2020 Democratic Nominee

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

35 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Rcp average.

It's interesting to look at the trend lines. Bernie's kind of had a steady decline after an initial dip. Kamala with the big jump after first debate. Liz Warren with steady growth and less volatility. That probably says something about the support she's building.

It'll be interesting to see if anyone makes a Kamala like jump after next debate. Will be avoid sign of how much the race is settling in.

Like the first debate, Biden is the most vulnerable.  I don’t see much vulnerability for Bernie or Warren in night one but there will be some pressure on Bernie to outshine Warren.  I don’t expect them to get into it unless Bernie strikes first which I doubt, he knows better.  

Buttigieg should be trying to define himself between the progressives and the centrists.  He might go on a little offense because he’s barely hanging on in the top tier.  

Most likely target for Pete:  Bernie. 

[Larry T. Spider 1740]

Prediction: in a month warren will be in first place.

[tantric superman 4667]

11 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Ugh, FINE, I'll listen to a Chapo episode.

Is it better now than it was a year or so ago?  I thought "the gang" was kind of insufferable.  Like bad loud morning radio hosts but on a pod cast.

Signed,  Grouchy Old Man

[406W30th 1111]

12 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Is it better now than it was a year or so ago?  I thought "the gang" was kind of insufferable.  Like bad loud morning radio hosts but on a pod cast.

Signed,  Grouchy Old Man

I think they're funny as hell but more than anything they just talk a lot of shit. I do like their more substantive episodes, such as the Yang interview or interviews with activists, organizers, etc.

Meneker and Biederman are some funny, smart motherfuckers though.

[cactusflinthead 27594]

On 7/23/2019 at 11:01 PM, Hank Kingsley said:

Ayanna Pressley and Ro Khanna voted yes as well.  

*

She gone. Can't even get 20 bucks to bring her total to even. 

10 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Ok then stay home with your purity blanket and cry a fucking river.

 

[Larry T. Spider 1740]

The swing state mentioned in that article by The Hill is Ohio. The Dems absolutely DO NOT need Ohio in order to win. Or Florida for that matter. Win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Trump can start packing his boxes. 

[Js1 85109]

4 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

The swing state mentioned in that article by The Hill is Ohio. The Dems absolutely DO NOT need Ohio in order to win. Or Florida for that matter. Win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Trump can start packing his boxes. 

Just a reminder of all the states that went for Trump by less than Ohio (+8.6):

• Georgia: +5.7
• Arizona: +4
• North Carolina: +3.8
• Florida - +1.3
• Pennsylvania: +1.2
• Wisconsin: +1
• Michigan: +0.3

[Larry T. Spider 1740]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Just a reminder of all the states that went for Trump by less than Ohio (+8.6):

• Georgia: +5.7
• Arizona: +4
• North Carolina: +3.8
• Florida - +1.3
• Pennsylvania: +1.2
• Wisconsin: +1
• Michigan: +0.3

Hell, Texas was 9%. Ohio is a red state at this point and I would worry about the others first, especially the ones trending more blue.

[Zonahorn 8079]

14 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Just a reminder of all the states that went for Trump by less than Ohio (+8.6):

• Georgia: +5.7
• Arizona: +4
• North Carolina: +3.8
• Florida - +1.3
• Pennsylvania: +1.2
• Wisconsin: +1
• Michigan: +0.3

Can’t wait for Arizona to be blue

[DigglerontheHoof 21061]

5 minutes ago, Calihorn said:

Can’t wait for Arizona Texas to be blue

fify

[Pancho 44475]

37 minutes ago, Larry T. Spider said:

The swing state mentioned in that article by The Hill is Ohio. The Dems absolutely DO NOT need Ohio in order to win. Or Florida for that matter. Win Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Trump can start packing his boxes. 

Yeah, Ohio is the cousin on drugs who had a brief moment of realization and was clean for a bit until they ran into an old friend who said “you got soft nigga” and to prove their hoodness, they went back to their old ways.

 

[Hank Kingsley 20696]

Oof. 

 

[Js1 85109]

If Biden loses or barely wins Iowa and loses NH, SC would be his "oh god, please rescue my campaign from awful headlines" as it was for Hillary 2016. 

[Hank Kingsley 20696]

I don't think Joe wins Iowa or NH. 

Debate next week will either really hurt him or keep him afloat for a while longer. Unfortunately, I think there's a good chance he has a successful debate and lands some counter attacks on Kamala. That said, with Booker, Castro, DiBlasio, and Kamala on the same stage, Joe will be attacked mercilessly. It's gonna be a clown show. 

 

 

 

[bad_teammate 13132]

Negative attacks hurt the target, but they also hurt the person using them. Kamala and Cory going after Biden on their night while Warren and Bernie spend their whole night not attacking each other and outlining good progressive policies is the ideal outcome.

But, the debates will be garbage dogshit because all cable news is garbage dogshit incapable of producing anything good or useful.

[Hank Kingsley 20696]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

But, the debates will be garbage dogshit because all cable news is garbage dogshit incapable of producing anything good or useful.

[Pancho 44475]

40 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Oof. 

 

Booty is polling above Booker...lol

Cory Booker has been a fucking mess.  Take Rosario to Turks, and just stop trying to gain traction.  It ain't happening. 

[6th Street 6357]

At what point do the people polling at sub 5% start throwing in the towel? I mean their money has to be drying up quick right? And staffers will probably quit too

[henrygandorf 29175]

4 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

At what point do the people polling at sub 5% start throwing in the towel? I mean their money has to be drying up quick right? And staffers will probably quit too

after this next debate, the threshold for qualifying moves up a click (the sept ones are in houston).  

once folks don't qualify, they'll start to drop out.  

debates, press, fundraising, polling - all of these fuel each other.  once 1-2 of them start slipping, they all do.

there are still 5 debates in 2019.  plenty of time for it all to shake out.

[bad_teammate 13132]

5 hours ago, tantric superman said:

Is it better now than it was a year or so ago?  I thought "the gang" was kind of insufferable.  Like bad loud morning radio hosts but on a pod cast.

Signed,  Grouchy Old Man

Wouldn't know; not much of a Chapo listener.

Citations Needed, though, is great.

1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

If he is polling better in Ohio right now, I would be shocked if he weren’t also polling better in Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Florida, etc.

I don't know what connection Michigan has to Florida or Penn to NC.

The electoral math makes it obvious that Ohio is down on the list of priorities. Texas is a better use of time and money than Ohio.

Michigan: 16 EV (Trump +0.3)
Wisc: 10 EV (Trump +1)
Penn: 20 EV (Trump +1.2)

Job done. Win those 3 and you're the president now.

Florida: 29 EV (Trump +1.3)
NC: 15 EV (Trump +3.8)

Ohio: 18 EV (Trump +8.6)
Texas: 38 EV (Trump +9.2)

[Hank Kingsley 20696]

11 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

At what point do the people polling at sub 5% start throwing in the towel? I mean their money has to be drying up quick right? And staffers will probably quit too

We'll probably see quite a few drop out after the 3rd debate in Houston. 

 

 

[Js1 85109]

6 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Wouldn't know; not much of a Chapo listener.

Citations Needed, though, is great.

I don't know what connection Michigan has to Florida or Penn to NC.

The electoral math makes it obvious that Ohio is down on the list of priorities. Texas is a better use of time and money than Ohio.

Michigan: 16 EV (Trump +0.3)
Wisc: 10 EV (Trump +1)
Penn: 20 EV (Trump +1.2)

Job done. Win those 3 and you're the president now.

Florida: 29 EV (Trump +1.3)
NC: 15 EV (Trump +3.8)

Ohio: 18 EV (Trump +8.6)
Texas: 38 EV (Trump +9.2)

Don't forget Arizona.

Hell, I keep reading out Wisconsin is just so full of WWC voters that it's going to be the toughest flip of the blue wall.  You can grab AZ and still come out an EV ahead (11 vs. 10).  

The 2020 Dems better spend their time in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, Arizona, NC and flirt a little with Georgia and Texas. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Wait, we’re supposed to believe Steyer is at 2% in South Carolina after being in the race a week? With little to no coverage? As another generic white “elect me because I’m a billionaire” guy?

[Hank Kingsley 20696]

It's a qualifying poll too. Annoying. 

Looks like he's been buying TV ads in SC and has done some campaigning there. 

 

 

[Bateshorn 9899]

4 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

Hell, Texas was 9%. Ohio is a red state at this point and I would worry about the others first, especially the ones trending more blue.

Also, Rob Portman has built a first class political machine.

[Bateshorn 9899]

30 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Don't forget Arizona.

Hell, I keep reading out Wisconsin is just so full of WWC voters that it's going to be the toughest flip of the blue wall.  You can grab AZ and still come out an EV ahead (11 vs. 10).  

The 2020 Dems better spend their time in Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida, Wisconsin, Arizona, NC and flirt a little with Georgia and Texas. 

I read an interesting article about WI once that it's actually one of the most partisan states in the union.  Basically it's Madison and Milwaukee vs. the rest of the state.

[GopherRock 1765]

14 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I read an interesting article about WI once that it's actually one of the most partisan states in the union.  Basically it's Madison and Milwaukee vs. the rest of the 

Add Douglas County in the far northwest to the blue column, and that's pretty accurate. There's a blatant MAGA believer who owns a farm on I-94 right over the border by Hudson that isn't afraid to tell all passersby that he's all in on Trump. 

The GOP really gerrymandered their Legislature after their 2010 sweep, such that a statewide Dem majority vote yielded the GOP 64 of 100 seats in the Assembly. 

[Js1 85109]

Louder for y’all in the back! 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Js1

[bad_teammate 13132]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Louder for y’all in the back! 

What is the reaction I'm supposed to have to this?

The gap between Biden and Harris is re-widening after she closed it significantly.

Pre-debate: Biden +25
Immediately after: Biden +11
Now: Biden +16

She can go after Biden as hard as she wants, but I doubt there's another +14 bump in it for her. We were all surprised (and delighted) by her attack on him, but when she tries it again we'll see it coming and it won't be as attention-grabbing. Also, even though Biden was surprised to be attacked at the time, he did hit back in the moment. He will be very prepared this time, however.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Finally listened to the Yang-on-Chapo show and... meh.

He's clearly a smart guy, but he didn't really have an answer to his VAT proposal being extremely regressive other than saying that it's just too hard to tax the rich, so we have to tax the middle/poor instead. Also, I am irrationally furious when the word "entrepreneur" is used repeatedly and it makes me hate the person saying it over and over.

Props to Yang for identifying a real problem, but his supposed solution isn't a solution at all.

An E for effort.

[Js1 85109]

Quote

it's just too hard to tax the rich, so we have to tax the middle/poor instead

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

Article on the pretenders for the nomination and their desperation.

 

[gmr548 16511]

Ohio is a waste of time. If things break to where it's a winnable state for Ds, the outcome there doesn't matter because that means flips of WI, MI, PA, and FL are already happening and the election is over before it starts. Ohio is running up the score. If you want to chase pipe dreams, do it in GA or TX where the investment can lay some long term groundwork.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Patrick Bateman 3903]

Choppy water ahead?  Fox news poll so I'm sure some will ignore.

 

[henrygandorf 29175]

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

Louder for y’all in the back! 

 

so which kamala staffer gets credit for planting a story in vf that "the gop fears that kamala could be another obama"?

kamala harris : not a nutjob

i can already see the bumper stickers.

[gmr548 16511]

1 hour ago, longhornmatt said:

That may be true, but I don’t see the logic behind assuming the strongest candidate in Ohio isn’t also probably the strongest candidate in other swing states.  That person may not be Biden, especially after he’s had another 9 months to gaffe his way through the primary process.  But whoever it is, I would want to maximize my chances of winning with that person instead of thinking “we don’t need a comfortable margin”.  

But I don’t think Ohio is an outlier and most of the other swing states would have totally different general election preferences.  West Virginia, Utah, Vermont and Hawaii are weird states.  Ohio is still pretty close to meat and potatoes ‘Murica.

Ohio actually is an outlier, even relative to other midwestern states, in that it is actively getting whiter, older, and less educated. The whiter and less educated bits are absolutely not in line with America as a whole, absolutely impact its electoral behavior, and are at odds with several swing states and swing-ish states: AZ, FL, NC, GA, etc. The pattern is even at odds with, or at least significantly accelerated, relative to WI and MI, and especially PA, where growth is driven by metro Philadelphia, which isn't midwestern in profile at all.

Ohio is basically the mirror image of TX, where latino population is growing much faster than the white population, while newcomers tend to be young-ish professionals as opposed to Fox News grandparents and have high levels of education. You see the partisan leans/competitiveness of those states more or less converging now, but heading in opposite directions. Combine those demographic traits with the realignment of partisan battle lines along lines of educational achievement and Ohio is in fact going against the grain relative to other swing states and the nation as a whole.

Now, to your point, I don't disagree regarding candidates in this particular election. There is still a good bit of demographic similarity between OH and MI/WI. The candidates that will do best in WI/MI will likely also fare the best in OH. But Ohio would be a heavier lift, and doesn't warrant investment given the fact that, at this point, Ds need an immensely favorable political environment to win there, they are definitely carrying WI, MI, and PA in any scenario in which they win OH. Which is ballgame anyway.

[6th Street 6357]

5 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

 

so which kamala staffer gets credit for planting a story in vf that "the gop fears that kamala could be another obama"?

kamala harris : not a nutjob

i can already see the bumper stickers.

It's the old Mack Brown "scares ya to death" special

[406W30th 1111]

3 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

Finally listened to the Yang-on-Chapo show and... meh.

He's clearly a smart guy, but he didn't really have an answer to his VAT proposal being extremely regressive other than saying that it's just too hard to tax the rich, so we have to tax the middle/poor instead. Also, I am irrationally furious when the word "entrepreneur" is used repeatedly and it makes me hate the person saying it over and over.

Props to Yang for identifying a real problem, but his supposed solution isn't a solution at all.

An E for effort.

What, you don't think parents are entrepreneurs because they have kids?!

I agree with most of what you said, but I think he came off a little bit better than you're giving him credit for – ridiculous, egregious use of "entrepreneur" aside – and I like how he explains the pending labor crisis. No one else is even talking about it. 

[Js1 85109]

8 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

Ohio actually is an outlier, even relative to other midwestern states, in that it is actively getting whiter, older, and less educated. The whiter and less educated bits are absolutely not in line with America as a whole, absolutely impact its electoral behavior, and are at odds with several swing states and swing-ish states: AZ, FL, NC, GA, etc. The pattern is even at odds with, or at least significantly accelerated, relative to WI and MI, and especially PA, where growth is driven by metro Philadelphia, which isn't midwestern in profile at all.

Ohio is basically the mirror image of TX, where latino population is growing much faster than the white population, while newcomers tend to be young-ish professionals as opposed to Fox News grandparents and have high levels of education. You see the partisan leans/competitiveness of those states more or less converging now, but heading in opposite directions. Combine those demographic traits with the realignment of partisan battle lines along lines of educational achievement and Ohio is in fact going against the grain relative to other swing states and the nation as a whole.

Now, to your point, I don't disagree regarding candidates in this particular election. There is still a good bit of demographic similarity between OH and MI/WI. The candidates that will do best in WI/MI will likely also fare the best in OH. But Ohio would be a heavier lift, and doesn't warrant investment given the fact that, at this point, Ds need an immensely favorable political environment to win there, they are definitely carrying WI, MI, and PA in any scenario in which they win OH. Which is ballgame anyway.

Which just lends to the idea that in like 10 years, the upper Midwest goes red while AZ, NC, GA and (eventually) SC are blue tilting. 

[bolverk 29399]

24 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

....

Ohio also needs to be broken up geographically. The southwestern part of the state (Cincy) is doing alright but draws from Kentucky and Indiana so it reliably votes GOP as does southeast Ohio, which is basically West Virginia. Columbus is akin to Austin in that it's the state capital, has the flagship university of their state, is staying young, is thriving economically, and is their version of the blueberry in the tomato soup. The only thing keeping the state purple in the past was Cleveland and the rest of northeast Ohio. That region has, to put it kindly, sucked shit through a straw (economically) since the late 60s and those old union workers are the ones that have finally flipped the state safely in the red column. I don't see them turning their backs on Trump next year.

Edited July 26, 2019 by bolverk

[Skyline 325]

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/podcasts/the-daily/2020-electoral-college-race.html

 

Rundown about election math by the NYT. Basic tilting point will be Wisconsin, where Trump's approval rating is 47%. If he wins that state, he will win re-election. If he loses Wisconsin and every state where he's less popular then the Dem candidate will win. 

[gmr548 16511]

2 minutes ago, Skyline said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/podcasts/the-daily/2020-electoral-college-race.html

 

Rundown about election math by the NYT. Basic tilting point will be Wisconsin, where Trump's approval rating is 47%. If he wins that state, he will win re-election. If he loses Wisconsin and every state where he's less popular then the Dem candidate will win. 

My assessment as well. the data from 2016 and 2018 make it pretty clear. PA is flipping back and MI probably is too. FL is probably staying red. OH is staying red. WI is the one true tossup.

[bolverk 29399]

5 minutes ago, Skyline said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/podcasts/the-daily/2020-electoral-college-race.html

 

Rundown about election math by the NYT. Basic tilting point will be Wisconsin, where Trump's approval rating is 47%. If he wins that state, he will win re-election. If he loses Wisconsin and every state where he's less popular then the Dem candidate will win. 

Hopefully, the loss of Foxconn, Walker, and Ryan continues to bode well there.

[gmr548 16511]

12 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Which just lends to the idea that in like 10 years, the upper Midwest goes red while AZ, NC, GA and (eventually) SC are blue tilting. 

Generally, yes. MN has been a very successful lab for progressive policy so I don't see them flipping anytime soon, especially with the only growth concentrated in the Twin Cities. PA isn't flipping either (not sure if you were including it in that definition anyway). Otherwise, yes. I think the 2020-2028 election cycles could be very tricky for Ds, because those upper midwest states have already begun the process of becoming swing states/flipping, while AZ, GA, and NC all still lean red, particularly the former two.

The wild card is TX. I think that goes blue well before SC, and the 2020 election will be very telling. I'm a little pessimistic because I think the low hanging fruit has been picked and the realignment is largely complete, but if the trends we've seen over the past few cycles continue in 2020, Texas could make this entire discussion a moot point in a few election cycles. You add TX to the west coast, NV, CO, IL, and the northeastern states from VA on and it is a "blue wall" the GOP simply can't break. That is with conceding AZ, MN, WI, MI, NC, GA, and FL.

[gmr548 16511]

26 minutes ago, Skyline said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/podcasts/the-daily/2020-electoral-college-race.html

 

Rundown about election math by the NYT. Basic tilting point will be Wisconsin, where Trump's approval rating is 47%. If he wins that state, he will win re-election. If he loses Wisconsin and every state where he's less popular then the Dem candidate will win. 

As a follow up, this is far from implausible and would be kind of fun in a nihilistic, actual fracturing of the republic kind of way kind of way.

 

[Js1 85109]

25 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

My assessment as well. the data from 2016 and 2018 make it pretty clear. PA is flipping back and MI probably is too. FL is probably staying red. OH is staying red. WI is the one true tossup.

I think Arizona could surprise 

[henrygandorf 29175]

4 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

As a follow up, this is far from implausible and would be kind of fun in a nihilistic, actual fracturing of the republic kind of way kind of way.

 

then tom james becomes president?

150mm votes and fucking arizona is gonna decide this thing.

[UTDD 362]

29 minutes ago, Skyline said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/24/podcasts/the-daily/2020-electoral-college-race.html

 

Rundown about election math by the NYT. Basic tilting point will be Wisconsin, where Trump's approval rating is 47%. If he wins that state, he will win re-election. If he loses Wisconsin and every state where he's less popular then the Dem candidate will win. 

In my opinion (at least right now as a prediction) Wisconsin is BY FAR the most important state for the election unless Arizona can be flipped.  I think there is a pretty solid chance with all Dem candidates that Pennsylvania will turn blue as will Michigan, but Wisconsin is more iffy to me depending on which candidate is the general election flagbearer against Trump.

[Skyline 325]

4 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

As a follow up, this is far from implausible and would be kind of fun in a nihilistic, actual fracturing of the republic kind of way kind of way.

 

This is nightmare fuel, and I can't imagine a world where a Dem candidate will lose Ohio + Florida and still go on to win. 

25 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Hopefully, the loss of Foxconn, Walker, and Ryan continues to bode well there.

The podcast mentioned that those Milwaukee suburbs will likely get more conservative after choosing to sit out in 2016. 

[UTDD 362]

7 minutes ago, gmr548 said:

As a follow up, this is far from implausible and would be kind of fun in a nihilistic, actual fracturing of the republic kind of way kind of way.

 

Wow, that's actually possible.  I certainly could see NH squeaking blue, and AZ/WIS squeaking red.