• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

2020 Presidential Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
Craig4 said:
After watching Fareed's show yesterday, I expect Trump to declare himself the winner on election night based on early returns that almost always favor Republicans. A few days later, that will change and it will be clear Trump lost. Chris Wallace and John Roberts (Fox White House correspondent) better come heavy on election night at Fox. They might be the only two left at Fox who can tamp this down.
Click to expand...

The most important thing all commentators could do is to preface every results update with the phrase "With just XX percent of the votes counted, ....". Make clear every time that it's not over until it's over.
 
Bob001 said:
The most important thing all commentators could do is to preface every results update with the phrase "With just XX percent of the votes counted, ....". Make clear every time that it's not over until it's over.
Click to expand...
You think people acknowledge qualifiers and parse nuance and I think it makes you adorable.
 
While Trump clings to the claim about Biden being an extreme far-leftist who works for Bernie and Mao, Republicans running for office in Missouri and Nebraska have released ads that openly acknowledge that Biden is actually on their side: they play video of Biden's own anti-progressive rants to make the Republicans' case for them that their opponents in those races contrast with Biden by actually being lefties. They don't appear to think the public would buy Trump's claim that Biden is precisely what he was ranting against in those videos. That makes these Missouri & Nebraska Republican campaign videos essentially refutations against Trump's own campaign theme.
 
Last edited:
Top HHS official accuses scientists of plotting against Trump, tells supporters to buy ammunition

The top communications official at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) accused career government scientists of plotting against President Trump and told Trump supporters to arm themselves ahead of the November presidential election.

Michael Caputo said the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was harboring a “resistance unit" to Trump.

The scientists "haven’t gotten out of their sweatpants except for meetings at coffee shops to plot how they’re going to attack Donald Trump. There are scientists who work for this government who do not want America to get well, not until after Joe Biden is president.”

Caputo also warned Trump's followers to be prepared for an armed insurrection when Democratic nominee Joe Biden refuses to concede the election.

"When Donald Trump refuses to stand down at the inauguration, the shooting will begin,” Caputo said. “If you carry guns, buy ammunition, ladies and gentlemen, because it’s going to be hard to get.”
Click to expand...

https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...es-scientists-of-plotting-against-trump-tells
 
Trump Tweets

Rasmussen was one of the most accurate polls in 2016. Actually, I think, based on Crowds and Enthusiasm (of which Sleepy Joe has none!), that we are MUCH higher than 51%. The only thing Joe can count on is that a Federal Judge doesn’t eviscerate the Fake Ballot Rigging Scam!
 
Bob001 said:
Caputo is a long-time Trump hack and Roger Stone pal. He is not a health expert or a career official. Trump put him there in April.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...avels-pushes-conspiratorial-nonsense-n1240061
Click to expand...
If not for the constant maelstrom, Caputo would be a huge scandal. As you suggest, he's a stark raving mad CTist ala Roger Stone. And like quite a number of Trump appointees, he's not qualified for the job in any way, shape or form.

Just by virtue of not being frothing anti-science nuts, most of us here would be far more qualified.
 
Lincoln Project is on a roll.

Three messages:
1. you've (this one to is directed at Trump personally) spent bigly on the campaign and has to throw in his own money now.
2. it's not working. You're still losing.
3. oh, and lest you forget from our previous ad, your own people are still corrupt and embezzling campaign money.

I don't have metrics on how effective they are, but I just love these ads. It's like they know exactly how to get to him. Also love the use of a condescending female speaker for the *****-grabber in chief :D .
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Scientific American Tweeted

@sciam
Scientific American has never endorsed a presidential candidate in our 175-year history—until now.
The 2020 election is literally a matter of life and death. We urge you to vote for health, science and Joe Biden for President.
https://scientificamerican.com/article/scientific-american-endorses-joe-biden/
Click to expand...

That speaks volumes. Sadly, to Trump supporters it says "Those Godless elitist scientists are trying to take down President Trump. Caputo is right!"
 
I got a low resolution poll that includes information on the undecided voter.

Dead Heat In Sunshine by Florida Atlantic University

Biden hold a 49% to 46% lead in the ballot test with 5% undecided.
Those undecided voters are breaking for Trump 4:1 resulting in a statistical
tie at 50% each. About 9% of voters said there is a chance they will change
their mind while the other 91% said they will definitely stick with their choice.
97% of Trump voters and 94% of Biden voters say they will not change their
minds.
Click to expand...


I kept wondering, if you consider yourself liberal, then how could you not
know the president or his actions. Likewise, I expected the removal of certain
elements from the Republican Party reflects the inability to change their vote.

Big minus with this poll: A size ten times too small to detect third party voters.
I can only hope turn out remains small as in the Moore scenario.


I'm looking at the this survey on Rights And Responsibilities by Harvard University.
Surprised that the right to bare arms and BLT rights came in so low in importance.
I expected higher numbers from all the media coverage.
 
Solitaire said:
I got a low resolution poll that includes information on the undecided voter.




I kept wondering, if you consider yourself liberal, then how could you not
know the president or his actions. Likewise, I expected the removal of certain
elements from the Republican Party reflects the inability to change their vote.

Big minus with this poll: A size ten times too small to detect third party voters.
I can only hope turn out remains small as in the Moore scenario.


I'm looking at the this survey on Rights And Responsibilities by Harvard University.
Surprised that the right to bare arms and BLT rights came in so low in importance. I expected higher numbers from all the media coverage.
Click to expand...

So am I. People are usually pretty strong on their opinions on being able to cover their arms or not and on their bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwiches. :D
 
How badly is your campaign going if you’re resorting to accusing your opponent of taking performance enhancing drugs?

Trump War Room tweeted

Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022
@TrumpWarRoom
Joe Biden does NOT deny he is taking performance enhancing drugs
 
Captain_Swoop said:
How badly is your campaign going if you’re resorting to accusing your opponent of taking performance enhancing drugs?

Trump War Room tweeted

Trump War Room - Text TRUMP to 88022
@TrumpWarRoom
Joe Biden does NOT deny he is taking performance enhancing drugs
Click to expand...

On the other hand, Donald is NOT denying he is taking anti-paranoid schizophrenic drugs.
 
Safe-Keeper said:
Lincoln Project is on a roll.

Three messages:
1. you've (this one to is directed at Trump personally) spent bigly on the campaign and has to throw in his own money now.
2. it's not working. You're still losing.
3. oh, and lest you forget from our previous ad, your own people are still corrupt and embezzling campaign money.

I don't have metrics on how effective they are, but I just love these ads. It's like they know exactly how to get to him. Also love the use of a condescending female speaker for the *****-grabber in chief :D .
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how effective this would be against Trump. I watched and came away unimpressed. I had high hopes though! They could have done it way better.

Clinton outspent Trump by over a billion and she should have benefited by the RNC not being behind their own candidate until very late in the game.
Do you think that Trump needs to pay for more media exposure than his opponent this time? I don't think that is true for a campaign like his.

Trump is already President and so he actually could spend LESS this time around. He has the most free media of anyone on the planet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom