(Sidebar: Mitt Romney in 2012 was the only Republican presidential candidate to win a suburban vote – 50% to 48% over Barack Obama – and lose the election).
That correlation should apply deeply not only to Trump but to any Republican currently voting.
Why? Since the revolt against Trump in the suburbs, which was at the heart of the Democrats on the re-assignment of a majority of Parliament in the semesters, does not seem to show signs of slowing down.
“What really should scare Rs: Trump is following Biden by 7-9% more than he lost his popular vote in 2016, but because there are so many urban cores where Trump could fall for the first time, the decline is probably even bigger in swinging suburbs. “
And because Trump did all this while swimming in urban areas – Clinton beat him there by 26 points in 2016 – Wasserman’s claim (and is he right) is that a further decline in Trump’s stance in the general ballots against Biden is almost certain the result of losses in suburban areas.
Trump’s collapse in the suburbs – losing them by 5 or more points – not only would the White House almost certainly cost him. It would also put a bad threat to any Republican in a suburban suburb or Senate seat in a state with a large suburban population.
Full stop: Lose the suburbs and Trump loses the election. It’s that simple.