2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.

SirAF

Ageist
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
37,619
Location
+ 3 in Texas for a Dem Presidential candidate is still pretty good, especially given that Hillary lost by 9 in 2016.
Definitely, that's pretty encouraging! At least enough to perhaps make TX interesting to keep an eye on come election night.
 

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
[
+ 3 in Texas for a Dem Presidential candidate is still pretty good, especially given that Hillary lost by 9 in 2016.
Hell Yea. Not entirely surprising given turnout and the likes of Kansas, Arizona and Georgia polling. But still great to see.

ps. +3 is a better poll for Biden than +10 really. You’d write off +10 as an outlier as it’s not in the realms of possibility, but +3 is very plausible.
 

SirAF

Ageist
Joined
Sep 28, 2003
Messages
37,619
Location
[


Hell Yea. Not entirely surprising given turnout and the likes of Kansas, Arizona and Georgia polling. But still great to see.

ps. +3 is a better poll for Biden than +10 really. You’d write off +10 as an outlier as it’s not in the realms of possibility, but +3 is very plausible.
Excellent point.
 

Frosty

Logical and sensible but turns women gay
Joined
Jan 11, 2007
Messages
17,225
Location
Yes I can hear you Clem Fandango!
Posted this earlier. Really useful resource. According to the map they begin counting early votes before election day.

https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/politics/mail-in-voting/
Thanks both, much appreciated.

I was just thinking if this is the case, then Biden could be called as winning Texas on election night. That would prevent any and all Trump legal shenanigans.
 

MTF

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
5,243
Location
New York City
Thanks both, much appreciated.

I was just thinking if this is the case, then Biden could be called as winning Texas on election night. That would prevent any and all Trump legal shenanigans.
if Biden were to win Texas, that would be cause for some major major celebrations...
 

The Firestarter

Full Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2010
Messages
28,206
Thanks both, much appreciated.

I was just thinking if this is the case, then Biden could be called as winning Texas on election night. That would prevent any and all Trump legal shenanigans.
The only chance for Darth Snort to try something is if it comes down to a single state. Anything more than and it seems unfeasible he can make even remotely credible case.
 

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
Thanks both, much appreciated.

I was just thinking if this is the case, then Biden could be called as winning Texas on election night. That would prevent any and all Trump legal shenanigans.
If he wins Texas or Georgia, it’s over
 

Charlie Foley

Full Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
18,360
FL polls are thankfully now more in line with my analysis and predictions here of the last few days. That was a bit clutch. Trash pollsters aren't good for nerves.



That's a shame. (not that you disagree, but that he's not respected in the legal sphere) - I assume Roberts is broadly respected? What of the other conservatives? (I know RBG respected Scalia, but nothing else)
Scalia was a funny one. He got voted in 98-0, which is mad looking back at now (RBG has similar numbers) though I believe that was hot on the heels of Rehnquist’s CJ appointment being hotly contested and there wasn’t much stomach for another fight. Despite his very conservative leanings he should be more respected, generally speaking, by the left than he is: he was undeniably a great writer, and if you compare him to another originalist like Thomas who’s just...a joke, one can see that. One major bone I have to pick with Scalia is regarding the Commerce Clause and Obamacare. Scalia was extremely knowledgable re CC and I think his concurrence in Raich is his peak on the matter. Unfortunately for him, following that precedent would have required him to upheld Obamacare (which legally is messy, so, so, messy): so he flipped all of a sudden with a pretty flimsy reasoning, and no longer stood by Wickard as precedent, which he had done in Raich.

Perhaps an unpopular but I never had time for Kennedy: I thought he was a poor writer. I was happy when his decisions favoured my political persuasions, sure, who wouldn’t, but I can’t deny his reasoning was often foggy and convoluted. With that in mind I have more time for Roberts and most in my circle do: he had gradually been moving to the centre anyway, and as he became the swing vote (for a bit) he understood what that meant. I also think he respects the significance of his role as Chief Justice. A lot of that is subjective sure, but I think that’s the case. Massive cop out re gerrymandering though
.
Alito is brutal. I don’t know what else to add. Partisan hack. Seems to hate the first amendment, which I love pointing out the my conservative uncle who knows a lot less than he thinks about all this.

Gorsuch is quite highly regarded as a writer and thinker: his positions on labour law are absolute dick, however, but his stance re tribal rights is great stuff. Shouldn’t have made it to the SC when he did, poor Merrick Garland, but far and away the best appointment under Trump even if what lead to his appointment was a national and constitutional disgrace.

lastly Kavanaugh, he has a career of decisions I disagree with, but I don’t know what he’s at re the election cases: the Vermont gaffe is embarrassing, and he’s going back to some dangerous shit in Rehnquist’s Bush v Gore concurrence (and quoting lines from pieces that disagree with him)which couldn’t get a majority even then. Actually, the fact that he, a conservative, is harking back to that fecking case with its “disclaimer” of “this is to only apply just this one time” would almost be funny if it wasn’t so serious

As for the libs, Kagan is arguably the leading intellectual, though Sotomayor is now certainly the most passionate. It took a while to work Kagan out given she took a long time to write many separate opinions, but she’s probably the easiest for a non-lawyer to read without missing out on something either through over complication or over simplification; I believe her academic background helps in that regard. Re Breyer, as I am not an originalist I appreciate his frequent criticisms of the concept.
 
  • Like
Reactions: langster

Fridge chutney

Full Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2016
Messages
8,924
If Trump loses Texas, it's over for him. I wonder how he could lose? I thought Texas was heavily red (other than Austin).
 

Drifter

American
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
68,344
If Trump loses Texas, it's over for him. I wonder how he could lose? I thought Texas was heavily red (other than Austin).
Texas as been changing for years now and will continue to do so. People are moving there from other states, and they're bringing their liberal views with them, plus there is a growing voter registration of Latino, Asian, Black voters, while there is a decline in white voters. It may not go blue in this cycle, but eventually it will.
 

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
Scalia was a funny one. He got voted in 98-0, which is mad looking back at now (RBG has similar numbers) though I believe that was hot on the heels of Rehnquist’s CJ appointment being hotly contested and there wasn’t much stomach for another fight. Despite his very conservative leanings he should be more respected, generally speaking, by the left than he is: he was undeniably a great writer, and if you compare him to another originalist like Thomas who’s just...a joke, one can see that. One major bone I have to pick with Scalia is regarding the Commerce Clause and Obamacare. Scalia was extremely knowledgable re CC and I think his concurrence in Raich is his peak on the matter. Unfortunately for him, following that precedent would have required him to upheld Obamacare (which legally is messy, so, so, messy): so he flipped all of a sudden with a pretty flimsy reasoning, and no longer stood by Wickard as precedent, which he had done in Raich.

Perhaps an unpopular but I never had time for Kennedy: I thought he was a poor writer. I was happy when his decisions favoured my political persuasions, sure, who wouldn’t, but I can’t deny his reasoning was often foggy and convoluted. With that in mind I have more time for Roberts and most in my circle do: he had gradually been moving to the centre anyway, and as he became the swing vote (for a bit) he understood what that meant. I also think he respects the significance of his role as Chief Justice. A lot of that is subjective sure, but I think that’s the case. Massive cop out re gerrymandering though
.
Alito is brutal. I don’t know what else to add. Partisan hack. Seems to hate the first amendment, which I love pointing out the my conservative uncle who knows a lot less than he thinks about all this.

Gorsuch is quite highly regarded as a writer and thinker: his positions on labour law are absolute dick, however, but his stance re tribal rights is great stuff. Shouldn’t have made it to the SC when he did, poor Merrick Garland, but far and away the best appointment under Trump even if what lead to his appointment was a national and constitutional disgrace.

lastly Kavanaugh, he has a career of decisions I disagree with, but I don’t know what he’s at re the election cases: the Vermont gaffe is embarrassing, and he’s going back to some dangerous shit in Rehnquist’s Bush v Gore concurrence (and quoting lines from pieces that disagree with him)which couldn’t get a majority even then. Actually, the fact that he, a conservative, is harking back to that fecking case with its “disclaimer” of “this is to only apply just this one time” would almost be funny if it wasn’t so serious

As for the libs, Kagan is arguably the leading intellectual, though Sotomayor is now certainly the most passionate. It took a while to work Kagan out given she took a long time to write many separate opinions, but she’s probably the easiest for a non-lawyer to read without missing out on something either through over complication or over simplification; I believe her academic background helps in that regard. Re Breyer, as I am not an originalist I appreciate his frequent criticisms of the concept.
brilliant stuff, thanks. I read a summary of the freezing truck driver case and wrote gorsuch off as a textualist hypocrit.

do you see Roberts voting with the majority always now in order to write the opinions as narrowly as possible on key subjects?

Texas as been changing for years now and will continue to do so. People are moving there from other states, and they're bringing their liberal views with them, plus there is a growing voter registration of Latino, Asian, Black voters, while there is a decline in white voters. It may not go blue in this cycle, but eventually it will.
seen this media narrative loads (so not having a go at you). I find it both lazy and inaccurate
 

WI_Red

Redcafes Most Rested
Joined
May 20, 2018
Messages
12,125
Location
No longer in WI
Supports
Atlanta United
Scalia was a funny one. He got voted in 98-0, which is mad looking back at now (RBG has similar numbers) though I believe that was hot on the heels of Rehnquist’s CJ appointment being hotly contested and there wasn’t much stomach for another fight. Despite his very conservative leanings he should be more respected, generally speaking, by the left than he is: he was undeniably a great writer, and if you compare him to another originalist like Thomas who’s just...a joke, one can see that. One major bone I have to pick with Scalia is regarding the Commerce Clause and Obamacare. Scalia was extremely knowledgable re CC and I think his concurrence in Raich is his peak on the matter. Unfortunately for him, following that precedent would have required him to upheld Obamacare (which legally is messy, so, so, messy): so he flipped all of a sudden with a pretty flimsy reasoning, and no longer stood by Wickard as precedent, which he had done in Raich.

Perhaps an unpopular but I never had time for Kennedy: I thought he was a poor writer. I was happy when his decisions favoured my political persuasions, sure, who wouldn’t, but I can’t deny his reasoning was often foggy and convoluted. With that in mind I have more time for Roberts and most in my circle do: he had gradually been moving to the centre anyway, and as he became the swing vote (for a bit) he understood what that meant. I also think he respects the significance of his role as Chief Justice. A lot of that is subjective sure, but I think that’s the case. Massive cop out re gerrymandering though
.
Alito is brutal. I don’t know what else to add. Partisan hack. Seems to hate the first amendment, which I love pointing out the my conservative uncle who knows a lot less than he thinks about all this.

Gorsuch is quite highly regarded as a writer and thinker: his positions on labour law are absolute dick, however, but his stance re tribal rights is great stuff. Shouldn’t have made it to the SC when he did, poor Merrick Garland, but far and away the best appointment under Trump even if what lead to his appointment was a national and constitutional disgrace.

lastly Kavanaugh, he has a career of decisions I disagree with, but I don’t know what he’s at re the election cases: the Vermont gaffe is embarrassing, and he’s going back to some dangerous shit in Rehnquist’s Bush v Gore concurrence (and quoting lines from pieces that disagree with him)which couldn’t get a majority even then. Actually, the fact that he, a conservative, is harking back to that fecking case with its “disclaimer” of “this is to only apply just this one time” would almost be funny if it wasn’t so serious

As for the libs, Kagan is arguably the leading intellectual, though Sotomayor is now certainly the most passionate. It took a while to work Kagan out given she took a long time to write many separate opinions, but she’s probably the easiest for a non-lawyer to read without missing out on something either through over complication or over simplification; I believe her academic background helps in that regard. Re Breyer, as I am not an originalist I appreciate his frequent criticisms of the concept.
Thank you for this. This falls in line mostly with what my sister (a corporate attorney) has said. I will need to read her your take on Alito as she will get a kick out of it (very in line with her thoughts). He take on Kavanaugh, once you get past the disgusting nature of the man, is that he is also a partisan hack. She cited his flip flopping back and forth on whether a president can be sued from Clinton to Bush to Obama to Trump. I bet you can guess when he flipped and when he flopped.
 

InfiniteBoredom

Full Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2013
Messages
13,657
Location
Melbourne
Demographic isn’t really the key issue with Texas, R’s edge in registration and the brutal voting restrictions are. It’s a non-voting state, so the latest developments are encouraging.

Personally, I think it will be reverse Nevada for a couple more elections before turning blue, where the edge in registration and the pool of committed likely voters help Rs build a slim but unassailable lead. However, if Biden is truly winning +12 then statistically it’s possible, those votes can’t all come from CA.
 

Abizzz

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
7,636
If Trump loses Texas, it's over for him. I wonder how he could lose? I thought Texas was heavily red (other than Austin).
If he is to lose it it might as well be the biggest best greatest finest most powerful loss ever ever ever. No other Republican could lose Texas! Trust me, Bush tried, they knew Bush, still couldn't lose! Lying Ted tried it, couldn't do it. No one knows as much about losses!
 

owlo

Full Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2015
Messages
3,252
Demographic isn’t really the key issue with Texas, R’s edge in registration and the brutal voting restrictions are. It’s a non-voting state, so the latest developments are encouraging.

Personally, I think it will be reverse Nevada for a couple more elections before turning blue, where the edge in registration and the pool of committed likely voters help Rs build a slim but unassailable lead. However, if Biden is truly winning +12 then statistically it’s possible, those votes can’t all come from CA.
This is the root of Abbott and his suppression. He absolutely cannot afford for the Texas legislature to go blue. This means depressing turnout as much as he can, as often as he can.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,634
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days
How many states aren’t actually in play for Biden at this point?
 

ThierryHenry

wishes he could watch Arsenal games with KM
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
13,716
Location
London Town
4/9 odds for Biden look far too low based on this thread, and 538.

Am I wrong? Would anyone else jump in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.