Washington: "This is a great advantage for a president," said the 30th, "and is a major source of safety for the country to know he is not a great person." Or, Calvin Coolidge would say a great woman today.
While today's president is being advertised as "an extremely stable genius" and those who would replace it promise a national transformation, attention should be paid to the detailed details of presidential policy, which suggests that modesty policy can lead to changes in voting where they are important, and at least 270 voters for a Democrat.
If the near future resembles the immediate past that is often the case, the Democratic Party candidate in 2020 will be, as the Republican candidate was in 201
In addition, during the 110-day sprint between the end of the Milwaukee Democratic Nomination Convention and Election Day, the earliest vote, which is subject to change, began on 18 September in Minnesota and at least one-fifth of voters in 2020, they will probably roll their ballots before the day of the election. Decisive voters can be those who do not want transformation, but restoration – restoration of national government, which is neither disturbing nor exhausting. So the Democratic Party, the oldest party in the world to win the popular vote in six of the seven presidential elections for the first time, has to focus on pulling Donald Trump's list of countries in 2016 and to do so carrying more than 487 counties (3142) Clinton did. Democrats could try to decipher the nearly 41-point cradle in the impenetrable Howard County in northeastern Iowa, the only US state to vote for Obama over Mitt Romney (by 20.9 points) in 2012, and four years later in Trumps over Clinton Democrats must withdraw from 402 other districts who voted for Trump after having voted for Obama at least once. This will require Democrats' progressive lions to place a moderate lamb on the Democrats as biblical, as it is unpleasant to the progressive pride of their awakening. But they could be encouraged to be more political ecumenical, remembering this: In 2016, Clinton won a million more votes than Obama in 2012 in New York, Massachusetts and California, but won a million than it did anywhere else.
But it all depends on the rejection of Democrats before allowing them to influence their choice of candidate, their self-explanatory explanation for 2016. As William Vogelli, editor-in-chief of Claremont Review of Books, wrote: The 2016 Elections the fanaticism of your opponents clearly shows that the problem is not that the Democrats did not do enough to deserve the people's votes, but that people are not good enough to deserve the Democrats' rule. Rather than later, even Democrats will begin to suspect that denigrating people while they vote for you has no strategic plausibility. "