Election 2020

[revo]

About 6 months ago, you got very upset at me bringing up several huge red flags about Kamala Harris and you told me that they were baseless smears. A few months later, Tulsi Gabbard beought up those exact criticisms in the 2nd debate, and she absolutely destroyed her on those points. Harris had zero response. She's since completely tanked in polling, down into the 5% also-ran tier.

You also brought up that Biden tanked from his high, and lookee here, he's right back at the 32%-34% mark. Obviously he's been prone to verbal gaffes -- which the press certainly covers -- but is that an age thing, or is this who he's always been? And again, if age-related gaffes are an issue for you, Bernie is almost 78 and the oldest one in the field, so how can you continue to bust on one guy for being old and support the oldest geezer there is?

[Sour Masher]

You also brought up that Biden tanked from his high, and lookee here, he's right back at the 32%-34% mark. Obviously he's been prone to verbal gaffes -- which the press certainly covers -- but is that an age thing, or is this who he's always been? And again, if age-related gaffes are an issue for you, Bernie is almost 78 and the oldest one in the field, so how can you continue to bust on one guy for being old and support the oldest geezer there is?

Both Biden and Bernie's age has concerned me from the start, but surprisingly, to me, Biden is the one showing some slippage. Bernie has not yet. It is noteworthy that he has always been a gaffe machine. But haventl't those gaffes of old been more saying inappropriate or tactless things? Some of the recent ones seem to be different. Either way, either guy would be by far the oldest president ever elected. Both their vp picks will matter more than usual, I think.

About the media coverage on Biden, I agree. His gaffes have gotten mainstream coverage. I am not seeing a grand conspiracy in the media to hide this issue at all.

[Teenwolf]

Biden's gaffes (cognitive failures, more accurately) are totally being under-reported. Most of the details that I bring up I source from Daily Caller or other right wing sources ("President... my boss" didnt get any play outside right wing at all). For some reason, mainstream "lefty" media ignores it, but I dont care to debate the point. The important thing is that Biden's health comes under the microscope soon so he gets pressured to drop out. He's not well, and its suicidal to run a mentally incompetant candidate.

Here's your daily senility report. It's about Biden telling a completely fabricated story about a medal of honor, from Washington Post, but CNN are covering it too. Glad this story is getting play.

Except almost every detail in the story appears to be incorrect. Based on interviews with more than a dozen U.S. troops, their commanders and Biden campaign officials, it appears as though the former vice president has jumbled elements of at least three actual events into one story of bravery, compassion and regret that never happened.

[...]

The upshot: In the space of three minutes, Biden got the time period, the location, the heroic act, the type of medal, the military branch and the rank of the recipient wrong, as well as his own role in the ceremony.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...3c0_story.html

[Sour Masher]

TW, your posting of Biden's latest disturbing conflation reinforces your poing about Biden, but undercuts your point that left leaning mainstream media is trying to cover.for Biden. WaPo and CNN covering this shows they are not just bolstering him up, right?

[Teenwolf]

TW, your posting of Biden's latest disturbing conflation reinforces your poing about Biden, but undercuts your point that left leaning mainstream media is trying to cover.for Biden. WaPo and CNN covering this shows they are not just bolstering him up, right?

Exactly, they're realizing they cannot sweep it under the rug, it's getting too obvious. I've seen many prior incidents ignored, so I'm happy to see it covered, happy to see the trend break.

[DMT]

About 6 months ago, you got very upset at me bringing up several huge red flags about Kamala Harris and you told me that they were baseless smears. A few months later, Tulsi Gabbard beought up those exact criticisms in the 2nd debate, and she absolutely destroyed her on those points. Harris had zero response. She's since completely tanked in polling, down into the 5% also-ran tier.

So if you think the links to Third Way, or whatever other factual issues that I raise are just baseless smears, remember, I've already predicted which issues would take out Harris. I'm not nearly as uninformed as you like to paint me.

I don't recall ever calling you uninformed and I seriously doubt I was defending Harris because I've never been a big fan. I have called you biased and too quick to assume that your take on political minutiae is how the masses will see it. Sometimes you're right and sometimes you're not. I've also been critical of your tendency to slam everyone other than Sanders (and Gabbard) as faux progressives and unable to compete with Trump. I will continue to do so when I feel it's appropriate.

[fuhrdog]

I'll vote for whoever is going against Trump but haven't seen anybody I'm that invested for yet.

[Kevin Seitzer]

For TW:

[GwynnInTheHall]

For TW:

Link isn't working I assume it's that play last night A's vs KC........

Off Topic: Who knew that was a rule?

[B-Fly]

Interesting comment. How many of these Christian voters are undecided or are they all voting Republican anyway ? I suppose it a close election a relatively few voters could really matter.

I would imagine that the lion's share of undecided/persuadable voters are Christian in one denomination or another by self-identification, and that as undecided/persuadable voters (rather than right-wing diehards) they were willing and able to accept Barack Obama's Christian bona fides based on his self-identification and church affiliation.

[B-Fly]

Does Bernie not differentiate himself from the generic Jewish candidate in the view of Christians by showing his willingness to go after Israeli leadership?

I highly doubt it. While there are some who might shy away from a Jewish candidate out of some fear of dual loyalty to Israel, there are far more who I fear would shy away from a Jewish candidate (and particularly a liberal NYC-born Jewish candidate) for more vague "doesn't share my values" reasons.

[B-Fly]

I think the Berners are good with Warren, not so much Biden but I don't see him crossing the finish line. Warren essentially lied about being a native American. Now I get it, my sister claimed something similar and had a native American scholarship but she was under the impression that we /she was at least one quarter NA, when in actuality we're less than an eighth. Warren did not handle this well enough to keep trump from throwing out this as a lie somewhat canceling the lefts biggest card in the general.

Again, I like her and will support her, but I worry.

I agree that this remains a line of attack that Trump and his surrogates would use against Warren, but I think anyone who is fair minded recognizes that Warren as well honestly believed that she had material Native American heritage on account of being told so by her family members her whole life. As such I think it's a pretty stupid basis upon which to not support her/vote against her.

[revo]

Quinnipiac's latest General Election poll is a bonanza for all non-Trumpies:

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	Quinnipiac	Biden 54, Trump 38	Biden +16
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	Quinnipiac	Sanders 53, Trump 39	Sanders +14
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	Quinnipiac	Warren 52, Trump 40	Warren +12
General Election: Trump vs. Harris	Quinnipiac	Harris 51, Trump 40	Harris +11
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg	Quinnipiac	Buttigieg 49, Trump 40	Buttigieg +9

[Teenwolf]

I highly doubt it. While there are some who might shy away from a Jewish candidate out of some fear of dual loyalty to Israel, there are far more who I fear would shy away from a Jewish candidate (and particularly a liberal NYC-born Jewish candidate) for more vague "doesn't share my values" reasons.

Fair enough. I guess the question becomes how many persuadable voters that would not vote Sanders based on being Jewish are there? Further, will the number of minorities and young voters that Bernie would turn out (that, so far, Warren isn't) outweigh those anti-Jewish votes?

I get that every candidate is going to have Demographic weaknesses, but nobody has Sanders' type of grassroots support and broad appeal, so far. I dont see Warren with as high of a ceiling, but I'm just taking the small sample data we've seen and extrapolating it out.

[Teenwolf]

I agree that this remains a line of attack that Trump and his surrogates would use against Warren, but I think anyone who is fair minded recognizes that Warren as well honestly believed that she had material Native American heritage on account of being told so by her family members her whole life. As such I think it's a pretty stupid basis upon which to not support her/vote against her.

But the attacks would still work, and it's pretty funny how all the elites support Warren, and act like using some fantasy Native ancestry as a means of career advancement wont mean anything to working stiffs? 50% of the country making under $40K? Yeah, I'm sure she'll totally skate, Trump couldn't suppress turnout using that.