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

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

He definitely knows how to pitch to millennials.

I don’t like the “You guys are super educated and therefore the ones worthy of the mantle.” You can’t be explicitly telling the noneducated that they aren’t your base like that.  

[cactusflinthead 27627]

Will do. My original plan was on the 20th. 

Fuck Gov. Abbott. We're coming for his ass too.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

3 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

I know I've repeated it ad naseum on here, but please wait until the 19th. The 13th was an extension by Abbott that is under attack in the courts. Until it is a 100% settled matter, please plan on voting during the early voting period starting on the 19th. My concern is that the courts will find the extension illegal, thereby invalidating any votes cast between the 13th and the 19th. If you are able through your circumstances, I would wait until the 19th or later.

That is exactly what we are doing. I trust no one at this point. Still steams me that I don't have a paper receipt, but the machines our location uses do seem to be decent.

[Anastasis 23717]

1 minute ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

I don’t like the “You guys are super educated and therefore the ones worthy of the mantle.” You can’t be explicitly telling the noneducated that they aren’t your base like that.  

I don't think that's how the target audience for those comments will interpret them. 

[BradInATX 9208]

It's a little wild to me that some of you guys do enough arguing about politics IRL that you have playbooks on it. I can count on zero hands the amount of in-depth political arguments I've had recently. I go out of my way to avoid it, but even still, it's not something I encounter frequently.
Where are you guys finding these convos? Family? Friends?

[Dark Horse 2427]

I tend to avoid political discussions like the Rona. I can score a few points on my Dad, and he’ll say “I never thought about it like that” then a week later go back to the same Fox News talking point. 
 

I’m no match for the 24 hour propaganda machine. 

[Tuco 5093]

9 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

I'd like for the current candidate to just not take giant shits constantly on the guy who finished 2nd and is beloved by a massive need voter base for the Democratic Party now and in the future.

I don't think that's controversial.

I don't think Biden is taking a shit on anyone.  

I do think there are plenty of moderate Democrats who talk a lot about party unity, but whine like entitled pricks when a more progressive candidate wins primaries.  (I'm talking Congressional candidates.) 

But, for now, the focus is on winning as many positions as possible in the general elections, particularly for President, in the Senate, and in the House.  After the election is over, I'll worry about the interparty squabbling. 

 

[GopherRock 1773]

Some of the unrepentant Trumpers that I know have gone into full radio silence following his weekend at Walter Reed. I doubt it'll push them away from checking the box for him, but it's a step in the right direction.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

Indiana. Cutters Rule!!

 

 

[gmr548 16697]

70 year old Sooner diehard Trumpkin... friend
 
 

[immamac 44343]

27 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

I know I've repeated it ad naseum on here, but please wait until the 19th. The 13th was an extension by Abbott that is under attack in the courts. Until it is a 100% settled matter, please plan on voting during the early voting period starting on the 19th. My concern is that the courts will find the extension illegal, thereby invalidating any votes cast between the 13th and the 19th. If you are able through your circumstances, I would wait until the 19th or later.

This is literal nonsense, but if you feel this way please wait. 

once a vote is cast early or not it is cast. There is no distinction of "when" a vote is cast, if you vote with a state official there that is an officially cast ballot.

[Eastwood 4394]

7 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

It's a little wild to me that some of you guys do enough arguing about politics IRL that you have playbooks on it. I can count on zero hands the amount of in-depth political arguments I've had recently. I go out of my way to avoid it, but even still, it's not something I encounter frequently.
Where are you guys finding these convos? Family? Friends?

It is all family with me. I blocked friends who are deep into it. This actually started a decade ago. Forwards from grandpa. Lots of easily refutable information. I even had a compassionate sit down with him to explain exactly what he was forwarding. I showed him that the House Bill referenced in one of his emails was not about confiscating guns, but was a bill affecting nurses. I did this with several emails, picking apart all of the patently false information. I carefully explained to him that these emails are created by people who know the information is false in order to dupe trusting souls into buying their products and agenda. He nodded along like he understood. Two days later I got 5 more forwards from him.

About once a month, I will get a text or phone call from my mom. She'll start with a soft opening then dive in once she feels comfortable. She's more blunt over text. For example, she sent a simple "Have you seen this, yet?" with a link to the Plandemic video. I do a quick Google search, see the doctor that is the centerpiece to all this. "Mom, this doctor is an anti-vaxxer." Her response: "She's not against all vaccines. She spoke out against the big medical companies about what they put in them and they had her arrested." Fuck's sake.

Happening this way to a lot of my friends, too. My friends and I actually had a long conversation about it last week. Our parents have become everything they taught us not to be: gullible, lacking sympathy or empathy, cruel in thought, bigoted... Turns out TV and Facebook really do rot your brain. It's a positive feedback loop for them. It's an addiction. It's a shame that my final memories of them might be from this period of time.

[The Dog 44860]

1 hour ago, Dark Horse said:

That CNN poll is an outlier, but the recent polls have been very good for Biden. 

The Biden number is (56%), but Trump's number (41%) is not. 

This poll includes leaners and about 8-10% of the supporters for each candidate might change their vote. 

[DigglerontheHoof 21551]

4 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

 

 

 

free piggyback rides?

[Bookman 4760]

33 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

I know I've repeated it ad naseum on here, but please wait until the 19th. The 13th was an extension by Abbott that is under attack in the courts. Until it is a 100% settled matter, please plan on voting during the early voting period starting on the 19th. My concern is that the courts will find the extension illegal, thereby invalidating any votes cast between the 13th and the 19th. If you are able through your circumstances, I would wait until the 19th or later.

I appreciate the caution, but if the courts don’t stop it before it starts there’s just no way the remedy will be to invalidate the votes.

[BradInATX 9208]

5 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

It is all family with me. I blocked friends who are deep into it. This actually started a decade ago. Forwards from grandpa. Lots of easily refutable information. I even had a compassionate sit down with him to explain exactly what he was forwarding. I showed him that the House Bill referenced in one of his emails was not about confiscating guns, but was a bill affecting nurses. I did this with several emails, picking apart all of the patently false information. I carefully explained to him that these emails are created by people who know the information is false in order to dupe trusting souls into buying their products and agenda. He nodded along like he understood. Two days later I got 5 more forwards from him.

About once a month, I will get a text or phone call from my mom. She'll start with a soft opening then dive in once she feels comfortable. She's more blunt over text. For example, she sent a simple "Have you seen this, yet?" with a link to the Plandemic video. I do a quick Google search, see the doctor that is the centerpiece to all this. "Mom, this doctor is an anti-vaxxer." Her response: "She's not against all vaccines. She spoke out against the big medical companies about what they put in them and they had her arrested." Fuck's sake.

Happening this way to a lot of my friends, too. My friends and I actually had a long conversation about it last week. Our parents have become everything they taught us not to be: gullible, lacking sympathy or empathy, cruel in thought, bigoted... Turns out TV and Facebook really do rot your brain. It's a positive feedback loop for them. It's an addiction. It's a shame that my final memories of them might be from this period of time.

Damn. That's tough, man. Sorry you're dealing with that. I guess I'm fortunate that my immediate family are all Biden voters. I'm not sure I'd have the patience to even try to rehab Trump voters. With Fox News constantly blaring propaganda at them, you're basically fighting an unwinnable war. It's like you said about your dad, you spend a bunch of energy getting one reasonable point across, and one week/30 hours of nonstop Fox News later and they've reset to default. That's gotta be frustrating. I've had similar with a few of my more reasonable rural friends, but I don't really care how they vote. Family is much more frustrating.

[immamac 44343]

Just now, Bookman said:

I appreciate the caution, but if the courts don’t stop it before it starts there’s just no way the remedy will be to invalidate the votes.

I want to stress this. There is absolutely no way under any existing legislation that exists to invalidate previously validated votes. This would have to be new law, and new law cannot be passed before the election results are decided. The SC has already spoken on this in 2000 you have to count all ballots the same way you can't just change the way you count ballots after they have been cast and differently for different people. 

Quote

The court ruled 5–4 on the remedy of the matter, with the majority holding that the Florida Supreme Court’s decision had created new election law—a right reserved for the state legislature—and that no recount could be held in time to satisfy a federal deadline for the selection of state electors.

you can't just make up new fucking rules without legislature. You can invalidate existing legislature as not-valid.

[The Dog 44860]

7 minutes ago, Bookman said:

I appreciate the caution, but if the courts don’t stop it before it starts there’s just no way the remedy will be to invalidate the votes.

agreed with you and immamac - once voting starts the "genie is out of the bottle", so to speak. I think they have to rule before voting begins. The entire challenge is that the governor doesn't have the authority to move the date to start early voting IIRC and they have to rule before the new date or else it stands.

[BradInATX 9208]

17 minutes ago, The Dog said:

The Biden number is (56%), but Trump's number (41%) is not. 

This poll includes leaners and about 8-10% of the supporters for each candidate might change their vote. 

Yeah, definitely an outlier. But if you look at the five polls on RCP.com that have come out since the debate, in aggregate they show an average +3 bump to Biden since the last iteration of the same poll. A 2-3% bump from people disgusted by his debate behavior sounds about right and passes the bullshit test. If those 2-3% hold and don't run back home the first time Trump calls Joe a socialist (they will), that would be the end of Trump's chances. 

To win without much drama, Biden needs to win the popular vote by about 5% to overcome electoral college disadvantages and voter suppression. 5% would get him the rust belt plus Arizona, and maybe Florida. IMO, Florida is the line in the sand where Trump's post-election fuckery will get no traction. The RCP average right now is 9.1%. That's good stuff, although I still expect it to tighten closer to election day.

Edited October 6, 2020 by BradInATX

[Fudge Nuggets 19455]

Have y’all not been paying attention the last 3.75 years?  They will do whatever the fuck they want to do and ain’t nobody going to stop them.

[Eastwood 4394]

1 minute ago, immamac said:

This is literal nonsense, but if you feel this way please wait. 

once a vote is cast early or not it is cast. There is no distinction of "when" a vote is cast, if you vote with a state official there that is an officially cast ballot.

There is absolutely a distinction. The states set their own dates on when a vote can begin. Why would Republicans challenge their own governor over the extension of the early voting period? They are attacking it by saying that it was an overreach of emergency powers and that it was the state legislature's job to issue the extension. There is a non-zero chance that it could happen, so why risk it? I could see them pulling language out of Bush v. Gore to attack it.

For example, "The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the electoral college." That's pulled directly from Bush v. Gore. You can say it is literal nonsense, but the case law is there for the possibility. Further, "History has now favored the voter, and in each of the several States the citizens themselves vote for Presidential electors. When the state legislature vests the right to vote for President in its people, the right to vote as the legislature has prescribed is fundamental; and one source of its fundamental nature lies in the equal weight accorded to each vote and the equal dignity owed to each voter. The State, of course, after granting the franchise in the special context of Article II, can take back the power to appoint electors."

Your vote is vulnerable in Texas, even after you cast it. SCOTUS has said so. The Texas legislature is accusing Abbott of overstepping his bounds and will lean on this language. I choose to remove all doubt and use the state legislature appointed date of 10/19.

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26848]

21 minutes ago, immamac said:

This is literal nonsense, but if you feel this way please wait. 

once a vote is cast early or not it is cast. There is no distinction of "when" a vote is cast, if you vote with a state official there that is an officially cast ballot.

It's shocking but 3 justices signaled a willingness to consider a similar distinction yesterday. 
 

Quote

There were no noted dissents, while Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch would have granted a stay application in full, meaning ballots already submitted that did not have a witness signature would have been rejected.

 

[Eastwood 4394]

12 minutes ago, immamac said:

I want to stress this. There is absolutely no way under any existing legislation that exists to invalidate previously validated votes. This would have to be new law, and new law cannot be passed before the election results are decided. The SC has already spoken on this in 2000 you have to count all ballots the same way you can't just change the way you count ballots after they have been cast and differently for different people. 

you can't just make up new fucking rules without legislature. You can invalidate existing legislature as not-valid.

I think you and I are actually circling the same thing here, but with different results. The Republicans are attack the Abbott extension BECAUSE it wasn't done by the legislature. Therefore, it was an illegal extension and the votes cast during it were not under the laws enacted by the legislature.

[Bozo_Casanova 26848]

59 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

He definitely knows how to pitch to millennials.

It's funny because at the time I thought this was a bad answer and that he sounded doddering live at that moment (otherwise, I thought he did very well last night), but the soundbite seems to have been very well received. it Seems odd that’s Joe Biden would play through social media this well, but here we are. 

Edited October 6, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[SubliminalHorn 7009]

4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Have y’all not been paying attention the last 3.75 years?  They will do whatever the fuck they want to do and ain’t nobody going to stop them.

This. Amusing that there are those that think that votes are considered sacred and would NEVER be thrown out. Shit 3.75 years? Try the last 230 years. 

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

16 minutes ago, immamac said:

I want to stress this. There is absolutely no way under any existing legislation that exists to invalidate previously validated votes. This would have to be new law, and new law cannot be passed before the election results are decided. The SC has already spoken on this in 2000 you have to count all ballots the same way you can't just change the way you count ballots after they have been cast and differently for different people. 

you can't just make up new fucking rules without legislature. You can invalidate existing legislature as not-valid.

I'd also like to point out that while SCOTUS validated the votes cast prior to their ruling below, they set a postmark date by which they have to be received. Not that there is anything messed up with the US Postal Service right now.
 

Quote

 

WASHINGTON (CN) — The U.S. Supreme Court Monday night reinstated a Republican-backed witness signature requirement for absentee ballots in South Carolina, rejecting Democrats’ complaints of voter suppression during the Covid-19 pandemic. The high court granted South Carolina Republicans’ application for stay in part. Due to the Nov. 3 election being less than one month away, the Supreme Court exempted absentee ballots that have already been mailed and received by Wednesday, Oct. 7.

South Carolina Democrats sued election officials last month in federal court and U.S. District Court Judge J. Michelle Childs, a Barack Obama appointee, issued a preliminary injunction against the witness signature requirement on Sept. 18. In spite of the witness signature requirement being in place since 1953, Childs concluded it could increase the risk of voters contracting Covid-19 while forcing other already-infected voters to risk exposing a witness to the disease. Excerpt from Courthouse News Service

 

Edit-- @Bozo_Casanova already on top of things..

Edited October 6, 2020 by Mrs Whiggins

[gmr548 16697]

you can't just make up new fucking rules without legislature. You can invalidate existing legislature as not-valid.

TX GOP:

[Bookman 4760]

And once early voting starts the case should be dismissed as moot.

[immamac 44343]

Show me in Title 7 Subtitle A anywhere where dates are set by legislature on when votiing can occur please and I'll shut up.

[Mrs Whiggins 13050]

4 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

 The Republicans are attack the Abbott extension BECAUSE it wasn't done by the legislature. Therefore, it was an illegal extension and the votes cast during it were not under the laws enacted by the legislature.

THIS times eleventy billion. Dot the 'i' and cross the 't' folks. This is down to Deflategate type precision and how many of you all want to risk a loss because 100,000 votes got tossed?

[The Dog 44860]

This won't have any impact on me as I'm waiting not because I'm skeered but because I'm lazy.

[immamac 44343]

7 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

I think you and I are actually circling the same thing here, but with different results. The Republicans are attack the Abbott extension BECAUSE it wasn't done by the legislature. Therefore, it was an illegal extension and the votes cast during it were not under the laws enacted by the legislature.

ah, yes I just confirmed that. 

You are saying it's an area of ambiguity and I'm saying it's a area of "timing". Timing as long as it's before Nov 3rd would just be qualified as "early voting". Early voting has started and was started as soon as the first ballot was eligible to be returned lawfully.

You can send back your mail in ballot now, early voting is valid it's just whether or not they have an in person proctor that hasn't been decided.

[Dahobbs 18318]

26 minutes ago, Bookman said:

I appreciate the caution, but if the courts don’t stop it before it starts there’s just no way the remedy will be to invalidate the votes.

Yup. That's my take as well. A court could stop further votes from being collected, but it couldn't invalidate submitted votes. 

[BradInATX 9208]

2 minutes ago, The Dog said:

This won't have any impact on me as I'm waiting not because I'm skeered but because I'm lazy.

This right here. I've always found the middle of the 2nd week to have almost no lines too. Rainy and/or cold day preferable since unlike most of the olds I'm not going to melt if some water gets on me. 

Edited October 6, 2020 by BradInATX

[Eastwood 4394]

5 minutes ago, Bookman said:

And once early voting starts the case should be dismissed as moot.

 

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Yup. That's my take as well. A court could stop further votes from being collected, but it couldn't invalidate submitted votes. 

Should and could are the operative words. We might just be left shaking our heads while reading an opinion.

Look, I'm not trying to be chicken little here. If a person absolutely must vote any time between the 13th and 19th because of their circumstances, then please, please, please vote. I don't care if you're R or D or I, just vote. We need 100% of the eligible voices to let the country and world know who we are as a people. However, due to the conditions of our time and the uncertainty that the Texas GOP has put around the extension, however minute, I choose to follow the legislature's start date for in-person voting and not Abbott's. I intend to remove all doubt, within my control, that my vote will be counted.

[Hank Kingsley 21780]

 

[Hank Kingsley 21780]

 

[Storm the Field 5366]

2 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

It's still +8 even if you go with their "low turnout" LV model.

[Eastwood 4394]

32 minutes ago, immamac said:

ah, yes I just confirmed that. 

You are saying it's an area of ambiguity and I'm saying it's a area of "timing". Timing as long as it's before Nov 3rd would just be qualified as "early voting". Early voting has started and was started as soon as the first ballot was eligible to be returned lawfully.

You can send back your mail in ballot now, early voting is valid it's just whether or not they have an in person proctor that hasn't been decided.

Yeah, that's my fault for not distinguishing in-person early voting from mail-in ballot voting.

[Patrick Bateman 3966]

4 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

Important....

Also...... Biden starting to press in Texas for an advantage.

 

[immamac 44343]

1 minute ago, Eastwood said:

Yeah, that's my fault for not distinguishing in-person early voting from mail-in ballot voting.

I'm saying by law they are same same (apparently)

[BradInATX 9208]

5 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

[Ghost of LL 15698]

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

Hard core Trump supporters are even bigger frontrunners than most political fanboys. There's a fine line in messaging. The Democrats need to convince their voters it's too close for comfort and every vote is needed, but they also need Trump supporters to believe he's going to lose. 

If he's painted as the guy who's actually going to lose to the libs then even more of them will stay home. 

I have been saying this for some time.  As our politics becomes more like sports, our behavior as voters becomes a lot more like sports fans.  If the Longhorns suck, am I rushing out to go to DKRTMS?  No, of course not.  

Trump voters are very much that way.  They're not motivated by policy.  They're poorly educated people who are often infrequent voters.  And with no policy motivation, they're all about the "team."  If the team is losing bigly, they won't bother to show up.

3 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

I don’t think I believe this is even remotely close, but maybe?  It was always going to be a possibility that he lost bigly, but 16 points man- that’s 50% more than Reagan in 84 territory, right?  If it was 16 points we’d see him up 7 in Texas. That doesn’t seem right. 

I don't think it's wrong.

Trump can't get over about 42%.  So as @The Dog rightly pointed out, the poll is not an outlier in that respect.  It's an outlier only in that it has virtually every undecided going to Biden (and, more importantly, voting).

I'm not sure how realistic that is.  I think a lot of the undecideds will just decide not to vote.  But I think a lot of them will vote for Biden.  The more Biden looks calm and (even moderately) capable in the midst of this Trump shitstorm, the better vis-a-vis undecideds.

There's a really weird thing with the Trump campaign right now.  It doesn't appear anymore like it's trying to persuade undecideds.  I'm not even sure it's trying to do much in the way of motivating leaners.  And there's absolutely no electoral strategy.  It's just geared toward trying to satisfy Trump's ego.  And Trump's ego would rather have 40% evenly spread across all the states (and lose in the EC 538-0) than win a bunch of shithole states (I see you, West Virginia).  He'd rather have the passionate love of 10% than the grudging support of 50%.  And that's how he's running his campaign.

[Dahobbs 18318]

25 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

 

Should and could are the operative words. We might just be left shaking our heads while reading an opinion.

Look, I'm not trying to be chicken little here. If a person absolutely must vote any time between the 13th and 19th because of their circumstances, then please, please, please vote. I don't care if you're R or D or I, just vote. We need 100% of the eligible voices to let the country and world know who we are as a people. However, due to the conditions of our time and the uncertainty that the Texas GOP has put around the extension, however minute, I choose to follow the legislature's start date for in-person voting and not Abbott's. I intend to remove all doubt, within my control, that my vote will be counted.

I get it. But, if they are going to get votes thrown out in this method, then they are going to go much farther and nothing will matter anyway. 

[immamac 44343]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I get it. But, if they are going to get votes thrown out in this method, then they are going to go much farther and nothing will matter anyway. 

Exactly this - if we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater then votes don't count, ballots don't count, democracy is dead.

[G650 14437]

4 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I have been saying this for some time.  As our politics becomes more like sports, our behavior as voters becomes a lot more like sports fans.

My wife has really been on this analogy lately. I quite agree

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

And Trump's ego would rather have 40% evenly spread across all the states (and lose in the EC 538-0) than win a bunch of shithole states (I see you, West Virginia).

good post, but disagree with this part.   he is big into the us v them of politics, and loves us states.  he'll tell everyone CA is shit, IL is shit because he knows it soothes the anxieties of folks left behind in WV.  he tells every alabaman and tennessee troglodyte they are the 'real' americans.

[Dahobbs 18318]

Just now, G650 said:

My wife has really been on this analogy lately. I quite agree

[Voldemort86 2259]

3 hours ago, Post Oak said:

I enjoy the polls. But I'm inclined not to believe any of them.  I've been bitten before

I don’t think the polls will keep democrats away from voting. Too many of them made the mistake last time. Millions of democrats assumed that trump was going to lose and either they didn’t need to go vote at all or they can protest vote 3rd party. The national 3rd party popular vote was about 8% and thankfully it will be much lower this time.

[Michael Knight 13217]

18 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Cool. If we are related to them we should probably unpeople them.  If they are on our street maybe burn their house down. It's only 45% of the voting public. We should send them all to concentration camps or something. 

None of that upsets me. You can choose to do whatever you want. I choose to internally roll my eyes whenever I hear someone talking about how awesome he is. And I choose to roll my eyes whenever someone blames him for rain on their wedding day or some other nonsense that has nothing really to do with him, which happens a lot (note- not only to him- but every president that we've ever had- it's the nature of the job).   

ah I remember 2016