Red Mosquito

McParadigm wrote:I can’t decide whether the idea that Trump supporters would turn for **any** candidate, or that they are a demographic needed to win the election, is more absurd.

They've already won once, a lot of them will vote again, and if enough of the other team doesn't show up he could win again.

tragabigzanda wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I can’t decide whether the idea that Trump supporters would turn for **any** candidate, or that they are a demographic needed to win the election, is more absurd.

They've already won once, a lot of them will vote again, and if enough of the other team doesn't show up he could win again.

I'd be genuinely shocked if we saw the same level of low turnout for Dems this time around. There are enough angry people, and the DNC is raking in enough dough, that they will build a huge turnout campaign.

I hope you are right. Some other threads I've read, where there is a conservative majority, are showing signs of being the low turnout voters this time around. They are disgusted by Trump, but can't bring themselves to vote for "libtards". Hopefully that rings true and they just stay at home.

darth_vedder wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I can’t decide whether the idea that Trump supporters would turn for **any** candidate, or that they are a demographic needed to win the election, is more absurd.

They've already won once, a lot of them will vote again, and if enough of the other team doesn't show up he could win again.

86% of voters in 2018, a midterm that saw presidential election-sized numbers, said that Donald Trump was a major factor in their vote. Result: it was brutally one-sided. Since that time, his support has dwindled even further, the number of Americans who believe he has committed crimes during his presidency has skyrocketed, and he’s attacked the wrong democratic candidate.

Nearly all of the difference in the election results between 2016 and 2018 can be chalked up to changes in nonaffiliated voters, a group that as a general rule dislikes everybody and hates no one. That’s exactly the attitude that Trump was able to slide by on in 2016: the feeling among middle of the road voters that everybody on both sides is equally bad. In 2018 he had some of the worst polling among that group of any sitting president in your lifetime. Not only is it even worse now (34% among a group that he needs roughly 60% of the vote from in 2020), but more than half of that group (55%) believes he should be impeached and removed from office.

Unless you see how he gets 60% of the vote from a group whose majority doesn’t even want him to be allowed to finish THIS term, he’s pretty fucked. Assuming he’s the nominee.

McParadigm wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I can’t decide whether the idea that Trump supporters would turn for **any** candidate, or that they are a demographic needed to win the election, is more absurd.

They've already won once, a lot of them will vote again, and if enough of the other team doesn't show up he could win again.

86% of voters in 2018, a midterm that saw presidential election-sized numbers, said that Donald Trump was a major factor in their vote. Result: it was brutally one-sided. Since that time, his support has dwindled even further, the number of Americans who believe he has committed crimes during his presidency has skyrocketed, and he’s attacked the wrong democratic candidate.

Nearly all of the difference in the election results between 2016 and 2018 can be chalked up to changes in nonaffiliated voters, a group that as a general rule dislikes everybody and hates no one. That’s exactly the attitude that Trump was able to slide by on in 2016: the feeling among middle of the road voters that everybody on both sides is equally bad. In 2018 he had some of the worst polling among that group of any sitting president in your lifetime. Not only is it even worse now (34% among a group that he needs roughly 60% of the vote from in 2020), but more than half of that group (55%) believes he should be impeached and removed from office.

Unless you see how he gets 60% of the vote from a group whose majority doesn’t even want him to be allowed to finish THIS term, he’s pretty fucked. Assuming he’s the nominee.

OMG, that would be amazing. I'm basically just really worried that we'll get 4 more years of this clown, so I guess I'm not letting myself get my hopes up.

McParadigm wrote:

darth_vedder wrote:

McParadigm wrote:I can’t decide whether the idea that Trump supporters would turn for **any** candidate, or that they are a demographic needed to win the election, is more absurd.

They've already won once, a lot of them will vote again, and if enough of the other team doesn't show up he could win again.

86% of voters in 2018, a midterm that saw presidential election-sized numbers, said that Donald Trump was a major factor in their vote. Result: it was brutally one-sided. Since that time, his support has dwindled even further, the number of Americans who believe he has committed crimes during his presidency has skyrocketed, and he’s attacked the wrong democratic candidate.

Nearly all of the difference in the election results between 2016 and 2018 can be chalked up to changes in nonaffiliated voters, a group that as a general rule dislikes everybody and hates no one. That’s exactly the attitude that Trump was able to slide by on in 2016: the feeling among middle of the road voters that everybody on both sides is equally bad. In 2018 he had some of the worst polling among that group of any sitting president in your lifetime. Not only is it even worse now (34% among a group that he needs roughly 60% of the vote from in 2020), but more than half of that group (55%) believes he should be impeached and removed from office.

Unless you see how he gets 60% of the vote from a group whose majority doesn’t even want him to be allowed to finish THIS term, he’s pretty fucked. Assuming he’s the nominee.

Like 90% of me has thought for a while that Trump is fucked. He thread the needle once, and the "mystery" of how he'd govern was an asset he can't duplicate (obviously) a second time. He has no margin for error, but has erred a lot. But man, no serious person thought he could win 2016. The numbers didn't add up and yet he kept winning primaries, then won it all. Now I feel we're in a weird place where we relied too much on conventional logic then, and are now over-correcting. But I'm not sure anyone knows where that happy medium is.

Huh.

Mine said:

Kamala Harris 98%
Elizabeth Warren 98%
Julián Castro 98%
Bernie Sanders 97%
Marianne Williamson 95%
Amy Klobuchar 93%

Mine said these things are compiled by interns and dumb

Hillary is looking fairly appealing right now

liebzz wrote:Mine said:

Kamala Harris 98%
Elizabeth Warren 98%
Julián Castro 98%
Bernie Sanders 97%
Marianne Williamson 95%
Amy Klobuchar 93%

Harris 96%
Warren, Castro, Sanders 95%

Birds in Hell wrote:Huh.

I'm mostly curious about the descriptors. What exactly is Andrew Yang's humor policy? And is Cory Book not only 'tender', but also 'finger licking good'?

and john delaney is apparently a fucking criminal

I just took the isidewith.com poll for the first time since 2016, and my top five are:
- Amy Klobuchar
- Marianne Williamson
- Kamala Harris
- Pete Buttigieg
- Bernie Sanders

cutuphalfdead wrote:and john delaney is apparently a fucking criminal

Anyone that sexy is

"Tulsi is being groomed as a Russian agent" - Hillary

go home Hillary, you're drunk.

It was actually only in the last few months that I was surprised to discover this wasn’t the most common assumption. What is the alternative interpretation of her passionate Assad defense? That liberal ideals brought her to a place of admiration for imprisoning human rights advocates, and an authoritarian regime that institutionalizes discrimination against women and minorities?

go home McP, you're drunk.