If These Numbers Hold, Zero Way Biden Wins Without Fraud
- Thread starter IowaHawkeyeFBnBB4Life
- Start date
Hope your planing for a huge victory party, Iowa. I know you will have a great time with all your friends!
Florida Latinos are different from the rest of the country. The Cubans are solid GOP voters. Same thing with refugees from Venezuela. Puerto Ricans are not in the tank for the DNC like some would have you believe. We don't have many Mexicans or other Central Americans here comparatively.
This ^^^^^^^ is nothing new. It has been this way since the 1950s, hasn’t it? Florida votes Republican...and Republicans do well in Florida because the GOP controls who votes and which votes get counted.
Well the Cubans appreciate the brutality of socialism better than our neo-socialists currently being cultivated by today’s universities. I suspect this has much to do with who they vote for.
Florida is a luxury for Biden, icing on the cake; he will likely get 300+ EV's even without Florida. OTOH, Florida is a MUST for Trump if he has any prayer for re-election. The fact that Biden has been leading consistently in Florida overall for months, despite Trump's Hispanic support that you're boasting, does not bode well for Trump or the GOP overall this November.
OP must be very susceptible to sales pitches - no one should take what Trump says seriously. He lies 85% of the time he open his mouth.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 93,917
- 189,805
- 113
OP likes his Cubano sammies served with strong black Havana coffee and a side of human shit.
so what you’re saying is, people of color who have experienced socialist governments similar to the direction the current Democrat party wants to go towards, are more likely to know the current Democrat party is going in the wrong direction.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 93,917
- 189,805
- 113
Well that would be dumb considering Joe Biden was a pretty fierce critic of the Castro regime, so much in fact that he was rebuked by the Cuban leader in 2009:
SUN MAR 29, 2009 / 11:13 PM EDT
Fidel Castro criticizes Biden for embargo support
REUTERS/ARGENTINE PRESIDENCY/HANDOUT
(Reuters) - Former Cuban leader Fidel Castro criticized U.S. Vice President Joe Biden on Sunday for saying that the United States will not lift its 47-year-old trade embargo against Cuba.
Castro, in a column published on the Internet, said it was "fun to see how the guts of the empire (U.S.) churn, filled with problems and insurmountable contradictions with the people of Latin America."
Biden told reporters during a political summit in Chile on Saturday a "transition" is needed in U.S. policy toward the communist-ruled island, but replied in the negative when asked if the embargo would be ended.
He said he and President Barack Obama "think that Cuban people should determine their own fate and they should be able to live in freedom and with some prospect of economic prosperity."
The 82-year-old Castro, who resigned as Cuba's president last year but still has behind-the-scenes influence, said Biden's comments were a "pity" because all Latin American countries view the embargo as a "burden of the past."
(Reporting by Jeff Franks; editing by Alan Elsner)
Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust
If those numbers hold, no way does Biden lose without fraud.
I won't go so far as that, but virtually every poll out there would have to catastrophically wrong.
This is such a classic gringo take: Florida's hispanic community (primarily Cuban-American) will vote the same way as Mexican-Americans and other ethnic groups from central and south america. Guarantee OP calls every brown skinned spanish speaker mexican.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 93,917
- 189,805
- 113
Latest news
Sept. 4, 2020
Theories that the unrest following the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, would benefit President Trump electorally appear to have been wrong -- at least so far. To the contrary, a new ABC News/Ipsos survey found that most Americans think the president is making the situation worse, while majorities think Joe Biden would do a better job handling the protests, racial discrimination and uniting the country. Meanwhile, Biden’s lead in national polls has narrowed since the Republican National Convention, but only slightly. New state-level polls show basically the same thing as national polls -- a relatively stable race.
2020 Election Forecast
Latest forecast of the 2020 presidential election between President Donald Trump and Joe Biden by Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight
- Sep 13, 2002
- 93,917
- 189,805
- 113
She told me he came out sideways and that’s why her undercarriage is so wrecked. Apparently he went unoxygenated for 48 minutes. It was a miracle he survived with the only longlasting side effects being terrible political takes and an insatiable appetite for human excrement.
Last edited:
Two things...
1) Right now Biden is walking a tightrope, trying to take as centrist a position as possible for the election, while at the same time trying not to piss off the radical left
2) It would be dumb to think Biden"s dementia would allow him to complete a first year in office anyway.
But there is no longer a centrist position in the GOP. They have gone full bore radical right which was proven by the lack of a party platform instead saying they will just support Trump.
But yet you ignore Trump's obvious mental and physical failings as they get worse. While both may have a degree of mental slippage, Biden is much healthier physically. Biden is out bike riding while Trump is a candidate for a major stroke.
If a successful presidency is determined by who rides a bicycle better, Biden might be the guy...
since it's determined by who does the best job of getting out of the way as much as possible and letting our economy solve it's own problems...
Trump, warts and all, is the better pick.
How did you write that sentence with a straight face? Trump, with his alpha personality, is completely incapable of getting out of the way, and in fact has directly impacted it through his trade wars with China.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 93,917
- 189,805
- 113
The “Law and Order” Backlash Against Biden Was a Mirage
New polls show that the premature consensus about Trump’s rhetoric was wrong—for now, anyway.
Osita NwanevuSeptember 4, 2020
For all the effort expended over the past 15 years to bring punditry a step or two closer to the social sciences and into communion with statistics, the art of the political take is still, for the most part, the art of the quick draw.
Our discourses and the technologies that now sustain them aren’t built to reward patience; as ever, the loudest and most important voices are those that can mold their predictions out of raw, uncomplicated intuition with speed and ease. Other, more careful and more interesting voices root their arguments at least partially in scholarship about our political past.
We’re a little under two months out from the election and a little over three months into a season of protests against racism and police violence that, despite what their critics have said, really have been mostly peaceful.
A series of polls taken in June suggested between 15 and 26 million Americans demonstrated against the killing of George Floyd that month—if most had been committed to or engaged in violence, the president and the right would probably have more to fear now than a mere loss at the polls in November. Of course, there genuinely has been looting and rioting in cities across the country. For several nights in late May, the nation watched sections of Minneapolis go up in flames. And as it was happening, we heard a lot about 1968.
Our understanding of the impact the King assassination riots had on racial politics and that year’s election has been capsulized into a tidy piece of received wisdom, one invoked so solemnly and so often this summer it might have been thought a law of physics: Riots and disorder hurt Democratic candidates and help Republicans.
But Biden’s continued rise in the polls after Minneapolis suggested strongly that this particular election, with these particular candidates, might play out differently. And now, after another round of high-profile protests, a Republican National Convention heavy with “law and order” rhetoric, and a wave of quality national and state data, we can say with some confidence that those who raised the alarm about the demonstrations have, so far, been comprehensively wrong.
The limits of the ’68 comparisons should have been obvious from the beginning.
In the first place, the racial attitudes of the American public and the disposition of the mainstream press toward racial protest have changed dramatically over the last half-century. Our basic political geography has also changed, as has the composition and partisan sort of the electorate.
And the “law and order” candidate this time around is a historically unpopular incumbent who has deepened the lawlessness and disorder he decries—an incumbent who, incidentally, has also bungled the response to a pandemic that remains at the top of mind for most voters and has killed nearly 190,000 Americans.
The Trump campaign’s decision to elide this last fact and lean fully into messaging about urban disorder during the RNC should have been seen universally as an act of desperation. Instead, a slew of pundits—spooked by the unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, following the shooting of Jacob Blake, not chastened in the slightest by Biden’s numbers post-Minneapolis—insisted that Trump had settled on a strategy sure to succeed absent a dramatic change in strategy from Biden who, just to shut people up, delivered his millionth denunciation of rioting in Pittsburgh and Kenosha this week.
“It’s no use dismissing their words as partisan talking points,” The Atlantic’s George Packer wrote of the RNClast Friday. “They are effective ones, backed up by certain facts. Trump will bang this loud, ugly drum until Election Day. He knows that Kenosha has placed Democrats in a trap.”
On Monday, the Times’ Bret Stephens accusedprogressives of “unthinkingly helping Trump” and referenced a recent book on looting that had upset some in his circle. “Many of these friends, I suspect, will reluctantly vote for Trump,” he wrote, “not out of sympathy for him, but out of disgust with defenses of looting and other things they see too often on the left.”
Anecdotes like this tell us nothing about the wider electorate, of course; Stephens doesn’t have that many friends. We can turn instead to a collection of polls released over the past week. According to FiveThirtyEight’s average, Biden leads Trump by over seven points nationally, 50.4 to 43 percent. And despite the right’s best efforts, the constituency of Americans who believe Joe Biden is in cahoots with the Black bloc remains small.
According to The Economist and YouGov’s latest national poll, only 38 percent of voters believe Biden holds extreme views compared to 56 percent who say the same of Trump. That holds true even among the always critical over-65 set that the Trump campaign and the conservative press probably imagined they’d have an easier time scaring—unsurprisingly, polls have shown them to be more hostile to the protests and anxious about unrest than the electorate at large. Even so, 50 percent of them say Trump holds extreme views, while 37 percent say the same of Biden.
Quinnipiac’s latestfinds 50 percent of likely voters and a 46 percent plurality of those over 65 believe they’re less safe with Trump as president. A 42 percent plurality of likely voters and a 46 percent plurality of those over 65 believe they would be safer with Biden as president.
Moreover, 52 percent of voters disapproveand 42 percent of voters approve of Trump’s handling of “crime and criminal justice” specifically, according to The Economistand YouGov. Similarly, 55 percent of voters say Trump’s handling of crime makes them “uneasy,” to the 39 percent who express confidence in it.
These are all national numbers, and they wouldn’t mean all that much if they didn’t hold true in the swing states likeliest to actually decide the election—but they appear to. It should be old news by now that the ballyhooed decline in support for Black Lives Matter in Wisconsin—likely the consequence of a repolarization around the protests that didn’t actually reduce net support for the movement—also didn’t correspond at all with Biden’s lead in the state, which continued a fairly steady rise.
Now we can say that the unrest in Kenosha hasn’t put a real dent in Biden’s standing either. On Wednesday, the day before he set foot in Kenosha for an address on the violence, Biden led Trump in FiveThirtyEight’s average by 7.2 points: 50.2 to 43 percent. On August 23, the day Jacob Blake was shot, Biden led by seven points: 50.1 to 43.1 percent.
When asked how worried they were about crime and lower property values being brought to their own particular neighborhoods, a full 74 percent of Pennsylvania voters replied that they were “not too” or “not at all” concerned, including 66 percent of voters over 65, 75 percent of noncollege whites, and 75 percent of those in deeply pro-Trump counties.
None of these numbers should be taken as indication that Biden has nothing to worry about. Although Trump hasn’t been able to pin him on the riots and Biden continues to lead in polling on coronavirus, character, and uniting the country, he still isn’t doing especially well on the economy. A 48 percent plurality of registered voters believe it’s getting worse, according to The Economist and YouGov; CNN finds 58 percent of Americans are worried about the economic situation in their own communities. Yet Trump is effectively tied or ahead of Biden on the economy in multiple polls—likely voters split 48 to 48 percent on who would handle the economy better in Quinnipiac, and CNN, which shows Trump with a net positive economic approval rating, has him a toe ahead of Biden on the issue: 49 to 48 percent. Trump is also tied with Biden on the economy among likely voters in Wisconsin, 46 to 44 percent, according to a Fox News poll.
It should be said that the political impact of the protests and riots may still change between now and November. The takeaway from all we’ve seen over the past few months isn’t that unrest and radical action are, always and everywhere, free of political cost. Rather, it’s that our current political commentariat can’t reliably inform us when and how those costs might be incurred. The underlying questions are too complex to be handled at our discourse’s normal speed; the many voices within it who allow their disdain for radicalism to cloud their analyses can’t be trusted to handle the issue carefully anyway. That’s a responsibility left to the rest of us.
New polls show that the premature consensus about Trump’s rhetoric was wrong—for now, anyway.
Osita NwanevuSeptember 4, 2020
For all the effort expended over the past 15 years to bring punditry a step or two closer to the social sciences and into communion with statistics, the art of the political take is still, for the most part, the art of the quick draw.
Our discourses and the technologies that now sustain them aren’t built to reward patience; as ever, the loudest and most important voices are those that can mold their predictions out of raw, uncomplicated intuition with speed and ease. Other, more careful and more interesting voices root their arguments at least partially in scholarship about our political past.
We’re a little under two months out from the election and a little over three months into a season of protests against racism and police violence that, despite what their critics have said, really have been mostly peaceful.
A series of polls taken in June suggested between 15 and 26 million Americans demonstrated against the killing of George Floyd that month—if most had been committed to or engaged in violence, the president and the right would probably have more to fear now than a mere loss at the polls in November. Of course, there genuinely has been looting and rioting in cities across the country. For several nights in late May, the nation watched sections of Minneapolis go up in flames. And as it was happening, we heard a lot about 1968.
Our understanding of the impact the King assassination riots had on racial politics and that year’s election has been capsulized into a tidy piece of received wisdom, one invoked so solemnly and so often this summer it might have been thought a law of physics: Riots and disorder hurt Democratic candidates and help Republicans.
But Biden’s continued rise in the polls after Minneapolis suggested strongly that this particular election, with these particular candidates, might play out differently. And now, after another round of high-profile protests, a Republican National Convention heavy with “law and order” rhetoric, and a wave of quality national and state data, we can say with some confidence that those who raised the alarm about the demonstrations have, so far, been comprehensively wrong.
The limits of the ’68 comparisons should have been obvious from the beginning.
In the first place, the racial attitudes of the American public and the disposition of the mainstream press toward racial protest have changed dramatically over the last half-century. Our basic political geography has also changed, as has the composition and partisan sort of the electorate.
And the “law and order” candidate this time around is a historically unpopular incumbent who has deepened the lawlessness and disorder he decries—an incumbent who, incidentally, has also bungled the response to a pandemic that remains at the top of mind for most voters and has killed nearly 190,000 Americans.
The Trump campaign’s decision to elide this last fact and lean fully into messaging about urban disorder during the RNC should have been seen universally as an act of desperation. Instead, a slew of pundits—spooked by the unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, following the shooting of Jacob Blake, not chastened in the slightest by Biden’s numbers post-Minneapolis—insisted that Trump had settled on a strategy sure to succeed absent a dramatic change in strategy from Biden who, just to shut people up, delivered his millionth denunciation of rioting in Pittsburgh and Kenosha this week.
“It’s no use dismissing their words as partisan talking points,” The Atlantic’s George Packer wrote of the RNClast Friday. “They are effective ones, backed up by certain facts. Trump will bang this loud, ugly drum until Election Day. He knows that Kenosha has placed Democrats in a trap.”
On Monday, the Times’ Bret Stephens accusedprogressives of “unthinkingly helping Trump” and referenced a recent book on looting that had upset some in his circle. “Many of these friends, I suspect, will reluctantly vote for Trump,” he wrote, “not out of sympathy for him, but out of disgust with defenses of looting and other things they see too often on the left.”
Anecdotes like this tell us nothing about the wider electorate, of course; Stephens doesn’t have that many friends. We can turn instead to a collection of polls released over the past week. According to FiveThirtyEight’s average, Biden leads Trump by over seven points nationally, 50.4 to 43 percent. And despite the right’s best efforts, the constituency of Americans who believe Joe Biden is in cahoots with the Black bloc remains small.
According to The Economist and YouGov’s latest national poll, only 38 percent of voters believe Biden holds extreme views compared to 56 percent who say the same of Trump. That holds true even among the always critical over-65 set that the Trump campaign and the conservative press probably imagined they’d have an easier time scaring—unsurprisingly, polls have shown them to be more hostile to the protests and anxious about unrest than the electorate at large. Even so, 50 percent of them say Trump holds extreme views, while 37 percent say the same of Biden.
Quinnipiac’s latestfinds 50 percent of likely voters and a 46 percent plurality of those over 65 believe they’re less safe with Trump as president. A 42 percent plurality of likely voters and a 46 percent plurality of those over 65 believe they would be safer with Biden as president.
Moreover, 52 percent of voters disapproveand 42 percent of voters approve of Trump’s handling of “crime and criminal justice” specifically, according to The Economistand YouGov. Similarly, 55 percent of voters say Trump’s handling of crime makes them “uneasy,” to the 39 percent who express confidence in it.
These are all national numbers, and they wouldn’t mean all that much if they didn’t hold true in the swing states likeliest to actually decide the election—but they appear to. It should be old news by now that the ballyhooed decline in support for Black Lives Matter in Wisconsin—likely the consequence of a repolarization around the protests that didn’t actually reduce net support for the movement—also didn’t correspond at all with Biden’s lead in the state, which continued a fairly steady rise.
Now we can say that the unrest in Kenosha hasn’t put a real dent in Biden’s standing either. On Wednesday, the day before he set foot in Kenosha for an address on the violence, Biden led Trump in FiveThirtyEight’s average by 7.2 points: 50.2 to 43 percent. On August 23, the day Jacob Blake was shot, Biden led by seven points: 50.1 to 43.1 percent.
When asked how worried they were about crime and lower property values being brought to their own particular neighborhoods, a full 74 percent of Pennsylvania voters replied that they were “not too” or “not at all” concerned, including 66 percent of voters over 65, 75 percent of noncollege whites, and 75 percent of those in deeply pro-Trump counties.
None of these numbers should be taken as indication that Biden has nothing to worry about. Although Trump hasn’t been able to pin him on the riots and Biden continues to lead in polling on coronavirus, character, and uniting the country, he still isn’t doing especially well on the economy. A 48 percent plurality of registered voters believe it’s getting worse, according to The Economist and YouGov; CNN finds 58 percent of Americans are worried about the economic situation in their own communities. Yet Trump is effectively tied or ahead of Biden on the economy in multiple polls—likely voters split 48 to 48 percent on who would handle the economy better in Quinnipiac, and CNN, which shows Trump with a net positive economic approval rating, has him a toe ahead of Biden on the issue: 49 to 48 percent. Trump is also tied with Biden on the economy among likely voters in Wisconsin, 46 to 44 percent, according to a Fox News poll.
It should be said that the political impact of the protests and riots may still change between now and November. The takeaway from all we’ve seen over the past few months isn’t that unrest and radical action are, always and everywhere, free of political cost. Rather, it’s that our current political commentariat can’t reliably inform us when and how those costs might be incurred. The underlying questions are too complex to be handled at our discourse’s normal speed; the many voices within it who allow their disdain for radicalism to cloud their analyses can’t be trusted to handle the issue carefully anyway. That’s a responsibility left to the rest of us.
We’ve been in a trade war with China since Bill Clinton. You didn’t know it until Donald Trump told you.
Last edited:
Of course we have been. How many tariffs did Trump lay on China that directly impacted Americans? None of which solved the issue.
Trump getting out of the way of the economy? Surely you jest!? You need to pay closer attention!
Latest news
Sept. 4, 2020
Theories that the unrest following the police shooting of Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin, would benefit President Trump electorally appear to have been wrong -- at least so far. To the contrary, a new ABC News/Ipsos survey found that most Americans think the president is making the situation worse, while majorities think Joe Biden would do a better job handling the protests, racial discrimination and uniting the country. Meanwhile, Biden’s lead in national polls has narrowed since the Republican National Convention, but only slightly. New state-level polls show basically the same thing as national polls -- a relatively stable race.
2020 Election Forecast
Latest forecast of the 2020 presidential election between President Donald Trump and Joe Biden by Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEightprojects.fivethirtyeight.com
Interesting. I was a part of the Ipsos polling from yesterday.
Okay....
so Trump was heavily involved in creating record economic numbers and the lowest Black unemployment rate ever.
