2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
Red Defence said:
It means that I just can’t see him being around. The man’s clearly tuppence short of a shilling and the GOP know this.

Don’t make a big deal out of a simple comment. It’s just my opinion but the Dems should be sensible and realise that there is a possibility that he might not run and therefore not base everything on the fact that he will definitely be the GOP candidate. Yes his base like him but his base is dwindling. Farmers are already turning against him and others are bound to if the economy (seemingly their overriding concern) takes a turn for the worse. Let’s face it, his popularity is not exactly gaining in strength.
Click to expand...

Sorry, that just doesn't make any sense all. Unless something very drastic happens, some kind of scandal not even the Republicans can ignore, there is absolutely no chance the GOP will choose someone else. It might be a winning move, but it would also be complete and total political suicide for any who participated. While Trump is unpopular on a national scale, he's enormously popular with Republicans.

You might say his popularity isn't gaining in strength, but if we've seen anything the last three years it hasn't been falling either. His approval rating has hovered around 40% for nearly his entire term, with lows of 37% and highs of 43% (ignoring the very first weeks of his term). I'm really not trying to make a big deal out of a simple comment, but it's just a comment that doesn't have any basis in reality.
 
nimic said:
Sorry, that just doesn't make any sense all. Unless something very drastic happens, some kind of scandal not even the Republicans can ignore, there is absolutely no chance the GOP will choose someone else. It might be a winning move, but it would also be complete and total political suicide for any who participated. While Trump is unpopular on a national scale, he's enormously popular with Republicans.

You might say his popularity isn't gaining in strength, but if we've seen anything the last three years it hasn't been falling either. His approval rating has hovered around 40% for nearly his entire term, with lows of 37% and highs of 43% (ignoring the very first weeks of his term). I'm really not trying to make a big deal out of a simple comment, but it's just a comment that doesn't have any basis in reality.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I disagree, so there we are. We’ll leave it at that and see what the next few months holds.
 


I thought this particular attack wouldn't appear till the end of the primary season (last time Bernie=anti-semitic started only after the NY debate in mid-March).
 
Red Defence said:
Sorry, I disagree, so there we are. We’ll leave it at that and see what the next few months holds.
Click to expand...

I would put Donald Trumps chances of not running again at a conservative 0%. If only for him being terrified of being prosecuted when he leaves office, and that's ignoring his jokes about changing it so he can stay beyond 2 terms, and the fact that he's already running a re-election campaign.
 
Zarlak said:
I would put Donald Trumps chances of not running again at a conservative 0%. If only for him being terrified of being prosecuted when he leaves office, and that's ignoring his jokes about changing it so he can stay beyond 2 terms, and the fact that he's already running a re-election campaign.
Click to expand...

extremely optimistic 0%
 
'I'm too old not to touch women and young girls without consent, I'm proud of my work with racists, I know you hate my policies... Vote for me'.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
Steyer? I thought she was with the Green Party.
Click to expand...
Tom Steyer the billionaire.

It’s kinda a sad indictment on the US electorate as a whole that a single-issue candidate like Inslee on climate change is at 1%, yet a single-issue candidate like Steyer on impeachment is polling quite consistently above 3%.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Tom Steyer the billionaire.

It’s kinda a sad indictment on the US electorate as a whole that a single-issue candidate like Inslee on climate change is at 1%, yet a single-issue candidate like Steyer on impeachment is polling quite consistently above 3%.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was a flippant jab at the random candidates.

Speaking of which, I don't see how that in particular is a sad indictment of the Dem electorate. You're just dealing in the margins there.
 
I don’t trust anyone who I’ve never heard of before being able to buy multiple CNN ads to advertise their run for president.
 
Raoul said:
You’ve never heard of Steyer? He’s been on TV nonstop for the past two years railing against Trump.
Click to expand...
I honestly haven't. I felt like I've only heard of him for the past two months instead of two years. What are his policies that you think are progressive?
 
Florida Man said:
I honestly haven't. I felt like I've only heard of him for the past two months instead of two years. What are his policies that you think are progressive?
Click to expand...

I see him as a Jay Inslee with more money type guy. Heavy on climate change, taking on big business etc.
 
Raoul said:
True, but that doesn't resolve the bit that the Dems don't have the political capital to deal with such a situation if they themselves are split on big policies like healthcare and beyond. In order to overcome a GOP blockade you have to be unified - and the Dems are anything but unified, so the likeliest scenario is that nothing happens other than what is possible through EO.
Click to expand...

Politicians are sheep, they will eventually rally around the leader. You've seen the same with Republicans - it went from Trump being a cartoon character in the primaries (he skipped a debate and held a parallel charity event because of unfair FOX coverage) to a potential contested GOP convention, to the party almost splintering and creating a large 'never Trump' faction, to basically the party of Trump to happily fellate him at every opportunity. Same will happen to the Democrats, regardless of who the winner is. If Tulsi/MayorPete/Kamala/Warren/Biden/Sanders wins they will be hailed as the Messiah, period.
 
emerson consistnetly the most favourable to bernie


Of those who voted for Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Primary, 45% now support Biden, 21% support Warren, 14% support Harris, and just 4% support Sanders. Among those who voted for Sanders in 2016, 53% still support him, 24% support Warren, 9% support Biden, and 3% support Harris.
Click to expand...
 
Their sample was 39% HRC voters and 36% Bernie voters in a state Bernie won 60-40. This is a trend I've seen in every poll that reports the 2016 voting preference - they have more HRC voters than her percentage from 2016. Given the age profile of Bernie 2016, it can't be because Bernie voters have died off since then. So either 2016 Bernie voters have shifted party or they're not voting or they're being undersampled.
 
bacon-FOREIGNPOLICY-0819-1.png
 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...xtra-for-attending-trump-speech-a9064066.html
They are paying people to attend Trump’s rallies, to promote goodwill from the Unions who have agreed to do this.

Royal Dutch Shell plant in Pa told their workers to attend the Trump rally or not get paid time and a half. They were also banned from yelling or shouting anything viewed as resistance.

Support is definitely down.
 
Suedesi said:
How reliable are these polls in the first place? Who has a landline anymore? Are robopolls accurate?
Click to expand...
Polling is not perfectly accurate, but good polling is still good polling, so who does it matters a lot.

If Trump and Brexit showed anything is that polls are largely unreliable.
Click to expand...
Polls on Trump weren't really very far off, it's just that the media drew conclusions that weren't supported by the (good) polling. It was still off, and that was enough to flip a few important states, but the actual polling wasn't the complete disaster it's been made out to be.

Brexit wasn't great, that's fair. But there have been many instances since then of polling doing fairly well. So while, during elections in France and Austria, some people were citing Trump/Brexit as evidence of polling underestimating support for right-wing candidates (the old "afraid to tell the truth" thing), the following results didn't really back it up. Basically, it's less about polls and more about interpretation and analysis. So the people who gave Clinton a 99% chance to win in 2016 were doing a bad job, for example. The same people also gave FiveThirtyEight a lot of stick for maintaining, up until the election, that the margin of error made sure that Trump had at least a ~30% chance to win.
 
Jill Biden said:
"Your candidate might be better on, I don't know, health care, than Joe is, but you've got to look at who's going to win this election. And maybe you have to swallow a little bit and say, 'OK, I personally like so-and-so better,' but your bottom line has to be that we have to beat Trump."
Click to expand...

A double edged play from the Biden camp if this was a planned message. And frankly this is what this primary boils down to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.