Its over. Joe Biden is stepping down

[Scouts Honor]

19 minutes ago, ionel said:

It was obvious from the shooting that Trump scares easily.  He jumped right out of his shoes.  

he is making sure kamala is actually the candidate... zero votes in chicago

[Scouts Honor]

[headshuck]

after all they have been shown.. and seen... they still dont get it

The media is right. She wasn’t appointed the Border Czar, she was appointed the Border’s Czar. Or was it the other way around?

[Scouts Honor]

 

[Scouts Honor]

justice no longer blind

 

[Scouts Honor]

we must save democracy!!!
https://x.com/hwinkler4real/status/1816301567303376924

 

[PortaJohn]

2 hours ago, uncle bernard said:

This is laughably untrue. There was only 1 split ticket result in 2020 (Susan Collins in Maine when Biden won the state) and 0 in 2016.

There is an extreme correlation between senate and national elections. 

Senate races do not effect presidential races.  It's the opposite.  Presidential races effect senate races.  Using senate race polling this early in the cycle does not and again I will repeat does not correlate to the presidential race.  The polling on senate races will follow and fall in line with polling on the presidential race.   

Here is my original comment, "Senate polls/races are not an indicator on the national race." 

Following sentence, "Trump will win Ohio handily and Sherrod Brown will win his Ohio Senate race by a few points". 

 

 

Edited yesterday at 03:14 AM by PortaJohn

[WrestlingRasta]

On 7/25/2024 at 6:29 AM, headshuck said:

Obama hasn’t endorsed her or the coup so there’s a chance she won’t be the candidate.

He has now

[Danny Deck]

10 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

how fake and shallow the left is

joe biden quit... forced out... the base loved him... but they forced him out anyway

the base forgot about him in 10 seconds

The base loved him but all the way back to 2022, 75% of Democrats wanted someone else as nominee in 2024. In recent polls 90% of Democrats say he did the right thing stepping down. 

[Paul158]

48 minutes ago, Danny Deck said:

The base loved him but all the way back to 2022, 75% of Democrats wanted someone else as nominee in 2024. In recent polls 90% of Democrats say he did the right thing stepping down. 

Do you think he stepped down or was he on the edge of the cliff with 10 knives sticking in his back.  Then he said OK I will surrender for the sake of Democracy.

[Danny Deck]

36 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Do you think he stepped down or was he on the edge of the cliff with 10 knives sticking in his back.  Then he said OK I will surrender for the sake of Democracy.

He was obviously forced out. It's too bad it didn't happen a year ago.

[Wrestleknownothing]

42 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

Do you think he stepped down or was he on the edge of the cliff with 10 knives sticking in his back.  Then he said OK I will surrender for the sake of Democracy.

And yet, his departure from office is still miles more dignified and graceful than the last guy.

[headshuck]

My favorite was Hillary. She still thinks she won.

[Offthemat]

19 minutes ago, Danny Deck said:

He was obviously forced out. It's too bad it didn't happen a year ago.

You don’t think that would have resulted in a Kamela candidacy?

[jross]

Kamala has nutty views

• Illegal Aliens
  1. Should immigrants be deported if they commit a serious crime?  No
  2. Should local law enforcement be allowed to detain immigrants for minor crimes and transfer them to federal immigration authorities?  No
  3. Should immigrants have access to government-subsidized healthcare?  Yes, and grant them citizenship
  4. Should sanctuary cities receive federal funding?  Yes
  5. Should immigrants be offered in-state tuition rates at public colleges within their residing state?  Yes
  6. Should the U.S. increase restrictions on its current border security policy?  No
  7. Should immigrants from high risk countries be banned from entering the country until the government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists?  No
• Crime
  1. Should funding for local police departments be redirected to social and community based programs?  Yes
• Education
  1. Should critical race theory be taught in K-12 education?  Yes
• Elections
  1. Should the electoral college be abolished?  Yes
  2. Should a photo ID be required to vote?  No
  3. Should foreigners, currently residing in the United States, have the right to vote?  Yes
  4. Should the minimum voting age be lowered?  Yes
• Social
  1. Should hate speech be protected by the first amendment?  No
  2. Should the federal government institute a mandatory buyback of assault weapons?  Yes
  3. Should universities provide “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” for students?  Yes
  4. Should transgender athletes be allowed to compete against athletes that differ from their assigned sex at birth?  Yes
  5. Should a business be able to deny service to a customer if the request conflicts with the owner’s religious beliefs?  No
  6. What is your stance on abortion?  No-limits abortion on demand at any point in pregnancy via cosponsored “Women’s Health Protection Act,” (abortion expansion)

To be fair, Trump is a bit nutty too

• Domestic Policy
  1. Should it be illegal to burn the American flag?  Yes
  2. Should the government regulate social media sites, as a means to prevent fake news and misinformation?  Yes
• Immigration
  1. Should the US increase or decrease the amount of temporary work visas given to high-skilled immigrant workers?  Decrease
• Elections
  1. Should the electoral college be abolished?  Yes
  2. Should the government attempt to influence foreign elections?  Yes

This one is fun

• Should a politician, who has been formerly convicted of a crime, be allowed to run for office?  No

Edited yesterday at 02:02 PM by jross

[Danny Deck]

Just now, Offthemat said:

You don’t think that would have resulted in a Kamela candidacy?

I'd have bet the field for sure.

The more interesting alternate history is what would have happened if one plausible candidate entered the primary vs Biden and polled well? Would others have entered if one had entered and shown Biden's weakness?

[headshuck]

Excellent point. Dean Phillips was right.

[Offthemat]

5 minutes ago, Danny Deck said:

I'd have bet the field for sure.

The more interesting alternate history is what would have happened if one plausible candidate entered the primary vs Biden and polled well? Would others have entered if one had entered and shown Biden's weakness?

 

2 minutes ago, headshuck said:

Excellent point. Dean Phillips was right.

What does this say about dim voters?  

[Danny Deck]

1 minute ago, Offthemat said:

 

What does this say about dim voters?  

Dean Phillips, a 3 term backbencher in the house, was not plausible. 

Compare to others who did more to damage the incumbent:

Ted Kennedy - national figure who had been a senator for 18 years

Ronald Reagan - 2 term governor of California, actor

Eugene McCarthy - 10 years in the senate, 20 years in office, had given nationally televised speeches before

Pat Buchanan - Part of 3 presidential administrations, often on TV, had a radio show

Maybe Newsom would have fit the bill? The governors getting the tryout for VP seem okay, but it's hard to say many had a national profile before last week. 

[Offthemat]

20 minutes ago, Danny Deck said:

Dean Phillips, a 3 term backbencher in the house, was not plausible. 

Compare to others who did more to damage the incumbent:

Ted Kennedy - national figure who had been a senator for 18 years

Ronald Reagan - 2 term governor of California, actor

Eugene McCarthy - 10 years in the senate, 20 years in office, had given nationally televised speeches before

Pat Buchanan - Part of 3 presidential administrations, often on TV, had a radio show

Maybe Newsom would have fit the bill? The governors getting the tryout for VP seem okay, but it's hard to say many had a national profile before last week. 

Yes, Dean Phillips entered out of frustration that no one else would act on what was painfully obvious to the majority of the country.  He tried to convince others to challenge, to no avail. 

[uncle bernard]

12 hours ago, PortaJohn said:

Senate races do not effect presidential races.  It's the opposite.  Presidential races effect senate races.  Using senate race polling this early in the cycle does not and again I will repeat does not correlate to the presidential race.  The polling on senate races will follow and fall in line with polling on the presidential race.   

Here is my original comment, "Senate polls/races are not an indicator on the national race." 

Following sentence, "Trump will win Ohio handily and Sherrod Brown will win his Ohio Senate race by a few points". 

 

 

Your point would hold if the national race numbers were permanent. They're not. Kamala has already made gains.

So, will the Senate races and national race fall in line? Probably! But that doesn't mean the Dem senate candidates will collapse. There are clearly enough people willing to vote Democrat in those states, just not for Joe Biden. Well, Joe Biden is gone. That was my point in bringing up the senate polling. There are enough people open to voting Democrat for Kamala to win those states. 

It's strange that you can't understand that, but try to waive off senate polling "this early in the cylce." Yes, it's early! That's what I'm telling you. The Democratic candidate just went from an 80 year old white man with extremely visible cognitive decline to a 59 year old black woman. That's a pretty big change. And yet, you're acting like Biden's horrible numbers are set in stone and there's nothing Harris can do to improve them. 

[PortaJohn]

31 minutes ago, uncle bernard said:

Your point would hold if the national race numbers were permanent. They're not. Kamala has already made gains.

So, will the Senate races and national race fall in line? Probably! But that doesn't mean the Dem senate candidates will collapse. There are clearly enough people willing to vote Democrat in those states, just not for Joe Biden. Well, Joe Biden is gone. That was my point in bringing up the senate polling. There are enough people open to voting Democrat for Kamala to win those states. 

It's strange that you can't understand that, but try to waive off senate polling "this early in the cylce." Yes, it's early! That's what I'm telling you. The Democratic candidate just went from an 80 year old white man with extremely visible cognitive decline to a 59 year old black woman. That's a pretty big change. And yet, you're acting like Biden's horrible numbers are set in stone and there's nothing Harris can do to improve them. 

I never said Harris can't improve.  I said Harris can't win.  The polling is shaping in to Trump Biden polling from the Spring.  And Trump had an advantage then.  You're the one ignoring all the key data points. 

I can already tell you what your life is going to be like. Harris is getting non stop positive coverage.  She's going to gain in the polls.  Shel'll get a slight convention bounce.  You're going to go wild.  Maga supporters are going to panic.  You're going to feel great. Pounding your chest.  Then come the fall (late September mid October)  Trump is going to cement a solid electoral advantage.  Game over.  The race was set and has been set for this election cycle.  I'm no longer going to respond to your posts because your the one who continues to ignore all the key data points

Edited yesterday at 04:20 PM by PortaJohn

[Paul158]

15 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I never said Harris can't improve.  I said Harris can't win.  The polling is shaping in to Trump Biden polling from the Spring.  And Trump had an advantage then.  You're the one ignoring all the key data points. 

I can already tell you what your life is going to be like. Harris is getting non stop positive coverage.  She's going to gain in the polls.  Shel'll get a slight convention bounce.  You're going to go wild.  Maga supporters are going to panic.  You're going to feel great. Pounding your chest.  Then come the fall (late September mid October)  Trump is going to cement a solid electoral advantage.  Game over.  The race was set and has been set for this election cycle.  I'm no longer going to respond to your posts because your the one who continues to ignore all the key data points

There is also the Trump factor when it comes to polling. Supporters for Trump sometimes intentionally mislead the pollsters. Usually, it is worth 2or 3 points. 

[uncle bernard]

19 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

I never said Harris can't improve.  I said Harris can't win.  The polling is shaping in to Trump Biden polling from the Spring.  And Trump had an advantage then.  You're the one ignoring all the key data points. 

I can already tell you what your life is going to be like. Harris is getting non stop positive coverage.  She's going to gain in the polls.  Shel'll get a slight convention bounce.  You're going to go wild.  Maga supporters are going to panic.  You're going to feel great. Pounding your chest.  Then come the fall (late September mid October)  Trump is going to cement a solid electoral advantage.  Game over.  The race was set and has been set for this election cycle.  I'm no longer going to respond to your posts because your the one who continues to ignore all the key data points

I don't really care who wins. I won't be voting for Harris. The dems are aiding a genocide in Gaza. You keep assuming I'm some fanboy. I despised Harris in the primary. I'm just telling you she has a real shot at this. 

You keep citing data points that are not permanent, trending away from your prediction, and at the same time say that all of the Dem senate candidates are going to regress because it's still early. It's incoherent.

[uncle bernard]

2 minutes ago, Paul158 said:

There is also the Trump factor when it comes to polling. Supporters for Trump sometimes intentionally mislead the pollsters. Usually, it is worth 2or 3 points. 

Not true. The polls in 2020 were pretty solid and the Republicans underperformed in 2022.

Edited yesterday at 04:41 PM by uncle bernard