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.
Well, today is Sunday and the first debate is Tuesday. Maybe I think this is too much like the unexpected hanging paradox, but I think if Biden wants to pull out of the debates for any reason, today is the last day he would do so.

Tuesday is obviously too late logistically. Monday wouldn't be too late logistically, but a withdrawal for any reason on the day before the debate would be too blatantly obvious that the accusations about Biden are true and they're trying to hide him.

So today is it. If he doesn't drop today under some pretense I think we'll know for sure he will be on that debate stage with Trump on Tuesday.
 
I'm wondering how likely it is the Republicans can get the House back and if Trump can actually win the popular vote. There must be so many regular people who are afraid to say they're voting for Trump, particularly in states such as California. At least SOME of the riot footage must have reached them despite a lack of coverage by the corporate press.

As someone else said in another thread I believe, people who vote Joe Biden are more so voting against Trump and that was his explanation for the lack of enthusiasm for Biden but still strong poll numbers. It's all so confusing, just look at the rallies from Trump and Biden is literally not even campaigning. How the hell do they expect Biden to win?

Maybe my confusing the actual goal of the media right now so they can cheat the election with the mail-in ballots and stretching out the counting proces. If that happened I wonder if the right will break and start their own revolution.
 
Yes, but we were discussing a betting market and the odds of him winning 55% or more.

@StarkRavingMad is also correct that this is a narrative play on the left's part. There's already riots in the streets, violence and "resistance" being planned, and the idea now that Trump controls the USPS and is using it to suppress votes. Add on this week's mini-furor over him not "committing to the peaceful transfer of power". Now add in an election where he "loses" the popular vote.

There's a narrative structure in place to support half of America believing that Trump actually lost an election and should be forced from office. They just need that last piece to fall into place to complete the story.

I don't think they actually get to force him from power, of course. But then we're still dealing with a sizable population who have been primed for months to believe in that story, and no evidence to the contrary will change their minds. That is a major societal problem which doesn't go away just because the military sides with the President.
I am convinced that they're going to go with the popular vote narrative if only for the fact that California, a state that is in no danger of flipping to Trump, passed some of the most egregious vote-by-mail policies in the entire union.

A state of 55 million people with voter registries that haven't been properly maintained in decades is sending a ballot out to everyone. They're gonna stuff the boxes like there's no tomorrow, then try and use that to undermine Trump's mandate if he wins.
 
I'm starting to think that Trump picking ACB over Lagousa was brilliant 4D chess. Leftist are now openly attacking her religious background energizing that demographic. Christians are usually more compassionate, so blm narrative was hurting Trump a bit, but this is gonna piss them off. ACB might end up winning Trump more catholic latino voters than Lagousa.
:story:
 
I hope Pence has sense enough to know not to run in 2024. The GOP (and the Dems) have a hard time saying no to ex-VP’s who think it’s ’their turn’ and Pence would kill the current party unity. I’m looking out for Trump 2.0, there’s a few possibilities but prob too soon for most of them. I feel Candace Owens is one to watch, there are a lot of strong black Republican voices out there but it’s likely to be Don Jr in 24, he has the name, the money and (by then) a hotter FLOTUS than Melania. They could do worse.
No way Don jr should be a GOP candidate. Just say no to political dynasties.
 
I hope Pence has sense enough to know not to run in 2024. The GOP (and the Dems) have a hard time saying no to ex-VP’s who think it’s ’their turn’ and Pence would kill the current party unity. I’m looking out for Trump 2.0, there’s a few possibilities but prob too soon for most of them. I feel Candace Owens is one to watch, there are a lot of strong black Republican voices out there but it’s likely to be Don Jr in 24, he has the name, the money and (by then) a hotter FLOTUS than Melania. They could do worse.
You lost me at Candace Owens.
 
I'm starting to think that Trump picking ACB over Lagousa was brilliant 4D chess. Leftist are now openly attacking her religious background energizing that demographic. Christians are usually more compassionate, so blm narrative was hurting Trump a bit, but this is gonna piss them off. ACB might end up winning Trump more catholic latino voters than Lagousa.
:story:

I don't know if it's brilliant, that's a predictable reaction either way. With Barrett, they even got to make a Handmaid's Tale reference.

Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 11.46.03 AM.png

link / archive / article / article archive

The left knows exactly how this looks, and it's got the narrative response prepared for its drones, right there in the headline.

Screenshot 2020-09-27 at 11.50.19 AM.png
 
I hope Pence has sense enough to know not to run in 2024. The GOP (and the Dems) have a hard time saying no to ex-VP’s who think it’s ’their turn’ and Pence would kill the current party unity. I’m looking out for Trump 2.0, there’s a few possibilities but prob too soon for most of them. I feel Candace Owens is one to watch, there are a lot of strong black Republican voices out there but it’s likely to be Don Jr in 24, he has the name, the money and (by then) a hotter FLOTUS than Melania. They could do worse.
Ok... I can understand being concerned about Pence, but how would an identity politics diversity pick or political dynasty attempt be any better?

I'm starting to think that Trump picking ACB over Lagousa was brilliant 4D chess. Leftist are now openly attacking her religious background energizing that demographic. Christians are usually more compassionate, so blm narrative was hurting Trump a bit, but this is gonna piss them off. ACB might end up winning Trump more catholic latino voters than Lagousa.
:story:
Honestly I really did not expect them to sperg out so hard yesterday-- or rather, to sperg out in such dumb directions. Maybe they'll recover over the week and start trying to focus more on her specific sect, but definitely big brained to publicly come out against interracial adoption and start quoting John Locke's reasons on why Catholics should not be in politics; I'm sure normies approve such sentiment :story::story:.
 
You lost me at Candace Owens.
The strange thing for me is that I have never heard of Candace Owens until lately and I watch a lot of black conservative commentators on Youtube. Maybe they have mentioned her but I have never bothered to watch her stuff.

As far as black conservatives go, Thomas Sowell would be the Patrician or Kino choice if anyone wants a strong background in black conservatism. And that Aaron Coleman guy has potential as well.

Also the People's Champion has endorsed Joe Biden, its all over guys. Where is Stone Cold Steve Austin to stop his endorsement like he did to him in Sacramento all those years ago.
 
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/27/politics/biden-clinton-trump-first-debate-polls/index.html
https://archive.vn/wip/B3kjV

Still, it is possible that Trump comes back. We can't be sure what margin Biden needs to beat Trump by nationally in order to win a majority of electoral votes. History and statistical modeling this year indicate that Biden needs to win nationally by 5 points or more to feel pretty safe about winning in the Electoral College.

Biden's ahead by only a few more points than that 5 point margin. While national polls are usually pretty accurate at the end of the campaign, they can miss by 3 points or more. (It happened as recently as 2012.)

The margin of error for a poll of 1000 is plus or minus 3%. If I were running Biden's campaign I'd be worried.

Here's CNN's article on how Biden needs to be +5 to be sure of winning the electoral college. Given the margin of error of +-3% I'd say a 3% lead in Florida is not good news at all. It reminds of Nate Silver pointing out that Hillary's lead over Trump was within the margin of error, which means it could be due to polling.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/05/politics/joe-biden-lead-analysis/index.html
https://archive.vn/C84D3

Remember, the only thing that ultimately matters is winning 270 electoral votes in the Electoral College. To understand how easy a path each candidate has, you have to look at the state level polling.

The polling there is not nearly as universally good for Biden. Yes, some of it was good for Biden. He was up 8 points in a Fox News poll of Wisconsin. But a Quinnipiac University poll in Florida had the spread between Biden and Trump at just 3 points.

Indeed, if you were to look at all the swing state polling and average it, Biden's up by around 6 to 7 points in Michigan and Wisconsin. His advantage in Arizona is closer to 5 points. That gets Biden to 270 electoral votes exactly, assuming he holds all the states Hillary Clinton won in 2016 and also picks up the well-educated 2nd Congressional District in Nebraska. (Nebraska, like Maine, gives an electoral vote to the winner in each of its congressional districts.)

In other words, the true margin (or the margin in the state that puts Biden over the top in the Electoral College) is 5 points.
This matches what we saw in the CNN/SSRS poll that had Biden up by 8 points nationally and with a 5-point difference in the aggregate of the 15 closest states in 2016. That 3-point gap is what our poll also had last month.

This 3-point spread between popular vote margin and the true margin pretty much exactly what we saw in 2016. Clinton won by 2 points nationally, while Trump took Wisconsin by 1 point and with it the electoral college.

Now, we obviously don't know what the exact difference between the popular vote and the true margin will be in 2020. But a difference almost always exists, and it's quite likely that this cycle it will favor Trump.

My study of elections over the past 160 years shows that there has been about a 2-point difference on average between the popular vote margin and true margin. The gap tends to be larger when one party has its votes concentrated in a certain area. During the post-Civil War area, that was in the South for Democrats. Today, it tends to be in the urban areas for the Democrats.

One of the better ways to think about the split between the true margin and popular vote margin was put forth by FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver. Biden is generally favored to win the Electoral College if his popular vote margin is greater than 3 points and is generally the underdog when it is less. Either candidate, however, would have at least a 10% chance of winning if the popular vote margin is between 1 and 5 points.

History indicates, as does the current math, that Biden's lead should only be considered pretty safe if he wins the popular vote by at least 5 points. Right now, the polls indicate that he will.

It wouldn't take much, though, to shift the race so that Biden's national lead is less than 5 points, which would mean the true margin would be in the competitive territory.

I think Trump will pick up a few points and win the electoral college.
 
I’m not especially arguing for or against any of these potential Republican picks for 2024 and I absolutely agree with no political dynasties. But we know reality doesn’t work like that, it’s down to name recognition and MONEY. Hence why Chelsea Clinton will likely win a safe house or senate seat, why the Kennedy’s have lasted this long (although the tide is possibly changing with that one). Trump, love him or hate him, is now the head of a new dynasty. If Don Jr chooses to run he’ll have all the goodwill for his father plus the cash to spend, he’ll likely be unstoppable.

My favourite black conservative is Jericho Green. If only he would run, with the Officer Tatum as his VP the country would be sorted in miliseconds, Jericho would personally push Gavin Newsom into the sea and I’d be here for all of it.
 
I'm convinced that there will be enough Election Day fuckery that Biden might pull out a contested win. But I'm not sure about the Democrat candidates. Biden is barely coherent and his penchant for gaffes make George W. Bush look like eloquent, while Harris was never that popular even among DNC circles.
The problem is the amount of rigging they would need to achieve victory via the courts and not have either a military coup or civil war, is astronomical. Imagine a scenario where Trump wins New Mexico and Colorado, with MI and PA flipping blue due to an influx of mail in ballots, with Republican sweeps everywhere else. No one would buy it.

All it would take is one Project Veritas plant to out a ballot stuffing, and its all ogre for them. This makes me think its largely out of the question.
 
If Barrett can pass through the Senate with minimal trouble, then it ends up being a solid choice by Trump. I could see a small bump from the religious and Suburban women which Trump is really struggling with. If not, I'm worried these attacks on ACB have some staying power. You don't want to be tainted by someone who has now been deemed a loser with these "archaic" beliefs.
 
The Dem's platform is rapidly diverging between progressives, who want to spend untold trillions reshaping every facet of our economy, and centrists, who want stability and a strong economy. The only thing holding them together right now is orange man bad and Trump won't be running in '24.

If you think that removes the Orange Man Bad factor, then you don't remember the 2008 election very well. The Democrats had devolved into BUSH BAD for a half decade at that point, and it was used (correctly) to paint McCain as just a continuation of Bush. Obama as a charismatic personality helped, but the thing that really got him that +7% win was centrists and even Republicans who didn't want more of Bush.

Even worse for them is that Trump has scooped up millions of disaffected voters who were left behind by shitty trade deals and/or Obama flipping them the bird with industry-breaking regulations, and he is now expanding the GOP's base further by broadly appealing to Blacks & Hispanics.

There's been some bashing on Barnes for the last few days over the SCOTUS pick. But I agree with one of his main election analysis points: those voters are not GOP voters, they are Trump voters. They are coming out to vote for the man, not his recently adopted party, and certainly not for the New Right conservatism that's desperate to reassert itself.

Watch a few of his rallies. There aren't a lot of generic GOP merch/signs, they're all Trump signs or slogan signs (MAGA, Fill That Seat, etc). The identity signs aren't for the party or the ideology; they are for the man (Blacks for Trump, Workers for Trump, etc). The only other symbols flying are the American flag, and sometimes the Blue Lives Matter flag.

Listen to his speeches, hear what gets the biggest pop. He isn't pushing Republicans, he's bashing Democrats and the media. Republicans only get approval if they agree with Trump personally. It's not an ideological purity test, it's a loyalty test.

I hope Pence has sense enough to know not to run in 2024. The GOP (and the Dems) have a hard time saying no to ex-VP’s who think it’s ’their turn’ and Pence would kill the current party unity. I’m looking out for Trump 2.0, there’s a few possibilities but prob too soon for most of them. I feel Candace Owens is one to watch, there are a lot of strong black Republican voices out there but it’s likely to be Don Jr in 24, he has the name, the money and (by then) a hotter FLOTUS than Melania. They could do worse.

In 2024, the Democrats get one last shot at Orange Man Bad as a rallying cry. They'll frame it as "he's so bad you need Generic Democrat to fix everything", and it will work. If a GOP candidate is anywhere remotely connected to Trump, the unity call automatically succeeds.

The GOP needs a Trump-like populist that can win the same coalition on his/her own personal recognizance. They completely failed to revamp the 2012-2016 ideological problems; it's been Trumpism or sectarianism for the last 4 years. They haven't overhauled their messaging to match Trump's formula, except to pick up diversity pandering to start highlighting more minorities.

Pence is out (and he knows it), Don Jr is completely out, and the Tea Party crowd (Rubio, Cruz) won't keep Trump's voters. I don't have a prediction for what happens in 2024, but I know what won't work, and that's trying to replicate Trump on short notice without the decades-long brand building.
 
More bad news for the Democrats. Approval for BLM protests has fallen from 54% in June to 39% in September as the media narrative of 'mostly peaceful protests' has collapsed.

https://apnorc.org/projects/compare...ice-who-cause-harm-need-greater-consequences/
https://archive.vn/otBjS

1601228826150.png


Approval is very partisan

Views of the protests differ by party identification with 70% of Democrats approving and 75% of Republicans disapproving. This partisan difference emerges even among white Americans: 72% of white Democrats approve of the protests while just 9% of white Republicans agree.

The interesting thing about the BLM protests/riots is that they happened too early. If the election had been in June they could well have worked for the Democrats saying 'Orange man racist and bad'. Now it seems like with approval ratings for them securely in minority territory Trump calling for law and order and the Democrats sabotaging the police response to protests in their areas and their media proxies spreading the 'mostly peaceful' line is not going to do them any favors.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/09/15/...rning-people-in-riot-zones-into-trump-voters/
https://archive.vn/wip/8eEL5

According to Rasmussen, the law and order issue is very important to these voters.

Among all voters, 65% say the violent protests are important to their vote in the presidential election this fall, with 41% who say it’s ‘Very Important.’

Among those who have had violent protests in their community, even more (76%) rate them important to their vote, including 54% who say they are ‘Very Important.’ Sixty-three percent (63%) of these voters ‘Strongly Approve’ of the job Trump is doing versus 35% who ‘Strongly Disapprove.’

Meanwhile, a fresh round of BLM riots broke out in Lancaster, PA over the shooting of an armed lunatic, where, as Ace of Spades points out, “the GOP has already seen a net +24,262 increase in voter registration” in just a month.

And in Florida, where only five percent of the public is undecided, those undecideds are breaking for Trump 4:1.

I don't really trust either the journal of American greatness or Rasmussen but it doesn't seem that unexpected that people in areas that have had riots would favor a candidate who thinks the police should stop the rioting.
 
Last edited:
If you think that removes the Orange Man Bad factor, then you don't remember the 2008 election very well. The Democrats had devolved into BUSH BAD for a half decade at that point, and it was used (correctly) to paint McCain as just a continuation of Bush. Obama as a charismatic personality helped, but the thing that really got him that +7% win was centrists and even Republicans who didn't want more of Bush.

I recognize the Dems cast McCain as a nazi and pulled similar shit in '08, as they did in '88, '00, and '04. The difference is the level of support that sentiment had. Orange man bad is a mantra among a large portion of the left but it is much, much less prevalent amongst moderates and republicans than the anti-Bush vibes because of the difference between Bush/McCain and Trump -- pro-war neocons vs an anti-war populist who has created a stronger US economy. Bush oversaw the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq and the '07 recession. McCain ran on a platform of continuation. In comparison, orange man bad is fixed on Trump's personality, largely his perceived lack of decorum and that he isn't a great public speaker.

The left will naturally try to come up with similar branding for the GOP's '24 candidate, but it'll have a lot less sway so long as Trump refrains from starting any wars and keeps improving the economy.

There's been some bashing on Barnes for the last few days over the SCOTUS pick. But I agree with one of his main election analysis points: those voters are not GOP voters, they are Trump voters. They are coming out to vote for the man, not his recently adopted party, and certainly not for the New Right conservatism that's desperate to reassert itself.

Watch a few of his rallies. There aren't a lot of generic GOP merch/signs, they're all Trump signs or slogan signs (MAGA, Fill That Seat, etc). The identity signs aren't for the party or the ideology; they are for the man (Blacks for Trump, Workers for Trump, etc). The only other symbols flying are the American flag, and sometimes the Blue Lives Matter flag.

Listen to his speeches, hear what gets the biggest pop. He isn't pushing Republicans, he's bashing Democrats and the media. Republicans only get approval if they agree with Trump personally. It's not an ideological purity test, it's a loyalty test.

I agree re: Trump voters rather than GOP voters; however, if Trump successfully reshapes the GOP then that will translate to continued support for the GOP from Trump voters, so long as the GOP doesn't pick a neocon in '24. That's already happened to a large extent--most anti-Trump Congressional Republicans lost their seats in '18 and have been replaced on the '20 ballot with pro-Trump candidates.

I don't buy your argument about signs/slogans because it goes both ways. I haven't seen generic GOP signs, but I also haven't seen generic Democrat signs in years. Its similar to the orange man bad issue. The Dems have built a big tent coalition in '20 around orange man bad rather than specific policy platforms because their voters wildly disagree over policy but agree that trump=hitler.
 
More bad news for the Democrats. Approval for BLM protests has fallen from 54% in June to 39% in September as the media narrative of 'mostly peaceful protests' has collapsed.

https://apnorc.org/projects/compare...ice-who-cause-harm-need-greater-consequences/
https://archive.vn/otBjS

View attachment 1625181

Approval is very partisan



The interesting thing about the BLM protests/riots is that they happened too early. If the election had been in June they could well have worked for the Democrats saying 'Orange man racist and bad'. Now it seems like with approval ratings for them securely in minority territory Trump calling for law and order and the Democrats sabotaging the police response to protests in their areas and their media proxies spreading the 'mostly peaceful' line is not going to do them any favors.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/09/15/...rning-people-in-riot-zones-into-trump-voters/
https://archive.vn/wip/8eEL5



I don't really trust either the journal of American greatness or Rasmussen but it doesn't seem that unexpected that people in areas that have had riots would favor a candidate who thinks the police should stop the rioting.
What I fear from all the Democrat narratives failing from BLM to even mail-in voting now is that they'll go all-in on the only one that solidly benefits them, Corona-Chan. They'll infect masses of people and force insane laws like mandatory masks year-round to keep it going so Trump might lose.
 
What I fear from all the Democrat narratives failing from BLM to even mail-in voting now is that they'll go all-in on the only one that solidly benefits them, Corona-Chan. They'll infect masses of people and force insane laws like mandatory masks year-round to keep it going so Trump might lose.
Bit too late for that, innit? All those protests and riots have pushed COVID off the front page for most part.

And if there were spikes that could be used to blame Drumpf, we'd have it earlier, like July or August.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back