Cont: The Biden Presidency (4)

The Great Zaganza

Maledictorian
The Great Zaganza
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
29,896
Continued from here.
Posted By: Agatha




Republicans have won ONE popular vote for President in the last 35 years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stacyhs said:
How is that 'centrist'? Sounds pretty progressive to me. And it's financially unfeasible anyway.
Click to expand...

It only sounds that way to a US person...
(literally the only 'advanced' country in the world that doesn't have a publicly funded universal heath care system...)

And it seems we all can manage to do it financially even...
(indeed at a considerably lower total cost per capita, and with better end results...)

(Biden would be a center right candidate in most countries, very few of his policies are even close to 'center', none close to even mildly 'left')
 
The US Presidency is a beauty contest, and has always been. There is no tradition to prepare a successor, the assumption being that most Presidents get a second term, at which point the Party holding the White House will change.

I wish that the same people who say Biden is to old and should set away from power would use the same level of energy to tell McConnell, Feinstein, Pelosi, SCJ Thomas, Alito and everyone else above 70.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
The US Presidency is a beauty contest, and has always been. There is no tradition to prepare a successor, the assumption being that most Presidents get a second term, at which point the Party holding the White House will change.

I wish that the same people who say Biden is to old and should set away from power would use the same level of energy to tell McConnell, Feinstein, Pelosi, SCJ Thomas, Alito and everyone else above 70.
Click to expand...
So that's trump out of the running too LOL

(he's 77, born in June, 1946)

Mind you- he's only a 'little' bit younger than Joe Biden (Nov,1942) and in considerably poorer physical health...
(no he isn't 6'3" and 215 pounds lol)
And mentally- well, yeah, his mental health has been in question for a long time....

(Biden's BMI is 24.1, while trump is (according to his self proclaimed figures) 30.4, but in reality- he's exaggerated his height, and reduced his weight (considerably) which likely means his BMI is far higher....)
 
acbytesla said:
Trump cannot win a general election against Biden.
Click to expand...
Edited by Agatha: 
Edited to remove reference to forum management issue


Anyway, 1 with at least the beginnings of a reason to actually believe it would be better... like this:

The Great Zaganza said:
Republicans have won ONE popular vote for President in the last 35 years.
Click to expand...
(I think you mean one who wasn't an incumbent, right?)

Unfortunately, that doesn't cut it.

For one thing, the rural party doesn't need the popular vote to win the Presidency over the urban party.

Second, 1 proves that it is possible, and the claim that started this was that it's impossible (and 1 out of the last 8 or 9 elections, or less than that if we're only counting non-incumbents, isn't even particularly tiny odds).

Third, a Biden popular-vote loss is what the surveys show us heading for, whether it would be the first time in whatever number of years or not. (They've wavered between a popular-vote loss and a toss-up, which averages out to a small loss... in an election where he needs to not just win but win by a certain minimum margin, not just any majority.)

And fourth, acting like it's already over and a Trump win is an absurd notion that could never really happen is an exact duplication of what many Democrats were doing when Trump actually won, except that the surveys now are slightly better for Trump than they were back then.

Bonus problem: the "the surveys can be wrong; just look at how wrong they were when Trump won" response is multiple types of failure combined; the surveys got it right that a Trump win was substantially likely, the pretense today that the surveys must be wrong in exactly the way we need is another exact duplication of the pretense back then that they were wrong in the exact way we need, to the small extent that any survey bias existed it was toward making things appear worse for Trump in the survey than they are in reality which is the opposite kind of survey bias from the one the argument would need, and if you do acknowledge the reality of the situation but your response is just to whine & scold people for not already having fallen in line then that's just how to make things worse for your own side not better.

Bonus bonus problem: one might want to counter the Trump/Biden surveys with the election results in recent special elections, which have swung in Democrats' favor by an average of 11 points compared to historical trends, but those are other Democrats versus other Republicans, not Biden versus Trump. So that comparison only means Biden should be up over Trump by about that much, which he isn't, so it only emphasizes that the Democrats are once again putting their weakest candidate up for the biggest position.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Biden has so weaponized the DOJ for political motives. Not only did they indict his son, but now they are going after Senator Menendez....
 
Delvo said:
Edited by Agatha: 

Anyway, 1 with at least the beginnings of a reason to actually believe it would be better... like this:

(I think you mean one who wasn't an incumbent, right?)

Unfortunately, that doesn't cut it.

For one thing, the rural party doesn't need the popular vote to win the Presidency over the urban party.

Second, 1 proves that it is possible, and the claim that started this was that it's impossible (and 1 out of the last 8 or 9 elections, or less than that if we're only counting non-incumbents, isn't even particularly tiny odds).

Third, a Biden popular-vote loss is what the surveys show us heading for, whether it would be the first time in whatever number of years or not. (They've wavered between a popular-vote loss and a toss-up, which averages out to a small loss... in an election where he needs to not just win but win by a certain minimum margin, not just any majority.)

And fourth, acting like it's already over and a Trump win is an absurd notion that could never really happen is an exact duplication of what many Democrats were doing when Trump actually won, except that the surveys now are slightly better for Trump than they were back then.

Bonus problem: the "the surveys can be wrong; just look at how wrong they were when Trump won" response is multiple types of failure combined; the surveys got it right that a Trump win was substantially likely, the pretense today that the surveys must be wrong in exactly the way we need is another exact duplication of the pretense back then that they were wrong in the exact way we need, to the small extent that any survey bias existed it was toward making things appear worse for Trump in the survey than they are in reality which is the opposite kind of survey bias from the one the argument would need, and if you do acknowledge the reality of the situation but your response is just to whine & scold people for not already having fallen in line then that's just how to make things worse for your own side not better.

Bonus bonus problem: one might want to counter the Trump/Biden surveys with the election results in recent special elections, which have swung in Democrats' favor by an average of 11 points compared to historical trends, but those are other Democrats versus other Republicans, not Biden versus Trump. So that comparison only means Biden should be up over Trump by about that much, which he isn't, so it only emphasizes that the Democrats are once again putting their weakest candidate up for the biggest position.
Click to expand...
Edited by Agatha: 


The biggest problem that seems to be lost is that the Republicans took measures to cheat in the 2024 elections. They've made it harder for Democrats to vote, they've gerry-mandered, they've put their own political operatives in as the "referees", they are getting help from Russia and other political rivals from other countries, they are also intimidating voters and election officials with violence.

Hillary did a fine job with her campaign, she could have done things better, but the big reason she lost was because Republicans don't play by the rules.

Biden is the most successful President in decades. He's doing a great job. However, it's an uphill battle because of Republican cheating and the media generally helping the Republican cause.
 
Mmm.

Last week, one day before the United Auto Workers launched a historic strike for higher wages, President Joe Biden delivered a speech outlining the "choice between Bidenomics and MAGAnomics."

"Republicans have given us a failed plan of trickle-down economics that didn’t work," he told students at Prince George’s Community College in Largo, Maryland. "My guess is, your story is just like mine: Not much trickled down that ended up helping y’all."

Biden went on to detail the lowlights of the GOP's trickle-down economic scheme in his view: shipping jobs overseas, hollowing out America's main streets and middle class, blowing up the deficit, and producing anemic growth.

"And it stripped the dignity and pride and hope out of a community, one after another," Biden concluded.

These are all important points. Also, does anyone even know the president gave that speech? Outside of event attendees, the White House press corps, and a subset of Beltway operatives, probably not.
Click to expand...

Related news - Biden is apparently going to join the picket lines on Tuesday. I can see that not happening, of course, if a deal is reached before then, and this announcement does add pressure. Also, Trump claims to be going on Wednesday, despite the strong union objections. After all, Trump has been a major enemy of workers and unions in practice and him trying to use them for a PR stunt is naturally repulsive in light of that.

In less pleasant news, looks like we may be facing a potential government shutdown. Again. Thanks to the 'Freedom from Sanity' Caucus and their Republican enablers.

In more pleasant news...

'Thanks Joe Biden’ trends on X, with glowing reviews of the president
 
Here's an example of stupidity even among liberal reporters.

David Brooks a well known typically progressive columnist pointed to his $79 meal of burger and fries at the Newark Airport saying this was why Americans think the economy was terrible.

The problem with his complaint was that the burger and fries cost $17. His liquor tab was $60.
 
acbytesla said:
Here's an example of stupidity even among liberal reporters.

David Brooks a well known typically progressive columnist pointed to his $79 meal of burger and fries at the Newark Airport saying this was why Americans think the economy was terrible.

The problem with his complaint was that the burger and fries cost $17. His liquor tab was $60.
Click to expand...
That's revealing.

Brooks is not a Progressive.
... an American moderate conservative political and cultural commentator ...
Click to expand...

Shields on Shields and Brooks was the Progressive voice, Brooks not so much.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Or not at all.
He just wasn't a Trumper.

Looks like now he is
Click to expand...

If someone isn't a Trumper, they are liberal-commie-scum-hippie-woke-panzies.

Looks like he saw the light and has come to the Right side of politics, the far-far, authoritarian Right.
 
Delvo said:
Third, a Biden popular-vote loss is what the surveys show us heading for, whether it would be the first time in whatever number of years or not. (They've wavered between a popular-vote loss and a toss-up, which averages out to a small loss...)
Click to expand...
Now by 9 points instead of just 1 or 2, according to this one:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/troubles-biden-age-reelection-campaign-poll/story?id=103436611

This seems to be the same one from what I could see before I got the pay-me-pop-up:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/24/biden-trump-poll-2024-election/

I don't buy such a sudden large jump, and it's definitely an outlier, but the statistically easiest way to get an oversized outlying jump is if there really is a smaller actual jump hidden inside it.
 
something went wrong if any poll results in a 9 point lead either way
 
Delvo said:
Now by 9 points instead of just 1 or 2, according to this one:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/troubles-biden-age-reelection-campaign-poll/story?id=103436611

This seems to be the same one from what I could see before I got the pay-me-pop-up:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/24/biden-trump-poll-2024-election/

I don't buy such a sudden large jump, and it's definitely an outlier, but the statistically easiest way to get an oversized outlying jump is if there really is a smaller actual jump hidden inside it.
Click to expand...

They are the same poll. :rolleyes:

And admittedly even by those 2 media sources, outliers. IOW **** we report because it's sensational.
 
Last edited:
Delvo said:
Now by 9 points instead of just 1 or 2, according to this one:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/troubles-biden-age-reelection-campaign-poll/story?id=103436611

This seems to be the same one from what I could see before I got the pay-me-pop-up:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/24/biden-trump-poll-2024-election/

I don't buy such a sudden large jump, and it's definitely an outlier, but the statistically easiest way to get an oversized outlying jump is if there really is a smaller actual jump hidden inside it.
Click to expand...

If you look at the metrics used by the polling company ABC news uses, it operates under a very narrow set of criteria for choosing respondents which leans heavily into landline phone owners and completely disregards online polling methodologies. This means it will heavily skew older and whiter.

The 9% margin is easily explained if they don't correct for their initial skew.
 
Not to mention they do a fixed percentage sample of each political party, for some reason, building in an assumption that there are an equal number of democrats and republicans in the population.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom