US Presidential Election 2020

StringerBell

Making a play for the Trump vote surely.

Rjd2

pixelburp wrote: »

I don't want Biden for a start but it's not up to me and the needle has barely shifted since the start. He's gotta be a shoe-in at this stage, so the next question is how to reach out to the inevitable disenfranchisement of the left leaning base; therefore Warren, Sanders or anyone left enough and young enough, if age is that important. In this case, it shouldn't be because the above two are effectively left leaning royalty.

Age isn't as important as health, and Warren seems pretty healthy and lucid. In fact I'd presumed her early 60s TBH given how she presents.

The left aka the Sanders base don't really like Warren that much.

It will probably be someone like Castro, Booker or long shot Harris who gets it,,younger and politically probably closer to Biden than Warren.

Obviously the optics as well.

Professor Moriarty

Misael Bewildered Sobriety wrote: »

JoeBiden's latest comment to a crowd Iowa might fail to charm the Irish vote:

Joe Biden tells the audience (for the 2nd time now):

https://www.joe.ie/politics/joe-biden-tells-audience-may-irish-im-not-stupid-688643
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/biden-in-hot-water-for-saying-i-may-be-irish-but-im-not-stupid-jxz63vk75
https://www.irishpost.com/news/joe-biden-reportedly-tells-audience-may-irish-im-not-stupid-175064

Stay classy (and stupid) old Joe!

Racism.

The Phantom Jipper

Castro has endorsed Warren.

mickdoocey

looks like biden, sanders and warren are favs.
the problem all 3 have is they must be very progressive and socialist in their views to get the ticket but these views will not get them elected president.
i think pelosi knows they have little chance of beating trump in november and she is using the impeachment process which will ultimately fail to try and win the senate back.
then even if trump wins in november and is pres the dems will have both houses and he will be open to another impeachment which this time will succeed

pixelburp

mickdoocey wrote: »

looks like biden, sanders and warren are favs.
the problem all 3 have is they must be very progressive and socialist in their views to get the ticket but these views will not get them elected president.
i think pelosi knows they have little chance of beating trump in november and she is using the impeachment process which will ultimately fail to try and win the senate back.
then even if trump wins in november and is pres the dems will have both houses and he will be open to another impeachment which this time will succeed

This, again? Come on. Biden is NOT progressive and not a socialist, dunno how many more times this needs clarifying; his dominance in the polls is pure name recognition and being one of the more famous & celebrity politicians in America. His policies have been explicitly centrist and he has gone out of his way to position himself thus & as one who reaches across the aisle. He, Sanders and Warren are all seen as beating Trump in polls, Biden the most comfortably. But, he is not a socialist, even by US standards.

PopePalpatine

I hate to say it, but...I'd say it's looking good for Trump after the Soleimaini killing. It'll be like Dubya's reelection, with Trump getting in by getting enough Rust Belters high on jingoism. If Iran attack, the GOP will be all like, "See! This is what the Dems enabled!" If they don't, the GOP can claim that Iran have been cowed into submission.

mickdoocey

pixelburp wrote: »

This, again? Come on. Biden is NOT progressive and not a socialist, dunno how many more times this needs clarifying; his dominance in the polls is pure name recognition and being one of the more famous & celebrity politicians in America. His policies have been explicitly centrist and he has gone out of his way to position himself thus & as one who reaches across the aisle. He, Sanders and Warren are all seen as beating Trump in polls, Biden the most comfortably. But, he is not a socialist, even by US standards.

I did not say he was a socialist.
I said he must be very progressive and socialist in his views to get the ticket, that when he tries to revert to some normality when taking on trump, everything insane he said trying to get the ticket will be used as soundbites to easily defeat him.

his too old anyway, it seems he may have the onset of dementia or something like that. could you imagine him in the debates against trump, it would harrowing to watch.
his time was 2016.

SharpshooterTom

Biden's dominance is due to one thing.

Obama nostalgia.

Although its partially misguided as Obama was popular for his personality/charisma and historic nature of of his candidacy rather than his actual policies IMO, which were fairly milktoast and centrist for the most part, and Joe Biden's lightyears away from Obama on any form of charisma.

A lot of talk about the GOP being cocooned in a cult around Trump, but the democrats are in a bit of a personality cult bind with regards to Obama themselves if we're being honest.

We all know if Michelle Obama had entered the race she would have won this race in a landslide, irrespective of what her policies were, they don't matter.

And when Malia Obama's old enough she will win too if she ran.

eagle eye

And she'd beat Trump too unlike the current candidates.

everlast75

PopePalpatine wrote: »

I hate to say it, but...I'd say it's looking good for Trump after the Soleimaini killing. It'll be like Dubya's reelection, with Trump getting in by getting enough Rust Belters high on jingoism. If Iran attack, the GOP will be all like, "See! This is what the Dems enabled!" If they don't, the GOP can claim that Iran have been cowed into submission.

At this stage, if Trump told his supporters that black is white they would believe him.


People need to quit trying to turn whatever is left of the republican supporters (Trump's base) of circa 30% of the population, and focus on mobilising the remaining 70%.

StringerBell

I think they have to large extent. It is clear at this stage that there is a base there that will vote for him no matter what happens.

The focus seems to be on the biggest group of voters, the undecideds and the ones that voted Obama in 2012 but trump 2016...not to mention the bloody protest voters and abstentionists.

peddlelies

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

We all know if Michelle Obama had entered the race she would have won this race in a landslide, irrespective of what her policies were, they don't matter.

Speak for yourself.

Gbear

StringerBell wrote: »

I think the election of Trump has kinda blown a lot of the theories about needing to be able to answer debate questions intelligently, or even coherently tbf.

I would imagine that Trump won't even agree to appear in debates.

As with Boris Johnson, there is nothing for him to gain from them.

His insanity is bad enough in isolation, but when contrasted starkly against someone who's essentially a normal human being (albeit a politician), it will do nothing for those who he needs to woo, and it'll make no difference to his base.

is_that_so

StringerBell wrote: »

I think they have to large extent. It is clear at this stage that there is a base there that will vote for him no matter what happens.

The focus seems to be on the biggest group of voters, the undecideds and the ones that voted Obama in 2012 but trump 2016...not to mention the bloody protest voters and abstentionists.

That need to think with brains rather than hearts will indeed decide it. Most groups outside the Trump bubble share one fundamental aim, ensuring he doesn't get reelected. If they can see that he should lose but if it's all about lofty principles he may well be there for 4 years.

Water John

Julian Castro comes out in support of Warren.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/08/julian-castro-endorsing-elizabeth-warren

StringerBell

Yeah he did that yesterday, very soon after pulling out of the race. An unusual move really when you think he'd have kept as many irons in the fire as possible to hang around for a VP spot.

The Phantom Jipper

StringerBell wrote: »

Yeah he did that yesterday, very soon after pulling out of the race. An unusual move really when you think he'd have kept as many irons in the fire as possible to hang around for a VP spot.

I think it makes some sense for him. I'd imagine if the nominee is a man, they'll be choosing a woman, in part for gender balance. Seemingly Castro and Warren have a good relationship prior to him dropping out aswell.

StringerBell

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I think it makes some sense for him. I'd imagine if the nominee is a man, they'll be choosing a woman, in part for gender balance. Seemingly Castro and Warren have a good relationship prior to him dropping out aswell.

Yeah they have both spoken on the record before during this campaign cycle in good terms about each other.

What your saying makes sense actually yeah, Warren is the only realistic female candidate and it's highly likely if a male wins the nomination they will be made to bring in a female candidate as VP, someone like Harris maybe even to tick off the racial diversity box that Castro would fit for Warren.

ghost of ireland past

Howdy folks.

Trump will easily win in 2020 unless the Dems choose thier best candidate.

That candidate is Andy Yang, the man with the answers, and not just to maths questions. I don't think the Dems will select him though and so Trump seems like a shoo-in for 2020.

The people of earth should start concentrating on 2024 and keeping Don Jr out.

And of course, China is building strength all the while, it is their world now.

Rjd2

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/10/iowa-des-moines-register-poll-democrats-097372

bernie pulling ahead in iowa.

cosybeach

it doesn't matter trump is a shoe in unless health issues dems needed an obama type candidate the list here haven't a chance
His impeachment wont effect so bad is the list bernie is a corrbyn
continue strength in the economy thrump is the markets choice

Cody montana

cosybeach wrote: »

it doesn't matter trump is a shoe in unless health issues dems needed an obama type candidate the list here haven't a chance
His impeachment wont effect so bad is the list bernie is a corrbyn
continue strength in the economy thrump is the markets choice

Well if he is re-elected, they deserve everything they get.
My only concerns are environmental.
No reversing that damage.

ghost of ireland past

Trump appears to be a protest candidate, like Dustin the Turkey. People don't vote for him because of his policies, they vote for him because they are not willing to vote for the other guy, or gal.


A majority of people , perhaps 80% or more are not routinely interested in politics. Those people allowed the government to get on with it over the last few decades. Their governments betrayed them in the west and outsourced their jobs to other countries. Now we don't have good employment and our tax base is threatened. Our societies are falling apart, and our politicial systems are failing to cope.

This is obvious stuff but it is denied by most politicians except the likes of Trump.


If professional politicians continue to refuse to discuss issues, and they continue to refuse to represent their electorates, then we can expect more of Trump and Brexit.

China has the best system, and the longest lasting system. A benevolent dictator. Like your parents for example, who are also benevolent dictators.

Socialism and sharing is good for the family home but not for society apparently.

Ireland should join the Belt and Road and get the advantage of being an early mover.

pixelburp

Trump was a protest candidate, but that's the problem right there. Unless the voter strongly believes he has done a good job on behalf of the forgotten in the rust belt, that protest will have rung itself out. Of course we're talking the Undecideds given the party faithfuls will hold their nose.

It was always going to be captivating to talk big and promise easy solutions to things like healthcare, and from the sidelines, but as he Trump has learned it's much more difficult to enact changes. All those promises about a beautiful healthcare system amounted to nothing. His tax changes were the biggest success but nearly every other loud promise has not come to pass. The cynics point to the Iranian crisis as a distraction from impeachment, but ultimately Trump is now a player on the field, not a hurler on the ditch.

ghost of ireland past

The only democrat who is decent in my view is Andy Yang, and I think Andy Yang can beat Trump.

I did wonder at first if Andy could defeat Trump in the debates but then I learned that Andy Yang represented America on their national debate team and he competed in London. He is a very quick thinker and fast on his feet.

Andy Yang is a very strong candidate but I don't think the Democrats are intent on choosing their strongest candidate.

American politicians need to put America first and if Democrats put the whole world first then they will lose.

It must be kept in mind that many Americans are like Joe Rogan, which is to say they are not well informed.

This century is for China, and the next few too.

Water John

I think the one thing we can generally learn is that, the skillset for a business man/woman are not the skills needed by a leading politician. They don't seem to transfer very well.

ghost of ireland past

The whole point is that the west hasn't been well served by 'professional' politicians and so now we need to try something new.

The west has a problem with talking about issues. I feel that no politician represents my views and they haven't done for a long time.

The ultimate problem is that politicians are refusing to represent their electorates. Trump will represent his voters even if they are racist. Democrats will refuse to represent their own voters if their own voters are racist and that is why they'll lose.

People are racist and are increasingly willing to state that. If politicians don't recognise this then Trump is the future.

China is showing the world that having a benevolent dictator is far superior to having an elected politician desperately trying for re-election.


Democracy may not be the best system. Parents don't use democracy in their households as the children aren't sufficiently informed. Our electorates are not informed either so perhaps they shouldn't get a say.

You can criticise me but we are in a competition with China and we are losing. China of course are a lot nicer than the US and a world run by the Chinese would be far more peaceful than a world run by the US.

I support China over the US.

pixelburp

Water John wrote: »

I think the one thing we can generally learn is that, the skillset for a business man/woman are not the skills needed by a leading politician. They don't seem to transfer very well.

Yup, and history keeps showing examples of what happens when business people take the reigns of political power. It'll never go out of fashion, certainly not in the US where wealth is king, as there's a seductive and reductive attraction to this idea that someone who makes money will surely run the government equally efficiently - despite the two worlds having completely differing priorities.

Of course, Trump's continuous bankruptcy and failed businesses blows the theory of the "successful" businessman out the water, but equally he cultivated enough of a mythological brand to paper over the realities of his career.

Nody

ghost of ireland past wrote: »

The whole point is that the west hasn't been well served by 'professional' politicians and so now we need to try something new.

The west has a problem with talking about issues. I feel that no politician represents my views and they haven't done for a long time.

The ultimate problem is that politicians are refusing to represent their electorates. Trump will represent his voters even if they are racist. Democrats will refuse to represent their own voters if their own voters are racist and that is why they'll lose.

People are racist and are increasingly willing to state that. If politicians don't recognise this then Trump is the future.

China is showing the world that having a benevolent dictator is far superior to having an elected politician desperately trying for re-election.


Democracy may not be the best system. Parents don't use democracy in their households as the children aren't sufficiently informed. Our electorates are not informed either so perhaps they shouldn't get a say.

You can criticise me but we are in a competition with China and we are losing. China of course are a lot nicer than the US and a world run by the Chinese would be far more peaceful than a world run by the US.

I support China over the US.

And the statewide corruption, the people living in poverty, the poor quality of service, houses etc. are what, improvement?

The thing is in a democracy you get the government you vote for; if the populace are to stupid to vote in better people then the fault is on them, not the politicians. You brought up "work moved away", well look at the USA and the number of small mom & pop food stores that are left after Walmart rolled through. No one stopped people shopping at the local stores but Walmart was cheaper (and I'm not even going to go in on their general business practices) so they screwed themselves out of local stores and jobs. The voting population screwed themselves by not bothering to look behind the curtain and simply buying the cheapest stuff instead and then they turn around and complain to politicians about "losing our American jobs". Well the simple fact is that's not due to politicians but the voting base simply encouraging that behavior and rewarding the companies doing it. Yes Trump was a protest vote no question about it but what they are protesting against is their own actions that they have done to encourage and support what they are against. They are the once who go to Walmart and shop the cheap stuff built and grown overseas. They are the once that complain that the town centers are dying while driving out to the giant shopping mall at the weekend. They are the once who complain that American tax base is shrinking and then goes and hire an illegal immigrant to clean their pools, cut their lawns paid black because it's cheaper while having one of the biggest tax havens in the world in their own country. They are the once who did not bother to look to closely at the deals the sellers of sub prime loans came with them because "it was going to be easy money to get rich". At every point it's the voting base that screwed themselves over only to turn around and complain about the politicians and the fat cats in Washington when in fact it is themselves that screwed themselves over by not bothering to do a minimum of research or understanding.

So yes; the voters get the politicians they deserve because ultimately they have not only the power to select the politicians but also have the power to impact company policy on the ground. It's time for the voters to actually take some god damn responsibility for their actions instead of constantly believing the next conman giving them someone else to blame for their woes and they are all poor unfortunate victims.

ghost of ireland past

Yes, voters get the politicians they vote for.

The point is that parents do not bow and bend to every whim of their children. Neither should politicians.

That means that politicians should say things like 'I know that's what you want but you cannot have it for reasons that you cannot understand.'

That's what a parent says when their children ask for silly things, like candyfloss for breakfast.

I don't accept that China is a dystopia. I think there's a lot of fake news in the west about China.

The other thing is that I support a type of totalitarianism. I think criminals should be caught and punished for the good of society. I think the west is failing at that and the west is overrun with crime.

If China put cameras everywhere and catch every criminal act I have no problem with that.

StringerBell

So you like China is what I get from your posts....have you thought about going to live there? Have you lived there? If so why did you leave?

ghost of ireland past

It's not so much that I like China but I am prepared to compare and to contrast our competing political systems.

I certainly don't hate China.

I read Newt Gingrich's new book, Trump vs China, and there was lots of very interesting info in it. The west won't win in a competition with China.

The Chinese call the time from about 1820 to abut 1970 I think as the 'Century of Humiliation'. The Chinese are not what we know of them. We have known them at their lowest point and now they are rising up again.

The Chinese see themselves as equal with everybody and as having no superiors. The future is undoubtedly Chinese, and space exploration too.

Another very interesting fact is that China had huge sea going expeditions with hundreds of huge ships around 1,300 and onwards, before the Europeans had any ships at all. This went on for decades but a new Emperor put an end to it. I wonder what the world might be like now if China had continued and discovered America.


The Americans are fighting over every little thing and not making progress. In other words, the American system is failing to compete and they're starting to realise it.

StringerBell

Sorry, I asked you different questions right?

Have you ever lived in China?

If yes then why did you leave?

If no then why not?

No one has a chance against Trump in the debates because they're not actual debates. He turns them into slagging matches and it's impossible to get the better of Trump in one because he has no shame.

Water John

This new poster should get the habit of answering questions posed. After that perhaps we'll get back to the threads title subject matter.

ghost of ireland past

I'm not required to answer other posters questions, especially questions about where I live.

But no, I don't live in China and never have, nor have I ever visited.

Serious people like Sam Harris for example would agree with me and would say that if everyone refuses to talk about certain issues because of political correctness then the only people speaking about those issues will be people like Trump, and then he'll win.

The reason I support Andy Yang and believe he would beat Trump is because he is focused on the issues and he makes sense. Inequality in America is too high and it must be addressed. The Chinese are the most successful nation of all time at lifting people out of poverty.

The main problem though is the sheer number of Americans who won't be voting based on the issues. Politicians know this and take advantage.

I wasn't surprised that Trump won last time and I expect him to win again, as things stand. No democrat is especially appealing.

StringerBell

To be fair I'm only engaging with you at all to try to figure out which former poster you remind me of most. Carry on I won't engage any more

pixelburp

This thread has maintained a weirdly persistent murmur of support for Yang, despite every available poll neither showing support for him, nor belief in a head to head that he'd win. Or indeed is there every much of an intellectual explanation as to WHY he'd be such a strong opponent. You'd think a candidature built upon literal free money for all would have done better than he has too. He seems a decent guy with some long term vision but Trump is an aberrant president, I'm not even sure Biden will win a debate with someone so vulgar and shameless.

ghost of ireland past

There are few candidates who are certain to win in a head to head against Trump. That's not because of a problem with the candidates, it's because of a problem within the voters.

Put simply, the voters are too misinformed by fake news and by bad education that they don't know how to vote in their own best interests.

It's also possible that a majority of Americans simply want to be the best nation on Earth and that is no longer possible for the US. But Trump lies and says it is possible and enough Americans believe him.


The best political analysis on TV is the Bill Maher show, back on 20th January I think. Bill is highly critical of how the democrats comport themselves.

Gbear

Nody wrote: »

And the statewide corruption, the people living in poverty, the poor quality of service, houses etc. are what, improvement?

The thing is in a democracy you get the government you vote for

This is only true up to a point.

With about 42%, the Conservative party in the UK only got 2% more votes than Labour in 2017 and got 50 more seats, and close to a majority. Even in the recent landslide, they only got under 44% of the votes. I don't know how many times in history there has been a government with an actual mandate of the majority of the voters in the UK, but I can't imagine it happens often.

In the US, the House of Representatives is more or less proportional (there's a bit of shenanigans at the fringes with some states being so tiny), but the Senate and the President don't hold power in proportion to their nationwide support.
Only something like 19% of Americans voted for Trump.

There are arguments about what the roles are of different government bodies, and whether you need proportional representation in a federal system, but you need to have the appropriate level of devolution and limits on power in those circumstances, and that's certainly not true of the Executive branch of the US.

Water John

This book by Rick Wilson, Running against the Devil, should be interesting.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/11/donald-trump-rick-wilson-running-against-the-devil

He is co-founder of the Super Pac; Lincoln Project, and he favours Biden as the person to beat Trump.
It's an interesting viewpoint.

ghost of ireland past

I think Biden has no chance. He is too much like Hillary. He has nothing to offer except he's not offensive. Except of course he is gaff prone and says stupid things like the story about when he was a lifeguard and how he has hairy legs. Inexplicable stuff.

I also read recently
Alienated America: Why Some Places Thrive While Others Collapse
Book by Timothy P. Carney

and I think it was very good. I don't agree with his conclusion that we need the Church back to give people purpose but I think we need secular social outlets for people, like Men's Sheds, and Tidy Towns initatives, things that get the community together and give people a purpose.


People are voting for Trump because of a loss of social structure in the US. Communities are being destroyed as large employers close shop and head to cheaper countries. Large numbers of people feel like they have no purpose as a result.

Trump offers a vision and he offers a purpose. He tells Americans that they are great and that is soothing for Americans even if some of them must know it's not true.

Trump is unstoppable as nobody has the answer to America's problems. America's previous glories cannot be easily restored.

ghost of ireland past

Water John wrote: »

This book by Rick Wilson, Running against the Devil, should be interesting.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/11/donald-trump-rick-wilson-running-against-the-devil

He is co-founder of the Super Pac; Lincoln Project, and he favours Biden as the person to beat Trump.
It's an interesting viewpoint.

I also read Rick Wilson's, Everything Trump Touches Dies.


He is very biting in his use of language. He is a Republican strategist but it seems he has now defected and works for the Democrats. (only in the sense that he is highly critical of Trump)


He seems to be very much on the ball about many things and he would be a fearsome opponent. He knows how to run political campaigns, especially the underhand stuff.

marno21

Gbear wrote: »

In the US, the House of Representatives is more or less proportional (there's a bit of shenanigans at the fringes with some states being so tiny), but the Senate and the President don't hold power in proportion to their nationwide support.
Only something like 19% of Americans voted for Trump..

The House is reasonably representative but it suffers from gerrymandering which skews it some bit

Take North Carolina for example. The 2018 House election was won 50-48 by Republicans, but they won 10 seats and the Democrats won 3.

There are examples of this countrywide. Take a look at Texas’ 2nd Congressional District in Houston for one.

greenfield21

Just on china. Why should anyone feel sorry for the US and especially mnc's in the west.its to late to care about this issue now.

When all these large scale companies were moving out of the US to increase their margins no one cared- the companies definitely didn't care. They didn't give a crap about how there products were made and environmental issues, workers rights, product quality. All they wanted was the short term gain and huge advantage been located in china gave them- higher margins etc.

It's only now these companies are starting to panic when they know that China has robbed them of Billions of intellectual property and has launched its own multinational Giants as competition.

The Chinese have already come for our textiles,household goods, tech components companies etc. now they are moving into healthcare, pharma,software tech,heavy machinery etc. they are moving up the value chain at an incredible speed.

They are going to gut the likes of Germany and the US. No politician seems to care though, Christ just look at the trump thread where we have had years of gibberish and hardly ever a mention of any policy ideas The politicians never think long term the people definitely don't. But yeah agree with previous poster above the future is most definitely China's.

duploelabs

https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/1216437138625003522?s=19

ghost of ireland past

The political discourse in the US just seems so childish. So many stupid memes about socialism.

Americans hate socialism. That means they hate sharing and helping other people.

Most families are run on a social basis. Parents don't insist their children must work like slaves for food.

Americans really seem to have no idea as to what makes a country good to live in. A majority of Americans seem to like the macho dog-eat-dog system even though most of them will never succeed.

StringerBell

If you look a bit closer, they don't hate socialism at all. Just the word, socialism, communism, Marxism, they hate the terms. What they associate them with. In turn then these buzzwords are used to rile up bases and divide.

Country is ****ed, been saying that a long time.

pixelburp

Equally, you arguably have a generational issue now occurring, one where younger demographics are growing up without that huge stigma attached to those words; socialism is just another system in the eyes of some IMO, especially those who have benefited from things like the ACA or more progressive states' policies. The USSR is a faded memory, while capitalism's shine has never seemed more scuffed. Ironically it has taken a Boomer to highlight that socialist policies are not necessarily the devil here, even though you'll see Fox persist with this "commie" narrative, or paint Western Europe as borderline failed states...