Mega-Thread: 2020 United States General Election

[Benggaul]

Interesting poll from military times that Trump is losing the military:

https://twitter.com/bfriedmandc/stat...240739333?s=21

(In fact the “military supports republicans en mass” idea has always been a myth. The military rank and file lean slightly democratic, and generally matches the us population at large. Officers lean conservative, but the military has always been “lean” as opposed to “overwhelmingly”. I wish I had something more recent than https://swampland.time.com/2012/11/0...an-republican/)

Hmm, I always thought it was the opposite--that the officers lean liberal, being more highly educated in general among other reasons. @Thekri could set me straight, though.

[Elegiac]

I honestly can't see trump losing this election nor the Democrats doing well in the senate... the past three months have been pretty disastrous with cities being burned and local mayors simply watching it happen and when they are offered aid they refuse it out of some bizzare political principle.

Man, it's almost as if Trump sucks at leading a unified republic, and saying "this will be America under Biden" is kinda stupid when it already is America under Trump. Shocking.

[Theodarzna]

And it's a valid question to ask since giving people health care clearly doesn't address the full extent of concerns within a big tent party despite some people's insistence to the contrary, as seen in this thread. Once again: playing "Medicare Para Todos" on repeat didn't help Bernie in the primary.

"If the Democrats just addressed my pet issues they would easily win the election" has to be one of the more navel gazing takes of this electoral cycle.

No, it is a ploy to avoid actually doing that policy. It is unironically how the Health Insurance Industry has chosen to protect itself and they can count on the Wokies to be perfect hand maidens for Capital.

A massive universal program that helps everyone, especially the poor, is manifestly a good thing. And Racism, according to your main HR Consultancy Fee Supreme Robin DiAngelo is unsolvable, so its a nonsense point to raise.

[unfilteredJW]

so its a nonsense point to raise.

That irony though.

[beanman12345]

I honestly can't see trump losing this election nor the Democrats doing well in the senate... the past three months have been pretty disastrous with cities being burned and local mayors simply watching it happen and when they are offered aid they refuse it out of some bizzare political principle.

Yeah people really love the civil unrest in Trumps great America, he's got it in the bag.

[Elegiac]

No, it is a ploy to avoid actually doing that policy.

Only because a certain group of people have made "but Medicare for All" the universal answer to every weakness in the progressive platform and campaigning strategy which, again, clearly isn't effective in a big tent party.

It is unironically how the Health Insurance Industry has chosen to protect itself and they can count on the Wokies to be perfect hand maidens for Capital.

A massive universal program that helps everyone, especially the poor, is manifestly a good thing.

And Racism, according to your main HR Consultancy Fee Supreme Robin DiAngelo is unsolvable, so its a nonsense point to raise.

Again, fairly telling that all you can actually raise in criticism to DiAngelo is "but she works in HR" with the tone that she's only an anti-racist because her eggs are dried up or whatever; but that aside, the question remains valid simply because not addressing racism greatly decreases the possibility such universal programs will either come into existence or come into existence in such a way as to prevent ratfuckery within the letter of the law.

This isn't a theoretical concern either - every major social program in the United States ranging from the New Deal to the GI Bill has always made concessions for the ability of the federal or state governments to discriminate against minorities, even when such programs are 'universal' on the face of it. So you're caught between a public skeptical of M4A on the one hand, and people that do not believe Americans will vote for a progressive when asked to make any sort of monetary concession as M4A would require.

It's not a winning issue, regardless of its merits, and y'all have yet to demonstrate otherwise beyond navel gazing to the effect of "the Democrats will lose unless they cater to me specifically". And this continued attempt to import white European leftism into a country deeply tainted by racial animus remains a nonstarter.

Hey look, Olly Thorne made a video specifically for people who bitch about how tired they are from hearing from the experts:

[Trifle]

I am very anti Trump but I don't care for Sleepy Joe either. Awful candidates on both sides.

The very fact you call him by Trumps stupid name for him suggests you aren't "very anti-Trump"

[shimerra]

The very fact you call him by Trumps stupid name for him suggests you aren't "very anti-Trump"

Especially when Trump's nicknames are 99% what you'd expect a 2 year old with a speech delay to come up with because he made you wont let him have ice cream for dessert. Might as well call him big stupie butthead Joe or something. My favorite is when Trump calls out women, usually after they've shown themselves to be much smarter than him or ask a question he cant' answer/doesn't have a good lie for, as ugly not realizing that he's no looker himself or else he he wouldn't have to bribe porn stars to screw him.

@jdbond only people I've seen use his nicknames are supporters or supporters who lie that they aren't supporters because no one with an IQ high enough to tie their shoes thinks those nickames are good or clever unless you're a cultist/fanatic.

[Katchii]

So people will vote for a senate and presidency that has caused cities to burn? I guess that’s one way to go...

It's because it's being spun in such a way that they blame Democrats for all of it happening, or it's only happening in predominantly Democrat run cities, or it's Democrat's doing the burning, or it's anti-Trump people causing the problems....etc....

There are people out there that seriously eat up the whole "see what would happen in Biden's America!?" while showing pictures and videos of what's currently happening in Trump's America where civil unrest is at a high, and say that only Trump can fix it...when it's happening under his watch.

It is truly shocking to me how people can specifically believe THAT rhetoric....

[starlord]

ah, i see the new tactic to divert from trumps latest failures on leading the nation is to regurgitate digested & passed talking points from the dem primary.

- - - Updated - - -

It's because it's being spun in such a way that they blame Democrats for all of it happening, or it's only happening in predominantly Democrat run cities, or it's Democrat's doing the burning, or it's anti-Trump people causing the problems....etc....

There are people out there that seriously eat up the whole "see what would happen in Biden's America!?" while showing pictures and videos of what's currently happening in Trump's America where civil unrest is at a high, and say that only Trump can fix it...when it's happening under his watch.

It is truly shocking to me how people can specifically believe THAT rhetoric....

i personally know several people that believe that stuff.
sure freedom justice rah rah rah but the protests & riots are a double edged sword. hopefully come november they won't be for naught.

[Felya]

Hey look, Olly Thorne made a video specifically for people who bitch about how tired they are from hearing from the experts:

In 2 hours... damn it... you got my hopes up... see ya in the live chat?

[ShakesForPRide]

2020: The year that spoiled brats finally have buyers remorse??

Our NBC/WSJ polls of 2020 have interviewed a combined 215 Johnson/Stein voters. And they're breaking for Biden over Trump by a 2-to-1 margin.

Given how close 2016 was, that movement -- if it holds -- is a big deal.

Poll: Third party voters from 2016 are backing Biden 2-to-1


Also, do not talk RCP polling averages too seriously. RCP has been including Rasmussen, gravis, and Trafalgar polls.
Then they are baking in a whooping 6% bonus for Trump. In their words "to account for shy Trump supporters", not opening acknowledging their support for Trump.

Shy Trump supporters ... really explains a lot of MMO-C.

[kaid]

I can't say I have ever met a shy trump supporter. Maybe in 2016 but they have had 3+ years and they are out and they are proud now.

[Endus]

How is the line "constantly shifting"? What have left-leaning people supposedly tried to cancel? I can think of three categories: racists (including blackface)/misogynists and serial harassers (including comedians who masturbate unprovoked in front of female colleagues)/homophobic and transphobic assholes.

Let's be clear.

The claim that there is a "cancel culture" argues, essentially, that public outcry against (mostly) public figures (the "culture"), for the messages they espouse or endorse, has caused negative impacts on the careers of those public figures (the "cancelling").

There are multiple issues with this argument;

1> The public outcry has no capacity to effect real change. A lot of people calling you a racist on Twitter doesn't mean anything, in and of itself. Looking at the outcry is a deliberate distraction. The real cause of the impacts are those who control your revenue stream; your employer, or Youtube, or whatever. They think you're racist, or at least bad business, and thus choose to not do business with you any longer.

2> You're not "cancelled" or "silenced", in a broad sense. Your ties with some particular employer or platform have been severed because you broke their terms of service. You can still say whatever you want on any platform that'll have you. If you've made yourself persona non grata because you behave badly, well, that's your fucking fault. Not that of those who pointed it out.

3> It argues that there either should not be such a public outcry, or that your employers/partners should not react to your conduct. This is inherently an argument against either freedom of speech, or freedom of association; you either want such outcry to be silenced before it begins and be banned wholesale from public discourse, or you want businesses to be forced to do business with you against their will. Presenting this as an argument for freedom is just . . . deliberate dishonesty.

To be extra clear; you didn't say these things, I'm using your post to bounce off of and make this point.

The "line" is shifting. Because a lot of abusive conduct that used to be overlooked is no longer being overlooked. And yeah; we're looking backwards at past abuses. "But I could get away with being an abusive dickweed, back then" isn't really a defense that you weren't abusive.

The whole outcry against "cancel culture" is just people who've never had to face consequences before, because of societal privilege or advantage, suddenly having to face those consequences, and they don't like it. I don't care if they don't like it. I care if they deserve it, if their actions warrant negative consequences.

And for the most part, they have.

[Thekri]

Let's be clear.

The claim that there is a "cancel culture" argues, essentially, that public outcry against (mostly) public figures (the "culture"), for the messages they espouse or endorse, has caused negative impacts on the careers of those public figures (the "cancelling").

There are multiple issues with this argument;

1> The public outcry has no capacity to effect real change. A lot of people calling you a racist on Twitter doesn't mean anything, in and of itself. Looking at the outcry is a deliberate distraction. The real cause of the impacts are those who control your revenue stream; your employer, or Youtube, or whatever. They think you're racist, or at least bad business, and thus choose to not do business with you any longer.

2> You're not "cancelled" or "silenced", in a broad sense. Your ties with some particular employer or platform have been severed because you broke their terms of service. You can still say whatever you want on any platform that'll have you. If you've made yourself persona non grata because you behave badly, well, that's your fucking fault. Not that of those who pointed it out.

3> It argues that there either should not be such a public outcry, or that your employers/partners should not react to your conduct. This is inherently an argument against either freedom of speech, or freedom of association; you either want such outcry to be silenced before it begins and be banned wholesale from public discourse, or you want businesses to be forced to do business with you against their will. Presenting this as an argument for freedom is just . . . deliberate dishonesty.

To be extra clear; you didn't say these things, I'm using your post to bounce off of and make this point.

The "line" is shifting. Because a lot of abusive conduct that used to be overlooked is no longer being overlooked. And yeah; we're looking backwards at past abuses. "But I could get away with being an abusive dickweed, back then" isn't really a defense that you weren't abusive.

The whole outcry against "cancel culture" is just people who've never had to face consequences before, because of societal privilege or advantage, suddenly having to face those consequences, and they don't like it. I don't care if they don't like it. I care if they deserve it, if their actions warrant negative consequences.

And for the most part, they have.

It is also absolutely nothing new in any of those categories, much like Voter Fraud, Media bias, and all the other things that people believe magically sprang into existence in 2015.

Let's take one of the most well known historical examples of "Cancel Culture". A book called Uncle Tom's Cabin. It is famous for a bunch of reasons, with the relevant 3 being, 1) It was the best selling book of the 19th century if you don't count the Bible, 2) It explosively upended the Southern narrative of "Benevolent Slavery" and 3) It was the most banned book in US History.

Essentially, the publication of Uncle Tom's Cabin pissed off a lot of people. Booksellers that sold it were threatened, attacked, and often run out of town. Stowe herself was even sent an ear that was cut off a Slave as an example (How this was supposed to show slavery was a more benevolent institution then the book portrayed I am not sure, seems to just be proving her point to me). After the civil war, Uncle Tom's Cabin continued to be offensive to the south, as its existence conflicted with the new narrative of the noble South they were building. Uncle Tom's Cabin continued to be nearly constantly banned by local school boards for a wide variety of reasons, including its language, its religious content, and more recently, its constant use of the N-word (A perfect example of applying 21st century morals to the book).

This is an example of the real "Cancel culture" that is harmful. It is extremely different then advertisers pulling away from Tucker Carlson's show. It is is a prolonged, society wide assault on a narrative that goes contrary to their preferred view of history or politics. It has as much in common with the "Cancel Culture" the right likes to complain about as a mouse has with a tiger.

[Flower Milk]

First time I have heard of this event. Interesting and also ironic at the same time.....

.....

- - - Updated - - -



That is not what the poster indicated or said. He/she truthfully stated the Democrat authorities in Portland have did a shitty, terrible job in handling the violent and destructive protesting, thus empowering them.

No I didn't, I said Democrats have done a shitty job of handling the white supremacist police force bashing our skulls in on a nightly basis.

I have a more pessimistic perspective... It’s not a paradox... They simply agree with Trump and are trying to help.

Yes clearly I agree with the man who sent feds to kidnap us and bash our skulls in every night. You got me, I thought I was getting beat up by fascists and skinheads for decades trying to defend the people of color within my community from getting beat up or killed by them because the police here refuse to do anything about them because they are also Proud Boys, but really I was mistaken and I've totally been on their side this whole time. Who knew?

[Thepersona]

Also, do not talk RCP polling averages too seriously. RCP has been including Rasmussen, gravis, and Trafalgar polls.
Then they are baking in a whooping 6% bonus for Trump. In their words "to account for shy Trump supporters", not opening acknowledging their support for Trump.

Shy Trump supporters ... really explains a lot of MMO-C.

Really? they're doing that?

[cubby]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots. With Trump tweeting every five minutes or so. I can't think of a worse course of events.

[Edge-]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots.

The Chads has better stay the fuck outta this election, this time.

[Thekri]

Axios is predicting Election Chaos, with Trump seeming to win in a landslide on election night, and Biden winning overall, after mail-in ballots are tallied.

Might take a week or more to tally the ballots. With Trump tweeting every five minutes or so. I can't think of a worse course of events.

That is disturbing, and potentially accurate. I could easily see battleground states going Trump, even fairly strongly, during in person voting, then going Biden with mail-in voting. Which will be absolutely catastrophic for election confidence.

I really recommend in person voting if you can manage it at all. Not because I don't believe in mail in voting, but just to head off bullshit like that. Yes, I know Covid will still be a risk, but some personal risk is acceptable to make sure your vote gets counted, and gets counted early.