How to cancel an election/Trump's plan if he loses
Smedley said:
It's possible to lament those things *and* be thankful they cost Trump re-election, if in fact they cost Trump re-election.
how would we know what would have happened in an alternate reality?
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
not sure what that link is supposed to prove.
from the beginning of the year, Biden was performing well in battleground states, and except for some weirdness in April, Biden's lead held steady or increased consistently.
Anyway, I've though Trump was a sure loser since last year.
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
not sure what that link is supposed to prove.
from the beginning of the year, Biden was performing well in battleground states, and except for some weirdness in April, Biden's lead held steady or increased consistently.
Anyway, I've though Trump was a sure loser since last year.
The link shows on march 11 Trump had a 54% chance to win the electoral college. So at the time he was hardly a "sure loser" based on the data.
Re impeachment -- I'm not the first one to notice this, but one big fear raised by impeachment had been that in a national crisis, Trump would treat the country the way he treated Ukraine. And, in fact, that's come to pass. So whether or not it was dumb to impeach Trump, the reasons he was impeached for are looking well grounded in retrospect.
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
not sure what that link is supposed to prove.
from the beginning of the year, Biden was performing well in battleground states, and except for some weirdness in April, Biden's lead held steady or increased consistently.
Anyway, I've though Trump was a sure loser since last year.
The link shows on march 11 Trump had a 54% chance to win the electoral college. So at the time he was hardly a "sure loser" based on the data.
on March 11, Biden was not the clear winner of the nomination yet. Once he was, later in March, he started
to pull away.
polling without a real candidate is kinda useless.
Smedley said:
Let’s just have the election rather than reflect on impeachment. As crappy as 2020 has been with COVID and racial injustices, both have shone a light on how sh*tty a president trump is and hopefully that will result in him not being re-elected. The further the dumb and botched impeachment recedes into the rear-view mirror by November, and the more it is forgotten, the better.
If trump loses it will be despite democrats, rather than because of democrats. The Dems can then thank their lucky stars that Derek chauvin and the guy who ate the bat in China were things this year.
How was the impeachment process "dumb" and "botched" exactly? If anything, Boltons book proves that they impeached him exactly for the right reason. The fact the GOP sold their souls to the devil is no reason not to do the right thing.
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
not sure what that link is supposed to prove.
from the beginning of the year, Biden was performing well in battleground states, and except for some weirdness in April, Biden's lead held steady or increased consistently.
Anyway, I've though Trump was a sure loser since last year.
The link shows on march 11 Trump had a 54% chance to win the electoral college. So at the time he was hardly a "sure loser" based on the data.
on March 11, Biden was not the clear winner of the nomination yet. Once he was, later in March, he started
to pull away.polling without a real candidate is kinda useless.
Biden had effectively a 100% of winning the nomination as of March 11. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
I'm not sure what you're arguing about really. If you're saying that Trump was a sure loser before Covid and George Floyd, that may have been your hunch at the time, but it's not supported by data.
basil said:
Smedley said:
Let’s just have the election rather than reflect on impeachment. As crappy as 2020 has been with COVID and racial injustices, both have shone a light on how sh*tty a president trump is and hopefully that will result in him not being re-elected. The further the dumb and botched impeachment recedes into the rear-view mirror by November, and the more it is forgotten, the better.
If trump loses it will be despite democrats, rather than because of democrats. The Dems can then thank their lucky stars that Derek chauvin and the guy who ate the bat in China were things this year.How was the impeachment process "dumb" and "botched" exactly? If anything, Boltons book proves that they impeached him exactly for the right reason. The fact the GOP sold their souls to the devil is no reason not to do the right thing.
It was dumb and botched because it predictably didn't remove trump from office nor did it sway public opinion. All it did was give the MAGA crowd a rallying cry about Dem overreach, which -- to my original point this morning -- has thankfully been eclipsed by Covid and racial injustice as election issues.
Smedley said:
basil said:
Smedley said:
Let’s just have the election rather than reflect on impeachment. As crappy as 2020 has been with COVID and racial injustices, both have shone a light on how sh*tty a president trump is and hopefully that will result in him not being re-elected. The further the dumb and botched impeachment recedes into the rear-view mirror by November, and the more it is forgotten, the better.
If trump loses it will be despite democrats, rather than because of democrats. The Dems can then thank their lucky stars that Derek chauvin and the guy who ate the bat in China were things this year.How was the impeachment process "dumb" and "botched" exactly? If anything, Boltons book proves that they impeached him exactly for the right reason. The fact the GOP sold their souls to the devil is no reason not to do the right thing.
It was dumb and botched because it predictably didn't remove trump from office nor did it sway public opinion. All it did was give the MAGA crowd a rallying cry about Dem overreach, which -- to my original point this morning -- has thankfully been eclipsed by Covid and racial injustice as election issues.
BLM really should have taken a poll before going to protest Floyd's death. What if public opinion hadn't come behind them?
Apples to apples right there.
Let me ask you this, if Pelosi & co. knew what the end result of impeachment would be beforehand, do you think they would do the same thing the same way all over again?
Smedley said:
Apples to apples right there.
Let me ask you this, if Pelosi & co. knew what the end result of impeachment would be beforehand, do you think they would do the same thing the same way all over again?
If you knew how the 2016 election would have ended ahead of time, would you still have voted?
ml1 said:
everyone knew ahead of time what the end result of impeachment would be
Well that was a lot of hullabaloo for an academic exercise.
Smedley said:
Well that was a lot of hullabaloo for an academic exercise.
did you really think the Senate would convict? I don't know anyone who thought it was a probability.
ml1 said:
I would put that probability at pretty close to zero. The Republicans in the House and Senate had the opportunity to rid the country of Trump this winter and did nothing. Actually worse than nothing. They opposed impeachment and removal.
The difference, as I see it, is that getting him out pro actively was a gamble that might cost them their political future and I think we agree that this is what motivates them.
If he lost the election, they would have a better excuse to ask him to leave peacefully. The handwriting would be on the wall and by not escorting him out the door they would probably hurt their political future.
I'm not ascribing altruistic motives. I think many of them recognize the damage he has done to the Republican Party, but they care about there personal careers and are weighing the options. Pure pragmatism. A few extremists among them might back Trump just to go on the attack against the Dems and just go down in flames but I don't think it will be the majority.
However it happens, as long as it happens.
ml1 said:
Smedley said:
Well that was a lot of hullabaloo for an academic exercise.
did you really think the Senate would convict? I don't know anyone who thought it was a probability.
Of course not. That was always a prayer.
Note I said earlier that the failure of impeachment was that it didn't remove trump from office nor did it sway public opinion.
Do you really think Pelosi, a career politician and a strident adversary of POTUS, moved on impeachment purely as an issue of right and wrong? Something from the Girl Scout code or something? Not at all as a political move meant to weaken Trump ahead of an election?
Come on, man.
That was the failure of impeachment -- that it didn't weaken Trump politically at all. If anything it turned out being a marginal benefit for him, because while the left was demoralized at how the whole thing went pffft with the electorate, it fired up the MAGA side by playing right into Trump's aggrieved, poor-me narrative.
basil said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
everyone knew ahead of time what the end result of impeachment would be
Well that was a lot of hullabaloo for an academic exercise.
Are you always this grumpy?
Let me ask you this, if Pelosi & co. knew what the end result of impeachment would be beforehand, do you think they would do the same thing the same way all over again?
Smedley said:
Do you really think Pelosi, a career politician and a strident adversary of POTUS, moved on impeachment purely as an issue of right and wrong? Something from the Girl Scout code or something? Not at all as a political move meant to weaken Trump ahead of an election?
Pelosi passed the ACA and, IIRC, strongly suspected it would have negative repercussions for the House Democratic caucus. I think that, in fact, sometimes politicians do act in pursuit of what they believe to be the right course of action.
Smedley said:
Of course not. That was always a prayer.
Note I said earlier that the failure of impeachment was that it didn't remove trump from office nor did it sway public opinion.
Do you really think Pelosi, a career politician and a strident adversary of POTUS, moved on impeachment purely as an issue of right and wrong? Something from the Girl Scout code or something? Not at all as a political move meant to weaken Trump ahead of an election?
Come on, man.
That was the failure of impeachment -- that it didn't weaken Trump politically at all. If anything it turned out being a marginal benefit for him, because while the left was demoralized at how the whole thing went pffft with the electorate, it fired up the MAGA side by playing right into Trump's aggrieved, poor-me narrative.
The Ukraine extortion was so open, so obviously wrong that it forced Pelosi's hand. I don't think she really wanted an impeachment, but not impeaching Trump at that point would have angered a fairly large part of the Democratic base, as well as a fairly significant chunk of her caucus. She really had no choice, or at least not a great choice from a political standpoint.
Smedley said:
That was the failure of impeachment -- that it didn't weaken Trump politically at all. If anything it turned out being a marginal benefit for him, because while the left was demoralized at how the whole thing went pffft with the electorate, it fired up the MAGA side by playing right into Trump's aggrieved, poor-me narrative.
If the House had not moved forward on impeachment it would have demoralized "the left" and the Democratic base far more than the failure of the Senate to remove him did.
The Election of Trump energized left leaning women to become political activists. They fueled the 2018 Blue Wave. If after that the Dems just punted they would have questioned why they had spent so much time and energy.
You seem to understand the Trump base far more than you understand the Anti-Trump Base.
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
drummerboy said:
Smedley said:
STANV said:
How do you account for the "Blue Wave" in 2018?
Many people did not need the incompetent response to COVID 19 and the images of Police murders to know that Trump was a bum. But the more the merrier.
The "blue wave" of 2018 was what it was, but as recently as Feb/Mar 2020 Trump's approval rate was up to 45-46%, he had >60% approval on the economy which was humming along, and he was likely to win re-election. It wasn't until recently that he went from likely to unlikely. (Which of course could still change back again.)
that's a strange recollection.
He hasn't been "likely" to win in a long time.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/
Is it? have you heard of a thing called the electoral college?
not sure what that link is supposed to prove.
from the beginning of the year, Biden was performing well in battleground states, and except for some weirdness in April, Biden's lead held steady or increased consistently.
Anyway, I've though Trump was a sure loser since last year.
The link shows on march 11 Trump had a 54% chance to win the electoral college. So at the time he was hardly a "sure loser" based on the data.
on March 11, Biden was not the clear winner of the nomination yet. Once he was, later in March, he started
to pull away.polling without a real candidate is kinda useless.
Biden had effectively a 100% of winning the nomination as of March 11. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-primary-forecast/
I'm not sure what you're arguing about really. If you're saying that Trump was a sure loser before Covid and George Floyd, that may have been your hunch at the time, but it's not supported by data.
a prediction that simply follows today's poll is not much of a prediction. my "hunch" was based on the 2018 election turnout and the fact that Trump was no longer an outsider but had an actual record to defend.
Among other things.
COVID has just turned a probable loss into a probable landslide.
Smedley said:
Do you really think Pelosi, a career politician and a strident adversary of POTUS, moved on impeachment purely as an issue of right and wrong? Something from the Girl Scout code or something? Not at all as a political move meant to weaken Trump ahead of an election?
Come on, man.
That was the failure of impeachment -- that it didn't weaken Trump politically at all. If anything it turned out being a marginal benefit for him, because while the left was demoralized at how the whole thing went pffft with the electorate, it fired up the MAGA side by playing right into Trump's aggrieved, poor-me narrative.
Come on, man. You’re not thinking this through. The earliest coronavirus infections were detected in Wuhan in the first week of December. When did Pelosi announce that the House would draft articles of impeachment? That’s right: the first week of December.
Democrats needed something to distract Trump, because they knew the pandemic was what would really weaken him politically. So they came up with the impeachment plan. Rather effective after all, wasn’t it?
Smedley said:
basil said:
Smedley said:
ml1 said:
everyone knew ahead of time what the end result of impeachment would be
Well that was a lot of hullabaloo for an academic exercise.
Are you always this grumpy?
Let me ask you this, if Pelosi & co. knew what the end result of impeachment would be beforehand, do you think they would do the same thing the same way all over again?
Yes I do actually. Like ml1 I believe this Ukraine behavior was so clearly an impeachable offense, and so brazen and out in the open, that ignoring it was simply impossible. And it has the extra bonus of being the right thing to do.
DaveSchmidt said:
Come on, man. You’re not thinking this through. The earliest coronavirus infections were detected in Wuhan in the first week of December. When did Pelosi announce that the House would draft articles of impeachment? That’s right: the first week of December.
Democrats needed something to distract Trump, because they knew the pandemic was what would really weaken him politically. So they came up with the impeachment plan. Rather effective after all, wasn’t it?
Do you own Alcoa stock?
Dennis_Seelbach said:
Do you own Alcoa stock?
No. Alcoa is more aluminumy than it is irony.
For Sale
Garage Sales
-
MAY THE 4TH BE WITH YOU YARD SALE Sale Date: May 4, 2024
More info
Free Items
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
It's possible to lament those things *and* be thankful they cost Trump re-election, if in fact they cost Trump re-election.