US Presidential Election 2020 Thread II - Judgement Day(s)

Exclamation Marc

Girly Gal wrote: »

So who does everyone think will be the next president in 2024, Biden will be 82 then, probably too old to run again, Harris as VP would be the natural successor, that's if she hasn't already become president in the next 4 years if anything happens to Biden. Wouldn't be surprised if Trump goes again. Any other candidates people think will run in 2024.
Someone who seems to have gotten a huge groundswell of support is AOC, 2024 probably a bit early for her, but, definitely see her running in the future.

I don't see Trump running again. He'll be 78 himself and I imagine in horrendous shape given the shape he's in now. His version of 78 will be worse than Biden's.

And then, will he be as exposed? Any continuation of his rhetoric will see him dumped off social media burning his reach. Will the GOP back someone who's lost the popular vote twice and lost an incumbent election? He's also losing any White House protections and will be open to lawsuits that have been growing.

Of course there are other reasons why he may be worth the nomination, the enormous vote size this time etc.

But I just don't see it.

TomOnBoard

Brian? wrote: »

My last evening in John King’s company. I’m feeling nostalgic already. See you in 2022 John.

I'm hearing Wolf Blitzer repeating "Right Nowww" in my brain all night since I switched the telly off...

breezy1985

This tweet just cracked me up

"Some say the world will end in fire/
Others say at Four Seasons Total Landscaping north of the Tacony-Palmyra bridge, near the porn shop"

Mirafiori

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

I don't see Trump running again. He'll be 78 himself and I imagine in horrendous shape given the shape he's in now. His version of 78 will be worse than Biden's.

And then, will he be as exposed? Any continuation of his rhetoric will see him dumped off social media burning his reach. Will the GOP back someone who's lost the popular vote twice and lost an incumbent election? Of course there are other reasons why he may be worth the nomination, the enormous vote size this time etc.

But I just don't see it.

Wouldn't it be the usual primary process though? It is not up to Senators or Congress representatives to decide whether he gets to run for the party. They may be a lot more prepared to handle him next time but if he stays popular enough with the registered GOP voters, he may get the nomination anyway.

Exclamation Marc

Mirafiori wrote: »

Wouldn't it be the usual primary process though? It is not up to Senators or Congress representatives to decide whether he gets to run for the party. They may be a lot more prepared to handle him next time but if he stays popular enough with the registered GOP voters, he may get the nomination anyway.

Sort of yes. Its up to the voting delegates who will select based on the primaries. I think there were somewhere around 2000 or 3000 who voted in 2016 and he got just over half the votes. I guess I mean whether the GOP will have a stronger more reliable candidate.

paul71

devnull wrote: »

Looks like the Russian bots are in overdrive today, their new programmed line is


Just look at the sheer number of bots tweeting this:
https://twitter.com/search?q=%22That%E2%80%99s%20it.%20That%20seals%20the%20deal.%20I%E2%80%99ve%20been%20an%20american%20citizen%20for%2054%20years%22&src=typed_query&f=live

Even 4 years later the KGB cannot get someone to write in English.

i've with no capital and no space after a full stop.

paul71

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

You didn't know what you were responding to...

I did

Dodge

The personal vote of Trump (and Biden) is overstated too fwiw

47% of the electorate will alway vote Republican. 47% will vote Democrat. The rest is about getting the people who veer towards your side out

Trump won in 2016 partly because Clinton energised nobody. Biden partly won because he got an anti Trump vote

bennyl10

CNN reporting Kushner has approached the president to concede

Exclamation Marc

Another thousand votes to Biden overnight in Georgia who now leads by 10195.

Recount is going to do sweet fück all.

breezy1985

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Another thousand votes to Biden overnight in Georgia who now leads by 10195.

Recount is going to do sweet fück all.

At this stage it won't put a dent in the overall "landscape"

Exclamation Marc

breezy1985 wrote: »

At this stage it won't put a dent in the overall "landscape"

Oh for sure. But you can imagine if a recount resulted in a different result. You'd never hear the end of "all the states I lost should be recounted, here's evidence that I should have won and would win if the corrupt states would recount".

Timberrrrrrrr

Exclamation Marc wrote: »

Oh for sure. But you can imagine if a recount resulted in a different result. You'd never hear the end of "all the states I lost should be recounted, here's evidence that I should have won and would win if the corrupt states would recount".

He hasn't called for a single recount in any states he won though, shows you how much he's trying to steal the election.

Girly Gal

Dodge wrote: »

The personal vote of Trump (and Biden) is overstated too fwiw

47% of the electorate will alway vote Republican. 47% will vote Democrat. The rest is about getting the people who veer towards your side out

Trump won in 2016 partly because Clinton energised nobody. Biden partly won because he got an anti Trump vote

I think you're right, not sure on the exact %, but the Democrats and Republicans are guaranteed a very similar base line percentage regardless who they run. Most elections come down to who wins a handful of swing states. I think the real issue over the last 2 presidential elections was the quality of all 3 candidates that ran was so poor, effectively Trump won because he wasn't Hillary Clinton and Biden has won because he's not Trump.which really isn't the best way to select a president.

An Ciarraioch

Dodge wrote: »

The personal vote of Trump (and Biden) is overstated too fwiw

47% of the electorate will alway vote Republican. 47% will vote Democrat. The rest is about getting the people who veer towards your side out

Trump won in 2016 partly because Clinton energised nobody. Biden partly won because he got an anti Trump vote

One point of note is that the Democrats have now only lost the popular vote once since 1988, but even though the percentages for both parties vary little, the electoral college margins are much more volatile, so clearly Irish-style campaign networks in every purple state county are required for both blocs to maximise their communications and returns with their grassroots:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election#Electoral_college_results

flazio

Some of those "safe states" do change eventually. I'm looking at Texas for example. Republican strong hold and still Republican this time out. However the Democratic vote has been getting stronger and stronger as the years go on that I reckon it will turn blue within the next 3 elections depending on who the Democrats run.

The Raging Bile Duct

Girly Gal wrote: »

So who does everyone think will be the next president in 2024, Biden will be 82 then, probably too old to run again, Harris as VP would be the natural successor, that's if she hasn't already become president in the next 4 years if anything happens to Biden. Wouldn't be surprised if Trump goes again. Any other candidates people think will run in 2024.
Someone who seems to have gotten a huge groundswell of support is AOC, 2024 probably a bit early for her, but, definitely see her running in the future.

Can't ever see AOC ever getting a run at president. She is too much of a turn off for the moderates that can flip between Dem and Rep. Some Democrats believed the high visibility of AOC and the squad was a big problem for Biden's campaign.

Exclamation Marc

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Can't ever see AOC ever getting a run at president. She is too much of a turn off for the moderates that can flip between Dem and Rep. Some Democrats were believed the high visibility of AOC and the squad was a big problem for Biden's campaign.

She's also let loose somewhat this morning in the New York Times noting that Joe Biden’s relationship with progressives would hinge on his actions. And she dismissed criticism from House moderates, calling some candidates who lost their races “sitting ducks.”

Excerpt

These folks are pointing toward Republican messaging that they feel killed them, right? But why were you so vulnerable to that attack?

If you’re not door-knocking, if you’re not on the internet, if your main points of reliance are TV and mail, then you’re not running a campaign on all cylinders. I just don’t see how anyone could be making ideological claims when they didn’t run a full-fledged campaign.

Our party isn’t even online, not in a real way that exhibits competence. And so, yeah, they were vulnerable to these messages, because they weren’t even on the mediums where these messages were most potent. Sure, you can point to the message, but they were also sitting ducks. They were sitting ducks.

There’s a reason Barack Obama built an entire national campaign apparatus outside of the Democratic National Committee. And there’s a reason that when he didn’t activate or continue that, we lost House majorities. Because the party — in and of itself — does not have the core competencies, and no amount of money is going to fix that.

If I lost my election, and I went out and I said: “This is moderates’ fault. This is because you didn’t let us have a floor vote on Medicare for all.” And they opened the hood on my campaign, and they found that I only spent $5,000 on TV ads the week before the election? They would laugh. And that’s what they look like right now trying to blame the Movement for Black Lives for their loss.

I'm not in any way inferring a position on her comments and their validity but rightly or wrongly, she's pushing to move the Democrats on and as you point out, some of the party just won't buy that (again, rightly or wrongly).

prawnsambo

I can't really disagree with that. Obviously I don't know if she's right about how they were campaigning, but she clearly has some knowledge of that. It's basic politics really, you have to have visibility and you have to have it constantly. Not just at election time. If your opponents are winning on a particular platform, then you have to match them at least.

breezy1985

The Raging Bile Duct wrote: »

Can't ever see AOC ever getting a run at president. She is too much of a turn off for the moderates that can flip between Dem and Rep. Some Democrats believed the high visibility of AOC and the squad was a big problem for Biden's campaign.

Not sure she will ever run for president as she could achieve a lot staying on her current path and I think in 20/30 years she will be the Nancy Pelosi of her generation rather than a Bernie Sanders

listermint

prawnsambo wrote: »

I can't really disagree with that. Obviously I don't know if she's right about how they were campaigning, but she clearly has some knowledge of that. It's basic politics really, you have to have visibility and you have to have it constantly. Not just at election time. If your opponents are winning on a particular platform, then you have to match them at least.

She's entirely right. The ones whining are the ones that lost and were simply not running a dynamic campaign. They were up against lies and fear against them and they had no actual arguments to contain it. Or didn't bother trying.

Kermit.de.frog

Trump back on Twitter, same old stuff. Quoting claims the "entire election" is in doubt.

An Ciarraioch

listermint wrote: »

She's entirely right. The ones whining are the ones that lost and were simply not running a dynamic campaign. They were up against lies and fear against them and they had no actual arguments to contain it. Or didn't bother trying.

Yes, even if the senior Democrats disagree with her personal politics, her suggestions on how to rejig the party and better communicate with ordinary voters should still be implemented for the midterms.

StringerBell

bennyl10 wrote: »

CNN reporting Kushner has approached the president to concede

Called that yesterday I believe, it's the easiest path for himself and Ivanka to symbolically begin the distancing and the responsible adults schtick

breezy1985

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Trump back on Twitter, same old stuff. Quoting claims the "entire election" is in doubt.

What happens if he physically refuses to leave the White House. At what stage in the tantrum do the security just pick him up and drag him out by the arms and legs

440Hertz

breezy1985 wrote: »

What happens if he physically refuses to leave the White House. At what stage in the tantrum do the security just pick him up and drag him out by the arms and legs

It depends how far it goes. If he’s trying to remain in the White House beyond 12:00 noon (Washington DC time) on 20 January he would be open to being physically evicted from the White House.

Hopefully, it wouldn’t come to that, but that’s not he absolute limit.

The mechanics of it have probably never been considered, but it would likely be a case of being escorted off the property by White House security.

I would assume they would ensure it would never get to this, but who knows.

For example, if he just refused to leave or tried to barricade himself in, eg a milita supporting him or something utterly weird like that, it would become a case of the military removing him.

I think though, realistically, scenes like that aren’t likely at all. He’ll accept it at some stage and storm off in a huff saying how everyone else is a loser and he didn’t want to be president in the first place etc etc

You can expect the flounce off into the sunset scene at some stage between Christmas and January.

I’ve no expectation that it will be a dignified exit, I’d wager he won’t even attend the inauguration.

Windmill100000

breezy1985 wrote: »

What happens if he physically refuses to leave the White House. At what stage in the tantrum do the security just pick him up and drag him out by the arms and legs

No idea, but I'm sure someone will film it :pac:

Exclamation Marc

breezy1985 wrote: »

What happens if he physically refuses to leave the White House. At what stage in the tantrum do the security just pick him up and drag him out by the arms and legs

Secret Service will remove him and he'd be arrested if he resisted.

firemansam4

Ohh this is just something I would love to see...

But then again it would probably incite violence from some of the MAGA gun weilding lunitics so probably best if it doesn't happen.

440Hertz

firemansam4 wrote: »

Ohh this is just something I would love to see...

But then again it would probably incite violence from some of the MAGA gun welding lunitics so probably best if it doesn't happen.

I would reckon that absolutely everyone with any sense will try to avoid that.

The Republicans will ultimately have to weigh in heavily too, should they want to retain any shred of dignity. There’ll come a point where enough is enough.