US Presidential Election 2020

[Jattdogg]

4 hours ago, Lionator said:

Do we know what this supposed Obamagate is yet? Or is it just some sort of cryptic distraction to try and change the narrative? 

My take is Trump just wants to tarnish Obama since Obama was in the office. Having said that, they all have sneaky shiet they've done. It plays to his base and again will be another reason why he beats sleepy joe.

Edited 14 May 2020 by Jattdogg

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Latest polling shows trump behind in the popular vote (51-46) but ahead in the swing states (52-45) ..........  

 

crucially, trump is trusted more than Biden on economy and by the time we get to polling day, I’m pretty sure it’s going to be the recovery of the economy which will be centre stage. The virus may not have gone away but the republican narrative will be that a vaccine is just around the corner and we will have found some therapeutic tools to allay some of the fears .....

 

 

May I ask where this is from?

 

Latest realclearpolitics polling has Biden ahead by at least 3/4 points in Florida, Wisconsin, Penn and Michigan, and he perhaps only needs two out of those four? That being said, there's an awful lot that can happen between now and November - I'm thinking the Covid outbreak will still have some import precisely because of its influence on the economy. Don't see all the people currently out of work because of it being back in work or being solvent by then, for instance.

 

 

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

May I ask where this is from?

 

Latest realclearpolitics polling has Biden ahead by at least 3/4 points in Florida, Wisconsin, Penn and Michigan, and he perhaps only needs two out of those four? That being said, there's an awful lot that can happen between now and November - I'm thinking the Covid outbreak will still have some import precisely because of its influence on the economy. Don't see all the people currently out of work because of it being back in work or being solvent by then, for instance.

Can d/l the full polling report here...

 

I've cashed out now, slight profit either way. 

 

Edging back towards Trump to be honest as the pandemic can't really get much worse than this and it doesn't seem to have hurt him anywhere near as much as I thought.

 

If the election, as I now expect, is to be fought on economic recovery than I think he'll have more than enough to win.

 

The only hope is Biden has an absolute storming set of performances in the debates.

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, MattP said:

Can d/l the full polling report here...

 

I've cashed out now, slight profit either way. 

 

Edging back towards Trump to be honest as the pandemic can't really get much worse than this and it doesn't seem to have hurt him anywhere near as much as I thought.

 

If the election, as I now expect, is to be fought on economic recovery than I think he'll have more than enough to win.

 

The only hope is Biden has an absolute storming set of performances in the debates.

Thanks for that.

 

Personally, I'm not quite getting why so many people think a president who has overseen the biggest jump in unemployment claims since the Great Depression is somehow a safe pair of hands economically and that one issue also supersedes the overall health policy based response to this crisis too?

 

I mean, does the message "it's not his fault, act of God, blame the Chinese" really sustain so many people in swing states? If so, I have to applaud the mastery of smoke and mirrors PR - better piece of work than anything done so far tbh.

 

[Guest MattP]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Thanks for that.

 

Personally, I'm not quite getting why so many people think a president who has overseen the biggest jump in unemployment claims since the Great Depression is somehow a safe pair of hands economically and that one issue also supersedes the overall health policy based response to this crisis too?

 

I mean, does the message "it's not his fault, act of God, blame the Chinese" really sustain so many people in swing states? If so, I have to applaud the mastery of smoke and mirrors PR - better piece of work than anything done so far tbh.

Ignoring the rhetoric, you don't think your average voter is seriously going to pin the blame for the unemployment rise on him do you? Even the most ardent anti-Trump supporter must surely realise the pandemic is more to blame that he is.

 

But the economic question in an election won't be what has happened, it will be what will happen and given the pre-virus job boost and economic boom (even if it was built on debt) you can see why voters might be prepared to go for him for the fiscal recovery.

[Detroit Blues]

12 hours ago, Jattdogg said:

Hundreds of millions of citizens and this is the best america can do

Unfortunately, the way our political system is set up, this is the inevitable result. 

[leicsmac]

12 hours ago, MattP said:

Ignoring the rhetoric, you don't think your average voter is seriously going to pin the blame for the unemployment rise on him do you? Even the most ardent anti-Trump supporter must surely realise the pandemic is more to blame that he is.

 

But the economic question in an election won't be what has happened, it will be what will happen and given the pre-virus job boost and economic boom (even if it was built on debt) you can see why voters might be prepared to go for him for the fiscal recovery.

Why not? The response his administration has applied to the pandemic is what is responsible for that unemployment (as Trump himself was very keen to point out re. Obama in 2009). This is quite clearly evidenced by quite a few other leading countries not having similar problems:

 

https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/LUR@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD

 

(Some interesting factoids there though - Brazil, Spain, Italy and France are all struggling similarly.)

 

I know it's Teflon Don we're talking about, but this one really ought to stick to him - in terms of the way he addressed it at the start, the way it has spread, and the consequences thereof. He's said before that the buck stops at the top - well, that is what that really means.

 

And I'm not sure how pointing out the carefully crafted message of "blame everyone but Trump, bonus points if it's another country" and being rather surprised that so many people are buying it is somehow rhetoric as the message itself is patently obvious, to say nothing of being massively hypocritical, for reasons above.

 

That all being said, Trump's overall approval rate has stayed pretty much straight and level (40-45%) through this entire thing short of a couple of bobs and weaves, as it has done pretty much since he took office. That suggests that for all of this the lines in the sand really are still drawn, they're not moving, and November will be about convincing a certain number of undecideds in swing states to come out and vote (or not). Economic arguments may well play a part in all that.

Edited 15 May 2020 by leicsmac

[Detroit Blues]

Trump won last election because the over 65 crowd favored him over Clinton. Now, after the way he's handled the covid pandemic, the over 65 crowd favors Biden. All of this talk of "sacrificing the older folks for the economy" is not being well received

[Chocolate Teapot]

5 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Why not? The response his administration has applied to the pandemic is what is responsible for that unemployment (as Trump himself was very keen to point out re. Obama in 2009). This is quite clearly evidenced by quite a few other leading countries not having similar problems:

 

https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/LUR@WEO/OEMDC/ADVEC/WEOWORLD

 

(Some interesting factoids there though - Brazil, Spain, Italy and France are all struggling similarly.)

 

I know it's Teflon Don we're talking about, but this one really ought to stick to him - in terms of the way he addressed it at the start, the way it has spread, and the consequences thereof. He's said before that the buck stops at the top - well, that is what that really means.

 

And I'm not sure how pointing out the carefully crafted message of "blame everyone but Trump, bonus points if it's another country" and being rather surprised that so many people are buying it is somehow rhetoric as the message itself is patently obvious, to say nothing of being massively hypocritical, for reasons above.

 

That all being said, Trump's overall approval rate has stayed pretty much straight and level (40-45%) through this entire thing short of a couple of bobs and weaves, as it has done pretty much since he took office. That suggests that for all of this the lines in the sand really are still drawn, they're not moving, and November will be about convincing a certain number of undecideds in swing states to come out and vote (or not). Economic arguments may well play a part in all that.

On the same argument the Tories successfully managed to pin the global financial crisis solely at labour, whether it was or wasn't. So its very plausible that it will affect his ratings in a very significant way.

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

On the same argument the Tories successfully managed to pin the global financial crisis solely at labour, whether it was or wasn't. So its very plausible that it will affect his ratings in a very significant way.

True - If you believe that the democrats and Biden will manage an effective campaign of negativity....... If it comes down to that type of campaign then I think the republicans will do it better then the democrats......  Obama was elected on a change mandate and new hope ....it was fairly positive 

[leicsmac]

59 minutes ago, Abrasive fox said:

On the same argument the Tories successfully managed to pin the global financial crisis solely at labour, whether it was or wasn't. So its very plausible that it will affect his ratings in a very significant way.

You'd think that's a possibility...but given how everything has played out so far, I honestly don't know.

[Guest MattP]

8 hours ago, Abrasive fox said:

On the same argument the Tories successfully managed to pin the global financial crisis solely at labour, whether it was or wasn't. So its very plausible that it will affect his ratings in a very significant way.

They didn't blame it entirely on Labour as you couldn't get away with that. (And they didn't pin it on then that successfully either as we had a hung parliament in 2010)

 

It wasn't wrong to point out that Brown was the man in charge while Labour were running budget deficits of 30-40 billion in the middle of a credit boom though mid 2000s - leaving us in a worse position to tackle the crisis.

[leicsmac]

Gerrymandering and now what is tantamount to election fraud.

 

But the good thing is as long as you win, you can make up any story you like about how it was all in fact OK and people will buy it. Or it seems to be the case, anyway.

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Gerrymandering and now what is tantamount to election fraud.

But the good thing is as long as you win, you can make up any story you like about how it was all in fact OK and people will buy it. Or it seems to be the case, anyway.

If you think it's bad over there you should see some of the stories over here, it's how Labour have won so many by-elections.

 

Activists on the ground racking up postal votes and sending them in, one convicted voting fraudster cruising the mosques and areas in certain communities having bizarrely high turnout rates in Peterborough last year.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/vote-riggers-role-casts-doubt-over-labour-win-in-peterborough-bcpmdm8zj

 

Very little you can prove of course, but we all know it's happening.

[leicsmac]

7 minutes ago, MattP said:

If you think it's bad over there you should see some of the stories over here, it's how Labour have won so many by-elections.

 

Activists on the ground racking up postal votes and sending them in, one convicted voting fraudster cruising the mosques and areas in certain communities having bizarrely high turnout rates in Peterborough last year.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/vote-riggers-role-casts-doubt-over-labour-win-in-peterborough-bcpmdm8zj

 

Very little you can prove of course, but we all know it's happening.

Yeah, I think it's worse over there - because unlike over in the UK where the (alleged) fraudsters lost, the fraudsters, gerrymanderers and voter suppressors Stateside have won the country and took overall power.

 

That can make rather a large difference in terms of what comes out and how it is addressed IMO - because if you win, most often you control the narrative, and then you didn't do anything wrong at all. (In a twisted way, I rather admire the Repubs for knowing that and applying it so efficiently.)

Edited 15 May 2020 by leicsmac

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yeah, I think it's worse over there - because unlike over in the UK where the (alleged) fraudsters lost, the fraudsters, gerrymanderers and voter suppressors Stateside have won the country and took overall power.

 

That can make rather a large difference in terms of what comes out and how it is addressed IMO - because if you win, most often you control the narrative, and then you didn't do anything wrong at all. (In a twisted way, I rather admire the Repubs for knowing that and applying it so efficiently.)

The alleged fraudsters won that by-election, though it conveniently swung back to the Tories in a GE.

 

Although I don't think it makes you better or worse if you win or lose, if you committing voting fraud you should be treated very harshly and very seriously whatever the result has been.

[Chocolate Teapot]

32 minutes ago, MattP said:

They didn't blame it entirely on Labour as you couldn't get away with that. (And they didn't pin it on then that successfully either as we had a hung parliament in 2010)

 

It wasn't wrong to point out that Brown was the man in charge while Labour were running budget deficits of 30-40 billion in the middle of a credit boom though mid 2000s - leaving us in a worse position to tackle the crisis.

 

I think you've helped prove my point there, similar arguments could be made about the lack of readiness and complacency of the US government. The latest ft article on how trump's handled the crisis is frightening - all it takes is someone to construct that narrative in a simple way and he'll be up against it. There's already a lot noises to say the older vote of which he is very reliant aren't happy about the way he's managed the crisis.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, MattP said:

The alleged fraudsters won that by-election, though it conveniently swung back to the Tories in a GE.

 

Although I don't think it makes you better or worse if you win or lose, if you committing voting fraud you should be treated very harshly and very seriously whatever the result has been.

Certainly agree with the second paragraph, but events in the US in recent times seem to imply that winning or losing sadly does indeed make a difference on that score.

 

I wonder how much of it will be seen in November?

Edited 15 May 2020 by leicsmac

[Guest MattP]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Certainly agree with the second paragraph, but events in the US in recent times seem to imply that winning or losing sadly does indeed make a difference on that score.

 

I wonder how much of it will be seen in November?

Doubt it will have much of an effect, high turnout and they don't have the activist numbers to have such an impact on something as big as a national election.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

Doubt it will have much of an effect, high turnout and they don't have the activist numbers to have such an impact on something as big as a national election.

Hmmmm...to use one example, black turnout was massively down in 2016. Can that be proven to be purely down to lack of appetite for voting for Hillary or Trump with no other factor involved?

 

Maybe, maybe not.

 

If the same thing happens again this time, we might know more.

 

Of course, as per my thoughts above if Trump does win (with that playing a critical role or not) I doubt it will be proven when the key power holders would have no desire whatsoever for it to be uncovered.

[Guest MattP]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Hmmmm...to use one example, black turnout was massively down in 2016. Can that be proven to be purely down to lack of appetite for voting for Hillary or Trump with no other factor involved?

 

Maybe, maybe not.

 

If the same thing happens again this time, we might know more.

 

Of course, as per my thoughts above if Trump does win (with that playing a critical role or not) I doubt it will be proven when the key power holders would have no desire whatsoever for it to be uncovered.

The Democrats were in power before that election, how would the Republicans manage to rig logistics for that?

 

Hillary was just a crap candidate, no need to get into Carole Cadwaller type conspiracy theory because your side lost.

 

Trump won because the left lost touch with its core voting base, look at that rather than procedure.

[ealingfox]

32 minutes ago, MattP said:

If you think it's bad over there you should see some of the stories over here, it's how Labour have won so many by-elections.

 

Activists on the ground racking up postal votes and sending them in, one convicted voting fraudster cruising the mosques and areas in certain communities having bizarrely high turnout rates in Peterborough last year.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/vote-riggers-role-casts-doubt-over-labour-win-in-peterborough-bcpmdm8zj

 

Very little you can prove of course, but we all know it's happening.

 

Dodgy electoral practices are many orders of magnitude greater in the US than they are here, we aren't even comparable.

[leicsmac]

5 minutes ago, MattP said:

The Democrats were in power before that election, how would the Republicans manage to rig logistics for that?

 

Hillary was just a crap candidate, no need to get into Carole Cadwaller type conspiracy theory because your side lost.

 

Trump won because the left lost touch with its core voting base, look at that rather than procedure.

Voter suppression where you have local bureaucratic control (like through making accepted ID difficult to obtain for certain demographics) is not difficult to do, and the Repubs have that control in many places. Obviously just a theory, but it's possible.

 

Oh, and if we're talking partisan then dismissing this theory as bunk and/or unimportant while actively entertaining the equally theoretical Muslim voter fraud in the UK seems a bit partisan too.

 

[StanSP]

It's an actual child in charge of USA... 

 

[WigstonWanderer]

2 hours ago, StanSP said:

It's an actual child in charge of USA... 

 

I gave this a , but it’s actually quite frightening that this guy is in charge of the most powerful nation on earth