Three new polls today (B/C rating) showing Biden at +10, +13 and +11 overall. What polls have TV2 been using? SurveyMonkey?
Another A+ with +7 in PA also.
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Three new polls today (B/C rating) showing Biden at +10, +13 and +11 overall. What polls have TV2 been using? SurveyMonkey?
Another A+ with +7 in PA also.
Three new polls today (B/C rating) showing Biden at +10, +13 and +11 overall. What polls have TV2 been using? SurveyMonkey?
Another A+ with +7 in PA also.
The PA Muelenberg Poll is encouraging. Just wish it had a bigger sample size.
I'd be more worried if the same people crowing about how Trump won the debate last night weren't saying the exact same thing after his horror show in the first debate. Dear leader can do no wrong, so when he manages not walk into a wall he gets double points.
Trump needs a Comey. He's trying oh so hard to manufacture one, but he employs the worst people.
Biden just needs to stay the course, keep his head down. If I were him I'd take a holiday for 10 days.
Over a third of votes are already cast, so even a surprise will have muted impact.
Trump needs a Comey. He's trying oh so hard to manufacture one, but he employs the worst people.
Biden just needs to stay the course, keep his head down. If I were him I'd take a holiday for 10 days.
Over a third of votes are already cast, so even a surprise will have muted impact.
Three new polls today (B/C rating) showing Biden at +10, +13 and +11 overall. What polls have TV2 been using? SurveyMonkey?
Another A+ with +7 in PA also.
I don't trust polls at all - the vast majority of people who voted for Trump the first time will likely vote for him again this time - the question is whether Biden will be able to bring out more people to vote for him. I'm not sure he will.
I think a lot of people are scarred by 2016, but the polls weren't *that* wrong. Trump's marginal win in the important rust belt states were all (? I don't have the exact numbers right now) so small that they were within the margin of error. Biden has a better lead than Clinton back then - so my understanding is that if the final result is within the margin of error (like in 2016) then Biden got this.
That said, there are probably other posters with a far greater knowledge on this - like @Raoul.
This guy is tracking all the early voting. Well worth a bookmark
https://twitter.com/ElectProject
https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/index.html
So far nearly 50m have already voted (36% of the entire 2016 total), which will probably double by election day.
Dem voting has so far nearly double what GOP voters have sent in.
Cheers, I'll keep an eye on it.
They do: all the words for Trump should have been qualified by, “For Trump, ...”
I'm not so sure that's true. Sure, a lot of them will, but I also get the sense that a lot of people voted for him in 2016 as a protest vote, or to try something other than the 'establishment'. Hillary was also a terrible candidate, and historically disliked. Now that is has been made clear that things did not in fact change for the better, and Trump was not able to deliver on all his wild promises, I suspect some of these voters will change sides or not vote at all.
Correct. Unless the Great Lakes states tighten to around 5, there is no reason to worry about the numbers. Post-election shenanigans are another matter.
Possibly but if anything I think many of his supporters are absolutely delighted with how he has been doing and I don't think Biden is a strong candidate at all.
This is a good point.
The usual suspects were claiming a Trump victory after the first debate, and then his numbers absolutely tanked in the days afterwards.
Like I said earlier, I think Trump really needed a big win yesterday to try and claw back some momentum and it just didn't happen.
The fact that The Sun, the horrible right wing mouthpiece of Satan himself Murdoch, were talking about Trump only "edging" a win says it all.
Absolutely. I'm just hoping that at least some of his 2016 voters have come to their senses over the last 4 years, but it is certainly not guaranteed.
Yep, Biden only need to draw and he did that
I am actually surprised at the amount of people who are voting for him. Few people at the office and even some family members of mine. I tried putting myself in their shoes to get a clearer reason as to why they are voting for him but that's a scary dark place to be. Most of them are anti BLM and believe that immigrants should be allowed here or have any rights etc. They all have some type of extremist view based on some form of superiority complex. They just think they're better than everyone, they deserve more than everyone and Trump is the one to make that happen. America is a dark place right now and if Trump gets a second term they'll get exactly what they deserve.
Please, please, please let this be nearing the end where I don't have to hear him or for him to matter every single fecking day.
I think there are a lot of people that simply look at the bottom line. They don't care about personal idiocies and identity politics, they just want to know where they will be personally during the next presidency. Especially in the economic middle, where people are not rich but not in hardship and have some savvy for their own finances, there is no obvious choice from that perspective. (Above that category, if it's based based on personal financial advantage alone, it's always the GOP, whoever the candidate.)
What did you read/watch? De Volkskrant this morning reports is more or less like this thread: Trump much better behaved this time, but still full of lies, and not many 'winners'; Biden solid if a little underwhelming, but he did score some good points.
A good media outlet has (a) reporter(s) in the country though - my own newspaper has two right now. If they have to rely on American tv, they're not really a source I'd like to get my new from.
Think it was Eric Mouthaan. It was just the first headline I read and I thought, well if he says Trump was sort of okay, it's not a great sign. Seems in hindsight the debate was mostly "meh" which I think helps Biden more than Trump.
It's a sad state of affairs though, that one of the candidates is just lying about almost everything isnt seen as the clear loser and utterly doomed in the elections. Or that it's apparently a very bad move by Biden, he wants to cut down on fossil fuel. The republicans remind me of those dryland bad guys from Waterworld at this point.
Viewed from this side of the pond, what has always puzzled me is why did Biden not run the last time? Wasn't he the VP last time? How come Hilary got in front of him ?
It doesn't seem to bode too well does it? If Biden lost out to Hilary for the Democratic nomination and she (apparently) wasn't well liked, but Democrats thought she should run instead of Biden, but then she lost out to Trump....?
Why put Biden up now? Surely if Biden wasn't good enough last time, the Democrats should have put someone else up now? Its like saying to the American public look Biden didn't tick all the boxes, but he does now... or really be honest and say ..."we haven't got anyone else"
Not really following the logic here, could someone explain?
It doesn't seem to bode too well does it? If Biden lost out to Hilary for the Democratic nomination and she (apparently) wasn't well liked, but Democrats thought she should run instead of Biden, but then she lost out to Trump....?
Why put Biden up now? Surely if Biden wasn't good enough last time, the Democrats should have put someone else up now? Its like saying to the American public look Biden didn't tick all the boxes, but he does now... or really be honest and say ..."we haven't got anyone else"
Not really following the logic here, could someone explain?
His son had recently passed away around the time if I recall? Could explain why he didn't feel like he had the energy nor state of mind to be involved in that election.
She was viewed as the heir apparent after having missed out to Obama in 2008, so the entire party apparatus got behind her fairly early on, which made it harder for Biden (who had just lost his son to brain cancer at the time) to muster up the emotional energy or support to launch a serious challenge. He would've probably won had he run since he didn't have her baggage, was male, and was four years more lucid than he is now.
OK Thanks for that... so he didn't even put himself up for the Democrat nomination? That makes a bit more sense if he withdrew for personal reasons.
Otherwise it would now look like the Democrats are desperate and are putting up a nomination loser, who lost out to a Presidential loser... well third time could be lucky!
There's a big dose of unknown when it comes to evaluating who is a strong candidate in general elections. No one really knows before you run the primaries, and even then it still isn't very clear. Joe Biden ran in the democratic party primaries in 1988 and in 2008. In neither of those contests did he get any real traction, but both of those were before he was Vice President.
Coming into 2016, the Democratic party establsihment (namely Obama and his closest allies, and then probably some leftovers from Bill Clinton's troupe) wanted to run Hillary Clinton. She had come close enough in the primaries against him in 2008, and they also wanted to break the glass ceiling of electing a woman. I also think think they underestimated their opposition when they saw the Republican party in disarray given the number of candidates in their primaries, and didn't examine their own choice of candidate thoroughly enough.
Biden has always wanted to be President, and some stories have said he wanted to run in 2016. But it was apparently Obama who didn't believe in him, thought it was possibly too much for him to go through emotionally given the recent loss of his son, and so continued to move the party apparatus to nominating Hillary (some more background in this piece: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/08/14/obama-biden-relationship-393570)
So I think that's kind of it. As I said at the beginning, no one has that great of a grasp of how naturally popular a candidate is or isn't at least until the primaries get going. And in 2016 Biden had essentially what you could call "his own team" in the democratic party establishment, supporting someone else. It wasn't that anyone was sure that he was a weak candidate. The 2016 results, the 2020 primaries, and so far at least the 2020 polls have seemingly proven them wrong about his popularity and chances as a candidate. If they knew all that in 2016 I imagine they would have made a different decision, but it was just unknowable.
The Dems need to ignore them and ensure every single supporter in the dozen or so battleground states actually votes.
Last edited:
That's really interesting, you think he could have won, he could have beaten Hilary for the Democrat nomination last time had he stood, but personal issues prevented that outcome?
That isn't coming through at all over here (not that it matters) over here to many people Biden looks like a nice guy, but some one heading to be a three-time loser.
My impression on Biden's history of running is slightly different. Without a doubt Clinton was going to be the centrist DNC candidate for 2016. She had the experience, the resume, the stature to be President. And would be if not for James Comey. She was able to defeat Sanders and was on track to defeat Trump, despite being hugely unpopular with swathes of the electorate. I don't think Biden had any urge to buck the DNC's wishes and run against her, which would have split that centrist pool and likely handed victory to Bernie.
Fast forward 2.5 years, and by all accounts I've seen/heard Biden was out of politics for good. He didn't want to run again, indeed he got in really late compared to most of the democratic candidates. And again - just rumours - that was because the establishment came to him and said save us uncle Joe, you're our only hope. Because certainly back then there was no way a Sanders or Warren were going to beat Trump given his advantages. So Biden agreed.
On the 2016 polls - as anyone who digs into them will point out, most results were well within the magin of error, and it was a stupidly close election that was very much not outside of the polling data. It was 1 in 3 for Trump to win, and he did.
Fast forward 2.5 years, and by all accounts I've seen/heard Biden was out of politics for good. He didn't want to run again, indeed he got in really late compared to most of the democratic candidates. And again - just rumours - that was because the establishment came to him and said save us uncle Joe, you're our only hope. Because certainly back then there was no way a Sanders or Warren were going to beat Trump given his advantages. So Biden agreed.
On the 2016 polls - as anyone who digs into them will point out, most results were well within the magin of error, and it was a stupidly close election that was very much not outside of the polling data. It was 1 in 3 for Trump to win, and he did.
Others are saying this too it must be me that got the wrong impression. I really can't believe it though I thought biden was strong and coherent and actually got trump cornered and triggered.
But I see everyone saying trump did well so im not sure.
Thank you for this, very helpful. As I have said in other posts, over here Biden looks a nice guy but seems to have no track record of winning anything, after standing in the Democratic party line he is now (seemingly) taking his turn to 'carry the flag' so to speak.
* they obviously didn't think he was the strongest either?
Hillary was also shafted by the right-wing machine for two decades. Hit job after hit job. She became the focus of Benghazi after Obama won reelection and was the presumptive choice going forward. Fox News, Limbaugh, et al went after her from there on. I don't think a single political figure ever endured as much negative bullshit from the opposition as she did. I was not a fan of hers but we'd be in much better shape had she won, especially in the long game with the courts (McConnell would probably have blocked them).
It was "her time" in the party, right or wrong can be debated.
It was "her time" in the party, right or wrong can be debated.
This is my take on it as well. Now, I don't doubt that Biden has his personal ambitions like others but I do honestly feel that he's "sacrificing" himself to save his country from Trump by running. I mean, the guy is 77 - he could be spending time with his grandchildren and eating ice cream instead of dealing with this.
Where is "over here" if I may ask?
The UK?This is my take on it as well. Now, I don't doubt that Biden has his personal ambitions like others but I do honestly feel that he's "sacrificing" himself to save his country from Trump by running. I mean, the guy is 77 - he could be spending time with his grandchildren and eating ice cream instead of dealing with this.
Where is "over here" if I may ask?
Yes, UK.... the race for President gets slotted in the news reports between the Covid -19 up dates, so probably isn't getting the coverage it might otherwise have done?
Isn't Trump 74? perhaps both should be playing with the grandkids, or spinning their yarns down the pubs/Golf courses... or seeing its America, down the shooting ranges!!
It's been way too long since I saw Waterworld for me to get that reference!
But yeah,I find it heartbreaking to see that someone can just lie and bullshit himself through a career and come out on top, largely unchecked. The way it is now, as long as you get the first word in, the audience will be with you. It doesn't matter if you're right; it's very rare that subsequent corrections get the same attention.
'Heartbreaking' might sound strong since I'm not in the US and this doesn't directly affect me all that much; but it's a tactic being copied around the world, and I can clearly see it with Canadian and Dutch populists as well. At least the culture is a bit different in both places and it doesn't have the same effect - for now.
This focus on Biden as a loser is odd to me. To my knowledge, many presidential candidates lost out in primaries before they did manage to become the candidate. Other than that, Biden won Delaware senate elections many times in a row to be senator from 1973 to 2009, won the presidential elections twice as Obama's sidekick, and now won the primary. When did he lose, except for the primaries for the 2016 elections? (Serious question - I really don't get it.)
Cheers. Yes, you are probably right.
Yeah, Trump is also too old in my opinion. However, he's so crazy that we tend to forget his age
Next to polls, I would also look at betting odds for a more complete picture of where we stand. If they universally favour Biden as well then the conclusion is straightforward.
Obama told him no (the deal with her had been worked out) and her early entry + Obama's words meant that he wasn't able to staff his campaign. He was tempted to run in ~Oct 2015 when Hillary had gone down from ~90% to ~65% in the primary polls, but by then with the staff gone it was too late.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/441050-obama-pushed-biden-not-to-run-in-2016-ny-times
Yes, they also didn't think he was the strongest. But just remember that these things are hard.... it seems to me that either you stand pretty unanimously a-la Hillary, or you come seemingly out of nowhere a-la Obama 2008. Sometimes being known but not being the presumptive nominee is the toughest position to make a primary run from. You lose out many of your top adviser picks to whoever is the "chosen one", while also having big expectations on you shoulders about fund-raising, early performance, etc.
I agree that painting him as a perennial loser is exaggerated, its just that he entered but dropped out early of primaries in 1988 and 2008.
Isn't that because people in the final analysis when 'selling something' (including yourself) see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear. Otherwise most sales people would be out of a job. Everybody who wants to learn the truth I suspect usually apply the clean filters rather those with pink shading!
Which is what prompted my original post, as is the case, the headlines grab the news and Biden previously doesn't seem to have had any 'headlines' good or bad, where as with Trump, you could paper a room with them, mostly outrageous rather than good or bad!
Love me, hate me, but don't ignore me...Trumps stock in trade!!
Why they don't just turn off any internet traffic from any country that's trying to hack the elections?
I think Trump is expected to be a charismatics idiot so that's sort of the bar he sets. And the world wants to see him put in his place. Whereas from what I saw somehow Biden was allowing for his history and family to be put on the spotlight. Also I just think he's a robotic generic speaking which doesn't help him either.
Hopefully Trump's actually presidency costs him.
- Status