I feel like the more plausible scenario is that republicans lose the presidency and senate, everyone throws a giant parade of happiness, and then everyone realizes that the judges that have been packed on to lifetime appointments in federal courts and the Supreme Court will be used to practice the same form of obstructionism the republican in the senate used during the obama administration.
Everything the Dems attempt will be challenged in court. Health reform? Challenged. Executive orders undoing Trump insanity? Challenged. Republicans knew wheat they were doing. Their “legacy” is safer than you think.
Not if they win all governments and pack the court within 2 years
Someone mentioned the CBC segment about the Lincoln Project, here it is:
While I love what they are doing right now, it sure is going to suck for the Democrats once Trump is out and they go back bashing them. They have gotten really good at what they do and I doubt they cease once this election is over. I imagine their services will go to the Republicans and/or the highest bidders.
One of the principle members created an Obama attack ad so mean that John McCain refused to air it.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
New Monmouth (A+ rated) poll in Georgia today shows why Democrats are giving a last-minute push there. Biden's up 2/4 there, based on low/high turnout models, and Ossof's up 1/2. It also looks like Warnock will waltz to the January runoff at this point, but with him already polling in the low 40s, there's a very narrow chance that with a massive Democratic turnout surge, he could hit 50% and avoid a runoff... A Civiqs (B/C rated) poll yesterday found him at 48%.
I still think Kemp will make sure that Georgia stays red, but Georgia makes more sense as an 'expand the map' target that Texas at this point.
I think the takeaway from the polls would seem to be that things are not shifting back towards Trump/GOP and if anything Biden continues to make gains. That seems completely opposite to 2016.
Man, that is a long post that only a few people will want to read. Sorry about that folks.... sometimes I get myself going and don’t know when to stop!
No, that was great. It's the most I have ever read about Iowa. Man I find it so crazy that with the electoral college, some of these places get trotted out as "If so and so wins here, they win the election". Like, Iowa decides the fate of the USA? Pennsylvania decides the trajectory of a superpower? Craziness.
No, that was great. It's the most I have ever read about Iowa. Man I find it so crazy that with the electoral college, some of these places get trotted out as "If so and so wins here, they win the election". Like, Iowa decides the fate of the USA? Pennsylvania decides the trajectory of a superpower? Craziness.
Neither of them really do. The math is more like, "if Biden loses Pennsylvania, then X must have happened, and if X happens, he'll also lose these other states, which will make it hard to see him winning".
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
No, that was great. It's the most I have ever read about Iowa. Man I find it so crazy that with the electoral college, some of these places get trotted out as "If so and so wins here, they win the election". Like, Iowa decides the fate of the USA? Pennsylvania decides the trajectory of a superpower? Craziness.
I think it's also related to a general trend across the country. It's not like Canada, where if Quebec picks a party, that's who wins.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
To be clear, there is a realistic scenario where Biden loses all of Ohio, Florida, Georgia, Iowa and Pennsylvania and still wins the election. It's unlikely, but it's possible.
There isn't really much of a chance for Trump unless he wins Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
And a high turnout is nearly a certainty...Texas is already within 1M votes of 2016 totals.
It's hilarious Trumpers think it's in the bag for them and Trump is to get 400+ electoral college votes. Tucker has proven Biden is a criminal and the election is over
I think the takeaway from the polls would seem to be that things are not shifting back towards Trump/GOP and if anything Biden continues to make gains. That seems completely opposite to 2016.
Yeah, there might be a slight tightening in the national polls, but 538 has said that the national polls have suggested a wider margin than the state polls, and it wouldn't be surprising to see the national polls tighten a little to bring them in line with the state polls, or the state polls widening to bring them in-line with the national polls. My loose reading, without crunching any numbers but just looking at trend lines, is that we're seeing a little of both.
The only thing that would be really worrying for Biden is the state polls tightening in Trump's favour, and that's definitely not happening at the moment.
Obama appointed two justices in his first 2 years - Elana Kagen and Sonia Sotomayor.
Cocaine Mitch and the Republicans have had control of the Senate since 2011.
Unless RBG was going to retire 12 years ago, she was forced to wait on a Democratic Senate that never came.
Give the old battle axe her due credit - she held the line.
Like I said, she could have stepped down when Obama and the Dems had control, she would've been in her 70s then and made perfect sense. I'm just pointing it out - politics is all about chess, and she didn't make the right moves. So be it.
The mail-in voting has to be disheartening for Team Trump. Knowing that regardless of what lie they can make up about Biden today, that 70 million Americans have already voted, has to have them sick to their stomach.
I'm very curious to see how the Hispanic demographic ends up voting in this election. It seems like Trump's strategy of labeling Biden as a socialist and stoking fears about him turning the US into Cuba or Venezuela is working for many of them from reports.
The mail-in voting has to be disheartening for Team Trump. Knowing that regardless of what lie they can make up about Biden today, that 70 million Americans have already voted, has to have them sick to their stomach.
You're assuming those votes will count.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Even Pennsylvania is looking less like the tipping point state. If you take away the #### polls from Trafalgar and Rasmussen, Biden has been leading in North Carolina and Arizona in a lot of polls recently. The fact Trump was even wasting time in Omaha last night for one EC vote is pretty telling of how grim things look for them right now.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
Not if they win all governments and pack the court within 2 years
Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk
To me the problem with “packing the Court” is that in addition to being a nuclear option that will just mean the GOP does it again next time they can, it doesn’t solve the fundamental (and much more challenging) problem with the American judiciary: it’s not truly independent, and has now clearly become both a political football, and a political tool.
This is a harder problem to fix, but it’s a really big one. Consider the contrast to Canada, where our jurists sometimes face criticism on political grounds but generally don’t descend into the political fray in the way they do in the US. You just don’t know, in the same way, how each of the members of our Supreme Court will vote on a constitutional question before their decision is issued. For example, we can be pretty confident here that a Trudeau appointee will not automatically side with Trudeau in the event of a legal dispute regarding the outcome of the next election, but will make the decision in accordance with how that judge interprets the law.
That independent judiciary is fundamental to a working democratic society, and right now the US just doesn’t have it.
To me, focusing on the fact that the Court is 6-3 Republican RIGHT NOW dangerously misses the point. It would NOT be better if the Court were 7-6 Democratic—that wouldn’t fix the underlying problem at all, which is the fact that we can predict a judge’s vote based on their partisan affiliation at all.
What they need is widespread reform of the judiciary. And one possible ally for a Biden administration in achieving this is John Roberts, who is a smart guy and I SUSPECT understands the problem. Unfortunately, any realistic solution is almost guaranteed to be politically difficult to implement and may be unpopular. So.... my hopes aren’t high. But I do think simply “packing the Court” is a mistake.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Iowa_Flames_Fan For This Useful Post:
