• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US Presidential Election 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thucydides said:
A British view on the debates. It is interesting to see their take on this,

Right.

BBC News

Presidential debate: How the world's media reacted

UK
As The Times in the UK wrote, "The clearest loser from the first presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden was America."

The paper went further, saying the event "was not a debate in any meaningful sense" but rather "an ill-tempered and at times incomprehensible squabble between two angry septuagenarians who palpably loathe each other".

"The rest of the world - and future historians - will presumably look at it and weep," the paper wrote, adding that Mr Biden was the only man who looked "remotely presidential" on the stage and  "saying that if Mr Trump was re-elected in November, this dark, horrifying, unwatchable fever dream will surely be the first line of America's obituary."

The Financial Times highlighted how the president had stoked lies about voter fraud and urged his supporters to carefully watch polling stations. "'Dog-whistling' is the politico-speak for such language, but it implies subtlety. Mr Trump was blatant," it wrote.

The paper also noted that snap polls after the event said Mr Biden had come out on top. "But no one with a care for American democracy can have switched off feeling anything but queasy."

That's for the UK only. France, Germany, Italy, Russia, China, and India are also in the BBC News report,
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54354405

Glad I tuned into Sons of Anarchy instead.  :)



 
The Biden campaign is pulling all their negative ads.

https://politicalwire.com/2020/10/02/biden-pulls-all-negative-ads/
 
So a few polls and trends are emerging post debate.  I mentioned watching the betting houses as good indicator of how things are going.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/predictive-markets-bet-on-biden-victory-post-debate-as-trumps-momentum-evaporates-210249771.html

538 is showing a slight bump in favour of Biden post debate.

Of course none of this included recent events surrounding Trump being hospitalized with COVID.

 
New Jersey's Department of Homeland Security's put together some scenarios of what could happen come election time as part of their most recent threat assessment - FTO's are Foreign Terrorist Organizations.
 

Attachments

  • njdhs-2020electionscenariospage.pdf
    923.7 KB · Views: 16
Nate Silver comments on how not wanting to get a stimulus package going might be a bad move for Trump.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-economy-was-trumps-one-remaining-advantage-now-he-might-have-blown-it/
 
Remius said:
Nate Silver comments on how not wanting to get a stimulus package going might be a bad move for Trump.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-economy-was-trumps-one-remaining-advantage-now-he-might-have-blown-it/
In other words, bribe, don't threaten.
 
And now he’s backtracking saying it needs to get done.

He’s pretty erratic on a good day but this is getting really out of hand.

 
Latest poll results.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/

Nothing too surprising except the Rasmussen poll.  Generally one of the only ones giving Trump the  edge.

Except today.  Biden leads by 10pts in that poll.

Rasmussen is often tweeted by Trump.  Or supporters point to it as well. 

Even if you don’t believe in polls (I assure they real and exist) this has to have the Trump campaign worried.
 
[quote author=Remius]

Even if you don’t believe in polls (I assure they real and exist) this has to have the Trump campaign worried.
[/quote]

Trump seems to be doing better in the polls than he did in 2016 don't you think?
 
Jarnhamar said:
Trump seems to be doing better in the polls than he did in 2016 don't you think?

Best viewed at the site, as graphs are informative.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/10/06/yes-clinton-also-had-big-lead-2016-this-isnt-2016/


Yes, Clinton also had a big lead in 2016 — but this isn’t 2016

By
Philip Bump
Oct. 6, 2020 at 12:38 p.m. EDT

You don’t often see the number 57 percent in national, late-presidential-election polling. Maybe when measuring support among some demographic group, but not overall. The last time a presidential candidate received at least 57 percent of the actual vote was in 1984, when Ronald Reagan’s reelection bid earned him more than 500 electoral votes. Things like that don’t really happen anymore.

And yet here was CNN and its polling partners at SSRS, releasing a poll Tuesday morning showing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden leading President Trump by 16 points, with Biden earning the support of 57 percent of respondents. Now, in hyper-polarized 2020, CNN’s poll has Biden getting nearly 6 in 10 votes nationally. To call this surprising is an understatement.

It didn’t take long for people to dump cold water on enthusiastic Biden supporters. In mid-October 2016, after all, CBS News released a poll showing Hillary Clinton leading Trump by 14 points — and we know how that turned out. The central lesson from 2016 for many observers was that things can change dramatically and rapidly, and nothing should be taken for granted.

Which is true, in the broadest sense of that advice. But it is also important to recognize that the 2020 race has not generally mirrored the race in 2016. It’s important to recognize that Trump is now in a much worse position than he was four years ago, parallels aside.

The story of the 2016 race was wild swings in support. That Clinton led Trump was consistent, but the margin of that lead varied widely. In the last 150 days of the contest, the range of margins between Clinton and Trump spread across more than 10 percentage points. It was a sine curve, with Clinton seeing wider and narrower leads over the course of the year. The race ended with a narrower lead — narrow enough that Trump wrung an electoral college victory out of the contest.

By contrast, the 2020 race has been remarkably stable. Biden’s lead has never been less than six points or more than 10 points. It’s just a steady lead, as unaffected by the wild events of the year as the Rock of Gibraltar is obviously unaffected by a storm in the Mediterranean.

Image without a caption
(Most of the polls and charts in this article use FiveThirtyEight’s much-appreciated historic and current polling average data.)

The stability of the margins in the 2020 race has been remarkable, even in the context of the past five elections. In 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012 and 2016, there was at some point a tie in the polling average in the last 150 days of the race.

Not this year. This year, there hasn’t even been a moment in which Biden’s lead was as narrow as five points.

Image without a caption
Margins can be deceptive. That CBS News poll showing Clinton with a 14-point lead isn’t really comparable with the new CNN poll in part because her support in it was 52 percent. The issue for Trump wasn’t that Clinton was outpacing him, it was that 38 percent of voters planned to support him in that moment. Clinton had a big lead but relatively modest support.

Biden’s 57 percent support is much more robust. While CNN’s poll is currently an outlier (though, of course, that could change), the gap between Biden’s support and Trump’s is consistent with past polls from this cycle.

If we look at the average levels of support for the candidates in FiveThirtyEight’s data, we see a massive gap between Trump and Biden in 2020. Normally, the range of support seen by the candidates has some overlap, meaning that one candidate’s highest level of support is higher than the other candidate’s lowest level of support. In 2020, that hasn’t been the case.

In FiveThirtyEight’s average, Biden’s never been below 49.5 percent support in the last 150 days of the race, and Trump’s never been above 43.6 — a nearly six-point gap.

Image without a caption
So what happened in 2016? Well, for one thing, there were more solid third-party candidates. For another, there was a much bigger pool of undecided voters. The two races in which we’ve seen recent splits between the popular vote and the electoral vote were in 2000 and 2016, years with stronger third-party candidates and more undecided voters late in the election.

In 2020, that’s not the case. Measuring the level of third-party support or undecided voters in the FiveThirtyEight average, we see that about 6 to 7 percent of voters fall into one of those categories. Most voters have made up their minds — as would make sense, given how polarized views of Trump are — and there’s not much of an untapped pool of voters for either campaign to tap into.

Image without a caption
Trump trails in FiveThirtyEight’s average by more than eight points right now and only a bit more than 6 percent of the electorate is undecided or leaning third-party. That’s a problem for the incumbent.

Another problem is that the undecided voters are probably less likely to give him the benefit of the doubt than they were four years ago. One metric I’ve looked at frequently is how voters who dislike both candidates plan to vote. In 2016, Trump won that group on Election Day by 17 points. That was enough to make the difference in the three states that gave him his electoral college lead. This year, though, Biden has consistently led Trump among voters who view both him and Trump unfavorably — and led him by more than 20 points.

Here, too, though, there’s a difference from 2016: Biden’s favorability with voters is substantially better than was Clinton’s four years ago.

That captures one part of a bigger story of how 2016 and 2020 differ: that there have been remarkable swings in how demographic groups view Trump. For example, voters 65 and older have preferred the Republican to the Democrat in each of the past four presidential elections. It’s a group that votes heavily and made up an important part of Trump’s 2016 support.

Polling this year (including from The Washington Post and our partners at ABC News) show Biden with an advantage among older voters. He led by five points in our recent poll, which had Biden up 10 points overall. In CNN’s new poll, Biden leads among older voters by 21 points.

And then there’s support among women.

Image without a caption
Women have consistently voted more heavily for Democratic candidates in recent elections, but not by the margins we’re seeing in current polls. In the Post-ABC poll, women prefer Biden by 31 points. In CNN’s poll, the spread is 34 points. In 2016, Clinton won women by 13 points. And women make up more of the electorate than do men.

Now we get to the giant asterisk that’s been floating over 2020 polling like the Goodyear blimp: National polls don’t matter in a contest decided in state-to-state fights. And that’s obviously true, as both Clinton and Trump would be happy to inform you.

Trump’s position in state polling is better than his national position, even relative to 2016. Biden still leads in nearly every swing state, as we’ve written, but his leads might be subject to polling error, which could mean narrower victories than expected or repeat Trump victories.

Last month, we created this interactive, using current averages to compare state and national polling this year with years past. Explore. (On the interactive below, the arrows at right show the actual final vote margin.)

Show
National
average, including

1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992
1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016

With 78 days to go:

In 2000, the Democrat led by 1.3 points.
In 2004, the Democrat led by 2.3 points.
In 2008, the Democrat led by 1.6 points.
In 2012, the Republican led by 0.1 points.
In 2016, the Democrat led by 5.7 points.

In 2020, the Democrat led by 8.4 points.

The problem with having a blimp sitting over your head is that things which might in reality be pretty clear become shadowy. If every polling average is right on the money, no average changes before the election, and voters are able to cast votes as though there wasn’t a pandemic ensnaring the country, Trump would lose the 2020 election in dramatic fashion.

But none of those three things can be assumed. What we can say, with confidence, is that Biden is in much better position now than Clinton was four years ago. No one who watched 2016, though, should be willing to assume much more than that.
 
Remius said:
Even if you don’t believe in polls (I assure they real and exist) this has to have the Trump campaign worried.

I'm not as politically savvy as some. But, I find it pretty hard to see how "the Dems" have a hope in heck of getting him out of the White House.

MacLean's
By David Frum
October 7, 2020

If everyone eligible to vote is allowed to vote, if every vote legally cast is counted—then Trump is doomed. His only hope is to find some way to stop the voting, stop the count, and then rely on the weird mechanics of the U.S. Electoral College to save him, against the people’s vote.

Barton Gellman reported in the Atlantic in September that the Trump team is working with officials in Republican-held states to set aside vote counts altogether—and instead authorize state legislatures to choose the state’s electors. If this scheme proves unfeasible, the Trump team has in mind a series of smaller finagles: arbitrarily stopping vote counts prematurely, rejecting—or outright seizing—mailed ballots, and many other forms of chicanery not seen in U.S. politics since the aftermath of the Civil War.

Here’s the core math to remember on the way to a Trump “win.”

It’s a good estimate that somewhere close to 145 million Americans will vote in 2020, up from 133 million in 2016. The average of all the major national opinion polls suggests that this vote will break 50.3 per cent for Biden, 43.5 per cent for Trump; a margin of 10 million votes for Biden.

But in a presidential election, the crucial votes are cast not by the people, but by the states, through the Electoral College. In 2016, Trump won 2.9 million fewer votes than Hillary Clinton, yet he won 306 electoral votes to Hillary Clinton’s 232. If in 2020 Trump can limit his Electoral College losses to his very most threatened states—Michigan and Arizona—he can still eke out a 279 to 259 win. (Trump also got a single electoral vote from Maine in 2016. If he loses that, too, he can still squeak to victory, or 278 to 260.)

For all the talk about the solid Trump “base,” it’s important to remember that Trump has been the least popular first-term president in the history of opinion polling, the only first-term president never to reach 50 per cent approval in any reputable poll. Every single day of the Trump presidency since his inauguration in 2017, a documented majority of the American people have disapproved of his administration.

What if Donald Trump claims a second term despite another rejection by the majority of American voters?

A Trump “win” will open the question: does voting work? If the American people cannot get rid of a rejected president by casting millions more votes against him than votes for him—how do they get rid of him?

If Trump not only loses the popular vote, but loses that vote in ways that look unfair—stopping the count, junking mailed ballots, forcing voters in minority neighbourhoods to wait in huge lines while voters in wealthier neighbourhoods wait in short ones—what then? The only way a Trump re-election can be achieved is by setting aside normal expectations of how democracy should work. What happens then? Will politics move into the streets?

Rest of the article here,
https://www.macleans.ca/politics/washington/what-if-trump-wins/








 
Complicated ballots, long line-ups, inadequate preparation and/or general incompetence, etc, are all wholly under control of the state and lower level agencies that hold the authority to conduct the elections.  If the election is messy, it won't be Trump's fault.  All he can do is whine about things he thinks might go wrong in advance, and make challenges in courts if he thinks the rules laid down before the election are not being followed after the election.  That's just rule of law.

There are deadlines involved; the odd-ball brow-furrowing worries that people have spun up into conspiracies over choosing state electors or deciding the election by state delegations in the House are just the properly provided contingencies if deadlines expire without properly certified results.  If people are working up their anxieties over atypical scenarios, it's helpful to clarify how the law provides for dealing with those situations in advance.

The only math that matters is the statewide count in each of the handful of states which are not shoe-ins for either party.  Trump can be re-elected simply by winning the plurality of votes in enough of those states; no amount of tinfoil-hat theories can negate that reality.
 
The Lincoln Projects Evita parody of President Trumps return to the White House.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzhD0v0XBLc
 
PPCLI Guy said:
Best viewed at the site, as graphs are informative.

Thanks. Long read but I checked it out. It certainly sounds like we won't be subjected to 4 more years of Trumps crazy tweets and North Americans obsession over it. Crossing my fingers on that one. Bidens performance wasn't too awe inspiring in that debate but I'm rooting for him for purely self-serving reasons at this point.
 
Jarnhamar said:
Thanks. Long read but I checked it out. It certainly sounds like we won't be subjected to 4 more years of Trumps crazy tweets and North Americans obsession over it. Crossing my fingers on that one. Bidens performance wasn't too awe inspiring in that debate but I'm rooting for him for purely self-serving reasons at this point.

Biden was pretty flat at that debate.  All he has to do though is just let Trump talk.
 
Jarnhamar said:
Yup. Election is as good as over.

Well, truthfully, I won’t go so far as to say that.

I think the race is tighter than the polls indicate but this was a really bad week for Trump.
 
Jarnhamar said:
Yup. Election is as good as over.

Some other folks thought that in 2016...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHG0ezLiVGc
 
Jarnhamar said:
... It certainly sounds like we won't be subjected to 4 more years of Trumps crazy tweets and North Americans obsession over it....

Win or lose, we are going to be subjected to tweets from Trump and news reports about him for as long as he's alive.

Nobody paid much attention to him before 2016 but that's changed. I expect he'll be Fox News' and OAN's go-to political commentator for some time to come.

He's just not the kind of guy to go quietly into the night and leave the country to his successors. Nope.

:stirpot:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top