well-placed votes, out of 132 million, makes it a 350-188 final tally.

[Concentrate]

The ONLY way to win is to use voter ID! Just ask Diamond and Silk!
http://www.diamondandsilk.com

[Concentrate]

I don’t like to sign up for anything, so if you are like me, just go to youtube and punch it in. It’s worth it!