American Politics Thread: The Hunt for Blue November

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Red

They will let Trump off the hook. They never go after previous Presidents, it's not what western countries do.
They might go after some of the enablers, just to discourage others from doing the same in the future. Guys like Bannon, Gulliani, Barr, Miller, Lewandowski, Gorka and the rest of the scumbags. Maybe the kids and Kushner? At least I hope they do.

I think it depends if there are legit national security/treasonable offended. Being a bad/evil president will be overlooked but a traitor should not be.

I do hope they make an example of Barr though as a criminal enabler. Have to somehow reset norms that have shattered under Trump.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

The reason Presidents don’t go after Presidents is simple. It opens Pandora’s box. If Obama went after Bush, then it sets precedent for Trump to go after Obama.

I believe this is why prosecution of trump won’t be directly tied to the WH. It’ll be a specific jurisdiction that goes after him for any crimes he’s committed outside of his “presidential” duties.

Otherwise it opens the door for the GOP to go after the preceding Dem president the next time they get in power.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

As Chomsky said (I paraphrase): If the rule of law was actually applied every President since WWII would be hung for crimes against humanity.

That said, it looks like Trump will have a legal reckoning at the state level, particularly NY. Considering his alleged crimes and his likely upcoming 7th (or is it 8th) bankruptcy, it wouldn't surprise me if he actually did go to a place that's a little more friendly to him. It would be just another unprecedented act of corrosion to American democracy.

I guess that would be unless NY ever elected a GOP friendly governor and just pardoned Trump, if that’s even possible?

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Trump talks and treats everyone like that. To try and use women specifically to get an emotional response is so transparent. Just like their pandering to black voters with a rap battle video. Here's a novel concept. Maybe focus on trying to win votes on your own merit rather than trying to win them by default.

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/time.com...sh/%3famp=true

[Lanny_McDonald]

I've skipped a week trying to let some polling numbers catch up but here is a polling data update with the trends. Data comes from Real Clear Politics, 270toWin, and 538 to provide as much information as possible.

We will acknowledge that Trump is a clear winner in:
Alabama(3) +20, +20, +17.7
Alaska (3) +6, +6, +4.9
Idaho (4) +6, +20, +21
Montana (3) +9.2, +7, +8.2
Wyoming (3) No Data, +30, +33
Utah (6) +14, +10, +11.7
North Dakota (3) No Data, +20, +20.1
South Dakota (3) +6, +10, +14.9
Nebraska State Wide (5) No Data, +8, +6.4
Kansas (6) +9.5, +7, +6.8
Oklahoma (7) +25, +18, +21.2
Missouri (10) +9, +9, +6.2
Arkansas (6) +2, +19, +14.2
Louisiana (8) +17, +18, +14.6
Mississippi (6) +15, +20, +13.7
Tennessee (11) +14, +18, +13.7
Kentucky (8) +15.5, +6, +17.7
Indiana (11) +10.6, +7, +9.9
West Virginia (5) +16, +14, +22.7

Leaning Trump:

South Carolina (9) +12, +8, +6.3

Trump = 117 electoral college votes.

We will also acknowledge that Biden is a clear winner in:

California (55) +31.7, +26, +31.2
Oregon (5) +12, +22, +20
Washington (12) +25.2, +21, +25.1
Illinois (20) No Data, +23, +18.5
New York (29) +28.7, +32, +31
Massachusetts (11) +35.7, +40, +38.4
Rhode Island (4) No Data, +37, +31.7
Connecticut (7) +18, +30, +25.6
New Jersey (14) +17.4, +20, +19.8
Delaware (3) +19, +21, +26.4
Hawaii (4) +30, +33, +32.8
Maryland (10) +31.5, +31, +32.4
DC (3) ND, +78, +78.5

Leaning Biden:

Nevada (6) Biden +5.2, +2, +6.3
New Mexico (5) +14.5, +14, +13.3
Colorado (9) +10, +15, +13.1
Minnesota (10) +6.9, +6, +9
Maine (4) +6.6, +10, +14.8

Biden = 220 electoral college votes.

This leaves the follow as battleground states.

Arizona (11) Biden +4, +3.8, +3.9
Wisconsin (10) Biden +6, +6.2, +6
Michigan (16) Biden +7.2, +6.7, +7.9
Ohio (18) Trump+.5, Biden+1.4, Trump+.2
Pennsylvania (20) Biden +4.4, +4.8, +6.8
Virginia (13) Biden +11.4, +11, +13.3
North Carolina (15) Biden+2.7, +3, +3.2
Georgia (16) Biden+1.2, +1.7, +1.3
Florida (29) Biden+1.4, +2, +3

Texas (38) Trump +4.4, +3.6, +1.4
Iowa (6) Biden +1.2, +.8, +.2

Electoral College Projection

Trump (incumbent) - 187 vs Biden - 351


We'll also add some important Senate races as they provide interesting context to possible swings in given states and should help normalize expectations from some of the polling.

Arizona - Kelly (D) vs McSally (R)* - Kelly +8.3, +10, +6.2
North Carolina - Cunningham (D) vs Tillis (R)* - Cunningham+4.3, +3.8, +3
Michigan - Peters (D)* vs James (R) - Peters +4.9, +6.3, +6.4
Maine - Gideon (D) vs Collins (R)* - Gideon +4.2, +4.2, +3
Iowa - Greenfield (D) vs Ernst (R)* - Greenfield +4.8, +2.8, +.7
Montana - Bullock (D) vs Daines (R)* - Daines +3.3, +2, +3.4
Colorado - Hickenlooper (D) vs Gardner (R)* - Hickenlooper +9, +5, +7.1
Minnesota - Smith (D)* vs Lewis (R) - Smith +8.3, +10, +12.6
Georgia - Ossoff (D) vs Perdue (R)* - Perdue +1, +1.5, +3
Alabama - Jones (D)* vs Tuberville (R) - Tuberville +10, +15, +5
Texas - Hegar (D) vs Cornyn (R)* - Cornyn +7.6, +6, +7.6

South Carolina - Harrison (D) vs Graham (R)* - Lady G +6, +3.3, +5.6

Senate projection - Republican 49 vs Democrat - 51

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Biden's polling up 78 percentage points in DC?

Ahead By Seventy-Eight?!

Did I read that right?

[Julio]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

Biden's polling up 78 percentage points in DC?

Ahead By Seventy-Eight?!

Did I read that right?

2016 United States presidential election in the District of Columbia[21] Party Candidate Running mate Popular vote Electoral vote Swing Count % Count %
Democratic Hillary Clinton of New York Tim Kaine of Virginia 282,830 90.86% 3 100.00% 0.05%
Republican Donald Trump of New York Mike Pence of Indiana 12,723 4.09% 0 0.00% 3.19%


Hillary won by 86%, so yes...DC is as safe for the Dems as rural Alberta is for the Conservatives. Which is one of the main reasons that Republicans have not seriously considered any calls for statehood for DC. It would mean 2 Dem senators.

[Senator Clay Davis]

DC being so ridiculously pro-Dem is why statehood will never happen. GOP can have Wyoming and the Dakotas, but won't ever allow DC to happen.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

DC being so ridiculously pro-Dem is why statehood will never happen. GOP can have Wyoming and the Dakotas, but won't ever allow DC to happen.

So what? Elections have consequences is the new norm, per the Republicans. Dems win a 3 chambers? Get to work on fixing the balance.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

DC being so ridiculously pro-Dem is why statehood will never happen. GOP can have Wyoming and the Dakotas, but won't ever allow DC to happen.

To that notion, one of the reasons Eisenhower and Nixon pushed for Hawaii to become a state was because it was full of Republicans at the time. Today it is a Democrat stronghold. Woops!

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by SebC

In theory a former president would have access to a ton of classified information. But that would require reading the briefings.

That had me laughing!

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

It isn’t the Biden campaign or even Democrats

The specific purpose of the Lincoln project is to get Trunp out of office.

And yes Trump treats most people like dirt but there is also a clear pattern of mysogyny over and above that. Are you saying he’s not a mysogynist?

Trump can't even pronounce "misogynist"!

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by SebC

In theory a former president would have access to a ton of classified information. But that would require reading the briefings.

And understanding them in the unlikely event he actually reads them.

[GirlySports]

Trump was on a podcast on the 14th. Some interesting point of discussion.



https://www.aei.org/multimedia/wth-i...ourt-and-more/


Of course he still thinks he'll win. One of the points made is that positive enthusiasm always beats negative enthusiasm. It did in 2004 and 2012, will it in 2020?

[Julio]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Trump was on a podcast on the 14th. Some interesting point of discussion.



https://www.aei.org/multimedia/wth-i...ourt-and-more/


Of course he still thinks he'll win. One of the points made is that positive enthusiasm always beats negative enthusiasm. It did in 2004 and 2012, will it in 2020?

Something that I have been thinking about...Trump spends a whole lot of his day doing interviews, mostly with complient media. That gets his 'story' out constantly. This can be a good and bad thing, with me thinking it is way too much of his day. Will there be any pressure on Biden to have that level of engagement?

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

The reason Presidents don’t go after Presidents is simple. It opens Pandora’s box. If Obama went after Bush, then it sets precedent for Trump to go after Obama.

I believe this is why prosecution of trump won’t be directly tied to the WH. It’ll be a specific jurisdiction that goes after him for any crimes he’s committed outside of his “presidential” duties.

Otherwise it opens the door for the GOP to go after the preceding Dem president the next time they get in power.

While this is generally true, there are clear reasons why Democrats might want to make Trump an exception.

First of those is petty, but I don't think you can discount pettiness when it comes to stuff like this: Trump has himself repeatedly called for investigations into Obama's doings.

Second is major:
If Trump gets another season, Trump will make a serious push to turn the country into a dictatorship or at least a one-party authoritarian state. This should be obvious to everyone at this point. (Although tons of people are still in denial about it.)

In other words if Trump wins, the Democratic party goes from opponent to target. Everyone knows what starts to happen to opposition politicians in an authoritarian state: they're the first to go. Best known opposition leaders will be put in jail on more-or-less made up charges (something Trump has already threatened numerous times), while lesser known ones will start disappearing in the night. Trump already has loyal militias obviously eager to get their hands dirty in that latter part.

Probably some will start dying in sudden poisonings, because that's likely what Putin will advice Trump to do.

In other words, the Dems are one Biden heart-attack away from an extinction level crisis. Unless they're complete idiots, they have to know they can't react simply by returning to politics as normal. They can't risk this situation repeating.

Now, there are other options to a counter-attack. If they sweep the election, they could start making changes to update and strengthen their countries democracy to something more likely able to hold up against another power grab. They can hope that it's enough to re-solidify their position.

However, a counter-attack of some sort is probably a smart and necessary move at this point. I think it would be prudent to create some examples that if you try to do to the US government what Trump and his cronies did, that can come with serious personal consequences.

There should be personal risk involved in encouraging violence towards the Democratic party and attempting to end democracy in the United States. All these election shenanigans can't be a the risk-free "oh well, we'll get them next time" thing that it's been so far, because it clearly erodes the legitimacy of the system.

If Trump remains in the country he will also likely go on a completely unhinged relentless attack, and that in itself is also legitimately dangerous on a very personal level to Democratic politicians. If Trump doesn't shut up, and he won't if he remains in the country, he will likely force the Democrats to do something about him just for their own safety.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Julio

Something that I have been thinking about...Trump spends a whole lot of his day doing interviews, mostly with complient media. That gets his 'story' out constantly. This can be a good and bad thing, with me thinking it is way too much of his day. Will there be any pressure on Biden to have that level of engagement?

Less is probably more for Biden at this point. The fewer chances he has to screw it up, the better.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Julio

Something that I have been thinking about...Trump spends a whole lot of his day doing interviews, mostly with complient media. That gets his 'story' out constantly. This can be a good and bad thing, with me thinking it is way too much of his day. Will there be any pressure on Biden to have that level of engagement?

I think this election is a simple referendum on Trump. Nothing more, nothing less. And if so, the best thing Biden can do is keep his nose clean and not give the Republicans anything juicy to attack.

If the Democrats sent Biden on a holiday for the next two weeks, their chances of winning the election probably don't change. They might even go up.

(this is not an attack on Biden, just an opinion on where the country's collective head is at right now)

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I think this election is a simple referendum on Trump. Nothing more, nothing less. And if so, the best thing Biden can do is keep his nose clean and not give the Republicans anything juicy to attack.

If the Democrats sent Biden on a holiday for the next two weeks, their chances of winning the election probably don't change. They might even go up.

(this is not an attack on Biden, just an opinion on where the country's collective head is at right now)

I'd be careful with that though. Again, positive enthusiasm usually beats negative enthusiasm. I remember in the 2012 the absolutely hatred of Obama by Republicans with the Tea Party at it's peak. They called him everything up to being a traitor and a terrorist.


But nobody was enthusiastic about Mitt Romney and Obama won by about 4 million LESS votes than he had in 2008.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The positive enthusiasm here is to fix the covid response. The tea party had virtually nothing to do with Obama’s fewer votes in 12. That was progressives feeling largely duped imo.