Streathamite
ideological dogmatist
deleted - DP due to techie problems
I haven't got a clue about how the debates will pan out, and yes both could lose.So let me get this right: you're expecting a proper debate where either side could lose?
The ghosts of Richard Nixon and JFK would tell you they did. Before the first TV debate in thye 1960 contest, Nixon qwas leading and - as incumbent VP - the strong favourite to win. The incredibly telegenic Kennedy came acoss brilliantly, Nixon looked and sounded awful. Kennedy squeaked home.
Equally, Al Gore started the 2000 election-proper race as a widely-admired incumbent VP, and favourite to win, agaisnt a man widely soon as a thick, ignorant buffoon who would be nothing without his family name. In the debates, Gore came across as badly as is humanly possible - he came across as an arrogant, patronising, smug jerk with zero empathy or emotional IQ. Bush came across as a friendly, regular guy. That - plus some spectacularly venal electoral chicanery in Florida - won Bush the Presidency.
In a tight race, the debates matter, because such a race is decided by independent and undecided voters, and it is one of the few occasions they can sit down in the comfort of their own homes, and study how the candidates perform, and address issues, under pressure, over a long stint.
fair enough, we agree to disagree.Alright man. I still disagree. I don't think there ever is any 'debate' even on their terms.
Just asking, but do they ever make much difference? They're usually a couple of prepared statements over here in the UK aren't they, rather than the heavyweight slug-fest they are billed as.
That’s actually a good post.
Be interesting to see how Trump handles Biden as if it looks like he’s clubbing a baby seal, Biden may end up with a few sympathy votes.
Meanwhile - Nancy Pelosi doesn’t think there should be any debates!
oh gawd, let me guess: Marty1 or Donald HI mean the thread had promise and then this bollix turns up.
oh gawd, let me guess: Marty1 or Donald H
Oh great.Donald got zapped, Marty 1 continues
On (1) I absolutely agree with you that the demise of populism is nonsense. But I'd challenge the contention that candidates who run from the centre don't win anymore (I'd probably re-phrase that to be technocratic liberals don't win anymore) - after all the traditional centre-left/greens had something of a return in this years French elections, in Canada Trudeau won re-election (although lost his majority) and there was no populist breakthrough, in Germany the SPD actually managed a victory at the state level, after years of victories Erodgan's suffering recent loses, even in the Warsaw mayoral elections where the populist won it was a narrow win.The evidence is as follows:
1. Candidates who run from the centre don’t win anymore. Reports of the demise of populism are mainly the stuff of liberal fantasy. Does the pandemic scare people back to flaccid neo-liberalism? We’ll see
2. Biden’s appeal is essentially the same as Clinton’s. Both are insiders, both are establishment pols. Both reject change and present themselves as better managers of a system that voters have had enough of
3. The Dems will want to keep Biden covered up for sure. But as some point he’ll need to subject to public scrutiny. Let’s be honest here - he’s not a well man. To put it mildly. The right and media are going to savage him and highlight his gaffes and frailness endlessly.
4. The dem bounce looks over. Have a look at the latest polling especially in the states where the poster I was replying to was predicting a Biden walkover. The lead is less than firm. I’d argue that his two VP wins were more explainable by his running mate by the way.
At this point calling the result is for guessers and clairvoyants. But, this idea of a Biden landslide (which is what I was replying to), is a nonsense.
Also, New England becomes part of England again, Georgia becomes part of Georgia (Caucasus) and Paris, Texas becomes a suburb of Paris, France. It could happen.Biden wins both popular and electoral, kicking off massive protests by armed militias that descend into a combination of civil war and mass state secessions. Oregon becomes part of Canada; New Mexico just becomes a part of Mexico.
Biden wins both popular and electoral, kicking off massive protests by armed militias that descend into a combination of civil war and mass state secessions. Oregon becomes part of Canada; New Mexico just becomes a part of Mexico.
united forever in vast endless spaceAnd Alaska, like Crimea, will be liberated and return to the loving embrace of mother Russia.
Uhhh...you do know that Washington State is between Oregon and Canada, yes?Biden wins both popular and electoral, kicking off massive protests by armed militias that descend into a combination of civil war and mass state secessions. Oregon becomes part of Canada; New Mexico just becomes a part of Mexico.
Pretty good analysis that - but I also think you neded to factor in the latinosOn (1) I absolutely agree with you that the demise of populism is nonsense. But I'd challenge the contention that candidates who run from the centre don't win anymore (I'd probably re-phrase that to be technocratic liberals don't win anymore) - after all the traditional centre-left/greens had something of a return in this years French elections, in Canada Trudeau won re-election (although lost his majority) and there was no populist breakthrough, in Germany the SPD actually managed a victory at the state level, after years of victories Erodgan's suffering recent loses, even in the Warsaw mayoral elections where the populist won it was a narrow win.
National populism certainly is not going anywhere but there are relatively few places in the west where it is not a minority position with a cap on support. Which is where I disagree with you on (2). First, I don't think there is much evidence the sort of personal dislike voters had for Clinton with respect to Biden. That, combined with the four years of Trump, mean that the anti-Trump coalition is more strongly behind Biden than it was behind Clinton. Remember, that anti-Trump view led to the highest mid-term turnout since 1914. And while I admit it is possible for Biden's support to go down how does Trump's go up? What's so amazing about Trump's support/opposition is how constant it has been. OK there's been a little variation, the initial Covid-19 stuff gave him a small rally round the flag bounce, the combination of his subsequent handling of Covid-19 + and BLM stuff more than reversed that, but really the support/opposition has been pretty much flat.
There's always been a bigger anti-Trump vote than pro-Trump vote. Trump got lucky in 2016 in that pretty much everything was in alignment he was running against a candidate that was almost as unpopular as he was, and the Republicans had an real advantage in the electoral college, the Sunbelt seats that were/are drifting Democrat were still too far away for Clinton (who nevertheless had better votes than previous Democrats) to counteract the loss of the Rustbelt seats that had been drifting away from the Democrats. How much of that electoral college advantage remains is an open question but there is evidence that it is less than in 2016 (1, 2).
So while I can absolutely buy that there could (in fact probably will) be a narrowing of the polls by November, I don't see how Trump is going to take the popular vote, and I'll be highly surprised if Biden does not win the popular vote by more than Clinton did. And in that case it is difficult (but admittedly not impossible) for Trump to win.
I also don't agree that that a Biden landslide is a nonsense, certainly not in the EC where relatively small swings could change the numbers very significantly. Flavour is correct when they say that not only the Rustbelt states but Florida and the Sunbelt states are realistic targets for the Dems.
Uhhh...you do know that Washington State is between Oregon and Canada, yes?
Yeah, I know. I was originally going to say Washington and Oregon, but I'm not au fait with the former's current political climate.Uhhh...you do know that Washington State is between Oregon and Canada, yes?
Fair enoughYeah, I know. I was originally going to say Washington and Oregon, but I'm not au fait with the former's current political climate.
There's a movement for large swathes of rural Washington to secede and join idaho.Fair enough
Seattle - even more liberal than Oregon,
the small town/farming hinterlands, not sure
Apols if a pea roast, but this webpage may be a useful reference point over the next couple of months:Biden strikes me as a much weaker candidate than Hillary Clinton, perhaps because I hear too much Trump propaganda about him, so I'm really not convinced that he will be able to win a majority in the Electoral College, even if he wins the popular vote. I'm also fairly convinced that at least some of the Republican voter suppression plots will succeed, giving Trump a significant advantage.
Do you share my pessimism(Marty1 are you creaming yourself at the mere thought of it)? Also, will the Democrats be as accepting as they were last time, if he wins the popular vote and loses the electoral college? If it all starts going tits up would the military step in?
On (1) I absolutely agree with you that the demise of populism is nonsense. But I'd challenge the contention that candidates who run from the centre don't win anymore (I'd probably re-phrase that to be technocratic liberals don't win anymore) - after all the traditional centre-left/greens had something of a return in this years French elections, in Canada Trudeau won re-election (although lost his majority) and there was no populist breakthrough, in Germany the SPD actually managed a victory at the state level, after years of victories Erodgan's suffering recent loses, even in the Warsaw mayoral elections where the populist won it was a narrow win.
National populism certainly is not going anywhere but there are relatively few places in the west where it is not a minority position with a cap on support. Which is where I disagree with you on (2). First, I don't think there is much evidence the sort of personal dislike voters had for Clinton with respect to Biden. That, combined with the four years of Trump, mean that the anti-Trump coalition is more strongly behind Biden than it was behind Clinton. Remember, that anti-Trump view led to the highest mid-term turnout since 1914. And while I admit it is possible for Biden's support to go down how does Trump's go up? What's so amazing about Trump's support/opposition is how constant it has been. OK there's been a little variation, the initial Covid-19 stuff gave him a small rally round the flag bounce, the combination of his subsequent handling of Covid-19 + and BLM stuff more than reversed that, but really the support/opposition has been pretty much flat.
There's always been a bigger anti-Trump vote than pro-Trump vote. Trump got lucky in 2016 in that pretty much everything was in alignment he was running against a candidate that was almost as unpopular as he was, and the Republicans had an real advantage in the electoral college, the Sunbelt seats that were/are drifting Democrat were still too far away for Clinton (who nevertheless had better votes than previous Democrats) to counteract the loss of the Rustbelt seats that had been drifting away from the Democrats. How much of that electoral college advantage remains is an open question but there is evidence that it is less than in 2016 (1, 2).
So while I can absolutely buy that there could (in fact probably will) be a narrowing of the polls by November, I don't see how Trump is going to take the popular vote, and I'll be highly surprised if Biden does not win the popular vote by more than Clinton did. And in that case it is difficult (but admittedly not impossible) for Trump to win.
I also don't agree that that a Biden landslide is a nonsense, certainly not in the EC where relatively small swings could change the numbers very significantly. Flavour is correct when they say that not only the Rustbelt states but Florida and the Sunbelt states are realistic targets for the Dems.
Apols if a pea roast, but this webpage may be a useful reference point over the next couple of months:
US 2020 Presidential election forecast model: will Donald Trump or Joe Biden win?
I mean the thread had promise and then this bollix turns up.
There's also the FT and 538 trackersApols if a pea roast, but this webpage may be a useful reference point over the next couple of months:
US 2020 Presidential election forecast model: will Donald Trump or Joe Biden win?
especially they dynamic tracking: