2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

ohnonotgmail

Carfacemandog wrote: »

What happened to "Bernie was winning until the last few"?

I preferred Bernie, but the Democrats preferred Biden. No two ways about it.

Biden was the better choice. Saunders turns off moderates on both sides.

Leroy42

doggerland wrote: »

That's the key part, and for the US public I believe yes it is. And it sounds just dreadful. They really couldn't have come up with a worse slogan to alienate non-activists.

But you are, IMO, assigning far too much weight to the effect people like AOC have. Clearly she is having a major effect on the GOP, she has them running scared it seems, but she is just one Rep, from a liberal state.

Just like the likes of Evangelical reps don't represent the entire GOP. People voted for Trump despite knowing how he felt about women, his lack of experience, his racism.

AOC does not represent the DNC, in fact she ran against a sitting DNC to get her seat. What she appears to represent is a growing call for a change in the current situation, which of course Trump latched onto in 2016 but has failed to deliver on.

Of course, Trump and the GOP will rise AOC up, just like they did with Sanders, to try to scare people that communism or socialism (they seem to get the two confused) is on the way.

My point being that anyone that calls the calling for defunding the police as a reason to not vote for Biden needs to accept how hypocritical they are being given that Trump regularly threatens to defund lots of areas unless they get into line.

KiKi III

doggerland wrote: »

That's old news too tbh. Watch the latest AllGasNoBrakes, talk to American friends. People don't care as much as I thought they would.

It’s very much current news.

Some Americans might not care until it reaches their communities, but that’s 150,000 families, churches, schools, community centers that have lost someone and rising.

doggerland

Leroy42 wrote: »

But you are, IMO, assigning far too much weight to the effect people like AOC have. Clearly she is having a major effect on the GOP, she has them running scared it seems, but she is just one Rep, from a liberal state.

I really think you're under selling her. She has great talent, flair for speaking and for lack of a better word PR. Her star is rising and I forsee big things for her.

My point being that anyone that calls the calling for defunding the police as a reason to not vote for Biden needs to accept how hypocritical they are being given that Trump regularly threatens to defund lots of areas unless they get into line.

Welcome to politics! Yes, people are hypocritical. Education funding etc is boring and doesn't resonate with large swathes of the population. But people calling for defunding the police, with tv news full of riots and burning buildings... in an election year... well that's new and something people haven't seen before. Of course it's gonna carry more weight. Just like if a nominee came out of nowhere and talked about building a big wall... It's an idea/talking point that people focus on because of its outlandishness and boldness.

Carfacemandog

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Biden was the better choice. Saunders turns off moderates on both sides.

Yes, but the person I am talking to is apparently convinced that Sanders' contingent is far more popular and holds the power in the Democrat party, and that he was leading in the race right up until what would have been just last month ("the final few primaries" when there have been 18 since June started), despite Biden taking the lead after the fourth one in South Carolina. They are also now convinced that 'a few states' get to decide for everyone, despite Sanders winning the largest state by a distance in California and despite Biden having won 21-of-31 primaries at the time Sanders suspended his campaign.

To be honest, I'm just interested to see what plot twist they dig their way into next.

ohnonotgmail

Leroy42 wrote: »

But you are, IMO, assigning far too much weight to the effect people like AOC have. Clearly she is having a major effect on the GOP, she has them running scared it seems, but she is just one Rep, from a liberal state.

Just like the likes of Evangelical reps don't represent the entire GOP. People voted for Trump despite knowing how he felt about women, his lack of experience, his racism.

AOC does not represent the DNC, in fact she ran against a sitting DNC to get her seat. What she appears to represent is a growing call for a change in the current situation, which of course Trump latched onto in 2016 but has failed to deliver on.

Of course, Trump and the GOP will rise AOC up, just like they did with Sanders, to try to scare people that communism or socialism (they seem to get the two confused) is on the way.

My point being that anyone that calls the calling for defunding the police as a reason to not vote for Biden needs to accept how hypocritical they are being given that Trump regularly threatens to defund lots of areas unless they get into line.

not so much hypocrisy as hoping that repeating a lie often enough will convince some idiots to believe it. very much from the trump playbook.

doggerland

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not so much hypocrisy as hoping that repeating a lie often enough will convince some idiots to believe it. very much from the trump playbook.

It is fascinating how many here have replied (and sent me some not kind, possibly illegal PMs) accusing me of being a Trump agent and engaging in dirty tricks.

Lads, it's a minor Irish website and my descenting opinion has been to come in and say I think Trump will win in November. Some people live up their own ar5s, I'm out (and yes you can now celebrate, you've "won"). Bloody hell!

Overheal

doggerland wrote: »

Pretty much the reason I see Trump winning. When you have senior politicians talking about getting rid of the police, while cities are burning... Well it tends to become a voting factor!

Ah to be completely fair the politician you quoted is AOC, she is NOT a senior politician. She’s quite in fact the Baby of the House

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_of_the_House

Overheal

ELM327 wrote: »

You haven't posted a link to A PROMINENT DEM that has stated not to defund.

Joe Biden, on numerous occasions. Several from the past week.

Overheal

doggerland wrote: »

It is fascinating how many here have replied (and sent me some not kind, possibly illegal PMs) accusing me of being a Trump agent and engaging in dirty tricks.

That’s got to be the silliest overreaction to a PM I have ever heard of. However: If you are offended by any PM you received report it to an admin with the appropriate button from the PM screen. Personal abuse is not tolerated by PM.

Igotadose

Overheal wrote: »

Ah to be completely fair the politician you quoted is AOC, she is NOT a senior politician. She’s quite in fact the Baby of the House

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_of_the_House

And, if any of the *eight* QAnon supporters nominated for GOP seats wins a seat (at least two have a chance),does that mean all GOP supporters, support QAnon?

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/505745-qanon-scores-wins-creating-gop-problem

Igotadose

Usually, countries close their consulates prior to war. Well done, #IMPOTUS. China now ordering US consulates to close.

https://thehill.com/policy/international/508844-china-orders-us-to-close-chengdu-consulate-in-retaliatory-move

(This stuff's way more important than arguments over the US Police Departments)

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Ah to be completely fair the politician you quoted is AOC, she is NOT a senior politician. She’s quite in fact the Baby of the House

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_of_the_House

And while I would say she will rise in politics, she's probably a decade off having proper pull in the party. Like if he could point to a plan for government that involves defunding the police or Schumer/Pelosi favouring it that would be notable.

Also doggerland, in relation to polling. The lead Biden has in swing states is substantially different to 2016.

mcmoustache

doggerland wrote: »

It is fascinating how many here have replied (and sent me some not kind, possibly illegal PMs) accusing me of being a Trump agent and engaging in dirty tricks.

Is that a thing that actually happens here? I've been here for years and have only received PMs from mods when I've been naughty and some kid who didn't like my tone 10 years ago.

Carfacemandog

mcmoustache wrote: »

Is that a thing that actually happens here? I've been here for years and have only received PMs from mods when I've been naughty and some kid who didn't like my tone 10 years ago.

Me neither. It's a... strange thing to have happened within four hours of setting up their account, and stranger still their need to announce it in such a manner without stating whom the messages were from.

briany

Any chance you've changed your mind about Trump's certainty to win there, OP?

ohnonotgmail

briany wrote: »

Any chance you've changed your mind about Trump's certainty to win there, OP?

they cant reply to you. they were threadbanned a while ago.

Igotadose

Hey, a little backstreet modding. Maybe the follow-on thread (as this one is nearing 10k posts) can be created without the 'coronation' sh1te in the title? Just '2020 Presidential Election?'

Just a suggestion of course.

timsey tiger

doggerland wrote: »

Come November, it's gonna be one of two outcomes. You're calling me deranged for having a gut feeling about one of them coming to frutition. Honestly, look at yourself in the mirror!

No deranged for being confident that he will win, given the current situation.

Overheal

briany wrote: »

Any chance you've changed your mind about Trump's certainty to win there, OP?

I reckon when we go to Megathread #2 this weekend we should have "the Trump Coronation" dropped from the title

edit: igotadose beat me there.

Muahahaha

I actually think the opposite the 'aka: The Trump Coronation' ages remarkably well and gives me a laugh every time the thread pops up on my feed. I'd love to see it still in the title on November 4th

Overheal

Muahahaha wrote: »

I actually think the opposite the 'aka: The Trump Coronation' ages remarkably well and gives me a laugh every time the thread pops up on my feed. I'd love to see it still in the title on November 4th

I think the "Joe Goes to Washington 2: Biden Boogaloo" would be a fit title

Overheal

In nearly every swing state at this point, Biden’s outperforming Obama and Clinton

(On the charts below, lower is better for Biden, above the axis is Republican-leaning, below the axis is Democrat-leaning)



https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/07/24/nearly-every-swing-state-this-point-bidens-outperforming-obama-clinton/?hpid=hp_politics1-8-12_bump-swingstate-1220pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

Insufficient polling data in Minnesota to generate the average there.

Kidchameleon

Overheal wrote: »

In nearly every swing state at this point, Biden’s outperforming Obama and Clinton

Don't really want to get into a discussion with you about this but I will say one thing... the polls were wrong for the last election, very wrong. One of the reasons for that is observable even here in Ireland - if you show support for Trump, you will suffer abuse. How honest do you think the people taking those polls are being in America if the backlash is so bad even here? I firmly believe some of the anti Trump hysteria backfired in 2016 and it will probably backfire worse this year.

ohnonotgmail

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Don't really want to get into a discussion with you about this but I will say one thing... the polls were wrong for the last election, very wrong. One of the reasons for that is observable even here in Ireland - if you show support for Trump, you will suffer abuse. How honest do you think the people taking those polls are being in America if the backlash is so bad even here? I firmly believe some of the anti Trump hysteria backfired in 2016 and it will probably backfire worse this year.

the results of the last election were within the margin of error of the polls. this time the difference exceeds the margin of error and in some states it far exceeds the margin of error

Podge_irl

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Don't really want to get into a discussion with you about this but I will say one thing... the polls were wrong for the last election, very wrong. One of the reasons for that is observable even here in Ireland - if you show support for Trump, you will suffer abuse. How honest do you think the people taking those polls are being in America if the backlash is so bad even here? I firmly believe some of the anti Trump hysteria backfired in 2016 and it will probably backfire worse this year.

No they weren't. This has got to be the misconception/lie that perpetuates the most through here.

The national vote polls were correct - Clinton did indeed win the national vote.
The state polls suggested Clinton but none of the swing states were outside the margin of error.
The aggregator 538 gave Trump a ~30% change of winning. That is underdog territory, but not exactly spectacular.

Kidchameleon

Podge_irl wrote: »

No they weren't. This has got to be the misconception/lie that perpetuates the most through here.

The national vote polls were correct - Clinton did indeed win the national vote.
The state polls suggested Clinton but none of the swing states were outside the margin of error.
The aggregator 538 gave Trump a ~30% change of winning. That is underdog territory, but not exactly spectacular.

In my case it was a misconception. Yes indeed she did get the popular vote so I guess it makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up.


Probably one of the most epic moments of 2016 was this and it was all thanks to those polls:

Overheal

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Don't really want to get into a discussion with you about this but I will say one thing... the polls were wrong for the last election, very wrong.

You can see the "Actual result" on the polls I posted as well. In these swing states the poll error against the result is really no farther off than any other election (eg. look up at the chart on Nevada for 2008's result vs the polling which showed Obama won wildly more of the vote than polls expected him to).

Actual probabilistic modeling, like FiveThirtyEight did, in fact showed even on election night that Trump had roughly a 30% chance of being declared the winner. That's how probabilities work. Your chance of being struck by lightning being less by far than 1% doesn't mean it will never happen. This is high school level math.

Podge_irl

It has been rare for a president to win the electoral college without winning the popular vote and I think its unprecedented for someone to so resoundingly win the popular vote without winning the presidency. It was an understandable, if misguided, viewing of the polls - most of which are national. Blame the American electoral system.

Overheal

Here, I pulled up the archived 2016 megathread:

In October, FiveThirtyEight had:

BlackSwan wrote: »

FiveThirtyEight's "polls only" model forecast made 30 minutes ago shows Clinton with 86.7% to win, and Trump 13.3% for 8 November 2016. Their "polls plus" model forecast shows Clinton 84.1% and Trump 15.9%. And lastly, their "now cast" model (if election held today) shows Clinton 86.9% and Trump 13.1%. So it will be interesting to see how close FiveThirtyEight's forecasts have been on 9 November 2016, or if all 3 of their models were spurious.

1 week before the vote:

BlackSwan wrote: »

The presidential race has been tightening up with only 1-week to go, which has been typical with recent past presidential election years at this time in the cycle. FiveThirtyEight has tightened up too, with their polls-only forecast at Clinton 71.2% and Trump 28.8%.

On the day of, of course, the information was much more erratic:

Overheal wrote: »

From just a few hours ago, Hillary has jumped to 88.2/85% and Trump is at 11.8/15% (Polls/Polls+Historical)