The question is also if he does lose, no doubt there will be conspiracies and fraud claims etc, but will he actually stir up violence amongst his supporters, and will they listen? Sadly I think yes, and yes. With most police being firmly pro Trump, things could get seriously ugly.
I think ultimately though the military would uphold the law/constitution, even if the police won't.
I think ultimately though the military would uphold the law/constitution, even if the police won’t.
I have no doubts about the military and federal police. I think people underestimate the local police. There might be a few nutters in the small towns, but most cops are not going to side with outright lawlessness.
The question is also if he does lose, no doubt there will be conspiracies and fraud claims etc, but will he actually stir up violence amongst his supporters, and will they listen? Sadly I think yes, and yes. With most police being firmly pro Trump, things could get seriously ugly.
I think ultimately though the military would uphold the law/constitution, even if the police won’t.
The US would do well to suspend his Twitter account on election night, in fact if they won't / can't someone should wrestle the phone out of his tiny hands.
Yes, he will tweet "fake news" he will at the very least tip toe around calling for armed up risings, and I suspect some parts of US Police will support him, although **** knows why.
I'm saying.... at least a few localised riots nationwide and several deaths linked to protests and more mass shootings linked to Trump in the next few years.
The US is a ****ed up place in parts.
Huge poll from Morning Consult just dropped. Canvassed 14,500 likely voters (most polls have a sample size between 600 and 1500). This means it has a margin of error of +/- 1% (as opposed to the normal +/- of 3-4%). So very accurate.
Puts Biden on 52% to Trump's 44%. So 8% lead.
Which tallies with the last 6 national polls prior to this one, which average at 7.85% lead for Biden.
Turnout this year is going to be very high. Some saying as high as 150million.
If we say 140million to be safe, 52% gives Biden 73million votes, Trump has 61.5. So an additional 11.5 million votes for Biden.
In 2016 Clinton beat Trump by just under 3million votes and he just managed to scrape through the electoral college.
This time Biden has an additional 8.5 million votes over and above what Clinton had.
Critically though, the electoral college doesn't work on a pure majority, and in theory Trump can win again using the same base that won it for him. Namely white voters and specifically non college educated white voters.
However, in order to do this he needs a properly convoluted route to win, most likely by taking Texas and Florida and Georgia (two too close to call and one within margin of error, with Biden ahead by 3 points in Florida and .2% in Georgia, and Trump ahead by .7% in Texas) as well as taking enough from the rust belt states (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio and Iowa). Biden is ahead by 8% in Minnesota and Wisconsin and by 5% in Michigan and Pennsylvania.
Nevertheless if we accept that Minnesota and Wisconsin are too far out for the Orange baboon, then he needs to win Michigan and Pennsylvania (despite being 5 points down) as well as Ohio (.7% up and Iowa (2% up). In Texas he's 1.3% ahead, albeit the latest large scale poll (Morning consult again with margin of +/- 1%) shows a dead heat. Georgia is essentially all square, and Florida Biden is up 3%.
So Trump needs to win a bunch of states, all of which he is either behind in (in two states by more than 5%, above the standard margin of error) or essentially all square, other than Ohio and Iowa, both of which are well within the margin.
So doable, but very, very difficult.
However, where it gets really interesting is HOW he won in 2016, or more accurately WHO won it for him.
In 2016 Trump smashed the non-college educated white voters, winning 67% of a demographic that makes up approx 44% of the electorate. And crucially more than 50% of the electorate in the rust belt. Clinton got a paltry 28%.
Polls nationally show that Trump's base in this area has shrunk considerably, from 67% to 55%. Whilst Biden's has grown to 44%. This means that Trump loses approx 8million votes (41m to 33m) whilst Biden gains 10m (17m to 27m).
More importantly in key rust belt states of Michigan and Pennsylvania, Trump's gone from 62% to 52% Michigan and from 64% to 52% in Pennsylvania. In the same states Biden goes from 31% to 45% and 32% to 39%.
So you have a picture whereby Trump has been haemorrhaging support nationally within the constituency that got him elected, and to the same extent within the core states that swung it for him and that he will need to carry this time to have any chance. Based on current polling he cannot win without at least one of Michigan or Pennsylvania, and probably both given that to only need one he would then have to win all of Florida, North Carolina and Arizona, all of which he is 2-3% behind in.
In other words, unless he pulls an absolutely enormous rabbit out of a very, very large hat, he is boogered!
but most cops are not going to side with outright lawlessness.
I dunno, I think lots of the police have been radicalised, essentially. They see liberal protestors as antifa terrorists - they were shown to be supporting the Proud Boys surreptitiously at recent marches etc, even offering advice on how to not get arrested etc
If they think the 'deep state' has stolen the election from Trump who knows how they will react.
Did I hear rightly that some Walmarts have pulled guns and ammo from the shelves in certain states for fear of violence after the election? Its seems absurd that an operation like them would remove money spinners from the shelves on moral grounds. But then again its 2020 innit.
Did I hear rightly that some Walmarts have pulled guns and ammo from the shelves in certain states for fear of violence after the election?
You heard right. The problem for the US is that I can't see exactly when it will be safe to return them, regardless of the outcome this week.
Unfortunately I reckon there will be riots regardless of who wins 😭
It’s just a matter of who riots and where .....
As a non-American I'm just wondering what Donald Trump has done or what policies he's put in place in the last 4 years that would make anyone want to vote for him?
The only thing I can see is that unemployment continued on a downward trend until COVID-19 hit.
what Donald Trump has done or what policies he’s put in place in the last 4 years that would make anyone want to vote for him?
Spaaaaacee Fooooorccceee!!! Although he didn't start that, it's been in the works for years.
The US system makes it tough to figure out who did what. The president might sign something into law even though congress, or a particular congress person was really responsible for it happening.
It the president might sign an executive order which is entirely his or her work.
Probably the biggest thing he's done is appoint a lot of judges at all levels, which will change the leaning of the legal system from top to bottom for years to come. That will appeal to right leaning and religious 'christians".
As a non-American I’m just wondering what Donald Trump has done or what policies he’s put in place in the last 4 years that would make anyone want to vote for him?
American politics isn't about policies, it's about persuading people to vote for you. So you just have rallies and tell people what they want to hear. That's all Trump does.
The fascinating thing about Trump is that his administration has actually done some things which should be good for people who would generally vote democrat.
If he stopped the lying and bluster long enough to point some of them out, the voters might vote differently. It's the constant ego-driven BS that gets in the way.
It's a long list but scan it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/opinion/fact-check-trump.html
Good news from Texas with the drive-through vote case being thrown out- that was pretty much a test, a petition which openly had no legal standing but which they'd hoped could succeed because the Texas Supreme Court is packed with republicans (and which they also knew that the supreme court would not overrule). It got absolutely laughed out, best possible outcome and hopefully a nice reminder for people that filling a court with republicans doesn't mean they'll break the law for you.
cromolyolly
Free MemberIf he stopped the lying and bluster long enough to point some of them out, the voters might vote differently.
Well sort of. Yes there are policies that he could pitch at a lot of traditional democrat voters, but only at the cost of admitting that most of his policies have hurt most of his current voters. He could never do both. I mean, he could try, by lying to both, but that hasn't worked out, because you can't fool all of the people all of the time especially when Some Of The People can literally see that you said something contraductory to another Some Of The People.
P-Jay
Full MemberThe Democrats have done what they needed to, okay Biden isn’t Bernie or Corbyn so those of a very left of centre persuasion think he’s worse than Trump, but he’s not.
No, they do not. The closest you'll get to "Biden is worse than Trump" is from the people who think 5 more years of Trump will basically trash the post-war concensus so badly that the next election can bring in an actual left wing government, and that it's basically harm today for progress tomorrow. But they're very rare.
I mean, "very left of centre" is rare in itself in the states so a subset of that subset is basically about 30 people with a geocities website.
only at the cost of admitting that most of his policies have hurt most of his current voters. He could never do both
The troubling thing is I don't believe for a second he needs to. His base will vote for him no matter what he says. They will parrot his lies until they sound true, even if they didn't believe them to begin with. He signed into law some pretty progressive criminal justice measures which will primarily benefit poor african americans while telling his base he was going to lock up everyone in sight and protect people from being attacked in their own homes. His base listened to what he said and I bet not a single one of them would know about the legislation.
I fear that we might be making the same mistake as the first time, where everyone took him literally, no one took him seriously.
Biden isn’t Bernie or Corbyn so those of a very left of centre persuasion think he’s worse than Trump, but he’s not.
Before he became Obama's bro, he was a seriously non progressive legislator. He voted against school bussing, for seriously draconian sentencing laws, for the iraq war. Not being funny but his time with Obama whitewashed that. Trouble is you don't really know what you are getting with Joe, other than not Trump. The really ironic thing is that Harris is being portrayed as a socialist. This is the woman who zealously prosecuted death penalty cases in California, and supported hardline policies that affected largely minorities. Who knows what you are really getting with her.
It's incredible to think that in this day and age, in a western country, people are seriously talking about the police and/or army going rouge, gun fighting in the streets between members of the public, the old Pres refusing to leave office ..... sounds like Zimbabwe!
Just listened to the bunker podcast with Brian klaas
In terms of election night itself, he said best thing to do is wait for results from Florida, north Carolina and Texas where mail in and polling booth votes are counted at the the same time so you ll get a final result at 3-4am our time. Those results likely to come in at a similar time
If biden gets any of those then it's done. Saves having to pull an all nighter.
northwind - the separate case in from of Judge Hanen is being heard today but no decision yet as far as I know so it's not finalised yet.
Hanen is staunch republican.
Saves having to pull an all nighter.
Think I'll do what I did last time and set an alarm for 3am. Dunno why, I have a sinking feeling Trump will surprise everyone. On the surface the large turnout looks to benefit Biden but it's so polarised both sides have equal motivation to get the vote out. Not that I think it matter much. Biden is the least inspiring democrat candidate in a long time. Clinton wasn't much better but at least she had the benefit of being a woman. I just despair Sanders didn't win the nomination. If Biden does win the next four years will see a masterclass of inaction and fudging.
Just listened to the bunker podcast with Brian klaas
Caught that this morning. Was a good listen.
Biden may be uninspiring but he is "safe" enough for any rational non-trumper to vote for. And, my personal prediction, president for a year before providing a soft entry for Kamala who will then show everyone how it is done in time for reelection. I hope.
Geocities is shut down soz
My money is on Trump calling it early with the heavy mob of lawyers. Every time the press say Jo has it on the bag Trump wins a little bit more of the vote.
I have no doubts about the military and federal police. I think people underestimate the local police. There might be a few nutters in the small towns, but most cops are not going to side with outright lawlessness.
On an official / managerial level no. But the police unions can be pretty nasty pieces of work
So bad apples within the police department have the backing of their union and while officers aren't instructed to behave in a violent and lawless manner, if they do.
The actual actions of the police are perhaps less of a worry than their inactions. Throughout the BLM protests of late there have been lots of incidents of 'Negligent Response' -
This week, police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, faced intense scrutiny over their response to armed white men and militia groups gathered in the city amid demonstrations by Black Lives Matter activists and others over the police shooting of Jacob Blake, a Black father of three who was left paralyzed after being shot in the back. On Wednesday, Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old who appeared to consider himself a militia member and had posted “blue lives matter” content, was arrested on suspicion of murder after the fatal shooting of two protesters.
Activists in Kenosha say police there have responded aggressively and violently to Black Lives Matter demonstrators, while doing little to stop armed white vigilantes. Supporting their claims is at least one video taken before the shooting that showed police tossing bottled water to what appeared to be armed civilians, including one who appeared to be the shooter, the AP noted: “We appreciate you being here,” an officer said on loudspeaker.
Police also reportedly let the gunman walk past them with a rifle as the crowd yelled for him to be arrested because he had shot people, according to witnesses and video reviewed by the news agency.
The Kenosha sheriff, David Beth, has said the incident was chaotic and stressful.
German told the Guardian on Wednesday: “Far-right militants are allowed to engage in violence and walk away while protesters are met with violent police actions.” This “negligent response”, he added, empowers violent groups in dangerous and potentially lethal ways: “The most violent elements within these far-right militant groups believe that their conduct is sanctioned by the government. And therefore they’re much more willing to come out and engage in acts of violence against protesters.”
Yup.
A heavily redacted version of the 2006 document had previously been published, one of a handful of documents revealing federal officials’ growing concern with white supremacists’ “historical” interest in “infiltrating law enforcement communities or recruiting law enforcement personnel.” A different internal document obtained by The Intercept in 2017 had also noted that “domestic terrorism investigations focused on militia extremists, white supremacist extremists, and sovereign citizen extremists often have identified active links to law enforcement officers.”
https://theintercept.com/2020/09/29/police-white-supremacist-infiltration-fbi/
Many police forces in the US are heavily militarised also.
Yeah, police unions in the states basically aren't what you think they are. Kind of ironic that after over a century of villifying and crushing genuine unionisations, the right has now so completely embraced the one example that genuinely does act like an organised crime gang.
I mean seriously, check this out. An armed mob- of policemen- attack a car for no reason, smash in its windows, drag the passengers including 2 kids out, abduct the kid, beat the mother in the street then arrest her with no justification then release her without charge, don't get medical attention for the kid despite the injuries he took during the attack, and do nothing to help her recover the vehicle. All that not bad enough? How about faking up some propaganda pics using the kid?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/30/philadelphia-fop-posts-toddler/
“We are not your enemy. We are the Thin Blue Line. And WE ARE the only thing standing between Order and Anarchy.”
to do is wait for results from Florida,
Florida has voted with the eventual winner since the 70s with iirc only a couple of exceptions. Wait up for those results and then go to bed. Set the alarm for 7am or 2025 depending.
I just watched the video of that incident Northwind referred to, jeez. And they call antifa thugs.
“We are not your enemy. We are the Thin Blue Line. And WE ARE the only thing standing between Order and Anarchy.”
Very creepy doublespeak.
On the police unions etc stuff, it really is worth listening to Robert Evans’ Behind The Bastards 5 or 6 part special on the history of the police. Some truly staggering stuff in there and a good timeline to explain how they are how they are today.
Just in - Judge Hanen rejects GOP case at Texas federal court.
https://www.axios.com/texas-harris-county-drive-thru-voting-5a874c81-b927-48e7-8dcb-3bc1d5d76f6b.html
In theory the judiciary is independent from both the executive and Congress but of course each side promotes its own favourites. Sometimes it seems judges like to assert their independence - or maybe they have an eye on the future. Didn't Trump's first nominee to the Supreme Court, Kavenagh, vote with the Democrats on his first judgement?
Yes, Kavanaugh's first vote on the SC sided with the Dems argument but at the end of last week he voted against extending the deadline for counting mail-in votes in Wisconsin.
If the GOP appeal the Texas decision, we'll have a chance to see how he, Gorsuch and Barrett will vote.
The Supreme Court seems to be holding a line that this close to an election they should just let the states do what they will, as long as it's not outright illegal or unconstitutional. That might cut both ways but it gets really messy where state lawmakers and state law enforcers clash. And really really messy if/when state judges cross the line, as it's clear the republican party expects and demands they do.
So far, state judiciaries have decided the multiple cases brought by the GOP impartially - unlike the partisan SC decision regarding Wisconsin.
I was surprised that Hanen tossed the case in Harris County; given his political persuasion and reputation I expected him to find for the GOP but to say their case had no standing was good news.
Two of the three republicans who brought the case have form with multiple previous claims and there has been talk of them being either sued or barred from bringing further cases as vexatious litigants.
The trump show is on bbc2
Its going through his episode where he drew an extension onto the weather service diagram because he had it in his head that a hurricane would strike alabama
He is deluded
Assuming the polls are right and trump does lose, there's no telling how low he will go
Another GOP challenge to voting/counting fails - but an appeal is possible.
A judge has rejected a request by Republicans to stop ballot counting in Clark County, Nevada.
The Nevada Republican Party and Donald Trump’s re-election campaign had filed a lawsuit last month claiming the county violated state election laws.
The lawsuit argued that aspects of the ballot counting process were not observed closely enough, so officials should stop counting and verifying mail-in ballots.
However on Monday, District Court Judge James Wilson denied the request saying that there was no evidence of improper vote counting.
Nevada Republican Party Chairman Michael McDonald said the party has not decided if they will appeal to the state’s Supreme Court.It seems the judiciary are acting impartially and applying the law as intended; donny won't be impressed.
Well, that's just tough shit for the orange buffoon.
It seems the judiciary are acting impartially and applying the law as intended; donny won’t be impressed.
Well, that’s just tough shit for the orange buffoon.
We'll see. In Bush vs Gore in 2000 the SC ended the recount with a conservative majority without all the ballots being counted. The count in Miami Dade was ended by Republican activists trying to break into the count and threatening the counters and supervisors. This causwd them to miss the deadline.
That's the value of packing the Supreme Court before an election.
Clear election fraud in Dixville Notch. SAD!
Trump currently leading 61.5% to 38.5% (16 votes to 10).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/election-results/new-hampshire-2020/
Time to declare victory, and all subsequent ballots invalid then.
National Polls currently 51.6% Biden 43% Trumpy pants. (According the Grauniad)
But who knows and who's truthful? Are elections rig-free? Do politicians tell the truth? Would a cheesey Wotsit have stronger policies? Or more charisma?
Has anyone got any recommendations for moderate pro-Trump podcasts (or at least pro-Republican enough to overlook Trump)? I can kind of get my head round the extreme side of his supporters and why they vote for him. But the educated executive job type vote, I just can’t fathom. I’d like to hear how they rationalise or justify their positions. I suspect some of them have a single issue self interest (like being employed by Big Oil), but I can’t understand how that’s enough to ignore all the other stuff. What on Earth do they make of all the nepotism and self enrichment?
I don’t get think people change their minds by being shouted at, but I can’t debate without understanding their perspective. Help me out of my bubble!
Has anyone got any recommendations for moderate pro-Trump podcasts (or at least pro-Republican enough to overlook Trump)?
I think the never-Trump ex-Republicans are worth following.
https://podcast.thebulwark.com/
stwhannah
Full MemberHas anyone got any recommendations for moderate pro-Trump podcasts (or at least pro-Republican enough to overlook Trump)? I can kind of get my head round the extreme side of his supporters and why they vote for him. But the educated executive job type vote, I just can’t fathom. I’d like to hear how they rationalise or justify their positions. I suspect some of them have a single issue self interest (like being employed by Big Oil), but I can’t understand how that’s enough to ignore all the other stuff. What on Earth do they make of all the nepotism and self enrichment?
I don’t get think people change their minds by being shouted at, but I can’t debate without understanding their perspective. Help me out of my bubble!
You've missed out the other issue with 2 party politics there. Even many very intelligent people still have a massive "never the democrats" streak, so they have to vote Trump (or whoever) to make sure of that. I think the more amazing part is how he made it through the primaries (4 years ago) rather than the presidential election itself.
I'm lucky in that my brother move to Boston around 15 years ago - give a real insight into how it all works for normal folks
Assuming Biden wins the Dems also need to take the Senate otherwise it's going to be a shit show until at least the mid-terms
On the police unions etc stuff, it really is worth listening to Robert Evans’ Behind The Bastards 5 or 6 part special on the history of the police.
Cheers Darcy gonna have a listen now. Does it have anything about Chicago in there? I remember reading about a police chief there who was literally a crime boss.
Think it was this series of articles:
Long read but fascinating.
What on Earth do they make of all the nepotism and self enrichment?
I think the standard excuse is either 'it's fake news' or 'they're all at it, so what', or they simply don't see it because of how siloed everyone's news content is these days.
I'm just looking at some pictures of uptown Minneapolis posted up on Friendface. The whole place is completely boarded up!
Looks like they're expecting a spot of bother.
It's a good job everyone isn't armed up to the teeth with assault rifles
Oh.... erm...
I can kind of get my head round the extreme side of his supporters and why they vote for him. But the educated executive job type vote, I just can’t fathom.
The Rep/Dem debate amongst rational people is a philosophical one. Reps are in favour of small government, and some of their supporters are mistrustful of large government. And this argument is not without merit although I do not subscribe to it in the current context.
Also American government as a whole, from local to national level is somewhat different. Whilst people talk big about freedom, at the local level I personally find the huge volume of local statutes to be somewhat oppressive (on a petty scale) and people seem happy to comply and go along with them. It's simultaneously liberal and authoritarian. You can do whatever you want as long as it's within these strict lines - freedom is good, liberalism is not, apparently.
Anyway within that context, it's easier to see how people do not want the government running things. Although of course the alternative isn't any better, in my view.
2016: Hillary vs Trump
2020: Biden vs Trump.
I almost feel sorry for Americans having such shit choices. It almost makes our Boris vs Corbyn seem like good options.
Biden is a doddery old joke of a candidate
Which makes him exactly 1000000 x better than Trump, his response to coronavirus alone is enough to show the truth in that
The anti-science president needs to be got rid asap
Reps are in favour of
smallno government, and some of their supporters are mistrustful oflargeany government.
FTFY
Biden is a doddery old joke of a candidate
I think people underestimate Biden. He's been in politics a long time and was very successful at what he does, which is to be non-ideological and position himself near the center of public opinion. To ideologues, that's taken as being unprincipled. To pragmatic people, that's what a successful leader has to do in order to have any chance of getting things done. A very important part of his winning the Democratic nomination was very strong support among Black voters. Those voters seem to be quite pragmatic and non-ideological. They aren't interested in hearing about socialism and rubbish like that.
baboonz
Free Member
2016: Hillary vs Trump
2020: Biden vs Trump.I almost feel sorry for Americans having such shit choices. It almost makes our Boris vs Corbyn seem like good options.
@baboonz What made Clinton and what makes Biden bad choices?
Both have a long history of public service, have been elected to numerous public offices and have implemented legislation which made the world a better place.
What have Boris, Corbyn and Trump done that is any better? Boris seems to be out for himself and to build a legacy. He never believed in Brexit, it was just a means to an end. Corbyn was so committed to his own ideals of a pacifist, socialist utopia (I personally don't mind a lot of this) that he couldn't see that many (even in his own party) didn't want it. And as for Trump - Trump only got into this because he was repeatedly insulted by the Democrats, particularly Obama and set about destroying everything that Obama did over 8 years. He's a vain, petty, ignorant man whose only (positive...ish) legacy as president will be a reduction in America's trade deficit to China and putting three people on the Supreme Court. The latter of these only happened as they died on his watch (oh and the republicans cheated).
Which makes him exactly 1000000 x better than Trump, his response to coronavirus alone is enough to show the truth in that
I disagree, but each to their own. I was more saying in the sense of, if Trump wins, there still will be the Russia rhetoric plaguing his second term. If Biden wins, they will get a fresh batch of the same BS in the form of Chinese/Ukrainian interference through Hunter Biden.
They aren’t interested in hearing about socialism and rubbish like that.
Perhaps that is because they, (and you maybe) havent a clue what socialism is.
Not communism, nor Marxism.
The age old British institution of the Cooperative - SOCIALISM
Trade Union anyone , oops, again Socialism.
Fairer wages, having a national health system. Dear lordy, these socialist principles of fairness, how UnBritish.
Clinton had a scandal ridden tenure-I've actually listened through the hours of the congressional hearings, had no charisma and a large portion of the US thought she was a straight up liar. She represented everything that I disliked about the political class.
Biden's age and past health problems are showing in his press interactions. He was also part of the crime bills that resulted in the present mass incarceration. Then there is the baggage of his son, which as much as some people want to pretend it doesn't exist, its a ticking time bomb.
Boris and Corbyn at least somewhat stand for something, which is more than any of the above candidates can say. Also notice how I put Trump as a shit choice too.....
Perhaps that is because they, (and you maybe) havent a clue what socialism is.
Not communism, nor Marxism.
I am quite familiar with socialism. The technical definition is that strategic industries are publicly owned (whereas full-blown communism means that all means of production are publicly owned).
People like Bernie Sanders aren't really socialists in the true sense of the word and most of the young people who believe they're socialists, aren't really. Problem is, socialism was badly discredited in the 1970s and 80s, and no serious person wants to go back to that. Most people are fairly non-ideological about things - they want public services that work, but they aren't particularly bothered about the details of how they're provided. The dogmatic right-wing anti-government rhetoric doesn't impress most people, neither does talk of reviving socialism. Moderate politicians such as Joe Biden know that. He resisted the lure of moving left to appease the Sanders faction and moderate voters have rewarded him for that.
I’m going to ignore the election until the early hours tomorrow. Tonight I shall watch the Dunny on the Wold episode of Blackadder and wish we’d voted for Colin as our leader.
Event ardent anti socialists believe in some kind of socialism. Public roads for instance. It's really just a question of degrees.
And what is the furlough etc if not socialism.
CV19 has shown how hopeless individualism/libertarianism is for coping with major issues/threats. It's no coincidence that Trump, Bolsonaro and Johnson preside over some of the worst performing countries in the world in terms of Covid.
Clinton had a scandal ridden tenure-I’ve actually listened through the hours of the congressional hearings, had no charisma and a large portion of the US thought she was a straight up liar. She represented everything that I disliked about the political class.
Biden’s age and past health problems are showing in his press interactions. He was also part of the crime bills that resulted in the present mass incarceration. Then there is the baggage of his son, which as much as some people want to pretend it doesn’t exist, its a ticking time bomb.
Boris and Corbyn at least somewhat stand for something, which is more than any of the above candidates can say. Also notice how I put Trump as a shit choice too…..
The only scandals that I'm aware of with Clinton were the Benghazi affair and the e-mail server. Both of which were whipped to dramatic effect as the Republicans knew she'd be running again in 2016. Others, including her predecessor (CR) used a private e-mail server when standing as SoS.
You say that most people thought she was a straight up liar, but Clinton won the popular vote in both 2008 (for the democratic nomination) and in 2016 against Trump. She was also re-elected to the senate with 65% of the vote. It seems that many thought she was alright. Saying that, I do somewhat agree that I didn't warm to her, but I never doubted her competence or commitment to the USA. She would've been tough on Russia and China as she was as SoS.
Remind me - what does Boris stand for?
Boris.... at least somewhat stand for something,
Himself
But the educated executive job type vote, I just can’t fathom.
It's no different to this country, a mixture of political tribalism and naked self interest. If you're an executive or in an educated profession earning decent money in the US then materially you're much better off under the Republicans whoever is president. Also many middle class americans are very political. The ones I know and have worked with are political junkies. It's literally all they talk about, and they usually have the tribal connections to match.
One other factor which is specific to Trump is that he resonates with those who have no interest in politics. He gets straight to the point, and cuts through all the academic language and obfuscation which is designed to distance people from politics. People appreciate that because they feel like they're not being patronised, and they'll forgive the racism and mysogyny because deep down they are guilty of it too to some extent.
Event ardent anti socialists believe in some kind of socialism. Public roads for instance. It’s really just a question of degrees.
most people are reasonably pragmatic, not dogmatic ideologues. The Republican Party in the U.S. has become more and more dogmatic in their free-market thinking, so many of them oppose pretty much any public role beyond police and armed forces. There's very little support among voters for such extreme free-market views, so it's dressed up as something else, but that is what drives a lot of the Republican policymaking.
The same goes for socialists who want to go back to the 1970s. The voting public just aren't interested in the ideology. Some of the policies might have support, but from a pragmatic perspective, not an ideological one. People want health care that is effective, they really don't care whether the hospital is publicly or privately owned.
Opinion piece so take it as you will :
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-who-tells-dreadful-lies/2016/09/19/cd38412e-7e6a-11e6-9070-5c4905bf40dc_story.html
22% of Dems think Clinton is honest and trustworthy:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-clinton-maintains-big-lead-voters-doubt-trump-s-temperament-n631351
Event ardent anti socialists believe in some kind of socialism. Public roads for instance. It’s really just a question of degrees.
This is very much true here in the UK (for now)... we're all socialists and capitalists really... it's just that many of us are in denial about one of those. It is a bit different in the USA... take healthcare... or even the example of roads... there are people in the States, many of them, that would happily have no social healthcare, and all the roads owned by private companies and individuals... it's a weird idea of freedom where freedom is always bought and paid for by individuals, never shared via state or especially federal bodies. I suppose we made one step in that direction with the Brexit vote... all that focus on "our" money that went to "Brussels" and little attention to all that enabled on the ground here in the UK, and elsewhere. Given another decade... and it'll be all about how "our" money goes to "Westminster".
But the educated executive job type vote, I just can’t fathom
See also died-in-the-wool Conservatives who won't ever consiier voting anything else, regardless of buffoonery.
Assuming the polls are right and trump does lose, there’s no telling how low he will go
That's going to be the fun bit of watching it all unfold for me, see what tricks Angry Tinkerbell actually resorts to if he is getting royally defeated. One good thing I've read is that if he tries to prematurely try the trick of:
Time to declare victory, and all subsequent ballots invalid then.
the US media have devised a series of 'rules' to bury the news until it's all official.
It's not up to Trump to declare Victory.
I know it'll only take 1 media channel to break ranks for it to fall down but it's a sign that the media over there are going to be trying to tread carefully over calling it too early and having to back-track.
Assuming the polls are right and trump does lose, there’s no telling how low he will go
What's truly terrifying is that he has a ready 'militia' of people called Chuck or Cletus, who possess enough weaponry and ammunition to equip an army, and who firmly believe all the conspiracy theories the orange one has been feeding them for the last 5 years
People want health care that is effective, they really don’t care whether the hospital is publicly or privately owned.
No, I disagree. In the USA they DO care. Because the idea of small government has been worked into their national identity, and it's capitalised on by the right wing. That's why there was so much misinformation and outright lying during the Obamacare debates on state healthcare - huge numbers of people seem genuinely to believe that anything government run won't be in their best interests. (As if private healthcare is!) There is a huge amount of mistrust in the very concept of government.
the US media have devised a series of ‘rules’ to bury the news until it’s all official.
They don't have to 'bury' it, they can report on it but provide context. Language is everything here.
"Trump Declares Victory" is very different from
"Trump claims victory in unfinished race for presidency", or even
"Downbeaten Trump pursues 'victory' claim in laughable last-ditch propaganda attempt"
22% of Dems think Clinton is honest and trustworthy:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-clinton-maintains-big-lead-voters-doubt-trump-s-temperament-n631351
/blockquote>I wonder what that poll would look like in 2020. Clinton would look like a beacon of truth next to the president. A lot has changed (for the worse) since that poll in 2016.
I think you'll find that Americas problems existed LOOOOOOOOOG before Donald Trump came to power.
Quite a number of progs on recently to do with poverty in the US, which from the face of them suggests it all started 4 years ago.
Utter TOSH.
What made Clinton and what makes Biden bad choices?
Compared with Trump they aren't but let's face it their politics are mostly centre-right (as are most senior Dems like Pelosi and Schumer as well). It ends up with the "radical left Dems" actually not being very socialist at all whereas a lot of people want real change, as the progressive democrats like Bernie and AOC are pushing for.
Biden is the right candidate now - I doubt Bernie would have won vs Trump as the swing vote likely wouldn't have gone his way as he'd have been demonised as a communist etc.
The problem will be in 4 years (assuming Biden wins this time and the Dems control both Houses for the majority of his term). He'll either run again or Harris will get the backing of the party whereas they need someone like AOC elected to actually make a real difference (I can't see Bernie running in 2024 due to his age).
It's difficult to see, with the current voting system, AOC winning in 2024 though - it would need Biden having such a good term now that the swing vote believes Dems are best regardless of the candidate and I can't see how Biden can do that in 4 years as he's going to spend a year or two trying to sort out the current shit show and Trump legacy then it will be the mid-terms.
I get the impression that Biden was chosen by the Democrats because he was the best candidate for this election, rather than because he was a great potential president. He may be far too centrist for many Democracts but a calculation has been made that out of the options available he was the Democrat most likely to capture people who voted for Trump in 2016 and many of those to the left of Biden will vote for him anyway, as he'll at least be better than Trump.
Victory through dad dancing along to gay anthems!!!
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1323534663453913093?s=20
And, yes, this is what Donald Trump himself has posted out.
the Democrat most likely to capture people who voted for Trump in 2016 and many of those to the left of Biden will vote for him anyway, as he’ll at least be better than Trump.
Agree and dissagree - I remember hearing back in the Clinton Trump election, some democrats refusing to vote at all because they didn't like Hillary - essentially handing votes to the republicans. It's a double edged sword I guess.
I suppose it rests on how many centrist republican votes Biden can snatch, whilst not dissolusioning too many left leaning democrats into abstaining.
whilst not dissolusioning too many left leaning democrats into abstaining.
What leftist is going to abstain and allow Trump back in? That would be mad.
<Insert analogy about Turkeys / Christmas (or Slugs / Salt)>
Agree and dissagree – I remember hearing back in the Clinton Trump election, some democrats refusing to vote at all because they didn’t like Hillary – essentially handing votes to the republicans. It’s a double edged sword I guess.
Bernie voters were under the impression that the DNC had screwed Bernie over to favour Hillary. I can't remember the exact details of how and why, but I do remember this was a thing in 2016.
Victory through dad dancing along to gay anthems!!!
People still underestimate how **** good he is at this stuff. That is pure attention grabbing, smile inducing, hope filled, bombastic, voter engaging gold... we just don't want to see it as that because we know what and who he is. It's all about Biden being "fragile", and "nasty" liberals being in the wings ready to take over, and in contrast you get young (ha) robust super dad dancing Trump who will rule as his own man. And how can you not get a feel good vibe from bad dancing to that tune... "YOUNG MAN, there's no need to feel down!" Never underestimate this *. Let's hope Trump loses properly this month.
What’s truly terrifying is that he has a ready ‘militia’ of people called Chuck or Cletus, who possess enough weaponry and ammunition to equip an army, and who firmly believe all the conspiracy theories the orange one has been feeding them for the last 5 years
What's more concerning is how many police and National Guard officers are also in the militias - without that I don't think they'd be an issue as they'd get flattened by the police/NG/Army but the lines seem to be pretty blurred. Even if the police in general are just sympathetic to the militias and pull a lot of post November 3rd sickies or refuse to intervene against them it's going to lead to at least isolated shit shows.