Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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

88Comrade2000

By 88Comrade2000
in The Tailgate

TK
Message added by TK,

 

Recommended Posts

Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Llevron said:

Trump said, I believe when he was running for POTUS, that a man like him would have and should have taken better advantage of the recession to make a huge profit. I would be watching his moves closely if this happens.  

 

Pretty sure he said that the crash was great for him, because he bought so much stuff cheap.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

Abrams will be the veep to whoever the nominee is. Beto is going nowhere but back to Texas.

There's plenty of time for Biden's support to implode. Each day he makes the case, he's mentally unfit for the job. He's too old and is out of touch with today's democratic party.

Fam, Abrams just announced she was working to support an effort to end voter suppression across America. What are you talking about? LOL

1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

I know this may sound crazy, but I dont want Abrams or Gillum in White House yet.  We need to be flipping states blue, Obama proved jus having the White House in this political climate is not enough to get anything done.  They need to fix Georgia and Florida first, and the people came extremely close to letting them do that, even Senate is better then making them most powerful no power person in the world as VP.

Idk about Gillum, but Abrams is about ending voter suppression.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/13/stacey-abrams-2020-1461880

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Llevron

Llevron

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Pretty sure he said that the crash was great for him, because he bought so much stuff cheap.  

 

I think you are right. For some reason I feel like he said he should have taken more advantage of it right after that. I remember it that way, but I cant find a quote so im going with what you said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Recessions happen after long periods of growth, regardless of who is in the White House.  The question is what you do to prepare, and what you do in response.  Obama enacted a stimulus package.  Conservatives tend to favor austerity and further cuts to programs.  On top of likely proposing more tax cuts (if Trump gets a 2nd term).   Obama's recovery was far from perfect but it debunked the "can't spend your way out of a recession."  That stimulus package, which is really a lot less than Obama originally wanted, stopped the bleeding and got the ball back on the right track.   I don't even want to wonder about what Trump's response to it would be if things go south.

 

Think it's pretty clear that the Dem's response to crashes is deficit spending, to try to artificially lessen the impact and speed the recovery.  

 

Whereas it's pretty clear that Republican economic policy, last three years, has been to demand that the Fed and other agencies, and our deficit levels, should turbocharge the inflation of the bubble, and cross their fingers and hope that the balloon doesn't break till afer the election (so they can act like somebody else did it.)  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Renegade7

Renegade7

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

 

Idk about Gillum, but Abrams is about ending voter suppression.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/13/stacey-abrams-2020-1461880

 

Ya, saw that, too. Rumor is she might run in 2022 governor instead, but seriously she can do way more damage as an elected official.  So it might be she real wants to be governor so she can make executive changes, not struggle to make legislative ones.  I can see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
Posted
 
 
 
1
4 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Ya, saw that, too. Rumor is she might run in 2022 governor instead, but seriously she can do way more damage as an elected official.  So it might be she real wants to be governor so she can make executive changes, not struggle to make legislative ones.  I can see that.

GOtta be able to vote before you can do damage as an elected official.

 

I am not saying she won't eventually, but this is a cause that will last longer than her time in office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted

I feel like there is a bit too much of a bias towards Presidential hopefuls when considering VPs.

 

If it's a female nominee Sherrod Brown wouldn't be a bad option.  The one place he is sorta off standard is his protectionist policies, but that's probably a positive these days, and would help connect with workers.

 

He also co-sponsored PIPA so he's got some splainin' to do for us meme loving denizens of the net, but beyond that he fits the mould, a Dick Gephardt-esque fellow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted

Also, Butti needs more time in the oven.  Guy is not handling race relations issues well.  He needs to go back to South Bend, turn it around on race, then run for something larger.  Then he can revisit VP or Pres.  He's young, another decade in the oven and a focus on ensuring he can handle race issues, and he'll be formidable.  For now, great story, definitely can compete on whites, but is just botching every chance to show he knows how to handle race issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
No Excuses

No Excuses

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

I feel like there is a bit too much of a bias towards Presidential hopefuls when considering VPs.

 

If it's a female nominee Sherrod Brown wouldn't be a bad option.  The one place he is sorta off standard is his protectionist policies, but that's probably a positive these days, and would help connect with workers.

 

He also co-sponsored PIPA so he's got some splainin' to do for us meme loving denizens of the net, but beyond that he fits the mould, a Dick Gephardt-esque fellow.

 

Cant lose a safe Senate seat in an increasingly conservative state. He’s so much more valuable as a senator than VP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted

Also shout out to Joe Kennedy III for being the Randy Orton of politicians, slithering in outta nowhere, the guy is gonna be the nominee in a decade probably, once a Senate seat in MASS comes open and he gets 4+ years in it.

2 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

Cant lose a safe Senate seat in an increasingly conservative state. He’s so much more valuable as a senator than VP. 

I don't disagree but if he delivers Ohio (and has cred all through the midwest), then that's a strong tradeoff.  Trump's plan is to squeak victories electorally, and a Brown doing a loop from PA to MN would go a long way in push back on that and rebuild the blue wall there.  That happens, Trump probably can't win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, LadySkinsFan said:

I predicted in another thread that the recession will occur before the election. Democrat need to run on how bad Republicans screwed up the economy during Trump. 

 

It would obviously be because the Dems took back the House. 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Ya, saw that, too. Rumor is she might run in 2022 governor instead, but seriously she can do way more damage as an elected official.  So it might be she real wants to be governor so she can make executive changes, not struggle to make legislative ones.  I can see that.

Abrams also said that's she is open to be Veep for any democratic nominee.

 

Stacey Abrams Says She’s Open to Being Vice President for Any Democratic Nominee

 

If someone offers her the job, she will take it.  One step closer to the ultimate job.  Especially, if Biden or Sanders are the nominee. They are both so old; they are likely to die in office.  Also,  she can really put more focus on voter suppression as Veep or President.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rufus T Firefly

Rufus T Firefly

Posted
Posted

So, someone mentioned the civiqs poll from last week on Trump's approval/disapproval numbers by state. I meant to post something about it over the weekend but got busy/distracted. Civiqs contracts with Daily Kos to do polling, so the inclination is to consider it a liberally slanted group, but they actually end up giving Republicans numbers on the higher side of what they get elsewhere. Some posters on Kos have asked for the polls to be removed from the top of the site because they think it makes the left look weaker than they really are, polling wise. In this et of polls, they give Trump a 43 percent approval rating, which is here he is in the RCP average and ahead of where he is on 538. All of which is to say, it's a pretty fair poll to Trump overall.

 

So, the interesting numbers aren't just the number of states where he is underwater (ie disapproval numbers higher than approval numbers), imo. It's the fact that he is at least 11 points underwater in every state Hillary won, plus Pennsylvania and Michigan. If he were to lose all those states, that gives the Dems 268 electoral votes, two short of a win. So any state beyond that tips it (or winning the single split electoral vote in both Maine and Nebraska). 

 

Meanwhile, Trump's net negative is 9 points in Wisconsin. 7 in both Arizona and North Carolina. 3 in Georgia and Florida. 1 in Iowa, and even in Texas. I'm not bothering to mention Utah, because he ain't losing that state. It's bunch of Mormons who are clothing their pearls about how immoral he is and then will vote for him anyway. 

 

https://civiqs.com/results/approve_president_trump?annotations=true&uncertainty=true&zoomIn=true&utm_campaign=ticker

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Looking at that first month next year:

 

2/3- Iowa Caucus

2/11- New Hampshire Primary

2/22- Nevada Caucus

2/29- South Carolina Primary

 

Iowa isn't kind to front runners. You hear that Sleepy Joe. Iowa is also more to left for the Dems and more to the right for the GOP; than the regular electorate elsewhere.  Given Iowa's more liberal bent, I fully expect Elizabeth Warren to end up winning the Iowa Caucus.

 

New Hampshire voters like to be independent and they don't like to do what Iowa does.  There's 2 neighbors in this race. Warren and Sanders.   Can Sleepy Joe win here or will the voters of  New Hampshire buck the establishment?  I say they buck the establishment and give Bernie Sanders a win here.

 

Nevada-  It's a caucus, so I'd expect the voters to be more activist types. Really, to want to spend all day; you'd have to be.  Hispanic/Union turnout is big here.   I think either Elizabeth or Bernie ultimately wins here.

 

South Carolina-  The black vote is key here.  This will be Sleepy Joe's last stand.  If he can't win here; he's done.  Actually, it's the same for alot of others.   What happens here will tell you if it's going to be a long battle or not.  If Lizzie or Bernie wins here, especially if they do like I predicted in the earlier contests; they could roll to the nomination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...