2020 Presidential Election

[ashbury]

Each of these polls adds up to only about 100%. With the huge number of Democratic candidates I thought that figure would be up to 250% or more by now.

[Vanimal46]

I would ask who is actually voting on the polls? Biden gets the bump because he's the "proven closer" and name everyone knows. There's plenty of time for one of the young charasmatic candidates to win.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I would ask who is actually voting on the polls? Biden gets the bump because he's the "proven closer" and name everyone knows. There's plenty of time for one of the young charasmatic candidates to win.

 

Absolutely.  No one should anoint Biden today, only recognize a few of the factors that do make him more popular at this moment.  And the strengths he brings regardless.  You shouldn't have to love a candidate to see the strengths they bring to an election.

 

The lesson of 2016 was not about policy, it was about the danger of electing someone whose very name is toxic to a significant (and key) part of the voting demographic.  The same may be true of Biden, but there are two things to take away from Smerf's comment above:

 

1) Biden is popular with the voters most reliable to go to the ballot box

2) Biden is popular with the voters who are possible swing voters in swing states

 

Given the margin of error in 2016, those two strengths should not be ignored or underplayed.  Now we'll see if he can do more than that or if someone else will offer more electability.  

[Badsmerf]

That's sounds naive considering what went down last time

Polls were either accurate or within the margin of error. The prognosticators calling a Clinton lock were wrong. It is early, but generally that benefits the incumbent.

[Mike Sixel]

That's sounds naive considering what went down last time

Having a thirty percent chance to win is not no chance.... Even a fifteen percent chance is not no chance. I don't get why so many people seem to struggle with this part of predicting the future.

[ewen21]

Having a thirty percent chance to win is not no chance.... Even a fifteen percent chance is not no chance. I don't get why so many people seem to struggle with this part of predicting the future.

Biden to me will get slaughtered on the campaign trail. Slaughtered.

[ewen21]

Biden has more goofy quotes and soundbites than all of us can even count. He's going to misspeak, stammer and double talk his way into oblivion

[ewen21]

Polls were either accurate or within the margin of error. The prognosticators calling a Clinton lock were wrong. It is early, but generally that benefits the incumbent.

To take polls seriously at this stage is like following win probability in the 3rd inning of a ballgame

[PseudoSABR]

 

Biden has more goofy quotes and soundbites than all of us can even count. He's going to misspeak, stammer and double talk his way into oblivion

That's true but everyone already knows that.  Part of his electibility argument is that he's largely vetted on the national stage in two previous elections.

[ewen21]

 

That's true but everyone already knows that.  Part of his electibility argument is that he's largely vetted on the national stage in two previous elections.

I liked your last post because it goes to show that you just don't read anything I say.   Same with the last two posts I made in general politics in regard to immigration.  I cited a one week old report from Homeland Security, a much discussed article from the NY Times and a brilliant informative essay from the Atlantic.  I purposed picked articles from legitimate left of center sources and you STILL could not find a minute to read any of it.  Yet you speak as though you know how to solve the problem.

 

YOu prove time and time again that if you don't want to know certain facts then you just aren't going to know them.

 

Obviously, you did not read what I wrote earlier about Biden and you are not old enough to remember him bowing out of the 1988 race in shame:

https://www.businessinsider.com/plagiarism-scandal-joe-biden-first-presidential-run-1988-2019-3/

 

The busing thing never even came up in that run:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/opinion/biden-busing-integration.html

 

 

I know you told me to stop telling people how to post--and I will.

But I am making an exception with you until you actually read and opine on one of those links I posted in general politics.  That is the most recent news from impeccable sources and you just won't read them.....but you sure as heck are going to talk like you are an expert!

 

Go SABR

 

[Badsmerf]

To take polls seriously at this stage is like following win probability in the 3rd inning of a ballgame

Let's each put $5 on any game where there is a 70:30 split at the end of the third for the rest of the year. I'll take the 70, you take the 30. See how we end up.

[gunnarthor]

 

That's true but everyone already knows that.  Part of his electibility argument is that he's largely vetted on the national stage in two previous elections.

Yep, he also gets under Donny's skin, which is nice. Trump's path to re-election requires a lot of favorable things happening. His +/- in Michigan, for example, is -11 right now. -12 in WI. His numbers with independents and democrats are in the toilet and, while his numbers among republicans are always strong, the number of people claiming to be republican have shrunk. The Dems got a huge blue wave in 2018 which indicated that voters in WI, MI and PA were ready to vote Dem over GOP. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yep, he also gets under Donny's skin, which is nice. Trump's path to re-election requires a lot of favorable things happening. His +/- in Michigan, for example, is -11 right now. -12 in WI. His numbers with independents and democrats are in the toilet and, while his numbers among republicans are always strong, the number of people claiming to be republican have shrunk. The Dems got a huge blue wave in 2018 which indicated that voters in WI, MI and PA were ready to vote Dem over GOP. 

 

Plus....Biden's problem is he sometimes sounds like an idiot?

 

ewen...have you heard Trump?  I talk to pre-schoolers with a better command of the english language.  

[ewen21]

Let's each put $5 on any game where there is a 70:30 split at the end of the third for the rest of the year. I'll take the 70, you take the 30. See how we end up.

On the condition that I get to pick which games. I don't bet blind and you will lose

[PseudoSABR]

 

I liked your last post because it goes to show that you just don't read anything I say.   Same with the last two posts I made in general politics in regard to immigration.  I cited a one week old report from Homeland Security, a much discussed article from the NY Times and a brilliant informative essay from the Atlantic.  I purposed picked articles from legitimate left of center sources and you STILL could not find a minute to read any of it.  Yet you speak as though you know how to solve the problem.

 

YOu prove time and time again that if you don't want to know certain facts then you just aren't going to know them.

 

Obviously, you did not read what I wrote earlier about Biden and you are not old enough to remember him bowing out of the 1988 race in shame:

https://www.businessinsider.com/plagiarism-scandal-joe-biden-first-presidential-run-1988-2019-3/

 

The busing thing never even came up in that run:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/opinion/biden-busing-integration.html

 

 

I know you told me to stop telling people how to post--and I will.

But I am making an exception with you until you actually read and opine on one of those links I posted in general politics.  That is the most recent news from impeccable sources and you just won't read them.....but you sure as heck are going to talk like you are an expert!

 

Go SABR

I'm under no requirement to read your posts or click on your links.  You pick and choose what you respond to and ignore people's legitimately good ideas for the immigration problem beyond building the wall and shift the goals through out the earlier immigration discussion.  And I believe you were carrying on the discussion with others at the point of this post.  I don't think I ever disputed that there's problem with illegal border crossings or suggested that the numbers you provided were incorrect, so I'm not sure why I needed read your articles.  But what this had to do with Biden I don't know.  

 

Thanks for the like though.

[ewen21]

I'm under no requirement to read your posts or click on your links. You pick and choose what you respond to and ignore people's legitimately good ideas for the immigration problem beyond building the wall and shift the goals through out the earlier immigration discussion. And I believe you were carrying on the discussion with others at the point of this post. I don't think I ever disputed that there's problem with illegal border crossings or suggested that the numbers you provided were incorrect, so I'm not sure why I needed read your articles. But what this had to do with Biden I don't know.

 

Thanks for the like though.

On immigration...

I posted three links. One from Homeland Security and two from highly regarded liberal publications. All three links were under a week old.

 

.....and yet you just kept chirping the same recycled uniformed BS. It was the ultimate cop out. Kind of like the Privlige and Responsibilty thread that I nuked.

 

The problem is....

When you agree with me or have to acknowledge common ground or even note that I provided new information, you can't. I conceded your point on humanitarian aid to the northern triangle countries. We should help them. I agree.

 

 

Then again, you could not accept or understand what the issues at the border are for border patrol, cities near the border and even the migrants themselves. HumanitIan aid is very magnanimous, but what about what government is supposed to do? What about the pressing issue at the border and the fact that adults are smuggling children across the border and the reality of those figures? That we are now at the point that people just cross and aren't even detained. You won't even look at the data. No one did.

We are talking Homeland Security data.

 

It's like what chmpuckett said a couple of months ago. Very few people here can acknowledge that someone with a different ideology can have a valid point. Heck....nevermind that. Few even look at the most recent data in their own. Most insisted that although literally thousands are detained everyday because they crossed en masse ILLEGALY....that they shouldn't be called illegals. What?

Thank heaven for LoBombo breaking it down.

 

You proved in that thread you just won't read.

Too risky for you.. You've invested too much in being PSUEDO

 

Don't read, just keep flapping like you know all there is to know.

[gunnarthor]

 

On immigration...
I posted three links. One from Homeland Security and two from highly regarded liberal publications. All three links were under a week old.


Don't read, just keep flapping like you know all there is to know.

We've already showed that you don't understand the context of the links you share. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

On immigration...
I posted three links. One from Homeland Security and two from highly regarded liberal publications. All three links were under a week old.

.....and yet you just kept chirping the same recycled uniformed BS. It was the ultimate cop out. Kind of like the Privlige and Responsibilty thread that I nuked.

The problem is....
When you agree with me or have to acknowledge common ground or even note that I provided new information, you can't. I conceded your point on humanitarian aid to the northern triangle countries. We should help them. I agree.


Then again, you could not accept or understand what the issues at the border are for border patrol, cities near the border and even the migrants themselves. HumanitIan aid is very magnanimous, but what about what government is supposed to do? What about the pressing issue at the border and the fact that adults are smuggling children across the border and the reality of those figures? That we are now at the point that people just cross and aren't even detained. You won't even look at the data. No one did.
We are talking Homeland Security data.

It's like what chmpuckett said a couple of months ago. Very few people here can acknowledge that someone with a different ideology can have a valid point. Heck....nevermind that. Few even look at the most recent data in their own. Most insisted that although literally thousands are detained everyday because they crossed en masse ILLEGALY....that they shouldn't be called illegals. What?
Thank heaven for LoBombo breaking it down.

You proved in that thread you just won't read.
Too risky for you.. You've invested too much in being PSUEDO

Don't read, just keep flapping like you know all there is to know.

Why wouldn't I want to read that?  Look, I'm not sure why you're lashing out in the 2020 thread about immigration and my role in its discussion, but if you want my engagement this is not the way to accomplish it.

[ewen21]

We've already showed that you don't understand the context of the links you share.

You are going keep repeating "context" as if that's some magic bullet? Last post I read from you in the matter you STILL didn't think there was a problem. I believe you said, "why should we pretend there's some crisis" just last week.

 

That about sums up the breadth of your knowledge on the topic

[Squirrel]

You are going keep repeating "context" as if that's some magic bullet? Last post I read from you in the matter you STILL didn't think there was a problem. I believe you said, "why should we pretend there's some crisis" just last week.

That about sums up the breadth of your knowledge on the topic

Knock it off and keep to topic. And stop with the personal jabs. If you can’t post opinions without getting upset that others disagree with you, and your rebuttals turn dismissive and personal, think twice about posting at all. And if you are going to keep circling on the same subject making the same arguments with continued disagreement, walk away from it.

 

Even though I just happen to be quoting ewen’s post, this goes for everyone.

[Craig Arko]

Shooting oneself in the foot.

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/153723/democrats-created-electability-monster

[Mike Sixel]

Shooting oneself in the foot.

 

https://newrepublic.com/article/153723/democrats-created-electability-monster

Did anyone think Trump was electable when it all started a few years ago?

 

I am in love with this article. Electability is all about keeping us down.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Shooting oneself in the foot.

https://newrepublic.com/article/153723/democrats-created-electability-monster

Awesome.  My favorite line:

“Electability” is a crock of ****

[PseudoSABR]

 

Electability is all about keeping us down.

Couldn't agree more. I'll keep calling it cynical. Risk-aversion can be a viable model for running, say, a business. But I think it's horrible when applied to politics, i.e. leadership. 

[TheLeviathan]

Electability should not be the primary concern.  It should, however, concern people.

 

We're past the point of moral victories.  With the Republicans there are either victories or we're all screwed.  Winning is what matters, be that however we get there.

[Brock Beauchamp]

Electability should not be the primary concern. It should, however, concern people.

 

We're past the point of moral victories. With the Republicans there are either victories or we're all screwed. Winning is what matters, be that however we get there.

I agree but I don’t think electability is as much of a concern as it’s played up to be. The Dems have lost three times this century. The candidates were:

 

2000 - the most boring man on the planet

 

2004 - somehow, an even more boring man, this time one that resembled something rescued from a wax mannequin museum fire ten minutes too late

 

2016 - switch it up! a boring woman who gets bonus points for being despised by 50% of the country

 

It seems maybe electability isn’t the biggest problem here.

[PseudoSABR]

 

2004 - somehow, an even more boring man, this time one that resembled something rescued from a wax mannequin museum fire ten minutes too late
 

Hilarious.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Hilarious.

and almost ran in 2020!!!

[Brock Beauchamp]

and almost ran in 2020!!!

Funded by Madame Tussaud dark money, no doubt.

[Badsmerf]

How the **** did Gore and Kerry win the primaries? Honestly...