Trumpers at the 2018 midterms thought “ground game” meant softening up the enemy with a few bombs & mass shootings.
2020 should be even more deadly, sadly.
Trumpers at the 2018 midterms thought “ground game” meant softening up the enemy with a few bombs & mass shootings.
2020 should be even more deadly, sadly.
single wing wrote:
agip wrote:
I think you are refusing to agree to an obvious truth, out of fear of giving an inch and appearing weak.
While I appreciate your attempt to ascribe motive to me, the truth is that I just prefer to deal with reality as it is actually happening instead of hypotheticals that aren't really worth anything.
I have been thinking about the primary system. If the purpose is to maximize the chance of winning, I think the parties should adopt a system in which the primary calendar is front loaded by swing states (I guess as determined by the most recent election). There is no better way to test which candidates are able to appeal to voters in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida than by having those voters weigh in first. Iowa has some similarities demographically to PA, WI, and MI, but only imperfectly, although it would likely be an early state if you took the results of the last two elections instead of just one. I don't know if maximizing general election success is the goal of the parties or not. This method would be ideologically neutral.
My largest objection to the current primary system is that they commandeer all of the mechanism of the state to run it (voter's lists, volunteers, substantial state and local money to run the sites and machines) and then prohibit me from voting in specific contests (I can only vote in one party primary). If it is a state run election, as a registered qualified voter I should be able to vote in it. The way it is currently run is a violation of my free association and speech rights.
1) believing that politicians win elections because the other side splits its vote is hardly a hypothetical. But sure, case by case is hypothetical.
2) The party system's interlocking/dovetailing with the government is an odd piece of the puzzle, agreed.
3) Swing states change...hard to predict them. Ohio voted for Obama, as did Iowa. Florida used to be a swiing state. Texas is becoming one. No one saw WI, MI, MI becoming swingers. These things can be hard to predict so it might be hard to execute on your plan. As you acknowledge.
agip wrote:
3) Swing states change...hard to predict them. Ohio voted for Obama, as did Iowa. Florida used to be a swiing state. Texas is becoming one. No one saw WI, MI, MI becoming swingers. These things can be hard to predict so it might be hard to execute on your plan. As you acknowledge.
Well, you are right that swing states change. I think it is pretty easy to administer. You simply pick the metric from the most recent election or elections of the states with the narrowest partisan lean. So you can look at the last presidential election, or you can look at the last two, or you can merge presidential election results with congressional or state level results. There are lots of ways to do that. The proposal would be that the early states order would be fluid, so it already acknowledges that swing states change over time.
You are right that those results using the previous election would not perfectly line up with the eventual results from that election, but if you had polled FL (which is still a swing state), OH, IA, etc. you would have done better than the early state lineup currently does because many of those states are demographically similar to the ones who did turn out to be the turning point states. And WI, MI, PA would not have been far down the list.
By the way, this would limit that impact of large African American support in the South. These voters (because there are very few white democrats in the South) have a large impact on picking the Dem. nominee but have extraordinarily limited impact in the general, since so much of the south is currently out of play (but again that is not a permanent state of things). It would also limit the large safe states like CA and NY, which also have diverse populations but are extraordinarily safe for Dems currently.
It is not perfect, but I do believe this would be an improvement over the current system. Again, this is if the goal of the parties is to nominate the best most competitive candidate for the general. I have serious doubts that this is the goal for the parties.
Sally Vix wrote:
Trollminator wrote:
What if Biden puts Yang on the ticket?
That would be akin to a tree falling in the forest. No one is paying attention to either campaign. Biden finished 5th in New Hampshire. You could almost say he is a dead man walking. Yang is an afterthought in this.
Quid Pro Joe's campaign is on life support. Plus, the dems want a socialist to challenge Trump in the general election. The dems have spoken; they want more free stuff.
https://www.newsweek.com/76-percent-democrats-say-theyd-vote-socialist-president-new-poll-shows-1486732?amp=1Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
That would be akin to a tree falling in the forest. No one is paying attention to either campaign. Biden finished 5th in New Hampshire. You could almost say he is a dead man walking. Yang is an afterthought in this.
Quid Pro Joe's campaign is on life support. Plus, the dems want a socialist to challenge Trump in the general election. The dems have spoken; they want more free stuff.
https://www.newsweek.com/76-percent-democrats-say-theyd-vote-socialist-president-new-poll-shows-1486732?amp=1
I think Joe would have more luck putting the Ying Yang twins as his running mates (can you have more than 1?)
The last few months have been truly devastating for the normal Dems - and there are many. The debacle that the House partisan impeachment was and the subsequent acquittal made every Dem in the House look like idiots. Trump's approval rating is the highest ever. Can the Dems doing anything right? Bernie Sanders? Seriously? You really want a nutjuob socialist to go up against a very strong incumbent president as President Trump? Really?
Sally Vix wrote:
The last few months have been truly devastating for the normal Dems - and there are many. The debacle that the House partisan impeachment was and the subsequent acquittal made every Dem in the House look like idiots. Trump's approval rating is the highest ever. Can the Dems doing anything right? Bernie Sanders? Seriously? You really want a nutjuob socialist to go up against a very strong incumbent president as President Trump? Really?
February 10:
THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:
Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent
Trollminator wrote:
What if Biden puts Yang on the ticket?
What if monkeys fly out of my butt?
agip wrote:
February 10:
THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:
Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent
Hey look, Bernie polls better than all the moderates except for Mayor Mike and Buttigieg does the worst.
Aren't these head-to-head matchup polls the sort of thing the case for Biden's electibility was based on?
(I'm not saying they are reliable now, I am pointing out the things that make them dubious now also made them dubious when people were using them to say Biden was electable. I don't think they are worth much at all).
single wing wrote:
agip wrote:
February 10:
THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:
Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent
Hey look, Bernie polls better than all the moderates except for Mayor Mike and Buttigieg does the worst.
Aren't these head-to-head matchup polls the sort of thing the case for Biden's electibility was based on?
(I'm not saying they are reliable now, I am pointing out the things that make them dubious now also made them dubious when people were using them to say Biden was electable. I don't think they are worth much at all).
yeah, they aren't worth much agreed .Esp since Bernie hasn't seen any negative campaigning from Rs yet and Biden ah has seen some negative news stories about him and his family.
Plus, people are ashamed to tell pollsters they are Trumpists - we see that sense of shame for all the white nationalist parties around the globe.
Sally Vix wrote:
The last few months have been truly devastating for the normal Dems - and there are many. The debacle that the House partisan impeachment was and the subsequent acquittal made every Dem in the House look like idiots. Trump's approval rating is the highest ever. Can the Dems doing anything right? Bernie Sanders? Seriously? You really want a nutjuob socialist to go up against a very strong incumbent president as President Trump? Really?
Why don't you go take The Constitution that you believe was written in 1880 and find a bunch of deer that you believe will run away from headlights and find all these women you believe will be gaga over a nearly 60-year-old man, along with all your other idiotic ideas, and just go away. You are the dumbest person with which I have ever had the displeasure of crossing paths.
single wing wrote:
agip wrote:
February 10:
THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:
Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent
Hey look, Bernie polls better than all the moderates except for Mayor Mike and Buttigieg does the worst.
IDIOT. Learn to actual look and you will see that Trump does the worst.
semsurrrr wrote:
SAD!
https://www.infowars.com/survey-finds-people-who-identify-as-left-wing-more-likely-to-have-been-diagnosed-with-a-mental-illness/
Sad is to believe infowars is a credible site.
I am going to make a prediction. Even though Klobuchar doesn't have the national ground organization, She will continue to shock everyone and challenge if not take the lead. Many Democrat females were bitterly disappointed that a female was not elected in 2016. I think they will be voting in high numbers for Klobuchar. And her debate performances have become much stronger than they were at the beginning.
agip wrote:
Sally Vix wrote:
The last few months have been truly devastating for the normal Dems - and there are many. The debacle that the House partisan impeachment was and the subsequent acquittal made every Dem in the House look like idiots. Trump's approval rating is the highest ever. Can the Dems doing anything right? Bernie Sanders? Seriously? You really want a nutjuob socialist to go up against a very strong incumbent president as President Trump? Really?
February 10:
THE 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
Among all registered voters, Democratic candidates lead President Trump in general election matchups by between 4 and 9 percentage points, with Bloomberg claiming the biggest numerical lead against Trump:
Bloomberg tops Trump 51 - 42 percent;
Sanders defeats Trump 51 - 43 percent;
Biden beats Trump 50 - 43 percent;
Klobuchar defeats Trump 49 - 43 percent;
Warren wins narrowly over Trump 48 - 44 percent;
Buttigieg is also slightly ahead of Trump 47 - 43 percent
I also think democrats have a Bernie problem. His followers pride themselves on being anti establishment. Many somehow see the Democrat establishment similar to the Republicans (both are bad to them).
Although Bernie has the biggest following he also has the largest number of Democrats who do not want to see Bernie. Bernie will not get the nomination and his followers will become angry and think he was cheated. Some might stay home during election night.
Check out #MAGAValentinesGifts trending - one of the funniest things I’ve seen recently.
Trollminator wrote:
Check out #MAGAValentinesGifts trending - one of the funniest things I’ve seen recently.
Here's one. Trump picking a gift for Melanie.
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2257c5159f0c2a0d2cc423905271620804643af69669fafbba476b4e9d4561e3.jpgGreat interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday
Article: Director of BU track and field, cross country steps down following abuse allegations
