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

[wildcat09 29556]

You all need to write Joe in support of my “internet trolls get gibbets” policy proposal.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34079]

 

[Francisco 2.0 32543]

 

 

[Pig Bellmont 8867]

3 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

It doesn’t matter so long as conservatives control SCOTUS.

Agree. I think it will take a constitutional amendment 

[washparkhorn 9967]

1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Click the link, douche. 

Fake news.

The Tax Policy Center, which your link references, based their opinion on Biden's March 2020 tax plan. 

They have since corrected their analysis to reflect the fact that Biden has now safe harbored income below $400k from an increased tax burden. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/updated-analysis-former-vice-president-bidens-tax-proposals

Guy Benson - the author of your tweet - is dead wrong. He should know better, but he's gotta get paid, I suppose.

Edited October 16, 2020 by washparkhorn

[totallynotabuttpirate 5477]

Edited October 16, 2020 by totallynotabuttpirate

[totallynotabuttpirate 5477]

How GRHorn hasn't been negged back to his facebook group for his shitty trolling is beyond me. 

[Captainant 28387]

26 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

You sure it wasn't 135 million rubles?

[gmr548 16681]

Joe posting disinfo. Seems “potentially harmful”. Wonder if it’ll be taken down by the “fact checkers”. 
 

So you're saying I have to ditch the Costco membership the Trump tax cuts got me?

[Ted Lange 16353]

Reminder 

 

[SimonBolivar 11031]

36 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

 

I know that this is all theater, but this is the man we need.

[Irwin F Fletcher 3555]

Hey troll, you’re supposedly in the medical field, so I’m calling on your experience and wisdom here.
 
Please offer your thoughts on the specific impacts of the Trump healthcare plan. Please be sure to address how it will affect people with preexisting conditions, handling the currently uninsured, cost controls, and drug availability and pricing. I remind you, the entire description of the plan released to date is, and I quote directly from the president, “it’ll be great.”
 
Please explain the details of “it’ll be great,” and cite the basis for any specifics you attribute to it.
 
You are in the field, so surely you are better equipped than most of us to understand it - so, educate us.

Quoted to say once again, fuck off GRHorn. I'm disappointed that even when I have your drivel on mute you still pop up on occasion.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Ugh, my heart.

He’s just a good man.

[Voldemort86 2259]

57 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

Still a $60 million dollar surplus over team trump. Even with that decrepit nasty fuck Sheldon adelson chucking in $75 million. 

[henrygandorf 29219]

biden has more money than he can spend, but we should spend it all anyway.  make trumpers scared to turn on the fucking tv.

[thepop 4418]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[cactusflinthead 27626]

10 hours ago, GRHorn said:

Click the link, douche. 

No clicks for Townhall shithead 

[Bookman 4754]

This election doesn't feel anything like 2016. I think Biden is going to win big and it's a coin flip for Texas to go blue.

[Pancho 46054]

 

[Anastasis 23699]

7 minutes ago, Bookman said:

This election doesn't feel anything like 2016. I think Biden is going to win big and it's a coin flip for Texas to go blue.

He’s gonna win bigly. 

[gmr548 16681]

 

1.) What is nonincumbent turnout? Specifically democrats? We kind of know that's going to be above average.

 

2.) June 2020 forecast. Think things might have changed a bit since then.

 

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

2 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

June 2020 forecast.

Lulz

[Tuco 5093]

8 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

biden has more money than he can spend, but we should spend it all anyway.  make trumpers scared to turn on the fucking tv.

Joe has enough money to shovel it into places he has no chance of winning, like Alaska and Montana.  If he gets more votes there, so does the Dem/Indy Senate candidates who have legit shots. 

[Dahobbs 18190]

6 minutes ago, Tuco said:

Joe has enough money to shovel it into places he has no chance of winning, like Alaska and Montana.  If he gets more votes there, so does the Dem/Indy Senate candidates who have legit shots. 

I think he is at the point of literally shoveling the money. 

[South Austin 53154]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I think he is at the point of literally shoveling the money. 

[cactusflinthead 27626]

 

[tantric superman 4668]

I still think it'll be a nail biter.  While I'm pleased with some of the neighborhood feedback I am getting on Trump hate, I am also getting a quiet, low key aggyish Trumpy vibe form some of the younger couples in the neighborhood. 

I was chatting with a local 8 year old and asked him who he was going to vote for, and he said "Ummmm I I think.....Donald Twump".  "Well that's kind of an aggy thing to do!" I relied. (His dad was a Corps guy/decorated veteran.)

[cactusflinthead 27626]

 

[Pancho 46054]

28 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

I still think it'll be a nail biter.  While I'm pleased with some of the neighborhood feedback I am getting on Trump hate, I am also getting a quiet, low key aggyish Trumpy vibe form some of the younger couples in the neighborhood. 

I was chatting with a local 8 year old and asked him who he was going to vote for, and he said "Ummmm I I think.....Donald Twump".  "Well that's kind of an aggy thing to do!" I relied. (His dad was a Corps guy/decorated veteran.)

Fuck that kid. 

[washparkhorn 9967]

Wow.

Thanks for the good news, pancho 

People are excited to vote. Go vote today.

[BradInATX 9208]

Check this out. I've been casually batting this around in my head and we've talked about it some here but I decided to put something on the screen to get a real look at it. 

I can't get it out of my head how badly some of the individual state polls missed last time around and there's a "worst case scenario" that I can't kick. So I put some "what if 2016 happens again" numbers together.

This shows who would win battleground states based on current polling vs. each state's actual election results and how they skewed vs. the RCP polling average on election day. Black line represents the 2016 poll miss, the bars are Biden's current poll lead. What we want to see is the bar go past the line. So for example in PA Biden's lead is 5.7%, but RCP missed by 2.6% last time. If the polls missed the same way, Biden would still win by 3.1%, which is my "adjusted" number.

 

A few things stand out:

- AZ, MI, PA all look very safe and pretty well out of reach of polling error.
- Arizona is actually the most solid swing state out there in this analysis. It's more likely to go Biden than Wisconsin is IMO. Arizona could end up being our surprise insurance policy against the Rust Belt.
- Look at how crazy Wisconsin is. Biden is up by 6.3% but Trump outperformed polls by a huge 7.2% last time. I don't trust Wisconsin at all.
- Despite him having small polling leads, Biden is not probably not going to win Ohio or Iowa unless this is an absolute best-case scenario wipeout election.

This eased my nerves a little. Even if Wisconsin does weird white people things, and even if you call GA/FL "too close to call", the PA/MI/AZ combo gets Biden there:

 

Obviously not as much of a statement as you'd like it to be, and would spark endless lawsuits, but it puts Biden in office. And if Florida and one or both of GA/NC go blue too, it's a pretty resounding win. 

The only chance Trump has to win is if there's some sort of hidden groundswell of newly-politically-active Trump voters that none of the pollsters or pundits are picking up (possible), and there is no corresponding bump for team blue (seems almost impossible). 

Edited October 16, 2020 by BradInATX

[Snake Diggity 4698]

6 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

Check this out. I've been casually batting this around in my head and we've talked about it some here but I decided to put something on the screen to get a real look at it. 

I can't get it out of my head how badly some of the individual state polls missed last time around and there's a "worst case scenario" that I can't kick. So I put some "what if 2016 happens again" numbers together.

This shows who would win battleground states based on current polling vs. each state's actual election results and how they skewed vs. the RCP polling average on election day. Black line represents the 2016 poll miss, the bars are Biden's current poll lead. What we want to see is the bar go past the line. So for example in PA Biden's lead is 5.7%, but RCP missed by 2.6% last time. If the polls missed the same way, Biden would still win by 3.1%, which is my "adjusted" number.

 

A few things stand out:
- Arizona is actually the most solid swing state out there in this analysis. It's more likely to go Biden than Wisconsin is IMO.
- Look at how crazy Wisconsin is. Biden is up by 6.3% but Trump outperformed polls by a huge 7.2% last time. I don't trust Wisconsin at all.

This eased my nerves a little. Even if Wisconsin does weird white people things, and even if you call GA/FL "too close to call", the PA/MI/AZ combo gets Biden there:

 

Obviously not as much of a statement as you'd like it to be, and would spark endless lawsuits, but it puts Biden in office. And if Florida and one or both of GA/NC go blue too, it's a pretty resounding win. 

The only chance Trump has to win is if there's some sort of hidden groundswell of newly-politically-active Trump voters that none of the pollsters or pundits are picking up (possible), and there is no corresponding bump for team blue (seems almost impossible). 

I hate that a close election is still a plausible scenario.  I think PA, MI, and MN are pretty safely blue.  But that means Biden has to get one more “close” state.  I do not trust WI, AZ, NC, or FL.  Luckily I do think the odds are that Biden gets at least one, which gets him to 270.  Unfortunately anything less than 320 EV almost certainly means Trump contests the results which would mean we enter the most dangerous period in US history since the Civil War.

 

Its probably more likely that Biden gets 400 EV than Trump gets 270.  But sadly Biden getting 270-320 means the election result is a toss-up.

Edited October 16, 2020 by Snake Diggity

[Red Five 41596]

Y'all need to get ready for Trump to protest the results, even if Biden gets 400 EVs. 

[BradInATX 9208]

1 minute ago, Snake Diggity said:

I hate that a close election is still a plausible scenario.  I think PA, MI, and MN are pretty safely blue.  But that means Biden has to get one more “close” state.  I do not trust WI, AZ, NC, or FL.  Luckily I do think the odds are that Biden gets at least one, which gets him to 270.  Unfortunately anything less than 320 EV almost certainly means Trump contests the results which would mean we enter the most dangerous period in US history since the Civil War.

Yeah, and once again we find ourselves with a lot of importance on Florida, in terms of getting a big enough win to avoid hijinks. And we all know what happens when we trust Florida.

Keep in mind that I have no idea how the polling outfits have changed their weightings and likely-voter models to account for Trump and their 2016 misses. They might have made adjustments. Some probably have. If they have, then this map is a worst-case scenario, which still has the good guys winning.

[Snake Diggity 4698]

Just now, Red Five said:

Y'all need to get ready for Trump to protest the results, even if Biden gets 400 EVs. 

He will protest the results no matter what.  But if Biden gets 350+, there’s no way the courts or Senate give him the election.  People will abandon him.

[smuggs 9394]

1 hour ago, tantric superman said:

I was chatting with a local 8 year old and asked him who he was going to vote for, and he said "Ummmm I I think.....Donald Twump". 

 

[mdmost 43850]

Correct and this is why I'm thrilled at the in-person early voting numbers. People need to vote in person so the results are known faster and decisively. Mail in ballots are going to be challenged. Don't give him the luxury of doing that. Mask up and vote in person. 

[thepop 4418]

 

[The Dog 44771]

@BradInATX regarding Wisconsin: 

Hillary was actually ahead by "more" than Biden is at this time (6.7 to 6.3) but her raw share in the RCP average was only 44.7% while Biden is at 49.9%. Hillary's final RCP average was 46.8% and she got 46.5% of the vote, so the pollsters nailed it when it came to her support. Where they were wrong was Trump - late decides and third party switchers brought him from 40.3% to 47.2%. 

There's no question Biden will end up out-performing Hillary. The question I have is can Trump out-perform his 2016 vote share? If not then he's likely to lose Wisconsin.

[Guest Lobo]

I have voted for a lot of Republicans in a lot of elections, even after I had my first daughter.  I will be voting for several Republican candidates next week.  

But I just do not understand how any of you Surly dads who have daughters could possibly entertain voting for Trump for President.  What an absolutely spineless move.  

We're all modern dads navigating the brave new world, trying to be there for our children.  I don't know what it's like to have a son.  But if you have a young daughter (I have two), I simply do cannot wrap my head how you could support this human filth. 

What Trump, and his supporters, attempted to normalize with regard to how young women are treated will haunt us for decades.  Be a dad they don't have to live in shame of. 

Edited October 16, 2020 by Lobo

[Ghost of LL 15664]

6 minutes ago, thepop said:

 

They make good ads.

I know it's going to bother some of the hard-core Democrats on this board, but don't be surprised if you see someone like Steve Schmidt running a Democratic campaign for president within the next few cycles.

[BradInATX 9208]

Just now, The Dog said:

@BradInATX regarding Wisconsin: 

Hillary was actually ahead by "more" than Biden is at this time (6.7 to 6.3) but her raw share in the RCP average was only 44.7% while Biden is at 49.9%. Hillary's final RCP average was 46.8% and she got 46.5% of the vote, so the pollsters nailed it when it came to her support. Where they were wrong was Trump - late decides and third party switchers brought him from 40.3% to 47.2%. 

There's no question Biden will end up out-performing Hillary. The question I have is can Trump out-perform his 2016 vote share? If not then he's likely to lose Wisconsin.

Great point here too. You have to assume that the lower number of undecideds should flatten out some of the end results vs. polling. 

The main takeaway from for me was simply "if we get disastrous numbers of unexpected Trump votes in the same states like we did in 2016, Biden is still going to win". I wouldn't take it to be too predictive. I have Biden winning Wisconsin in my prediction on the electoral map thread. But I found some of the other takeaways more interesting, like AZ being more stable/predictable at this point than WI. If you put a gun to my head and said I had to pick WI or AZ for Biden to win, I'm going AZ.

[Brisketexan 106621]

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I will be voting for several Republican candidates next week. 

You absolutely 100% should not do that.  The party is 100% in lockstep loyalty as a cult.  Any vote for a GOP candidate rewards that behavior.

One of my dearest friends in the world is a GOP judge.  If I lived in her district, I would vote against her.  It's that important.  The behavior of a party that has fed and nurtured this horror MUST be punished, across the board.

[Snake Diggity 4698]

1 minute ago, Lobo said:

I have voted for a lot of Republicans in a lot of elections, even after I had my first daughter.  I will be voting for several Republican candidates next week.  

But I just do not understand how any of you Surly dads who have daughters could possibly entertain voting for Trump for President.  What an absolutely spineless move.  

We're all modern dads navigating the brave new world, trying to be there for our children.  I don't know what it's like to have a son.  But if you have a young daughter (I have two), I simply do cannot wrap my head how you could support this human filth. 

What Trump, and his supporters, attempted to normalize with regard to how young women are treated will haunt us for decades.  Be a dad they don't have to live in shame of. 

Yep.  Hard to believe there are people out there who have no bar for character that must be cleared before even considering policy views.  A lot of people who know me might be shocked to learn I will vote democrat now, but my answer to them is that the only 2 people in this world I really care about AT ALL are 1/4 asian preschool aged girls.  If you care about women or minorities at all, there is simply no way to justify a Trump vote.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

1 minute ago, Snake Diggity said:

Yep.  Hard to believe there are people out there who have no bar for character that must be cleared before even considering policy views.  A lot of people who know me might be shocked to learn I will vote democrat now, but my answer to them is that the only 2 people in this world I really care about AT ALL are 1/4 asian preschool aged girls.  If you care about women or minorities at all, there is simply no way to justify a Trump vote.

pics?

[gmr548 16681]

Check this out. I've been casually batting this around in my head and we've talked about it some here but I decided to put something on the screen to get a real look at it. 

I can't get it out of my head how badly some of the individual state polls missed last time around and there's a "worst case scenario" that I can't kick. So I put some "what if 2016 happens again" numbers together.

This shows who would win battleground states based on current polling vs. each state's actual election results and how they skewed vs. the RCP polling average on election day. Black line represents the 2016 poll miss, the bars are Biden's current poll lead. What we want to see is the bar go past the line. So for example in PA Biden's lead is 5.7%, but RCP missed by 2.6% last time. If the polls missed the same way, Biden would still win by 3.1%, which is my "adjusted" number.

 

A few things stand out:

- AZ, MI, PA all look very safe and pretty well out of reach of polling error.

- Arizona is actually the most solid swing state out there in this analysis. It's more likely to go Biden than Wisconsin is IMO. Arizona could end up being our surprise insurance policy against the Rust Belt.

- Look at how crazy Wisconsin is. Biden is up by 6.3% but Trump outperformed polls by a huge 7.2% last time. I don't trust Wisconsin at all.

- Despite him having small polling leads, Biden is not probably not going to win Ohio or Iowa unless this is an absolute best-case scenario wipeout election.

This eased my nerves a little. Even if Wisconsin does weird white people things, and even if you call GA/FL "too close to call", the PA/MI/AZ combo gets Biden there:

 

Obviously not as much of a statement as you'd like it to be, and would spark endless lawsuits, but it puts Biden in office. And if Florida and one or both of GA/NC go blue too, it's a pretty resounding win. 

The only chance Trump has to win is if there's some sort of hidden groundswell of newly-politically-active Trump voters that none of the pollsters or pundits are picking up (possible), and there is no corresponding bump for team blue (seems almost impossible). 

You're worrying a little too much about WI.

 

Trump got fewer votes in WI than Romney did in 2012. It was not an explosion of Trump support, ala Pennsylvania.

 

Wisconsin, more than anywhere, is an example of Democrats just not showing up for Hillary, be it by staying home (turnout was down from 2012 not just in terms of percentage, but about 90k raw votes, 4x Trump's margin of victory) or voting third party (~five percent of votes cast). Democrats in the state have proven that is definitely not happening in 2020 several times since then.

 

It isn't a stone cold lock in 2020, but Trump simply does not have the votes if everyone shows up. Indications are that everyone is showing up.

 

[Guest Lobo]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

You absolutely 100% should not do that.  The party is 100% in lockstep loyalty as a cult.  Any vote for a GOP candidate rewards that behavior.

One of my dearest friends in the world is a GOP judge.  If I lived in her district, I would vote against her.  It's that important.  The behavior of a party that has fed and nurtured this horror MUST be punished, across the board.

 Sorry, but I'm voting for folks like Becky Bray for County Commissioner. Raul Vargas for Sheriff.  Jeff Rose for Court of Appeals (even though he's gonna step down shortly since he didn't get tapped for Supreme Court of TX), Lani Popp, and a few others for Texas Supreme Court.  By my pre-printed ballot, I am voting for Biden and 3 other Democrats, 3 Libertarians (my usual go-to, but I think we all know where's just not as many on the ballot this time around), against the 3 props on my ballot, couple of school board choices, and what everybody is waiting on pins and needles to hear about---Lobo endorses for Edwards Aquifer Conservation Precinct #4---Bob Larsen. 

I have to stay in the party's good graces.  So that it's made even more sweet when we rise up against Dan Patrick in 2022.  the amount of money that's been bundled already to remove him from public office in perpetuity and put him back where he belongs---sucking off glory hole customers at truck stops for new radio headphones...would boggle your mind.  I can't believe how many enemies he's made already.  

Anyway, back to Biden and Trump.  Go Biden.  

[tantric superman 4668]

18 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Fuck that kid. 

The kids in that family are really cool.  It takes a decade, maybe two, to outgrow your parents.

 

[Biff Tannen 46061]

17 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I have voted for a lot of Republicans in a lot of elections, even after I had my first daughter.  I will be voting for several Republican candidates next week.  

But I just do not understand how any of you Surly dads who have daughters could possibly entertain voting for Trump for President.  What an absolutely spineless move.  

We're all modern dads navigating the brave new world, trying to be there for our children.  I don't know what it's like to have a son.  But if you have a young daughter (I have two), I simply do cannot wrap my head how you could support this human filth. 

What Trump, and his supporters, attempted to normalize with regard to how young women are treated will haunt us for decades.  Be a dad they don't have to live in shame of. 

The bolded is a contradiction.  Square it for me.