U.S. Presidential Election 2020

[ml1dch]

16 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

We're seeing the final straws being clutched at

I'd say that's optimistic. 

The reality is more like this.

Edited November 10, 2020 by ml1dch

[mjmooney]

44 minutes ago, maqroll said:

I firmly believe that a sizable swath of MAGA respected Sanders and could have voted for him this election and in 2016. 

Sanders' biggest problem (apart from his age - as with Trump and Biden) was his demeanour. He only had one style, that of hectoring schoolteacher (Corbyn had a similar problem). He never smiled, never had any sense of excitement or enthusiasm, it was always like a stern finger-wagging lecture. All factually logical, but no charisma. Even Biden had a bit of charm and likeability. 

The left needs someone like JFK if they are ever to have a chance in the US. 

[Seat68]

4 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Sanders' biggest problem (apart from his age - as with Trump and Biden) was his demeanour. He only had one style, that of hectoring schoolteacher (Corbyn had a similar problem). He never smiled, never had any sense of excitement or enthusiasm, it was always like a stern finger-wagging lecture. All factually logical, but no charisma. Even Biden had a bit of charm and likeability. 

The left needs someone like JFK if they are ever to have a chance in the US. 

Spot on. An accusation of Trump is that he is humourless. Its the same with Corbyn and Sanders too. 

[sharkyvilla]

7 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Sanders' biggest problem (apart from his age - as with Trump and Biden) was his demeanour. He only had one style, that of hectoring schoolteacher (Corbyn had a similar problem). He never smiled, never had any sense of excitement or enthusiasm, it was always like a stern finger-wagging lecture. All factually logical, but no charisma. Even Biden had a bit of charm and likeability. 

The left needs someone like JFK if they are ever to have a chance in the US. 

AOC maybe?  She can't stand for President for another 4 years but if Harris is President by then maybe she can breakthrough some of the barriers for someone like AOC to take over.  

[HanoiVillan]

18 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Sanders' biggest problem (apart from his age - as with Trump and Biden) was his demeanour. He only had one style, that of hectoring schoolteacher (Corbyn had a similar problem). He never smiled, never had any sense of excitement or enthusiasm, it was always like a stern finger-wagging lecture. All factually logical, but no charisma. Even Biden had a bit of charm and likeability. 

The left needs someone like JFK if they are ever to have a chance in the US. 

I actually think this is pretty valid as a criticism, on both counts TBH.

[TheAuthority]

It would be interesting if Europe ever became Federalized and you had you elect a President. Can you imagine 

[Keyblade]

4 hours ago, The Fun Factory said:

Well yes but you have to be smoking crack to think Sanders would have beaten Trump in the election. Even Biden wishy-washy centrist platform has only just go over the line. The states is a fairly right wing place and no socialist will ever become president.

Don't think this is true. Sanders is easily the most popular politician in the country, and his policies are overwhelmingly popular. He might not have done as well as that would suggest due to the incessant propaganda that would dissuade some voters from voting for a socialist as you say, but he'd still have more than enough to dispatch Trump I'd imagine. Democrats were very close to having egg on their face if Biden didn't just squeak over the line.

[sidcow]

Most political parties seem to pick someone eminently unsuitable to win an election and can't see beyond their own desires. 

It was completely obvious that Labour should have picked David Miliband. I'm certain they would have won the election then.  But no, they went for Ed who was never going to win an election. 

They persisted with Kinnock all those years wasting their time and effort and the same with Corbyn.  To win an election you need a dynamic leader with a bit of charisma. 

I'm certain if the Dems had put forward a better candidate than Biden the margin would have been much wider. 

Basically most political parties take their eye off the big prize and pick someone based on whatever internal party politics are going on. 

[mjmooney]

28 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

Sanders is easily the most popular politician in the country 

 

[Keyblade]

3 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

 

He's been polling as the most popular (currently active I should add) politician since 2016 at least from what I can remember. Usually that's measured by favourability rate.

[DCJonah]

3 hours ago, villakram said:

Classy.

I like how you have forgotten the immense amount of deportations under Obama or the locking of people/children in cages. 

As far is I know, the policy under Obama was to separate kids when they crossed the border, if it was unknown whether the person with them was a parent or if the child was being trafficked into the country. A horrible thing to do but I believe the policy came from trying to look after the safety of the child. 

This is in stark contrast to trump, who put in place a zero tolerance policy, with the aim to use separating kids from parents as some sort of weapon of warning. Its possibly one of the most disgusting things I've seen in many years and it truly bothers me. Its probably the thing that makes me hope trump spends the rest of his life in jail. 

Just a few days ago, the reported number of lost children in the system increased to over 600. 

Trumps policy has literally stolen over 600 children from their parents. Its absolutely monstrous and people like you trying to downplay is quite frankly disgusting, but exactly what I'd expect from his supporters. 

Shame on you. 

[blandy]

5 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

To restate the point - there has been a pronounced split in voting patterns by age. This is true in the US, though complicated by additional factors like the large difference in racial composition of generations. However, it is even clearer in the UK, where a shift has been visible over the last 20 years from a point when age was a very poor predictor of voting pattern to now being the best one available. This is a poor trade-off for left-wing political parties, because young people have very poor turnout rates in elections, eg in the UK:

When it mattered less how old you were as a predictor of who you voted for, this did not particularly hamper Labour, who were able to win in 2001 and 2005 despite record-setting low youth turnout. This situation is now a problem. However, that doesn't mean that younger people do not exist, it means that many of them are 'not politically organised', by which I mean they may have never voted, have little alignment with a particular ideology, or may have extremely limited engagement.

I am not suggesting even slightly that there are no right-wing voters in these age groups. Even among 18-24 year olds, roughly 20% vote Conservative; this rises to in the region of 40% by the time we are talking of people in their 40s. But reliably Conservative voters in these age brackets are far outweighed by people who are 'not politically organised'.

Younger workers are much more likely to be 'economically precarious' than older ones, or the retired. Many younger workers own no assets; are on short-term, part-time or unpredictable hours; are on low wages. Not all, by a long stretch, but certainly a large number, and these are who I am referring to as 'economically precarious'. The proportion of retired people who own no assets or who are in deep financial insecurity is significantly lower, and older people are mostly protected by government policies from the deepest hardship.

This group of younger voters is who I am talking about above. They are mostly not people who voted for Brexit (very unpopular with younger voters), and are not regular participators in elections. They are not the reason the Conservatives won in 2019 either, which is a story of predominantly older voters switching parties in long-term Labour seats, and that is why I am saying these are largely two different groups of people.

I’d be interested to see a more up to date graph as I perceive the situation has changed. I also don’t go along with the gist of younger = poorer. People of all ages are in significant part struggling. Income isn’t the only measure, outgoings to feed families, pay mortgages are often more burdensome than students have who may only have themselves to feed and house. Child poverty numbers indicate large numbers of families struggle, and these families are not exclusively young ones. Austerity has changed things. Further Trumpism and Brexitism has energised people to engage or “organise”. Whether that’s temporary or a longer term thing, who can say. I just think the world has changed a lot in the past 4 years and old certainties and assertions or assumptions are no longer necessarily valid. The poor don’t vote, or if they do they vote left is, as I said, one thing that doesn’t ring true. Of course some do, but I don’t think that it remains as easy an assertion to stand up. Uni students, sure they’re the ones with the education, in the cities and experiencing wider life. The ones who can’t afford or don’t get qualifications to go to uni, stuck in dead end towns ( as they see them), or doing casual jobs can be surprisingly right wing ( to me at least).

[colhint]

2 hours ago, sharkyvilla said:

AOC maybe?  She can't stand for President for another 4 years but if Harris is President by then maybe she can breakthrough some of the barriers for someone like AOC to take over.  

yes she can. She will be 35 in December. You are not President until January

[Dodgyknees]

 

 

[villakram]

4 hours ago, AXD said:

I didn't really understand how this conversation turned to kids in cages so I went back to look.

-Someone said he did not really believe these lawsuits would be effective

-You question this, because the republicans have good lawyers

-TheAuthority shows a tweet that says the Trump team did not file the appeal correctly, questioning the good lawyers

-You see this post as plagiarism

-TheAuthority asks why you mention plagiarism, giving an example of plagiarism

-You throw in 'deportations under Obama and locking kids in cages'

Did I summarise this correctly? If so, I am still confused as to how you got from a normal discussion about how all these lawsuits would go about and who would do well in them to using 'deportations under Obama' as a response. That is a completely different matter, or am I missing something?

You conveniently forgot the "whore... kids in cages" part.

[The Fun Factory]

14 minutes ago, avfcDJ said:

 

 

That is a load of malarkey.

[villakram]

3 hours ago, ml1dch said:

I assume it's referring to Biden. He plagiarised one of Neil Kinnock's speeches during his '88 election run.

One of those weird things that Trump supporters cling to in the absence of actual criticisms. 

I don't think he's accusing anything on here as being plagiarised. 

yes, a play on that and it already having been posted, but of course everything I post is because I'm an evil Russian Trump supporting etc., etc.

[villakram]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

As far is I know, the policy under Obama was to separate kids when they crossed the border, if it was unknown whether the person with them was a parent or if the child was being trafficked into the country. A horrible thing to do but I believe the policy came from trying to look after the safety of the child. 

This is in stark contrast to trump, who put in place a zero tolerance policy, with the aim to use separating kids from parents as some sort of weapon of warning. Its possibly one of the most disgusting things I've seen in many years and it truly bothers me. Its probably the thing that makes me hope trump spends the rest of his life in jail. 

Just a few days ago, the reported number of lost children in the system increased to over 600. 

Trumps policy has literally stolen over 600 children from their parents. Its absolutely monstrous and people like you trying to downplay is quite frankly disgusting, but exactly what I'd expect from his supporters. 

Shame on you. 

What?!? Where do you (plural) get off with your claims to some form of moral/ethical superiority.

He brought up the kids in cages things, so did I. According to this "logic", if I support kids in cages then he does too. Beyond silly.

Or are we not allowed to speak about or discuss anything controversial because to do so, implies support of whatever the "evil" flavor of the day is. Yay moral relativism.

 

[Dodgyknees]

10 minutes ago, The Fun Factory said:

That is a load of malarkey.

Not to Trump’s supporters

[blandy]

3 hours ago, ml1dch said:

assume it's referring to Biden. He plagiarised one of Neil Kinnock's speeches during his '88 election run

Even that is not really true. I read something by Kinnock in which this was mentioned. IIRC he said that Biden gave the speech with. Kinnock line in it, many times and got to know the speech he was giving off by heart. Every time he credited Kinnock with the one line “as Neil Kinnock said...”. Then once, just once he forgot to give the credit he’d repeatedly done in the past. He was apparently mortified after the speech when an advisor pointed it out. He  also , said Kinnock, apologised personally to him for forgetting it that one time.

so not quite the plagiarism alleged by Trumpers. I suppose technically it’s just about tenable, but it’s not what most people would call plagiarism.