Backintheday544 Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 3 minutes ago, Big Gun said: Of course you wont. You're pathetic. You lose an argument when have nothing to say except name calling. You asked for Trump lies, I need them. Someone else even named them. You then asked for Dem lies. Clearly moving your position. You're response to that was name calling. I'm sorry, but when your response is name calling and not facts, you lose the.debate. There's a ton of great posters here. Billsfannc is awesome he says things and backs it up. You haven't. Your argument for your position is name calling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 22 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: Yes they do. Golan Sachs even modelled that a blue wave would be better for the economy than a Trump win: https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-outlook-biden-blue-wave-boost-growth-goldman-sachs-2020-10-1029649255 Getting back on topic, 538's model now has Biden at an 87 percent chance of victory https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/ For reference, Hilary was about a 70 percent change on election night in 2016. A Biden win won't help the economy but it will help the Dow & the S&P as additional regulations make it tougher for new competitors to enter. Those companies will also be helped by better access to cheap Chinese labor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 10 hours ago, Doc Brown said: It's a different situation as the economy was doing great since at least 2013 and then you had to shut the whole damn thing down because of this virus. It's unprecented. The only advantage Trump has on the polls is who thinks they'll handle the economy better (usually by a few percentage points). The top two concerns are Covid (#1) and the economy (#2). Biden polls double digits better when it comes to who they think would better handle Covid. That's a common myth. People who look at polling for a living make the case that Perot hurt Clinton more. Clinton was just a more skilled politician as Bush road the cotails of Reagan. Horsehockey! Bush was leading before Perot quit & then most of those Perot voters switched to Clinton. When he got back in, he got some of those voters back, but not even close to what he had originally. Most of them stuck w/ Clinton once HRP came back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: This one is interesting: https://www.npr.org/2020/10/15/923946468/poll-biden-takes-double-digit-lead-over-trump I recall seeing one of these about Biden c. 2008 or 2012 and the leading word was "buffoon" or something like that. Now it's "honest." No wonder Trump is hell-bent on publicizing the Hunter thing. The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll asked what word comes to mind when thinking about President Trump. "Incompetent" stood out. The NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll asked what word comes to mind when thinking about former Vice President Joe Biden as president. The word "honest" stood out, but there were plenty of negatives too. NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll The ONLY major US politician in at least 50 years and possibly EVER that got drummed out of an election for being a PLAGIAERISER is most commonly described as "honest?" Seriously? Did they poll anyone over the age of 40? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 14 minutes ago, Taro T said: The ONLY major US politician in at least 50 years and possibly EVER that got drummed out of an election for being a PLAGIAERISER is most commonly described as "honest?" Seriously? Did they poll anyone over the age of 40? If they'd polled me "bullshitter" would've been in my top 3. But hey, we're not talking about some kind of absolute truth here, we're talking about perceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: If they'd polled me "bullshitter" would've been in my top 3. But hey, we're not talking about some kind of absolute truth here, we're talking about perceptions. Fair enough. But that a "bullshitter" like him can be considered honest shows just how broken the system is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 Just now, Taro T said: Fair enough. But that a "bullshitter" like him can be considered honest shows just how broken the system is. Agreed. I have a certain grudging admiration for the really good bs artist -- the ones you KNOW are bs'ing you, yet you leave the conversation almost charmed by how natural, how seemless it is. That's not Joe Biden. It was Bill Clinton for a lot of people - the guy who circulates through the cocktail party and spends precisely 30 seconds talking to you, yet in those 30 seconds you feel like you are truly the most important person to him in the room ... right up until he does it with the next person. That's political skill. If Clinton was a 10 out or 10, Biden is probably a 6. It's a little too easy to see through his b.s., almost like he doesn't 100% buy into it himself. Trump is bad at this (hence the rallies rather than town halls). Speech-making or in Trump's case monologue-giving is a different skill. For Obama the speech making thing made up for less than perfect one-on-one skills, and for Trump the rally spiels serve that purpose. Just my take after having met -- briefly -- more politicians in my life than I really care to have met. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Taro T said: Horsehockey! Bush was leading before Perot quit & then most of those Perot voters switched to Clinton. When he got back in, he got some of those voters back, but not even close to what he had originally. Most of them stuck w/ Clinton once HRP came back. If that's true it kind of tells you how weak a candidate Bush was. The analysis of that election is a statistical nerds dream. Edited October 16, 2020 by Doc Brown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 8 hours ago, Backintheday544 said: On your second point, without numbers, I feel Republicans don't go 3rd party as much historically. You're probably right and it has more to do with Republican voters being older on average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 5 hours ago, Doc Brown said: If that's true it kind of tells you how weak a candidate Bush was. The analysis of that election is a statistical nerds dream. 41 was a weak candidate who ran a poor campaign. Especially without Lee Atwater available to run his campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 I was a really big Perot supporter, if he was not in the race I would have voted Bush 41 who I liked a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 12 minutes ago, Taro T said: 41 was a weak candidate who ran a poor campaign. Especially without Lee Atwater available to run his campaign. 41 hated campaigning. He famously didn’t start campaigning until August 1992, IIRC. That led 42 to drive his numbers down unchallenged. Anyway, my memory isn’t great, but my high level take away of all these retrospectives of the 1992 election was that Perot did not hurt bush. Dartmouth published an interesting paper about this years back. Their claim is that Perot increased people going to the polls by 3%, but decreased Clintons winning margin by 7%. In a separate model, where everyone would technically have been forced to vote, the margins didn’t change. I did not dig deep enough to find out have a model of that situation. Anyway, the conclusion that Perot suppressed Clinton’s margin is along the lines of everything I’ve heard that in the last 28 years. https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.dartmouth.edu/dist/9/280/files/2016/09/LacyBurdenAJPS1999.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoshin Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 26 minutes ago, SDS said: 41 hated campaigning. He famously didn’t start campaigning until August 1992, IIRC. That led 42 to drive his numbers down unchallenged. Anyway, my memory isn’t great, but my high level take away of all these retrospectives of the 1992 election was that Perot did not hurt bush. Dartmouth published an interesting paper about this years back. Their claim is that Perot increased people going to the polls by 3%, but decreased Clintons winning margin by 7%. In a separate model, where everyone would technically have been forced to vote, the margins didn’t change. I did not dig deep enough to find out have a model of that situation. Anyway, the conclusion that Perot suppressed Clinton’s margin is along the lines of everything I’ve heard that in the last 28 years. https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/sites.dartmouth.edu/dist/9/280/files/2016/09/LacyBurdenAJPS1999.pdf I voted for 41 and always assumed Perot helped Clinton win (Clinton was a good president IMO--quite good until his scandal). But reading that and a few other articles after you shared it, I see that the case for who Perot helped, if anyone, is not clear at all. Thanks for correcting a bad assumption I've always had about the 92 election. I would have said this was crystal clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTier Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said: My point in pasting the NPR word cloud thing isn't to argue that Biden really is "honest," it's that despite all the criticism of his campaign, he's managed to pull public opinion in that direction. Or maybe it's just that perceptions of honesty are comparative, and here the comparison is Trump. Elections are won or lost on perceptions. In 2016, many voters perceived Covid Donnie to be an effective leader -- he was supposedly a "successful businessman" -- but they've learned differently. Now he has a public record as POTUS, and it says "INCOMPETENCE". It is what is. 9 hours ago, Big Gun said: Bravo, now name the things Biden and the Dems have lied about. You accused Biden of lying, so you list them -- and include better "proof" than some moron posting unsupport BS on Twitter. 7 hours ago, Taro T said: A Biden win won't help the economy but it will help the Dow & the S&P as additional regulations make it tougher for new competitors to enter. Those companies will also be helped by better access to cheap Chinese labor. Let me guess, you get your economic news from Twitter, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2020 Author Share Posted October 16, 2020 North Carolina: Trump vs. Biden Emerson Biden 49, Trump 49 Tie Michigan: Trump vs. Biden Trafalgar Group (R)* Biden 46, Trump 47 Trump +1 Florida: Trump vs. Biden Mason-Dixon Biden 48, Trump 45 Biden +3 Hawaii: Trump vs. Biden HNN/Civil Beat Biden 61, Trump 28 Biden +33 General Election: Trump vs. Biden vs. Jorgensen vs. Hawkins IBD/TIPP Biden 49, Trump 44, Jorgensen 3, Hawkins 1 Biden +5 North Carolina Senate - Tillis vs. Cunningham Emerson Cunningham 45, Tillis 44 Cunningham +1 North Carolina Governor - Forest vs. Cooper Emerson Cooper 50, Forest 46 Cooper +4 President Trump Job Approval Rasmussen Reports Approve 48, Disapprove 50 Disapprove +2 Thursday, October 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 2 minutes ago, Tiberius said: North Carolina: Trump vs. Biden Emerson Biden 49, Trump 49 Tie Michigan: Trump vs. Biden Trafalgar Group (R)* Biden 46, Trump 47 Trump +1 Florida: Trump vs. Biden Mason-Dixon Biden 48, Trump 45 Biden +3 Hawaii: Trump vs. Biden HNN/Civil Beat Biden 61, Trump 28 Biden +33 General Election: Trump vs. Biden vs. Jorgensen vs. Hawkins IBD/TIPP Biden 49, Trump 44, Jorgensen 3, Hawkins 1 Biden +5 North Carolina Senate - Tillis vs. Cunningham Emerson Cunningham 45, Tillis 44 Cunningham +1 North Carolina Governor - Forest vs. Cooper Emerson Cooper 50, Forest 46 Cooper +4 President Trump Job Approval Rasmussen Reports Approve 48, Disapprove 50 Disapprove +2 Thursday, October 15 That Michigan poll is surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2020 Author Share Posted October 16, 2020 1 minute ago, Backintheday544 said: That Michigan poll is surprising. Trafalgar group always has Trump doing better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Backintheday544 Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 26 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Trafalgar group always has Trump doing better Looking at the data, the 2 percent undecided is interesting. With the lack of undecided people, I think we will start seeing the polls be a bit more accurate than other years. The other interesting part on the polls is you need to figure about 20 percent of the people polled have already voted. (Basing the 20 percent on how many early voters we've seen already) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted October 16, 2020 Share Posted October 16, 2020 trump winning michigan would be surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts