Let's talk about the Biden Harris campaign and what it means for us....
2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
AOC would be 42 by then, which is a good age for president (she probably wouldn’t try earlier anyway), or if Kamala loses in 2024, AOC can try in 28.
To be fair, she is the only leftist figure in the party that does not suck (not counting Bernie and Warren for the future for obvious reasons). Progressives have feck all to show and it is ridiculous how they have been unable to produce another national figure after Bernie.
No, none of that is remotely feasible or necessary.
No doubt. Heck, Obama is living large now, he wouldn't want to go back and help, even if he could.
Also, Clinton’s lead was never as big as this, nowhere near.I hope lightning doesn't strike twice!
People miss the point of polls. Being 3 points ahead with a poll that has a margin of error of 4 points is not the same as being 15 points ahead.
Unless unprecedented voter suppression happens, Biden is going to easily win.
Are these polls in the battleground states? It's one thing to be up in California but Biden needs to be way up in Florida, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania etc... That is the game Hilary bottled completely.
He's been a lot more active in the past few months - he played the biggest role on Feb 29, calling Pete and Amy (and maybe Beto), he gave the big speech at the funeral recently where he talked about policy, and has recently started a podcast with his wife, where they talked about problems like unenthusiastic young voters.
My outrageous prediction for this election is that Texas will go blue.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Or unless Biden produced an epic gaffe before November.
I’m guessing these websites are to be taken with a pinch of salt but this paints an encouraging picture.
https://projects.economist.com/us-2...Vg5yzCh1l9QFvEAAYASAAEgIeE_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
https://projects.economist.com/us-2...Vg5yzCh1l9QFvEAAYASAAEgIeE_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds
Short term maybe, but medium term (2024/28) and beyond there are many other things that can happen.
For climate change, there is a cast-iron gaurantee of zero meaningful climate action till 2028. There is a strong chance of a more refined version of Trumpism (Josh Hawley, Tucker Carlson) in 2024, and the Dems will not have Russia/covfefe type stuff to throw at them.
For me as a leftist, there is a cast-iron gaurantee of there being zero left power till 2028 at the earliest. For you it should be an equal choice, Trump will try and lower taxes and Biden will not raise them. AFAIK you don't have visa issues either.
I know it’s a big deal, but is it actually that outrageous a prediction at this point?
I hear Biden's climate policy is pretty good.
https://slate.com/business/2020/07/...an-is-the-green-new-deal-minus-the-crazy.html
Yeah. It was predicted two years ago (Beto vs Ted) and even 4 years ago. As always, the answer is one cycle later.
It doesn't matter though, if Biden wins Florida, it is game over (and that governor is helping Biden a lot).
He has pretty much embraced Green New Deal without saying so.
I thought Minnesota usually was a blue state. Is it leaning towards Trump now? That's a bit weird to me.
It is not. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/minnesota/
It is closer than it should be though.
Well Texas hasn’t been blue since 1976 so I’d say so. Trump’s team probably has that down as a sure thing.
Yes, apparently it was created in consultation with Jay Inslee.
I also like (unlike Bernie) that he didn't embrace the bullshit populism of no nuclear energy. I actually think that the easiest way to go away from coal/oil/gas energy is by fully embracing nuclear energy.
Yea like I say I know it’s a big deal, I’m just not sure it’s that outrageous a prediction given it’s been seemingly getting closer for a while now.
Anyway it’s not important, let’s just hope it happens. Along with Florida.
The one @Raoul posted is national
Didn't Bernie Sanders vote for that bill?
They will pay lip service to the real progressive actions in the Green New Deal, but you’re mad if you think this regime will actually embrace such things if they present any obstacle to economic recovery.
Talk is cheap.
The US gonna be crossing their worst economic crisis in 100 years. Whoever wins out of Trump/Biden, will wanna show short term economic growth. That means, fuel the machine.
I always thought that for 'the green' energy to have any chance of succeeding, it needs to make economic sense. Humans won't harm their economy for the stuff that will happen in 3 decades.
So yeah, I think we are screwed unless we make alternative energy cheap. Which is why I support nuclear energy, it is probably the one type of energy that we can scale and make it cheap. Of course, it does not need to be the only one, though at the same time it also does not need to be banned as Bernie wants (to be fair, his entire energy/anti-global warming sucked balls).
As I said, it does not need to be. You can have both.
Vote Jill SteinTalk is cheap.
The US gonna be crossing their worst economic crisis in 100 years. Whoever wins out of Trump/Biden, will wanna show short term economic growth. That means, fuel the machine.
Biden and Harris speeches were good imo. Felt a bit long-winded that might because there's no crowd to bounce off and the delivery comes across as matter of fact. Makes me wonder how someone as charismatic and flowing as Obama would have handled giving speeches met with pin drop silence. Some politicians are great campaigners while others hate campaigning but enjoy the work. This Covid-19 experiment of campaigning is a leveller.
I don't think anyone can predict medium term expectations that well. Nobody could have predicted Trump will be president and US will pull out of Paris agreement even just before last elections.
Looking at medium term is an exercise in futility mostly.
Looks like Twitter has got a new nickname for Harris
"Mamala"
"Mamala"
No bueno
Mamala Verga
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
She should use that time to say F U
DNC
Am puting off some work past 2 days so I had some time to dig into the data. Looked at Yougov from August 9, 2016, the most recent Yougov, and the 2016 exit poll. Looked at the swings within each group. THe problem for the 2016 Yougov was the large number of DK/3rd parties (especially Gary Johnson, who was at 10% most of which seems to have gone to Trump in November), so I excluded all that and looked at the 2-person vote only.
tl;dr - Clinton maxed out what a centrist can do among women, black, and young people. The swing is coming from men not women. Ths data from Hispanics is inconsistent. The age trend is weirder than I thought, the boomers are equal to the overall swing mostly, the big change is 45-64. OTOH, 30-45 are stagnant or leaving the party in significant numbers.
The most consistent effect is people earning over 100k, going from a roughly even split to 60% Biden.
Specualting - Bernie would be doing much worse with 45-64 and much better with 30-44, marginally worse with 65+. Much, much worse with >100k. Marginally better with 18-29, <50k and blacks and hispanics. Overall significanly worse but probably still in the lead.
tl;dr - Clinton maxed out what a centrist can do among women, black, and young people. The swing is coming from men not women. Ths data from Hispanics is inconsistent. The age trend is weirder than I thought, the boomers are equal to the overall swing mostly, the big change is 45-64. OTOH, 30-45 are stagnant or leaving the party in significant numbers.
The most consistent effect is people earning over 100k, going from a roughly even split to 60% Biden.
Specualting - Bernie would be doing much worse with 45-64 and much better with 30-44, marginally worse with 65+. Much, much worse with >100k. Marginally better with 18-29, <50k and blacks and hispanics. Overall significanly worse but probably still in the lead.
Hillary had a record (since FDR) winning margin in California which distorted her national numbers. Based off of primaries and history, while Biden will breeze through Cali he’s not winning to the degree she did. I have a longer post in here I’ll try to find that broke down numbers.
biden has better national numbers and less of a California skew than Hillary:both of those are good for him
Good fecking postAm puting off some work past 2 days so I had some time to dig into the data. Looked at Yougov from August 9, 2016, the most recent Yougov, and the 2016 exit poll. Looked at the swings within each group. THe problem for the 2016 Yougov was the large number of DK/3rd parties (especially Gary Johnson, who was at 10% most of which seems to have gone to Trump in November), so I excluded all that and looked at the 2-person vote only.
tl;dr - Clinton maxed out what a centrist can do among women, black, and young people. The swing is coming from men not women. Ths data from Hispanics is inconsistent. The age trend is weirder than I thought, the boomers are equal to the overall swing mostly, the big change is 45-64. OTOH, 30-45 are stagnant or leaving the party in significant numbers.
The most consistent effect is people earning over 100k, going from a roughly even split to 60% Biden.
Specualting - Bernie would be doing much worse with 45-64 and much better with 30-44, marginally worse with 65+. Much, much worse with >100k. Marginally better with 18-29, <50k and blacks and hispanics. Overall significanly worse but probably still in the lead.
- Status