2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you think they won't try some shady shit, then you weren't paying attention during the midterms. They were seeing what they could get away with back then. All of this happened in one county, imagine this nationwide and with a system that is easier to tamper with. You can rest assured that the media won't even look into any irregularities this time around and they won't file lawsuits like last time.

Palm Beach elections supervisor bans cameras from public ballot-counting

Whoops! Brenda Snipes’ office mixed bad provisional ballots with good ones

Palm Beach County’s voting machines overheat and force recount of more than 170,000 votes

I urge everyone to go and read those articles to see what transpired, don't just read the headlines.
 
If you think they won't try some shady shit, then you weren't paying attention during the midterms. They were seeing what they could get away with back then. All of this happened in one county, imagine this nationwide and with a system that is easier to tamper with. You can rest assured that the media won't even look into any irregularities this time around and they won't file lawsuits like last time.

Palm Beach elections supervisor bans cameras from public ballot-counting

Whoops! Brenda Snipes’ office mixed bad provisional ballots with good ones

Palm Beach County’s voting machines overheat and force recount of more than 170,000 votes

I urge everyone to go and read those articles to see what transpired, don't just read the headlines.
And they still lost the governor and senate races, so color me :optimistic:
 
Unironically though, has anyone seen Trump answering questions? He is getting baited much less than in 2016 and in some cases are turning the questions against the media. This is one of my biggest complaints about him and he is rectifying it. I think the Coof briefings and constant interviews have given him a "trial by fire" and getting him used to answering off the cuff. That's why Biden is probably trying to get out of debating. Biden is getting more demented and Trump is getting better.
 
_____________
Not sure if posted yet, but according to reuters the Biden falling asleep video is a deep fake. Just felt like it should be here for posterity.
 
It's still cathartic to see that stadium every now and again.
Yes. Yes it is.
Egx-tvWVoAA-Yqk.png
 
For people like @Syaoran Li who say that the Democratic Party would purge the progressives once the Democratic Party loses this election this year, think again.

Today was the Massachusetts statewide primary, which decides upon the party's nominees for the US Senate, congressional seats, state legislative seats etc.

Ed Markey won the Democratic primary for the US Senate race. It's interesting because at the start, Joe Kennedy III, the primary challenger, was polling ahead of Markey and landed the endorsement of Nancy Pelosi. Markey seemed to be struggling, but someone came to the rescue and pretty much saved his campaign with her endorsement.

And that person is AOC.

More Democratic Party voters listen to AOC over Pelosi.

For the Democratic primary for Massachusetts' 4th congressional district (which is open due to Joe Kennedy III deciding to run for the Senate), the candidate who was endorsed by Ayanna Pressley, a member of the Squad, is looking like she'll be the winner of the primary.

Whatever happens to the Democratic Party after the Democrats lose this election will certainly be a sight to see.
 
For people like @Syaoran Li who say that the Democratic Party would purge the progressives once the Democratic Party loses this election this year, think again.

Today was the Massachusetts statewide primary, which decides upon the party's nominees for the US Senate, congressional seats, state legislative seats etc.

Ed Markey won the Democratic primary for the US Senate race. It's interesting because at the start, Joe Kennedy III, the primary challenger, was polling ahead of Markey and landed the endorsement of Nancy Pelosi. Markey seemed to be struggling, but someone came to the rescue and pretty much saved his campaign with her endorsement.

And that person is AOC.

More Democratic Party voters listen to AOC over Pelosi.

For the Democratic primary for Massachusetts' 4th congressional district (which is open due to Joe Kennedy III deciding to run for the Senate), the candidate who was endorsed by Ayanna Pressley, a member of the Squad, is looking like she'll be the winner of the primary.

Whatever happens to the Democratic Party after the Democrats lose this election will certainly be a sight to see.

The only good news about this, in my opinion, is that this strategy is bound to lose them the independents and moderates in the long run.

The GOP's tent is getting larger everyday. The DNC's keeps shrinking.
 
Maybe this is being super optimistic and not knowing America as well as I think I do, but I can see Trump winning big. As it not even close. I say that based on my experience with the 2019 UK snap election. People were fucking sick and tired of being bullshitted around by that point. The working class were tired of being bullied and shat on by politicians for making the wrong decision and come election time it showed. We had places that only ever voted Labour since their creation flipping. Places that for 50-60 years went red flipped. I think we can see something similar in the US. People underestimate when the average person becomes sick and tired of shit. Riots, being locked at home, all this bullshit with BLM being shoved into everywhere, being told you are not worth a damn because of the colour of your skin, being told that rioting is ok and not supporting it makes you the villain. I think it's reaching it's boiling point and it's going to blow

I'm sick of it, my apolitical parents are sick of it to the point they bitch about BLM and Coronavirus on calls with me, and they don't live in the place where it's at it's peak - the USA. Imagine being the average working class person (not twitter, not California) and this is what you have to deal with every day. On one hand, you have the guy in power for the last 4 years, who hasn't destroyed the country, shouting "law and order" and calling himself the people's president, on the other hand, you have this barely sentient fool with a corrupt ex cop for a replacement who's party openly supports all this shit and who can't be bothered to properly campaign. I think people are going to be surprised this year with how much Trump wins. Maybe I'm putting too much faith in the American electorate to vote for the right guy, but I think they will.
 
For people like @Syaoran Li who say that the Democratic Party would purge the progressives once the Democratic Party loses this election this year, think again.

Today was the Massachusetts statewide primary, which decides upon the party's nominees for the US Senate, congressional seats, state legislative seats etc.

Ed Markey won the Democratic primary for the US Senate race. It's interesting because at the start, Joe Kennedy III, the primary challenger, was polling ahead of Markey and landed the endorsement of Nancy Pelosi. Markey seemed to be struggling, but someone came to the rescue and pretty much saved his campaign with her endorsement.

And that person is AOC.

More Democratic Party voters listen to AOC over Pelosi.

For the Democratic primary for Massachusetts' 4th congressional district (which is open due to Joe Kennedy III deciding to run for the Senate), the candidate who was endorsed by Ayanna Pressley, a member of the Squad, is looking like she'll be the winner of the primary.

Whatever happens to the Democratic Party after the Democrats lose this election will certainly be a sight to see.

You do bring up a good point but at the same time. the neoliberal corporate Dems have the real power in the party's upper ranks and will probably do so for the next few years at least.

I think if Trump wins. Pelosi and the rest will do some high-profile purges of Woke Left figures (AOC is going to get purged from office no matter who wins since she's that much of a liability) to make an example of anyone who tries to do an internal coup. Pelosi and the rest know the game, and I think these primary wins are the kind of thing that makes Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, and their ilk view The Squad as a threat and they will use every dirty trick in the book to keep them in line.

The question is whether or not these internal purges will succeed or backfire on the neoliberals in the most horrible kind of way.
 
Markey seemed to be struggling, but someone came to the rescue and pretty much saved his campaign with her endorsement.

And that person is AOC.
[citation needed]

More Democratic Party voters listen to AOC over Pelosi.
Disagree. Anyone who would listen to AOC was already voting for Markey.

And he was the incumbent. Nancy Pelosi simply doesn't have that kind of pull in the state to get voters to primary out an incumbent Senator like that.

Also, it's Massachusetts. Do you actually think people needed Pelosi to tell them to vote for a Kennedy? If they really wanted to vote for a Kennedy that bad they didn't need Pelosi's input.
 

Perhaps, and I can see your point. Most of the incumbents did win in their primaries tonight in Massachusetts, including Richard Neal who fought off a challenge from Alex Morse, the progressive challenger.

And Stephen Lynch still won tonight (so even if Brianna Wu didn't drop out, he'd still lose to Lynch by a huge margin. :biggrin:)

It's still kinda surprising to see a Kennedy lose, much less in his own home turf, but it was foretold by polling.
 
This "red mirage" thing reeks of a screwjob. In fact this whole thing with the mail in voting is so transparent it's almost like setting up a swerve. Everyone sane says how terrible this is and how easily it can be fixed, then the mail in voting is overwhelmingly for Trump, and the democrats claim Trump was the person cheating in the election the next four years.

While not 100% things are leaning in Trumps direction and the left needs a "Russia" like scapegoat. Unfortunately it's more likely they are just this brazen openly cheating in a president election.

Here's the thing, I think most Republicans know (or at least, suspect) that the Dems will try and put the screws to the system. That's why they'll turn out in overwhelming numbers. And the thing is, Trump has nearly the entire GOP machine on his side this time around. So that means that whoever any local parties are, they'll try and make sure he wins as fairly as they'll allow.
 
Maybe this is being super optimistic and not knowing America as well as I think I do, but I can see Trump winning big. As it not even close. I say that based on my experience with the 2019 UK snap election. People were fucking sick and tired of being bullshitted around by that point. The working class were tired of being bullied and shat on by politicians for making the wrong decision and come election time it showed. We had places that only ever voted Labour since their creation flipping. Places that for 50-60 years went red flipped. I think we can see something similar in the US. People underestimate when the average person becomes sick and tired of shit. Riots, being locked at home, all this bullshit with BLM being shoved into everywhere, being told you are not worth a damn because of the colour of your skin, being told that rioting is ok and not supporting it makes you the villain. I think it's reaching it's boiling point and it's going to blow

I'm sick of it, my apolitical parents are sick of it to the point they bitch about BLM and Coronavirus on calls with me, and they don't live in the place where it's at it's peak - the USA. Imagine being the average working class person (not twitter, not California) and this is what you have to deal with every day. On one hand, you have the guy in power for the last 4 years, who hasn't destroyed the country, shouting "law and order" and calling himself the people's president, on the other hand, you have this barely sentient fool with a corrupt ex cop for a replacement who's party openly supports all this shit and who can't be bothered to properly campaign. I think people are going to be surprised this year with how much Trump wins. Maybe I'm putting too much faith in the American electorate to vote for the right guy, but I think they will.
It could happen, but I'm still keeping in mind that a Biden win is still plenty likely. The UK is still much whiter than the US, and that affects the voting patterns a lot. The MSM is mostly vehemently anti-Trump, and their pull over many people would lead a lot of voters to just blame everything on Trump instead of the Democratic Party's BS. I think many people buy into thinking that all the violence and division is Trump's fault and voting for Biden would lead to "peace and normalcy". I don't know how voting is done in the UK either, if they have a lot of absentee or early voting. It concerns me if states accept ballots way past election day.

I'm not betting on anything with how crazy this year's been.
 
You do bring up a good point but at the same time. the neoliberal corporate Dems have the real power in the party's upper ranks and will probably do so for the next few years at least.

I think if Trump wins. Pelosi and the rest will do some high-profile purges of Woke Left figures (AOC is going to get purged from office no matter who wins since she's that much of a liability) to make an example of anyone who tries to do an internal coup. Pelosi and the rest know the game, and I think these primary wins are the kind of thing that makes Pelosi, Schumer, Nadler, and their ilk view The Squad as a threat and they will use every dirty trick in the book to keep them in line.

The question is whether or not these internal purges will succeed or backfire on the neoliberals in the most horrible kind of way.
Unless Pelosi gets ousted or dies after 2020, the squad and woke left won't gain any ground. Unless they get an older, high ranking member of the party on their side, they have nothing. At this point, they'd be better off forming their own party than wasting energy fighting the old neolib guard. At least they'd create their own worth and power that way.

Considering Pelosi got 88% of the vote in 2018 and her opponent is another Dem, she's not losing her spot.
 
Might as well throw out three "prediction" maps, the scenario I think will happen, the best-case scenario for Trump, and the best-case scenario for Biden. This is as of September 1st, 2020,

Prediction:
2020-09-01 (11).png

Best-case for Trump:
2020-09-01 (12).png
Trump 349-189

Best-case for Biden:
2020-09-01 (13).png
Biden 413-125

Biden has a lot more opportunities to take states than Trump does, which means a 350+ landslide is possible for him. Only theoretically though as such an outcome is unlikely and would require a massive fuck up from Trump for that to happen. Trump won't be able to get a 350+ landslide unless pigs fly and anyone expecting that is setting themselves up for disappointment. That said, it will be much harder for him to take states from Trump seeing as several states like Iowa and Ohio are now light red.

Looks like the battlefield has opened up a little for this election. Previously I said that there were only thirteen states in competition along with Maine Congressional District 2 and Nebraska Congressional District 2. I've decided to add two more to this list, Texas and Oregon.

Arizona
Florida
Georgia
Iowa
Maine at-large
Maine Congressional District 1
Maine Congressional District 2
Michigan
Minnesota
Nebraska Congressional District 2
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Texas
Virginia
Wisconsin

The likely blue states are Maine except for the second congressional district, New Hampshire, Oregon, and Virginia. States that will probably remain red are Iowa, Georgia, the second congressional district of Maine, North Carolina, Ohio, and Texas. All of these states are clearly in the favor of either the Democratic or Republican party to keep this election but in a big upset, could flip to the other side. If say Trump takes Oregon - a likely blue states - it's safe to say he's won re-election since he has a lot more going against him than the tossup states. News could pop up or surprising poll results could lead to me adding or taking away potential swing states or giving swing states a darker or lighter shade, if not flip to the other side. There are still two month left so there are still legroom for this list to change.

Tossup states are those with either light red or light blue shading indicating where I think they will vote for this election, but a flip would not shock me. Those states are Arizona, Florida, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska Congressional District 2, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. I expect these states to be the prime source of election advertisement if they are not already by both campaigns. I expect states within this list to go for both Biden and Trump regardless of election outcomes. Losing one of these states means that Trump or Biden can find other pathways to victory within these tossup states but some states are much crucial than others. Losing Nevada is likely inconsequential to Trump, but if he loses Florida, then he has to also win Arizona, at least three of Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and possibly Nevada.

Swing State Analysis

I have no idea where people are getting poll numbers that New Hampshire is a close race. I know that Realclearpolitics is probably rigging the actual results and they're probably closer than we think, but last time I checked, Biden was leading in near double digit numbers. Things can change but it will be really difficult for Trump to close the gap unless people have evidence on hand for a potential flip. It could flip in the future if the state becomes more conservative but right now I'm saying no. Maine at-large and 2nd congressional district could swing hard enough to where one or both of them flips red but I also remain doubtful on this. It's a potential red state, just not right now. Virginia only has a chance because of Northam being an authoritarian who let Richmond be battered under his watch but I think that will be memory holed enough to where it stays blue.

Oregon is in the picture simply because of how badly tarnished Portland is. Between the daily riots, a far-right Trump supporter named Aaron Danielson being shot to death likely from an Antifa member, and Ted Wheeler proving how much of a unlikable cuck he is that people are outright demanding he resign and we have a recipe for a potential double digit swing. It will probably stay blue for this election, but there is a good chance that it will galvanize the conservatives into voting and making Portland a little lighter shade of blue. If that happens, we may see it turn red by 2028. Keep an eye on it, especially if it halves the gap of the 2016 outcome and we see state and local Republicans take power. Speaking of, not one poll has come out yet RealClearPolitics put it as leaning blue just based on previous performances. I wouldn't be shocked if internal polling are indicate a close race and the Democrats don't want it out due to fear of energizing the Republicans if they smell and opportunity to take power.

Not much to say about Ohio really. It's possible, but nothing indicates (Democratic-biased polls aside) that it will flip blue or even trend that way. Its days of being a swing state is over. Iowa will likely stay red too since it would require practically a double digit shift back to blue but who knows, farmers are pissed and that might change things. Georgia has a very loyal Democratic black voting base (even more than usual) to contrast the conservative white voters but if speculations of a 15%+ black voting Trump happens, it stays red. The fact Georgia and North Carolina are polling in favor of Trump means they're probably not flipping. Texas could flip but that requires a higher than expected Hispanic turnout and for the said ethnic group to not vote purpler. It will likely turn at least light blue this decade but I think it will stay for at least one more national election. Trump won Maine Congressional District 2 by double digits so while a massive shift to the left is possible, it's not likely in my books.

Now comes the fun part, the tossup states. Nebraska Congressional District 2 I suspect will turn blue just out of gut feelings given how urbanized it is. Nevada and Pennsylvania have higher numbers of registered Republican compared to 2016 so I can see them going either way. I lean blue on both although if I'll be fair, I would have given Trump a lower chance of flipping Pennsylvania in 2016 than now so we'll see. Nevada has barely had any polling for this election. What few favors Biden but I wonder if the lack of polling since January indicates if Democrats has the state locked up or they're concerned about revealing unfavorable results that indicates the state might be in play.

Even though Trump is polling decently in Michigan, I'm not convinced it will stay red. The fact a Democratic mayor managed to put to stop to the riots means Republicans do not have the narrative that Mike Duggan is encouraging the riots when its not on their front door. Great for the city as it shows that Democrat leaders are not made equal when it comes to awfulness, but bad for Trump when the coronavirus took away his best re-election pitch, the economy. Whitmer might be an awful governor, but I honestly think Trump's chances of keeping Michigan relies on if he can get more of the black votes that can turn Detroit and other heavily black populated cities a lighter shade of blue to compensate for loss of Rust Belt support. If he does not, Michigan will remain a light blue state for the future even if Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Minnesota all become light red. I think his chances are worse than in 2016 but it will also be close either way. 30-70 for Trump.

I've said before that Minnesota has a good shot of turning red and with six Iron Range mayors supporting Trump in what are historically Democratic regions, it has the best shot of flipping red of all tossup states. The riots also have the potential to benefit Trump as it is possible Minneapolis and St. Paul turn purpler in response to the riots damaging their economy. If that happens, not only will Minnesota turn red but the Republicans likely also have a reliable state for future elections. 70-30 for Trump.

The Kenosha riot and the backlash to Kyle's arrest makes me think that even if the blue collar workers are disappointed with the economy that they will show up to vote for Trump just because they do not want this shit on their backdoor. Kenosha is also close to Milwaukee which might turn the city a lighter shade of blue. If Trump wins and does so by a larger margin than last election, Wisconsin might also turn light red.

Florida gets a slight boost for Trump because of Maximo Alvarez's speech - a Cuban - speaking out against Communism and for his love of America to tens of millions of people. While a swing block now, Obama's farce of an idea to open up with Cuba swung Floridan Cuban voters to Trump. Trump knows the Cuban people are crucial to his victory and Floridian Hispanics vote purpler than the rest of the country. Time remains to be seen if Trump can keep this state but I honestly believe if he loses this, he loses the whole election since Pennsylvania and Michigan are big asks as is. If he can receive 15%+ of the black vote though, then Florida remains a light red state for the future. Right now, I'm feeling better about its chances than I did last month.

The real tipping point state I'd say is Arizona. Unlike Florida, it does not have a Hispanic ethnicity that are swing voters and Trump won the state by less than 4%. While it seems like a lot at first, it was a massive swing from Romney winning by over 9%. Trump's job will be to essentially maintain what is left of his lead and he needs a higher percentage of non-Cuban Hispanics to win Arizona. Still, there are literally no indication either way of either Trump or Biden winning so this will be a nail biter. Don't be surprised if Arizona turns out to be 2000's Florida where it takes weeks just to get the final result, possibly even a recount. 50/50 either way and IMO, the state that decides America's path for decades.

Get ready for one of the closest and ugliest election in decades. It's all down to the wire.
Yep, although South Florida encompasses a lot of suburbs, and the Arlington/Richmond corridor is a mix.

As of last census, only 19% of the country lives in rural areas. I don't view them as suddenly swinging blue for any reason, unless an honest blue-collar champion somehow pops up in the Democrats again. (No, Bernie isn't one.) So they aren't as big a predictor for the future.

This isn't really a criticism of the US Census Bureau, but I think the way they define urban vs rural is insufficient. They're doing it to objectively quantify the data, which is literally their job, so their definition works for that purpose. However I think there's a qualitative difference with the way people in sparse suburbs feel, even though they are included in a larger "urban" area.

The basic problem is urban sprawl turning into suburban sprawl. When you have an urban core and a traditional suburb outside it, the "escape the city" mindset is pretty clear. However, over the last 50 years, suburbs themselves have sprawled out, pushing into previously rural areas and turning them into semi-rural or less-dense suburb areas. This is partly because that's where the cheap land is, and partly due to the problems with a reverse move back into the cities.

You can see this in the "suburbs" of many cities: small houses on large 5 acre wooded lots, horse ranches and goat farms inexplicably next to brand new cookie-cutter McMansions, etc. The rural tracts got surrounded by developers, especially over the last 20 years, and just keep going while the chain stores and gated apartment complexes pop up in their areas.

So what is the mindset of that kind of resident? Someone who doesn't want the full rural experience, or the (relatively) closer community of the suburbs? Someone looking for more isolation, a quieter area? My theory is that they represent disenchantment with suburban homogeneity and lack of character, as the suburbs got built out in mass volumes. Maybe the desire to own some land, a proper homestead, instead of just a house and a lawn.

How do you characterize them, politically? Hard to say, since "semi-rural" isn't an accepted definition and it isn't fully studied yet. My theory is they represent a more conservative and isolationist swath of the suburban residents. If it were the opposite, they would want to move in the other direction, closer to the cities, and gentrify something.

If I'm correct, then the Census undercounts the number of people who think they are living in a quasi-rural lifestyle, because the geography includes them in some larger urban center.

The cities are locked down Democratic strongholds. I'm focused on them as sources of votes for the obvious reason--they are a central location with lots of people. But they're also the only reliable stronghold the Democrats have left. Every county level electoral map now looks like a population density map.
View attachment 1564373
If you want to predict the future of Democratic voting, we need to see if the cities will stay blue, or start to crack and bleed red.

Given these two factors in 2020, that makes the suburbs the battleground areas. And both campaigns know it. Trump slipped up and bragged that he was going to do "really well with the suburbs", after also bragging that he was "going to protect the suburbs". Both of which might be true, but he's really dumb to say it out loud. (Romney made a similar mistake in 2012 with his 47% remarks.)

What's telling is how the Democrats pounced on it. They first called it a racist dog whistle (of course), but then they shifted into talking about how they were going to win the suburbs. Which led to COPE headlines like this:

Suburban women are rejecting Trump’s ‘"blatantly racist" appeal for their votes: report
"Disdain for Trump is widespread among suburban women — including some who voted for him in 2016"

There are many more articles along these lines. What's really happening is a classic case of "repeat the thing enough times to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy". They're still pissed about the loss in 2016, where Trump was supposed to scare off all those nice proper soccer moms in the suburbs who keep betraying their gender by voting for Republicans. But it didn't happen.

View attachment 1564394

Now, especially with the riots going on, I don't think the numbers in the suburbs are predictive of electoral futures. It's a year-specific issue that will distort the vote. For now, I think suburbs will remain the battleground that will have to be fought each time. I want to see if urban flight from 2020 will change them, but we can't know that for another few years at least.

For me, this year's canary in the coal mines will be the strength or weakness of Democratic cities. The ones I picked out above are the ones I think are most likely to have the biggest swings.
Great post there.

It's also worth noting that all fifteen of the largest cities in the United States all fail to break 60% of non-Hispanic whites (archive). Most of these cities don't even have half of the population consist of whites-only. That shows that non-whites - particularly the blacks, Hispanics, and Asian voting block that matters - urbanize even more than whites do. Considering that these are all reliable Democratic voting blocks, it's not surprising when the vast majority of our 100,000+ cities elect Democratic mayors, sometimes with no Republican opposition. The Democrats are counting on the rural voting block disappearing so that a few Democratic counties in otherwise red states can pull easy victories like what you see in states like New York, Oregon, and Washington where most of the counties are Republicans but because cities like New York City, Portland, and Seattle are so predominantly blue, they get left out of Senate and Presidential races. It's why Hillary Clinton brushed off the coal miners and Obama said some jobs weren't coming back. As far as the Democrats and the far right are concerned, demographic is destiny, but they come to this conclusion for different reasons.

A politically incorrect fact is that blacks and Asians used to lean Republican when it came to elections. Blacks voted for Hoover in 1932 but when they saw the results of Franklin D. Roosevelt and his New Deal helping their community, they shifted towards Democrats, which consolidated with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and turned them into the 85%+ voting block you see today. Asians were voting Republicans as late as 1996 but shifted towards Democrats to where they voted Obama in by over 70% in 2012. There's also this video that shows if cities alone decided the election, Republicans would be unelectable. By contrasts, rural voters would give Republicans a permanent supermajority.

All of this is relevant because there was a slight shift from non-whites towards Trump and that likely factored into his victory in Arizona and Florida. These non-whites voters have only become more important in the past four years and I doubt we're getting huge bump in white support to accommodate for demographic changes. All of the pandering Trump and did towards non-whites - especially blacks and Hispanics - at the RNC is a thickly-veiled strategy to start the decades long progress towards reclaiming the cities. And to do that, they have to start getting non-whites to vote for Republicans again. I will take a hard stance and say his strategy is risky but necessary if he wants to win this election. He can't win Oregon without a purpler Portland, he can't win Minnesota without a purpler Minneapolis/St. Paul, Virginia is not in play without its cities trending lighter blue, and he needs to keep or increase his margin with Cuban voters from 2016.
This is, what I think is, the best case scenario for Trump. All the states he could possibly win. The blue states I'm extremely doubtful he could flip at all.

e: this is Trump maxing out. Baring an act of god, he's not going to win every state. Either in the country or even on the map below. And Trump might lose some of these states. But I think all the ones in red are in play as of the making of this post. The ones in blue I think are lost causes.
View attachment 1565094
I don't think he'll likely gets New Hampshire, but why New Mexico and not New Hampshire? The only reason why Clinton did not get a double digit win on New Mexico was because of Gary Johnson and I recall he took more from Clinton than Trump. I think the state is a lost cause until the Republicans figure out a plan to make Hispanic swing voters.
 
Last edited:
Not all states accept absentee ballots that arive late. The ones that do are as follows, according to this website. (This might not be entirely accurate. The page says some states may have changed policies due to Corona, but I'm not going to look that up for all 51 of them).

1 day:
Texas

48 hours after polls close:
New Jersey

Noon of third day after election day:
Virginia

3 days after election day:
California
Kansas
North Carolina

5 days after election day:
Washington

6 days after election day:
Iowa
Utah

6 days after election day for postmarked ballots, one day for those with no postmark.
West Virginia

7 days after election day:
D.C.
Minnesota
New York

10 days after election day, by 10:00 AM:
Maryland

10 days after election day:
Alaska
Ohio

14 days after election day:
Illinois

Apparently no limit:
Nevada

So if all this is accurate then I presume the worst-case semi-plausible scenario involves one party narrowly winning Ohio and narrowly winning the electoral college - and then the absentee ballots flip Ohio with its 18 electoral votes.
Have I got this right?
Listening to some talk on CSPAN a few weeks ago, some lady from a voting organization was speaking to Congress. Unfortunately I don't remember the details and can't go grab a link as I'm sleeping soon.
But the short of it is, she stressed the need this election season for the polls to take any ballot mailed before or on the day of the election. Meaning if you did your ballot day of and dropped it in a post box and it took 3 weeks to get there then it should still be valid.

Of course she doesn't make the rules but I think it's fair to say she's a mouthpiece for the Democrats and what they want and strive to achieve. If someone really wants I can find the hearing or whatever it was later.
 
[citation needed]
Disagree. Anyone who would listen to AOC was already voting for Markey.

And he was the incumbent. Nancy Pelosi simply doesn't have that kind of pull in the state to get voters to primary out an incumbent Senator like that.

Also, it's Massachusetts. Do you actually think people needed Pelosi to tell them to vote for a Kennedy? If they really wanted to vote for a Kennedy that bad they didn't need Pelosi's input.

Also, I'll mention the Kennedy name doesn't mean an automatic victory in MA anymore. It's been 60 years since JFK was president, Ted's been dead for a while, and there's just too many younger voters who don't remember them or just don't care about the Kennedy name.

Yes, it's really hard to unseat a Massachusetts incumbent. I remember when Bill Weld was the most popular Governor ever, won 70% of the vote in his re-election bid, then ran for Senate against John Kerry and lost.

Kennedy or no Kennedy, if they're a challenger not an incumbent, and if they're running against another Dem, they're still likely to lose.
 
For people like @Syaoran Li who say that the Democratic Party would purge the progressives once the Democratic Party loses this election this year, think again.

Today was the Massachusetts statewide primary, which decides upon the party's nominees for the US Senate, congressional seats, state legislative seats etc.

Ed Markey won the Democratic primary for the US Senate race. It's interesting because at the start, Joe Kennedy III, the primary challenger, was polling ahead of Markey and landed the endorsement of Nancy Pelosi. Markey seemed to be struggling, but someone came to the rescue and pretty much saved his campaign with her endorsement.

And that person is AOC.

More Democratic Party voters listen to AOC over Pelosi.

For the Democratic primary for Massachusetts' 4th congressional district (which is open due to Joe Kennedy III deciding to run for the Senate), the candidate who was endorsed by Ayanna Pressley, a member of the Squad, is looking like she'll be the winner of the primary.

Whatever happens to the Democratic Party after the Democrats lose this election will certainly be a sight to see.
MA is a state with a high degree of college educated people, the biggest determinate in determining if you're a far left prog or not. There was not a single county in MA that voted in majority for Trump. Consider the fact Biden, the most establishment and moderate figure of the primary race was the man who won. While there were some tricks pulled (getting every moderate to drop out after a supercharged Super Tuesday), the majority of the party rallied around him and not Bernie Sanders or Warren. And to return to MA, Warren could not even win her own state from the Joepedo. Fact of the matter is most Democratic voters aren't progressives. They just vote that way because they are either black, brown, on welfare, or until recently union workers. This bizarre mix of socialism and racial mysticism progs have been pushing is just as much a mystery to them as it is to anyone else.

There is going to be a schism that happens with the Democrats, and it may even come if they win.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back