Honestly, if Biden actually had a plan in regards to COVID other than "Mask mandate that is easier said than done, so it probably won't happen, but I promise it!" and "let's tank our economy with a 3-month long lockdown," then I could see him winning the Presidency with ease. COVID is the one issue where the media has pretty much won in regards to making Trump look bad. Even if the bad stuff happened because of state leadership (and not federal), the useful idiot normies will always blame the POTUS.
Literally, Biden's only campaign platform has been "Orange Man Bad." Anything in regards to policy is anyone's guess, since he changes his narrative all of the damn time.
My personal favorite at the moment is how he insists he's not going to raise anyone's taxes, and also says he's going to repeal Trump's tax cuts. Okay, so you found a really round-about way to say it, but that still means you're going to raise taxes you fucking retard.
Yeah, she outright lost her senate election to Sinema and then slipped into McCain's seat anyway after he died and is running against a relatively strong Democrat candidate in Mark Kelly. Her only hope is that Kelly's anti-gun platform loses him votes in Arizona.
Yeah, she outright lost her senate election to Sinema and then slipped into McCain's seat anyway after he died and is running against a relatively strong Democrat candidate in Mark Kelly. Her only hope is that Kelly's anti-gun platform loses him votes in Arizona.
I read somewhere that a bunch of former astronauts endorsed McSally and she did bring up that Kelly has connections to China during that one debate both had.
The GOP should have held a primary in Arizona to gauge enthusiasm in the state. Texas going by their jump in number is safe for Trump.
PA has more of a Republican lean than MI, MN, or WI, so Trump's unlikely to lose PA but win any of the others. Trump has a really good shot at AZ and FL, but still really needs PA to win. If Biden wins FL, which is redder than PA, then he's already won.
Biden can lose FL and still deny Trump the re-election if he regains the blue wall, but PA is really a must win for both.
PA has more of a Republican lean than MI, MN, or WI, so Trump's unlikely to lose PA but win any of the others. Trump has a really good shot at AZ and FL, but still really needs PA to win. If Biden wins FL, which is redder than PA, then he's already won.
Biden can lose FL and still deny Trump the re-election if he regains the blue wall, but PA is really a must win for both.
Biden will need to recover from himself if he hopes to win Florida. If I recall, 2020 Florida is shaping up to be the most red it has been for a while now.
Also, Dems are giving Trump more time for PA since Obama is pulling up Biden's campaign on the last day for early voting there.
Is this the first time Obama has actively come out to stump for Biden? If so the internal DNC polls must be dire since Obama barely wanted anything to do with the Biden campaign at the beginning, I wonder if they're seeing cratering black turnout.
If you start with the 2016 baseline, PA has the biggest chunk of EC votes in a competitive state. Losing PA could have knock-on effects throughout the rest of the Rust Belt, and the alternative paths have odd vote tallies that require multiple state flips.
Here's the 2016 map, when Trump won 304-227. The threshold to win is 270 EC votes.
If Trump holds everything else and only loses PA, he still wins, 284-247. He's still safe if he only loses MI. But if he loses PA and MI, he's below the threshold at a 268-268 tie (assuming no faithless electors). I think both campaigns are factoring in a MI flip to Biden this year, making PA the other state that needs to flip or be held.
If Trump loses PA and MI, he needs to flip another state to make it up, and that's always tricky. MN might go, and NV or NH are the long shots. But WI looks like it also might flip back blue this year, which makes the math worse.
A secondary consideration is winning enough states and enough popular vote to actually have a mandate this time around. In Baris' polling, he found something like 1/3 of the electorate have little or no faith that the election will be legitimate this year. That's bad for the Republic, and if the race is narrower than 2016 there's going to be actual loss of faith in the system.
As hyperbolic as it sounds, I think a solid Trump win, with a higher % than last time, is probably required for basic system legitimacy. No one on the right is going to believe the Dems played fair if MI gets stolen by their increasingly brazen governor, or if PA keeps counting votes for 3 weeks. But if the 2020 map looks the same as above, then the Dems could actually believe that nothing changed, Biden failed to move the country, and if only we had Favorite Candidate X instead then things would be very different.
If you start with the 2016 baseline, PA has the biggest chunk of EC votes in a competitive state. Losing PA could have knock-on effects throughout the rest of the Rust Belt, and the alternative paths have odd vote tallies that require multiple state flips.
Here's the 2016 map, when Trump won 304-227. The threshold to win is 270 EC votes.
If Trump holds everything else and only loses PA, he still wins, 284-247. He's still safe if he only loses MI. But if he loses PA and MI, he's below the threshold at a 268-268 tie (assuming no faithless electors). I think both campaigns are factoring in a MI flip to Biden this year, making PA the other state that needs to flip or be held.
If Trump loses PA and MI, he needs to flip another state to make it up, and that's always tricky. MN might go, and NV or NH are the long shots. But WI looks like it also might flip back blue this year, which makes the math worse.
A secondary consideration is winning enough states and enough popular vote to actually have a mandate this time around. In Baris' polling, he found something like 1/3 of the electorate have little or no faith that the election will be legitimate this year. That's bad for the Republic, and if the race is narrower than 2016 there's going to be actual loss of faith in the system.
As hyperbolic as it sounds, I think a solid Trump win, with a higher % than last time, is probably required for basic system legitimacy. No one on the right is going to believe the Dems played fair if MI gets stolen by their increasingly brazen governor, or if PA keeps counting votes for 3 weeks. But if the 2020 map looks the same as above, then the Dems could actually believe that nothing changed, Biden failed to move the country, and if only we had Favorite Candidate X instead then things would be very different.
But if he loses PA and MI, he's below the threshold at a 268-268 tie (assuming no faithless electors). I think both campaigns are factoring in a MI flip to Biden this year, making PA the other state that needs to flip or be held.
If he loses MI and PA, he is still at 270. The problem is with faithless electors. However, since Trump has consolidated the Republican base and the fact that they are probably accounting for a close election, they are going to vet the electors super thoroughly. Would still perfer more incase of fuckery.
I don't think thats entirely true. If you give up on a state, you stop campaigning there. You can make the arguement that he cut funding for MI ads, but he redirecting it to his 260 firewall and PA for a safer win. Pence, Trump, and the family are still in Michigan and Wisconsin, and to a lesser extent, MN.
I am also looking at Wisconsin's early vote, and holy shit, the WOW counties are pissed about the riots. They have a 77% Republican lead in Waukesha's early vote. BLM should not have fucked around in a Republican stronghold. This is evidence that Trump has consolidated the Walker coalition into his WWC one, which will deliver him the state easier since NeverTrumpers are no longer a sizable portion of the Republican party.
Wisconsin only suffered from Kenosha mostly whereas Minnesota got rocked hard. If Minnesota might go red then Wisconsin will go red.
For anyone in that area, who thinks that riots will end if Orange Man go away and if Wisconsin is going blue because of that reason then he is not winning any rust belt state. They vote as a bloc. And their gun rights are going bye bye as well under Biden and Kamala.
And the shit will just get worse. And those potential cuckolds will deserve it if they cave to the globalist democratic party that pissed away their jobs to begin with.
We already seen the numbers and they look very promising. Not guaranting a Trump win but his odds of winning are better than Obama 2012 or Bush 2004. That is for sure.
Yeah, she outright lost her senate election to Sinema and then slipped into McCain's seat anyway after he died and is running against a relatively strong Democrat candidate in Mark Kelly. Her only hope is that Kelly's anti-gun platform loses him votes in Arizona.
Martha McSally is going to win. Mark Kelly isn't that strong of a candidate. In fact, his performance was pretty bad in the only debate held between him and McSally. McSally will win because of the high Republican turnout, plus Mark Kelly's connections with China and his anti-gun positions being a huge mark against him.
It isn't. If anything, Wisconsin is actually becoming more red this time around. Trump and the Republicans have been outperforming in the WOW counties by a huge margin in early voting. So it's looking like it'll be mathematically impossible for Biden to win the state of Wisconsin.
To be frank with you, Trump holds all the thirty states he won with an increased margin, and wins more states.
I've heard that the Trump campaign is going to spend money in Oregon, New Mexico, and Arizona (though I haven't been able to confirm it myself). Make of that what you will.
Martha McSally is going to win. Mark Kelly isn't that strong of a candidate. In fact, his performance was pretty bad in the only debate held between him and McSally. McSally will win because of the high Republican turnout, plus Mark Kelly's connections with China and his anti-gun positions being a huge mark against him.
It isn't. If anything, Wisconsin is actually becoming more red this time around. Trump and the Republicans have been outperforming in the WOW counties by a huge margin in early voting. So it's looking like it'll be mathematically impossible for Biden to win the state of Wisconsin.
To be frank with you, Trump holds all the thirty states he won with an increased margin, and wins more states.
I've heard that the Trump campaign is going to spend money in Oregon, New Mexico, and Arizona (though I haven't been able to confirm it myself). Make of that what you will.
Arizona shouldn't be overlooked but it shouldn't be a problem. Trafalgar had him recently with a 4 point lead there with an overweighing of women and Latinos. Arizona spending is probably for McSally.
New Mexico is interesting. They are showing very good trends in early voting. They have also trended red since 2016. Maybe it can be competitive since Trump is increasing margins in the Sun Belt. At worst maybe a few House seats can come from it. Still, .
Should put more money in Nevada before Oregon though. NV also had a poll with Trump down by 2. Trump said himself that he sees good results in Nevada. I know, using polls when the arguement is that theyre manipulated, but if they are still using that 30% new voter bullshit in said poll, it may have a Trump tie or lead.
Baris also had him up in NH weeks ago. I wonder what he saw and if it still holds.
I've heard that the Trump campaign is going to spend money in Oregon, New Mexico, and Arizona (though I haven't been able to confirm it myself). Make of that what you will.
Washington and Oregon are fucked. Not enough to give Trump a win there. The general election numbers in 2016 showed a big margin for Hillary. Trump has a better chance flipping California over Washington and Oregon.
I kinda disagree. Republicans have been doing pretty good in registering new voters in the regions outside of Portland, plus many Oregonians are disliking the current Democrat Party leadership in their state, with a surprising amount of the disapproval coming from the Portland metro.
It will come down to how the independents and if 20% of the registered Democrats within the state of Oregon go for Trump. If that's the case, Oregon may very well go red, and since the states of Oregon and Washington usually vote together...
I personally think a lot of Democrats will abstain from voting, which is also why I personally think Oregon might have a chance at going red. Also cannot forget about the riots and the lockdowns, that could have a greater affect on how the state votes.
Barring a miracle or moderate Democrats and independents being really pissed at Portland more than we think, I don't see Oregon going red but I can definitely see it becoming a much lighter shade of blue this year because of what's going on.
Washington and Oregon are fucked. Not enough to give Trump a win there. The general election numbers in 2016 showed a big margin for Hillary. Trump has a better chance flipping California over Washington and Oregon.
I kind of disagree on this one. I do think Oregon and Washington will go blue but I can see them going to a lighter shade of it this year and helping Trump with the popular vote. But I do think those two states have a slightly higher chance of flipping than California.
Oregon and Washington are victims of the Manhattan Effect where a single large metro area holds the rest of the state hostage. In this case, it's Portland and Seattle respectively.
With California, you've got three massive metropolitan areas (Los Angeles, San Francisco Bay, San Diego) and the California Democrats are second only to Chicago in terms of political corruption
You obviously not talked to an actual mormon. They hate Trump as a person and see him as everything that goes against there religion.
I know many who will be voting red but there disgust with Trump is well known in the mormon community. Hell even the LDS church spoke out against him for the whole Muslim travel ban.
Nah, untrue, I grew up with some mormons in Nevada and they are all very fired up for Trump. Maybe they are cucks where you live.
Thing I wanted to post:
GOP are setting up quasilegal drop boxes in SoCal. I assume this is to keep the state from fudging numbers in the downballot, since they should theoretically need to know which addresses and sigs to forge:
Legal minds of Twitter, unaware this is not technically illegal (afaik, comfirmed by Rekieta), calling for blood:
They must have come up with some stupendous bribe for Obama. If he campaigns for another loser it tarnishes his image, which is the only thing he cares about. Maybe it's because a conservative SCOTUS majority is likely to wipe away most that remains of his legacy. Or maybe they've convinced him that the fix is in and they've guaranteed a Biden victory.
think another reason is that if Obama didn't campaign for his former vice president then it would hurt his reputation by making people think of how low he thought of Biden's chances and didn't even try to help him. If Biden lost, I don't think that would take a huge hit to his reputation but if Biden lost and Obama didn't bother helping him then Obama would be smeared as the reason Biden would lose.
Rallies are to get people to vote. The ground game is to get people registered. That's been active for a while now. He doesn't need to be there until closer to the election.
They must have come up with some stupendous bribe for Obama. If he campaigns for another loser it tarnishes his image, which is the only thing he cares about. Maybe it's because a conservative SCOTUS majority is likely to wipe away most that remains of his legacy. Or maybe they've convinced him that the fix is in and they've guaranteed a Biden victory.
.
