The US Presidential election prediction thread

[NotThePars]

4 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

I literally talked about the electoral college and voter suppression being the only thing keeping the Republicans in the game in the following paragraph and how by 2030 they will be toast because of demographic change. Did you bother reading the whole message before hitting reply?

Trump should have been road kill in 2016 after many of the things he said and did. The Democrats had fixed their primary process to ensure candidates favored by party bigwigs would win pretty much no matter what by having superdelegates. There was a mood for radical change in the electorate in 2016 rather than backing the establishment. They should have backed Bernie Sanders.

Hell, if Obama hadn't stopped Biden from making a run then he probably would've won as well. Hillary was shit but it did also partially come down to her campaign's steadfast refusal to break with the algorithm and campaign in swing districts.

[aDONisSheep]

4 hours ago, NotThePars said:

Hell, if Obama hadn't stopped Biden from making a run then he probably would've won as well. Hillary was shit but it did also partially come down to her campaign's steadfast refusal to break with the algorithm and campaign in swing districts.

God it sounds like I'm some sort of Hilary apologist, but I don't see where this confidence that Biden would easily have won comes from.

Hilary was first choice of nearly 46% of Democrat members, Biden was on 17%.  Now there were certainly mitigating factors.  Biden only had a shadow campaign because he wasn't on the trail whilst Beau was terminally ill in hospital.  Completely understandable and a shyt state of affairs.

This is also not a dig a Biden, who by all accounts is known for being one of the nicest people you'll ever meet (let alone a politician).  Be that from Michelle Obama or Lindsay Graham. 

What worries me, is that I think we (being us, the more left leaning or liberal) are falling into the same trap as we did four years ago.

Once again we seem to think that we can villainise the likes of Trump, point out how abhorrent an individual he is, call his supporters cooks, deplorables, racists and worse, as though that logic will be enough to win the day.  Trump was seen as an absolute joke candidate in 2016, be that late night comics, politicians (Obama included) and (most) political commentators. The end result, he tapped into fears and insecurities and became the most powerful man on the planet (we need to properly address those fears and insecurities, not just dismiss them out of hand).

 This notion that any other candidate would have walked 2016 because of how abhorrent Trump was/is, is flawed.  Build the wall, mexican rapists and drug smugglers, grabbing pussy, mountains of bullshit, didn't stop him in 2016 and in 2020 we had all of the above plus a literal tsunami of dead americans, it still didn't deter 74m+ people from voting for him.

Politics is becoming more polarised, and we (the left) are not helping ourselves by constantly calling anyone that votes Tory/Republican racist or stupid.  It doesn't change their minds, at best it just silences them till they vote.  

Calling Trump/Boris/Tories/Brexit voters etc cnvts is fun for a while, but it doesn't stop them getting elected.

Yours, christ I'm depressed.

aDONis

Edited November 21, 2020 by aDONisSheep

[welshbairn]

Hope you don't mind if I briefly celebrate a defeat for the dark side for the first election for a while, before I get all maudlin again..

Edited November 21, 2020 by welshbairn

[Granny Danger]

Republican Federal Judge from Pennsylvania rejects Trump lawsuit and blasts Giuliani.

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened," Brann added. "Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence."

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/21/politics/federal-judge-dismisses-trump-pennsylvania-lawsuit/index.html

 

[welshbairn]

Hopefully this takes off and it's not just the Dems being naughty.

https://www.newsweek.com/georgia-trump-supporters-destroy-gop-boycott-senate-runoffs-1549245

[RiG]

Trump and his supporters now *checks notes* claiming that a Wikipedia article being edited a certain way helps to back up their case.

ETA: I think this is the equivalent of being SLAPPED DOWN in court:

https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/147/127057/15517440654.pdf

Quote

Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise almost seven million voters. This Court has been unable to find any case in which a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.

That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative
complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its
sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 

and

Quote

Plaintiffs’ only remaining claim alleges a violation of equal protection. This claim, like Frankenstein’s Monster, has been haphazardly stitched together from two distinct theories in an attempt to avoid controlling precedent.

Ouch!

Edited November 22, 2020 by RiG

[AMMjag]

On 21/11/2020 at 16:00, aDONisSheep said:

God it sounds like I'm some sort of Hilary apologist, but I don't see where this confidence that Biden would easily have won comes from.

Hilary was first choice of nearly 46% of Democrat members, Biden was on 17%.  Now there were certainly mitigating factors.  Biden only had a shadow campaign because he wasn't on the trail whilst Beau was terminally ill in hospital.  Completely understandable and a shyt state of affairs.

This is also not a dig a Biden, who by all accounts is known for being one of the nicest people you'll ever meet (let alone a politician).  Be that from Michelle Obama or Lindsay Graham. 

What worries me, is that I think we (being us, the more left leaning or liberal) are falling into the same trap as we did four years ago.

Once again we seem to think that we can villainise the likes of Trump, point out how abhorrent an individual he is, call his supporters cooks, deplorables, racists and worse, as though that logic will be enough to win the day.  Trump was seen as an absolute joke candidate in 2016, be that late night comics, politicians (Obama included) and (most) political commentators. The end result, he tapped into fears and insecurities and became the most powerful man on the planet (we need to properly address those fears and insecurities, not just dismiss them out of hand).

 This notion that any other candidate would have walked 2016 because of how abhorrent Trump was/is, is flawed.  Build the wall, mexican rapists and drug smugglers, grabbing pussy, mountains of bullshit, didn't stop him in 2016 and in 2020 we had all of the above plus a literal tsunami of dead americans, it still didn't deter 74m+ people from voting for him.

Politics is becoming more polarised, and we (the left) are not helping ourselves by constantly calling anyone that votes Tory/Republican racist or stupid.  It doesn't change their minds, at best it just silences them till they vote.  

Calling Trump/Boris/Tories/Brexit voters etc cnvts is fun for a while, but it doesn't stop them getting elected.

Yours, christ I'm depressed.

aDONis

I agree with the gist of this in that there's absolutely nothing in the way of another Trump, or something worse, coming along next time. 

Whether aware of it or not, he, and Brexit gammonry here, have occupied a space vacated by a decades-long lack of any strong alternative voice or movement on issues like capitalism, immigration, security, national identity or whatever, where populism or the option of throwing a grenade into political establishment will generally win the day. In the UK, this has looked something like:

'I'm a Labour man because my dad was a Labour man' > 'Labour left me but I'll still vote for the waster in a red rosette anyway' > vote for Brexit > 'get Brexit done'. 

That doesn't mean you can't call a spade a spade, or a racist a racist though, which they and those responsible for their ascension into political relevance quite clearly are -or at least have willfully ignored the fascist overtones of their respective movements because "that'll show them". I'd rather occupy a minority and call them what they are than give them any credit for it.

 

Edited November 22, 2020 by AMMjag

[Fullerene]

3 hours ago, AMMjag said:

I agree with the gist of this in that there's absolutely nothing in the way of another Trump, or something worse, coming along next time. 

Whether aware of it or not, he, and Brexit gammonry here, have occupied a space vacated by a decades-long lack of any strong alternative voice or movement on issues like capitalism, immigration, security, national identity or whatever, where populism or the option of throwing a grenade into political establishment will generally win the day. In the UK, this has looked something like:

'I'm a Labour man because my dad was a Labour man' > 'Labour left me but I'll still vote for the waster in a red rosette anyway' > vote for Brexit > 'get Brexit done'. 

That doesn't mean you can't call a spade a spade, or a racist a racist though, which they and those responsible for their ascension into political relevance quite clearly are -or at least have willfully ignored the fascist overtones of their respective movements because "that'll show them". I'd rather occupy a minority and call them what they are than give them any credit for it.

Yes.  A case of "I'm angry with the current situation.  I want change".  Then change is offered up by the very people that you are angry with.  A masterclass in deflection.

[Granny Danger]

Emily Murphy, who is refusing as yet to recognise Biden as President elect and therefore not releasing funds, seems to have a questionable relationship with Trump.

This from The New York Review.  If true it is definitely corrupt and probably illegal.

“Murphy has a sordid history in the Trump administration. As I recounted in my July 2 piece for the Review, she cancelled a long-planned relocation of the FBI’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. Circumstances suggest she may have been satisfying a desire on the part of President Trump to avoid opening real estate near his Washington, D.C., hotel that a competing hotel could acquire. Trump leases the government’s Old Post Office building from Murphy’s agency for his hotel, which sits less than a block from the J. Edgar Hoover building that houses FBI headquarters.

Murphy has declined to discuss a meeting with President Trump at the White House shortly before the cancellation. She refused to answer questions about it posed by the GSA’s inspector general, who noted that her testimony in an April 2018 hearing before Congress may have “left the misleading impression that she had no discussions with the President or senior White House officials in the decision-making process about the project.”

[Thistle_do_nicely]

On 21/11/2020 at 16:00, aDONisSheep said:

God it sounds like I'm some sort of Hilary apologist, but I don't see where this confidence that Biden would easily have won comes from.

Hilary was first choice of nearly 46% of Democrat members, Biden was on 17%.  Now there were certainly mitigating factors.  Biden only had a shadow campaign because he wasn't on the trail whilst Beau was terminally ill in hospital.  Completely understandable and a shyt state of affairs.

This is also not a dig a Biden, who by all accounts is known for being one of the nicest people you'll ever meet (let alone a politician).  Be that from Michelle Obama or Lindsay Graham. 

What worries me, is that I think we (being us, the more left leaning or liberal) are falling into the same trap as we did four years ago.

Once again we seem to think that we can villainise the likes of Trump, point out how abhorrent an individual he is, call his supporters cooks, deplorables, racists and worse, as though that logic will be enough to win the day.  Trump was seen as an absolute joke candidate in 2016, be that late night comics, politicians (Obama included) and (most) political commentators. The end result, he tapped into fears and insecurities and became the most powerful man on the planet (we need to properly address those fears and insecurities, not just dismiss them out of hand).

 This notion that any other candidate would have walked 2016 because of how abhorrent Trump was/is, is flawed.  Build the wall, mexican rapists and drug smugglers, grabbing pussy, mountains of bullshit, didn't stop him in 2016 and in 2020 we had all of the above plus a literal tsunami of dead americans, it still didn't deter 74m+ people from voting for him.

Politics is becoming more polarised, and we (the left) are not helping ourselves by constantly calling anyone that votes Tory/Republican racist or stupid.  It doesn't change their minds, at best it just silences them till they vote.  

Calling Trump/Boris/Tories/Brexit voters etc cnvts is fun for a while, but it doesn't stop them getting elected.

Yours, christ I'm depressed.

aDONis

you know i have wondered about what on earth is going to go wrong at the next US election (I know Trump is still clinging on for dear life but I'm working on the assumption he eventually gets dragged out within a few months) - are the Dems and Republicans going to recognise how unbelievably dangerous it is to dog whistle to the extent of refusing to concede after an election (edit: I just noticed I lumped them both in together there which isn't really fair as a cursory glance at The $400 Million Dollar In Debt Man's twitter shows), or are they going to form an entente cordial once Trump is finished off? BLM and the Lafeyette Square truncheoning highlights how paper thin US society is becoming and if they don't at least keep up a pretence of civility after an election then its only going to get worse and nastier, probably to the extent of party officials being targeted for violence.

Could be that the damage is done at this point. Think as a hot take that agreeing to change from the electoral college shambles to something a little more representative with both parties committing to it could help undo some of it but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Edited November 22, 2020 by Thistle_do_nicely

[carpetmonster]

Emily Murphy doesn’t exist; it’s Barr in an NHS chemotherapy wig. 

[RiG]

On 20/11/2020 at 16:36, RiG said:

Sidney Powell seems like a batshit mental lunatic as well. She's a full blown conspiracy theorist who genuinely thinks that voting results had been transmitted to the German office of the Spanish firm Scytl, where they were tabulated to reveal a landslide victory for Trump, and that a company server had been seized in a raid by the United States military.

The GOP and their supporters have been completely overrun by Q Anon, Alex Jones types and it's absolutely bizarre to see them all disappearing down the same rabbit hole.

Sidney Powell has been removed from the Trump legal team

[Granny Danger]

1 hour ago, RiG said:

Sidney Powell has been removed from the Trump legal team

Too crazy for Giuliani is some achievement TBF.

[RiG]

Jenna Ellis seems a bit nutty as well:

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq?s=20

In other news here is Jenna Ellis slating Trump back in 2016 saying his values are not American. I guess enough money was flashed to make her rescind that opinion.

https://www.facebook.com/JennaEllisEsq45/posts/1667041533548434

[madwullie]

13 minutes ago, RiG said:

Jenna Ellis seems a bit nutty as well:

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq?s=20

In other news here is Jenna Ellis slating Trump back in 2016 saying his values are not American. I guess enough money was flashed to make her rescind that opinion.

https://www.facebook.com/JennaEllisEsq45/posts/1667041533548434

Values don't get much more American than that

[NotThePars]

Jenna Ellis seems a bit nutty as well:

https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq?s=20

In other news here is Jenna Ellis slating Trump back in 2016 saying his values are not American. I guess enough money was flashed to make her rescind that opinion.

https://www.facebook.com/JennaEllisEsq45/posts/1667041533548434

It’s like Jennifer Rubin pivoting from anti-Obama WaPo opinion writer to Democrat reply girl, Ian Miles Cheong going from anti-Gamergate to alt-right and Diamond and Silk doing their thing. It’s all one big grift. The American way, baby! Snake oils salesmen believing their own cure.

[welshbairn]

It's not just the loony conspiracy theories, they're literally just making up shit. This isn't about Giuliani mistaking Michigan for Minnesota, it's the numbers themselves.

Quote

For example, the affidavit cites Minnesota’s Benville Township as having 350% voter turnout, which would be by far the largest over-voting rate alleged in the document. Both Giuliani and Trump lawyer Sidney Powell cited the 350% figure in the Nov. 19 press conference. 

However, according to the Minnesota Secretary of State’s election data, 63 people voted in the township, and 71 were registered to vote, a turnout rate of 89%. 

 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/nov/20/rudy-giuliani/giuliani-cites-affidavit-crucial-errors-press-conf/

 

It's actually a testament to how solid the American electoral system is that they have to do this,  you'd have thought there would be countless glitches and clerical fuckups, along with some fraud to dig up if they looked hard enough, in a system so vast and diverse.

 

Edited November 23, 2020 by welshbairn

[RiG]

Their "evidence" seems to be a load of affidavits. That's it. It's utterly piss weak.

I enjoyed the statement in response to the judge laughing them out of the Pennsylvanian court room whcih tried to dress up the dismissal of their joke of a case as a good thing as it meant they could quickly take it to the Supreme Court. Given that you cannot lodge new evidence at the SC, and they have none to speak of right now, I can't wait to see how that goes even with the Republican leaning judges that are there.

ETA: Going back to Powell, she was cut by Trump because Tucker Carlson was critical of her on TV. Incredible!

Edited November 23, 2020 by RiG

[madwullie]

5 hours ago, RiG said:

Their "evidence" seems to be a load of affidavits. That's it. It's utterly piss weak.

I enjoyed the statement in response to the judge laughing them out of the Pennsylvanian court room whcih tried to dress up the dismissal of their joke of a case as a good thing as it meant they could quickly take it to the Supreme Court. Given that you cannot lodge new evidence at the SC, and they have none to speak of right now, I can't wait to see how that goes even with the Republican leaning judges that are there.

ETA: Going back to Powell, she was cut by Trump because Tucker Carlson was critical of her on TV. Incredible!

Nutters on twitter being all darkly knowing and saying she's split from the campaign team so she can properly show the real evidence the main team can't. Just wait etc 

No it didn't make any sense to me either. 

[NotThePars]