BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
Anyone read Running Against the Devil? I abhor his politics on almost all levels in normal times, but Rick Wilson doesn't half talk a lot of sense when it comes to this one particular issue.
Current Affairs Joe Biden POTUS #46
- Thread starter Ruairi77
- Start date
- Status
BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
Ah good. Death's back into full on troll mode.
Back on ignore you go. Could someone give me a heads up if he slips back into one of his (increasingly rare) serious modes?
Death
I'll take down dat coal powered MG, I tel u Hwat
It’s a common right wing trope to question the decision making of the youth. Just because she is dressing it up ala Tucker Carlson doesn’t mean she doesn’t know what she is doing.
BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
One last try to see if you could maybe find a reasoned response, but alas no...ever the optimist.
I mean it's medically established fact that people of that age make bad decisions. It's not a slight, they're physiologically/neurologically hampered compared to older people, but hey ho.
Ta ra lad.
BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
Harris: 90% approval among Democrats.
62% approval amongst young people (under 35) across the entire political spectrum. Which probably equates to a similar ~85-90% amongst young Democrats
62% approval amongst young people (under 35) across the entire political spectrum. Which probably equates to a similar ~85-90% amongst young Democrats
She made the speech in 2014. Long before she decided to run for President.
The speech was at the event for the program she was running for 18 to 24 year olds. It was part of a study.
Jesus at least Google it before making wild ridiculous claims.
And yet you call me basic.
The polling I've seen seems to suggest that objectively, Harris is a very strong choice.
BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
A program to allow the quashing of young people's first time drug offences, no less. That horrible right winger!!
Death has resorted to becoming those you see on Facebook and Twitter who share and retweet Russian made memes and manipulated videos. They then add what they believe to be clever comments of their own. But it just makes them look more foolish. So they have no choice but to double down or make a joke.
Death
I'll take down dat coal powered MG, I tel u Hwat
Of B
We call that Hitler science in left wing circles.
I mean let’s just have a look at the demographics of the people who voted for the current shower on either side of the Atlantic.
And yet it’s young people who make bad decisions.
BirkenheadBlue
Player Valuation: £70m
Haha, hard to argue there. But again, she wasn't talking about political decisions.
Oh I know. It was about being forgiven for mistakes that you made when you were young. Like minor drug offences etc.
Death
I'll take down dat coal powered MG, I tel u Hwat
You are confusing me with a pro Russian poster on here. The only right wing media I repeat is to mock it. Granted hypocritically some right wing channels hypocritically come at the Democrats from the left but that’s not to be taking seriously as the slant they stick on it is nefarious.
This seems to be as good a thread as any to give some views on the upcoming election. Just having a look through the numbers of this election to 2016 and some conclusions.
1) 2016 was much closer than people realise. The narrative that Trump won against all the odds and people were wildly out has been propagated. It's not really the case. The final polls put Clinton about 3.5-4% ahead in an election she won by over 2%. Had she have won by 3% she'd have won the election on a standard swing model (taken Florida, Pensylvania and Michigan). A 2.5% win would have been a 268 v 263 result. So if the same applies, a 3% win gives the Democrats a win, and 2.5% is probably about the tipping point.
The polls weren't wildly out. The perhaps misjudged the translation of votes to electoral college support (there's no guarantee this repeats either as it didn't under Obama). Even on election night though, 5-30-8 called the election 70-30% in favour of Clinton. I mean it's a lean Clinton prediction but by no means a certain prediction.
2) The polls actually crossed a lot more in 2016. By the end of July Trump was within 0.5%. Clinton had a 5.5% advantage in mid July and peaked at a 7.5% advantage in early August. The movement was quite volatile though (compared so far to this year). If 2.5% was the cut off and around 1.5-2% was the over estimation on Clinton, we can see there were sections Clinton was well ahead, but also times when Trump was comfortably in the lead.
3) Trump basically suffered with conventions and debates. In spite of the noise and headlines he makes great gains about 1 month after the conventions and about 2-3 weeks after the final debate. During the conventions and debates he loses around 3.5% in the former and and around 5% in the latter. He tended to do well when he was off television and the above was out of the news cycle. He has a great early August to late September (closes the gap from around 7.5% to around 1.5%) which what we know above is the difference between quite a heavy defeat into quite a clear victory.
4) Switching to the current race. Bidens lead is a lot firmer than Clintons. While it peaked at 9.6% at the end of June and Trump has eaten into it a little bit, it's shallow point was a 7.6% around 2 weeks ago. It's now bounced back to an 8.4%. So Biden has stablised things, but in honesty there is not the volatility there was 4 years ago. For Trump, tmhis is bad news, as he needs quite a big swing.
5) The closest the lines have been is really pre-Covid. April 13th where it was a 3.4%. If Trump gets back to that territory, he is really in the race, and is arguably favourite. We don't know how far pollsters have adjusted, or how far he will utilise his vote as per last time, but you feel he needs to be in that range to be serious on winning.
6) Trump's supporters will say, legtiately that they closed a 7.5% gap to a 2% deficit on election day. Bidens supporters will say that Bidens support is much higher than Clinton (ultimately much less wavering and unknown voters) plus he's not a woman so with less swinging voters and a higher and harder core vote there is less room to work with for Trump- and that it will ultimately be a bridge too far. The question really comes, can Trump repeat some of the traits he showed in 2016, in fairly substantially more challenging terrain. My feelings are, if he is to make the move, August/September is critical, and thus far Biden is stabilising.
1) 2016 was much closer than people realise. The narrative that Trump won against all the odds and people were wildly out has been propagated. It's not really the case. The final polls put Clinton about 3.5-4% ahead in an election she won by over 2%. Had she have won by 3% she'd have won the election on a standard swing model (taken Florida, Pensylvania and Michigan). A 2.5% win would have been a 268 v 263 result. So if the same applies, a 3% win gives the Democrats a win, and 2.5% is probably about the tipping point.
The polls weren't wildly out. The perhaps misjudged the translation of votes to electoral college support (there's no guarantee this repeats either as it didn't under Obama). Even on election night though, 5-30-8 called the election 70-30% in favour of Clinton. I mean it's a lean Clinton prediction but by no means a certain prediction.
2) The polls actually crossed a lot more in 2016. By the end of July Trump was within 0.5%. Clinton had a 5.5% advantage in mid July and peaked at a 7.5% advantage in early August. The movement was quite volatile though (compared so far to this year). If 2.5% was the cut off and around 1.5-2% was the over estimation on Clinton, we can see there were sections Clinton was well ahead, but also times when Trump was comfortably in the lead.
3) Trump basically suffered with conventions and debates. In spite of the noise and headlines he makes great gains about 1 month after the conventions and about 2-3 weeks after the final debate. During the conventions and debates he loses around 3.5% in the former and and around 5% in the latter. He tended to do well when he was off television and the above was out of the news cycle. He has a great early August to late September (closes the gap from around 7.5% to around 1.5%) which what we know above is the difference between quite a heavy defeat into quite a clear victory.
4) Switching to the current race. Bidens lead is a lot firmer than Clintons. While it peaked at 9.6% at the end of June and Trump has eaten into it a little bit, it's shallow point was a 7.6% around 2 weeks ago. It's now bounced back to an 8.4%. So Biden has stablised things, but in honesty there is not the volatility there was 4 years ago. For Trump, tmhis is bad news, as he needs quite a big swing.
5) The closest the lines have been is really pre-Covid. April 13th where it was a 3.4%. If Trump gets back to that territory, he is really in the race, and is arguably favourite. We don't know how far pollsters have adjusted, or how far he will utilise his vote as per last time, but you feel he needs to be in that range to be serious on winning.
6) Trump's supporters will say, legtiately that they closed a 7.5% gap to a 2% deficit on election day. Bidens supporters will say that Bidens support is much higher than Clinton (ultimately much less wavering and unknown voters) plus he's not a woman so with less swinging voters and a higher and harder core vote there is less room to work with for Trump- and that it will ultimately be a bridge too far. The question really comes, can Trump repeat some of the traits he showed in 2016, in fairly substantially more challenging terrain. My feelings are, if he is to make the move, August/September is critical, and thus far Biden is stabilising.
- Status