Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

US Presidential Election 2020

Options
1…8384868889…306

Comments

  • Options
    #2552
    SharpshooterTom
    Registered Users Posts: 3,017 ✭✭✭SharpshooterTom


    RobertKK wrote: »
    This is Trump's election to lose, the Democrats need a financial crash at this stage to win it.

    Sanders will have the problem Corbyn had and will be seen/portrayed as a communist.

    Which is what they might be getting.

    Have you not seen the stock market recently? Coronavirus is the democrats big opening.


  • Options
    #2553
    briany
    Registered Users Posts: 13,559 ✭✭✭✭briany


    RobertKK wrote: »
    This is Trump's election to lose, the Democrats need a financial crash at this stage to win it.

    Sanders will have the problem Corbyn had and will be seen/portrayed as a communist.

    The big problem with the economic recovery is that fewer people have felt it. If a sign of the economic recovery in a midwestern American city has been that an Amazon fulfillment centre has opened up there, it must surely be the modern equivalent of the mines that Merle Travis sang about in 16 Tons, except it would now be called 16 Miles, which is the amount of walking pickers routinely have to do in a day. The reality is that many people are working more for little money, and their hours are less certain, and they have almost no job security.

    To label the questioning of this as Communist is a trite deflection of the real question which is, "Is it fair?".


  • Options
    #2554
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,082 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    everlast75 wrote: »
    I still have to periodically stop and take in the fact the Trump defenders on here are okay saying they would vote for him, despite the fact that he is an absolute (there can be no equivocation at this stage) racist.

    Our species has learned **** all.

    "It's the economy stupid"


  • Options
    #2555
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,070 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    "It's the economy stupid"

    thanks for proving my point


  • Options
    #2556
    FatherTed
    Registered Users Posts: 2,684 ✭✭✭FatherTed


    RobertKK wrote: »
    This is Trump's election to lose, the Democrats need a financial crash at this stage to win it.

    Sanders will have the problem Corbyn had and will be seen/portrayed as a communist.

    I am amazed at people in the US especially the pundits on TV how they have zero grasp in what Sanders is proposing which is essentially national healthcare that is available in most countries. It's not a radical idea. Also, they conflate socialism to communism. So clueless.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2557
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    briany wrote: »
    The big problem with the economic recovery is that fewer people have felt it. If a sign of the economic recovery in a midwestern American city has been that an Amazon fulfillment centre has opened up there, it must surely be the modern equivalent of the mines that Merle Travis sang about in 16 Tons, except it would now be called 16 Miles, which is the amount of walking pickers routinely have to do in a day. The reality is that many people are working more for little money, and their hours are less certain, and they have almost no job security.

    To label the questioning of this as Communist is a trite deflection of the real question which is, "Is it fair?".

    In Ireland Fine Gael tried in both 2016 and 2020 to run with the narrative of economic recovery and were met with a very hostile response from working class people, with many voting Sinn Fein in 2020.

    Yet in the US it seems most of the white working class, at least outside the major cities, are in thrall to Trump despite this so called economic recovery being overwhelmingly felt by the rich, and not by them.

    It's bizarre, the US white working class have bought into a narrative you'd expect to hear from the upper classes in Ireland.

    People didn't vote for Trump in the first place because of the economy. They voted based on the cancerous ideology of white identity.


  • Options
    #2558
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,033 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    FatherTed wrote: »
    I am amazed at people in the US especially the pundits on TV how they have zero grasp in what Sanders is proposing which is essentially national healthcare that is available in most countries. It's not a radical idea. Also, they conflate socialism to communism. So clueless.

    I think that is a quite lazy and ignorant view of the situation.

    Most understand and would welcome the concept of it if they could click their fingers and have it tomorrow with the 'savings' now being claimed by Bernie. What most are wary of is the potential for it to be incredibly expensive and the risks of ending up far worse off than they are with their current plans.

    What Bernie is promising is moving a country from basically no public healthcare for those of working age to something beyond what even Slaintecare is aiming for, in a country of 65 times the population and one that has to deal with states having their own rules and systems.

    Having concerns about such a dramatic shift isn't a sign that they are clueless, if anything it is the opposite. It is made worse by the fact the person that is promising it has repeatedly struggled with how he is going to bring it about.


  • Options
    #2559
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,033 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    sid waddell wrote: »
    In Ireland Fine Gael tried in both 2016 and 2020 to run with the narrative of economic recovery and were met with a very hostile response from working class people, with many voting Sinn Fein in 2020.

    Yet in the US it seems most of the white working class, at least outside the major cities, are in thrall to Trump despite this so called economic recovery being overwhelmingly felt by the rich, and not by them.

    It's bizarre, the US white working class have bought into a narrative you'd expect to hear from the upper classes in Ireland.

    People didn't vote for Trump in the first place because of the economy. They voted based on the cancerous ideology of white identity.

    You're right, economic growth not being felt was used as an excuse by pundits for working class people voting for Trump over Hillary but nearly every Trump number of the last few years has been worse than the last 3 years of the Obama presidency but he still leads polls with them.

    US politics is incredible by the fact that so many people vote against their own personal fiscal interests, whether it is wealthy democrats voting for higher taxes or working class republicans voting for a reduction in monetary supports for themselves. The social and identity elements are so important to many people.


  • Options
    #2560
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,070 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Latest polls... from Fox

    https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1233418514935042048?s=19


  • Options
    #2561
    Foxtrol
    Registered Users Posts: 11,033 ✭✭✭✭Foxtrol


    everlast75 wrote: »
    Latest polls... from Fox

    https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1233418514935042048?s=19

    There is basically no point in looking at anything other than state by state polls and focusing on swing states.

    There is no prize for the popular vote.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2562
    Joe_ Public
    Registered Users Posts: 13,023 ✭✭✭✭Joe_ Public


    Is it very likely any candidate would win the electoral college with 43% of the popular vote? Anything is possible - including the polls being inaccurate - but that would be fairly astonishing imo.


  • Options
    #2563
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,070 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Foxtrol wrote: »
    There is basically no point in looking at anything other than state by state polls

    Tell Trump that. He's having another meltdown

    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1233412547958755329?s=19


  • Options
    #2564
    eagle eye
    Registered Users Posts: 37,652 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    FatherTed wrote:
    I am amazed at people in the US especially the pundits on TV how they have zero grasp in what Sanders is proposing which is essentially national healthcare that is available in most countries. It's not a radical idea. Also, they conflate socialism to communism. So clueless.
    It's not that they don't understood it, it's that they don't want it. These people would all earn a good living and are happy with how things are.


  • Options
    #2565
    vetinari
    Registered Users Posts: 1,025 ✭✭✭vetinari


    Yeah, some of the questions Sanders gets are intentionally moronic.
    I prefer Warren but cringe every time I hear
    "Senator Sanders isn't it true your healthcare plan will raise taxes"
    They intentionally have no interest in the idea of overall costs for people going down.
    They just want a soundbite where Sanders says taxes are going up.


  • Options
    #2566
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,082 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    everlast75 wrote: »
    thanks for proving my point

    Voters will overlook certain issues as long as their financial security is maintained.

    You may find that baffling but it's a universal truth.


  • Options
    #2567
    Joe_ Public
    Registered Users Posts: 13,023 ✭✭✭✭Joe_ Public


    CNN doesnt even bother to make it subtle anymore. They're symptomatic of dems who pretend to be concerned that sanders wont be able to beat trump though their greater fear is that he will.

    https://twitter.com/MuseWendi/status/1233754436729700352?s=20


  • Options
    #2568
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    Voters will overlook certain issues as long as their financial security is maintained.

    You may find that baffling but it's a universal truth.
    Is that the financial security where 40% of Americans can't meet a surprise $400 bill?

    I suppose that's a form of financial security, where you're secure in the knowledge that your finances are screwed should things not go quite to plan.


  • Options
    #2569
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Seems 538 shows Biden heavy favourite to win SC, so presumably the next thing will be the mainstream media pivots to suddenly proclaim a backlash of centrism against Sanders' uprising. Biden was always in contention in Carolina, but given how obviously skewed reporting bad been, I won't be surprised if the narrative swings behind Biden


  • Options
    #2570
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Joe_ Public wrote: »
    Is it very likely any candidate would win the electoral college with 43% of the popular vote? Anything is possible - including the polls being inaccurate - but that would be fairly astonishing imo.
    The election is about turnout. The Democrats need to aim for 70 million votes. Obama got 69 million in 2008.

    I don't see Trump getting more than 65 million votes. 70 million votes will push whoever the Democratic candidate is over the top.

    Who is the best placed candidate to pull 70 million votes is the question. I think it's Sanders. To pull 70 million votes, you need massive energy in your campaign and Sanders energises people on the ground more than other candidates.


  • Options
    #2571
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Joe_ Public wrote: »
    CNN doesnt even bother to make it subtle anymore. They're symptomatic of dems who pretend to be concerned that sanders wont be able to beat trump though their greater fear is that he will.

    https://twitter.com/MuseWendi/status/1233754436729700352?s=20
    And here's more "centrist" hostility. Yet some people here think this is made up.

    https://twitter.com/mashagessen/status/1233811800849879040


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2572
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,147 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    How could anyone get so worked up for Pete? There's nothing there.


  • Options
    #2573
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,991 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    sid waddell wrote: »

    Who is the best placed candidate to pull 70 million votes is the question. I think it's Sanders. To pull 70 million votes, you need massive energy in your campaign and Sanders energises people on the ground more than other candidates.

    You can think what you like, but so far, democratic numbers in this primary is down, including the young vote.
    Sanders has shown no proof that he can pull in the numbers needed for him to get over the line.


  • Options
    #2574
    DreamsBurnDown
    Closed Accounts Posts: 136 ✭✭DreamsBurnDown


    Look like Biden has won SC, and CNN are projecting a very significant margin with him getting at least 14 of the 54 delegates and possibly more. That would vault him into a clear second place on delegates so far. It could well be that we have a two horse race at the end of super Tuesday.


  • Options
    #2575
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,991 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    DreamsBurnDown wrote: »
    Look like Biden has won SC, and CNN are projecting a very significant margin with him getting at least 14 of the 54 delegates and possibly more. That would vault him into a clear second place on delegates so far. It could well be that we have a two horse race at the end of super Tuesday.

    This Biden win could help Bernie. Bloomberg will eat into the moderate vote which will be a problem for Biden. Bernie, on the other hand, has a clear run at it from the more progressive side.

    We will be down to 3 or 4 candidates after Super Tuesday.
    Berine, Bloomberg, Biden and one of Warren or Buttigieg


  • Options
    #2576
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    markodaly wrote: »
    You can think what you like, but so far, democratic numbers in this primary is down, including the young vote.
    Sanders has shown no proof that he can pull in the numbers needed for him to get over the line.

    Sure if you're so sure about that why don't you post up the numbers who voted in the Democratic primaries in 2016 and 2020 in the states we have the figures for so far - Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada?

    I'll give you a hint as to why you didn't - it's because for each of the three, there was a higher turnout in 2020, ie. you're wrong.


  • Options
    #2577
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,991 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    sid waddell wrote: »
    Sure if you're so sure about that why don't you post up the numbers who voted in the Democratic primaries in 2016 and 2020 in the states we have the figures for so far - Iowa, New Hampshire and Nevada?

    I'll give you a hint as to why you didn't - it's because for each of the three, there was a higher turnout in 2020, ie. you're wrong.

    Nice goalpost shifting.

    The turnout for these primaries have been much much lower than the 2008 primaries, which elected Obama.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/02/was-iowa-caucus-turnout-a-huge-red-flag

    The numbers are not that big for Bernie if you break down the numbers. In fact he has gotten fewer votes in both Iowa and NH this year than compared to 2016.
    Its just the field is more split and he is coming out on top.

    Your theory of Bernie being elected on a wave of young voters does not hold up to any scrutiny.
    This is not Obama 2008, nowhere close. Its like McGovern 1972


  • Options
    #2578
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    markodaly wrote: »
    Nice goalpost shifting.

    The turnout for these primaries have been much much lower than the 2008 primaries, which elected Obama.

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/02/was-iowa-caucus-turnout-a-huge-red-flag

    The numbers are not that big for Bernie if you break down the numbers. In fact he has gotten fewer votes in both Iowa and NH this year than compared to 2016.
    Its just the field is more split and he is coming out on top.

    Your theory of Bernie being elected on a wave of young voters does not hold up to any scrutiny.
    This is not Obama 2008, nowhere close. Its like McGovern 1972

    I didn't move any goalposts, you did. This is very simple. You said turnout is down. It isn't.

    You were wrong. Move on.


  • Options
    #2579
    Joe_ Public
    Registered Users Posts: 13,023 ✭✭✭✭Joe_ Public


    It's hardly surprising any candidate would get less votes now given there is such choice in the field. I mean, thats just obvious. But sanders polls the best in voters second choices so he'll do well from any candidate who drops out and not just progressives, ie warren.


  • Options
    #2580
    sid waddell
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,664 ✭✭✭sid waddell


    Biden is obviously going to win South Carolina, but on closer inspection the exit polls don't look as great for him with a view to other states.

    From 538:
    Sanders won 45 percent of white voters aged 17 to 44 while Biden won only 8 percent, but among black voters, Biden actually edged Sanders 41 percent to 29 percent under 45.

    Obviously Biden was always going to do very well with black voters in an older, more conservative southern state given his association with Obama.

    But that figure of just 8% of white voters aged 17-44 has to be alarming for him - not just for states with whiter electorates in the primaries, but in terms of his ability to win in November, whereas the black vote would fall heavily for Sanders if he makes it to November.

    It should be remembered that in 2016, Hillary Clinton won South Carolina by a margin of 51.42% over Sanders.

    Biden's margin of victory tonight is projected to be 24%. It looks Sanders will take second place with around 20%.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2581
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 13,991 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    sid waddell wrote: »
    I didn't move any goalposts, you did. This is very simple. You said turnout is down. It isn't.

    You were wrong. Move on.

    Ah, see with that attitude, Bernie is in for a hiding, McGovern style.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement