I didn’t make any predictions for 2020 after saying in the early fall of 2018 that Trump would step down by June 2019.
I did throw out a number that Biden wound get over 400 electoral votes leading up to this election.
I was right about Georgia.
Overly hopeful for Texas.
Pretty surprised about Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
Still shocked at all of the cult followers in the US.
Will the future restore my faith in humanity?
L L wrote:
I didn’t make any predictions for 2020 after saying in the early fall of 2018 that Trump would step down by June 2019.
I did throw out a number that Biden wound get over 400 electoral votes leading up to this election.
I was right about Georgia.
Overly hopeful for Texas.
Pretty surprised about Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
Still shocked at all of the cult followers in the US.
Will the future restore my faith in humanity?
No.
I’m not big on making predictions but I did argue long and hard that Biden was the best candidate to beat Trump, mostly with Bernie bros.
I was right about that.
Gina wrote:
I’m not big on making predictions but I did argue long and hard that Biden was the best candidate to beat Trump, mostly with Bernie bros.
I was right about that.
It is not clear to me how one concludes that you were right about that when the alternative presidential races with Trump vs Candidate X were never run.
L L wrote:
Posting now to see if I have been banned or just censored.
Now you see that this thread is censored, and what gets censored. Even comments not naming any individual were taken out. That level of censoring is unusual for this forum, but when it does happen you can figure out who is responsible by the posts that were erased.
1101 wrote:
It is not clear to me how one concludes that you were right about that when the alternative presidential races with Trump vs Candidate X were never run.
Nothing will ever be clear to you if you don't know how to do trend or parametric analysis or estimates. There seem to be no 'what ifs' in your way of looking at things. 'What ifs' like polls, or market trends, or what to invest in, or will she say yes or no?
cuando wrote:
1101 wrote:
It is not clear to me how one concludes that you were right about that when the alternative presidential races with Trump vs Candidate X were never run.
Nothing will ever be clear to you if you don't know how to do trend or parametric analysis or estimates. There seem to be no 'what ifs' in your way of looking at things. 'What ifs' like polls, or market trends, or what to invest in, or will she say yes or no?
Wow, that was so clever.
No, I mean it. That was really, really clever.
cuando wrote:
1101 wrote:
It is not clear to me how one concludes that you were right about that when the alternative presidential races with Trump vs Candidate X were never run.
Nothing will ever be clear to you if you don't know how to do trend or parametric analysis or estimates. There seem to be no 'what ifs' in your way of looking at things. 'What ifs' like polls, or market trends, or what to invest in, or will she say yes or no?
Biden was not a good candidate and the perception of him as being old and feeble gave Trump a chance of winning. Trump wouldn't have had a prayer against the 2008 Obama.
The pool of the 2020 Democrat candidates was weak, but Klobuchar would have been a better choice as being the one with the best chance of beating Trump.
1101 wrote:
Wow, that was so clever. ... No, I mean it. That was really, really clever.
Cut and pasting your own prior reply. #sad #tryagain #dontbesolame
SDSU Aztec wrote:
The pool of the 2020 Democrat candidates was weak, but Klobuchar would have been a better choice as being the one with the best chance of beating Trump.
Klobuchar would not have won against Trump because a woman candidate would have dragged more male conservative out of the woodwork in the swing states. Politics according to Trump makes that so. Now that Trump is done, and Harris is in as VP, the door is opened to a woman to run for president in the next election cycle and after.
cuando wrote:
1101 wrote:
Wow, that was so clever. ... No, I mean it. That was really, really clever.
Cut and pasting your own prior reply. #sad #tryagain #dontbesolame
I am predicting a republican sweep in the Georgia Senate runoffs. I think Chuck Schumer agrees with me. Anyone predicting a democrat sweep?
cuando wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
The pool of the 2020 Democrat candidates was weak, but Klobuchar would have been a better choice as being the one with the best chance of beating Trump.
Klobuchar would not have won against Trump because a woman candidate would have dragged more male conservative out of the woodwork in the swing states. Politics according to Trump makes that so. Now that Trump is done, and Harris is in as VP, the door is opened to a woman to run for president in the next election cycle and after.
A very unlikable Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and narrowly lost the swing states against Trump. She was also hindered by the email server scandal.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
cuando wrote:
Klobuchar would not have won against Trump because a woman candidate would have dragged more male conservative out of the woodwork in the swing states. Politics according to Trump makes that so. Now that Trump is done, and Harris is in as VP, the door is opened to a woman to run for president in the next election cycle and after.
A very unlikable Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and narrowly lost the swing states against Trump. She was also hindered by the email server scandal.
And you think with Trump as president during this election squashing a female presidential candidate would not have been taken up to volume 11, or 12?
I did not consider Hillary Clinton as very unlikable, especially compared to a loudmouth Trump. You swallowed the media pills about her, and that was my point why a woman presidential candidate cannot win, not yet in the U.S.
I should have commented> the door is opened to a woman to run for president AND WIN in the next election cycle and after.
Trump is gone. Much of his base will go back to not voting, and old conservatives will peter out. Then a better qualified woman can beat a vociferous, weakly qualified, fake manly-man like Trump.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
cuando wrote:
Nothing will ever be clear to you if you don't know how to do trend or parametric analysis or estimates. There seem to be no 'what ifs' in your way of looking at things. 'What ifs' like polls, or market trends, or what to invest in, or will she say yes or no?
Biden was not a good candidate and the perception of him as being old and feeble gave Trump a chance of winning. Trump wouldn't have had a prayer against the 2008 Obama.
The pool of the 2020 Democrat candidates was weak, but Klobuchar would have been a better choice as being the one with the best chance of beating Trump.
I disagree pretty strongly that biden was a weak candidate...I think the results of the 2018 midterms and 2020 election show that the R's accusations of 'socialism' work quite well. Because the swing suburban districts lean to the right but just hate trump. So Biden's repuation as a middle of the roader helped him.
Add that to his connection with Obama, which helped get him the black vote. Amy is great, but she has no real connection to the A-A community. The key states need high black turnout.
Plus, amy did very badly in the primaries and has not made much of a name for herself nationally. She's not very good at national politics. Hard to see how her fail at national poltiics in the primary would turn into a big triumph against Trump.
1101 wrote:
Gina wrote:
I’m not big on making predictions but I did argue long and hard that Biden was the best candidate to beat Trump, mostly with Bernie bros.
I was right about that.
It is not clear to me how one concludes that you were right about that when the alternative presidential races with Trump vs Candidate X were never run.
I think the election was entirely for or against Trump.
Who’s to say Warren wouldn’t have won PA, MI and WI.
The biggest difference between 2016 and 2020 was way fewer third party votes this time.
Trump was in the 46% range both times.
I think team Trump did gain some votes going after the Hunter Biden angle. Even if it was bogus.
L L wrote:
Pretty surprised about Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.
...
Will the future restore my faith in humanity?
..
Hope so. No one wants Marxism. I've lost faith such a large vocal minority is ok with it.
NC gives me faith.
Florida and Ohio expose everything. Despite the algs, he still won. They counted the mail in balots ahead of time so they couldn't add extra ones after they knew the margins.
L L wrote:
Hunter...... Even if it was bogus.
Bobolinksy disagrees.
cuando wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
A very unlikable Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and narrowly lost the swing states against Trump. She was also hindered by the email server scandal.
And you think with Trump as president during this election squashing a female presidential candidate would not have been taken up to volume 11, or 12?
I did not consider Hillary Clinton as very unlikable, especially compared to a loudmouth Trump. You swallowed the media pills about her, and that was my point why a woman presidential candidate cannot win, not yet in the U.S.
I should have commented> the door is opened to a woman to run for president AND WIN in the next election cycle and after.
Trump is gone. Much of his base will go back to not voting, and old conservatives will peter out. Then a better qualified woman can beat a vociferous, weakly qualified, fake manly-man like Trump.
It did seem like people didn't like her and being married to Bill didn't help. You're saying a woman can't win but Clinton almost did. At the time, Trump was portrayed by many as a brilliant businessman that would make so many great deals that we would become tired of winning. Thus time, he's the guy that effed up the pandemic response.
As far as future female candidates go, Harris being VP is meaningless; people voted for Biden, or against Trump, and not for her. I don't see Biden running for re-election, but Harris will not be the replacement candidate. On the Republican side, I see Nikki Haley as becoming their nominee.
Calamity Joe wrote:
I am predicting a republican sweep in the Georgia Senate runoffs.
...
100% agree. According to some people on twitter, KL and DP aren't helping Trump because the fix is in. Some say GA R's are in the whole steal. Some say rumor of deal T loses, they win. Same say the machines will make sure they win. They limited the absentee ballots which they have less control over, but are using the same machines.
NYC is only able to vaccinate 4,000 people per day.
The city is up to 0.7% vaccinated. Half vaccinated, to be complete.
Absolutely f'in pathetic.
Should be d-day in here. Should be vast resources focused on it.