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

[Biff Tannen 46168]

18 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

At this point I don't see how Trump doesn't win this November. Especially with all the unrest being shown on the news and spread around social media. I think that's enough to sway independents as long as Biden is silent to condemn what everyone is seeing. The presidential debates will be his moment, he's just gotta take advantage of it like he did in 2012.

 

[gmr548 16701]

https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-poll-only-lets-you-support-trump-for-president?ref=home
 

Fox News viewers who responded to a television ad asking them to vote in a poll on the 2020 presidential race may have been surprised to learn that the survey’s only available option was a vote of support for President Donald Trump’s re-election.
A company called American Polling LLC has been buying ad time on Fox programs this month, according to documents filed with the Federal Communications Commission. A publicly available version of one of the group’s 30-second ads asks viewers to call a 1-800 number to give their preferences on the 2020 presidential contest.

 

PAY DIRT decided to give the number a call. The ad as aired on TV prompted viewers to press two to support Joe Biden, three for Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and four for Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)—the latter two of whom are no longer running for president. But the automated survey that greeted actual callers simply asked them to press one if they supported Trump. Press two, and the automated service replies, "Thank you for supporting President Trump. Your vote will only be counted once. Goodbye."
Surveys, by definition, are supposed to give respondents more than one choice. But this is not actually a survey. And the group sponsoring it, American Polling LLC, isn’t actually a polling company. And the client behind these ads has no interest in gauging public sentiment on the presidential race. Rather, it is a pro-Trump super PAC attempting to use these “polls” to gin up new fundraising leads.

 

Callers who pressed one to select Trump right off the bat in the telephone surveys promoted in American Polling’s ad campaign were then asked to press one to hear a message from Ed Rollins, a veteran Republican operative and the chairman of the group Great America PAC.
“Great America PAC led the fight in 2016 to elect President Trump and we will lead the fight again for his re-election in 2020, but we urgently need help from President Trump supporters like you,” Rollins declares in a pre-recorded message. “Can we count on you to make a contribution to support the fight for his re-election in 2020? If you are willing to make a contribution, please press 1 now.” 

 
 

Pressing one when prompted forwards the call to a real person who then collects credit card and donor information on behalf of Great America PAC. 
Callers who pressed nothing at all when asked if they supported Trump were greeted by an automated voice that says "Sorry I did not understand you," which then prompted the narrator to re-read the survey all over again: “Thank you for calling American Polling to take our presidential election survey. Please press 1 now if you will vote for the re-election of President Trump. Again, press one now for President Trump.” If you don’t press a button three times in a row, the automated voice says “Since you seem to be having lots of trouble with this question, let's move on to the next question,” after which Rollins’ recorded message is played. 

 
Spoiler

In short, there is no survey, just various paths to get to a place where Rollins hits you up for cash. He did not respond to questions about the American Polling ad campaign.
According to FCC filings, the company has purchased nationwide airtime on Fox News this month to broadcast the spot. Publicly available versions of the company’s ads don’t mention Great America PAC at all; they simply say the ads are paid for by American Polling LLC. Neither Great America PAC nor any other federal political committee has reported paying that firm in Federal Election Commission filings.
FCC filings do indicate that American Polling’s president is a man named Bryan Hartong. He’s a Canton, Ohio-based fundraiser and media buyer who also leads the firm RRTV Media. That company “develops and executes fundraising campaigns for political & nonprofit organizations that acquire donors and produces results that exceed traditional fundraising programs,” according to Hartong’s LinkedIn page.
American Polling’s 2020 election spot is not the first ad the company has run for Great America. It also put out a spot early this year asking for similarly dubious survey participation regarding voter attitudes on Trump’s impeachment. Like the more recent ad, that spot directed callers to an automated message from Rollins, and then to a Great America fundraising representative.

 
Lol. To be fair, it's not like FOX viewers need another option.

[gmr548 16701]

Color me shocked that Trump’s numbers are consistently below 42% now.  I thought that was his hard floor.  They’ll come back, though.

His hard floor has shown to be high 30s. He got there during the govt shutdown that dragged on for like a month. I do agree that they'll find av way back. Biden will do something mildly stupid and that's all they need.

[4th&Five 42005]

 

[SilasCoade 2622]

30 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Ultimately, they'll end up with "but I can't vote for a liberal communist socialist who eats babies in a pizza parlor" and they'll pull the level for Trump.

Trump still has the inside track on being re-elected, because of that, and because his base will turn out and actually vote at a 99% turnout rate.  For the opposition, it's all about turnout, because trust me, those Trump voters will turnout, and the ones you think are leaving him.....most of them aren't.

I see you've met my parents.

[Bruh Man 3160]

37 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

At this point I don't see how Trump doesn't win this November. Especially with all the unrest being shown on the news and spread around social media. I think that's enough to sway independents as long as Biden is silent to condemn what everyone is seeing. The presidential debates will be his moment, he's just gotta take advantage of it like he did in 2012.

 

The unrest is happening under his watch. Or are we in such a warped world where he gets to separate himself from this? 

[Brisketexan 106899]

Just now, Bruh Man said:

The unrest is happening under his watch. Or are we in such a warped world where he gets to separate himself from this? 

He uses the unrest to his advantage.  LAW AND ORDER!

You would be wise not to underestimate how many scared and angry white people there are out there.  They are going to show up in November, and vote for Trump in droves.

[Chuckie Finster 23079]

At this point I don't see how Trump doesn't win this November. Especially with all the unrest being shown on the news and spread around social media. I think that's enough to sway independents as long as Biden is silent to condemn what everyone is seeing. The presidential debates will be his moment, he's just gotta take advantage of it like he did in 2012.
 

I feel like this is one of those things where they have a bot analyze thousands of news articles and then generate a paragraph.

[HRSchenker 2341]

12 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

The unrest is happening under his watch. Or are we in such a warped world where he gets to separate himself from this? 

No he definitely will separate himself from this. He'll say "in 2018 the blue wave happened and look what it has done for America" and then point to all of the blue states and localities where there's been violence and protests. That's why I said it will require Biden to flat out dismiss and refute it publicly or during the debates. You know the GOP is going to run ads showing the George Washington statue in Oregon defaced and lying in the grass like they've been showing this morning on CNN.

 

[Grade of D as in David 13255]

41 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Well no shit, Fox didn't include Russians and Chinese in their poll. They're going to make it an extremely close election.

[Red Five 41738]

So every poll is fake now. Got it. 

Most people grow out of that mindset by the time they turn seven or so. "I don't like it so it's not real!". 

 

[Grade of D as in David 13255]

3 minutes ago, Red Five said:

So every poll is fake now. Got it. 

Most people grow out of that mindset by the time they turn seven or so. "I don't like it so it's not real!". 

 

Quote

Are you still a believer in Santa polls? 'Cause at seven, it's marginal, right?

 

[Bruh Man 3160]

37 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

He uses the unrest to his advantage.  LAW AND ORDER!

You would be wise not to underestimate how many scared and angry white people there are out there.  They are going to show up in November, and vote for Trump in droves.

 

22 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

No he definitely will separate himself from this. He'll say "in 2018 the blue wave happened and look what it has done for America" and then point to all of the blue states and localities where there's been violence and protests. That's why I said it will require Biden to flat out dismiss and refute it publicly or during the debates. You know the GOP is going to run ads showing the George Washington statue in Oregon defaced and lying in the grass like they've been showing this morning on CNN.

 

I know he's shifted to a scare whitey strategy, but a poll just came out yesterday saying a majority of the country believes he's made the unrest worse (54%), only 12% said he was making it better. So I don't know how he successfully separates himself from what's been happening when he's the gottdamn president in charge. I don't think Independents are going to fall for it. A lot of it has to do with who the Dem candidate is. If Bernie was the candidate, he'd probably be in the middle of Chaz right now on a megaphone so maybe some of these attacks would stick but not milquetoast Joe. Hard to paint that dude as a radical. He's done a good job separating himself from some of the fringe elements in the streets. 

Edited June 19, 2020 by Bruh Man

[Biff Tannen 46168]

3 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

 

I know he's shifted to a scare whitey strategy, but a poll just came out yesterday saying a majority of the country believes he's made the unrest worse (54%), only 12% said he was making it better. So I don't know how he successfully separates himself from what's been happening when he's the gottdamn president in charge. I don't think Independents are going to fall for it. A lot of it has to do with who the Dem candidate is. If Bernie was the candidate, he'd probably be in the middle of Chaz right now on a megaphone so maybe some of these attacks would stick but not milquetoast Joe. Hard to paint that dude as a radical. He's done a good job separating himself from some of the fringe elements in the streets. 

And this is what I came to realize when Biden dominated SC and then the rest.  I was struggling with whether playing to the center or the left was the right move.  According to the people, the center is the direction people want.  Normalcy. 

[Patrick Bateman 3980]

49 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I feel like this is one of those things where they have a bot analyze thousands of news articles and then generate a paragraph.

It's if Trump wins, "I told ya so".  If Trump loses, "Thank god I was wrong".  The ole' counter data or logic position.

 

[Bruh Man 3160]

6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

And this is what I came to realize when Biden dominated SC and then the rest.  I was struggling with whether playing to the center or the left was the right move.  According to the people, the center is the direction people want.  Normalcy. 

It's going to be the right move until the Reagan generation dies off or until Democrats get young people to show up during the primaries, whichever comes first.

 

[Ghost of LL 15698]

10 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

I would guess that a lot of the undecideds are typically right leaning folks that don’t like trump and can’t figure out what to do. Hate trump but “liberalism is a mental disorder”. I worry about a lot of those people going back to trump because some wedge issue that comes up in the month before the election. Wouldn’t be surprised for Dotard to start going off on abortion to get those people back on board.

Ok.  That's fine.

This is a guy who won by the narrowest of margins (i.e., 77,000 votes across three states).  And he can't get his own coalition back together.  It's now less than five months to election day, and he is having to work to reconstruct the base that he used to win in 2016.  That's a really bad sign for a presidential reelection campaign.

Presidents have the inside track for reelection because they can typically count on getting the same voters to vote for them for reelection as voted for them four years earlier.  So they can spend all four years--and especially the reelection campaign--reaching out to persuadable voters.  Look at how Clinton did it--after the midterms in 1994, he adjusted and "triangulated."  Without speaking to the wisdom of the public policy that came out of those efforts, Clinton was able to keep his base of Democratic voters while persuading a whole lot of Independents and even a few Republicans.

Trump hasn't done that.  He hasn't spent a moment of his presidency trying to persuade anybody who didn't vote for him in 2016.  And now, he's having to spend all of his time trying to keep those people in his corner.  It's an impossible position that he's put himself in in June of an election year, and it makes him the underdog in this campaign.

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

This.  Ultimately, they'll end up with "but I can't vote for a liberal communist socialist who eats babies in a pizza parlor" and they'll pull the level for Trump.

Trump still has the inside track on being re-elected, because of that, and because his base will turn out and actually vote at a 99% turnout rate.  For the opposition, it's all about turnout, because trust me, those Trump voters will turnout, and the ones you think are leaving him.....most of them aren't.

This is a bad take, and you should feel bad for it.

Trump doesn't have the inside track.  That's ridiculous.  He's down double digits in every poll out there.  And there is no Electoral College magic that overcomes a double-digit spread.  Three points--sure.  Four points--maybe.  Five points--ehh, probably not.  Ten points, fuggetabbouted.

His "base" is 35-40%.  He needs 46% to have a prayer (and probably higher because of the lack of good third-party candidates).  That means persuading some people who are not in his "base."  And he isn't doing that.

As we sit here today, Trump is the underdog.  Underdogs do sometimes win.  But he definitely does not have the "inside track."

1 hour ago, HRSchenker said:

At this point I don't see how Trump doesn't win this November. Especially with all the unrest being shown on the news and spread around social media. I think that's enough to sway independents as long as Biden is silent to condemn what everyone is seeing. The presidential debates will be his moment, he's just gotta take advantage of it like he did in 2012.

 

This is a bad take, and you should feel bad for it.

You really "don't see how Trump doesn't win this November"?  Really?  He's down in every poll by double digits.  The economy is in the tank.  Thousands of Americans are dying each month of a disease that he has botched the response to.  We have racial strife that a significant majority says he is making worse.  And you can't envision him losing?

That's a pretty damned limited imagination you've got there.

[Larry T. Spider 1747]

Don’t take my opinion on who undecideds are as me predicting trump will win. I think a good amount of those people will go back to him but he’s going to need more than that to make up what is possibly a 10 point deficit nationwide right now.

[BradInATX 9208]

35 minutes ago, Bruh Man said:

 

I know he's shifted to a scare whitey strategy

Shifted?

[gmr548 16701]

So every poll is fake now. Got it. 
Most people grow out of that mindset by the time they turn seven or so. "I don't like it so it's not real!". 
 

Never been to the dt thread or football board, I see.

[Pancho 46312]

 

[HRSchenker 2341]

54 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

This is a bad take, and you should feel bad for it.

You really "don't see how Trump doesn't win this November"?  Really?  He's down in every poll by double digits.  The economy is in the tank.  Thousands of Americans are dying each month of a disease that he has botched the response to.  We have racial strife that a significant majority says he is making worse.  And you can't envision him losing?

That's a pretty damned limited imagination you've got there.

Bad take? Hardly. People said the same thing about the GOP in 2016. Hillary has won every major national poll since the beginning of the year. The stock market has been going up under a Democrat administration and a Trump presidency will result in lost confidence in the S&P. Scandal free administration while running against a candidate who seems to get sued 10x a day. I can't see how Hillary loses this election.

Now's the time for humble pie.

[tantric superman 4668]

1 minute ago, HRSchenker said:

Bad take?

More of a really shitty take.  (Not that you think Trump might win.  That you can't see how he doesn't win.)

 

[gmr548 16701]

Bad take? Hardly. People said the same thing about the GOP in 2016. Hillary has won every major national poll since the beginning of the year. The stock market has been going up under a Democrat administration and a Trump presidency will result in lost confidence in the S&P. Scandal free administration while running against a candidate who seems to get sued 10x a day. I can't see how Hillary loses this election.
Now's the time for humble pie.

Hillary was never just completely eviscerating him like Biden is now. She was also never over 50 percent consistently. Biden is consistently within the margin of error in Texas. They are not comparable situations.

It's smart to pump the breaks because if this year had taught us anything it's that none of us have the slightest fucking clue what the world will look like in 4.5 months. But if it looks like it does today the election is no contest. I suspect it'll be closer. Polls still aren't universally adjusting for education, which is very predictive among white voters. You have to assume undecideds are Trump voters because if you haven't seen enough to rule him out by now, you never will. But to make up a 8-10 point national deficit, as GoLL pointed out, is not happening. If it's within five points nationally on election day, that's where you should worry.

[Ghost of LL 15698]

9 minutes ago, HRSchenker said:

Bad take? Hardly. People said the same thing about the GOP in 2016. Hillary has won every major national poll since the beginning of the year. The stock market has been going up under a Democrat administration and a Trump presidency will result in lost confidence in the S&P. Scandal free administration while running against a candidate who seems to get sued 10x a day. I can't see how Hillary loses this election.

Now's the time for humble pie.

As @tantric superman rightly points out, there is a big difference between "Trump could win" and "I don't see how Trump doesn't win."

The PTSD from 2016 has really gotten out of control.  The fact is that Hillary was a terrible candidate.  And once the Comey letter came out, she was in real trouble--a point on which a lot of us commented at the time.  

This is a very different election under very different circumstances with a very different candidate.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

5 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

As @tantric superman rightly points out, there is a big difference between "Trump could win" and "I don't see how Trump doesn't win."

The PTSD from 2016 has really gotten out of control.  The fact is that Hillary was a terrible candidate.  And once the Comey letter came out, she was in real trouble--a point on which a lot of us commented at the time.  

This is a very different election under very different circumstances with a very different candidate.

Not to mention third party votes (the Gary Johnson voter was a thing) due to near-equal revulsion at both candidates.  I think you have one-way revulsion this year.

[The Dog 44861]

As [mention=3067]tantric superman[/mention] rightly points out, there is a big difference between "Trump could win" and "I don't see how Trump doesn't win."
The PTSD from 2016 has really gotten out of control.  The fact is that Hillary was a terrible candidate.  And once the Comey letter came out, she was in real trouble--a point on which a lot of us commented at the time.  
This is a very different election under very different circumstances with a very different candidate.

And something like 90% of the undecided voters broke for Trump and there were a lot of them.

[Pancho 46312]

Being reported by cnn that through Rudy, the trump tram is pushing for more than the 3 traditional debates. 
 

[MC Fresh Breath 4075]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

 

This is a bad take, and you should feel bad for it.

Trump doesn't have the inside track.  That's ridiculous.  He's down double digits in every poll out there.  And there is no Electoral College magic that overcomes a double-digit spread.  Three points--sure.  Four points--maybe.  Five points--ehh, probably not.  Ten points, fuggetabbouted.

His "base" is 35-40%.  He needs 46% to have a prayer (and probably higher because of the lack of good third-party candidates).  That means persuading some people who are not in his "base."  And he isn't doing that.

 

 

He should feel bad for having an opinion?  Was he rude to you?  This is why the Cloak Room has the 'rep' it does outside of it.

I recall in 2016 being assured over and over again how there was no way Trump was going to be the R nominee. 

Then I was assured he was going to beat Hillary:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus

Forgive some of us who have this PTSD you speak of.  That election night was shocking to me.  Absolutely shocking that no matter the excuses, no matter how bad Hillary was as a candidate that somehow the country chose the ridiculousness that is Trump.  It still shocks me, honestly.  

[Hank Kingsley 21785]

28 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

The PTSD from 2016 has really gotten out of control.  The fact is that Hillary was a terrible candidate.  And once the Comey letter came out, she was in real trouble--a point on which a lot of us commented at the time.  

This is a very different election under very different circumstances with a very different candidate.

Correct. Here's another way to look at it. 

Trump is going to lose WAY more voters that supported him in 2016 than pick up voters who didn't support him in 2016.

2016 third party voters will favor Biden over Trump. 

New voters will favor Biden over Trump. 

 

 

 

[Ghost of LL 15698]

8 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

 

He should feel bad for having an opinion?  Was he rude to you?  This is why the Cloak Room has the 'rep' it does outside of it.

I recall in 2016 being assured over and over again how there was no way Trump was going to be the R nominee. 

Then I was assured he was going to beat Hillary:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus

Forgive some of us who have this PTSD you speak of.  That election night was shocking to me.  Absolutely shocking that no matter the excuses, no matter how bad Hillary was as a candidate that somehow the country chose the ridiculousness that is Trump.  It still shocks me, honestly.  

You're bad at math, and you should feel bad.*

According to the fivethirtyeight.com forecast, Trump had a 28% chance of winning.  That's a pretty significant chance--it's better than 1-in-4.  Think about how often a 1-in-4 bet comes in.  And think about those odds for a minute.  If you were told you had a 1-in-4 chance of dying in a plane crash today, is there any way you'd go anywhere near the airport?  Fuck no.  Because there's a significant chance of that happening.

And that's what happened with Trump.  He pulled an inside straight (metaphorically speaking, because an inside straight has far longer odds than 1-in-4) when he won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by a combined 77,000 votes.

The notion that somebody can't see any way Trump doesn't win in 2020 when he's currently down double digits--that's absurd.

 

 

*This is a joke, which I would hope is obvious.

 

[SimonBolivar 11064]

40 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not to mention third party votes (the Gary Johnson voter was a thing) due to near-equal revulsion at both candidates.  I think you have one-way revulsion this year.

Hey that's me.

 

I do worry that the polls are wrong (more than the traditional +- margin) because too many people are embarassed to admit they are voting for Trump, not 10 points worth but 2 or 3 points worth. I

Edited June 19, 2020 by SimonBolivar

[gmr548 16701]

 

He should feel bad for having an opinion?  Was he rude to you?  This is why the Cloak Room has the 'rep' it does outside of it.

I recall in 2016 being assured over and over again how there was no way Trump was going to be the R nominee. 

Then I was assured he was going to beat Hillary:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#plus

Forgive some of us who have this PTSD you speak of.  That election night was shocking to me.  Absolutely shocking that no matter the excuses, no matter how bad Hillary was as a candidate that somehow the country chose the ridiculousness that is Trump.  It still shocks me, honestly.  

538 is probably not the model I would cite to say the media was guaranteeing a Trump win. They made a point to highlight that he had a path, albeit narrow. 28 percent isn't no shot. It's more likely than your flight getting delayed. That's a better chance than FPI/odds gave Texas over Georgia or Oklahoma in 2018. It's double any team's best chance at winning the NBA draft lottery.

 

Things with a 28 percent chance of happening happen all the time.

 

If there was some forecast citing 95 percent or something, flame away.

 

Edit: goll beat me to it

[Hank Kingsley 21785]

2 minutes ago, SimonBolivar said:

I do worry that the polls are wrong because too many people are embarassed to admit they are voting for Trump, not 10 points worth but 2 or 3 points worth.

I think that is a legitimate concern. But I think it's offset by other undecideds (independents, progressives) that will end up significantly favoring Biden in the end. 

 

 

 

[Doc Sam Beckett 5908]

36 minutes ago, Pancho said:

Being reported by cnn that through Rudy, the trump tram is pushing for more than the 3 traditional debates. 
 

Yeah of course he's pushing for more debates, I would kick ass at debating if everything I said was fact and everything my opponent said was fake news 

[Bama Chick 28596]

[MC Fresh Breath 4075]

29 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

You're bad at math, and you should feel bad.*

According to the fivethirtyeight.com forecast, Trump had a 28% chance of winning.  That's a pretty significant chance--it's better than 1-in-4.  Think about how often a 1-in-4 bet comes in.  And think about those odds for a minute.  If you were told you had a 1-in-4 chance of dying in a plane crash today, is there any way you'd go anywhere near the airport?  Fuck no.  Because there's a significant chance of that happening.

And that's what happened with Trump.  He pulled an inside straight (metaphorically speaking, because an inside straight has far longer odds than 1-in-4) when he won Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin by a combined 77,000 votes.

The notion that somebody can't see any way Trump doesn't win in 2020 when he's currently down double digits--that's absurd.

 

 

*This is a joke, which I would hope is obvious.

 

 

Cool, I'm kind of hangry right now, so maybe I shouldn't post and get a snack instead.  That said, I used 538 as an example, but I was being assured everywhere that there was no way Trump could win.  I'm not blaming anything, I just don't see him winning again out of the realm of possibility.

And I'm no Biden fan, by any stretch of the imagination.  I can't stand the two choices in front of us, but at this point I feel like I'm in some horror movie.  And what I've learned from horror movies is that until you see the corpse completely obliterated you cannot trust that it is no longer a threat.   I also feel that the effects of Trumpism will be with us for a long time but that's not really the point of the thread I suppose.

[LCHorn 2751]

49 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

 

What's particularly interesting is the tacit acknowledgment by the Biden campaign that it's better to focus on Trump's negatives than Biden's positives.  Look at the air time ratio on one versus the other. 

It's not that this is hugely novel, rather it speaks to a certain amount of humility within the campaign leadership ("we're going to get a more enthusiastic response shitting on the other guy").  I'm sure it's quite a change from drawing up ads for Obama. 

I think there's a pivot here I'd be interested in seeing to further demoralize the Trumpists ("you've stuck by Trump out of racial fealty; he's going to lose, there's no hope") that might be possible with some small adjustments. 

I'm also wondering if it would make sense for Biden to just decline any debates at all.  "The NY Times has already documented 18,000 lies over the last three years.  I'm not interested in enabling a national platform for one more." 

[henrygandorf 29225]

2 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Correct. Here's another way to look at it. 

Trump is going to lose WAY more voters that supported him in 2016 than pick up voters who didn't support him in 2016.

2016 third party voters will favor Biden over Trump. 

New voters will favor Biden over Trump. 

don't forget the ever-present "voters who dislike both options".

i'm sure somebody can grab that data, but the difference in 2020 from 2016 is night and day.

for the 100th time, donald trump is about to find out what it's like to be the unpopular name on the ballot.  hillary was that bad.

[FWD 297]

1 hour ago, LCHorn said:

What's particularly interesting is the tacit acknowledgment by the Biden campaign that it's better to focus on Trump's negatives than Biden's positives.  Look at the air time ratio on one versus the other. 

It's not that this is hugely novel, rather it speaks to a certain amount of humility within the campaign leadership ("we're going to get a more enthusiastic response shitting on the other guy").  I'm sure it's quite a change from drawing up ads for Obama. 

I think there's a pivot here I'd be interested in seeing to further demoralize the Trumpists ("you've stuck by Trump out of racial fealty; he's going to lose, there's no hope") that might be possible with some small adjustments. 

I'm also wondering if it would make sense for Biden to just decline any debates at all.  "The NY Times has already documented 18,000 lies over the last three years.  I'm not interested in enabling a national platform for one more." 

They have been making these negative ads and showing them online but haven't put a lot of money behind them. It is interesting that now they have some real funds and are going on the air in a big way the ad they are showing is just pro-Biden and not anti-Trump.

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/18/us/politics/joe-biden-ads-trump.html

Joe Biden Begins First General Election TV Ad Blitz

 

[Biff Tannen 46168]

1 hour ago, FWD said:

They have been making these negative ads and showing them online but haven't put a lot of money behind them. It is interesting that now they have some real funds and are going on the air in a big way the ad they are showing is just pro-Biden and not anti-Trump.

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/18/us/politics/joe-biden-ads-trump.html

Joe Biden Begins First General Election TV Ad Blitz

 

Well done I think.

[NameAlreadyInUse 5169]

Yeah that makes sense, and I think it's a good play.  Give the red meat to the people on the internet who want the red meat.  Appeal to the larger group on television who doesn't follow politics by appealing to their better selves.  

[Voldemort86 2259]

Trump asking for more debates is a sign of desperation. 

he’s trying to change the campaign format which has been in place for years. We always have 3 debates and the first one is at the end of September.

the more desperate candidate is almost always the one who wants more debates.

I hope they don’t change anything to placate his sorry ass.

[henrygandorf 29225]

2 minutes ago, Voldemort86 said:

Trump asking for more debates is a sign of desperation. 

he’s trying to change the campaign format which has been in place for years. We always have 3 debates and the first one is at the end of September.

the more desperate candidate is almost always the one who wants more debates.

I hope they don’t change anything to placate his sorry ass.

i'm not sure who the "they" is in this scenario, but isn't it just a negotiation between the campaigns with the press paying close attention?  if they both wanted to do one, there would only be one.  it's not like there's some debate law.  i don't even think the voters care at this point.

[Biff Tannen 46168]

1 hour ago, Voldemort86 said:

Trump asking for more debates is a sign of desperation. 

he’s trying to change the campaign format which has been in place for years. We always have 3 debates and the first one is at the end of September.

the more desperate candidate is almost always the one who wants more debates.

I hope they don’t change anything to placate his sorry ass.

Where did he ask for more?

[Biff Tannen 46168]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

i don't even think the voters care at this point.

Nope.  No need.  We all know who dotard is.  Either you are on board with his bullshit or not.

[Aqua Buddha 14806]

Terrible, actually:

 

[Bozo_Casanova 26851]

16 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

I would guess that a lot of the undecideds are typically right leaning folks that don’t like trump and can’t figure out what to do. Hate trump but “liberalism is a mental disorder”. I worry about a lot of those people going back to trump because some wedge issue that comes up in the month before the election. Wouldn’t be surprised for Dotard to start going off on abortion to get those people back on board.

A plurality of the undecided group is the hate both crowd, which generally breaks 2-1 against the incumbent. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26851]

14 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Terrible, actually:

 

And while they are a minority, the white evangelicals I’ve seen who oppose Trump strongly oppose him on a moral level and are treating working against him in the campaign as missional.

[Orale 1178]

Give him zero debates. As someone said above, Biden should just say what's the point, everything Trump says is a lie.