Election 2020

[Sour Masher]

So in the case of Trump being President... best to give him a big increase in military spending right? He couldn't possibly misuse those funds, right?

Hard to oppose Trump when you've funded his war efforts. But no big deal for B-Fly, or I guess most folks here.

Who here supports a bigger defense budget? No one. I think it may be the one issue we all agree on. I honestly do not know what you are refering to here. You seem to be creating a strawman.

Just because I think we use are military might wrongly 90% of the time rather than 100% doesn't make me a warmonger. You know this. You just pointed out last week how even Chomsky was against us abandoning the Kurds.

[Teenwolf]

Who here supports a bigger defense budget? No one. I think it may be the one issue we all agree on. I honestly do not know what you are refering to here. You seem to be creating a strawman.

Just because I think we use are military might wrongly 90% of the time rather than 100% doesn't make me a warmonger. You know this. You just pointed out last week how even Chomsky was against us abandoning the Kurds.

Sorry for the confusion, I thought my point would be clear.

Elizabeth Warren voted in favor of Trump's 2 separate defense spending increases. That's all.

[Sour Masher]

Sorry for the confusion, I thought my point would be clear.

Elizabeth Warren voted in favor of Trump's 2 separate defense spending increases. That's all.

Ah, I understand now--I did not realize you were talking about Warren's votes. You are right she did do that. Most Senators vote for these budgets, I assume partly because the increases have so much pork for almost every state that employs so many in the MIC. I do not yet fully understand why, though, as it may be more than that for Warren and others. Is she just in the pocket of Raytheon et al, or is it more complicated than that? Was she banking on Congress to adjust the actual numbers, but saw the need to pass it in the Senate before it got to that point? I need to look into it more to understand it.

I have to admit, the first clip I came across of her being asked about it, she totally dodged the question. She switches the question of her votes to an answer that we need to reduce military spending. My generous assumption is she believes that but made those votes because they way they were put forth made it impractical to vote against them. But yeah, her actually answering the question would have been nice. Thanks for pointing me toward this. It is something I need to look at more, but it sounds like she wanted to avoid getting into the politics of why the Senate always passes these with overwhelming support, such as getting into how defense spending is often tied in with debt ceiling increases. Maybe she didn't want to get into all that, but I'd like to see her and others explain that stuff honestly to voters.

[revo]

Interesting series of polls the last few days. In polls of the Dem nomination, Biden has surged and in the CNN poll, has his largest lead since April (+15). All this after Warren had surged last week and taken the lead in many polls. How he rebounded is anyone's guess:

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	CNN	Biden 34, Warren 19, Sanders 16, Buttigieg 6, Harris 6, O'Rourke 3, Yang 2, Booker 1, Klobuchar 3, Gabbard 1, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 0	[B]Biden +15[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	Emerson	Biden 27, Warren 21, Sanders 25, Buttigieg 6, Harris 5, O'Rourke 2, Yang 4, Booker 3, Klobuchar 1, Gabbard 3, Steyer 1, Bennet 0, Castro 0	[B]Biden +2[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	The Hill/HarrisX	Biden 27, Warren 19, Sanders 14, Buttigieg 6, Harris 5, O'Rourke 3, Yang 2, Booker 1, Klobuchar 1, Gabbard 0, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 1	[B]Biden +8[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	Politico/Morning Consult	Biden 30, Warren 21, Sanders 18, Buttigieg 6, Harris 6, O'Rourke 3, Yang 3, Booker 3, Klobuchar 2, Gabbard 1, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 1	[B]Biden +9[/B]

In the general election, CNN shows the Dems all leading Trumpie by a wide margin, but the Emerson poll has it much closer (with Trump at a consistent 49%):

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	CNN	Biden 53, Trump 43	Biden +10
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	CNN	Warren 52, Trump 44	Warren +8
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	CNN	Sanders 52, Trump 43	Sanders +9
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg	CNN	Buttigieg 50, Trump 44	Buttigieg +6

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	Emerson	Biden 51, Trump 49	Biden +2
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	Emerson	Warren 51, Trump 49	Warren +2
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	Emerson	Sanders 51, Trump 49	Sanders +2

In a couple of important state polls, Biden & Warren lead Trump in Florida (for some reason, Bernie wasn't listed) and Minnesota:

Florida: Trump vs. Biden	UNF	Biden 48, Trump 43	Biden +5
Florida: Trump vs. Warren	UNF	Warren 46, Trump 43	Warren +3

Minnesota: Trump vs. Biden	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Biden 50, Trump 38	Biden +12
Minnesota: Trump vs. Warren	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Warren 51, Trump 40	Warren +11
Minnesota: Trump vs. Sanders	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Sanders 49, Trump 40	Sanders +9
Minnesota: Trump vs. Klobuchar	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Klobuchar 55, Trump 38	Klobuchar +17

[nots]

Interesting series of polls the last few days. In polls of the Dem nomination, Biden has surged and in the CNN poll, has his largest lead since April (+15). All this after Warren had surged last week and taken the lead in many polls. How he rebounded is anyone's guess:

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	CNN	Biden 34, Warren 19, Sanders 16, Buttigieg 6, Harris 6, O'Rourke 3, Yang 2, Booker 1, Klobuchar 3, Gabbard 1, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 0	[B]Biden +15[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	Emerson	Biden 27, Warren 21, Sanders 25, Buttigieg 6, Harris 5, O'Rourke 2, Yang 4, Booker 3, Klobuchar 1, Gabbard 3, Steyer 1, Bennet 0, Castro 0	[B]Biden +2[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	The Hill/HarrisX	Biden 27, Warren 19, Sanders 14, Buttigieg 6, Harris 5, O'Rourke 3, Yang 2, Booker 1, Klobuchar 1, Gabbard 0, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 1	[B]Biden +8[/B]

2020 Democratic Presidential Nomination	Politico/Morning Consult	Biden 30, Warren 21, Sanders 18, Buttigieg 6, Harris 6, O'Rourke 3, Yang 3, Booker 3, Klobuchar 2, Gabbard 1, Steyer 1, Bennet 1, Castro 1	[B]Biden +9[/B]

In the general election, CNN shows the Dems all leading Trumpie by a wide margin, but the Emerson poll has it much closer (with Trump at a consistent 49%):

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	CNN	Biden 53, Trump 43	Biden +10
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	CNN	Warren 52, Trump 44	Warren +8
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	CNN	Sanders 52, Trump 43	Sanders +9
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg	CNN	Buttigieg 50, Trump 44	Buttigieg +6

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	Emerson	Biden 51, Trump 49	Biden +2
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	Emerson	Warren 51, Trump 49	Warren +2
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	Emerson	Sanders 51, Trump 49	Sanders +2

In a couple of important state polls, Biden & Warren lead Trump in Florida (for some reason, Bernie wasn't listed) and Minnesota:

Florida: Trump vs. Biden	UNF	Biden 48, Trump 43	Biden +5
Florida: Trump vs. Warren	UNF	Warren 46, Trump 43	Warren +3

Minnesota: Trump vs. Biden	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Biden 50, Trump 38	Biden +12
Minnesota: Trump vs. Warren	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Warren 51, Trump 40	Warren +11
Minnesota: Trump vs. Sanders	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Sanders 49, Trump 40	Sanders +9
Minnesota: Trump vs. Klobuchar	Star Tribune/Mason-Dixon	Klobuchar 55, Trump 38	Klobuchar +17

I’m not really sure what to make of these polls. They seem ‘off’ for lack of a better word.
Trump approval rating has been sinking rather steadily the last week or so. Even Rasmussen has him at -9, which is really low for their surveys. Yet, we get a poll showing him only down 2 to all 3 major Democratic candidates? Just doesn’t seem correct.
On the Democratic side, last Wednesday we get a poll with Warren +4. A week later, it’s Biden +15? All without Warren doing anything seemingly wrong? Unless a lot of lurkers are in here reading my anti-Warren MFA screeds (��) that just doesn’t seem accurate. I don’t remember 2 polls taken during the 2012 or 2016 primaries that had such a wide variance in such a short period of time. Someone’s methodology is really off or else they are wildly over sampling.

[nots]

CNN poll: Biden +15
Quinnipiac poll: Warren +7

Something is really off with these polls.

[DMT]

CNN poll: Biden +15
Quinnipiac poll: Warren +7

Something is really off with these polls.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1187360142771347456?s=09

[nots]

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/st...771347456?s=09

I would like Silver to do an article on why these polls have such variance. I don’t recall ever seeing a similar situation.

[GwynnInTheHall]

The last poll I saw listed only Warren, Biden, Harris and then Other. I'm sure some polls aren't this obvious in their bias toward one candidate or another, but with the latest results, somethings being skewed somewhere.

[DMT]

I would like Silver to do an article on why these polls have such variance. I don’t recall ever seeing a similar situation.

I would assume his argument would be that any individual poll could represent an outlier which is why he always talks about looking at overall trends and not reading too much into any single poll.

[revo]

CNN poll: Biden +15
Quinnipiac poll: Warren +7

Something is really off with these polls. Trump approval rating has been sinking rather steadily the last week or so. Even Rasmussen has him at -9, which is really low for their surveys. Yet, we get a poll showing him only down 2 to all 3 major Democratic candidates? Just doesn’t seem correct.

That's really bizarre. Also, latest Rasmussen poll has him at a whopping -11 now, a drop of 10 points since their last poll.

The Quinnipiac approval rating poll has him at -20%(!!!), the lowest since January's government shutdown.

Two state Dem polls, Iowa & California, show Warren comfortably ahead. And both these polls show Biden slipping badly:

Iowa Democratic Presidential Caucus	Iowa State University	Warren 28, [B]Biden 12[/B], Buttigieg 20, Sanders 18, Harris 3, Steyer 3, Klobuchar 4, Gabbard 2, Yang 2, Booker 1, O'Rourke 1, Bullock 0, Bennet 1	Warren +8
California Democratic Primary	KQED/NPR	[B]Biden 19[/B], Warren 28, Sanders 24, Harris 8, Buttigieg 9, Yang 3, O'Rourke 1, Gabbard 2, Booker 1, Klobuchar 2, Castro 0, Steyer 1, Williamson 1	Warren +4

[revo]

With a formidable primary opponent looming, and her habit for upending Democratic norms, Tulsi Gabbard announced she will not seek re-election to Congress. Broadcasting next?

[revo]

Greg Walden, the lone GOP Rep. in Oregon, announced he too will not seek re-election in 2020, becoming the 22nd GOPer to either resign or announce they're not running for re-election (compared to just 7 Dems). This is a similar phenomenon to what took place in the '18 midterms, with GOPers retiring or moving on in droves rather than either lose their seat or be in the minority.

Axios is reporting that there's an increased sense in the GOP of a total wipeout in 2020, with fears of losing the House, Senate and Presidency rising:

https://www.axios.com/republican-party-2020-election-wipeout-house-senate-trump-3ca4a371-cdfb-4213-9ff0-2cf058aa7537.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twsocialshare&utm_campaign=organic

[Sour Masher]

Greg Walden, the lone GOP Rep. in Oregon, announced he too will not seek re-election in 2020, becoming the 22nd GOPer to either resign or announce they're not running for re-election (compared to just 7 Dems). This is a similar phenomenon to what took place in the '18 midterms, with GOPers retiring or moving on in droves rather than either lose their seat or be in the minority.

Axios is reporting that there's an increased sense in the GOP of a total wipeout in 2020, with fears of losing the House, Senate and Presidency rising:
https://www.axios.com/republican-par...mpaign=organic

This may be my Trump paranoia, but I wonder if the sense that Democrats may have control of both the House and Senate in 2020 might be helpful to Trump's chances, if the Democratic nominee for president is Sanders or Warren. There may be concerns that the more extreme and costly solutions they advocate for, specifically Med4All, could actually get traction if the GOP loses the House and senate big. I think there will still be too many moderate Dems to get Med4All done, but I fear a little bit that some voters might vote their local Repub out but vote for Trump over a far left progressive.

[Teenwolf]

The last poll I saw listed only Warren, Biden, Harris and then Other. I'm sure some polls aren't this obvious in their bias toward one candidate or another, but with the latest results, somethings being skewed somewhere.

You're finally starting to see the clear media bias against Bernie this time around. To me, there's been a very clear effort to either pretend he doesn't exist, or smear with bullshit. He almost never receives positive coverage. Even the recent endorsements of AOC, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib, hardly getting coverage from MSM. John King on CNN asked if these endorsements made the coalition "too urban"... gee, 2016 it was "white young dumb males", and now it's "too urban"... even Nate Silver had a disgusting tweet dismissing Bernie's racially diverse coalition by saying "Not sure Bernie should get credit for having more diverse support than last time given that he has far less support than last time. A lot of voters have left him. White liberals have been particularly likely to leave him (for Warren) so the residue of what's left is more diverse."... yeah, his racial diversity is just the "residue" of white liberals leaving him... Whatever narrative they can come up with to declare him DOA, they will trot it out.

New CNN poll out of New Hampshire shows Bernie leading. Sanders 21, Warren 18, Biden 15, Buttigieg 10, Gabbard 5, Klobuchar 5, Yang 5.

Despite Bernie leading CNN produces 5 stories with the following headlines:

"Buttigieg in fourth, but a strong fourth"

"This is a historically unprecedented New Hampshire mess"

"Early state primary voters much more undecided than voters nationally"

"A disappointing poll for Biden"

"Sanders and Warren sit atop in New Hampshire primary, but there's no clear front-runner"

I understand Sanders' lead is within the margin of error, but they're totally loathe to let the secret out that Sanders has a ton of support. He's also risen nationally, up 3 pts in the last 3 weeks, from 14 to 17. So ultimately, the media narrative doesn't matter so much. I think if Bernie is able to outperform in the early states as he did vs. Hillary, that will only increase the shock and awe of his early performance. He has a good chance to win New Hampshire and Nevada, if he's able to outperform expectations in Iowa and finish 1st or 2nd while polling 4th at 13% (and outside the minimum 15% to acquire delegates)... that would all set him up to crush the media blackout, and general media disdain for him. His fundraising is gangbusters, must be over 1.5 Mil donors by now, nobody else close. Never covered in any detail. But they'll be forced to take him seriously once he starts winning states. I just have to have faith his slow rise continues, and that he drives turnout from typical non-voters that aren't being polled.