|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Biden has good numbers in the states that matter. I think he's likely to win the election given that when all is said and done, Trump will not look good as the "I do not take responsibility for this crisis" president.
I can't really see him as a competent administrator, though, and the obvious cognitive decline plays no small part in that. He seems like the kind of person who has a foolproof strategy for winning the last war. I'm still waiting to see if he's ever going to do something to try to help alleviate these concerns that many people have, but I'm quite certain it's not coming. All I see is a candidate looking to cash in on Obama-era nostalgia and hoping Trump is unpopular enough to make that a winning bet.
|
On April 12 2020 08:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I definitely second the impression that biden's age is showing, been feeling that since he announced his candidacy.
I'd still vote for him against Trump without a second's hesitation or ill feeling about it, though. Trump wants everything to be about himself and his gut feeling is the primary motor behind his decision making process - I'd expect Biden to have a far more delegatory nature and his mental decline to be less of a big deal in how he performs his presidential duties. To me, it's more worrisome in terms of how likely he is to win the general election - when Biden was attacked for bis apparent senility in one of the debates, it seemed to play very poorly with the crowd, but Trump and the people surrounding him aren't gonna pull any punches at all.
Yeah, Trump is going to HAMMER him in any debates, Biden is almost guaranteed to trail off into nothingness multiple times and Trump will probably throw some serious barbs his way.
That being said, I still don't think thats going to help Trump win. Trump won when noone knew how he'd perform, against an unfathomably unpopular candidate, after a full 8 year Democrat presidency, and he lost the popular vote.
Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote.
|
On April 12 2020 09:44 Zambrah wrote:
Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote.
This is an extremely bold call to make a month into the greatest disruption in the international order since the cold war.
The next election will turn on whether or not Trump can deflect people's fear and anger onto something external, and so avoid being held to account for his disastrous response.
The world will be a different place by November. Biden's clear descent into senility won't help, but anything can happen.
|
On April 12 2020 12:28 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 09:44 Zambrah wrote:
Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote. This is an extremely bold call to make a month into the greatest disruption in the international order since the cold war. The next election will turn on whether Trump can deflect people's fear and anger onto something external, versus being held to account for his significant role in the disaster. The world will be a different place by November. Biden's clear descent into senility won't help, but anything can happen.
Trumps supporters don’t care what he does, and I would’ve said Democrat supporters had higher standards for their candidate til I spent time on Twitter and saw how people act when it comes to ignoring or dismissing Biden’s problems in order to defeat Trump.
I don’t believe most Democrats or Republicans give two shits about anything other than their colors victory to be honest.
|
Everything you guys needed to know (or already knew) about Trump's (and to be fair his entire administration's) failures with the Corona Virus pandemic in one nifty New York Times piece. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-response.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=hinytmynameisben
Some quotes from the article that I particularly liked or rather hated because of what they actually mean.
The president, though, was slow to absorb the scale of the risk and to act accordingly, focusing instead on controlling the message, protecting gains in the economy and batting away warnings from senior officials. It was a problem, he said, that had come out of nowhere and could not have been foreseen...
...Unfolding as it did in the wake of his impeachment by the House and in the midst of his Senate trial, Mr. Trump’s response was colored by his suspicion of and disdain for what he viewed as the “Deep State” — the very people in his government whose expertise and long experience might have guided him more quickly toward steps that would slow the virus, and likely save lives.
And this is just perfect Trump behavior trying to lie incessantly to change the facts about everything that happened in order to make himself look good.
He only regained his swagger, the associate said, from conducting his daily White House briefings, at which he often seeks to rewrite the history of the past several months. He declared at one point that he “felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic,” and insisted at another that he had to be a “cheerleader for the country,” as if that explained why he failed to prepare the public for what was coming.
Mr. Trump’s allies and some administration officials say the criticism has been unfair. The Chinese government misled other governments, they say. And they insist that the president was either not getting proper information, or the people around him weren’t conveying the urgency of the threat. In some cases, they argue, the specific officials he was hearing from had been discredited in his eyes, but once the right information got to him through other channels, he made the right calls.
“While the media and Democrats refused to seriously acknowledge this virus in January and February, President Trump took bold action to protect Americans and unleash the full power of the federal government to curb the spread of the virus, expand testing capacities and expedite vaccine development even when we had no true idea the level of transmission or asymptomatic spread,” said Judd Deere, a White House spokesman.
There's a ton more, + Show Spoiler +The following day, Dr. Kadlec and the others decided to present Mr. Trump with a plan titled “Four Steps to Mitigation,” telling the president that they needed to begin preparing Americans for a step rarely taken in United States history.
But over the next several days, a presidential blowup and internal turf fights would sidetrack such a move. The focus would shift to messaging and confident predictions of success rather than publicly calling for a shift to mitigation.
These final days of February, perhaps more than any other moment during his tenure in the White House, illustrated Mr. Trump’s inability or unwillingness to absorb warnings coming at him. He instead reverted to his traditional political playbook in the midst of a public health calamity, squandering vital time as the coronavirus spread silently across the country
The man is a sociopathic, compulsive narcissist that would gladly trade thousands of American lives if it improved his chances of staying in power. This is no longer hyperbole, this is reality.
|
On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:Show nested quote +On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route.
Enlighten me.
What happened in Germany?
|
On April 12 2020 20:38 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route. Enlighten me. What happened in Germany?
Rarely does such a perfect opportunity to post the following present itself.
Also, Happy Easter to those who celebrate!
|
On April 12 2020 20:53 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 20:38 mahrgell wrote:On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route. Enlighten me. What happened in Germany? Rarely does such a perfect opportunity to post the following present itself. Also, Happy Easter to those who celebrate!
Are you egging these two into arguing on Easter?
|
On April 12 2020 23:31 mikedebo wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 20:53 farvacola wrote:On April 12 2020 20:38 mahrgell wrote:On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route. Enlighten me. What happened in Germany? Rarely does such a perfect opportunity to post the following present itself. Also, Happy Easter to those who celebrate! Are you egging these two into arguing on Easter?
That would be a very hare-brained thing to do on this fine day, so of course not!
|
Northern Ireland25405 Posts
Trump’s response to the virus makes Bush’s to Katrina look the peak of quality in the field of disaster management.
Difficult to put oneself in a time capsule back to then, memories distort things and it was a different time in terms of the nascent information sphere we have today.
Does anyone remember the response to Bush’s handling being quite as unhinged as it is to Trump’s amongst ostensible Republicans? I’m not talking necessarily swinging support entirely, but at least acknowledging failures?
I’ve fled back here thankfully from other corners of the internet where my sanity was being stretched to its limits. People trying to argue Trump took it seriously and took decisive action which is completely at odds with event chronology.
There will always be a certain cohort of diehards attached to any politician or party, the Dems certainly have them too but this cohort is noticeably larger than it should be, least for me.
Curious to your thoughts y’all. As much as I can I try to keep track but it’s through the prism of media and the internet, it’s not quite the same as living in America, being surrounded by American media and having those conversations in the office or the bar (although obviously not now)
|
On April 12 2020 04:17 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 03:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 03:24 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 03:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 02:35 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 01:44 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 00:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 00:34 ChristianS wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are.
Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have.
It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. If you don’t mind my asking: is your thinking that by you and people like you refusing to vote for either major party, neither Biden nor Trump will be president in 2021? If so, how? If not, doesn’t the bolded not make sense? Biff is saying that 2021-2024 specifically will be a critical period in shaping the US economy (including how much it focuses on reducing carbon emissions and other pollution). If you’re saying “on either track, the trolley will destroy all living things” I can understand the apathy about which track to put it on, but I also don’t think that’s what the science says. As of now a valid 2020 election is a probability. Depending on what one think constitutes a valid election influences where the baseline for that probability is for any particular person. For example. Several hour lines to vote are both ubiquitous to US elections and recognized (globally) as voter suppression. Both parties don't consider that (or when combined with specific demographic targeting) is sufficient to make elections invalid. Disenfranchising people that have served their time, closed polling stations, lost or miscounted votes, etc. None of that is enough to invalidate elections in the US. Both parties have demonstrated this as recently as this cycle. So we go back to the question of the probability there will be a valid 2020 election. I would set a different bar for what constitutes a valid election than what passes for one in the US. So before entertaining questions about 2021 I'd have to know what we mean by "me and people like me". Because me and people like me live in places where our votes have already been stripped of their meaning by the system working as intended. That's an electoral college that means my vote is actually for electors (determined at the state level), not the president through to people who have been disenfranchised by other means like conflicts between exploitative jobs and absurd election processes, pandemic voting, voter ID, etc. So we're the millions of people that whether we vote Biden, Columbo, Willy Wonka, or watch a Pokemon marathon instead of voting we get the same result (Biden get's the electoral votes assigned to us geographically [or doesn't for Democrats in Red states]). If you want me to put myself in the shoes of a different kind of voter we should specify that. I mean, neither of our votes matter, I know that. But if “the American people” or “the American left” or “swing voters” (all nebulous concepts, maybe so much so to be meaningless) are being asked to throw the switch and decide which track the trolley goes on, you probably have an opinion what they should decide, and I’m inferring it’s something like “don’t throw the switch at all, and let the trolley try to call you complicit.” I think there will almost certainly be an election in November (and if you disagree, I’d be interested to know why). It won’t be devoid of the sorts of undemocratic abuses you’re describing, and it remains to be seen if the coronavirus will present new and creative ways to suppress the vote, but at the end of the day, I think any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote, their votes will be tallied accurately within a reasonable margin of error. Low bar for an election, maybe. And then I think Americans will accept the legitimacy of whoever won as being president in 2021, even if there are irregularities. And that person, either Biden or Trump, will have all the powers associated with the presidency. Do you disagree on any particular point? The people to the left of Bernie and the "swing voters" in swing states at the allegorical switch are largely distinct groups, though there is some overlap. Typically I'm speaking from/about/raising the perspective of the countless people on the tracks. I think the trolly question is a moral abstraction meant to distance the people pushing the trolly over their countrymen and fellow humans around the planet of their role/responsibility by starting the question with the presumption the trolly, tracks, and people tied to them are inevitable and unquestionable. Within this faulty framing I suggested the only ethical action imo was to derail the trolly. In that way this ties into Wombat's point about striking while the iron is hot. Covid-19 has the trolly teetering and both Biden and Trump (and their supporters) want to get it back on the tracks (Trump's tracks lined with more people). Which is the place from which I argue derailing the teetering train is not only the ethical action, but necessary and more possible than it has been in our lives while what we'll need to do and how many people will be lost increases by the second. We've seen coronavirus already impact Wisconsin/Illinois and Republicans/Democrats are fully willing to exploit it for political gain. With that and the Mueller investigation/Ukraine impeachment I think your confidence in a valid election even by US standards just prior to Trump is misplaced. That said I'd put the odds that there isn't more significant foreign interference, election fraud, voter suppression, etc. than 2016 very low and the odds that there will be enough to argue the results are questionable for more than just some of the losing side is closer to 50/50. That said, I think most Americans will consider the election valid regardless if for no other reason than they can't imagine an alternative. With all respect I disagree with pretty much everything about what you're saying but to try to wrap up the specifics you asked if I disagreed with I sorta missed: any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote as a matter of fact isn't true without a LOT of *'s and what you describe/what we have is a low bar for an election objectively/compared to other democracies in "1st world" countries would be my position. Then to abandon the analogy you object to, and return to the original question: are you thinking this political movement will somehow produce a reasonable chance of neither Trump nor Biden being president in 2021? And if so, can you briefly describe a reasonable path from here to there? Because I honestly can’t picture it, and maybe a specific scenario would help people understand where you’re coming from. Might be easier to amend the trolly analogy to a less imperfect (anything short of a treatise will be) one but let's see. Odds aren't great it will, but revolutionary optimism springs eternal. What would it look like? Starting today it would be Biden's support plummeting when people see both his record and mental/physical condition with more scrutiny (our media is unlikely to provide). Then, desperate to replace him (before whatever becomes of the convention) Democrats across the country reject someone like Cuomo, Clinton, Buttigieg or anyone to the right of Bernie as a suitable replacement and he cleans up enough delegates in June to make it clean electorally. Unfortunately it seems that the overwhelming number of the most politically involved Democrats have seen the worst of Biden and chose to actively support it and demand those that find it unacceptable support him anyway. Just to be clear Bernie isn't really "derailing" imo, but hopping to an off-screen track that has far fewer people than the others with them spaced further out. Trolly version: + Show Spoiler +"Derailing" would fall more under refusing to move forward electorally until we committed to rebuilding the whole thing from trolly to track. I'm more just trying to encourage the people getting kicked off the trolly to the front to work to slow the trolly and untie people from the tracks (solidarity from newly unemployed middle class), encourage those kicked off to the back to not start pushing ( not tell people "Vote for Biden! It's the only moral mature choice!"), and those kicked to the sides of the trolly (affluent/comfortable onlookers under minimal/temporary financial stress) to try to tip that bih over before the billionaires send it over the edge of a rollercoaster style drop heading straight for the most marginalized people in society on both the Biden and Trump track (significantly less so, like a much bigger distance than between Biden and Trump, is the Bernie track,). The Bernie track the one being still a reasonable and viable path within the political imagination of most Americans imo. Would you agree that the Bernie track (of all the tracks you might be persuaded to include under “acceptable”) has demonstrated the broadest appeal? And that we just recently concluded an electoral contest in which the Bernie track couldn’t find plurality support even among the “left?” The very first contest (if you ignore everything leading up to it in media and the party) demonstrated that electoral contest was not valid imo. Several subsequent state contests demonstrated that as well. If you set aside the electoral fraud we all witnessed in Iowa and the subsequent voter suppression lines in Texas, Chicago, Wisconsin, etc.. the small fraction of the general electorate that constitutes the Democratic primary (typically a moderate group) selecting Biden doesn't allow me to draw the conclusions you have. Bernie support among the left is overwhelming, the left is only a small part of the Democratic primary (for many reasons within and beyond their control) I mean, don’t get me wrong, a scenario in which Bernie somehow convinces Democrats to back him at the last minute sounds great to me. But Bernie just spent a year trying to convince them any way he knew how, and it didn’t work, right? What do you think will change? Coronavirus certainly didn’t seem to hurt Biden’s polling. If anything the opposite, actually. I'm suggesting the increased scrutiny a competent and non-complacent media would provide could expose people to enough to realize how terrible of an idea it is to put Biden up against Trump and there's more than enough votes left to prevent that fate. Also that doing so by way of delayed primary voting and a delayed convention (made possible/unavoidable by covid-19) is far preferable than trying to come up with solutions after Biden is nominated or if he wins, or worse, if he loses. But your assessment of the validity of the election isn’t the issue here. Whether you think those irregularities cost Bernie the primary (and I think it’s pretty clear they didn’t), there’s not any clear metric by which Bernie could claim legitimacy. He didn’t win the primary, he hasn’t been ahead in polls at almost any point, and at this point he himself has dropped out. You’re hoping some negative media will take Biden down, but he’s been in the public eye for decades, including as VP for eight years. If there’s an angle the media could cover him by that would sink him, why would it only happen in the next 6 months?Do you think Bernie was wrong to drop out? Do you think he was likely to turn it around? And more importantly, do you really think there’s a real chance of convincing voters to support a guy who already dropped out?
What about Tara Reade's accusations?
|
On April 13 2020 01:19 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 04:17 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 03:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 03:24 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 03:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 02:35 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 01:44 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 00:55 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 00:34 ChristianS wrote:
[quote]
If you don’t mind my asking: is your thinking that by you and people like you refusing to vote for either major party, neither Biden nor Trump will be president in 2021? If so, how? If not, doesn’t the bolded not make sense? Biff is saying that 2021-2024 specifically will be a critical period in shaping the US economy (including how much it focuses on reducing carbon emissions and other pollution).
If you’re saying “on either track, the trolley will destroy all living things” I can understand the apathy about which track to put it on, but I also don’t think that’s what the science says. As of now a valid 2020 election is a probability. Depending on what one think constitutes a valid election influences where the baseline for that probability is for any particular person. For example. Several hour lines to vote are both ubiquitous to US elections and recognized (globally) as voter suppression. Both parties don't consider that (or when combined with specific demographic targeting) is sufficient to make elections invalid. Disenfranchising people that have served their time, closed polling stations, lost or miscounted votes, etc. None of that is enough to invalidate elections in the US. Both parties have demonstrated this as recently as this cycle. So we go back to the question of the probability there will be a valid 2020 election. I would set a different bar for what constitutes a valid election than what passes for one in the US. So before entertaining questions about 2021 I'd have to know what we mean by "me and people like me". Because me and people like me live in places where our votes have already been stripped of their meaning by the system working as intended. That's an electoral college that means my vote is actually for electors (determined at the state level), not the president through to people who have been disenfranchised by other means like conflicts between exploitative jobs and absurd election processes, pandemic voting, voter ID, etc. So we're the millions of people that whether we vote Biden, Columbo, Willy Wonka, or watch a Pokemon marathon instead of voting we get the same result (Biden get's the electoral votes assigned to us geographically [or doesn't for Democrats in Red states]). If you want me to put myself in the shoes of a different kind of voter we should specify that. I mean, neither of our votes matter, I know that. But if “the American people” or “the American left” or “swing voters” (all nebulous concepts, maybe so much so to be meaningless) are being asked to throw the switch and decide which track the trolley goes on, you probably have an opinion what they should decide, and I’m inferring it’s something like “don’t throw the switch at all, and let the trolley try to call you complicit.” I think there will almost certainly be an election in November (and if you disagree, I’d be interested to know why). It won’t be devoid of the sorts of undemocratic abuses you’re describing, and it remains to be seen if the coronavirus will present new and creative ways to suppress the vote, but at the end of the day, I think any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote, their votes will be tallied accurately within a reasonable margin of error. Low bar for an election, maybe. And then I think Americans will accept the legitimacy of whoever won as being president in 2021, even if there are irregularities. And that person, either Biden or Trump, will have all the powers associated with the presidency. Do you disagree on any particular point? The people to the left of Bernie and the "swing voters" in swing states at the allegorical switch are largely distinct groups, though there is some overlap. Typically I'm speaking from/about/raising the perspective of the countless people on the tracks. I think the trolly question is a moral abstraction meant to distance the people pushing the trolly over their countrymen and fellow humans around the planet of their role/responsibility by starting the question with the presumption the trolly, tracks, and people tied to them are inevitable and unquestionable. Within this faulty framing I suggested the only ethical action imo was to derail the trolly. In that way this ties into Wombat's point about striking while the iron is hot. Covid-19 has the trolly teetering and both Biden and Trump (and their supporters) want to get it back on the tracks (Trump's tracks lined with more people). Which is the place from which I argue derailing the teetering train is not only the ethical action, but necessary and more possible than it has been in our lives while what we'll need to do and how many people will be lost increases by the second. We've seen coronavirus already impact Wisconsin/Illinois and Republicans/Democrats are fully willing to exploit it for political gain. With that and the Mueller investigation/Ukraine impeachment I think your confidence in a valid election even by US standards just prior to Trump is misplaced. That said I'd put the odds that there isn't more significant foreign interference, election fraud, voter suppression, etc. than 2016 very low and the odds that there will be enough to argue the results are questionable for more than just some of the losing side is closer to 50/50. That said, I think most Americans will consider the election valid regardless if for no other reason than they can't imagine an alternative. With all respect I disagree with pretty much everything about what you're saying but to try to wrap up the specifics you asked if I disagreed with I sorta missed: any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote as a matter of fact isn't true without a LOT of *'s and what you describe/what we have is a low bar for an election objectively/compared to other democracies in "1st world" countries would be my position. Then to abandon the analogy you object to, and return to the original question: are you thinking this political movement will somehow produce a reasonable chance of neither Trump nor Biden being president in 2021? And if so, can you briefly describe a reasonable path from here to there? Because I honestly can’t picture it, and maybe a specific scenario would help people understand where you’re coming from. Might be easier to amend the trolly analogy to a less imperfect (anything short of a treatise will be) one but let's see. Odds aren't great it will, but revolutionary optimism springs eternal. What would it look like? Starting today it would be Biden's support plummeting when people see both his record and mental/physical condition with more scrutiny (our media is unlikely to provide). Then, desperate to replace him (before whatever becomes of the convention) Democrats across the country reject someone like Cuomo, Clinton, Buttigieg or anyone to the right of Bernie as a suitable replacement and he cleans up enough delegates in June to make it clean electorally. Unfortunately it seems that the overwhelming number of the most politically involved Democrats have seen the worst of Biden and chose to actively support it and demand those that find it unacceptable support him anyway. Just to be clear Bernie isn't really "derailing" imo, but hopping to an off-screen track that has far fewer people than the others with them spaced further out. Trolly version: + Show Spoiler +"Derailing" would fall more under refusing to move forward electorally until we committed to rebuilding the whole thing from trolly to track. I'm more just trying to encourage the people getting kicked off the trolly to the front to work to slow the trolly and untie people from the tracks (solidarity from newly unemployed middle class), encourage those kicked off to the back to not start pushing ( not tell people "Vote for Biden! It's the only moral mature choice!"), and those kicked to the sides of the trolly (affluent/comfortable onlookers under minimal/temporary financial stress) to try to tip that bih over before the billionaires send it over the edge of a rollercoaster style drop heading straight for the most marginalized people in society on both the Biden and Trump track (significantly less so, like a much bigger distance than between Biden and Trump, is the Bernie track,). The Bernie track the one being still a reasonable and viable path within the political imagination of most Americans imo. Would you agree that the Bernie track (of all the tracks you might be persuaded to include under “acceptable”) has demonstrated the broadest appeal? And that we just recently concluded an electoral contest in which the Bernie track couldn’t find plurality support even among the “left?” The very first contest (if you ignore everything leading up to it in media and the party) demonstrated that electoral contest was not valid imo. Several subsequent state contests demonstrated that as well. If you set aside the electoral fraud we all witnessed in Iowa and the subsequent voter suppression lines in Texas, Chicago, Wisconsin, etc.. the small fraction of the general electorate that constitutes the Democratic primary (typically a moderate group) selecting Biden doesn't allow me to draw the conclusions you have. Bernie support among the left is overwhelming, the left is only a small part of the Democratic primary (for many reasons within and beyond their control) I mean, don’t get me wrong, a scenario in which Bernie somehow convinces Democrats to back him at the last minute sounds great to me. But Bernie just spent a year trying to convince them any way he knew how, and it didn’t work, right? What do you think will change? Coronavirus certainly didn’t seem to hurt Biden’s polling. If anything the opposite, actually. I'm suggesting the increased scrutiny a competent and non-complacent media would provide could expose people to enough to realize how terrible of an idea it is to put Biden up against Trump and there's more than enough votes left to prevent that fate. Also that doing so by way of delayed primary voting and a delayed convention (made possible/unavoidable by covid-19) is far preferable than trying to come up with solutions after Biden is nominated or if he wins, or worse, if he loses. But your assessment of the validity of the election isn’t the issue here. Whether you think those irregularities cost Bernie the primary (and I think it’s pretty clear they didn’t), there’s not any clear metric by which Bernie could claim legitimacy. He didn’t win the primary, he hasn’t been ahead in polls at almost any point, and at this point he himself has dropped out. You’re hoping some negative media will take Biden down, but he’s been in the public eye for decades, including as VP for eight years. If there’s an angle the media could cover him by that would sink him, why would it only happen in the next 6 months?Do you think Bernie was wrong to drop out? Do you think he was likely to turn it around? And more importantly, do you really think there’s a real chance of convincing voters to support a guy who already dropped out? What about Tara Reade's accusations?
Yeah, that one’s a little more plausible. If we’re answering “how will the public respond once this story is widely reported?” I have no idea what the answer is, or what would happen if more women came forward. My intuition is that it would damage but not sink him, but that’s really nothing more than a guess. What if we had an Access Hollywood-style “in his own words” proof of sorts?
Probably the more difficult question is “how should we respond to credible but unproven allegations against powerful figures like this?” I had a long back-and-forth with Mohdoo a few months ago that felt productive (to me, at least), but I suspect the same conversation in this context would be impossible to have. Tempers are a lot higher now than they are then.
|
Hopefully he wins the election and if the accusations are credible, gets impeached. Win-win. 
|
On April 12 2020 20:38 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route. Enlighten me. What happened in Germany?
We're missing our own emission targets by a mile and keep countless of dirty as fuck coal plants open. And most of it from lignite, which is pretty much the worst polluter around.
Bernie's ban on nuclear, and just as importantly, his ban on fracking would be disastrous for the US. The shale revolution and the resulting increase in the utilization of natural gas in the US is a major driver behind reduced emissions. Banning fracking and nuclear power is basically strengthening autocratic oil nations on the planet, destroying jobs, and harming your own environment.
|
On April 13 2020 01:30 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 01:19 IgnE wrote:On April 12 2020 04:17 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 03:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 03:24 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 03:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 02:35 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 12 2020 01:44 ChristianS wrote:On April 12 2020 00:55 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
As of now a valid 2020 election is a probability. Depending on what one think constitutes a valid election influences where the baseline for that probability is for any particular person.
For example. Several hour lines to vote are both ubiquitous to US elections and recognized (globally) as voter suppression. Both parties don't consider that (or when combined with specific demographic targeting) is sufficient to make elections invalid. Disenfranchising people that have served their time, closed polling stations, lost or miscounted votes, etc. None of that is enough to invalidate elections in the US. Both parties have demonstrated this as recently as this cycle.
So we go back to the question of the probability there will be a valid 2020 election. I would set a different bar for what constitutes a valid election than what passes for one in the US. So before entertaining questions about 2021 I'd have to know what we mean by "me and people like me".
Because me and people like me live in places where our votes have already been stripped of their meaning by the system working as intended. That's an electoral college that means my vote is actually for electors (determined at the state level), not the president through to people who have been disenfranchised by other means like conflicts between exploitative jobs and absurd election processes, pandemic voting, voter ID, etc.
So we're the millions of people that whether we vote Biden, Columbo, Willy Wonka, or watch a Pokemon marathon instead of voting we get the same result (Biden get's the electoral votes assigned to us geographically [or doesn't for Democrats in Red states]).
If you want me to put myself in the shoes of a different kind of voter we should specify that. I mean, neither of our votes matter, I know that. But if “the American people” or “the American left” or “swing voters” (all nebulous concepts, maybe so much so to be meaningless) are being asked to throw the switch and decide which track the trolley goes on, you probably have an opinion what they should decide, and I’m inferring it’s something like “don’t throw the switch at all, and let the trolley try to call you complicit.” I think there will almost certainly be an election in November (and if you disagree, I’d be interested to know why). It won’t be devoid of the sorts of undemocratic abuses you’re describing, and it remains to be seen if the coronavirus will present new and creative ways to suppress the vote, but at the end of the day, I think any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote, their votes will be tallied accurately within a reasonable margin of error. Low bar for an election, maybe. And then I think Americans will accept the legitimacy of whoever won as being president in 2021, even if there are irregularities. And that person, either Biden or Trump, will have all the powers associated with the presidency. Do you disagree on any particular point? The people to the left of Bernie and the "swing voters" in swing states at the allegorical switch are largely distinct groups, though there is some overlap. Typically I'm speaking from/about/raising the perspective of the countless people on the tracks. I think the trolly question is a moral abstraction meant to distance the people pushing the trolly over their countrymen and fellow humans around the planet of their role/responsibility by starting the question with the presumption the trolly, tracks, and people tied to them are inevitable and unquestionable. Within this faulty framing I suggested the only ethical action imo was to derail the trolly. In that way this ties into Wombat's point about striking while the iron is hot. Covid-19 has the trolly teetering and both Biden and Trump (and their supporters) want to get it back on the tracks (Trump's tracks lined with more people). Which is the place from which I argue derailing the teetering train is not only the ethical action, but necessary and more possible than it has been in our lives while what we'll need to do and how many people will be lost increases by the second. We've seen coronavirus already impact Wisconsin/Illinois and Republicans/Democrats are fully willing to exploit it for political gain. With that and the Mueller investigation/Ukraine impeachment I think your confidence in a valid election even by US standards just prior to Trump is misplaced. That said I'd put the odds that there isn't more significant foreign interference, election fraud, voter suppression, etc. than 2016 very low and the odds that there will be enough to argue the results are questionable for more than just some of the losing side is closer to 50/50. That said, I think most Americans will consider the election valid regardless if for no other reason than they can't imagine an alternative. With all respect I disagree with pretty much everything about what you're saying but to try to wrap up the specifics you asked if I disagreed with I sorta missed: any citizen sufficiently motivated will be allowed to vote as a matter of fact isn't true without a LOT of *'s and what you describe/what we have is a low bar for an election objectively/compared to other democracies in "1st world" countries would be my position. Then to abandon the analogy you object to, and return to the original question: are you thinking this political movement will somehow produce a reasonable chance of neither Trump nor Biden being president in 2021? And if so, can you briefly describe a reasonable path from here to there? Because I honestly can’t picture it, and maybe a specific scenario would help people understand where you’re coming from. Might be easier to amend the trolly analogy to a less imperfect (anything short of a treatise will be) one but let's see. Odds aren't great it will, but revolutionary optimism springs eternal. What would it look like? Starting today it would be Biden's support plummeting when people see both his record and mental/physical condition with more scrutiny (our media is unlikely to provide). Then, desperate to replace him (before whatever becomes of the convention) Democrats across the country reject someone like Cuomo, Clinton, Buttigieg or anyone to the right of Bernie as a suitable replacement and he cleans up enough delegates in June to make it clean electorally. Unfortunately it seems that the overwhelming number of the most politically involved Democrats have seen the worst of Biden and chose to actively support it and demand those that find it unacceptable support him anyway. Just to be clear Bernie isn't really "derailing" imo, but hopping to an off-screen track that has far fewer people than the others with them spaced further out. Trolly version: + Show Spoiler +"Derailing" would fall more under refusing to move forward electorally until we committed to rebuilding the whole thing from trolly to track. I'm more just trying to encourage the people getting kicked off the trolly to the front to work to slow the trolly and untie people from the tracks (solidarity from newly unemployed middle class), encourage those kicked off to the back to not start pushing ( not tell people "Vote for Biden! It's the only moral mature choice!"), and those kicked to the sides of the trolly (affluent/comfortable onlookers under minimal/temporary financial stress) to try to tip that bih over before the billionaires send it over the edge of a rollercoaster style drop heading straight for the most marginalized people in society on both the Biden and Trump track (significantly less so, like a much bigger distance than between Biden and Trump, is the Bernie track,). The Bernie track the one being still a reasonable and viable path within the political imagination of most Americans imo. Would you agree that the Bernie track (of all the tracks you might be persuaded to include under “acceptable”) has demonstrated the broadest appeal? And that we just recently concluded an electoral contest in which the Bernie track couldn’t find plurality support even among the “left?” The very first contest (if you ignore everything leading up to it in media and the party) demonstrated that electoral contest was not valid imo. Several subsequent state contests demonstrated that as well. If you set aside the electoral fraud we all witnessed in Iowa and the subsequent voter suppression lines in Texas, Chicago, Wisconsin, etc.. the small fraction of the general electorate that constitutes the Democratic primary (typically a moderate group) selecting Biden doesn't allow me to draw the conclusions you have. Bernie support among the left is overwhelming, the left is only a small part of the Democratic primary (for many reasons within and beyond their control) I mean, don’t get me wrong, a scenario in which Bernie somehow convinces Democrats to back him at the last minute sounds great to me. But Bernie just spent a year trying to convince them any way he knew how, and it didn’t work, right? What do you think will change? Coronavirus certainly didn’t seem to hurt Biden’s polling. If anything the opposite, actually. I'm suggesting the increased scrutiny a competent and non-complacent media would provide could expose people to enough to realize how terrible of an idea it is to put Biden up against Trump and there's more than enough votes left to prevent that fate. Also that doing so by way of delayed primary voting and a delayed convention (made possible/unavoidable by covid-19) is far preferable than trying to come up with solutions after Biden is nominated or if he wins, or worse, if he loses. But your assessment of the validity of the election isn’t the issue here. Whether you think those irregularities cost Bernie the primary (and I think it’s pretty clear they didn’t), there’s not any clear metric by which Bernie could claim legitimacy. He didn’t win the primary, he hasn’t been ahead in polls at almost any point, and at this point he himself has dropped out. You’re hoping some negative media will take Biden down, but he’s been in the public eye for decades, including as VP for eight years. If there’s an angle the media could cover him by that would sink him, why would it only happen in the next 6 months?Do you think Bernie was wrong to drop out? Do you think he was likely to turn it around? And more importantly, do you really think there’s a real chance of convincing voters to support a guy who already dropped out? What about Tara Reade's accusations? Yeah, that one’s a little more plausible. If we’re answering “how will the public respond once this story is widely reported?” I have no idea what the answer is, or what would happen if more women came forward. My intuition is that it would damage but not sink him, but that’s really nothing more than a guess. What if we had an Access Hollywood-style “in his own words” proof of sorts? Probably the more difficult question is “how should we respond to credible but unproven allegations against powerful figures like this?” I had a long back-and-forth with Mohdoo a few months ago that felt productive (to me, at least), but I suspect the same conversation in this context would be impossible to have. Tempers are a lot higher now than they are then.
#BelieveWomen was the Democratic mantra when it was Kavanaugh.
|
On April 12 2020 09:44 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 08:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I definitely second the impression that biden's age is showing, been feeling that since he announced his candidacy.
I'd still vote for him against Trump without a second's hesitation or ill feeling about it, though. Trump wants everything to be about himself and his gut feeling is the primary motor behind his decision making process - I'd expect Biden to have a far more delegatory nature and his mental decline to be less of a big deal in how he performs his presidential duties. To me, it's more worrisome in terms of how likely he is to win the general election - when Biden was attacked for bis apparent senility in one of the debates, it seemed to play very poorly with the crowd, but Trump and the people surrounding him aren't gonna pull any punches at all. Yeah, Trump is going to HAMMER him in any debates, Biden is almost guaranteed to trail off into nothingness multiple times and Trump will probably throw some serious barbs his way.
That being said, I still don't think thats going to help Trump win. Trump won when noone knew how he'd perform, against an unfathomably unpopular candidate, after a full 8 year Democrat presidency, and he lost the popular vote. Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote.
Having watched the Trump/Clinton debates, this seems unlikely to me. Trump was and is a very, very bad debater, and the trends in polling for him were pretty bad in the aftermath of all the 2016 debates (even the primary ones IIRC). I think the "trail off into nothingness" meter will be at least equal for both and Trump descends into nonsense very quickly even when he has a script.
That said, you're right that debates are just so far from election day and the news cycle has accelerated so much that their impact on actual votes is not likely to be very high.
(also, for what it's worth I thought Biden did fantastic in the 2012 debates against Paul Ryan-watching those debates is a master class in humiliating your opponent and undermining their claims of being a "policy wonk"-but Paul Ryan is a terrible debater and that will have been 8 years ago, so it's not worth much)
|
That debate was Biden at his best imo, though I conversely find his handling of things like the Anita Hill hearings to be examples of the worst that US politics and government has to offer.
Nevertheless, I’ll vote for Biden.
|
On April 13 2020 02:35 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 20:38 mahrgell wrote:On April 12 2020 06:28 Elroi wrote:On April 11 2020 22:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 11 2020 17:23 Biff The Understudy wrote:
Just read the NYT chat on the consequences of the COVID to the economy and the human cost of the crisis. It's chilling.
So, anyway, outside the 12d chess of some of our friends are doing (if Biden lose, then in 5 years, maybe our guy has better chances of winning because [insert logic]), the question one has to ask himself, and I think the only one that is truly relevant right now is: who, between Trump and Biden, and which administration, do you want to navigate the country out of the COVID crisis.
What is abundantly clear is that the reconstruction of the economy will shape the country for decades. We've got only two choices.
If the liberals win, they will have to govern with the progressives, that are a force to reckon with in both chambers. If the Republican win, it will give Trump and his goons a once in a century opportunity to remold America the way they want it to be.
I think it's going to be one of the most important elections of our lifetime. We are going to live with the consequences all our lives. It can't be either of them or we're doomed according to the best available science. I don't understand why Democrats refused to recognize that but here we are. Because as you rightly note how we come out of this will shape the country for decades and neither Trump or Biden have any intention to implement the radical climate/economic proposals required to mitigate catastrophic and irreversible warming in the shrinking ~10 year window we have. It's similar to covid imo in that the lag between action and consequence makes it more difficult to convince people of the necessity of that action. But much trickier in that the delay is measured in years and decades rather than days and weeks. I, for one, think that Bernies ban on new nuclear power would lead to a disaster in the fight against global warming - just look at what happened to Germany when they tried a similar route. Enlighten me. What happened in Germany? We're missing our own emission targets by a mile and keep countless of dirty as fuck coal plants open. And most of it from lignite, which is pretty much the worst polluter around. Bernie's ban on nuclear, and just as importantly, his ban on fracking would be disastrous for the US. The shale revolution and the resulting increase in the utilization of natural gas in the US is a major driver behind reduced emissions. Banning fracking and nuclear power is basically strengthening autocratic oil nations on the planet, destroying jobs, and harming your own environment.
Oh yes, Germany should certainly be ashamed of its energy mix when compared to the US!
2019:
Germany: 29.1% Coal, 10.5% Gas, 13.8% Nuclear, 46.1% Renewables
USA: 23.5% Coal, 38.4% Gas, 19.7% Nuclear, 17.5% Renewables
All bless the greatest green revolution, fracking. Only this will save the environment.
You were kidding, right? I really hope so...
Bonus points for the US having twice the energy consumption per capita.
|
On April 13 2020 02:40 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On April 12 2020 09:44 Zambrah wrote:On April 12 2020 08:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I definitely second the impression that biden's age is showing, been feeling that since he announced his candidacy.
I'd still vote for him against Trump without a second's hesitation or ill feeling about it, though. Trump wants everything to be about himself and his gut feeling is the primary motor behind his decision making process - I'd expect Biden to have a far more delegatory nature and his mental decline to be less of a big deal in how he performs his presidential duties. To me, it's more worrisome in terms of how likely he is to win the general election - when Biden was attacked for bis apparent senility in one of the debates, it seemed to play very poorly with the crowd, but Trump and the people surrounding him aren't gonna pull any punches at all. Yeah, Trump is going to HAMMER him in any debates, Biden is almost guaranteed to trail off into nothingness multiple times and Trump will probably throw some serious barbs his way.
That being said, I still don't think thats going to help Trump win. Trump won when noone knew how he'd perform, against an unfathomably unpopular candidate, after a full 8 year Democrat presidency, and he lost the popular vote. Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote. Having watched the Trump/Clinton debates, this seems unlikely to me. Trump was and is a very, very bad debater, and the trends in polling for him were pretty bad in the aftermath of all the 2016 debates (even the primary ones IIRC). I think the "trail off into nothingness" meter will be at least equal for both and Trump descends into nonsense very quickly even when he has a script. That said, you're right that debates are just so far from election day and the news cycle has accelerated so much that their impact on actual votes is not likely to be very high. (also, for what it's worth I thought Biden did fantastic in the 2012 debates against Paul Ryan-watching those debates is a master class in humiliating your opponent and undermining their claims of being a "policy wonk"-but Paul Ryan is a terrible debater and that will have been 8 years ago, so it's not worth much)
I didn’t mean hammer so much in the debating sense, more so that Trump will repeatedly interrupt and belittle Biden at just about any time where he does the trailing off “... err you know what mean thing I uh say” stuff.
As to whether or not it’ll make Biden look like a doddering old man, incite Biden to literally challenge Trump to some sort of fist fight (god almighty this is where the US is at,) or make Trump look like a bully who pushes around the old and infirm, I can’t say, but I doubt it’ll make a huge impact on the election in any case.
|
On April 13 2020 03:04 Zambrah wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2020 02:40 TheTenthDoc wrote:On April 12 2020 09:44 Zambrah wrote:On April 12 2020 08:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I definitely second the impression that biden's age is showing, been feeling that since he announced his candidacy.
I'd still vote for him against Trump without a second's hesitation or ill feeling about it, though. Trump wants everything to be about himself and his gut feeling is the primary motor behind his decision making process - I'd expect Biden to have a far more delegatory nature and his mental decline to be less of a big deal in how he performs his presidential duties. To me, it's more worrisome in terms of how likely he is to win the general election - when Biden was attacked for bis apparent senility in one of the debates, it seemed to play very poorly with the crowd, but Trump and the people surrounding him aren't gonna pull any punches at all. Yeah, Trump is going to HAMMER him in any debates, Biden is almost guaranteed to trail off into nothingness multiple times and Trump will probably throw some serious barbs his way.
That being said, I still don't think thats going to help Trump win. Trump won when noone knew how he'd perform, against an unfathomably unpopular candidate, after a full 8 year Democrat presidency, and he lost the popular vote. Im pretty sure nothing will change between now and election day when it comes to who people are voting for, camps are set, most people who are engaged are going to be impossible to budge from their anti-Trump or pro-Trump vote. Having watched the Trump/Clinton debates, this seems unlikely to me. Trump was and is a very, very bad debater, and the trends in polling for him were pretty bad in the aftermath of all the 2016 debates (even the primary ones IIRC). I think the "trail off into nothingness" meter will be at least equal for both and Trump descends into nonsense very quickly even when he has a script. That said, you're right that debates are just so far from election day and the news cycle has accelerated so much that their impact on actual votes is not likely to be very high. (also, for what it's worth I thought Biden did fantastic in the 2012 debates against Paul Ryan-watching those debates is a master class in humiliating your opponent and undermining their claims of being a "policy wonk"-but Paul Ryan is a terrible debater and that will have been 8 years ago, so it's not worth much) I didn’t mean hammer so much in the debating sense, more so that Trump will repeatedly interrupt and belittle Biden at just about any time where he does the trailing off “... err you know what mean thing I uh say” stuff. As to whether or not it’ll make Biden look like a doddering old man, incite Biden to literally challenge Trump to some sort of fist fight (god almighty this is where the US is at,) or make Trump look like a bully who pushes around the old and infirm, I can’t say, but I doubt it’ll make a huge impact on the election in any case.
Biden already called a voter fat and challenged him to a push up contest and talked about wanting to take Trump behind the barn, so yeah, Trump's definitely going to push his buttons much worse than that voter (or others he's grabbed or poked in the chest).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
