Thread: 2020 US Presidential Race

Originally Posted by pickel

Would you rather fucking idiots vote for Trump or Biden? I thought the whole plan was to defeat Trump.

Idiots gonna idiot.

My point was more that if they haven't made up their minds by now after seeing just 4 years of carnage and criminality under Trump then they're going to vote for Trump regardless.

Originally Posted by pickel

Quite a few Trump supporters liked Bernie in 2016.

Really? This is news to me as fairly well everything he stands for is antithetical to what Republicans believe in. You may be right, but I hadn't heard that at all.

Originally Posted by pickel

in 2016 people wanted change. The Democrats chose to not give them that change, and the Republicans did (albeit for the worse). The Democrats have failed at realizing this.

Can't argue that one. I'd even suggest that Obama was a dismal failure in many ways . . . but what a contrast to Mr 100% Failure

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

He doesn't seem to understand that it's all being held online.

It hurts to see/listen to him

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

My point was more that if they haven't made up their minds by now after seeing just 4 years of carnage and criminality under Trump then they're going to vote for Trump regardless.

I'd agree.


He's now wheeling out the battle against big pharma again . . . promising tremendous healthcare etc... everything he promised last time and didn't deliver. The fuckwits who vote for him deserve everything bad that can and should happen to them

Originally Posted by panama hat

Really? This is news to me as fairly well everything he stands for is antithetical to what Republicans believe in. You may be right, but I hadn't heard that at all.

Similar to Brexit, the votes that put Trump over the edge were people that didn't normally vote, but somebody came along that represented change. Wasn't it roughly 80,000 votes in the battleground states that gave him the electoral college? Life-long Republicans may not have voted for Bernie, but those voters would have.

Right, i see what you mean.

Personally I'm just a lot more fatalistic -- not sure that's the correct word? -- on it all at this point.

There's a funny vid on the Daily Show narrated by Steve Buschemi that paints Biden as 'the perfectly adequate candidate' for now because for all his faults he's not Trump.

If anyone, Republican or Independent, still can't see how fundamentally unfit for office Trump is then there's no policy shift or non-shift that can help. Fuck 'em.

Originally Posted by pickel

Wasn't it roughly 80,000 votes in the battleground states that gave him the electoral college? Life-long Republicans may not have voted for Bernie, but those voters would have.

That is a correct assumption I would say. Those swing state voters where typically Democrats and many were also union members. They bought into the hope that the orange one would actually change things.

They have clearly been had.

Originally Posted by bsnub

They have clearly been had.

Making sure they realize that has to be a key..

Originally Posted by pickel

He's brought up his plan to ban assault rifles which will gain him no new votes, and will push Republicans on the fence back into Trumps camp.

Good luck America, but you blew your last chance and his name was Bernie.

care to opine on how many republicans on the fence would have been pushed back into to the trump camp if there was a socialist on the other ticket?

Originally Posted by raycarey

care to opine on how many republicans on the fence would have been pushed back into to the trump camp if there was a socialist on the other ticket?

The ones that are on the fence that are realizing they need healthcare and better wages. There's a lot more of those Republicans than there are ones thinking about whether or not to ban guns.

Originally Posted by pickel

He wasn't running against Trump, which requires gaining votes from Republicans. People that support a ban are already voting for Biden. He will lose votes, not gain them.

Yes, but conversely people who are bothered by an attampt to ban assault weapons are probably already voting trump, come what may.

Originally Posted by nidhogg

Yes, but conversely people who are bothered by an attampt to ban assault weapons are probably already voting trump, come what may.

Biden would lose Dem votes if did not include in platform. So agree with both you guys.

Zero gain zero loss. However, unless the Dems get the Senate votes to pass gun laws, nothing changes.

Originally Posted by Norton

unless the Dems get the Senate votes to pass gun laws

Which even if the Dems take the Senate is still unlikely.

killing the filibuster is the only way it gets done.

and that would in turn provoke a 1994/2010 republican wave in 2022....so dems will tread lightly.

Some predictions from the beginning.

Many got on the Biden/Harris ticket early ...

Originally Posted by David48atTD

Me? My thoughts? This is the Democrats election to lose.

I hope they choose a candidate who is not from the far left.

Someone with the policy position of a Joe Biden, but with the charisma of say a Kamala Harris.

Originally Posted by Norton

Kamala Harris off to a good start.

Originally Posted by David48atTD

Elizabeth Warren, US Democratic senator, announces 2020 presidential bid

Absolutely 0% chance of winning.

Originally Posted by Norton

Zip. Less than 0

Originally Posted by Davis Knowlton

^Zero- chance. Can't imagine why she's making what indeed will be a short-lived attempt.Fuckin loon.

Originally Posted by Humbert

I don't know why you would call her a 'dark horse'. She is in a tie with Biden at the top of the polling. Biggest state, huge number of delegates, articulate, highly qualified. A very strong candidate.

Warren is already a non-starter as are both Gabbard and Gillibrand who destroyed her chances by calling for Franken to step down.

Originally Posted by Topper

I'd like to see Biden and Harris on the same ticket with Biden as the presidental nominee. After his first term, I'd like to see him decline to run for reelection (he's getting up there in age) and then have Harris as the presidental nominee.

Originally Posted by Norton

Doubt majority of Dems care who runs as long as they can beat 45.

Maxed out the # of quotes apparently.

More to follow ...

Up to page 12 ...

Originally Posted by raycarey

anything else you want to be wrong about, newbie dave?

Originally Posted by Cujo

“Don’t you f*cking dare” Hillary Clinton told

Originally Posted by Texpat

For over two years Democrats have encouraged hate, harassment, vandalism, acts of violence and even threats of assassination.

I wouldn't mind seeing wholesale slaughter of the Democratic Party. They're repulsive.

Originally Posted by Switch

The dems need to field someone who can upset Trumptard. Getting republicans wound up is easy, they have dozens of candidates who can do that.

Just find one who really pisses the Trumptard off big style, and watch him shoot himself in both feet. Once he loses it in public, he’s gone.

Originally Posted by raycarey

and that would in turn provoke a 1994/2010 republican wave in 2022....so dems will tread lightly.

No chance, I think . . . changing/evolving demographics are firmly against Republicans unless they fundamentally change

Originally Posted by raycarey

i believe it will all come down to turn out.....and whether or not all the votes get counted.

Ray and I clash on some things but I agree 100% on this.

^ yes. Everything I have seen says trump still has BIG support. Again it looks like this election will be decided by what goes on in a few key states. The electoral college system definately opens the possibility that trump could squeak in again. Unbelievable.

Originally Posted by panama hat

changing/evolving demographics are firmly against Republicans unless they fundamentally change

This is correct. The right in America is aging especially the Evangelicals and are not attracting sufficient numbers of young people to replenish the ranks. States like Texas, Florida, Georgia, Arizona etc. that were once solidly red are turning blue at a very rapid pace. The party bosses are well aware that this election is probably the last time that there will be a Republican president for some time. They will have to completely transform as a party to be viable in the future.

Originally Posted by pickel

He wasn't running against Trump, which requires gaining votes from Republicans. People that support a ban are already voting for Biden. He will lose votes, not gain them.

Baffling.

Originally Posted by pickel

Similar to Brexit, the votes that put Trump over the edge were people that didn't normally vote

You are coming out with some zingers today.

Do you have any evidence to support that in an election with only 55% turnout?

All I saw was a load of the usual redneck republican supporters parroting baldy's election promises: "He's going to drain the swamp!", etc.

Originally Posted by bsnub

That is a correct assumption I would say. Those swing state voters where typically Democrats and many were also union members. They bought into the hope that the orange one would actually change things.

They have clearly been had.

Again, where is the evidence for this?

Everything I saw indicated that it was the Democrats NOT voting that swung it rather than the swing voters that did.

I shall look into it deeper, but if either you or Pickel can produce some evidence I'd like to see it.

So, in 2016

Michigan had its joint lowest turnout since 2004

Wisconsin had its lowest turnout since 2004

Pennsylvania had its second lowest turnout since 2004

I would assert that it was Democrats aggrieved at the treatment of Sanders, plus the Clinton campaign failing to pay attention to those states, that led to a lower Democrat vote, rather than Democrat voters voting for baldy orange cunto.

Added: Say what you like about rednecks, but when it comes to voting they do have a commendable level of turkey-like commitment to voting for thanksgiving.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Everything I saw indicated that it was the Democrats NOT voting that swung it rather than the swing voters that did.

In those rust belt swing states there was indeed a group of voters that switched from Democrat to Trump.

Disaffected rust belt voters embraced Trump. They had no other hope | Richard C Longworth | Opinion | The Guardian

And of course the low turnout hurt the Democrats it always does.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I would assert that it was Democrats aggrieved at the treatment of Sanders, plus the Clinton campaign failing to pay attention to those states, that led to a lower Democrat vote, rather than Democrat voters voting for baldy orange cunto.

It was both that caused the loss. As we all remember...

Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania account for 46 electoral votes. If Clinton had won these states, she could have sealed the presidency with 274 total electoral votes. This election was effectively decided by 107,000 people in these three states. Trump won the popular vote there by that combined amount. That amounts to 0.09 percent of all votes cast in this election.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...state-margins/

The above really just reinforces what a broken system we have with the electoral college. The fact that 107,000 people in three states decided the direction of a country of 327 million. It is insanity.