First off, Trump is only "super unpopular" with liberals. And if you only listen to liberals and the msm, you're not getting the full picture.

For sane centrists and conservatives, despite all Trump's shortcomings, he's still the only real bulwark against the extremes of the (perceived) radical Left, which presently make up the Democrat's hard core base.

For a liberal to hear that is damn near blasphemy, I know, but believe it or not, there's a whole lot of us out there who are not onboard with what the Dems have been pedaling the last decade and longer.

But to answer the question more directly: for Democrats to have a "bigger lead", they'd have to appeal to the center, to moderates, to swing voters.

Are they doing that? No. Not even close. Quite the opposite in fact.

While the "sky is falling", "democracy at risk", "orange man bad" rhetoric worked to keep the public outraged for a long time, with help of the liberal msm, that messaging hasn't aged well.

Implying half the country are Nazis doesn't bring in the new recruits either.

But if Democrats are ever going to take the majority again, either the GOP/Trump will have to f'k up really bad, and that is certainly possible

- OR -

Democrats will have to stop pushing largely unpopular socialist-inspired policies and anti-American radical Left ideologies, all of which is off putting to the "everyman" of the political center.

Of course, the Democrat plan to radicalize the youth and import foreign bodies has been moving along at quite the pace, but people are catching on.

The fact is, the Center is what decides between Left and Right today, as each makes up roughly ~30% of the electorate. No side can win without winning the center.

So, we have a largely moderate-right party in power and a far-left party out of power.

Why?

Because Americans have historically been moderate by nature, which used to de facto mean "liberal", but increasingly that moniker comes with some very pernicious baggage, as eventually, people do get wise to the grift, especially when it hits them in the wallet, as it has in so many now quite "unlivable" blue states which people are leaving en masse.

Otoh, if Iran becomes a boondoggle, Dems may get their chance. And oh are they hoping it all goes completely sideways too. But it's going to be a very slim chance unless they get a clue, and start moving back to the center-left of the 80's and 90's.

You asked. You probably don't like the answer. But don't shoot the messenger, OK?

> So, we have a largely moderate-right party in power and a far-left party out of power.

I'd say you -- mind you, I'm writing from the other side of the Atlantic, and even if I have lived in the US, that was a long time ago! -- have lunatic right-wingers in power and lunatic liberals who think they are entitled to running the show as the (weak but noisy) opposition.

Why does this happen? Because close to nobody votes in the primaries, and so it is mostly candidates who have rather extremist views that are chosen by the two parties. How to solve this? By getting more people to vote in the primaries, so that more middle-of-the-road candidates are chosen.

How would this be even possible? Only if expressing one's vote were much simpler. I pretty much subscribe to Bradley Tusk's view (see: Vote with your phone: Why Mobile Voting Is Our Final Shot at Saving Democracy) that allowing people to vote from their phones is the only way to save the US.

Isn’t Trumps approval number with independent voters far lower than Obama ? I also find it odd to frame the current admin as moderate right considering their policies on immigration and trade