Are you really looking for metrics to evaluate Donald Trump as president or for metrics to evaluate any president? The title says the first; I think we actually want the second.
I think it’s really difficult—the important things a president can influence are all affected by lots of other factors too. Consider e.g. “Obamacare”; for good or ill, the healthcare reform Obama was actually able to get done was (for better or worse) strongly influenced by what congressional Republicans were willing to do, and of course its actual overall effect is liable to be somewhat affected by the incoming administration’s commitment to destroying it. So it could (if not dismantled) be a huge success only because the Republicans blocked a bunch of much worse options Obama would have preferred. Or a huge failure only because the Republicans blocked a bunch of much better options he would have preferred. Or anywhere in between.
Trump, on the other hand, may reasonably expect the House and the Senate to be on his side for at least two years, and probably longer unless the first two years make him unpopular enough to have really big effects on the next round of congressional elections. (In the Senate, there are 26 D and only 8 R up for re-election or replacement.) But “on his side” doesn’t mean “their actions are mere consequences of his”.
In the Senate, there are 26 D and only 8 R up for re-election or replacement.
Worth noting that many of those Ds are in states that voted R in the most recent election. We should increase predicted probability they will lose now, and not be surprised or change our evaluation of evidence when it actually happens.
Yup. Key point here: no, the Democrats are not in any way likely to retake the senate in 2018, even if Donald Trump is conspicuously disappointing.
(If, as some have suggested might transpire, he is not so much “conspicuously disappointing” as “full-on fascist totalitarian dictator” then that might bring enough unpopularity to others in his party—but in that case I wouldn’t be too optimistic about the prospects for improving anything by voting, no matter what the result.)
Are you really looking for metrics to evaluate Donald Trump as president or for metrics to evaluate any president? The title says the first; I think we actually want the second.
I think it’s really difficult—the important things a president can influence are all affected by lots of other factors too. Consider e.g. “Obamacare”; for good or ill, the healthcare reform Obama was actually able to get done was (for better or worse) strongly influenced by what congressional Republicans were willing to do, and of course its actual overall effect is liable to be somewhat affected by the incoming administration’s commitment to destroying it. So it could (if not dismantled) be a huge success only because the Republicans blocked a bunch of much worse options Obama would have preferred. Or a huge failure only because the Republicans blocked a bunch of much better options he would have preferred. Or anywhere in between.
Trump, on the other hand, may reasonably expect the House and the Senate to be on his side for at least two years, and probably longer unless the first two years make him unpopular enough to have really big effects on the next round of congressional elections. (In the Senate, there are 26 D and only 8 R up for re-election or replacement.) But “on his side” doesn’t mean “their actions are mere consequences of his”.
Worth noting that many of those Ds are in states that voted R in the most recent election. We should increase predicted probability they will lose now, and not be surprised or change our evaluation of evidence when it actually happens.
Yup. Key point here: no, the Democrats are not in any way likely to retake the senate in 2018, even if Donald Trump is conspicuously disappointing.
(If, as some have suggested might transpire, he is not so much “conspicuously disappointing” as “full-on fascist totalitarian dictator” then that might bring enough unpopularity to others in his party—but in that case I wouldn’t be too optimistic about the prospects for improving anything by voting, no matter what the result.)