Ara is a Journalism graduate from California State University Northridge who is always looking to explore his writing opportunities.
The Importance of Voting
The above scenario for the 2020 Presidential Election is a hypothetical situation but interesting to ponder
Bernie Sanders of Vermont is now the most popular US Senator today. His name keeps on being mentioned as a possible Democratic nominee for President in 2020. I decided to offer an analysis of which candidate would win in a hypothetical match up between Bernie Sanders and current US President Donald Trump. This article will be more like a 2020 election projection between these two men. Before I go any further with this article, let me say that all attempts will be made to analyze the election in such a way so that the article will not have a partisan slant. This means that attempts will be made to not make it too left-wing or too right wing. I have studied history since the early 1990’s however I am not a political expert by any means. I know that so many people in the United States may or may not be thinking of which person the Democrats will nominate for President to challenge Donald Trump (assuming that he is still in office by 2020). With that said, let’s get to the main focus of the article which is the 2020 Presidential Election. It is a detailed electoral analysis that shows how and why Bernie Sanders will beat Donald Trump a view that I had before the results of the 2020 Democratic primary.
Initial prediction: Bernie Sanders defeats incumbent President Donald J. Trump but the margin of victory would be very small.
Total projected Electoral votes:
Bernie Sanders 274
Donald J. Trump 264
How Do We Calculate the Electoral Vote Numbers?
The way that the Electoral votes were projected for the article is as follows: when you visit the website 270 to win, there is a map of the United States. Start with a blank map and choose which candidate you think will win each state. There is a drop down menu on the page that allows you to select the names of the candidates. This is the simplest way to describe what to do when you visit the website. This is a fun activity that can leave you addicted to the page. Note: I used the numbers for the 2016 Election in making my calculations.
|Candidate Name||Political Party||Color on the Map for 270towin.com|
Donald J. Trump
Can Bernie Sanders Defeat Donald Trump?
Faces of Bernie Sanders
The West Coast States (California, Washington, and Oregon)
In this area of the country, Bernie Sanders is going to beat Donald Trump by a huge margin. Oregon and Washington will go in Bernie’s favor because of Seattle and Portland and the fact that these two cities are so liberal. California which has not gone to a Republican candidate since the 1980’s will end up voting for Bernie Sanders by an even bigger margin than it did for Hillary Clinton in 2016. We may see something like this:
Bernie Sanders: 75%
Donald Trump: 25%
The reason for this is that by 2020, Donald Trump will be even more unpopular and CA voters rejected him by margins of at least 3 to 1. I expect him to be beaten by an even worse margin in 2020. California is too urban and too liberal for any Republican candidate to win there. Hawaii will go overwhelmingly in favor of Bernie Sanders because of the high minority population there and Alaska will vote for Donald Trump (this one’s pretty much obvious). With wins in California, Oregon, and Washington, Sanders will end up with an easy 74 Electoral Votes if we use the 2016 numbers.
Bernie Sanders' Vice Presidential Nominee
The Mountain West States (Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana)
The Mountain West or the Rocky Mountain States will go heavily in favor of Donald Trump and this is because these states are too conservative. There are 22 Electoral Votes in this section of the country. In addition, I would also put Nevada in Trump’s favor because of the fact that Nevada is still one of least educated states in the country. Even though the minority population in Nevada is growing, it may not be enough to help Sanders win the state. Utah which will vote for Trump pretty much no matter what, may become competitive if Evan McMullin enters the race as an Independent candidate.
Colorado and New Mexico should be won by Bernie Sanders due to the young people, African Americans, and Trump’s extreme immigration policies.
I would be shocked if Sanders didn’t win both New Mexico and Colorado.
A photo of Donald Trump and Mike Pence at the 2016 Republican National Convention
The Great Plains States (North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, and Kansas)
The Great Plains States will vote heavily in favor of the incumbent Trump even if he is more unpopular in 2020. There is something to be said about a sort of loyalty to the party. States like Kansas voted Republican for generations and I don’t expect that to change in 2020.
Most of the southern states, Iowa, Indiana, and Missouri will more than likely be Trump wins
The above statement is pretty much accurate for those of us that understand the mentality of the populations of these states and demographics. Bernie Sanders will lose very badly in the South because the South does not believe in gun control. Also, the South has been conservative since the end of the 1970’s. Even though the minority population in Texas has been growing, Sanders will lose in Texas by at least double digits due to the fact that residents in that state would not be in favor of his socialist views. Iowa and Missouri are still going to be too rural for Sanders to win those two states. Indiana will go in Trump’s favor due to what I like to call the Mike Pence effect. Pence is from Indiana and served as the state’s governor. Sanders will win Illinois due to turnout levels in Chicago. Minnesota which has not voted Republican since 1972 will vote for Bernie Sanders by a wide margin, something like 70 to 30 percent. Michigan might be won by Bernie. I say this because he won Michigan in the Democratic primary in 2016. And if African American turnout is anywhere near 2008 or 2012 levels, I expect Bernie to win this swing state. Trump may win in Wisconsin due to the nature of it being a conservative Democratic state. Madison is seen as a college town but that will not be enough to help Sanders win in Wisconsin. Although Ohio has lots of working class whites, many of whom voted for Donald because they didn’t like Hillary Clinton, will probably vote for Trump again but not by much. He will probably win Ohio by 1 to 2 percent. By this point in the Election night:
Donald Trump: 235 Electoral Votes
Bernie Sanders: 138 Electoral Votes
The Northeast states including New York will vote overwhelmingly for Bernie Sanders especially in 2020
A message for Republicans here: don’t even waste your time trying to win any of these states. The Northeast especially New York and Vermont will vote heavily in favor of Bernie Sanders. He may even win in New Hampshire due to getting most of the support of college educated voters. New York will reject its native born Donald Trump yet again, thus bringing Sanders closer to victory.
Other swing states: Pennsylvania, Florida, and Arizona
PA and FL have been swing states since about 2000. PA will be a tossup but if the African American vote is anywhere near 2008 or 2012 levels, Bernie Sanders will win the state in a close, hard fought battle. Florida while also a swing state may go to President Trump due to the conservative White vote and the Cuban vote. Cubans usually vote Republican. Florida is a critical battleground state but I just find it hard to believe that Florida voters would embrace Bernie Sanders’ left wing stance. Arizona I would also classify as a battleground state by 2020 because of Latinos’ dissatisfaction with Trump. Arizona has traditionally voted Republican since 2000 but because Trump will be so unpopular, that will more than likely cause him to lose the state. Do not forget Arizona! If Bernie Sanders wins the state of Arizona and wins PA, he ends up with 274 Electoral votes, thus ensuring that he will serve as either the 46th or 47th President of the United States (if Mike Pence is the President prior to the election).
Can Bernie Sanders really beat Donald Trump?
Normally, I would say that US voters would be reluctant to vote for a Jewish man as President. But 2020 will not be a normal election cycle. I expect higher voter turnout if Sanders is the nominee because he is so popular and he started a sort of political revolution that young people (the millennials really liked). However, Sanders’ ability to win also depends on how much of the African American and Latino votes he can get. If the minority voter turnout is low, Trump will be reelected as President. As to who Sanders may choose as his VP running mate, names such as Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii come to my mind. All of the above assumes that Sanders even decides to run for President again and wins the nomination. His age of 79 by 2020 may be a liability but as 2016 showed us, if someone like Donald Trump was able to win at 70, then Sanders’ age should not be a big issue. Are we ready to vote for a man like Bernie Sanders? I certainly would do so but would the rest of the country do it? Time will tell but my assumption is that Sanders even at 79 could beat Trump because he is a better populist candidate with a strong message. Donald Trump did win in 2016 but he did not win by a huge margin. He won’t have the fortune of being a brand new candidate in 2020 who is not a politician. He will be an incumbent President who may suffer the same fate that George H.W. Bush did in 1992. Or on the flip side, those that voted for Donald Trump in 2016 may do so again due to being fearful of change. Often times, many people will not want to go outside their comfort zone and take risks. Nothing is a guarantee in the United States when it comes to voting patterns. The US is not Canada or Sweden. Upon analyzing Sanders' chances against Trump in 2020 had he been the nominee for the Democrats, Sanders would have actually lost the election to Donald Trump due to not being a strong enough candidate to appeal to Independent voters that don't necessarily like Donald Trump. The other issue that Bernie Sanders would have had is that he may not have been able to attract enough support from African American or Latino voters.
As we look back at the 2020 Democratic Primary season, given how poorly Bernie Sanders performed in many of these primaries, he would not have beaten President Donald Trump in this election cycle. I give him credit for at least attempting to make another run for the White House during a time when the United States remains a country that is very much divided politically.
Bernie Sanders Announcing His 2020 Presidential Bid
Bernie Sanders and his chances against incumbent Donald J. Trump
Secular Talk's Kyle Kulinski Predicts a Bernie Sanders Run in 2020
© 2017 Ara Vahanian
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on February 12, 2020:
Edward Lane: thank you for your comment. As far as how the recent impeachment may affect how these people vote, it will not have much effect as those that still support Trump enthusiastically will do so. And those that don't like him won't vote for him. The moderates are the ones that will decide the 2020 election as well as how much minority voter turnout there may be as I mentioned in the article. Yes, both Sanders and Trump have populist appeal you are correct. If Sanders is the nominee he will have to figure out how to attract more of those moderate Democrats, that is the challenge for him. Sanders is not a corporate Democrat like Hillary Clinton and this may be an advantage for him in some respects. Democrats have to be careful though because Sanders will not win the 2020 election easily.
Edward Lane from Wichita Falls, Texas on February 12, 2020:
Love your article! Excellent analysis of what might happen! After New Hampshire, you may be a prophet. I can see Sanders and Trump appealing to many of the same populist voters. Not sure how the impeachment will affect it. What do you think?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on February 11, 2020:
Isabella Ides made an interesting comment. Systemic change is important certainly. Rather than being afraid of centrist Democrats, Democrats must unite and come together and attempt to embrace each other and be a better example of change, something that the GOP for the most part has not done. Voter turnout is essential if the Democratic nominee is to defeat Donald Trump.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on February 07, 2020:
MG Singh: Interesting comment that you left here. I do think what you say is certainly reasonable. However, Trump does not have the broad base of support that other incumbent Presidents like Ronald Reagan did in 1984. There are many who say that Sanders will have trouble getting enough support from certain groups. It will all come to voter turnout. If he can motivate people to come out and vote then he has a chance. Who would you say is a more formidable candidate?
Isabella Ides on February 07, 2020:
I think Sanders is the best person to BEGIN the process of addressing the problems of late-stage-capitalism: economic injustice, social injustice, and increasing power of the wealthy. Thus in my mind, he can help preserve Democracy. We've gone too far in the direction of oligarchy and dictatorship. Systemic change is vital to preserve our freedoms. So don't be afraid of the left. Be more afraid of the center that thinks it can hold. That is the illusion that will destroy us. Trump has exposed the dark side of American. Now we must face that reality, and create real change.
MG Singh emge from Singapore on February 06, 2020:
I will indulge in a bit of Astro- forecast. I have studied the horoscope of both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders. Sadly I have to conclude that Trump is going to win the presidential election this year. I can say Bernie Sanders is going to cook the goose for the Democrats. They should look for a more for a formidable candidate.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on February 06, 2020:
Thanks. It is good to know that you like my writing. At the time that this was written, this was what my thoughts and perspective was in regards to the topic. I may have to edit the article at least slightly because the political landscape is changing. Let me know what I can do to make the article better.
Edward Lane on February 06, 2020:
Well written article. I don’t agree, but I like your writing.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on October 20, 2019:
Brad: if you are still here, I felt I had to kind of get some thoughts out of my system. I've had some time to think things through and have come to a few realizations:
1. There is a lot of corporate money flowing through the system today and that's what many people are tired of. Hence, that could be one of the reasons why Hillary Clinton didn't win in 2016.
2. I have heard a few people mention that they think Bernie Sanders is the "Donald Trump of the Left." He is seen s one of those people with a populist message.
3. There are flaws in both major parties.
4. Even though I have tended to vote Democrat, I sometimes think that Bernie Sanders may be too liberal even for me.
Brad on March 18, 2019:
I liked your comment.
As for party loyalty, we have only one congress, unlike sports teams, and when the congress loses a game, we all lose and it doesn't matter whether the fault is one part or the other. I would make the analogy that instead of being loyal to one party, we should be loyal to one country. And pick congress and the president as if we were making an all star team.
You are right that Bernie will have a tough time to win the DNC primary with all the opposition. If Biden stays in, I don't think he will lose the primary. He is the heir to Obama and that gives him the edge in my opinion. It won't be the GOP that will have to attack him, the democrat opponents will do it.
What I don't know is what does Bernie bring to the democrats that will make him win the primary?
Also, where would we be today, if Bernie had beaten Hillary and Trump? What would be the significant difference that we would say is better today with Trump as president.
I am not a fan of either party, probably less of fan of the democrats. When Willie McCovey left baseball, I left baseball, and Trump is my Willie McCovey if that makes sense.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 18, 2019:
Brad, that comment may have been long but it also gives me a lot to think about. Party loyalty is a tricky issue as passions can get very heated at times. It is similar to sports where many follow a team so closely and when that team loses, they may get angry, upset and even lose sleep over the fact that their team lost a game or playoff series. You mentioned something about the constant state of war in the US and that's very true as the buildup of the military industrial complex has seen massive US troop involvements. In the last century, most historians would say that World Wars 1 and 2 were technically wins by the allies though they came at a significant loss of life and destruction of buildings and lands. With the massive increase in size of the US government since the 1780's, there has been a huge influence of corporate money in politics and this is what has led to the corruption especially what happened with Debbie Wasserman Schulz and the DNC. That's not to say the GOP isn't corrupt because they are as well. Bernie Sanders is different because he is not seen as a corporate, centrist Democrat. Though he will have a much harder time winning the nomination this time with so many candidates for the Democrats. Still, should the scenario described here in the article happen, Sanders will still have a dog fight on his hands as the GOP will do whatever they can to discredit him and Trump is a guy that will battle until the end. But ultimately, it will depend on whether Sanders can win over the voters in the Rust Belt States and if he does, he will win the election. But if he loses even one of the three states I mentioned earlier, he will have to win Nevada and try to win Arizona or Florida which will be very tough. Donald Trump will not go down without a fight. Thoughts?
Brad on March 15, 2019:
What you said about the parties is more than just when the president is in power? The fundamental ideology of the two parties are diametrically opposed, and that doesn't change with the presidents. The left is going in one direction, and the right is going in the exact opposite direction.
This is not conducive to compromise, but it sparks gridlock. When I was in high school one my teachers said basically, don't vote for RowA or RowB vote for the best candidate. That best candidate is difficult because the party is the one that picks the selection of candidates. So, it has always been the choice of the lesser of the evils, not the best.
The concept of the loyal party voter to me is human sheep. There are the sheep who follow, or actually are herded by the shepherds, the party. We have one congress and one president, and yet voters treat their party like a sports team. When congress fails, or the president fails, then it doesn't matter which party was guilty because the game for the US was lost.
I don't have a party to follow, and that is why I voted for Donald Trump, as he didn't cause the problems that both parties left him with after many decades. He didn't have to cover up what other politicians caused on both sides. Yet, both parties tried to tie him to their post, and the loyal party voters bought into it. It is calling coming into a set stage, yet before he was even in the Oval Office people started blaming him, and they haven't stopped yet.
I see no value in people becoming political sheep, and one only has to look at our history to see why that isn't a good thing. With the one team we have called congress, if people want to go the sports team route, then make it like the all star game.
The county thanks to both parties has been in continual wars for at least the last 100 years, and in my opinion we didn't win any of them. It all depends on what your definition of winning is to agree or disagree with my opinion.
As an accounting student, you might consider the following analogy about parties that are opposite trying to decide whether something is a debit or credit.
The core of accounting is the debit or credit and to make the account balance everyone has to agree on what is a debit or a credit. Many of the accounting transactions are straight forward, but there are some that aren't and in order to standardize the process, a choice is made, and the important thing about the choice is that it remain a constant.
In congress, every party that takes control from another party, wants to make the T account ordered to their interpretation of debit and credit, and then until the power changes again, it remains a constant. But, when the other party gets control, that constant is not a variable until it changes the previous constant into the new constant.
Another analogy, congress is like a seesaw the party in control moves the seesaw in the opposite direction from the party that isn't in control. A seesaw only goes up and down and not forward. The first thing that the party that get control back is to reverse what the last party in control did when they were in power.
Sorry for the lengthy comment, but none of it is left or right,
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 14, 2019:
I'm actually thinking of a way to improve this article so I think I will try to add a secondary & a primary source if I can find one even though this is not a research paper. It is possible that the important issues will get ignored. The other thing is too that the opposition party never seems to agree with the other party while their president is in power. If there is a Democrat in office it seems that the Republicans try to do what they can to obstruct the president & vice versa. You're right: many of the issues that are going on today such as the massive income gap between the haves and have nots was not caused by Trump. Many people looked to him because they thought he was different and that maybe he could improve their lives.
Brad on March 14, 2019:
Thanks, I really appreciate you discussing this with me, no so much that we have some sort of agreement, but just the process of discussing it.
Many on the left at Hp think, I am too harsh on them because I insist on them arguing their points to support their articles. I am actually looking for a point of view that would make me change my view.
My point on the 2020 issues is important because each presidential election we waste a lot of time and energy going over residual issues, issues that haven't been changed in several decades like Roe v Wade. We did that in 2008, and while every politician in Washington was campaigning for themselves, or their party, we ignored what was the biggest issue at that time, the economy.
Today, we have a lot of issues that are just like Roe in that they will be used as political distractions, while the important issues whatever they turn out to be will once again get ignored.
Currently, I don't agree with anything that is being done by the democrats, and I am not happy with the republicans. I support Trump, but not in everything, and because he didn't cause these issues that have gone on for decades.
As for information verification using the Internet today is much like the programming of the gambling slot machines. You wonder if the house has added more than the odds of the game to win. Like Fire, the Internet can help you or it can burn you.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 13, 2019:
No I have not given any thought to what the major 2020 issues should be but there is definitely a lot that needs to be addressed. I am grateful for the interaction that this article is finally getting! Thanks! As for the top 2020 issues I would say that there has to be something that can help to address the massive income gap & the fact that so many are working so hard but they are barely making ends meet. As for Sanders being a socialist I have heard this from many people. I can certainly see your point about Comey not doing his job because when they asked him about whether re-opening the investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server, he then basically said: "I would feel nauseated if what I did influenced the outcome of the election." I may be wrong but he may have been trying to play partisan politics.So basically I do see your point about Comey. He was flawed and did make mistakes but as to whether his actions may have affected the outcome of the election, I would say... well probably not because voters on both sides had their minds made up who they were going to vote for. What led to Trump's win is based in part by lower voter turnout in a few key states on the Democratic side, plus some were not inspired enough by Clinton to vote for her. I think that you and I can both agree that Clinton did have her flaws and I'll give you one example: she voted in favor of authorizing the use of force against Iraq in 2003 which was a mistake. I sense that I'm coming to a level of understanding, better than I would have in 2016. Thanks for your comments and for being patient with me.
Brad on March 12, 2019:
As I said, as per Hubpages policy, I cannot link to other articles or promote other sites.
B: What do these sites do for you?
Comments are only for responding to others comments.
B: So comment
I will agree with you that the investigation into Hillary Clinton, 11 days before the 2016 Election as Comey announced that her investigation had been re-opened, that is questionable and who knows what his motives are.
B: I was talking about both of the Comey investigations.
And secondly, Mueller isn't only investigating collusion, he has been investigating other things as well.
B: My point was that he was a special investigator for the collusion, but collusion isn't a federal crime, so what was he investigating. I gave you a lot more on that including Mueller had a conflict of interest with president Trump
I just researched the Russian hacking scheme and according to the January 2017 ICA or Intelligence Community Assessment, they (The US Senate) found that Russia used a notorious troll farm to spread a social media disinformation campaign and they made attempts to breach election infrastructure. Keep in mind that it is not me saying these things, these are things that the US Senate found while working & doing their job.
B: I think you need to research it further because, no one has found any influence in the election.
I cannot be any more clear than that. I could be more specific but since I am not supposed to link to other sites or promote other sites, I can only do what I can by researching the issues.
B: You didn't answer my points, and what does that have to do with linking to other sites?
Both you and I have gone off on a tangent here as this article was never intended to address anything about Russian collusion or 2016. This is mainly an election prediction and because it is a prediction, there is no 100% guarantee that Bernie would win the election if he were the nominee. A part of it will determine whether he will be able to influence minority voters to come out and vote for him. Will voters really be influenced by what he calls a political revolution? If voters really want to see change, they need to become active and take part in the process.
B: There was no tangent, because as part of the prediction in your article you included president Trump. So anything concerned with Trump losing the election to Bernie is on target.
He has to beat the democrat candidates, and then if he wins the primary, he has to beat president Trump?
What does he call a political revolution? Socialism?
Have you given any thought as to what the top 2020 issues "should" be in your opinion?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 12, 2019:
As I said, as per Hubpages policy, I cannot link to other articles or promote other sites. Comments are only for responding to others comments. I will agree with you that the investigation into Hillary Clinton, 11 days before the 2016 Election as Comey announced that her investigation had been re-opened, that is questionable and who knows what his motives are. And secondly, Mueller isn't only investigating collusion, he has been investigating other things as well. I just researched the Russian hacking scheme and according to the January 2017 ICA or Intelligence Community Assessment, they (The US Senate) found that Russia used a notorious troll farm to spread a social media disinformation campaign and they made attempts to breach election infrastructure. Keep in mind that it is not me saying these things, these are things that the US Senate found while working & doing their job. I cannot be any more clear than that. I could be more specific but since I am not supposed to link to other sites or promote other sites, I can only do what I can by researching the issues. Both you and I have gone off on a tangent here as this article was never intended to address anything about Russian collusion or 2016. This is mainly an election prediction and because it is a prediction, there is no 100% guarantee that Bernie would win the election if he were the nominee. A part of it will determine whether he will be able to influence minority voters to come out and vote for him. Will voters really be influenced by what he calls a political revolution? If voters really want to see change, they need to become active and take part in the process.
Brad on March 12, 2019:
You didn't respond to my detailed comment, why?
And I provided you with exactly what he told Lester Holt?
If you are quoting from Comey, then you just have hearsay, and that is not evidence or proof. What you would need is authentication?
What evidence to you have to say he didn't mean it. My evidence is that he didn't stop the investigation as ridiculous as was its premise. It was supposed to be investigating the Russian Trump collusion to influence the election. So far, he has gotten people to plead to charges of lying, and not anything to do with Russia, Trump, collusion or influencing the election. Collusion isn't a crime, so what was Mueller investing for more than a year? Mueller has been investigating searching for a crime that didn't exist when he started the investigation. Do you know what he was appointed to investigate, and was it a crime?
The Trump tower meeting was lawful, although the FISA warrant on Carter Page was really questionable. Got anything else?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 12, 2019:
Trump said to Comey this: "I want you to let Michael Flynn go. Michael Flynn is a good guy" That's basically what he said and I won't link to any articles about this because the policies set in place by Hubpages don't allow me to. Comment section is only for providing feedback about comments left by members. Did Trump really want to know what happened with Russian hacking? I don't really think so. I would encourage others to leave their comments on this article which was an election prediction for 2020. I will have to update this written piece because much has changed with the US political landscape.
Brad on March 12, 2019:
B:You cherry picked one thing and left the rest of my comment alone?
"If you recall, Brad, the reason that Robert Mueller was appointed was because Trump fired then FBI Director James Comey
B: Did firing James Comey have any affect on the investigation, James Comey was the director of the FBI, but the investigation continues with another director. James Comey was a bad FBI director even before he let Hillary off, and his investigation on her was nothing like his investigation into the Russia influence on the election. That was the goal of the 4 other investigations where they found zero evidence that the election results were influenced at all. Even president Obama said that there was now way the election could be rigged. And he said that shortly before the election took place.
Comey was fired way after he and president Trump had their meeting, where later Comey had his notes of that meeting leaked to the press when he was fired.
In that meeting and several before, Comey told president Trump he was not being investigated. He merely asked Comey to try and see what he could do. He never directed Comey to do anything as an order, and the Flynn investigation never stopped.
The director of the FBI serves at the pleasure of the president, and Trump fired him for not doing his job. Comey went around the country doing his on PR instead of doing his job. You didn't have a problem when Comey usurped his authority and made a decision to not indict Hillary Clinton when that was not his job. It was his job to turn over the results of Hillary Clinton's investigation to the DOJ and the DOJ is the one to make the disposition of whether to indict.
Even in a local police matter, the Chief of police doesn't make decisions for the District Attorney.
The investigation of Hillary Clinton by Comey was a sham. He didn't have a grand jury, the Hillary interview by the FBI was not under oath, it was not recorded into the record, and another witness was allowed to be at the interview.
who by the way was investigating him and he told Comey specifically to drop the investigation into Michael Flynn.
B: You need to go back to that Comey Trump conversation and get the wording correct, president Trump never told him to drop the case.
That is called obstruction right there! Trump was caught red handed like a five year old trying to reach into a jar of cookies when his mother told him not to do so.
B: If it were obstruction, which it was not because he never told him to drop the case, Comey as the FBI would have been required to put that into the record, which he didn't and forward it to the DOJ which he didn't. Comey didn't follow FBI procedure and that again is the reason he got fired. His leaked memorandum, basically his memory of about the meeting, is not the record.
And I am disappointed in your making this cookie jar analogy when there was never any evidence even mentioned to make such a statement, and it makes me believe that you don't really know the facts.
If you also recall, he (Trump) even admitted to Lester Holt on National TV (I saw that portion with my own eyes) that the reason he fired James Comey was because of the Russia investigation. That is clear obstruction of justice."
B: First of all if it was a clear obstruction of justice, a grand jury could have indicted him then, but there was no grand jury, there was no indictment, and no obstruction of justice.
"Here is what Trump said about the Russia investigation during the interview:
"I want that thing to be absolutely done properly."
"I want to find out if there was a problem with an election having to do with Russia, or by the way, anybody else, any other country. And I want that to be so strong and so good, and I want it to happen."
"But I want to find out, I want to get to the bottom—if Russia hacked, if Russia did anything having to do with our election. I want to know about it."
I hope that your response will address the points, I made here.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 11, 2019:
If you recall, Brad, the reason that Robert Mueller was appointed was because Trump fired then FBI Director James Comey who by the way was investigating him and he told Comey specifically to drop the investigation into Michael Flynn. That is called obstruction right there! Trump was caught red handed like a five year old trying to reach into a jar of cookies when his mother told him not to do so. If you also recall, he (Trump) even admitted to Lester Holt on National TV (I saw that portion with my own eyes) that the reason he fired James Comey was because of the Russia investigation. That is clear obstruction of justice.
Brad on March 10, 2019:
That is not evidence, that is a question.
"If you claim there is no evidence on Russian hacking, then why was Paul Manafort indicted and arrested?
B: What was he arrested for, it had nothing to do with Trump. Are you talking about the DNC alleged hacking? If so, when Podesta's password is password?
And these are my exact words
"Where is the evidence on Trump?
There has been no proof at all that the 2016 election was influenced by anyone, including Russia or Trump or Russia and Trump."
Why is Roger Stone in deep trouble?
B: What trouble is that, and does it connect to Russia?
And Trump's crooked son Don Jr. admitted that he attended that famous Trump Tower meeting in order to gather up dirt on Hillary Clinton after he was asked about it several times. You're probably reading news sources that aren't reporting what I read. The mainstream media in the US doesn't report everything so that's why I read alternative news sources.
B: First, I am disappointed that you stooped to "crooked", and second The Trump Tower meeting had nothing to do with anything. Trump and his team were under surveillance through Carter Page for a year from a FISA warrant based on a Russian Dossier containing no evidence, and they didn't find anything. And the Russian Woman Lawyer at that meeting was never according to her even interviewed by the any US agency about that meeting. And what does getting dirt on Hillary have to do with influencing the election. This has been rolling around since 2016, and where is the evidence of anything that has made it to an arrest or indictment or anything. How is this meeting that didn't have any results be evidence of anything.
As for Bernie dropping out of the race in 2016, he did it when he finally realized he could not catch up to Hillary in the primary. He lost by a substantial number."
B: Really, the way I saw it he was winning one after another in the spring and he was on his way to catching up with her, and at least he could have challenged her in the primary. Is that what you want in a president to give up? And there isn't anyone in the democrats that can beat Joe Biden. Hillary and Bernie included.
So where is the evidence, there have been five investigations in the last three years, and Mueller keeps his investigation alive. Is this the way a president should have to work in his first two years?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 10, 2019:
If you claim there is no evidence on Russian hacking, then why was Paul Manafort indicted and arrested? Why is Roger Stone in deep trouble? And Trump's crooked son Don Jr. admitted that he attended that famous Trump Tower meeting in order to gather up dirt on Hillary Clinton after he was asked about it several times. You're probably reading news sources that aren't reporting what I read. The mainstream media in the US doesn't report everything so that's why I read alternative news sources. As for Bernie dropping out of the race in 2016, he did it when he finally realized he could not catch up to Hillary in the primary. He lost by a substantial number.
Brad on March 10, 2019:
Where is the evidence on Trump?
There has been no proof at all that the 2016 election was influenced by anyone, including Russia or Trump or Russia and Trump.
And If Bernie Sanders runs for the presidency in 2020, don't you think the voters need to know why he dropped out of the primary when he gaining on Hillary?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 10, 2019:
That's a good question. I would give Biden a good chance to get the nomination because of his appeal and his moderate stances. But as I said, the Democratic Party may try to nominate a corporate, centrist Democrat. If they do this, most of those corporate guys will more than likely lose to Trump but there is no guarantee Trump will even be the nominee in 2020. Even without all these investigations, he would still have to go through the nomination process. I have been reading the news on occasion and Robert Mueller and or the SDNY will have something to say about this. Trump is in big trouble with the Russia scandal and even if Mueller doesn't finish him off then the state of New York will. No one can be pardoned for state crimes. I digress a little bit but we can't assume Trump will be the nominee in 2020 but this article was written at the time assuming that he would be.
Brad on March 10, 2019:
Then who can beat Joe Biden for the democrat primary?
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on March 10, 2019:
Actually Brad the final vote tally in terms of the Electoral Vote count was actually 306-232. In terms of Washington and Oregon, Bernie would have to make it past the primary stage that's correct. I think he will have a very tough time this time getting past that. I have a feeling that the Democratic Party would rather nominate a corporate, centrist Democrat and that's what political parties try to do. I know that I said earlier that Tim Kaine would be one of the weakest Democratic candidates though he is very experienced. I think that were Sanders able to get the nomination, he would win Michigan and Pennsylvania. Joe Biden seems like one of the better candidates as well. Though he is 77 years old but Trump was elected at age 70 so does it really matter? I think that 2020 is going to come down to who wins the Rust Belt states. Bernie would win at least 2 of 3 (Wisconsin is a tough one) and he won't win Iowa. So he will have to carry Nevada and then try and pick off FL or AZ which won't be easy. In the end, assuming this scenario happens where Sanders is the nominee, I expect him to beat Donald Trump even if he barely wins.
Brad on March 09, 2019:
With the campaign for the presidency getting into full swing, isn't it time to update your article. There are over a dozen democrats saying they are going to run.
I just wrote an article on can any democrat beat Joe Biden, and that included Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders?
I am interested to hear your opinion.
BTW, I looked at your article again, and in the beginning where the article says, that Washington and Oregon will go to Bernie would be true if he made it past the primary.
Keep in mind that Washington, Oregon, California, Illinois and New York went to Hillary, no surprise, and yet Trump still won 306 to 230. Just a thought.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on January 21, 2019:
Brad: Happy New Year to you as well! I would have to say that Bernie Sanders would be better than many of these establishment corporate Democrats. I would say Bernie probably has not accepted as much corporate money compared to candidates such as Tim Kaine, Cory Booker, Nancy Pelosi & others. I've heard many also say that they think Bernie Sanders would not be a strong candidate because he is Jewish & too far to the left politically. Still, I think he is a decent candidate. As far as the weakest one for the Democrats... just my opinion but Nancy Pelosi would be the weakest one along with Tim Kaine.
Brad on January 21, 2019:
Happy New Year to you and good luck with Bernie. There are so many worse candidates in the Democrat possible 2020, Bernie would certainly be better than most of them.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on April 26, 2018:
It is very much a fair response though what I said in the last paragraph which is the one I hope people will read and that I basically said that people shouldn't expect Sanders to win easily. He'll still have a battle on his hands but Sanders wasn't as scandalized as Hillary was. And don't forget, Sanders is male so even if something is found out about him in terms of scandals, people won't care as much. Sanders isn't a corporate centrist kind of Democrat so he should have a better chance. Is he the strongest candidate? That's debatable. But at least he wasn't as universally disliked as Hillary Clinton.
Brad on April 25, 2018:
These are just my comments after reading your article.
"Bernie Sanders: 75%
Donald Trump: 25%
The reason for this is that by 2020, Donald Trump will be even more unpopular and CA voters rejected him by margins of at least 3 to 1. I expect him to be beaten by an even worse margin in 2020. California is too urban and too liberal for any Republican candidate to win there."
In 2016 Trump had 4 million and Hillary had 7 million votes. That is less than 2 to 1.
? Why would the DNC back Bernie after dumping him in 2016.
Clinton won CA, OR, and WA along with NY and Il and still lost in an EC landslide.
"Normally, I would say that US voters would be reluctant to vote for a Jewish man as President. But 2020 will not be a normal election cycle. I expect higher voter turnout if Sanders is the nominee because he is so popular and he started a sort of political revolution that young people (the millennials really liked)."
Do you think that supporters will forget how easily he caved into HRC and left before the convention. Is that what a president would do? Trump overcame 16 of the best professional, and experienced republican politicians. They said it couldn't be done, but he did it.
He then beat Hillary and she was predicted to win even on election night according to CNN.
Do we really want the United States to be the United Socialists States Republic?
That is like taking the lowest strata of the people in the country and bringing everyone else down to that level. Except of course the rich, because in any type of government the rich always persevere.
I think this has been a fair response to your article, but if you don't think so, please del it.
Ara Vahanian (author) from LOS ANGELES on June 14, 2017:
Angel Guzman: thank you for your comment. I also think that we will see a more energized Democratic voter base in 2020. We have to make sure that this man (Trump) is a one-term President. The big key is going to be voter turnout. If we can get people to go to the polls to be motivated enough to actually vote, then Trump will be defeated.
Angel Guzman from Joliet, Illinois on June 14, 2017:
The left is energized and hopefully he is a one term president.