New York Times writes OP-EDs for Trump winning and losing in 2020

Two NYT journalists decided to write two OP-EDS, one predicted a Trump win in 2020 the other predicted a Trump loss.

Here are the beginning excerpts from both:


In the end, a bitterly fought election came down to the old political aphorism, popularized during Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 run against George H.W. Bush: “It’s the economy, stupid.” This time, however, it was the Republican incumbent, not his Democratic challenger, who benefited from that truism.

Donald J. Trump has been decisively re-elected as president of the United States, winning every state he carried in 2016 and adding Nevada, even as he once again failed, albeit narrowly, to gain a majority of the popular vote. Extraordinary turnout in California, New York, Illinois and other Democratic bastions could not compensate for the president’s abiding popularity in the states that still decide who gets to live in the White House: Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida.

Yet, unlike 2016, last night’s outcome came neither as a political upset nor as a global shock. Mr. Trump and Vice President Mike Pence have consistently polled ahead of Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and her running mate, Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, since July. The New York Times correctly predicted the outcome of the race in every state, another marked change from 2016.


In the end, it was a lot simpler than it often seemed.

Donald J. Trump, who spent much of the past four years as a historically unpopular president, lost his bid for re-election Tuesday. His approval rating hasn’t approached 50 percent since he took office, and neither did his share of the vote this year.

In an era of deep national anxiety — with stagnant wages, rickety health insurance and aggressive challenges from China and Russia — voters punished an incumbent president who failed on his central promise: “I alone can fix it.”

(Click on the winning or losing tab to read the full write ups from NYT)

The amazing thing surrounding these two OP-EDS are how accurate they actually are. The losing OP-ED written by David Leonhardt gives an accurate synopsis of what it would take for Trump to lose. He cites people becoming weary of his style and them thinking Trump is only in it for himself as the reasons for his 2020 downfall.

The winning profile outlines something much different. It outlines voters who vote Trump again because of a robust economy and the fact he has kept America safe. It also looks at the Democrats going to far left.

You can tell that the losing OP-ED was much more real than him winning again. The only way Trump doesn’t get reelected is if he is viewed as only in it for himself and people become worn down by the media constant hysteria. Although decent the winning OP-ED is much more forced. It is like giving Trump a backhanded compliment. They don’t give him any real successes. They don’t give him peace with North Korea, better relations with Russia or an overhaul of our immigration system and tariffs as a reason for his reelection. They simple give the ‘Well he was good enough to vote for again’.

I’m no fan of The New York Times but these two OP-EDs give important insight into the thinking of the journalists covering Trump as well as a decent view into how Trump wins or loses in 2020.

Share Your Thoughts

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here