Biden vs Trump 2020 - vote now and discuss!

The Juggler

Biden

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Well of course he had more name recognition than the other 2020 primary candidates. He was Vice-President for 8 years. But before he was VP, and despite him being, as you said few posts back, one of the most recognizable politicians for decades, he had to drop out of the 2008 primary after Iowa after getting 1% of the vote. I know, he was going up against much, much more recognizable Hillary and a once-in-a-lifetime politician in Obama. But still, maybe he wasn’t as recognizable before he was VP as you’re suggesting he was. 

He’s only the nominee now because the Democrats couldn’t come up with anyone better, and he’s only polling ahead of Trump cause Trump’s the worst president ever. 

And I don’t think he’ll get a boost following the convention, even if others have in the past. And it’s going to be because of his running mate. I don’t think many people that are on the fence are going to see his VP pick and say “Oh well NOW I’m voting for Biden.” I think any independent or Trump-hating Republican that is going to vote for Biden has already made up their mind that they will. All his VP pick can do is scare potential members of that voting block away. 

It's true that a lot more people have their minds made up this year compared to 2016, which bodes well for Biden. But name me one nominee in the history of this country that has not gotten even a little convention bump. If a candidate as unliked as HRC can get one, Biden will as well. 

Not doing well in the Iowa primary in '08 doesn't mean people didn't know who he was, right? They just preferred other candidates more. And then he was VP for 8 years which further enhanced his brand. 

The bottom line is people do know him and he's a hell of a lot more likable than HRC was. That's the point. And that is why Trump is having such a hard time defining him as someone he's not, a far left wing puppet. Think about, if people didn't know him and/or didn't like him like most didn't like HRC, don't you think Trump's relentless ad campaign since May would have had more of an effect than about 1 or 2%?

It doesn't get much more steady than this:

Well let’s just see how the polls look say two weeks after the running-mate pick. I request of you a full 538 report two weeks after he makes the pick. I contend that the only things that can hurt Biden at this point is the running-mate pick, and him coming off like a blathering fool (even with Trump’s own idiocy on display) in the debates. I’ll be happy to be wrong on this though. 

He's going to pick the VP this week. The convention is next week. That is what when he will get the bump. The week after, I believe, is the RNC convention when Trump will likely get his bump. Everything should settle back down a few weeks prior to the debates.

50.1% right now. To see if there's a bump, check in early next week! If he doesn't get a bump, I reckon it will be the first time in the history of polling. But you never know...

Well from the moment Trump came down the escalator, we’ve seen plenty of “first time in history” instances in relation to the presidency, so anything’s possible. And I agree with gimmesometruth and Halifax that no matter what the polls say, things should be approached like Biden is behind. The last thing you wanna see is people feel, as many did with Hillary, that it’s already in the bag. While voting is kinda fun for me based on my voting location (right in, right out), others have to wait in line for an ungodly amount of time. If those people believe that the result isn’t in question, they might not bother going out to vote. 

HOPEFULLY that experience from '16 is gonna trigger an enormous turnout this time around. Midterms were encouraging.

I'm really concerned about them grinding the mail down to a halt...

The Juggler

Biden

mrussel1 said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

The only thing that can save Trump's election fate is if he promises to solve the Iran crisis within a month of being re-elected.  I just don't see how he can make such a promise. 

I don't know. Biden is a huge favorite but this is Trump and this is the god forsaken year of 2020. Halifax is right in that they are doing everything in their power to sabotage this thing. Moron left wing voters not showing up like in 2016 combined with a lower than expected turnout, topped off with Trump fucking up the mail could be devastating. 

He's up 8. Pretend he's down 8. 

Dammit he outsmarted the Dems again!  https://thehill.com/policy/international/511347-trump-vows-deal-with-iran-within-four-weeks-if-reelected

Oh
My 
God

His 30% base of morons will eat that up too. lol

mrussel1

Biden

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

The Juggler said:

mrussel1 said:

The only thing that can save Trump's election fate is if he promises to solve the Iran crisis within a month of being re-elected.  I just don't see how he can make such a promise. 

I don't know. Biden is a huge favorite but this is Trump and this is the god forsaken year of 2020. Halifax is right in that they are doing everything in their power to sabotage this thing. Moron left wing voters not showing up like in 2016 combined with a lower than expected turnout, topped off with Trump fucking up the mail could be devastating. 

He's up 8. Pretend he's down 8. 

Dammit he outsmarted the Dems again!  https://thehill.com/policy/international/511347-trump-vows-deal-with-iran-within-four-weeks-if-reelected

Oh
My 
God

His 30% base of morons will eat that up too. lol

But...I'm only going to do it as a reward for electing me.  

mickeyrat

Biden

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

The Juggler said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Well of course he had more name recognition than the other 2020 primary candidates. He was Vice-President for 8 years. But before he was VP, and despite him being, as you said few posts back, one of the most recognizable politicians for decades, he had to drop out of the 2008 primary after Iowa after getting 1% of the vote. I know, he was going up against much, much more recognizable Hillary and a once-in-a-lifetime politician in Obama. But still, maybe he wasn’t as recognizable before he was VP as you’re suggesting he was. 

He’s only the nominee now because the Democrats couldn’t come up with anyone better, and he’s only polling ahead of Trump cause Trump’s the worst president ever. 

And I don’t think he’ll get a boost following the convention, even if others have in the past. And it’s going to be because of his running mate. I don’t think many people that are on the fence are going to see his VP pick and say “Oh well NOW I’m voting for Biden.” I think any independent or Trump-hating Republican that is going to vote for Biden has already made up their mind that they will. All his VP pick can do is scare potential members of that voting block away. 

It's true that a lot more people have their minds made up this year compared to 2016, which bodes well for Biden. But name me one nominee in the history of this country that has not gotten even a little convention bump. If a candidate as unliked as HRC can get one, Biden will as well. 

Not doing well in the Iowa primary in '08 doesn't mean people didn't know who he was, right? They just preferred other candidates more. And then he was VP for 8 years which further enhanced his brand. 

The bottom line is people do know him and he's a hell of a lot more likable than HRC was. That's the point. And that is why Trump is having such a hard time defining him as someone he's not, a far left wing puppet. Think about, if people didn't know him and/or didn't like him like most didn't like HRC, don't you think Trump's relentless ad campaign since May would have had more of an effect than about 1 or 2%?

It doesn't get much more steady than this:

Well let’s just see how the polls look say two weeks after the running-mate pick. I request of you a full 538 report two weeks after he makes the pick. I contend that the only things that can hurt Biden at this point is the running-mate pick, and him coming off like a blathering fool (even with Trump’s own idiocy on display) in the debates. I’ll be happy to be wrong on this though. 

He's going to pick the VP this week. The convention is next week. That is what when he will get the bump. The week after, I believe, is the RNC convention when Trump will likely get his bump. Everything should settle back down a few weeks prior to the debates.

50.1% right now. To see if there's a bump, check in early next week! If he doesn't get a bump, I reckon it will be the first time in the history of polling. But you never know...

Well from the moment Trump came down the escalator, we’ve seen plenty of “first time in history” instances in relation to the presidency, so anything’s possible. And I agree with gimmesometruth and Halifax that no matter what the polls say, things should be approached like Biden is behind. The last thing you wanna see is people feel, as many did with Hillary, that it’s already in the bag. While voting is kinda fun for me based on my voting location (right in, right out), others have to wait in line for an ungodly amount of time. If those people believe that the result isn’t in question, they might not bother going out to vote. 

HOPEFULLY that experience from '16 is gonna trigger an enormous turnout this time around. Midterms were encouraging.

I'm really concerned about them grinding the mail down to a halt...

request the ballot. fill it out. drop it off yourself......

Halifax2TheMax

And he’d still invite Putin on the ritz, even after 
Bountygate. #PTAPE 

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/10/politics/donald-trump-g7-november/index.html

brianlux

Biden

Damn!   We have to get every Dem and moderate Republican out to vote this year.  We just can't have another 4 years of tRumpus amongst us.  We caaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan't have it!

mickeyrat

Biden

  https://apnews.com/31fd62b679a43387369cde91c10aa553

Constraints gone, GOP ramps up effort to monitor voting

By ERIC TUCKER and NICHOLAS RICCARDI

Today

WASHINGTON (AP) — Since 1937, the state of Pennsylvania has had strict rules about who can stand in polling stations and challenge the eligibility of voters. The restrictions are meant to curb the use of “poll monitors” long sent by both parties to look out for voting mishaps, but at times used to intimidate voters.

In June, the Republican National Committee sued to ease those rules, saying they imposed arbitrary limits on the party's ability to keep tabs on the voting process no matter where it occurs.

The Pennsylvania lawsuit over an obscure slice of election law is just one piece of the party’s sweeping plan to expand poll monitoring this election year. Thanks to a federal court ruling that freed the party from restrictions — a result of tactics found to be aimed at minority voters — the GOP is mounting a broad effort to keep a close watch on who casts ballots.

The GOP is recruiting 50,000 monitors, typically party activists and specially appointed volunteers, across 15 battleground states. Meanwhile, the party has filed, or intervened in, lawsuits challenging election rules across the country, including cases in battleground states like Nevada, Wisconsin and Florida that challenge laws meant to ease access to absentee ballots and voting by mail.

Republicans say they are focused on preventing the fraud they have long maintained, without evidence, is rampant in U.S. elections. Democrats and voting rights groups fear the planned influx of poll watchers under the imprimatur of the RNC is a veiled effort to suppress Democratic turnout, particularly in minority communities.

The issue is especially contentious for two parties already clashing over how to protect the right to vote during a pandemic. As election officials prepare for an unprecedented surge of mailed ballots, both parties are gearing up for the possibility of protracted legal battles over how those votes are tallied, giving new weight to the question of who can monitor the count.

“By and large, these kinds of ballot security operations, especially in a heated partisan and polarizing environment and with the emotions surrounding elections — they risk crossing lines, causing disruptions,” said Wendy Weiser, who directs the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.

Republicans say the monitors they’re recruiting will receive training to ensure they follow state laws. The real reason Democrats are objecting is because Republicans know that “the playing field has been leveled,” said RNC spokesperson Mandi Merritt.

“We can do what Democrats and other Republican groups have been able to do for decades," Merritt said in a statement. “This is about getting more people to vote, certainly not less.”

Democrats say they, too, have spent millions of dollars building up staff. They say their goal is to support voters who need questions answered and to combat what they say is a misinformation campaign aimed at suppressing turnout.

Former Vice President Joe Biden told those attending a July fundraiser that his campaign has 600 attorneys and 10,000 volunteers ready to ensure voters can cast ballots.

Traditionally, poll watchers monitor polling locations and can alert campaigns and party lawyers about perceived irregularities, including people being unfairly blocked from voting, identification laws not being followed or poor signage. In some states, citizen observers can lodge challenges against individual voters, kicking ballots to a review board or forcing them to be counted provisionally until the complaint is settled.

In 2020, when as many as half of ballots may be cast by mail, poll watching may extend to mail balloting, where boards that include observers from both parties often review individual ballots to determine whether they should be counted.

The Pennsylvania lawsuit seeks to overturn state law that says poll watchers may serve only in the counties where they live. Republicans are asking a judge to allow monitors to be present any place votes are cast, including any locations where absentee or mail ballots are returned.

Even before the coronavirus reconfigured the election, both parties were bracing for a titanic battle over voting in courts and at the polls.

Intensifying the conflict was a judge’s 2018 decision to lift a consent decree, in place for nearly 40 years, that required the RNC to have court approval for organized poll monitoring activities, such as interrogating prospective voters about their qualifications before they cast ballots or deputizing civilians as law enforcement officials.

“There is no modern precedent for what to expect,” said Marc Elias, who represents Democrats in voting rights lawsuits across the country.

The 1982 agreement resolved a lawsuit that accused the RNC and the New Jersey Republican State Committee of voter intimidation tactics in that state’s gubernatorial election one year earlier. Those included the hiring of off-duty law enforcement officers to patrol polling places in minority communities.

Newly freed from the decree, the RNC can now centralize what individual parties and campaigns and the states had to perform.

“For 40 years, the Republican Party has been fighting this battle with one hand tied behind its back,” Justin Clark, now a senior counsel to Trump's campaign, told a conservative conference in March.

Democrats are concerned an organized poll-watching force could engage in the type of activity that produced the consent decree in the first place. The agreement was modified several times after Democrats raised new allegations that it had been violated, including in 1990 after the North Carolina State Republican Party sent postcards to Black voters warning them that submitting false information to a federal election official was a crime.

Republicans have given some clues as to how their poll watchers might be deployed.

The monitors will ideally both watch the setup of election systems, where Clark said the bulk of errors occur, and eyeball Election Day activity for possible fraud. Rather than solely focusing in Democratic bastions, they’ll also spread out to smaller cities, such as Eau Claire, Wisconsin, where Trump will try to run up robust margins.

“What we’re going to be able to do if we can recruit the bodies is focus on these places because that’s where our voters are,” Clark told a Republican lawyers group in Wisconsin in November, according to a recording posted online by the Democratic group American Bridge. “Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places, but let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are now.”

Another Republican operative, Josh Helton, speaking at the March conservative conference, recalled organizing 2,000 volunteers to watch polling places in Philadelphia in 2016.

“Just having a presence of some sort is a deterrent for probably 80% of the bad behavior that is going to happen,” Helton said. “If people are left unattended and unchaperoned in some of these areas where there is no Republican presence whatsoever, then they’re going to cheat.”

Democrats, for their part, have hired voter protection staffers in 19 states, created an online tool to warn voters they may be purged from registration systems, and launched toll-free numbers where voters could report problems.

“We have a really robust operation,” said Rachana Desai Martin, Biden’s voter protection director. “We have a ton of interest. My inbox is filled with people who want to help us protect the right to vote.”

____

Halifax2TheMax

mickeyrat said:

  https://apnews.com/31fd62b679a43387369cde91c10aa553

Constraints gone, GOP ramps up effort to monitor voting

By ERIC TUCKER and NICHOLAS RICCARDI

Today

WASHINGTON (AP) — Since 1937, the state of Pennsylvania has had strict rules about who can stand in polling stations and challenge the eligibility of voters. The restrictions are meant to curb the use of “poll monitors” long sent by both parties to look out for voting mishaps, but at times used to intimidate voters.

In June, the Republican National Committee sued to ease those rules, saying they imposed arbitrary limits on the party's ability to keep tabs on the voting process no matter where it occurs.

The Pennsylvania lawsuit over an obscure slice of election law is just one piece of the party’s sweeping plan to expand poll monitoring this election year. Thanks to a federal court ruling that freed the party from restrictions — a result of tactics found to be aimed at minority voters — the GOP is mounting a broad effort to keep a close watch on who casts ballots.

The GOP is recruiting 50,000 monitors, typically party activists and specially appointed volunteers, across 15 battleground states. Meanwhile, the party has filed, or intervened in, lawsuits challenging election rules across the country, including cases in battleground states like Nevada, Wisconsin and Florida that challenge laws meant to ease access to absentee ballots and voting by mail.

Republicans say they are focused on preventing the fraud they have long maintained, without evidence, is rampant in U.S. elections. Democrats and voting rights groups fear the planned influx of poll watchers under the imprimatur of the RNC is a veiled effort to suppress Democratic turnout, particularly in minority communities.

The issue is especially contentious for two parties already clashing over how to protect the right to vote during a pandemic. As election officials prepare for an unprecedented surge of mailed ballots, both parties are gearing up for the possibility of protracted legal battles over how those votes are tallied, giving new weight to the question of who can monitor the count.

“By and large, these kinds of ballot security operations, especially in a heated partisan and polarizing environment and with the emotions surrounding elections — they risk crossing lines, causing disruptions,” said Wendy Weiser, who directs the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.

Republicans say the monitors they’re recruiting will receive training to ensure they follow state laws. The real reason Democrats are objecting is because Republicans know that “the playing field has been leveled,” said RNC spokesperson Mandi Merritt.

“We can do what Democrats and other Republican groups have been able to do for decades," Merritt said in a statement. “This is about getting more people to vote, certainly not less.”

Democrats say they, too, have spent millions of dollars building up staff. They say their goal is to support voters who need questions answered and to combat what they say is a misinformation campaign aimed at suppressing turnout.

Former Vice President Joe Biden told those attending a July fundraiser that his campaign has 600 attorneys and 10,000 volunteers ready to ensure voters can cast ballots.

Traditionally, poll watchers monitor polling locations and can alert campaigns and party lawyers about perceived irregularities, including people being unfairly blocked from voting, identification laws not being followed or poor signage. In some states, citizen observers can lodge challenges against individual voters, kicking ballots to a review board or forcing them to be counted provisionally until the complaint is settled.

In 2020, when as many as half of ballots may be cast by mail, poll watching may extend to mail balloting, where boards that include observers from both parties often review individual ballots to determine whether they should be counted.

The Pennsylvania lawsuit seeks to overturn state law that says poll watchers may serve only in the counties where they live. Republicans are asking a judge to allow monitors to be present any place votes are cast, including any locations where absentee or mail ballots are returned.

Even before the coronavirus reconfigured the election, both parties were bracing for a titanic battle over voting in courts and at the polls.

Intensifying the conflict was a judge’s 2018 decision to lift a consent decree, in place for nearly 40 years, that required the RNC to have court approval for organized poll monitoring activities, such as interrogating prospective voters about their qualifications before they cast ballots or deputizing civilians as law enforcement officials.

“There is no modern precedent for what to expect,” said Marc Elias, who represents Democrats in voting rights lawsuits across the country.

The 1982 agreement resolved a lawsuit that accused the RNC and the New Jersey Republican State Committee of voter intimidation tactics in that state’s gubernatorial election one year earlier. Those included the hiring of off-duty law enforcement officers to patrol polling places in minority communities.

Newly freed from the decree, the RNC can now centralize what individual parties and campaigns and the states had to perform.

“For 40 years, the Republican Party has been fighting this battle with one hand tied behind its back,” Justin Clark, now a senior counsel to Trump's campaign, told a conservative conference in March.

Democrats are concerned an organized poll-watching force could engage in the type of activity that produced the consent decree in the first place. The agreement was modified several times after Democrats raised new allegations that it had been violated, including in 1990 after the North Carolina State Republican Party sent postcards to Black voters warning them that submitting false information to a federal election official was a crime.

Republicans have given some clues as to how their poll watchers might be deployed.

The monitors will ideally both watch the setup of election systems, where Clark said the bulk of errors occur, and eyeball Election Day activity for possible fraud. Rather than solely focusing in Democratic bastions, they’ll also spread out to smaller cities, such as Eau Claire, Wisconsin, where Trump will try to run up robust margins.

“What we’re going to be able to do if we can recruit the bodies is focus on these places because that’s where our voters are,” Clark told a Republican lawyers group in Wisconsin in November, according to a recording posted online by the Democratic group American Bridge. “Traditionally it’s always been Republicans suppressing votes in places, but let’s start protecting our voters. We know where they are now.”

Another Republican operative, Josh Helton, speaking at the March conservative conference, recalled organizing 2,000 volunteers to watch polling places in Philadelphia in 2016.

“Just having a presence of some sort is a deterrent for probably 80% of the bad behavior that is going to happen,” Helton said. “If people are left unattended and unchaperoned in some of these areas where there is no Republican presence whatsoever, then they’re going to cheat.”

Democrats, for their part, have hired voter protection staffers in 19 states, created an online tool to warn voters they may be purged from registration systems, and launched toll-free numbers where voters could report problems.

“We have a really robust operation,” said Rachana Desai Martin, Biden’s voter protection director. “We have a ton of interest. My inbox is filled with people who want to help us protect the right to vote.”

____

How many of those repub poll intimidators won’t be wearing a mask and will be armed? Me thinks we need the UN to observe the elections in the greatest democracy in the world.

Ledbetterman10

Biden

Stupid Trump says 'Men Are Insulted' by Biden committing to pick a female as his running mate

I think it's should be the other way around. If I was a potential female VP candidate, I'd be insulted that I'm only being considered because I'm a woman. I'd want to know I'm really considered the best person for the job. That's why I think he'd have been better off to not specify the sex of the running-mate, and then just pick a female if that's what he wanted. It would make her look more legit. And he'd look even woker! "I weighed all the options, and [insert woman-of-color here] is the best person for the job." That comes off better than being pressured to pick a woman, and then being pressured even more to pick a woman of color. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-suggests-men-are-insulted-by-biden-committing-to-pick-female-as-his-vp/ar-BB17PTl7?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds

dignin

Bass said she's not the VP pick.

Sounds like today's the day.

Gern Blansten

Biden

It's Kamala.....interesting

The Juggler

Biden

dignin said:

Bass said she's not the VP pick.

Sounds like today's the day.

Well that is a relief...

dignin

Gern Blansten said:

It's Kamala.....interesting

Source?

The Juggler

Biden

dignin said:

Gern Blansten said:

It's Kamala.....interesting

Source?

Joe Biden. I can confirm this

dignin

The Juggler said:

dignin said:

Gern Blansten said:

It's Kamala.....interesting

Source?

Joe Biden. I can confirm this

Nice. I see it now too.

It's who I thought. Not my first pick, but I think she's great.

The Juggler

Biden

I like it!

dignin

She's gonna make Pence look like a clown.

Gern Blansten

Biden

Part of me feels sorry for Pence....but that part of me will leave my body at roughly 730am tomorrow

The Juggler

Biden

Gonna mop the floor with Pence.

This also jabs at Trump's "law and order" campaign, which wasn't working as well as he had hoped up to this point anyway. 

Great pick, Joe. 

jeffbr

Biden

Biden / Harris 2020. I'm in.