Trump vs Biden 2020, Ultimate battle for the fate of our universe (pt 3)Read OP 01/11

osarusan

Phoebas wrote: »

Down ticket races. Also forces Trump to divert money to counter.

This is true alright.

But if Biden is winning in Texas, it's indicative of a huge huge swing that means he is winning in other red states also.

I don't think he has any chance in Texas anyway. Texas hasn't voted Democrat since 1976, and apart from Ross Perot stealing votes in the 90s, it hasn't even been close.

MeMen2_MoRi_

8-10 wrote: »

Biden isn't going to win Texas in a million years!

But there are some House seats in close races there as well as Texas house seats that can be flipped.

The Senate seat in TX is also unlikely to be flipped but there are a lot of smaller races in Texas that could benefit from a protest-type vote.

Thats weird to be splurging the cash if it ain't flipping for Biden. Would there be a by product of advertising for Biden, and helping the house seats flip?

Whatever the reason I'm sure he isn't going to miss a cent of the cash..

Faugheen

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

Thats weird to be splurging the cash if it ain't flipping for Biden. Would there be a by product of advertising for Biden, and helping the house seats flip?

Whatever the reason I'm sure he isn't going to miss a cent of the cash..

Exactly. He isn’t going to miss it. Polling shows Biden is really close in Texas. It’s had the highest early voter turnout with some counties already going past 2016 totals. It’s absolutely worth a punt if he has the money to play with.

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

whats your point .
that a poll 84% Hilary 14% TRump was within the margin of errror ... too busy to address such undefendable positions , it would be too easy.

That wasn't a poll. It was a probability. If you don't understand the difference maybe you shouldn't comment.

Call Me Jimmy

MeMen2_MoRi_ wrote: »

Thats weird to be splurging the cash if it ain't flipping for Biden. Would there be a by product of advertising for Biden, and helping the house seats flip?

Whatever the reason I'm sure he isn't going to miss a cent of the cash..

Bloomberg was utterly mocked and rejected by even the party he ran for. He is almost a cartoonish billionaire villain trying to hurt Trump any way he can, he pledged to spend some ungodly figure to help *whoever* is against Trump. So I'm not sure anything he's doing is particularly cerebral. If you have endless cash why not try and snipe around the edges?

It does mean in the future the democrats 'money in politics' talking points are rendered completely hollow.

Non solum non ambulabit

8-10 wrote: »

I have no issue with the fact that each State is equal in the Senate other than the disenfranchisement of voters in Washington DC and Puerto Rico

Washington DC in particular is a bit mad. It has more than 700k residents, including most congresspeople because Congress literally sits there, yet they get no Senate representation.

I think you misread my post. I didn't say it was wrong.

Agree on DC. Crazy.

Igotadose

The trials and tribulations of the #IMPOTUS continue; Judge finds for E. Jean so the case can continue: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-rape-case-jean-e-carroll-defamation-lawsuit-update-b1372777.html


We'll need a "What's #IMPOTUS up to" thread post-election should he lose. So many lawsuits, so little time.

duploelabs

Igotadose wrote: »

The trials and tribulations of the #IMPOTUS continue; Judge finds for E. Jean so the case can continue: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-rape-case-jean-e-carroll-defamation-lawsuit-update-b1372777.html


We'll need a "What's #IMPOTUS up to" thread post-election should he lose. So many lawsuits, so little time.

It's going to be an interesting time alright

Professor Moriarty

Igotadose wrote: »

The trials and tribulations of the #IMPOTUS continue; Judge finds for E. Jean so the case can continue: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-rape-case-jean-e-carroll-defamation-lawsuit-update-b1372777.html


We'll need a "What's #IMPOTUS up to" thread post-election should he lose. So many lawsuits, so little time.

I look forward to checking the news online on a daily basis and reading about The Donald's day in court yesterday.

Call Me Jimmy

I encourage you's to watch the Anderson Cooper interview again.

MeMen2_MoRi_

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Bloomberg was utterly mocked and rejected by even the party he ran for. He is almost a cartoonish billionaire villain trying to hurt Trump any way he can, he pledged to spend some ungodly figure to help *whoever* is against Trump. So I'm not sure anything he's doing is particularly cerebral. If you have endless cash why not try and snipe around the edges?

It does mean in the future the democrats 'money in politics' talking points are rendered completely hollow.

Hasn't he paid off outstanding fees for people who committed felonies in Florida, Donnie called it rigging the election or something along those lines.. why not re-engage people in the most fundamental way in society by allowing them to cast a vote.. fair fcuks to him.

Just because acts are being committed by the side you're on means diddly squat about wanting money out of elections.. the insane amounts of money poured into election campaigns to curry favour when your one gets in power is a virus on democracy..

It's interesting that this issue on the face of it seems to be just a dem issue, me wonders why!!

Phoebas

osarusan wrote: »

I don't think he has any chance in Texas anyway. Texas hasn't voted Democrat since 1976, and apart from Ross Perot stealing votes in the 90s, it hasn't even been close.

Tend to agree, except - the polling shows it very tight, with a fair few polls giving it marginally to Biden. Biden is as close or closer to Trump in Texas as Trump is to Biden in a fair few of the battleground states that Trump absolutely needs to win, so on a good day for Biden, he could well take Texas.

My view of this election is that it will come down to Trump's handling of the Covid crisis. Texas has had more cases than any other state, with the numbers currently going in the wrong direction.

extra gravy

RIGOLO wrote: »

and some Situation Room pencils

Nearly spat out my coffee, you have a gift for comedy!

Call Me Jimmy

Phoebas wrote: »

My view of this election is that it will come down to Trump's handling of the Covid crisis. Texas has had more cases than any other state, with the numbers currently going in the wrong direction.

In terms of covid, are people in Texas going to blame Trump more than the people who decide the actual policies? If a governor decides to close down or open up or ban people getting together are they really going to blame trump because of his lack of leadership on masks and messaging? Not a rhetorical question.

e.g. in New York who did the most damage, Trump or Cuomo?

gmisk

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

In terms of covid, are people in Texas going to blame Trump more than the people who decide the actual policies? If a governor decides to close down or open up or ban people getting together are they really going to blame trump because of his lack of leadership on masks and messaging? Not a rhetorical question.

I would say they will blame both, that won't help Trump as the Governor of Texas is also a republican.

Phoebas

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

In terms of covid, are people in Texas going to blame Trump more than the people who decide the actual policies? If a governor decides to close down or open up or ban people getting together are they really going to blame trump because of his lack of leadership on masks and messaging? Not a rhetorical question.

They may blame lots of people, but little opportunity to express it. The election gives them that opportunity.

Zubeneschamali

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

in New York who did the most damage, Trump or Cuomo?

I'd say New Yorkers will not vote for either of them next week.

Igotadose

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

In terms of covid, are people in Texas going to blame Trump more than the people who decide the actual policies? If a governor decides to close down or open up or ban people getting together are they really going to blame trump because of his lack of leadership on masks and messaging? Not a rhetorical question.

e.g. in New York who did the most damage, Trump or Cuomo?

As a NY'er with many friends & family in the area, they blame Trump.

AllForIt

I don't agree with the America Supreme Court setup. I don't think anyone should be on it for life, I think 20 years max would do it, I think there should be more on it and I'm not even sure if they should be appointed by one person.

However I think the media angle on this both in the US and especially here is western Europe has been absolutely appalling. It has been spun as evil Trump appoints evil SC justice and shows a bias here that could not be more obvious. Aren't journalist's and media outlets supposed to be impartial? One can hardly give out about Fox News when our news organisations are exactly the same. All of these things make me hope Biden looses.

salmocab

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

In terms of covid, are people in Texas going to blame Trump more than the people who decide the actual policies? If a governor decides to close down or open up or ban people getting together are they really going to blame trump because of his lack of leadership on masks and messaging? Not a rhetorical question.

e.g. in New York who did the most damage, Trump or Cuomo?

They are going to blame both, it’s not binary multiple people can have done a bad job. I’ve said several times the blame isn’t all Trumps not by a long shot but ultimately he’s the guy in charge. If he had led plenty would have followed.

Phoebas

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

e.g. in New York who did the most damage, Trump or Cuomo?

I think where Trump will suffer isn't just about what he did or failed to do, but that people are very worried about it and Trump doesn't appear to care at all about it at all. It's a lack of empathy thing.

If Trump had done more or less what he did do, but without the clangers like the disinfectant thing, and had he replaced his usual rhetoric with words that were rooted in reality but offered hope, then I think he would be in a much stronger position than he is.

Professor Moriarty

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't agree with the America Supreme Court setup. I don't think anyone should be on it for life, I think 20 years max would do it, I think there should be more on it and I'm not even sure if they should be appointed by one person.

However I think the media angle on this both in the US and especially here is western Europe has been absolutely appalling. It has been spun as evil Trump appoints evil SC justice and shows a bias here that could not be more obvious. Aren't journalist's and media outlets supposed to be impartial? One can hardly give out about Fox News when our news organisations are exactly the same. All of these things make me hope Biden looses.

I wouldn't be choosing Trump over Biden based solely on appointees to the Supreme Court and media reportage of the issue. Polarisation, climate change, equality and the economy are just a few other issues that spring to mind.

Carfacemandog

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't agree with the America Supreme Court setup. I don't think anyone should be on it for life, I think 20 years max would do it, I think there should be more on it and I'm not even sure if they should be appointed by one person.

However I think the media angle on this both in the US and especially here is western Europe has been absolutely appalling. It has been spun as evil Trump appoints evil SC justice and shows a bias here that could not be more obvious. Aren't journalist's and media outlets supposed to be impartial? One can hardly give out about Fox News when our news organisations are exactly the same. All of these things make me hope Biden looses.

The attention is because republicans absolutely insisted on not even holding a hearing for a SC nominee in 2016 because it was an election year. 2020 is also an election year.

The answer for the democrats assuming Biden wins next week is to simply expand the number of people on the SC. It has been expanded before, and republicans have been expanding other courts in the interests of packing them for years - to great effect and with no punishment from voters for it - so the precedent is there and the people (Republican voters included) have been loud and clear that they don't mind the practice of expanding.

ohnonotgmail

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I'd say New Yorkers will not vote for either of them next week.

Cuomo will be devastated

dark crystal

Faugheen wrote: »

Exactly. He isn’t going to miss it. Polling shows Biden is really close in Texas. It’s had the highest early voter turnout with some counties already going past 2016 totals. It’s absolutely worth a punt if he has the money to play with.

Precisely. If Biden takes Texas, it's all over for Trump. It's always worth the punt when a race is this close.

Look at the race between Ted Cruz and Beto O'Rourke in 2018. Polls had Cruz up by almost 7 points (Trafalgar group had him up by 9). As it ended up, he scraped the win by 2.6 points.

Biden's numbers are even better than O'Rourke's (I accept Presidential v Senatorial races are somewhat different!), however, if Biden does even better than the polls are predicting in Texas, as happened with Beto, it'll be worth every cent spent.

A mentioned above, early voting stats so far in Texas are huge, which is generally a good sign for Dems, so I think it's extremely smart to target Texas as much as possible during the next 6 days.

Faugheen

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't agree with the America Supreme Court setup. I don't think anyone should be on it for life, I think 20 years max would do it, I think there should be more on it and I'm not even sure if they should be appointed by one person.

However I think the media angle on this both in the US and especially here is western Europe has been absolutely appalling. It has been spun as evil Trump appoints evil SC justice and shows a bias here that could not be more obvious. Aren't journalist's and media outlets supposed to be impartial? One can hardly give out about Fox News when our news organisations are exactly the same. All of these things make me hope Biden looses.

Calling out a pro-life woman who has slammed Obamacare and does not believe climate change is factually based but instead is a politically contentious issue is not ‘biased’.

Why is it when people are called out for their shady past it’s being biased?

She’s supposed to be non-partisan but her past, and indeed calling herself an ‘originalist’ in the mould of Scalia, suggests she is absolutely partisan to one side or the other and as such deserves to be called out on all of that.

threeball

AllForIt wrote: »

I don't agree with the America Supreme Court setup. I don't think anyone should be on it for life, I think 20 years max would do it, I think there should be more on it and I'm not even sure if they should be appointed by one person.

However I think the media angle on this both in the US and especially here is western Europe has been absolutely appalling. It has been spun as evil Trump appoints evil SC justice and shows a bias here that could not be more obvious. Aren't journalist's and media outlets supposed to be impartial? One can hardly give out about Fox News when our news organisations are exactly the same. All of these things make me hope Biden looses.

I'd be more worried about an SC judge who has shown herself to be less than impartial than some journalists who have no real affect on the lives of people other than those who choose to believe whats written or reported as gospel. You're talking about a person who now holds sway in an elite group that dictates the lives of hundreds of millions if not billions of people. Decisions she makes will resonate well outside the shores of the States.

Call Me Jimmy

Phoebas wrote: »

I think where Trump will suffer isn't just about what he did or failed to do, but that people are very worried about it and Trump doesn't appear to care at all about it at all. It's a lack of empathy thing.

I find it interesting when people believe the likes of Biden or Hillary are empathic because they make robotic, rehearsed feigned gestures. They don't care one iota imo.

gmisk

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I'd say New Yorkers will not vote for either of them next week.

Cuomo will walk it in NY mad to say otherwise imo
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/governor/new-york/

ohnonotgmail

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

I find it interesting when people believe the likes of Biden or Hillary are empathic because they make robotic, rehearsed feigned gestures. They don't care one iota imo.

That is just an assumption on your part whereas with trump we know he doesn't care because he can't even be arsed to pretend to care.