2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.

[Francisco 2.0 32612]

 

 

 

[Js1 87289]

Just now, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

He told us he doesn’t need Nikki’s voters anyhow so it shouldn’t matter. 

[Voldemort86 2259]

4 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

[atomheartbevo 90679]

 

[henrygandorf 29229]

gonna make trump’s broke ass defend fl and tx. lol. 

[Hornius Emeritus 12813]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

gonna make trump’s broke ass defend fl and tx. lol. 

 

I guess it sort of makes sense.  Both states are booming, economically, under Biden.

[tx ind 7060]

Imagine that helps down ballot if they could pick off a few spots in some states (even when Biden loses those states).

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

Negative Nancy here but I hope that he doesn’t pull a Hillary and try to expand the map before locking up 270 EVs. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26910]

10 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Negative Nancy here but I hope that he doesn’t pull a Hillary and try to expand the map before locking up 270 EVs. 

Disagree- I agreed then and now with Howard Dean- Some places are obviously more important than others but all 50 states should be contested, and that starts with strong local candidate recruitment with locally relevant campaigns that can live off the land. 
Make them defend every inch. 
 

Texas is winnable- we have a state Democratic Party problem, not a demographic problem. 

Edited March 20 by Bozo_Casanova

[Js1 87289]

A rising tide lifts all boats - Biden will also be focusing on helping along Allred, whoever ends up running against Rick Scott in FL, Josh Stein in NC, statehouse Dems, local races, etc. 

[tx 3 putt 78760]

 

[tx ind 7060]

He’s just trolling at this point, right?

[The Dog 44865]

33 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Negative Nancy here but I hope that he doesn’t pull a Hillary and try to expand the map before locking up 270 EVs. 

Biden isn't going to completely ignore swing states like she did. Her campaign literally didn't set foot in either Michigan or Wisconsin (can't remember which). 

[Js1 87289]

11 minutes ago, The Dog said:

Biden isn't going to completely ignore swing states like she did. Her campaign literally didn't set foot in either Michigan or Wisconsin (can't remember which). 

Don't forget he has very effective surrogates in both states - Evers and Whitmer.  Both states had GOP governors in 2016

[Js1 87289]

Last night, despite running unopposed, the following percentages of Republicans voted against Trump:

Arizona - 25%

Kansas - 25%

Ohio - 21%

Florida - 19%

Illinois - 19%

These results have been consistent with the previous Republican primaries across the board. There is also another pattern developing - Trump continues to struggle with suburban voters. This is a critical demographic for his campaign. While Trump's results were fairly consistent across every group from 2016-2020, suburban white voters are the reason Trump lost in 2020. He narrowly lost those voters in 2016 to Hillary Clinton, but lost them by a wide margin in 2020 to Biden. That was the difference in the two elections. Those are also the voters who continue to refuse to vote for Trump - even Republicans.

[LurkingHorn 1093]

Polling issues causing some angst and a potential Biden health scare aside, am I the only one who feels like this isn't going to be particularly close? I don't think Trump can count on all of these people switching to him in the General. Meanwhile, he's out of money and the RNC is out of money to really do much about it. 

[Pato del Muerto 53603]

I just can’t make myself trust that those 20%, or a substantial portion thereof, will stay home or cross the aisle in November.  I need to see it happen to believe it.  

[Snake Diggity 4720]

5 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

Polling issues causing some angst and a potential Biden health scare aside, am I the only one who feels like this isn't going to be particularly close? I don't think Trump can count on all of these people switching to him in the General. Meanwhile, he's out of money and the RNC is out of money to really do much about it. 

The last 9 years have proven that rational thinking and obvious outcomes are not dependable when it comes to American politics.  
 

Trump is a terrible candidate, a loser, a criminal, and one of the worst/most unlikable human beings on the planet.  He’s broke, his party is broke, and his path to victory is extremely narrow.  His opponent has more money, a better track record of success, is infinitely more likable, and possesses a starkly superior moral character.  The Democrats control the governorship and/or state leg and state courts in almost every swing state.

There is no rational thinking that would lead to predicting a Trump victory in November.  But it was the same way in 2016 and 2020.

Edited March 20 by Snake Diggity

[Js1 87289]

14 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I just can’t make myself trust that those 20%, or a substantial portion thereof, will stay home or cross the aisle in November.  I need to see it happen to believe it.  

Except Dems have been killing the special elections and 2022 midterms with doing just that. Persuasion. The GOP is getting more extreme by the day.  

[Goredho 17663]

21 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

Polling issues causing some angst and a potential Biden health scare aside, am I the only one who feels like this isn't going to be particularly close? I don't think Trump can count on all of these people switching to him in the General. Meanwhile, he's out of money and the RNC is out of money to really do much about it. 

Well, shit, this in the bag.  I guess I can stay home in November.

To me the wildcard is the nation states that benefit from a weakened U.S. with the means to influence the election. Obviously led by Russia.

 The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee investigation submitted the first in their five-volume 1,313-page report in July 2019. The committee concluded that the January 2017 intelligence community assessment alleging Russian interference was "coherent and well-constructed". The first volume also concluded that the assessment was "proper", learning from analysts that there was "no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions". The final and fifth volume, which was the result of three years of investigations, was released in August 2020,^[8] ending one of the United States "highest-profile congressional inquiries".^[9][10] The Committee report found that the Russian government had engaged in an "extensive campaign" to sabotage the election in favor of Trump, which included assistance from some of Trump's own advisers.^[9] 

A 2019 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee^[161] found "an unprecedented level of activity against state election infrastructure" by Russian intelligence in 2016.^[162] The activity occurred in "all 50 states" and is thought by "many officials and experts" to have been "a trial run ... to probe American defenses and identify weaknesses in the vast back-end apparatus—voter-registration operations, state and local election databases, electronic poll books and other equipment" of state election systems.^[163] The report warned that the United States "remains vulnerable" in the 2020 election.^[162]

Russia's path to victory in the Ukraine is through Donald Trump and conservative congress members that would stymie aid to Zelensky and leave NATO without a super-power's teeth.  They are going to go for broke in influencing this election, and as we've seen, you don't have to tilt the odds nationwide, just in a relatively small number of swing counties in a relatively small number of swing states.

[LurkingHorn 1093]

12 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

While not in the bag, it's a situation where it's Biden's to lose and if he plays it by the book, as analogy if he runs the ball 3 times in a row and doesn't try to get cute and throw it, he can run out the clock.

I think a lot of moderate Republicans and conservative folks who are turned off by Trump will be just fine with another 4 years of Biden.

That’s a better way of putting it. 

[Snake Diggity 4720]

26 minutes ago, Goredho said:

Well, shit, this in the bag.  I guess I can stay home in November.

To me the wildcard is the nation states that benefit from a weakened U.S. with the means to influence the election. Obviously led by Russia.

 The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee investigation submitted the first in their five-volume 1,313-page report in July 2019. The committee concluded that the January 2017 intelligence community assessment alleging Russian interference was "coherent and well-constructed". The first volume also concluded that the assessment was "proper", learning from analysts that there was "no politically motivated pressure to reach specific conclusions". The final and fifth volume, which was the result of three years of investigations, was released in August 2020,^[8] ending one of the United States "highest-profile congressional inquiries".^[9][10] The Committee report found that the Russian government had engaged in an "extensive campaign" to sabotage the election in favor of Trump, which included assistance from some of Trump's own advisers.^[9] 

A 2019 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee^[161] found "an unprecedented level of activity against state election infrastructure" by Russian intelligence in 2016.^[162] The activity occurred in "all 50 states" and is thought by "many officials and experts" to have been "a trial run ... to probe American defenses and identify weaknesses in the vast back-end apparatus—voter-registration operations, state and local election databases, electronic poll books and other equipment" of state election systems.^[163] The report warned that the United States "remains vulnerable" in the 2020 election.^[162]

Russia's path to victory in the Ukraine is through Donald Trump and conservative congress members that would stymie aid to Zelensky and leave NATO without a super-power's teeth.  They are going to go for broke in influencing this election, and as we've seen, you don't have to tilt the odds nationwide, just in a relatively small number of swing counties in a relatively small number of swing states.

There are a few things working in Trump’s favor:

 

Foreign influence: Russia, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and Iran all stand to benefit from a Trump presidency.  Thought: why aren’t NATO countries meddling in our election the opposite direction to cancel them out?

Passion: Trump has fewer supporters than Biden but they are far more passionate about him.  His base is more solid, and they are willing to do more (including breaking the law) to help him win.

Electoral college: Regardless of the overall numbers, there are only 6-7 states that matter.  Expanding the margins in safe blue states is meaningless.  Biden could lead the popular vote by 10 million votes but still lose if GA, AZ, and MI/WI don’t go his way.

Supreme Court: this is less certain but a conservative court probably works in Trump’s favor if they end up deciding the election.

[Js1 87289]

I think, like with most things, this will be gamed out to be as chaotic and awful as possible, and then we will know the winner by November 7 at the latest.  Biden having control of the DCNG and military will ensure no big crowds on counting day in Congress.  Marge and Ted and Hawley and some other idiots will bluster but they won’t have the votes to overturn a single state or even mount a significant challenge due to the new challenge requirements

The courts having accelerated timelines for disputes will lead to Trump getting slapped down quickly in December. Just a quicker 0-162 result 

[chainsaw 10309]

24 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

Trump has fewer supporters than Biden but they are far more passionate about him

They might be more passionate, but there's been a massive drop in passion over the past few years. Not as many flags or yard signs

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

I think the white trash branding has really hurt the passion. 

[Js1 87289]

Just now, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

I think the white trash branding has really hurt the passion. 

Also all the losing. Because they're a big pack of losers. 

[henrygandorf 29229]

1 hour ago, BeardIP said:

While not in the bag, it's a situation where it's Biden's to lose and if he plays it by the book, as analogy if he runs the ball 3 times in a row and doesn't try to get cute and throw it, he can run out the clock.

I think a lot of moderate Republicans and conservative folks who are turned off by Trump will be just fine with another 4 years of Biden.

context or not, the bloodbath situation really helped, and here's why.

trump's rallies have been batshit cult 1930's germany style for months now, but nobody was reporting about it.  there was actually more reporting on why it wasn't getting reported more, but hardly anyone was talking about it.  i even posted a longcat twitter thread (on here or on the downfall thread) weeks ago listing out and showing video of the 16 things he does at every rally.  and everyone was like, "shit, if people could just see how crazy this really is, it would help the cause."

well now that he said bloodbath, it's become a story.  it snatched up 2-3 cycles and it's still alive.  whether he meant the auto industry or not is 100% immaterial.  we finally broke through and have msm talking about it and it's all over twitter, and finally gotten picked up by the non-msnbc's of the world.

now more reporters will suck it up and go to rallies to find the next "bloodbath" moment.  and captain dipshit is actually enjoying the extra publicity, and going on his wacko shows and discussing it more - as a feature, not a glitch, because trump doesn't ever make a gaffe.  so he's actually fueling the fire, and likely thinking up his next bloodbath moment.

he's whipping his base into a frenzy, which is what he does.  they get more passionate, but these are the same people at the rallies again and again, and they're much smaller, and in off-brand towns.  and with any luck, it will continue like this for the next 7 months.

since the sotu, the trending has been really fucking strong in the direction we need it to be.  shit, they're not even talking about him being a doddering old man shuffling around the basement anymore.  they're running stories about him being hopped up on something.  all because he didn't appear old and stumbling which somehow didn't match up against the woodward-and-bernstein-style crack investigative journalism researched by (checks notes) the same hacks that ran with the senile-old-man narrative the past 6 months.  they even got an incidental assist from snl.

i felt good in october.  i feel great in march.  let's fucking go. 

[Snake Diggity 4720]

I read The Art of the Deal in 2007 during a binge of biographies I was going through.  I was moderately interested in Trump, mostly because I knew nothing about him and figured there had to be more to him than the person I’d seen on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous in the 80s or on his reality shows in the aughts.  I got thru that book and blew a raspberry, thinking “that dude is nothing but an attention-starved trust fund baby who was born into enough capital to buy fame and purchase an unearned reputation.  A bankrupt business genius.”  It’s why I never ever considered him a serious threat to the presidency and figured if he did win he’d be totally uninterested in actually doing anything.  I totally underestimated how dangerous he was.  But this entire last 9 years I have been very confident that his flaws will undo him, as they have multiple times throughout his life; it’s just a matter of time.  I don’t know if that’s actually happening now, with apparent dwindling enthusiasm for his style, money and legal problems, and age-related decline. I’m scared to bank on it.  But it will happen, eventually.  And it will be very satisfying for me to watch. 

[Js1 87289]

I was too young and naive to celebrate Reagan’s death. I cannot wait to celebrate Trump’s. 

[bolverk 30375]

14 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I was too young and naive to celebrate Reagan’s death. I cannot wait to celebrate Trump’s. 

In all fairness, he'd been out of office and the public eye for so long, and it had been so well-known he'd been ill that it really didn't make much of a splash. The Iraq War, GWOT, and American torture abuses seemed much more urgent and were grabbing the headlines at the time. 

Edited March 20 by bolverk

[Js1 87289]

Just now, bolverk said:

In all fairness, he'd been out of office and the public eye for so long, and it had been so well-known he'd been ill that it really didn't make much of a splash. The Iraq War, GWOT, and American torture abuses were grabbing the headlines at the time. 

I was also 15, I didn't really give a flying fuck about politics. 2 years later (2006 when the Dems took the House and Nancy became the first female Speaker) did I suddenly become interested.  (Because it was a month before my 18th birthday and I couldn't vote in the 2006 midterms) 

[Snake Diggity 4720]

5 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

And he didn't even write it. Some ghostwriter hack did. Can you imagine if Trump actually did attempt to write something? Oof.

It’s an easy/quick read, which I assume was partially Trump’s influence.  That’s about its only non-negative trait.  There’s not a single insightful point about business nor a single humanizing anecdote about Trump’s life.  If you come away from that book thinking anything positive about Trump, you’re a rube.

[Sbbruin 22147]

51 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i felt good in october.  i feel great in march.  let's fucking go. 

I need @Brisketexan to be the yin to this unbridled yang enthusiasm.  

[YGIFS 19458]

23 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

I read The Art of the Deal in 2007 during a binge of biographies I was going through.  I was moderately interested in Trump, mostly because I knew nothing about him and figured there had to be more to him than the person I’d seen on Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous in the 80s or on his reality shows in the aughts.  I got thru that book and blew a raspberry, thinking “that dude is nothing but an attention-starved trust fund baby who was born into enough capital to buy fame and purchase an unearned reputation.  A bankrupt business genius.”  It’s why I never ever considered him a serious threat to the presidency and figured if he did win he’d be totally uninterested in actually doing anything.  I totally underestimated how dangerous he was.  But this entire last 9 years I have been very confident that his flaws will undo him, as they have multiple times throughout his life; it’s just a matter of time.  I don’t know if that’s actually happening now, with apparent dwindling enthusiasm for his style, money and legal problems, and age-related decline. I’m scared to bank on it.  But it will happen, eventually.  And it will be very satisfying for me to watch. 

To redundantly share a story.  For some reason our AP Economics teacher in HS assigned us to read this book.  I didn't understand why.  Years later, I'd look her up and see, sure as shit, she became a MAGA donor for 2016.  Anyway, during my once an academic quarter phone call with my father out of state to check on my grades, I told him about the book.  And he was living in New York and knew some guys that did deals with Trump.  And he explained to me exactly how Confidence Schemes work.  My father had been dealing with trucking unions and the Chicago mafia for most of his adult life, so he knew a thing or two about what he was talking about.  And he told me how people like Trump fix it so that you have to try to earn their confidence and adulation, not the other way around like you'd first expect.  Thankfully he didn't have to live to see Trump get elected or he'd have died again.  The ghost writer for that book told our literary circle that Trump barely edited or gave notes, just made sure certain people were mentioned and certain people were left unmentioned as some sort of see-and-be-seen game.  Now in middle-age, I've done some business with some LP's in New York on real estate stuff here in Texas.  And most of them are Jewish and many of them have done business with Trump in the past, and they all say pretty much the same thing, "He's a complete dipshit, has no idea what he's doing, but if you can get the capital stack and term sheet right while stroking his ego, there's money to be made off of him."  But most of them are done with that Organization forever.  It's not worth the risk anymore.  Other than Ivanka, the other kids are fucked.  They'll be lucky to walk away with a few million bucks and the company will fold within months of his death.  

3 minutes ago, bolverk said:

In all fairness, he'd been out of office and the public eye for so long, and it had been so well-known he'd been ill that it really didn't make much of a splash. The Iraq War, GWOT, and American torture abuses were grabbing the headlines at the time. 

I know Reagan had some bad policies.  I probably hold him in higher regard than all of you (that's a low bar, I know).  But one thing I think we can all agree on is he loved the United States of America.  In his bones, this was a wonderful place to him (despite not loving all Americans).  This country is just an ATM to Donald Trump.  it just happened to be the place he was born into that happened to have tens of millions of stupid people aching to be acknowledged and validated.  Donald Trump would have become Donald Trump in any of 100 other countries in a dozen different eras in history.  He was always going to be this way.  We just happened to be a fertile proving ground for him.  And our children will suffer because of it.  I celebrated a bit when Bin Laden died.  I paused when folks like H.W. Bush and Reagan and Dole and McCain died.  Bad politics aside, they loved our country and they served it in myriad aspects of their life.  Other than a round of beers for Dahmer's death announcement, I don't know that I ever went out reveling over another human's death, even if they were completely maniacal assholes.  Nothing will compare to the celebration of Donald Trump's death.  It will be exalted all around our planet.  And every anniversary of it shall be a "cheat" day for all of us.  And every year, our celebration will agitate his sad left-behind followers.  And the look on their faces each and every year will make it even sweeter.  

[bolverk 30375]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I was also 15, I didn't really give a flying fuck about politics. 2 years later (2006 when the Dems took the House and Nancy became the first female Speaker) did I suddenly become interested.  (Because it was a month before my 18th birthday and I couldn't vote in the 2006 midterms) 

I know it wasn't your intention, but this post made me acutely feel my age. I was 32, a recent first-time homeowner, still fairly new to my career, and raising a 4-year-old kid at the time. Little did I know what destruction was lying around the corner a few years later: a painful divorce, the Great Recession, job loss, and the resulting years of alcohol-fueled madness to numb a broken soul and dashed dreams.

[Rimbo 27092]

12 hours ago, henrygandorf said:

gonna make trump’s broke ass defend fl and tx. lol. 

 

 

5 hours ago, tx ind said:

Imagine that helps down ballot if they could pick off a few spots in some states (even when Biden loses those states).

 

You gotta start rebuilding somewhere. The national Democrats literally gave up on Texas in 2000 (and I've been angry about the disrespect they showed Ann Richards that year ever since), and even if they win nothing, they can sow the seeds for 2026 and 2028.

 

4 hours ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

Negative Nancy here but I hope that he doesn’t pull a Hillary and try to expand the map before locking up 270 EVs. 

 

The Democrats have more money now than any party ever had. They can have it all.

 

4 hours ago, tx ind said:

He’s just trolling at this point, right?

 

No, he's quite genuine. Might be the only things he's saying that are.

His appeal is to Americans who thought that "you can't say the word n***er" was a taboo on speech, as opposed to something that reflected an immoral mindset. They see him lifting that taboo by saying these things, and love him for it. He's racist and xenophobic, and validates their own bigotry by saying it.

They never thought bigotry was wrong, just impolite to say aloud.

 

3 hours ago, LurkingHorn said:

Polling issues causing some angst and a potential Biden health scare aside, am I the only one who feels like this isn't going to be particularly close? I don't think Trump can count on all of these people switching to him in the General. Meanwhile, he's out of money and the RNC is out of money to really do much about it. 

 

It's absolutely trending that way, but November is a long nine months from now.

[chainsaw 10309]

17 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

I know Reagan had some bad policies.  I probably hold him in higher regard than all of you (that's a low bar, I know).  But one thing I think we can all agree on is he loved the United States of America.  In his bones, this was a wonderful place to him (despite not loving all Americans).  This country is just an ATM to Donald Trump.  it just happened to be the place he was born into that happened to have tens of millions of stupid people aching to be acknowledged and validated.  Donald Trump would have become Donald Trump in any of 100 other countries in a dozen different eras in history.  He was always going to be this way.  We just happened to be a fertile proving ground for him.  And our children will suffer because of it.  I celebrated a bit when Bin Laden died.  I paused when folks like H.W. Bush and Reagan and Dole and McCain died.  Bad politics aside, they loved our country and they served it in myriad aspects of their life.  Other than a round of beers for Dahmer's death announcement, I don't know that I ever went out reveling over another human's death, even if they were completely maniacal assholes.  Nothing will compare to the celebration of Donald Trump's death.  It will be exalted all around our planet.  And every anniversary of it shall be a "cheat" day for all of us.  And every year, our celebration will agitate his sad left-behind followers.  And the look on their faces each and every year will make it even sweeter.  

I think of it as a reverse Mao policy. (In China, the government says that the praise to criticism ratio for Mao should be 70:30). I think Reagan was 70 percent demon (terrible on the environment, destroyed the mental health system, deregulated and cut taxes to favor the wealthy, was probably the worst president ever for unions and labor, appointed Scalia, Nancy's "Just Say No" bullshit and the "war on drugs", he destabilized Central America, and he was behind the Iran-Contra scandal, he also supported a federal ban on abortion), 30 percent decent (immigration amnesty, seemed to be a public servant rather than a grifter).

Honestly 30:70 is the wrong ratio for Reagan. Probably closer to 10:90, if that.

[YGIFS 19458]

Wasn't intended as a policy debate-as-thread derail.  My point was simply to illuminate how Trump views our country.  Most of "bad presidents" at least still loved the ideals of the United States, even if they didn't try to elevate/implement them.  Most of them served them in the military, other political office, civil service, post-presidency advocacy, etc.  To Trump, this is just a venue to run his Confidence Schemes.  And his followers aren't really Patriots to him, or even 'Fellow Americans', they're Marks.  That's what makes it so disturbing to watch unfold.  No matter when and where he was born, so long as it was to parents with some resources and network, he was always going to awaken the worst in people and fleece them of their money and liberty.  And that they welcome it with open arms and open checkbooks is what makes it the mark of true evil.  He never comes with a pointy tail and a pitchfork, he comes with a goofy hat and comes as your friend.

[Biff Tannen 46203]

52 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

They can have it all.

Our empire of dirt?

[Longhorn_Fan68 34108]

5 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Our empire of dirt?

you just read the climate thread, didn't you?

['stache 22147]

4 hours ago, Pato del Muerto said:

I just can’t make myself trust that those 20%, or a substantial portion thereof, will stay home or cross the aisle in November.  I need to see it happen to believe it.  

 

4 hours ago, Js1 said:

Except Dems have been killing the special elections and 2022 midterms with doing just that. Persuasion. The GOP is getting more extreme by the day.  

The presidency has become way more of a powerful position (both in reality and by perception) than it used to be, and voters act differently in presidential elections. I too have zero trust that traditionally republican voters who say they hate trump will stay home or vote against him. First, the fact that they are still staunchly republican means they have some love of cruelty and dislike for "others" and I feel are overstating their dislike of trump. The numbers are still astonishing to me that a vile hateful incompetent criminal of a human is the overwhelming choice of a major political party. That alone is alarming.

But more importantly, I just see way too many wedge issues prevail on the right. These people, even if they truly do not like trump, will almost certainly fall for the wedge issue of the day. Trump may be a bad guy, but the other side are socialists/baby killers/queer lovers/facists (because covid restrictions)/traitors (because of all these Mexicans). It's gonna happen. I also don't trust that the youths will save us. It was supposed to start happening at least a decade ago and yet we got the most despicable person ever elected (even missteps by Clinton should not have made it even close). And we're already seeing that young liberals are demanding idealogical purity (Gaza being a massive hotbutton for them), and others (males in particular) are falling for the incel "fuck everyone" mindset at way too high a clip. 

I do still think that Biden will win, but it won't be by much more than 2020, and we're guaranteed that the orange baby will act out again as will his worshipers. 

Edited March 20 by 'stache

[Bozo_Casanova 26910]

5 hours ago, LurkingHorn said:

Polling issues causing some angst and a potential Biden health scare aside, am I the only one who feels like this isn't going to be particularly close? I don't think Trump can count on all of these people switching to him in the General. Meanwhile, he's out of money and the RNC is out of money to really do much about it. 

I have the same feeling, but that feeling also could be hope casting and we both might be whistling past the graveyard. 
No matter what, Trump will claim it was rigged and will do whatever he accuses Biden of doing and more.
It’s really important that it not be close for multiple reasons. In some ways a blowout Trump win is better for the country than a close Trump win and in any case seems more likely than a blowout Biden win.
 Im worried about Trump winning of course, but I’m also worried it will be close either way. 

[LurkingHorn 1093]

9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I have the same feeling, but that feeling also could be hope casting and we both might be whistling past the graveyard. 
No matter what, Trump will claim it was rigged and will do whatever he accuses Biden of doing and more.
It’s really important that it not be close for multiple reasons. In some ways a blowout Trump win is better for the country than a close Trump win and in any case seems more likely than a blowout Biden win.
 Im worried about Trump winning of course, but I’m also worried it will be close either way. 

Trump is already claiming the 2024 election is going to be rigged. He's already planning his strategy when he inevitably loses. That, to me, speaks volumes about how he and his campaign see things going. 

https://apnews.com/article/trump-2024-election-lies-voter-fraud-biden-f3f3691c2ea0667ad694e3bee577d802

The difference this time is he isn't the head of state.  I think it's going to be a very similar map to 2020 with maybe 1 or 2 states going back to Trump, but it won't be enough. I don't care if it's close or not, he just needs to lose. 

[Js1 87289]

14 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

The difference this time is he isn't the head of state.  I think it's going to be a very similar map to 2020 with maybe 1 or 2 states going back to Trump, but it won't be enough. I don't care if it's close or not, he just needs to lose. 

Yep, if I had to guess:

Biden wins AZ, NV, WI, MI, PA, NH, NE-02
Trump wins NC
I'm 50/50 on Georgia

Marist had some polls (grain of salt) last night with Trump up less than 5 in both GA and NC.  I do recall in 2020 and 2022 that the Georgia polls were not good for Dems early and then flipped the closer to the election we got.  Because in March 2020, I was not counting on Georgia being a blue state in November. 

[LurkingHorn 1093]

4 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Yep, if I had to guess:

Biden wins AZ, NV, WI, MI, PA, NH, NE-02
Trump wins NC
I'm 50/50 on Georgia

Marist had some polls (grain of salt) last night with Trump up less than 5 in both GA and NC.  I do recall in 2020 and 2022 that the Georgia polls were not good for Dems early and then flipped the closer to the election we got.  Because in March 2020, I was not counting on Georgia being a blue state in November. 

If Trump takes back Georgia and Arizona, he still loses without flipping MI, PA, or WI. I just have a hard time seeing everything breaking for him given the current state of the GOP in those states. 

[Js1 87289]

12 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

If Trump takes back Georgia and Arizona, he still loses without flipping MI, PA, or WI. I just have a hard time seeing everything breaking for him given the current state of the GOP in those states. 

Same.  But I don't see him winning AZ.  Those McCain Republicans detest him.  They don't mind Biden.  

It's funny, because Emerson is pushing out all these polls showing Senate Dems doing really well but the same samples somehow have Trump beating Biden as well.  This country doesn't ticket split like that anymore outside of "big personal brands" like Brown, Tester, Manchin, Collins.  You can pretty much guarantee that if Baldwin (WI), Slotkin (MI), Casey (PA), Rosen (NV) and Gallego (AZ) win their states, Biden won them as well.  

The only potential ticket splitting would be NC Gov - I can 100% see Stein beating Robinson and Trump beating Biden and MT/OH Senate. 

Edited March 20 by Js1

[Biff Tannen 46203]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In some ways a blowout Trump win is better for the country than a close Trump win and in any case seems more likely than a blowout Biden win.

Wat

[Snake Diggity 4720]

State govt GOP control of swing states:

PA: Senate

WI: House, Senate, Supreme Court

MI: Supreme Court

GA: House, Senate, Governor, Supreme Court

AZ: House, Senate, Supreme Court

NV: Governor 

 

Georgia is the only swing state where the GOP controls all 4, and Kemp hates Trump, so it’s unlikely shenanigans go easy for them even there.

[chainsaw 10309]

16 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

State govt GOP control of swing states:

PA: Senate

WI: House, Senate, Supreme Court

MI: Supreme Court

GA: House, Senate, Governor, Supreme Court

AZ: House, Senate, Supreme Court

NV: Governor 

 

Georgia is the only swing state where the GOP controls all 4, and Kemp hates Trump, so it’s unlikely shenanigans go easy for them even there.

Not sure this is accurate. SCOWI for example is no longer under GOP

[Js1 87289]

2 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

Not sure this is accurate. SCOWI for example is no longer under GOP

Yeah that one that is wrong. Michigan Supreme Court is also 4-3 Dem and one of the GOP is not running this year