1. #2121
    Quote Originally Posted by ringpriest View Post
    https://archive.is/89TRa

    (If you want to bother reading the opinion of a pack of eager Murdoch shills. Not really worth it.)
    The Supreme Court’s decision last week that the Presidency enjoys constitutional immunity for official acts has more or less sealed the failure of the lawfare election strategy.
    What the fuck does this even mean rofl, this is so aggressively dumb. Especially given that the whole like barely 5 paragraph op-ed exclusively focused on the Manhattan case and doesn't mention the Florida case. You know, the one where Donald stole tons of classified documents. Then hid them. Then lied to the National Archives and FBI about it. Then hid them again. Then got his club raided where FBI agents discovered tons of highly classified documents that Donald lied about.

    Which almost exclusively occured while Donald was a private citizen, and not POTUS, meaning that SCOTUS ruling is irrelevant to that case. Even if the judge in that case, a Trump appointee who's been fairly consistently and universally criticized for slow-walking this and entertaining every rote filing as if it's a novel request in need of extensive briefing and argument, seems very casual about it all.

  2. #2122
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!

  3. #2123
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    So, how was that red wave blowout in 2020 or 2022?

  4. #2124
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    Continues to astroturf for far right fascists in every thread you participate in.
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Their enemies are busy labeling people "shitheads," dodging all the tough arguments (to the extent they acknowledge contrary arguments existing), and going over all the prejudices that make them believe they're arguing with bad people.
    "Dodge tough questions" types the poster with people on ignore who he couldn't handle the tough questions of.

  5. #2125
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    what's funny/interesting is most of the states that have senate races right now it's looking pretty good for the Dems. it's quiet literally only Joe Biden that's tanking in the polls, even in states like New York. if they got ANYONE else in there as the nominee this would be a cake walk for them. OH WELL!

  6. #2126
    Now they are forming up.
    Quote Originally Posted by tehdang View Post
    Their enemies are busy labeling people "shitheads," dodging all the tough arguments (to the extent they acknowledge contrary arguments existing), and going over all the prejudices that make them believe they're arguing with bad people.
    "Dodge tough questions" types the poster with people on ignore who he couldn't handle the tough questions of.

  7. #2127
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    I can guarantee it won't be.

  8. #2128
    Herald of the Titans tehdang's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    2,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    I can't read it because I don't have a WSJ sub, but I have no problems dunking on it for validating the "Democratic lawfare" conspiracy theories.

    Also, I didn't mention fascism in my post? I'm not sure how you got that explanation from what I posted. It's just a bad headline, and likely article, lol, it's not that deep.
    Fascism, in this case, is just an entrant to explain why voters are choosing Trump in their numbers, and arises from studied ignorance of the real reasons why.

    Is there a hall of fame for political backfires? Democrats cheered on the prosecutions of Mr. Trump, hoping they’d guarantee his defeat. Instead they energized his re-election effort. The first indictment, brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, stretched the law to turn misdemeanor bookkeeping offenses into felonies. Almost immediately, Mr. Trump’s support in the GOP primary jumped several points, and in the Real Clear Politics polling average it never again fell below 50%.

    Mr. Bragg’s indictment, which back then was criticized as weak by legal analysts of all persuasions, gave Mr. Trump the argument that he was being singled out unfairly. Republicans rallied to him. Maybe Mr. Bragg and other prosecutors suspected this would happen. But all the better, from their perspective, if that would lead Republicans to pass over younger candidates, including Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley, to renominate Mr. Trump, who supposedly couldn’t win a general election.

    So much for that. The concocted nature of Mr. Bragg’s indictment, the first one to be unveiled, may have tainted the others in the public mind. Mr. Bragg secured a jury conviction this May, but it didn’t move the polling, since voters can see that this business records prosecution would not have been brought against any businessman not named Donald Trump.

    Meantime, the other legal efforts against him blew up one by one. The attempt by Colorado and other states to kick Mr. Trump off the ballot as an “insurrectionist” failed 9-0 at the Supreme Court. The Georgia prosecution of Mr. Trump for trying to reverse the 2020 election imploded amid embarrassing public testimony from Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis about her romantic relationship with one of her underlings.

    In the federal Jan. 6 case, special counsel Jack Smith underrated the legal challenges of bringing American history’s first prosecution of a former President. This included possible claims of constitutional immunity. Mr. Trump was sure to exploit every possible challenge, and the lower courts erred by refusing to look seriously at the Supreme Court’s Nixon v. Fitzgerald precedent. The High Court was all but obliged to take the case.

    Mr. Smith might have written a narrow indictment focused tightly on the law, but instead he filed a document that reads like a report by the House Jan. 6 committee. Then he demanded that the case proceed on an election timetable, though courts did not agree, and now he is left with a shell of a case.

    Mr. Smith’s other prosecution of Mr. Trump, accusing him of keeping classified files after he left office and then covering it up, has been tied up in motions, with new briefings this month on whether or how presidential immunity applies. Meantime, Mr. Biden was let off the hook for his own classified stash, since special counsel Robert Hur thought a jury would see him as too old and forgetful to convict.

    None of this is a vindication of Mr. Trump’s conduct or an endorsement of paying off a porn star, trying to overturn the 2020 election, or refusing to help a besieged Congress on Jan. 6. But as the past nine years have shown over and over, Mr. Trump’s biggest opponents are often his best asset. They convinced themselves he won in 2016 by colluding with Russia, and special counsel Robert Mueller would get to the bottom of it. They impeached him twice. Mr. Trump plowed through it all.

    ***
    Democrats should have trusted the voters. They beat Mr. Trump once, if barely, in 2020, and won midterm elections in 2018 and 2022, as Democratic turnout soared. Yet this time, they thought, the legal cases against Mr. Trump would let them win almost by political disqualification. And since Mr. Trump was sure to lose, why bother having awkward conversations about 81-year-old Mr. Biden?

    The silver lining is that perhaps this Democratic lawfare failure and the Supreme Court’s immunity decision will cause future prosecutors to think twice about indictment as a political strategy. The painful result for Democrats is that Mr. Trump’s prosecutors might end up indicting him into the Oval Office.
    Give it a read, if for nothing else than to elevate yourself beyond dunking on the headline.

    For more on-topic, and off the Opinion page towards political reporting and analysis, "How Biden’s Inner Circle Worked to Keep Signs of Aging Under Wraps"
    Senior White House advisers for more than a year have aggressively stage-managed President Biden’s schedule, movements and personal interactions, as they sought to minimize signs of how age has taken a toll on the oldest president in U.S. history.

    The White House has limited Biden’s daily itinerary and shielded him from impromptu exchanges. Advisers have restricted news conferences and media appearances, twice declining Super Bowl halftime interviews—an easy way to reach millions of voters—and sought to make sure meetings with donors stuck to scripted pleasantries.

    Senior aides dismissed travel suggestions over worries the president didn’t have the stamina for them, including an idea for Biden to make weekly cross-country trips in 2022 to tout the benefits of his infrastructure law.

    All of this unfolded as Biden’s slips became increasingly obvious, and his top advisers were assuring everyone the president was fine.

    When the 81-year-old president took the stage at last month’s debate, his abysmal performance in the 90-minute event stunned members of his party, including some White House staffers who rarely spend one-on-one time with Biden.

    Now, many donors and lawmakers say they feel misled by what they say is an effort to tamp down concerns, raised well before the debate, about whether Biden is fit for a second term. Some high-ranking Democrats said they worry that few in the party have the courage to tell Biden face-to-face that he needs to step aside.

    News reports about the president’s mental acuity have triggered White House rebukes and denials from Biden’s allies. The offices of Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., N.Y.) alerted the White House earlier this year when The Wall Street Journal asked questions about Biden’s performance at a January meeting. The president spoke softly, paused for long periods, read from notes to make obvious points and closed his eyes, the Journal reported.

    Murray told the Journal in April that she hadn’t seen a change in Biden’s acuity during her years of working with him. “He engages in a very personal way, asking questions,” she said. “He is listening and absorbing.”

    On Monday, Murray said in a statement that Biden should consider his legacy in deciding whether to remain in the race: “We need to see a much more forceful and energetic candidate on the campaign trail in the very near future in order for him to convince voters he is up to the job.”

    Biden’s team feels Washington is out to get him, and this us-versus-them worldview has led to what some Democrats describe as a bunker mentality, blinding the president and his aides to Biden’s political liabilities.

    In an ABC News interview on Friday, Biden scoffed at questions about whether he was up to the job and said he would step aside only if the “Lord almighty” asked him to. He has also played down the opposition in his party to him staying in the race. On Monday, he dismissed what he described as pushback from “elites in the party.”

    People close to Biden blame a handful of advisers for putting in place a strategy that minimized the president’s age-related struggles. Those advisers include the president’s big-picture thinkers: Anita Dunn, who is responsible for the White House’s communications strategy and echoes the president’s disdain for the news media; along with Steve Ricchetti and Mike Donilon, decadeslong political counselors.

    Biden allies outside the White House also pointed to lesser-known aides who have served as gatekeepers for the president, including Annie Tomasini and Anthony Bernal, close confidants of Biden and first lady Jill Biden, respectively. The White House didn’t make Tomasini, Bernal, Dunn, Ricchetti or Donilon available for comment.

    This account is based on interviews, before and after the debate, with more than two dozen current and former Biden administration officials, as well as Democratic lawmakers, major campaign donors and Democratic strategists, along with a Wall Street Journal analysis of visitor logs.

    “Joe Biden is proud of the team he leads as he continues to build on the most successful record in modern American history,” White House spokesman Andrew Bates said. He disputed that Biden had been shielded from the public and that his staff acted as gatekeepers. Many of the measures the president’s team has put in place have been standard procedure in past administrations, Bates said. The president has participated in media interviews, answered questions from reporters and traveled around the U.S., he said.

    The work of Tomasini, Biden’s deputy chief of staff, goes well beyond attending to the president, a White House official said. Regarding Biden and Dunn’s shared disdain for the news media, Bates said: “The President and Anita [Dunn] only feel that way about some of the press.”

    A number of deep-pocketed donors have directed their frustration at Hollywood mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg, a co-chair of the Biden campaign. At lunches around Los Angeles before the debate, Katzenberg—who counseled the president to turn his age into an asset—made the case for Biden. He told people that he saw the president regularly, and that Biden was sharp and in command, according to those who spoke with Katzenberg, whose relationship with Biden stretches back decades.

    Biden has had plenty of moments in the public eye. He was widely praised for his State of the Union address in March, where he made a forceful case that the freedom of Americans was at risk in the November election. In January, he went to Blue Bell, Penn.—not far from where George Washington rallied troops at Valley Forge—and spoke about the high stakes of the election in a well-received address. He has made several high-profile trips, including a surprise visit to Kyiv last year and a trip to Israel days after the Hamas attack.

    The president’s public appearances and his private interactions, according to people who described them, suggest that Biden has moments where he is sharp and detail-oriented. At other times, he is forgetful, stumbles over words and struggles to convey his thoughts. Those kinds of slip-ups have become more frequent, according to people who have met with the president, with many widely shared on social media.

    Some who have spent time with the president after not seeing him for a while said they were surprised by how much he had slowed. Last summer, a former top Biden adviser who had met with the president told an associate the meeting was “not good” and that Biden had noticeably aged since they had last seen each other.

    The president’s abysmal debate performance was a crystallizing moment for some Biden backers, who said it caused them to reassess previous interactions with the president. Another former Biden adviser said the Atlanta debate caused many people to piece together gnawing concerns about Biden’s mental acuity they had long harbored.

    Trading places
    Lawmakers in both parties say they don’t get enough face time with the president. Biden took almost a week to call Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) after the debate. A White House official said the president has spoken to at least 20 lawmakers since the debate. Biden’s team refused requests by Republican House leaders to meet with the president, instead offering conversations with senior White House aides.

    Biden has had fewer small meetings with lawmakers as his term has gone on, visitor logs show.

    German officials, aware of Biden’s fatigue at night, sought to accommodate the president by planning a June 2022 event with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in the early evening.

    The informal event, a soiree at the Alpine resort Schloss Elmau during the Group of Seven summit, was arranged as a confidential meeting on Ukraine in a relaxed setting. Biden didn’t show, surprising the chancellor and his aides, officials said. Instead, Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived and announced that Biden had to go to bed, according to two people who were there.

    Matthew Miller, a State Department spokesman, denied that Blinken said Biden had to go to bed. “Secretary Blinken never said that or anything like it,” he said.

    A U.S. official said the White House indicated early on that Biden wouldn’t attend. The official disputed the characterization that Blinken was standing in for the president. A White House official said that Biden during the summit balanced engagements with world leaders and pressing needs at home, ending one evening at 10 p.m., after an hourlong call with his team about domestic matters.

    During working hours at the summit, the people who were present said Biden showed no sign of cognitive decline. Yet, they said, he appeared to be physically worn out as the days passed. U.S. aides told officials at the summit that it was due to the lack of air conditioning, according to the people, a contention the State Department disputed.

    Biden salesman
    Even before the Democratic primaries, some donors pressed Katzenberg on whether Biden should be the nominee, given his advanced age. Katzenberg told them that Biden was the party’s best bet to beat Donald Trump.

    One entertainment executive who had lunch with Katzenberg around six weeks ago said he asked Katzenberg whether Biden was too incapacitated to win the election. “No. Absolutely not,” the executive recalled Katzenberg saying. “I see him, I talk to him all the time. He’s solid. The mental acuity is there.”

    Katzenberg had dozens of meetings at the White House from March 2023 through March 2024, visitor logs show.

    At some fundraising events, the campaign allows few impromptu moments with the president, even with top donors. The campaign has long directed donors to submit their questions for the president in advance, including at an event this year in South Florida with only eight people attending, according to a donor. Biden spoke slowly and stumbled over some of his words, but he ultimately gave detailed responses, the donor said. The president seemed to have “lost a step,” the donor said, but he didn’t seem impaired.

    Aides sometimes stepped in to help. At a fundraiser in New York around the time of the United Nations General Assembly last fall, Biden seemed at a loss trying to answer questions about the Middle East from people in a photo line, according to a person there. An aide whispered in Biden’s ear, the person said, and the president then answered.

    During a fundraiser at the Four Seasons in New York in June 2023, Biden spoke for five to 10 minutes and then took a few questions, said attendees who bought a ticket. They were struck by how fragile he seemed. At one point, Biden couldn’t recall the word for “veteran.” The president asked the group to help him find the word, saying he wanted to refer to a person who had served in the Army or Navy.

    Asked about these events, Kevin Munoz, a Biden campaign spokesman, criticized reporters who used anonymous sources to recount the president’s behind-the-scenes interactions. “None of them change the facts at play this election and what this campaign will be focused on every single day: that President Biden is the most accomplished president in modern history,” he said.

    High-profile Democratic lawmakers also defended the president’s mental acuity. During an interview in April, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), the former House Speaker, recalled how she batted down worries from a celebrity who called her to ask, “What’s up with Joe Biden?” Pelosi said she responded by describing how well Biden had performed during a recent fundraiser in San Francisco. “He gave a great speech, no notes,” she recalled telling the celebrity. Biden, she said, recognized everyone, not needing to rely on nametags.

    Pelosi has full confidence in Biden, her spokesman said Monday.

    Some donors said they kept their concerns quiet because they didn’t want to risk their access or influence. No one wanted to jeopardize a chance to become an ambassador or host a fundraiser, said a Los Angeles-based longtime Democratic donor.

    Musical exit
    When Biden was a senator, he regularly spoke with reporters in the hallways of the Capitol. As vice president, he invited journalists to his house for pool parties. At the start of his presidency, Biden spoke off-the-cuff more frequently, including at fundraisers.

    These days, Biden’s public appearances are brief. He occasionally answers shouted questions from reporters, but his responses are often clipped—sometimes a “yes,” “no” or just a thumbs-up. Since the debate, his public remarks have on average lasted less than 10 minutes. His campaign has planned more unscripted interactions with voters following criticism from Democrats.

    Biden has held fewer news conferences and interviews than any president at this point in their terms going back to Ronald Reagan, according to an analysis by presidential scholar Martha Joynt Kumar, whose data starts with Reagan’s presidency.

    White House aides often erect barriers to keep reporters from asking Biden questions. Journalists are sometimes kept dozens or even hundreds of feet away from the president at events. White House staff often blast music so questions can’t be heard during the president’s exit.

    Radio hosts who interviewed the president last week, part of an effort to reassure the public of Biden’s mental fitness, said they were provided a list of approved questions from the Biden campaign. After that was reported, the campaign decided to curtail the practice, according to a person familiar with the Biden booking operation.

    When Biden holds one of his rare news conferences, White House officials often reach out to reporters whom the president might call on, in a bid to determine what questions they plan to ask. Many reporters rebuff these requests. White House aides often hold the microphone for reporters so that aides can pull it away, preventing follow-up questions.

    In June 2023, during an appearance at a graduation ceremony for the U.S. Air Force Academy, Biden tripped over a sandbag and fell as he walked across the stage. He got up quickly with the assistance of Secret Service agents. Biden’s fall, which was replayed on cable news for hours, raised alarms at the White House, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Officials said it was a commonplace accident but nonetheless recognized the damaging political optics of Biden tumbling to the ground. In the following months, they took extra precautions to make sure he didn’t trip again. He started wearing sneakers more often for better traction, and he often used shorter stairs when boarding Air Force One.

    The president, during a meeting with Democratic governors last week, spoke of the need for more sleep and suggested he avoid events that begin after 8 p.m.

    That comment was met with incredulity by some governors, a person briefed on the discussion said. Some, though, were relieved that Biden at least acknowledged there was a problem, the person said.
    If Democrats learn and understand why this happened, then the party can move on to more healthy relationships between the legislative politicians --- the Presidential party apparatus --- the donor/DNC complex --- the media institutions and reporters. You know, reckon with the reporting in this article. It's in fact very unhealthy to focus on political partisan points like "How dare reporters not focus only on Trump" or other comments only purposed to mock harsh but fair articles.
    "I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."

  9. #2129
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    And I wish I was wrong. Hilary was objectively the most qualified candidate in U.S. history, and she lost.

    Agreed. Assuming a Biden win, it would be interesting if he resigned post 2026 and gave her the incumbency to fight from for 2028. But that discussion is for another time.
    While I understand this sentiment, this is revisionist hyperbole given the number of former VPs who have become presidents. If you were to argue her qualifications dwarfed her opponents more than any candidate in modern history you would have a more legitimate argument.

    More on topic, I have a bad feeling about this election. I think regardless of what the Democrats do in the next four months Biden will win the popular vote by a huge margin but Trump will still win the election by taking Arizona, Georgia, and one of PA, WI, or MI. If that happens, I think there is a strong likelihood that the US as we have come to know it ends in the next 2-5 years. If you know anyone in those states please encourage them to vote against Trump.

  10. #2130
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    1. You mistake being off by a few points with being wrong and they usually favor Biden.
    2. Biden is the first democratic president who has a shot of losing the popular vote in 24 years, he also has the lowest approval rating but you can be dismissive of all that by saying like a Trumper that polls are wrong.
    3. The echo here has been STFU and vote.
    4. One of the replacements is literally on the ticket but the problem is they cannot just kick Biden out there has to be pressure for him to step aside and he doesn't want to.
    Last time I'm replying to this because it's just more tiresome back and forth in which you are either willfully or accidentally misconstruing literally everything.

    1. No, I do not. I have been watching Dems overperform by as much as 15-20 points above polling and conversely I have seen the same polling sources say either Trump or Biden is winning depending practically on the time of day by a difference of 5-10 points. I also don't know why you think most polls are favoring Biden because I've been seeing a pretty even split consistently for the past 4 months even after the "omg bad Biden" debate. The people who conduct polls have systematically failed at updating their methodology to keep up with how people communicate in the past decade. It's no longer feasible to look at current polls--or an aggregate of polls--to get an accurate sense of how a candidate is doing.

    2. Cool, well I'll just handwave your statement since you're dismissive of mine. Suits me.

    3. Even if that were true, that's not "Anyone who criticizes the dear leader is the enemy supporter", which is what you claimed. So quit moving goalposts or figure out what you actually want to say.

    4. Has Harris expressed any interest in running? Can she run if she is already Biden's VP? If either of those are "no", then she's not an option. Try again.

    Quote Originally Posted by uuuhname View Post
    I just LOVE how you clowns continue acting as if I'm the sole factor that will decide this election. even I can't imagine having such a bloated ego.
    Literally nobody thinks you, personally, are a factor. Ego indeed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout.

    Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    Regardless of whether or not Biden wins, it's not going to be a Red Wave. Sorry to burst your bubble you utterly disingenuous troll.
    Last edited by Benggaul; Yesterday at 04:25 AM.

  11. #2131
    Old God Kathranis's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    10,338
    Quote Originally Posted by gondrin View Post
    All that chart shows is nobody wants either. However, Trump will always have his base as he is a fascist bigot and his base is exactly like him. Lets show some polls on who would do better than Biden, shall we?

    Here is Trump vs Harris.

    https://www.realclearpolling.com/pol...rump-vs-harris

    Trump 48 - Harris 44. Worse than Biden

    What about Trump vs Sanders?

    https://emersoncollegepolling.com/ju...p-46-biden-43/

    Trump 46 - Sanders 43

    What about Trump Vs Warren?

    https://emersoncollegepolling.com/ju...p-46-biden-43/

    Trump 49 - Warren 39

    As I said, Biden literally has the closest gap. I mean, people want evidence, here is their evidence.
    Biden has the closest gap after how many months on the campaign trail and making public appearances. Harris is only two points behind him with only minimal public appearances.

    That's not the ringing endorsement of Biden or attack on potential replacements you seem to think it is.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Benggaul View Post
    4. Has Harris expressed any interest in running? Can she run if she is already Biden's VP? If either of those are "no", then she's not an option. Try again.
    She was reportedly upset that some strategists were considering passing her over for Newsom, so I'd say yeah she's probably interested. She ran against Biden in the 2020 primaries and by all accounts is planning to run in 2028. She's already next in line to hold the office if Biden croaks.

    I don't even know why you're asking whether the VP can run for president.

    She's not going to go out in public and undermine her running mate with speculation about him stepping down until that decision is officially made, but anyone who runs for president obviously has ambition and some measure of narcissism to think they can win. So I'm sure she's playing what cards she can to try and line up that nomination without potentially rocking the boat too much, same as a lot of other Democratic leaders that are saying things like "I support Biden but I would also support Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket."

  12. #2132
    Quote Originally Posted by postman1782 View Post
    I can guarantee it won't be.
    At this point in 2020, Biden was up like 9 points? And barely won by like 40k votes across a few states. Now he's down by like 6? This is a landslide loss.

    Especially if he is peeling away enough young black/Latino men, and just enough suburban women? Dems had 8 years to prepare for this ...yet outside of reproductive rights, they continue to poll behind the GOP in every conceivable category. Maybe they're just not as popular as you hope they are?

    "The numbers were daunting before the debate, and now there’s a real danger that they’re going to get worse,” David Axelrod, the chief strategist for Barack Obama’s two winning campaigns, told me in the first week of July. “If that’s the case—if we get to the point of fighting to hold on to Virginia and New Hampshire and Minnesota, meaning the main six or seven battlegrounds are gone—then yeah, we’re talking about a landslide, both in the Electoral College and in the popular vote.”

    Axelrod added, “The magnitude of that defeat, I think, would be devastating to the party. Those margins at the top of the ticket would sweep Democrats out of office everywhere—House, Senate, governor, you name it. Considering the unthinkable latitude the Supreme Court has just given Trump, we could end up with a situation where he has dominant majorities in Congress and, really, unfettered control of the country. That’s not far-fetched.”

    Congrats, you just turned the Dems into a small regional party.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...campaign=share
    Last edited by Somewhatconcerned; Yesterday at 04:59 AM.

  13. #2133
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    At this point in 2020, Biden was up like 9 points? And barely won by like 40k votes across a few states. Now he's down by like 6? This is a landslide loss.
    And at this point in 2016 Clinton was up by 6 points and lost. Polling this far out means fuck all for how the election goes.

  14. #2134
    Old God Kathranis's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    10,338
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    And at this point in 2016 Clinton was up by 6 points and lost. Polling this far out means fuck all for how the election goes.
    Then why are so many people in this thread so adamantly unwilling to consider switching candidates? The idea that Biden's going to improve from here on out is just silly to me. You don't beat age by waiting. This is only going to get worse, and it's going to remain an issue for the rest of the election season. He's going to be scrutinized every time he makes a public appearance. Any stutter or foible is going to make people waver. It is not reassuring, it is not emboldening, it doesn't inspire confidence. It will depress turnout. Mark my words.

    That this conversation is still so dominant in the media only exemplifies that he is not the right candidate. You can attack the media for driving the narrative, and you can attack "unfaithful Democrats" for not holding the line, but this is the objective reality of the situation. If they think maintaining course with Biden at this point is the safer pathway to victory, I must say I think they're delusional.

    I'm not even saying he decidedly won't win, but what does he realistically bring to the table? His record? His approval rating is sitting below 38% so I'm not sure that's going to beat out the now widely held perception that he's so old as to be unfit for office.

    If we're just expecting voters to vote blue to save democracy, it doesn't matter who is running against Trump.
    Last edited by Kathranis; Yesterday at 05:47 AM.

  15. #2135
    Over 9000! PhaelixWW's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Washington (né California)
    Posts
    9,044
    I think a whole lot of people are ignoring the third party effect. Support for third-party candidates is usually strongest around now. We're far enough into the election cycle for people to push the dark horse candidate in protest of the default choices, but once we get closer to the actual election, reality sets in and those third party polling numbers usually wane. And the election results are even worse than late polling figures for third party candidates.

    Pew: Third-party and independent candidates for president often fall short of early polling numbers
    Kennedy, an environmental lawyer and anti-vaccine activist, is currently polling in the mid-single digits nationally. He appears to draw support both from people who might otherwise back President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump, complicating both men’s campaign calculations. (Bear in mind that accurately gauging support for third-party candidates can be tricky.)

    But U.S. political history tells us that third-party and independent candidates usually finish a lot lower than where they start.

    Not only did support for third-party and independent candidates tend to decline over the course of their campaigns, but their vote shares often came in lower than polls suggested they might.
    I mean, there's no adequate way of telling which candidate has "lost" more support to Kennedy. Nor is there any guaranteed way of determining which of those voters will be more willing to break away from Kennedy and go back to their default choice.

    But the one thing that history shows is that it's a decision a lot of them will ultimately make.


    "The difference between stupidity
    and genius is that genius has its limits."

    --Alexandre Dumas-fils

  16. #2136
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    And at this point in 2016 Clinton was up by 6 points and lost. Polling this far out means fuck all for how the election goes.
    That's my point, polls have consistently underestimated Trump's strength.

  17. #2137
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    That's my point, polls have consistently underestimated Trump's strength.
    And yet, Democrats have also been consistently outperforming polls for the last few years. You should know, you've been predicting red waves since 2018 and still haven't been right.

  18. #2138
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,925
    Quote Originally Posted by Kathranis View Post
    Then why are so many people in this thread so adamantly unwilling to consider switching candidates?
    Because most things show switching now would be worse. If it's a late primary there will be election fatigue. Suppressing the vote.
    If they just declare a new candidate? How would the press massacre that?

    Look at how reactions would be and what would happen.
    - Lars

  19. #2139
    Quote Originally Posted by DarkTZeratul View Post
    And yet, Democrats have also been consistently outperforming polls for the last few years. You should know, you've been predicting red waves since 2018 and still haven't been right.
    And in Presidential years Trump has been outperforming the polls and guess what 2024 is.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Muzjhath View Post
    Because most things show switching now would be worse. If it's a late primary there will be election fatigue. Suppressing the vote.
    If they just declare a new candidate? How would the press massacre that?

    Look at how reactions would be and what would happen.
    And if your afraid of "suppressing the vote" how afraid you must be when Biden loses battleground states and turning blue states into battleground states.

  20. #2140
    Quote Originally Posted by Somewhatconcerned View Post
    Gotta say...Dems putting on a masterclass here of turning a competitive election into a red wave blowout. Should have listened to their own voters who didn't want Biden to run again!
    You predicted that before and you were wrong. And like the moral coward you are, you ran away and didn't show up here for a year or three.
    In a few months you'll run away again.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •