Fuuuuuuck that. Dude is an existential threat to our democracy.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
US PoliERA 2019 |OT4| Folded like a DOG
- Thread starter Midnight Jon
- Start date
- Status
There's just no way around the fact that, if Biden is the nominee, Trump loses Pennsylvania. That doesn't close off Trump's chances entirely, but it constricts an already narrow path.
I'm sure the Franken thing didn't help, but even before that I never saw it for Gillibrand. I mean, I don't understand what the thinking was behind her viability as a candidate outside of...occupying Hillary's old Senate seat?
Prior to 2017 she had no name recognition outside of New York. And she seems intent on running the kind of campaign that guarantees she never really will. Upstate NY ain't a model for the country, sis.
Prior to 2017 she had no name recognition outside of New York. And she seems intent on running the kind of campaign that guarantees she never really will. Upstate NY ain't a model for the country, sis.
Bahaha. This makes my soul glow.
Wasn't Bernie at the convention? I haven't seen coverage of him at the event.
EDIT:
Nevermind, Bernie's address is supposed to be today.
Last edited:
For a lot of us, the Franken thing was what got us interested in her to begin with. For a while there she was just so sharp, man. Every time there was some shift in the party policy, she was out there calling for it days or weeks in advance. Showed up to a ton of the DC protests in a big way, too.
Then she started to campaign for President and it all just fell apart. I think the response from some quarters to the Franken thing made her gunshy. She needed to double down on that, really commit to the intersectional feminism. Instead, she's acting like the people who called her an opportunist for doing good right.
Well, this Hill article sent me into a panic lol
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/445668-3-modelers-predict-trump-reelection
That + the Professor who predicted Trump would win based on his model.
Nate Silver has also been pretty hesitant about making a bold prediction or at least an assessment of where things stand now.
Yeah I'm gonna have to go and disagree with you there dawg
The problem is she's a shitty campaigner. She's failed to connect with any group, let alone multiple groups, and has no interesting policies that aren't shadowed by other candidates' better policies.
This is it, more eloquently than how I put it.
For 24A, I get the cryptic part of the definition, but I'm failing to see how NO TRUMP stems from 'possible contract'. Am I missing something obvious? This should be the easy bit!
The Hill articles are basically designed to send one into a tizzy.
What's funny is that the NYT opinion article that portions of the The Hill article are based on shines a light on just how much Trump's general assholery is hurting him:
Any sane Republican would cruise to re-election with an economy this good. The fact that the race is competitive at all just shows you how much of a dumpster fire he is.
Jake Sherman @JakeSherman
>@jaketapper got a big-time admission out of @WhipClyburn — the no 3 house democrats says he thinks trump will eventually be impeached.
10:50 AM - Jun 2, 2019
State of the Union @CNNSotu
.@JakeTapper: "It sounds like you think that the President will be impeached, or at least proceedings will begin in the House at some point, but just not right now?"@WhipClyburn: "Yes, that's exactly what I feel." https://cnn.it/2Mo5CFE #CNNSOTU
9:45 AM - Jun 2, 2019
>@jaketapper got a big-time admission out of @WhipClyburn — the no 3 house democrats says he thinks trump will eventually be impeached.
10:50 AM - Jun 2, 2019
State of the Union @CNNSotu
.@JakeTapper: "It sounds like you think that the President will be impeached, or at least proceedings will begin in the House at some point, but just not right now?"@WhipClyburn: "Yes, that's exactly what I feel." https://cnn.it/2Mo5CFE #CNNSOTU
9:45 AM - Jun 2, 2019
No, He won't. And if he does, he's not making it to the second round.
The ship thing is just such petty bullshit because the ships don't have their names plastered on the side of them like cruise ships, so does anyone really think Trump would have known, in the moment, that the USS John McCain was docked nearby?
Most of these candidates know they don't have a chance, they're just trying to get publicity, Hickenlooper probably not getting the publicity he wants, or maybe he is?
The fact that he brought "We can't afford a normal healthcare system" to a california democratic event makes me think he's not taking this too seriously.
I feel like tyt is singled out as worse then most news orgs, when if someone posts something from WSJ a paper that endorsed Bolsonaro or even CNN which has dumber pundits they don't immediately get ad hommed. Sure they're smaller and their aggressive progressive programming is incredibly stupid, but I would argue they're better than both sidesing CNN that doesnt face anywhere near the same scrutiny.
Also I feel like Brainchild takes the time to make well thought out posts and gets treated with the least amount of charity regularly with low effort responses and it's very annoying.
If Kasich were president right now, his approval rating would be in the mid-50s. Still might have lost the House due to a more standard midterm slump, but he'd be cruising to reelection.
Yep. After the midterm shellacking Trump hasn't tried to expand his base one bit and has doubled-down on anti-immigrant rhetoric, and from what we're getting from polling there's almost no undecideds when people are asked whether they approve or disapprove. If the 52+% that disapprove of him bother to turn out in decent numbers it should be a pretty good result for the Dem - plus the economic recovery appears to be peaking and with the ongoing trade dispute it's really going to hurt his farm-/rust-belt numbers.
It's not a done-deal but it's not at all impossible to beat him.
These were all really good picks.
By all means, defend TYT as a news gathering organization and Brainchild as a quality poster. Also, what's that Chapo Reddit you get your insight from? Also, has a post of yours not ever used lols as a response condescendingly. Rhetorical question so don't feel compelled to answer. Low effort indeed.
As the name is at the stern of the ship, I don't think he'd have any way of seeing it. Which makes the whole thing just that more petty.
You know, with the way I'm antagonized on this forum sometimes, you'd think I was some kind of petulant troll. If you don't like me, you can just say that instead of suggesting that I'm a low effort poster. If the goal is to get me to stop posting here (which I feel is a growing sentiment) then you might succeed on that front because I did not come here for this.
Do anyone thinks anything will turn out will? I doubt that Mexico has the ability to halt the flow of migrants or slow it down significantly it will take a lot of resources that they have with all the things going on in Mexico, unless they put a huge amount of focus exclusively on stop migration. That is something I don't see them doing.
Many of the Trump administration officials don't want the tariffs and Trump can be played, so I wonder if they come to an agreement that won't happen in reality to placate Trump.
Probably gonna end up with a lot more dead Mexican soldiers in cartel territory and a minimum reduction in immigration flowing to the US
I didn't say you were low effort, I was responding to those saying criticsms of your posts were low effort. Because those not ignoring you put a good deal of effort into reading your posts.
Not explicitly, no, but that's the implication, right? Your statement that Tomohawk should defend TYT and myself was sarcastic, right? Well, I'm sure people can infer from that sarcasm something a bit more disparaging than you're willing to say directly, and I just think it's a bit petty, but whatever. Don't wanna derail the thread, but I'd appreciate it if we didn't resort to these kinds of cheap shots when having discussions in this community.
Nope. I never said you were low effort. Tomohawk's post history was mighty low effort from the skim. Can't choose your defense force though, right Helio?
FYI on the above posted yesterday. You see how these can backfire on you and others. Thank you.
Im sorry I honestly don't understand this post. But yes I was condescending to someone who was being rude, you got me.
User Warned: Antagonizing other users, ignoring moderator instructions
Just once?
Imma going to stop engaging, but feel free to read my post history, I've probably been condescending more than once, you got me.
Yeah, right now I'm setting my expectations at about a three-point popular vote victory, which should be enough to win the presidency depending on the candidate. Biden, for example I think has Pennsylvania on lockdown, while Michigan should flip naturally - it would just be a matter then of flipping Wisconsin or Arizona, both of which could go blue for very different reasons (Wisconsin due to Midwestern/Rust Belt snapback, while Arizona is likeliest to be turned off by Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric). He could also win Florida, or for maximum comedy, peel off two extra electoral votes in Nebraska and Maine for the slimmest win possible.
Goddamn, that would be a beautiful platform in totality. I hope no matter who wins the primary, the country can get behind the nominee, win the House and Senate and make it all happen.
None of that strikes me as particularly fanciful, either, so long as something is done about the filibuster. Like, I think each of those is something even the Manchin-Sinema-Jones caucus could get behind, and peel off a few Republican votes in the process (along the Murkowski, Rubio, Romney lines - I'm hoping Collins is out by this point).
I'm not saying Trump won't win, but when multiple polls show him trailing in head-to-head matchups, sometimes by a lot; when his approval is as low as it always is; when he hasn't retooled his strategy after the midterms; when articles show that his team is privately worried about at least MI and PA... you can say he faces an uphill battle and we have a very good chance of winning. It doesn't mean you're ~~~complacent~~~. It doesn't mean you're jinxing anything. It doesn't mean you're unaware of the work it'll take to win the election. You're just being realistic.
Gillibrand's trying to play it too safe and there's nothing that really distinguishes her from the other candidates. It's easy to see why she's underwater.
The Hill kinda sucks and of course there are paths to Trump winning again, but besides that, I would hope Nate would be holding off on making any bold predictions. The election is nearly 1.5 years away.
The professor dude is a total hack that changes his mind and his prediction constantly, notes himself favorably whenever there is a EC/PV split, and is making some utterly baffling calls this time (Trump isn't hit by "scandal", which is laughable). He is bolstered by terrible political reporting that doesn't even try to judge anyone's predictions consistently.
People shouldn't take him seriously.
Last edited:
I looked at pre-convention polling for 2011 and Obama was leading almost every head-to-head, by a lot - he only dipped behind Romney after the primaries in mid 2012
Trump behind behind right now is awful.
Would a three point margin keep the House?
With incumbency advantage and distribution of the vote, we'd be pretty likely to keep it. These maps were designed for a President Romney or Kasich, not Trump. The areas that gave us the House won't vote GOP with him on the ballot.
- Status