Jump to content

2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

Patrick Bateman

By Patrick Bateman
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19070

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Agree - a one term presidency is not a problem given the present circumstances. It is a luxury and stabilizing. And it is consistent with many of those willing to vote for Biden in 2020 and our general perception that Biden is running as a caretaker President. 

Sure. And that’s probably the way it turns out being a 1 termer.  But there’s no upside in saying that before the 2022 midterm election elections are over for the Dems. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 39k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

I am so thrilled tonight! I spoke with my mom and asked her how my dad was taking the election. She said after every network declared Biden the winner, he turned off Fox News and said “Well, glad t

HenryJames
HenryJames
Thatguy
Thatguy

This was my experience in Galveston County, except for one thing. I came in and presented my ID to the geriatric at the front who printed out my pin number. I took my pin number to a table where two B

Posted Images

Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19070

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


 

 


It's definitely not a push. The bottom line is that each additional vote is more likely to benefit democrats because they're more likely to come from democratic constituencies - youth, minority, etc. There are a lot more non voters in these groups than in the older, whiter GOP leaning side. The lattter votes at much higher rates, doesn't have as many bodies to pull off the bench. So yes there are little old church ladies, but on a whole increased turnout benefits democrats because the additional votes, as a whole, will skew more blue than the existing electorate.

 

Like I said- I think it’s probably net benefit to Dems if everyone showed up, but probably not as beneficial as many might think. I don’t think it would push Texas outside the range where candidates matter and make it a slam dunk. I might also well be wrong. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16580

Posted
Posted
A fair number of non-voters really have no interest in voting. It's really another chore or waste of their time. In some cases, they really don't even know who is running or any difference between the candidates. They don't post ad nauseam about politics like we do. They might be registered only because it sounded like a good idea at the time.
You also have some people that shallowly self-identify with a party but they wouldn't be able to expand on why outside of one sentence. I think these people are very unreliable voters as well. they care but maybe not enough to spend more than 10 minutes in line. They also don't know much about the candidates other than the party.
Many of these people are still registered voters. As of the 2018 midterm in Texas, the SOS office reported 79 percent of voting age population was registered. 53 percent of registered voters voted, and that was a historically high turnout midterm election. In 2016, 78 percent of VAP was registered, 59 percent of registered voters cast a ballot.

In 2014, closer to an "average" midterm, 74 percent registered and 34 percent of those registered voted. 71/38 in 2010. 78/33 in 2006. I could keep going but we all know midterm turnout historically lags presidential turnout.

Looking up these numbers, I am now more skeptocal of the claim that 70 percent of registered voters participate in an average midterm. So the analysis shared by washpark is flawed by either a.) projecting turnout number unprecedented in the past 50 years would still not favor Biden, or b.) If they're using average midterm turnout instead of 70 percent and just blatantly fucked up communicating that, even entertaining the idea that any presidential election, let alone this one, would have such low turnout.giphy.gif?cid=349c9dd7hnsbdrxkxip3q18oubv3h5xw94u9ao8jauyrmw19&rid=giphy.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bolverk

bolverk 29677

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, gmr548 said:


 

 


It's definitely not a push. The bottom line is that each additional vote is more likely to benefit democrats because they're more likely to come from democratic constituencies - youth, minority, etc. There are a lot more non voters in these groups than in the older, whiter GOP leaning side. The lattter votes at much higher rates, doesn't have as many bodies to pull off the bench. So yes there are little old church ladies, but on a whole increased turnout benefits democrats because the additional votes, as a whole, will skew more blue than the existing electorate.

 

All of which is precisely why Republicans tend to throw up as many obstacles as possible so as to lower turnout. We've got a whole thread on that phenomenon, @Wulaw Horn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/biden-single-term-082129

Quote

“If Biden is elected,” a prominent adviser to the campaign said, “he’s going to be 82 years old in four years and he won’t be running for reelection.”

The adviser argued that public acknowledgment of that reality could help Biden mollify younger voters, especially on the left, who are unexcited by his candidacy and fear that his nomination would serve as an eight-year roadblock to the next generation of Democrats.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16580

Posted
Posted
Like I said- I think it’s probably net benefit to Dems if everyone showed up, but probably not as beneficial as many might think. I don’t think it would push Texas outside the range where candidates matter and make it a slam dunk. I might also well be wrong. 
It wouldn't still be a reliably red state that elects Dan Patrick, Sid Miller, etc. though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wulaw Horn

Wulaw Horn 19070

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, gmr548 said:
10 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:
Like I said- I think it’s probably net benefit to Dems if everyone showed up, but probably not as beneficial as many might think. I don’t think it would push Texas outside the range where candidates matter and make it a slam dunk. I might also well be wrong. 

It wouldn't still be a reliably red state that elects Dan Patrick, Sid Miller, etc. though.

Sure. That was my point about candidates mattering and we might end up with better choices. Maybe. Bowl’s point seems to me (and I could be reading more into it than I should) that it becomes slam dunk for Dems and I don’t think that’s probably right. But yeah- maybe it gets from any republican will win to a good republican is needed to win. And that would be a big step forward. 
The one thing I’m proud of our state for is that Trump did not win the primary, ran well below national levels, and even with a candidate Clinton that very few liked still lost a ton of vote share from Romney. 
that makes me believe maybe we aren’t as inept as we are sometimes portrayed. That and the large differential between Abbott and a few others and Cruz/Patrick. Candidates matter some (at the margins) here. I like that. Compare that to some of the other places like NH or WI where vote share for Pres and Senate we’re almost identical. 

Edited by Wulaw Horn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mo Horn

Mo Horn 8843

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Agree - a one term presidency is not a problem given the present circumstances. It is a luxury and stabilizing. And it is consistent with many of those willing to vote for Biden in 2020 and our general perception that Biden is running as a caretaker President. 

Wait, I was told that this was the dumbest thing ever posted on a forum, in the history of the internet. That was going to be my legacy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

“Socialist Farmers for Biden” would make a great sign to see in rural Texas.

Yea it’d get trashed, but you’d probably see more Biden signs.

You can buy multipack sheets of Kevlar off of ebay for 30.00. Affix the sign to the Kevlar and stick it in a large pile of manure for anyone on foot, and it might deter some folks. Or, stick it in a yard like mine and the clay soil will cement itself around the sign and you'll have it on location for a century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16580

Posted
Posted



Sure. That was my point about candidates mattering and we might end up with better choices. Maybe. Bowl’s point seems to me (and I could be reading more into it than I should) that it becomes slam dunk for Dems and I don’t think that’s probably right. But yeah- maybe it gets from any republican will win to a good republican is needed to win. And that would be a big step forward. 
The one thing I’m proud of our state for is that Trump did not win the primary, ran well below national levels, and even with a candidate Clinton that very few liked still lost a ton of vote share from Romney. 
that makes me believe maybe we aren’t as inept as we are sometimes portrayed. That and the large differential between Abbott and a few others and Cruz/Patrick. Candidates matter some (at the margins) here. I like that. Compare that to some of the other places like NH or WI where vote share for Pres and Senate we’re almost identical. 


If everyone voted, it's probably democrats' to lose. I think GOP behavior tells you that as much as anything. But it's not California. Still, the number of non voting young and minority voters in that scenario so vastly dwarfs the number of nonvoting gop olds that it probably closes the gap and then some. But there are some gop that don't bother. I think we saw that with Cruz in 2018. Pre election, most probably would've said 4mm votes wins it for Beto. But true believers came out for Cruz at nearly presidential levels because Beto was an actual threat.

Of course, the wildcard in this discussion is the truly apathetic that don't vote in presidential elections, not bc their vote didn't matter, bc of suppression tactics, or whatever. Maybe Kanye would get some votes.

We voted for Trump +9 and proudly elect the likes of Patrick, Miller, etc. Politics completely aside, these are profoundly stupid human beings that do not hide it well. That's indisputable. Stupdity is very clearly an electoral virtue here. I do not think that is much to be proud of but to each his own.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16580

Posted
Posted
Well--old Gen Xers/young Boomers, explain yourselves.

50-64 isn’t Xers but a combo of older Xers and younger boomers. Lots of X in the 34-49 group.
I was mostly trolling but it's the two groups that contain gen x that are down there.The other two age groups, in particular the olds, really let you know who's driving that particular result
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Dog

The Dog 44053

Posted
Posted
I was mostly trolling but it's the two groups that contain gen x that are down there.The other two age groups, in particular the olds, really let you know who's driving that particular result

Is like to see a breakdown of income and education for those groups too. I have a theory but can’t really elaborate without knowing that. I’m Gen X and know plenty who are still voting for Trump and several who will vote Biden.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Voldemort86

Voldemort86 2259

Posted
Posted

The narrative today is that the trump team is struggling to attack Harris.

they’ve called her 50 different things. Nothing has really stuck so far and they don’t even have a catchy nickname for her. Will they get desperate and try to attack her sex life? Would be a big mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29191

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

The narrative today is that the trump team is struggling to attack Harris.

i decided to watch fox news for a few min as i was waiting for this event.

the main talking points:

-after being in line with biden, she's now left of bernie

-progressives are pissed because biden/dems passed warren over, so they may be looking around

(they don't care that the first two points contradict each other)

-dems might not trust her because she took money from trump, ivanka, mnuchin, etc

all pretty worthless, though expected.  i still don't understand how the 3rd point works against dems.  if anything, that makes me think more of kamala and less of republicans who gave to her.  you can control who you give to a lot more than you can control who contributes to you.  makes no sense to try to hang that around kamala's neck.  sad.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48106

Posted
Posted

His speech has been pretty tremendous. I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's up there with the great speeches of Kennedy and such, but fuck in the void of shit that has been the last 3.5 years, leadership and hope and unity have been at such low supply that this has me ready to kneecap the kool-aid man and run through that motherfucker's wall. 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
washparkhorn

washparkhorn 9939

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i decided to watch fox news for a few min as i was waiting for this event.

the main talking points:

-after being in line with biden, she's now left of bernie

-progressives are pissed because biden/dems passed warren over, so they may be looking around

(they don't care that the first two points contradict each other)

-dems might not trust her because she took money from trump, ivanka, mnuchin, etc

all pretty worthless, though expected.  i still don't understand how the 3rd point works against dems.  if anything, that makes me think more of kamala and less of republicans who gave to her.  you can control who you give to a lot more than you can control who contributes to you.  makes no sense to try to hang that around kamala's neck.  sad.

“They had one weapon left and both knew it: treachery.” -- Frank Herbert, Dune.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29191

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Biden's speech is way too long. 

when the lone attack is that he's a demented, declined old gaffe-machine hiding in the basement, a long, coherent speech is the perfect response.

joe already has the whole half-chuckle "is this guy serious" face down cold when mentioning trump's garbage.  he'll need it in the debates.  hillary engaged him on his nonsense.  joe needs to look at the audience and say "give me a fucking break with your bullshit." (paraphrasing)

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...