We can afford welfare for banks & billionaires, but we can’t afford to save our planet or people.
We can afford welfare for banks & billionaires, but we can’t afford to save our planet or people.
Yosingleryx wrote:
CriminaI Trump wrote:
Wow .... you are ignorant. You cannot read. NOT stupid enough to pay you, you read as being paid.
You are is dumb. #sad
You missed this gem from him.
And as for russia, you’re not just clueless, but we’ve got a paid-in-rubles troll here who clearly doesn’t know as much about russia as me, so try to keep up, junior.
Apparently, I’m getting paid in rubles, but not by Russia.
Your "gem" has nothing to do with your inability to read and comprehend the post.
smh at your weak attempt at duck and cover #sad
moderates suck wrote:
Yosingleryy wrote:
I don’t put much stock in head-to-heads this early. We don’t even have a nominee yet.
There’s a lot of ammunition for Trump and his followers to latch on to with Sanders. Trump’s campaign will be able to rattle off a long list of “socialist” Sanders programs. Not so much with more moderate candidates.
I'm truncating for readability.
I agree that head-to-head polling this far out is not all that reliable. I think it is the most compelling evidence we have though.
I would ask if you have any evidence that Sanders will fare worse than any of the other nominees?
You’re correct that all we have is polling at this point as “evidence.” However, it is far from compelling evidence. I find that to be unreliable at this point. For months, Biden was the front runner in polls. Now? Not so much. Hell, Sanders may not be the nominee at the end of the process despite his run.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.htmlCriminaI Trump wrote:
Yosingleryx wrote:
You missed this gem from him.
Apparently, I’m getting paid in rubles, but not by Russia.
Your "gem" has nothing to do with your inability to read and comprehend the post.
smh at your weak attempt at duck and cover #sad
You’re right. I’m having difficulty comprehending that gibberish. But someone here is getting paid in rubles. And dammit I was hoping it was me.
Maybe I “are is” dumb. #sad
You are one sensitive guy, Yosingler... #sad
I can see why yo-“single”-ry is in fact single. Another proud incel.
CriminaI Trump wrote:
You are one sensitive guy, Yosingler... #sad
I know. #sad
I don't know what the fuss is...Sanders is hardly the most liberal senator. For example, Gillibrand is TWICE as liberal as Sanders. or infinity times, I dunno.
or
Thank goodness for gillibrand, so GOP has to lie if they call sanders the most liberal senator.
#96 0.05 Sen. Kamala Harris [D-CA]
#97 0.03 Sen. Jeff Merkley [D-OR]
#98 0.01 Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT]
#99 0.00 Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D-NY]
Yosingleryx wrote:
Maybe I “are is” dumb. #sad
^ Grammar troll #pathetic
agip wrote:
I don't know what the fuss is...Sanders is hardly the most liberal senator. For example, Gillibrand is TWICE as liberal as Sanders. or infinity times, I dunno.
or
Thank goodness for gillibrand, so GOP has to lie if they call sanders the most liberal senator.
#96 0.05 Sen. Kamala Harris [D-CA]
#97 0.03 Sen. Jeff Merkley [D-OR]
#98 0.01 Sen. Bernard “Bernie” Sanders [I-VT]
#99 0.00 Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand [D-NY]
Nice. Sanders’ new slogan. “If you’re not first, you’re last.”
If Sanders runs against Trump, I’m not sure we’ll even hear “liberal” used. It will be “socialist” 24/7.
CriminaI Trump wrote:
Yosingleryx wrote:
Maybe I “are is” dumb. #sad
^ Grammar troll #pathetic
Uh-oh. I’ve moved from #sad to #pathetic.
#howlowcanIgo?
Yosingleryx wrote:
If Sanders runs against Trump, I’m not sure we’ll even hear “liberal” used. It will be “socialist” 24/7.
The funny thing is that you think this will be different if somebody else is the nominee...
Yosingleryx wrote:
#howlowcanIgo?
You arrived there long ago. smh
Aaaaand an apparent (short-term, at least) return to normalcy: approval heading down, disapproval heading up. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
Yosingleryy wrote:
There’s a lot of ammunition for Trump and his followers to latch on to with Sanders.
No one is worried about convincing Trump's followers to vote for someone else.
They're locked in.
There is way more ammunition against Trump for swing voters and usual non-voters to latch on to.
Trump supporters really need to fear the old school Republican and conservative voters that will choose a write-in or leave the president choice blank rather than voting for Trump.
If Sanders is the nominee, he will attract people that never vote.
And the anti-Trump Democrat vote is totally locked in.
There will be moderates who would have voted for Biden who won't vote for Bernie, for sure.
But they won't vote for Trump.
I have a hard time seeing where Trump gains any significant voters that didn't vote for him last time.
He did nothing to expand his appeal, and his margin of victory was pretty slim in each swing state he won.
L L wrote:
Yosingleryy wrote:
There’s a lot of ammunition for Trump and his followers to latch on to with Sanders.
I have a hard time seeing where Trump gains any significant voters that didn't vote for him last time.
He did nothing to expand his appeal, and his margin of victory was pretty slim in each swing state he won.
disagree
1) The economy is better now than in 2016. You can say from now until 2024 that trump only kept the obama recovery going, but fact is, it's better now than before.
2) In their hearts, many people really don't want immigrants. They know they should want immigrants, but like most people, they are easily convinced that their own kind is better than the other, and that the other is coming to take away their way of life.
3) Trump proved he's a fighter. People like fighters. Esp when trump can say 'the whole world is terrible except america and I am fighting for Americans.' Facts don't matter here...it's just perception that the president of the US is fighting for americans rather than, say, Iraqis.
4) the simple appeal of incumbency will expand his appeal.
p.n. wrote:
Aaaaand an apparent (short-term, at least) return to normalcy: approval heading down, disapproval heading up.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/
RCP approval 45.7%
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.htmlDow is down over 1000 points today. Thanks Trump!
agip wrote:
L L wrote:
I have a hard time seeing where Trump gains any significant voters that didn't vote for him last time.
He did nothing to expand his appeal, and his margin of victory was pretty slim in each swing state he won.
disagree
1) The economy is better now than in 2016. You can say from now until 2024 that trump only kept the obama recovery going, but fact is, it's better now than before.
2) In their hearts, many people really don't want immigrants. They know they should want immigrants, but like most people, they are easily convinced that their own kind is better than the other, and that the other is coming to take away their way of life.
3) Trump proved he's a fighter. People like fighters. Esp when trump can say 'the whole world is terrible except america and I am fighting for Americans.' Facts don't matter here...it's just perception that the president of the US is fighting for americans rather than, say, Iraqis.
4) the simple appeal of incumbency will expand his appeal.
Do people really believe that Trump is some economics genius that's pulling all the levers to boost the economy? The guy is incapable of reading a report or even a summary about the economy. At one point he believed that total gains in the stock market would reduce the deficit.
A president doesn't have enough power to have much of an effect on the economy, anyway.