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

[Wulaw Horn 19560]

13 hours ago, The Dog said:

Good chat on 538: Are Arizona, Georgia, and Texas really in play?

tl;dr version - Arizona might be; Georgia and Texas are not.

Arizona isn’t in play. Trump has literally no chance of winning there. He’s more likely to win Wisconsin. 

[Guest Lobo]

16 hours ago, gmr548 said:

I'd bet (damn I'm clever amirite) at least two thirds of people betting on politics will vote for Donald Trump. The line is set as a equilibrium to get action. Biden has to be a really, really good value to get someone to bet against their own desire. Especially when you consider that at this point, this country has two sets of political "reality," I use that term loosely but I don't know what else to call it.

 

What kind of line would it take for you to bet OU over Texas?* Same thing.

 

*If the answer to that question isn't "no such line can exist bc OU sucks" then fuck you, btw.  

Well, your analysis gets one thing right...Trump is the OU of Presidents.  dOnald trUmp.  Right there in the name and in the suckitude.  And as the old adage goes, my two favorite teams are Texas and whoever is playing Oklahoma.  And this week Biden is playing 'em, so he's not my team...but I'm sure as hell pulling for him. 

Edited May 29, 2020 by Lobo

[thepop 4418]

I’ve never been this eager to vote in an election. Turns out Biden not being an exciting candidate doesn’t even matter.

[SubliminalHorn 6995]

Just now, thepop said:

I’ve never been this eager to vote in an election. Turns out Biden not being an exciting candidate doesn’t even matter.

I think it is better he isn’t a “exciting” candidate. America wants a return to normalcy. Where we hardly ever hear about the President unless something important is happening. This country is exhausted after 3.5 years of interesting times. 

[Voldemort86 2259]

54 minutes ago, thepop said:

I’ve never been this eager to vote in an election. Turns out Biden not being an exciting candidate doesn’t even matter.

Fucking this.

I don’t care if the pandemic is raging in November. That fucking crooked eyed loser Ken “Indictment” Paxton isn’t going to stop me from voting. 

[The Dog 44771]

10 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

so....exactly what everyone has been saying. 

Well it goes deeper than the "tl;dr" version and discusses the prospects of each state "turning blue" at some point in the future. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Grade of D as in David 13255]

40 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Quote

Among Trump supporters, 84 percent of adults say they would definitely vote for him in November, compared with 68 percent of Biden supporters. Among Trump backers, 87 percent say they are enthusiastic about supporting him and 64 percent are “very enthusiastic.” Among Biden supporters, 74 percent say they are enthusiastic about backing him, with 31 percent saying they are “very enthusiastic.”

When a Biden-Trump contest is filtered only through those who currently say they are certain to vote, the former vice president’s margin is cut in half (51-46 percent). That highlights the significance of efforts by both campaigns to register and turn out every possible supporter and heightens the ongoing debate over whether states should make voting by mail easier, which Trump opposes even as his party has promoted it as a tool.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-leads-trump-in-post-abc-poll-as-presidents-coronavirus-rating-slips/2020/05/29/37c0dac8-a1d1-11ea-9590-1858a893bd59_story.html

 

That lead is nowhere large enough yet. The Trump cult will definitely show up. Couple that with the "Independents" holding steady at 39%, just gives me a bad feeling about this.

[Newy25 7894]

5 minutes ago, Grade of D as in David said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-leads-trump-in-post-abc-poll-as-presidents-coronavirus-rating-slips/2020/05/29/37c0dac8-a1d1-11ea-9590-1858a893bd59_story.html

 

That lead is nowhere large enough yet. The Trump cult will definitely show up. Couple that with the "Independents" holding steady at 39%, just gives me a bad feeling about this.

When the polls showed Hillary with a large lead heading into the election, did the independent breakdown look like this then? 

[SubliminalHorn 6995]

Biden needs to go on TV with Obama and Bush to talk to the nation and try and calm things down. It would be big for the country and would put Biden next to past presidents and place that vision in voters’ heads. I don’t think it will happen, but it should. 

[Hank Kingsley 21598]

Maybe leave Bush out of it 

[SubliminalHorn 6995]

37 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Maybe leave Bush out of it 

Yeah, I know. Add Carter too then. The living Presidents with Biden with them? Pretty powerful symbol. But it won’t happen, so 🤷🏽‍♂️

[Guest Lobo]

actually his video during peak-Covid registered as very effective and was part of the inspiration for the Lincoln Project to move forward with their never-Trump campaign a few weeks ago.  You get just 5-10% of traditional GOP voters who went for Trump in 2016 and realize they can't do that again, and Trump is beyond defeated and their cherry on top is they can still preserve their Senate majority.  That's much closer to happening than people realize.  

Having said that, when I see the knocks on Biden...I get it.  I didn't particularly like either candidate in 2004 (Bush/Kerry) and went with Bednarik but I knew both major party candidates to be good men and good Americans.  Same in 2008, McCain being an exceptional America.  In 2012, I really didn't like the policy road Obama was on, but he and Romney are damn solid men and love their fellow Americans.  but I missed a meeting I guess, in 2016...the two choices were two of the biggest pieces of human shit to walk the face of the Earth.  And now, my choices are two fucking blubbering septuagenarians who've both been accused of rape.  And I get to make the choice during riots and pandemics, both of which could have been massively assuaged with just a modicum of vision and leadership.  What the fuck did we do to deserve this?  And don't tell me it's because I work in the fossil fuels business.  

So here's where I am.  Biden says stupid shit as a gaffe, when he goes off-script or gets away from himself.  It's an exception, not the rule.  Trump says stupid shit as a matter of policy, it's the core of his script, he only acts human as an accidental last resort.  As such, fuck my usual third party protest votes, it's Biden or Bust.  It's Trump is Treason.  

Biden is going to win this thing.  Y'all may worry about electoral fraud, Trump pouting about the results, delayed election days, polling station mishaps, etc.  

I am here to tell you, that is a concern...but I promise you with 100% certainty---when Trump is defeated in November, again when the EC casts their votes, and again on Inauguration Day...the mass shootings in this country around those times will make Las Vegas, Sutherland Springs, and Orlando look like a paintball game.  The "thank god, it's over" rallies that will occur after that will serve as the biggest beacons of "light 'em up" mentality the nation has ever known.  

[Biff Tannen 46061]

1 hour ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Yeah, I know. Add Carter too then. The living Presidents with Biden with them? Pretty powerful symbol. But it won’t happen, so 🤷🏽‍♂️

It's crazy to think that every living president would without question vote for Biden over dotard.  They know what is best for the country, yet 30-40% of Americans are too stupid to understand when they are being bludgeoned in the face with reality.  We truly may be too stupid to exist.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Until the democrats get their shit together, I sadly expect Trump to win again. He is going to cheat. He has already been impeached for cheating.  He is cheating in front of our faces right now and everyone is letting him get away with it because we now accept and expect it.

[Biff Tannen 46061]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Until the democrats get their shit together, I sadly expect Trump to win again. He is going to cheat. He has already been impeached for cheating.  He is cheating in front of our faces right now and everyone is letting him get away with it because we now accept and expect it.

Fuck that. We should and will fight. 

[Hank Kingsley 21598]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Until the democrats get their shit together, I sadly expect Trump to win again. He is going to cheat. He has already been impeached for cheating.  He is cheating in front of our faces right now and everyone is letting him get away with it because we now accept and expect it.

What entails Democrats getting their shit together? I don't disagree with you, but what in your opinion needs to be done? 

[Ghost of LL 15664]

On 5/31/2020 at 7:22 AM, Grade of D as in David said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-leads-trump-in-post-abc-poll-as-presidents-coronavirus-rating-slips/2020/05/29/37c0dac8-a1d1-11ea-9590-1858a893bd59_story.html

 

That lead is nowhere large enough yet. The Trump cult will definitely show up. Couple that with the "Independents" holding steady at 39%, just gives me a bad feeling about this.

I have to tell you, in am intensely unconcerned about these "enthusiasm" numbers.  I think it reflects an overly literal interpretation of the poll question by the respondents, and does not account for the role negative partisanship plays.  

The question is "Would you say you are very enthusiastic about supporting Biden, somewhat enthusiastic, not so enthusiastic or not enthusiastic at all?"  If you asked me that question, I would say "not so enthusiastic."  Joe Biden was my second-to-last pick in the primaries.  I would've preferred any number of other candidates.  But he's the candidate we've got.  I'm not enthusiastic about supporting him.  I'm very "meh" about Joe Biden.

But if you asked me "would you crawl a mile across broken glass to vote against Donald Trump," then my answer is an unequivocal "yes."

I think there are a lot of people just like me.  But this poll doesn't ask the right questions to figure out just how many such people there are.

 

[henrygandorf 29219]

21 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I have to tell you, in am intensely unconcerned about these "enthusiasm" numbers.  I think it reflects an overly literal interpretation of the poll question by the respondents, and does not account for the role negative partisanship plays.  

The question is "Would you say you are very enthusiastic about supporting Biden, somewhat enthusiastic, not so enthusiastic or not enthusiastic at all?"  If you asked me that question, I would say "not so enthusiastic."  Joe Biden was my second-to-last pick in the primaries.  I would've preferred any number of other candidates.  But he's the candidate we've got.  I'm not enthusiastic about supporting him.  I'm very "meh" about Joe Biden.

But if you asked me "would you crawl a mile across broken glass to vote against Donald Trump," then my answer is an unequivocal "yes."

I think there are a lot of people just like me.  But this poll doesn't ask the right questions to figure out just how many such people there are.

agreed.  and i'm certain that in other years, in primaries and general elections, that enthusiasm = turnout, but not when you're voting against somebody.  out of 5, i'm a 1 or 2 enthusiasm level to vote for biden.  but i'm 100% going to vote.  i would assume it's typically not like that.

separately, i would assume that typically enthusiastic supporters are able to convince others to vote their way.  but i don't really see trump voters changing anyone's minds.  people's minds are made up.  fuck enthusiasm at this point.

[Storm the Field 5360]

Polls that covered the last 3-4 days aren't showing any Trump "law and order" bounce so far.

YouGov National (5/29-30)

Biden 48, Trump 40. Biden +3, Trump -2 since 5/26. 

Morning Consult National (6/1) 

Biden 46, Trump 37. Biden no change, Trump -4 since 5/24.

PPP Michigan (5/29-30)

Biden 50, Trump 44. Biden and Trump both -1 since 5/19. 

[cactusflinthead 27626]

I agree that enthusiasm needs to be measured negatively as well as positively. I'm not exactly thrilled with the prospect of Uncle Joe, but my ballot finger is itchy to smite as many Republicans as I can. I can't get more fired up. Isn't that what Bitecofer is talking about when she says 'negative partisanship' ?

[Message Board User 12405]

8 minutes ago, Storm the Field said:

Polls that covered the last 3-4 days aren't showing any Trump "law and order" bounce so far.

YouGov National (5/29-30)

Biden 48, Trump 40. Biden +3, Trump -2 since 5/26. 

Morning Consult National (6/1) 

Biden 46, Trump 37. Biden no change, Trump -4 since 5/24.

PPP Michigan (5/29-30)

Biden 50, Trump 44. Biden and Trump both -1 since 5/19. 

Just as important, Biden's you ain't black comment does not appear, so far, to have affected his numbers.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

9 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

Just as important, Biden's you ain't black comment does not appear, so far, to have affected his numbers.

not one single dude in america said "don's my guy, not that racist joe" because of that comment.

[Message Board User 12405]

2 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

not one single dude in america said "don's my guy, not that racist joe" because of that comment.

Pos rep for the handle.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

Sorry if already asked, but can "terrorists" vote? 

[Jack Straw 2955]

On 5/31/2020 at 11:11 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Until the democrats get their shit together, I sadly expect Trump to win again. He is going to cheat. He has already been impeached for cheating.  He is cheating in front of our faces right now and everyone is letting him get away with it because we now accept and expect it.

people need to stop asking "will there be a legitimate election," and instead start asking "after Trump is re-elected in an illegitimate election, what are we going to do about it?" 

anyone who has been paying attention already knows the answer to the first question.  

 

[WBT 20884]

5 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I have to tell you, in am intensely unconcerned about these "enthusiasm" numbers.  I think it reflects an overly literal interpretation of the poll question by the respondents, and does not account for the role negative partisanship plays.  

The question is "Would you say you are very enthusiastic about supporting Biden, somewhat enthusiastic, not so enthusiastic or not enthusiastic at all?"  If you asked me that question, I would say "not so enthusiastic."  Joe Biden was my second-to-last pick in the primaries.  I would've preferred any number of other candidates.  But he's the candidate we've got.  I'm not enthusiastic about supporting him.  I'm very "meh" about Joe Biden.

But if you asked me "would you crawl a mile across broken glass to vote against Donald Trump," then my answer is an unequivocal "yes."

I think there are a lot of people just like me.  But this poll doesn't ask the right questions to figure out just how many such people there are.

 

Exactly.  Negative enthusiasm against Hillary got Trump elected to begin with.  The negative enthusiasm is strongly against Trump now.

[Message Board User 12405]

 

[Horn Dogg 4277]

On 5/29/2020 at 8:35 AM, SubliminalHorn said:

I think it is better he isn’t a “exciting” candidate. America wants a return to normalcy. Where we hardly ever hear about the President unless something important is happening. This country is exhausted after 3.5 years of interesting times. 

Agreed.  I’m at the point that I would get a lot of satisfaction from a president that would just shut the fuck up for a year and do nothing.  Biden doesn’t motivate me very much other than the fact he’s not Trump, but I would be happy to see him win and I’m stoked to get out and vote for him.  I would probably be happy seeing Trump defeated by a puppy, or a rotten banana, or a broken vacuum cleaner.  I’ll even go on record and say that I hate Trump more than OU.  That shithead must go!

[Horn Dogg 4277]

30 minutes ago, Jack Straw said:

people need to stop asking "will there be a legitimate election," and instead start asking "after Trump is re-elected in an illegitimate election, what are we going to do about it?" 

anyone who has been paying attention already knows the answer to the first question.  

 

 No shit, that’s my biggest fear.  You know he’s going to try....

Edited June 1, 2020 by Horn Dogg
Typo

[mdmost 43850]

Joe needs to blow him the fuck out. Leave no doubt. 

[Homercles 10206]

At this point I’d take Oog from aqua teen to lead this country 

 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Homercles

[Message Board User 12405]

 

[staboner 5067]

1 hour ago, Jack Straw said:

people need to stop asking "will there be a legitimate election," and instead start asking "after Trump is re-elected in an illegitimate election, what are we going to do about it?" 

anyone who has been paying attention already knows the answer to the first question.  

 

yeah no shit man. been wondering what these threads are even about. 

 

[Bone3421 716]

Let's say some Republicans wake up and help vote him out...what's the margin you think we could see a 60/40% win or higher?

[Bruh Man 3160]

Always in the fetal position. God, this party sickens me.

 

[Message Board User 12405]

I want to believe...

[Ghost of LL 15664]

25 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

Always in the fetal position. God, this party sickens me.

 

She's running in Kentucky.  You know--a state where 65% of the people are going to vote for Trump (and who presumably hope that Trump will have a second term).

She has to talk that way if she is going to have a chance of winning.

[Biff Tannen 46061]

1 hour ago, Message Board User said:

I want to believe...

If you will it, it is no dream.

[cactusflinthead 27626]

 

[cactusflinthead 27626]

 

[deac_tracy 517]

Are there any articles or polls yet showing how these George Floyd events affect Trump's chances in MN? He only lost to Hillary there by less than 2% in 2016. In 2018, the GOP gained 2 seats in the House making it the state with the largest amount of gains for the GOP. I could be wrong but I think MN is definitely in play for Trump this election year.

[gmr548 16681]

8 minutes ago, deac_tracy said:

I could be wrong but I think MN is definitely in play for Trump this election year.

Based on existing data I don't think MN is in play. Or rather, it isn't in play in terms of deciding the election. He could win there I guess, but if he does, he's almost certainly swept the rust belt and FL and won again anyway. But really I doubt it's in play at all.

In general I think the handicappers/media are putting way too much stock in one result vs the state's overall behavior. Not unlike TX with Beto getting close. The GOP did pick up two rural house seats in '18, but they also lost two house seats. Net of zero, and trading rural areas for the suburbs of the Twin Cities is a mathematical loser. They got between 39 and 42 percent in the two senate races and governor's race - that includes a senate special election and an open governor's race where the GOP ran a Hennepin County (Minneapolis) Commissioner, which I would think maximizes their performance in the Twin Cities. GOP received no more than 45 percent statewide in any race. That 45 percent was against Keith Ellison, a black, Muslim Bernie Sanders surrogate (so not in the white suburban moderate wheelhouse by any means) with some sort of domestic abuse or adultery accusation (don't remember specifics). To stick with the TX comparison, they were roughly as competitive as Lupe Valdez at the statewide level.

Trump came within two points of winning the state, but only had 44.9 percent of the vote. That's not a winning total, that's a huge anti-Clinton factor. Not much polling but the most recent poll was May 18-20 and had Biden +5, 49-44, which I'd note is consistent with Trump's generally inelastic support. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Minnesota.html

I'm not aware of any polls within the past few days, so barring some massive change - which I wouldn't expect because honestly, people's stance on this, like so many other things, is highly partisan - it's probably safe to say Trump is at a big disadvantage. Hillary ain't walking through that door. With MN's history up to and including 2018, and Trump's performance there, I don't think there's a significant chance Trump wins absent some sort of national landslide that seems unfathomable right now. 46 percent of the vote will win the state for Biden and that should be a relatively easy get in a blue state in this environment.

[6th Street 6654]

The only shot Trump had at winning MN was if Bernie Sanders were nominated - and even then a huge long shot based on the demographics that gmr cited

[deac_tracy 517]

18 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Based on existing data I don't think MN is in play. Or rather, it isn't in play in terms of deciding the election. He could win there I guess, but if he does, he's almost certainly swept the rust belt and FL and won again anyway. But really I doubt it's in play at all.

In general I think the handicappers/media are putting way too much stock in one result vs the state's overall behavior. Not unlike TX with Beto getting close. The GOP did pick up two rural house seats in '18, but they also lost two house seats. Net of zero, and trading rural areas for the suburbs of the Twin Cities is a mathematical loser. They got between 39 and 42 percent in the two senate races and governor's race - that includes a senate special election and an open governor's race where the GOP ran a Hennepin County (Minneapolis) Commissioner, which I would think maximizes their performance in the Twin Cities. GOP received no more than 45 percent statewide in any race. That 45 percent was against Keith Ellison, a black, Muslim Bernie Sanders surrogate (so not in the white suburban moderate wheelhouse by any means) with some sort of domestic abuse or adultery accusation (don't remember specifics). To stick with the TX comparison, they were roughly as competitive as Lupe Valdez at the statewide level.

Trump came within two points of winning the state, but only had 44.9 percent of the vote. That's not a winning total, that's a huge anti-Clinton factor. Not much polling but the most recent poll was May 18-20 and had Biden +5, 49-44, which I'd note is consistent with Trump's generally inelastic support. https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/Minnesota.html

I'm not aware of any polls within the past few days, so barring some massive change - which I wouldn't expect because honestly, people's stance on this, like so many other things, is highly partisan - it's probably safe to say Trump is at a big disadvantage. Hillary ain't walking through that door. With MN's history up to and including 2018, and Trump's performance there, I don't think there's a significant chance Trump wins absent some sort of national landslide that seems unfathomable right now. 46 percent of the vote will win the state for Biden and that should be a relatively easy get in a blue state in this environment.

MN is very white though. I could see the rural and suburban parts blaming this whole Floyd fiasco on the Democratic leadership of MN. Trump got a higher vote percentage than any GOP presidential nominee since Reagan and Biden has been far from inspiring with regards to this horrible Floyd situation. I really hope I'm wrong. Will be interesting to see the polls in the next coming weeks to see what the situation is in MN.

[StassneyHorn 6755]

1 hour ago, deac_tracy said:

Are there any articles or polls yet showing how these George Floyd events affect Trump's chances in MN? He only lost to Hillary there by less than 2% in 2016. In 2018, the GOP gained 2 seats in the House making it the state with the largest amount of gains for the GOP. I could be wrong but I think MN is definitely in play for Trump this election year.

In a presidential year, Hillary won the state with 1,367,716 votes.

In the 2018 midterms Dems won every statewide race with totals of 1,566,174 (Klobs), 1,370,540 (Tina Smith), and 1,393,096 (Tim Walz).

what does that mean? Hillary was an all time shitty candidate, and still won. In a midterm election where turnout drops off, every statewide candidate outperformed her results from a presidential year.

[gmr548 16681]

5 minutes ago, deac_tracy said:

MN is very white though. I could see the rural and suburban parts blaming this whole Floyd fiasco on the Democratic leadership of MN. Trump got a higher vote percentage than any GOP presidential nominee since Reagan and Biden has been far from inspiring with regards to this horrible Floyd situation. I really hope I'm wrong. Will be interesting to see the polls in the next coming weeks to see what the situation is in MN.

I imagine we'll see several polls when things die down - agree it will be interesting to see if there's a shift. Still, Trump appears to have a hard ceiling of about 45 percent in MN. Trump moving ahead there would not only mean that the decisive voters in that scenario would be defying a generation of partisan democratic voting, which has led to Minnesota consistently ranking among the most prosperous and highest quality of life states, to cross over to Mr. "When the looting starts the shooting starts" for law & order; it'd mean that they stay there for five months, in defiance of entrenched partisanship as well as education, which has become as powerful of a predictor of voter behavior as race. That's a lot to hope for if you're Trump.

2020 be wildin' though, so never say never I guess.

[Wulaw Horn 19560]

17 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I imagine we'll see several polls when things die down - agree it will be interesting to see if there's a shift. Still, Trump appears to have a hard ceiling of about 45 percent in MN. Trump moving ahead there would not only mean that the decisive voters in that scenario would be defying a generation of partisan democratic voting, which has led to Minnesota consistently ranking among the most prosperous and highest quality of life states, to cross over to Mr. "When the looting starts the shooting starts" for law & order; it'd mean that they stay there for five months, in defiance of entrenched partisanship as well as education, which has become as powerful of a predictor of voter behavior as race. That's a lot to hope for if you're Trump.

2020 be wildin' though, so never say never I guess.

Yeah- I’m touting MN as a long term play for the GOP to pick up a previously left voting state, but Trump ain’t that guy and 2020 ain’t that time- unless like you said there’s some bizarre Trump landslide which  would just be mind boggling. 

If trump wins (narrator voice- he won’t) it will be because he kept WI in his column in the upper Midwest, and somehow managed to keep AZ in his column which I just can’t fathom that happening. 

I’m on record saying biden wins with an Obama like number- but yeah- no way MN is the tipping point state. 

Thats in addition tough holds for him in N.C. and FL and to a lesser extent GA, Texas and a few other places (assuming MI and PA clearly Biden states) but like MN the opposite way, if we are counting ballots in N.C. and Florida this thing is over at 11:01 or whenever it is that the polls on the left coast close. 

Edited June 2, 2020 by Wulaw Horn

[gmr548 16681]

22 minutes ago, deac_tracy said:

Trump got a higher vote percentage than any GOP presidential nominee since Reagan

I looked this up because it didn't sound right. Trump actually got a lower vote percentage than every GOP candidate since 2000 except for McCain. Bush x 2, Romney, and Trump were all within a very narrow range of 45-47 percent, and Trump was on the low end, which tells us his appeal in MN isn't anything special relative to a typical GOP candidate. Clinton got a lower proportion of the vote since any Democrat since her husband's first run, though. Throw that one out because of Perot and you have to go back to Jimmy Carter 2 and McGovern to find Democrats in her ballpark.

The more I look into it the more it seems Clinton just grossly underperformed in MN and Trump has no shot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elections_in_Minnesota

[deac_tracy 517]

10 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

I looked this up because it didn't sound right. Trump actually got a lower vote percentage than every GOP candidate since 2000 except for McCain. Bush x 2, Romney, and Trump were all within a very narrow range of 45-47 percent, and Trump was on the low end, which tells us his appeal in MN isn't anything special relative to a typical GOP candidate. Clinton got a lower proportion of the vote since any Democrat since her husband's first run, though. Throw that one out because of Perot and you have to go back to Jimmy Carter 2 and McGovern to find Democrats in her ballpark.

The more I look into it the more it seems Clinton just grossly underperformed in MN and Trump has no shot.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_elections_in_Minnesota

Whoops. Sorry about that should've more research. I'm probably just being paranoid after the Dems lost Wisconsin in 2016 and hoping Minnesota in 2020 isn't similar. Anyways it'll still be interesting MN's numbers after the Floyd protests.

Edited June 2, 2020 by deac_tracy