Who thinks Trump will win?

astrofool

Ah right, just the Trafalgar group, looking at those numbers it looks like Biden is getting closer to Trump based on their previous polling

hotmail.com

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I knock Biden a lot but had I know he would do the following, I would have been on his side all along.


https://twitter.com/EddieZipperer/status/1322218253247303681

I shudder to think of what wars this guy will create to establish a legacy for himself.


He looks like that type.

Silentcorner

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Cahaly called the 2016 result. What's your problem with them?

They think that the polls you are looking at are biased but the one's they are looking at aren't....it's almost childlike.

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

I shudder to think of what wars this guy will create to establish a legacy for himself.


He looks like that type.

At least he won't be begging for attention or complaining that the media is talking about crops being destroyed in a state heavily dependent on agriculture instead of talking about him being nominated for an award (which he didn't win), or paying for illegal IP addresses to vote him as one of the worlds most influential businessmen.

hotmail.com

Tell me how wrote: »

At least he won't be begging for attention or complaining that the media is talking about crops being destroyed in a state heavily dependent on agriculture instead of talking about him being nominated for an award (which he didn't win), or paying for illegal IP addresses to vote him as one of the worlds most influential businessmen.

How does this post relate in any way to what I said ?

Pa ElGrande

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WibM5490ivU

Looks like the African American votes is staying home in Miami Dade, Florida. This county won by Clinton in 2016.

AllForIt

astrofool wrote: »

The polling hasn't changed much, or has slightly widened in favour of Biden the past few days, please link to where you see different.

I said I 'heard' as in on the radio (LBC). If the report is correct and LBC is a reputable news source, 'a slight lead in swing states' is a rather different picture to what it was a month ago isn't it. I'd say the same pattern as 4 years ago.

hotmail.com

hotmail.com wrote: »

How does this post relate in any way to what I said ?

In fairness, I'm not sure if there's much to discuss in your post. Some vague claim that "he looks the type" when from a realistic perspective that he's a big improvement on Trump.

hotmail.com

[Deleted User] wrote: »

In fairness, I'm not sure if there's much to discuss in your post. Some vague claim that "he looks the type" when from a realistic perspective that he's a big improvement on Trump.

US presidents have form for starting wars.

Danzy

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WibM5490ivU

Looks like the African American votes is staying home in Miami Dade, Florida. This county won by Clinton in 2016.

In ballots so far, the Black vote is down just over 1% nationwide.

At same for Florida as a State, with 2016. No great achievement in that.

osarusan

With less than a week to go, I think it will be close, as always really. Take a look at the last 3 elections.

Clinton votes in 2016: 65,853,514 Trump: 62,984,828
Obama votes in 2012: 65,915,795 Romney: 60,933,504
Obama votes in 2008: 69,498,516 McCain: 59,948,323

I think the 'Clinton was unpopular' line is overplayed - she got the same as Obama second time around. I'm not sure Biden will get any more than Clinton did, or Obama in 2012.

Trump energised a certain cohort to vote for him first time around, and obviously a chunk of them will again - I'd guess a large chunk.


The question for me is where do extra votes come from, or where are they lost?
I expect Biden to get very few extra votes, or lose any.

With Trump, I also expect him to get very few extra votes, as I can't imagine he has done much to win over people who didn't vote for him 4 years ago. Maybe 9 months ago with the economy in good shape, but I don't think that counts for much now.

Will he lose votes - there is going to be a certain kind of voter who gave him a chance 4 years ago, and won't do so again. But how big is that particular group of voters? Things have become so polarised I don't know how big that will be.


And in a way, all that really matters is how the above applies to the voters in a small number of swing states, and it's only possible to be sure which states they were until after the fact.

ohnonotgmail

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

All very well, except, Lincoln was dealing with chaos and yet got re-elected for a second term.

Trump has had more americans die of covid yesterday than died at the first battle of bull run. I dont recall lincoln saying that the civil war was a hoax.

francois

AllForIt wrote: »

I'm hearing.. .

I'm hearing Trump is going to lose bigly

francois

Danzy wrote: »

In ballots so far, the Black vote is down just over 1% nationwide.

At same for Florida as a State, with 2016. No great achievement in that.

"so far"

Tell me how

hotmail.com wrote: »

How does this post relate in any way to what I said ?

The implication in this is that Biden is concerned with notoriety for himself.

hotmail.com wrote: »

I shudder to think of what wars this guy will create to establish a legacy for himself.


He looks like that type.

The examples I gave are that Trump is demonstrably more concerned with such a motivation.

Outlaw Pete

vojiwox wrote: »

All that damning evidence... Its like it never existed.

Oh it still exists, just that mainstream liberal media are refusing to amplify the story the way they would if Donald had said he never spoke with Don Jnr about his overseas business dealings and then one of Don Jnr's ex business partners had come forward and, at risk of perjury, went on record with the FBI about how Donald was lying and he not only spoke with his son about his overseas business dealings, but went to hotel meetings about them in fact.

Couple that with the emails from Don Jnr's laptop let's say, suggesting that Donald took a slice off the top and that there was business relationships with someone like Patrick Ho, and for sure the mainstream liberal media would have been all over this, with the usual leftist talking heads calling it a bombshell of historical proportions.

This is election interference from big tech and mainstream media and no matter the election result, which side someone chooses now, with regards to these unethical actions, says everything about who people are what they are willing to allow happen just so their side can get/keep power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8pkCZBjgrk

So Pete, basically you're annoyed at publications enforcing editorial standards with stories that amount to conspiracy theories?

Tell me how

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh it still exists, just that mainstream liberal media are refusing to amplify the story the way they would if Donald had said he never spoke with Don Jnr about his overseas business dealings and then one of Don Jnr's ex business partners had come forward and, at risk of perjury, went on record with the FBI about how Donald was lying and he not only spoke with his son about his overseas business dealings, but went to hotel meetings about them in fact.

Couple that with the emails from Don Jnr's laptop let's say, suggesting that Donald took a slice off the top and that there was business relationships with someone like Patrick Ho, and for sure the mainstream liberal media would have been all over this, with the usual leftist talking heads calling it a bombshell of historical proportions.

This is election interference from big tech and mainstream media and no matter the election result, which side someone chooses now, with regards to these unethical actions, says everything about who people are what they are willing to allow happen just so their side can get/keep power.

The mainstream conservative media tried to drive this narrative and made a pigs ear of it leading to Carlson's embarrassing monologue the other night.

Facebook was a conduit for micro-targeting ad campaigns in both the 2016 US Presidential elections and the Brexit Referendum, two contests which were won with extremely small margins of victory.

Trump uses Twitter as his conduit to communicate with most of his fan-base.

Crying foul because governance/society has shown that there is a desire to prevent the use of manipulated media and strategies on these platforms says everything about who people are and what they are willing to allow happen just so their side can get/keep power.

briany

osarusan wrote: »

With less than a week to go, I think it will be close, as always really. Take a look at the last 3 elections.

Clinton votes in 2016: 65,853,514 Trump: 62,984,828
Obama votes in 2012: 65,915,795 Romney: 60,933,504
Obama votes in 2008: 69,498,516 McCain: 59,948,323

I think the 'Clinton was unpopular' line is overplayed - she got the same as Obama second time around. I'm not sure Biden will get any more than Clinton did, or Obama in 2012.

Trump energised a certain cohort to vote for him first time around, and obviously a chunk of them will again - I'd guess a large chunk.


The question for me is where do extra votes come from, or where are they lost?
I expect Biden to get very few extra votes, or lose any.

With Trump, I also expect him to get extra votes, as I can't imagine he has done much to win over people who didn't vote for him 4 years ago. Maybe 9 months ago with the economy in good shape, but I don't think that counts for much now.

Will he lose votes - there is going to be a certain kind of voter who gave him a chance 4 years ago, and won't do so again. But how big is that particular group of voters? Things have become so polarised I don't know how big that will be.


And in a way, all that really matters is how the above applies to the voters in a small number of swing states, and it's only possible to be sure which states they were until after the fact.

Hard to see where Trump realistically picks up extra votes from. He seems to have pinned a lot of hope on getting votes from being the law & order president and promising the world when it comes to defeating the Covid pandemic.

Regarding the first part of that, although a lot of middle class voters would be rightly dismayed by the damage caused by a minority of looters, that stuff probably isn't happening in their town, so it may not have the visceral impact on voting intentions that Trump wants. The Coronavirus, on the other hand, is all over the country. Are same middle class Americans particularly impressed by Trump's handling of this crisis? Consider this - Trump was winning a lot more polls in Pennsylvania back in March than he is now, so that would lead me to suspect the largest and most continuous issue since that time, i.e. Coronavirus, has impacted him and not in a positive sense.

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

So Pete, basically you're annoyed at publications enforcing editorial standards with stories that amount to conspiracy theories?

No idea how you could arrive at that conclusion. Maybe reread my post and watch the interview above. Again, if you've watched it already.

briany

Deleted User wrote: »

So Pete, basically you're annoyed at publications enforcing editorial standards with stories that amount to conspiracy theories?

"Don't listen to the fake news media!"

"Alright, where should I be getting my news from?"

"Facebook"

"What are Facebook's journalistic credentials?"

"They tell you what the fake news media doesn't want you to hear!"

"No, I think you misheard me. I asked what are their journalistic credentials?"

"They're not fake news!"

"How do you know that?"

"..."

gmisk

What a shock yet more scumbag comments from Trump this time about Doctors
https://twitter.com/timjhogan/status/1322246965808291840?s=19

Pa ElGrande

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

. . .This is election interference from big tech and mainstream media and no matter the election result, which side someone chooses now, with regards to these unethical actions, says everything about who people are what they are willing to allow happen just so their side can get/keep power.

Matt Taibbi pointed out the suppression of the Biden story is an even bigger story than the scandal itself.

Glenn Greenwald resigned in a very public manner gave his reasons, there is no way that the mainstream media in the USA can continue to suppress the story without severe reputational damage.

The damage control they have run for Joe Biden just blew up in their face.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya!

osarusan wrote: »

With Trump, I also expect him to get extra votes, as I can't imagine he has done much to win over people who didn't vote for him 4 years ago. Maybe 9 months ago with the economy in good shape, but I don't think that counts for much now.

You'd be wrong on that one... very wrong.

People will be voting on who they think is the best person to bring that economic prosperity back. That person is clearly Trump...

It's certainly not Bumbling Biden, who is going to tax the fcuk out of everyone and tear down the highly lucrative energy industry piece by piece if he gets in.

And the China plague was not Trump's fault... so people know that the economic situation was largely out of his hands. Just like everyone else that was hit with this virus. And the early growth numbers for the economy look really good, even with certain states not fully playing ball.

So, with all of that and the huge amount of positive rhetoric that he is sending out to the people about the future... it's a no brainer. Trump2020!!

Smee_Again

osarusan wrote: »

With less than a week to go, I think it will be close, as always really. Take a look at the last 3 elections.

Clinton votes in 2016: 65,853,514 Trump: 62,984,828
Obama votes in 2012: 65,915,795 Romney: 60,933,504
Obama votes in 2008: 69,498,516 McCain: 59,948,323

I think the 'Clinton was unpopular' line is overplayed - she got the same as Obama second time around. I'm not sure Biden will get any more than Clinton did, or Obama in 2012.

Trump energised a certain cohort to vote for him first time around, and obviously a chunk of them will again - I'd guess a large chunk.


The question for me is where do extra votes come from, or where are they lost?
I expect Biden to get very few extra votes, or lose any.

With Trump, I also expect him to get extra votes, as I can't imagine he has done much to win over people who didn't vote for him 4 years ago. Maybe 9 months ago with the economy in good shape, but I don't think that counts for much now.

Will he lose votes - there is going to be a certain kind of voter who gave him a chance 4 years ago, and won't do so again. But how big is that particular group of voters? Things have become so polarised I don't know how big that will be.


And in a way, all that really matters is how the above applies to the voters in a small number of swing states, and it's only possible to be sure which states they were until after the fact.

There could be an extra 10-25m votes this time. In terms of the popular vote it could be an annihilation for Trump, assuming extra votes break for Biden.

vojiwox

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh it still exists, just that mainstream liberal media ...

C'mon man! :P

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8pkCZBjgrk

Ah Greenwald!

The Intercept disputed Greenwald's accusations, writing that Greenwald "believes that anyone who disagrees with him is corrupt, and anyone who presumes to edit his words is a censor" and telling The Washington Post, "it is absolutely not true that Glenn Greenwald was asked to remove all sections critical of Joe Biden from his article. He was asked to support his claims and innuendo about corrupt actions by Joe Biden with evidence."

"He was asked to support his claims and innuendo about corrupt actions by Joe Biden with evidence" - I like this bit. More of this please.

Fair play to Greenwald anyway, he posted the text of his emails!! :pac:

It doesn't help his case IMO

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/emails-with-intercept-editors-showing

astrofool

Pa ElGrande wrote: »

Matt Taibbi pointed out the suppression of the Biden story is an even bigger story than the scandal itself.

Well of course they would. They said they had the evidence, yet they have released nothing, it's an embarrassment of an attempt at a story, and it's an embarrassment at the faux outrage of a "cover up". It's completely pathetic, and anyone still trying to big it up after tuckers on air meltdown is a completely pathetic loser.

Cheerful Spring2

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh it still exists, just that mainstream liberal media are refusing to amplify the story the way they would if Donald had said he never spoke with Don Jnr about his overseas business dealings and then one of Don Jnr's ex business partners had come forward and, at risk of perjury, went on record with the FBI about how Donald was lying and he not only spoke with his son about his overseas business dealings, but went to hotel meetings about them in fact.

Couple that with the emails from Don Jnr's laptop let's say, suggesting that Donald took a slice off the top and that there was business relationships with someone like Patrick Ho, and for sure the mainstream liberal media would have been all over this, with the usual leftist talking heads calling it a bombshell of historical proportions.

This is election interference from big tech and mainstream media and no matter the election result, which side someone chooses now, with regards to these unethical actions, says everything about who people are what they are willing to allow happen just so their side can get/keep power.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8pkCZBjgrk

Truth bombs from Greenwald. Many who watch this will never understand it!

vojiwox

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Truth bombs from Greenwald. Many who watch this will never understand it!

Think you might be underestimating people along with some projection!

Silentcorner

Isn't Miami supposed to be a Democrat city?

You'd wonder will the massive, unprecedented army of 2.5 million Trump volunteers that have been hard at work for months now, canvassing, knocking on over 12,000,000 doors in vital swing states, collecting data, registering first time voters (who don't get polled), analyzing the voting tendencies of attendees at rallies will pay off!!!

I don't believe their figures but if they are half right about the amount of attendees that identify as Democrats attending the rallies this will be an interesting few days!!!!