US Presidential Election 2020

looksee · 08-09-2020 05:46PM

droidus wrote: »

Nope. Him not attending the ceremony was reported on, but the comments he made at the time were not.

I am working from memory, but I only said that he did not attend the ceremony, I did not remark on any comments he may have made. Just failing to attend the ceremony, which all the other leaders managed to attend, was sufficient to show his attitude. The comments are the kind of thing that needs a 'head' of indignation and disgust to bring to light, which it now has.

Itssoeasy · 08-09-2020 05:55PM

looksee wrote: »

The battle of Belleau Woods happened in 1918 so 2018 was the anniversary, at which Trump failed to go to the ceremony for frivolous reasons. It was not 'sat on' it was reported at the time, but with the 'Drama a Day' of Trump's tenure as President it just got lost under the mountain of other stuff. It was recalled as one of the many times Trump disrespected the military.

All the story recently did was put some meat on the bone of what happened in 2018.

droidus · 08-09-2020 05:58PM

Sure, but my point was that somebody held back on the far more incendiary scandal of his derogatory comments about the military and dead soldiers which he made at the time and which were pretty outrageous even by trump standards.

It shows a degree of calculation and restraint by his opponents.

Water John · 08-09-2020 06:06PM

Jeffory Goldberg got his teeth into it. What he would have needed was, not just the original info of what Trump said, but then had to find others to colloborate the story. It required an investigate mind, time and contacts to put it together.

Perhaps a relook at the film Spotlight or All the Presidents Men would show that you cannot go with the story without a second person colloborating the info.

Muahahaha · 08-09-2020 06:39PM

And in Goldbergs case he corroborated the story with four different White House insiders who we now know via Jennifer Griffin are well known to Trump and "unimpeachable". Plus as a check and balance on Goldbergs work we have also had Fox, AP, Reuters and CNN corroborate both the story and his sources.

hirondelle · 08-09-2020 06:40PM

Water John wrote: »

Jeffory Goldberg got his teeth into it. What he would have needed was, not just the original info of what Trump said, but then had to find others to colloborate the story. It required an investigate mind, time and contacts to put it together.

Perhaps a relook at the film Spotlight or All the Presidents Men would show that you cannot go with the story without a second person colloborating the info.

Corroborating even!

Water John · 08-09-2020 06:42PM

In fairness, Jennifer Griffin Fox National Security Corr is to be especially commended on her work. She knew the blowback would come.

Thanks for the spelling correction. Not a very strong point for me.

droidus · 08-09-2020 06:49PM

Tightening polls in Florida against the run of play.

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1303381172056195072

StringerBell · 08-09-2020 09:20PM

You'd expect that, you'd expect him to win Florida in the end like. If he doesn't win Florida he doesn't have a hope of re election.

TomOnBoard · 08-09-2020 09:42PM

droidus wrote: »

Nope. Him not attending the ceremony was reported on, but the comments he made at the time were not.

My recollection is that Macron had made some very salient points in his addresses during that time, as had Trudeau, and Trump was very put out by them. His failure to do the cemetery gig was officially ascribed to adverse weather, but most commentators said it was more about Trump sulking with the TV in the Embassy and not wanting to have a bad hair day...

Itssoeasy · 08-09-2020 11:18PM

StringerBell wrote: »

You'd expect that, you'd expect him to win Florida in the end like. If he doesn't win Florida he doesn't have a hope of re election.

Florida may not matter if Biden carries the states that trump won in 2016 and including Arizona. Biden has more routes to 270 then trump does and the polling isn’t good for trump as it stands.

StringerBell · 08-09-2020 11:25PM

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Florida may not matter if Biden carries the states that trump won in 2016 and including Arizona. Biden has more routes to 270 then trump does and the polling isn’t good for trump as it stands.

Yep, hopefully it won't matter. Without it I don't see a path to victory for trump, their campaign having to spend money in Florida and Texas for example is a good thing though whether the democrats can snatch Florida or not.

For trump Florida is a must, just no path to victory if he doesn't keep it imo. He will have had a very, very bad night if he doesn't hold Florida which will have a knock on effect for other states you would assume.

marno21 · 09-09-2020 12:03AM

The biggest nightmare would be Biden flipping Michigan, Pennsylvania and Nebraska's 2nd congressional district. Such a result would see the election drawn at 269-269.

As if American politics wasn't divided enough.

Such a scenario is looking less likely though, Biden is polling better in Wisconsin than in Pennsylvania now.

droidus · 09-09-2020 12:11AM

StringerBell wrote: »

Yep, hopefully it won't matter. Without it I don't see a path to victory for trump, their campaign having to spend money in Florida and Texas for example is a good thing though whether the democrats can snatch Florida or not.

For trump Florida is a must, just no path to victory if he doesn't keep it imo. He will have had a very, very bad night if he doesn't hold Florida which will have a knock on effect for other states you would assume.

Yeah, its a bellwether, but conversely the amount Biden loses by will indicate how the rest of the election will go, I think the margin is about 0.5 to 1.5, anything more than that and it may be bye biden.

Fr Tod Umptious · 09-09-2020 12:24AM

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Florida may not matter if Biden carries the states that trump won in 2016 and including Arizona. Biden has more routes to 270 then trump does and the polling isn’t good for trump as it stands.

I remember watching the start of BBCs election coverage on the night in 2016.

And they said, andy displayed, something similar, i.e the multiple routes to the EC victory Hillary had and how difficult it was for Trump to get the numbers.

And it made so much sense, there was no way he could win it based on what would need to happen in his favour.

And look what happened.

Water John · 09-09-2020 12:34AM

If I remember right, Clinton's odds of winning was 85% and Trump's was 15% and he beat the odds.

StringerBell · 09-09-2020 12:36AM

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

I remember watching the start of BBCs election coverage on the night in 2016.

And they said, andy displayed, something similar, i.e the multiple routes to the EC victory Hillary had and how difficult it was for Trump to get the numbers.

And it made so much sense, there was no way he could win it based on what would need to happen in his favour.

And look what happened.

He is in a pretty similar position to last time, they didn't say he could not win. He had a 1 in 3 shot, he hit it. He hit it big, the electoral equivalent of hitting an inside straight really but he pulled it off.

The odds of him pulling off the same skin of his teeth victory again this time around is even smaller than last time but it's still there as a possibility, he's the incumbent and he is running in a time when you could slap an R on a cereal box and it would be in with a shot at getting elected.

If he pulls this out of the bag it will be a bigger shock than last time. Biden is in a much healthier position than Clinton and trump is in a worse place than he was 4 years ago. It's still gonna be close, which is the tragedy and hilarity of it all.

Headshot · 09-09-2020 12:51AM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/07/us/politics/trump-election-campaign-fundraising.html

Like every business he owns. Trump ran his campaign fund into the ground already. Hilarious they themselves nicknamed it "the deathstar", now we know what happens to those at end every film.

Behind paywall

mcmoustache · 09-09-2020 01:18AM

Water John wrote: »

If I remember right, Clinton's odds of winning was 85% and Trump's was 15% and he beat the odds.

538 had it at about 65/35 or so.

Events with a 35% probability happen about 35% of the time. It's quite common.

If you've ever seen a number divisible by 3 rolled by a die, it's a bit like that.

Igotadose · 09-09-2020 09:08AM

Headshot wrote: »

Behind paywall

Here's a non-paywalled analysis by Slate, who are virulently anti-Trump.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/09/trump-rnc-parscale-blown-through-nearly-billion-dollars-campaign-cash.html

Interesting link to a company set up to, ahem, pay for consultants like Lara Trump and Kimberly "ex-Mrs. Gavin Newsome" Guilfoyle: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/watchdog-trump-campaign-paid-usd170-million-fec-campaign-finance.html

letowski · 09-09-2020 09:41AM

mcmoustache wrote: »

538 had it at about 65/35 or so.

Events with a 35% probability happen about 35% of the time. It's quite common.

If you've ever seen a number divisible by 3 rolled by a die, it's a bit like that.

I think the reason Biden right now has a 70% chance in their model is mainly due to time. In that a lot can change from now until election day. But if election day was tomorrow, they would give Biden about a 90% chance. The Economist give Biden a much stronger chance as they have different fundamentals.

I think it's becoming very clear that Trump's path to victory will have to come via Florida, North Carolina and Pennsylvania. Florida and North Carolina are toss-ups, but Penn has tightened up somewhat, but still leaning Biden by about +4. I think it's the tipping point state in this election. WI, MI, MN and increasingly AZ look bad for Trump, MN and WI are pretty much gone at this stage. I expect a further dip in the AZ polls for Trump in the aftermath of these allegations of disparaging remarks of the military.

Igotadose · 09-09-2020 09:59AM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Apologies

Try this one instead, the "deathstar" thing is hilarious

https://www.salon.com/2020/09/08/surprise-gop-donors-trump-ran-his-campaign-finances-just-like-his-businesses-into-the-ground/

From behind the paywall, an interesting point: "Nicholas Everhart, a Republican strategist who owns a firm specializing in placing political ads, said the $800 million spent so far shows the “peril of starting a re-election campaign just weeks after winning.”

“A presidential campaign costs a lot of money to run,” Mr. Everhart said. “In essence, the campaign has been spending nonstop for almost four years straight.”"
---

We've been inundated with the #IMPOTUS reelection campaign since his slightly-attended inauguration. Well, it seems like spending like there's no tomorrow for nearly 4 years, isn't such great business. Whoulda thunk?

Quin_Dub · 09-09-2020 10:48AM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Yeh large chunk of the fund apparently was gone on legal fees to defend himself and people in his orbit on their death spiral into his black hole of selfishness.

He's also just had to spend a chunk on money repairing the damage to the WH caused by his Acceptance speech/rally a few weeks ago.

everlast75 · 09-09-2020 10:52AM

Quin_Dub wrote: »

He's also just had to spend a chunk on money repairing the damage to the WH caused by his Acceptance speech/rally a few weeks ago.

Mr. "I may pump $100 million into my own re-election campaign" is pulling resources from the Government to defend himself against a rape allegation too..

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1303474224506511360?s=19

Carfacemandog · 09-09-2020 11:00AM

On top of the myriad of other issues arising from this, the fact that William Barr - who has proven to be willing to break the law and outright lie on behalf of Trump as and when required - feels the need to jump in on this particular case is very damning in terms of the likelihood of Trump's guilt.

duploelabs · 09-09-2020 11:31AM

Carfacemandog wrote: »

On top of the myriad of other issues arising from this, the fact that William Barr - who has proven to be willing to break the law and outright lie on behalf of Trump as and when required - feels the need to jump in on this particular case is very damning in terms of the likelihood of Trump's guilt.

And the compromised nature of Bill Barr

Quin_Dub · 09-09-2020 11:43AM

everlast75 wrote: »

Mr. "I may pump $100 million into my own re-election campaign" is pulling resources from the Government to defend himself against a rape allegation too..

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1303474224506511360?s=19

Yet another delaying tactic, with Barr weaponising the DOJ for Trumps benefit.

This will almost certainly be rejected and sent back to the State level court , but the review by the Federal Judge is September 30th so he won't get deposed before the election.

Their argument is that

"President Trump was acting within the scope of his office as President of the United States at the time of the incidents out of which the Plaintiff's defamation claim arose. Indeed, when providing the challenged statements, the President was speaking to or responding to inquiries from the press, much as the elected officials in the cases cited above were speaking to the press or making other public statements at the time of their challenged actions,"

So - because he was asked a question at a Press Conference about the rape allegation , that means it's covered by "Presidential work"

Utter rubbish.

If it had stayed where it was , he would have been subpoenaed before the Election.

It's so transparent.

Brussels Sprout · 09-09-2020 01:29PM

Excellent poll for Biden today from Pennsylvania. Up 9 points with likely voters. Pollster is A+ rated with 538 too.

With Trump pulling ads from Arizona recently it's very difficult for him to win without Pennsylvania. If he wins it Biden could lose Florida, Wisconsin and North Carolina and still win the election.

link

droidus · 09-09-2020 02:20PM

It's a good poll for Biden, but I was speaking to a Pennsylvanian yesterday, resident here. When she tried to get an absentee ballot she got a 'cannot process for security reasons' from the website...

Igotadose · 09-09-2020 04:39PM

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Yeh large chunk of the fund apparently was gone on legal fees to defend himself and people in his orbit on their death spiral into his black hole of selfishness.

Like one of the founders of the Lincoln project titled a book: "Everything Trump Touches, dies." His Campaign funding. The generals and senior staff he appointed who are part of the "Military Industrial Complex." And on, and on.

US Presidential Election 2020

Comments