Presidential Election: 11/3/20 ---Now the President Elect Joe Biden Thread

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

He used to like it till he realized most of the country is not ****ing with him.

[Hersh]

2 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

 

 

 

 

Good reminder to current candidates how poorly run the Hillary campaign was in anyone actually thinking NC was in play. Don't make the same mistake this time. 

[tshile]

3 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Total malpractice to mention the Vegas thing and not give at least a PG version of the exploits...…..

Not possible

[Hersh]

7 minutes ago, tshile said:

Saying I went to Vegas is the PG version

 

fixed for you

[visionary]

 

[The Evil Genius]

5 hours ago, visionary said:

Won’t rural areas and smaller towns get ignored though?  I don’t know.  As much as I think the EC may be outdated, I’m not sure it’s a good idea for get rid of it.

 

 

 

 

Both California and New York have sizable rural populations. More so than many states combined. Currently their votes count for nothing at the federal election level (assuming the argument is that all rural areas vote overwhelmingly GOP). 

 

No one ever seems to mention that population area in those states though.

[Renegade7]

1 hour ago, Hersh said:

 

 

Good reminder to current candidates how poorly run the Hillary campaign was in anyone actually thinking NC was in play. Don't make the same mistake this time. 

Jesus, that was not amount that amount of resources.  If she just spread a little bit of the in the blue wall or all of it in Florida, she's probably president right now.

 

Am I the only one concerned with the idea of Biden walking in with the "expected to be crowned" rerun?

[88Comrade2000]

1 hour ago, visionary said:

 

That would be a mistake.  Let the race shake out. The veep may need to be one of the other candidates running, in order to unite the party.

36 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

Jesus, that was not amount that amount of resources.  If she just spread a little bit of the in the blue wall or all of it in Florida, she's probably president right now.

 

Am I the only one concerned with the idea of Biden walking in with the "expected to be crowned" rerun?

I don't get that.  The progressive base is decidedly not with Biden.  Biden may do better with the older voters but he will need the younger voters and that isn't going to be easy.

[Renegade7]

16 minutes ago, Rdskns2000 said:

That would be a mistake.  Let the race shake out. The veep may need to be one of the other candidates running, in order to unite the party.

 

I don't get that.  The progressive base is decidedly not with Biden.  Biden may do better with the older voters but he will need the younger voters and that isn't going to be easy.

 

Maybe I'm misreading the polling because I keep seeing him with a 10-20 point lead over Harris even without declaring.

[88Comrade2000]

6 hours ago, hail2skins said:

Total malpractice to mention the Vegas thing and not give at least a PG version of the exploits...…..

 

But I agree. Last incumbent president to not win re-election was GHWB in '92, and that was because he was running against a generational political talent in Clinton. I don't see a Bill Clinton in the crop of Dem candidates so far. The past two presidents before Trump went into their re-election bids fairly weakened, and yet were able to prevail. Trump has a decent economy going for him, albeit two years out, but his position is weakened by his insane narcissism. I also don't think the Dem candidate in 2020 is going to basically mail it in like Hillary did, and just assume that people wouldn't vote for Trump, and not make a better case for herself. And as others have said, I don't think many in the field so far have the baggage that Hillary did. I just think a lot of Americans do tend to be status quo, especially when the incumbent is running. Not sure how well they'll respond to a "shake it up" candidate...………….

The 2020 Dems are decisively to the left, save for Biden.  Thing is the country as a whole isn't quite there with the Dens yet. There's too many people who will buy the Trump/GOP/Russians attacks on the Dems.  Paint them as socialists, trying to change the country into something evil.  I know all the progressive feel now is the time. Their issues will win in 2020.  I think for every younger voter they get, they could lose an older voter. I could be dead wrong but nothing has convinced me that Trump doesn't win reelection.

When the Millennial and Gen Zers are the majority of the voting public; that's when progressivism will win en mass.  By the time AOC runs for presidennt in 2028; she just might be able to win it all.  She wouldn't win today, nor could she win in 2024. 

 

 

Kirsten Gillibrand needs to drop out.  She also had a town hall Monday but all your hear about is Warren's and that's even on MSNBC; which aired Gillibrand's town hall.

The 5 most likely people to be there when the primaries start are Sanders, Biden, Beto, Harris and Warren. Those are the ones you ear the most about now. You barely hear much about the others.

 

Once Joe jumps in, the only interesting thing might be who makes the futile attempt to run against Trump.  Weld, Hogan, Kasich, etc.. Who will it be.

 

[88Comrade2000]

7 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Maybe I'm misreading the polling because I keep seeing him with a 10-20 point lead over Harris even without declaring.

Name recognition.  He was the Veep.  The older Dems already know him.  Once Joe gets in, his numbers will go down. If Joe wins the nomination, he needs to convince those young voters to come out and vote for him.  His past will not sit well with today's younger voters.  The stances he took.  It is possible, Joe can win the nomination on the older voters alone; if the younger votes are split among several candidates.  He would need those voters in the fall.

 

Maybe someone should post a poll and see how the candidates poll well here?

[skinsmarydu]

10 hours ago, twa said:

He is not elected to be the representative

Yes, he's elected to represent us on the world stage. This one has failed miserably at trying to represent us in any good way. 

James Madison thought the EC could help Southern states because a large portion of their population (slaves) could not vote. That reasoning no longer applies. 

[skinsmarydu]

Mayor Pete on MoJoe now. 😃

[Bozo the kKklown]

10 hours ago, visionary said:

 

 

 

 

 

i think both guys have agendas

[twa]

1 hour ago, skinsmarydu said:

Yes, he's elected to represent us on the world stage.

 

a minor duty and one mostly delegated to others by a leader.

[grego]

7 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Name recognition.  He was the Veep.  The older Dems already know him.  Once Joe gets in, his numbers will go down. If Joe wins the nomination, he needs to convince those young voters to come out and vote for him.  His past will not sit well with today's younger voters.  The stances he took.  It is possible, Joe can win the nomination on the older voters alone; if the younger votes are split among several candidates.  He would need those voters in the fall.

 

Maybe someone should post a poll and see how the candidates poll well here?

 

I admit it seems a bit crazy that young people need any more motivation to vote than opposition to trump. But, this happened in 16, with alot of young voters sitting out and some Bernie supporters swinging to trump over Hillary. 

 

Still I would think that currently getting trump out of office would be enough. Ya never know, I guess. 

[PleaseBlitz]

13 hours ago, twa said:

 

Seems to be to you. 

 

POTUS does not represent us, he/she directs those under his/her authority.

 

 

That would be a dictator.  

[PleaseBlitz]

13 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I'll say this and then I'm done.  I don't want, and I don't think the FF wanted, POTUS to be elected by a simple majority.  That runs the risk if the majority suppressing the rights of the minority.  I think you know the reasons of the FF to want it this way.  That said, the POTUS was never meant to have the power he has today.  I'm all for resigning in the power of the Executive.  The bulk of power should rest with Congress who is a mix of representation by population and by a equal share of 50 states.  Now one could argue they are a **** show who can't get anything productive done.  And my counter point would be pointing to Trump.

 

The founders included the electoral college so that it would be possible to override the vote of the people, in order to keep out demagogues (like Trump) and other unqualified people.  The demagogues in the founder's day got elected by railing against the political elite (i.e., the founders) even though the demagogues had terrible ideas (like Trump) and the political elite (the founders) generally had better ideas about how a country should be run.  The founders were okay with POTUS being elected by a simple majority, they just wanted essentially veto power on the outcome.  So the put an additional layer, electors, in between the popular vote and actually being voted in, and assumed the electors would be political elites that could override the will of the people if the people made a bad choice. 

 

If the EC allows a person like Trump to be elected, it serves no purpose other than to undemocratically skew elections. 

[Bozo the kKklown]

8 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

If the EC allows a person like Trump to be elected, it serves no purpose other than to undemocratically skew elections. 

And that is primarily the issue.

 

I had a faint belief that the EC would override the vote and elect Clinton because that was exactly what the EC was intended to do. When they still voted for Trump, it should have been clear that this doesn't work.

[PleaseBlitz]

8 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

Maybe I'm misreading the polling because I keep seeing him with a 10-20 point lead over Harris even without declaring.

 

You aren't misreading it, but you should recognize that, this early, polling is mostly a reflection of name recognition.  Biden has the most recognition because he was Veep.  Sanders also has a ton because he ran for President in 16.  Everyone else is FAR FAR behind in name recognition.  

[TheGreatBuzz]

15 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

The founders were okay with POTUS being elected by a simple majority, they just wanted essentially veto power on the outcome.

This sentence seems to be in conflict with itself.  Also, where are you getting that the FF were fine with a simple majority?  I've never read that.  (I will admit that much like current media, history books can/are written with a certain slant to push whatever their agenda is)

 

17 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

If the EC allows a person like Trump to be elected, it serves no purpose other than to undemocratically skew elections.

I totally admit that the EC didn't do it's job with Trump.  That could be a reason to reform it, but doesn't mean it just gets thrown away.  

[PleaseBlitz]

Just now, TheGreatBuzz said:

This sentence seems to be in conflict with itself.  Also, where are you getting that the FF were fine with a simple majority?  I've never read that.  (I will admit that much like current media, history books can/are written with a certain slant to push whatever their agenda is)

 

It's not in conflict with itself.   The founders established a popular vote.  Then they added a layer allowing political elites to override it.  

 

Just now, TheGreatBuzz said:

 

I totally admit that the EC didn't do it's job with Trump.  That could be a reason to reform it, but doesn't mean it just gets thrown away.  

 

Sure.  The way that is being advanced to reform it is called he National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.  The Constitution mandates that each state send electors.  It does not specifically say how those electors must be chosen.  The NPVIC stipulates that the states that enter into it chose those electors based on the winner of the national popular vote.  It would solve most of the issues. 

[88Comrade2000]

18 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

It's not in conflict with itself.   The founders established a popular vote.  Then they added a layer allowing political elites to override it.  

 

 

Sure.  The way that is being advanced to reform it is called he National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.  The Constitution mandates that each state send electors.  It does not specifically say how those electors must be chosen.  The NPVIC stipulates that the states that enter into it chose those electors based on the winner of the national popular vote.  It would solve most of the issues. 

When that happens,I expect it to go to the supreme court. That's a few years away. I think they are up to around 180 Evs, in that pact. Need about 90 more. I may off, I was listening to someone on Potus, talk about that.

[skinsmarydu]

2 hours ago, twa said:

 

a minor duty and one mostly delegated to others by a leader.

That's hilarious. 

The black man? Responsible for everything wrong. 

THE WHITE LIAR? Don't do ****, except **** all over...not responsible for ****, tho.

Damn. I shoulda thought of that.