Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 3,901 through 3,930 (of 8,310 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124192
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Tom Tomorrow #124189
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124185
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Well my Twitter feed is ablaze with fear of a Trump coup after Pompeo’s remark.

    Here is David Sirota:

    https://www.dailyposter.com/p/trump-is-staging-a-coup-why-are-dems

    Trump Is Staging A Coup — Why Are Dems Not Sounding The Alarm?
    Republicans are following a clear plan to try to overturn the election results, just like they did in 2000. And once again, Democrats are not sounding a loud enough alarm.

    David Sirota

    The recent HBO film 537 Votes about the Florida 2000 election mess offers one overarching message: Democrats’ refusal to sound a clear alarm about the slow-motion heist in process ultimately let the election be stolen.

    In that debacle, Democrats seemed to think things would break their way with well-honed arguments inside the cloistered confines of the legal system — they never understood how public-facing politics can play a role in what ultimately ended up being a pivotal political brawl outside the courtroom.

    Twenty years later, the lesson of that debacle isn’t being heeded. Donald Trump and his cronies are quite clearly waging a public-facing campaign designed to create the conditions for the Electoral College process to pull off a coup.

    This is a full-scale emergency — and yet the Democratic strategy seems to be to try to pretend it isn’t happening, in hopes that norms win out, even though nothing at all is normal.

    Trump Has A Deliberate Strategy
    In the week since the election, Trump’s and his Republican allies have waged a public campaign to call the election results into question — not just in the courtroom, but in the public’s mind. Their lawsuits and Attorney General William Barr’s recent memo are designed as much to win rulings and initiate prosecutions as they are to generate headlines. Their tweets asserting fraud, and their high-profile promises of financial reward for evidence of fraud are all designed to do the same thing.

    Most ominously of all, Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Arizona are already insinuating the results may be fraudulent, even though they haven’t produced any evidence of widespread fraud.

    Why is public perception so important? Because as Ohio State University law professor Edward Foley shows in a frighteningly prescient 2019 article, legislatures could use the public perception of fraud to try to invoke their constitutional power to ignore their states’ popular votes, reject certified election results and appoint slates of Trump electors.

    In an article that predicted almost exactly what has already happened in Pennsylvania, Foley imagined Trump seeming to be ahead at first, then losing his lead as votes are counted, then making allegations of fraud, setting the stage for this:

    At Trump’s urging, the state’s legislature — where Republicans have majorities in both houses — purports to exercise its authority under Article II of the Constitution to appoint the state’s presidential electors directly. Taking their cue from Trump, both legislative chambers claim that the certified popular vote cannot be trusted because of the blue shift that occurred in overtime. Therefore, the two chambers claim to have the constitutional right to supersede the popular vote and assert direct authority to appoint the state’s presidential electors, so that this appointment is in line with the popular vote tally as it existed on Election Night, which Trump continues to claim is the “true” outcome.

    The state’s Democratic governor refuses to assent to this assertion of authority by the state’s legislature, but the legislature’s two chambers proclaim that the governor’s assent is unnecessary. They cite early historical practices in which state legislatures appointed presidential electors without any involvement of the state’s governor. They argue that like constitutional amendments, and unlike ordinary legislation, the appointment of presidential electors when undertaken directly by a state legislature is not subject to a gubernatorial veto.

    Foley notes how public-facing politics — outside the cloistered legal arena — could then come into play.

    “It might be too much of a power grab. One would hope that American politics have not become so tribal that a political party is willing to seize power without a plausible basis for doing so rooted in the actual votes of the citizenry,” he writes. “If during the canvass itself, Trump can gain traction with his allegation that the blue shift amounts to fraudulently fabricated ballots — along the lines of his 2018 tweet about Florida — then it becomes more politically tenable to claim that the legislature must step in and appoint the state’s electors directly to reflect the ‘true’ will of the state’s voters.”


    Normalizing The Idea Of A Second Trump Term

    To be sure, pulling this off would be complicated.

    Republicans would have to get not one but many of the five Biden states with GOP legislatures to try to ignore the popular vote.

    Congress would also have a role to play deciding which electors to recognize, which gives the House Democratic majority some leverage.

    And it’s not clear that any of the maneuvers would hold up in court (though let’s remember: the Supreme Court now includes three Republican-appointed justices who worked directly on the Bush v. Gore case that stole the 2000 election for the GOP).

    But this is quite obviously what the GOP is aiming for — and they’ve basically said it out loud. Indeed, Trump’s son has promoted the idea of legislatures overturning the election, and so has Trump’s staunch ally, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis. Meanwhile, a Republican lawmaker involved in Wisconsin’s new election fraud investigation suggested his state’s popular vote could be ignored.

    This is why we’ve seen Republican officials and policies continue pretending that Trump didn’t lose the election, and presuming that there will be a second Trump term. This isn’t merely infantile behavior or an immature temper tantrum — it is part of a cutthroat plan.

    They are trying to normalize the idea that regardless of how Americans actually voted, a second Trump term is inevitable because state legislatures and Congress will ultimately hand him the Electoral College.

    Where Is Democrats’ Call To Action?
    One big takeaway here should be that in the long-term, the Electoral College has to go — it has now become an even bigger threat to democracy, beyond just routinely throwing elections to the losers of the national popular vote. The system is being weaponized by a Republican Party determined to thwart the will of voters.

    In this particular crisis unfolding right now in the short term, a strong and serious response is needed.

    We do not need silly, self-aggrandizing, money-wasting vanity stunts from grifter groups like the Lincoln Project, who are preparing a campaign to try to make Trump attorneys at Big Law firms feel bad about themselves — as if a vicious pol like Trump can somehow be deprived of ruthless legal representation.

    We need a vociferous public campaign focused on preventing state legislators from feeling empowered to ignore their own voters. And such a campaign could be successful because at least some of these states’ legislatures are only narrowly controlled by the GOP — meaning they may be sensitive to a future voter backlash in 2022 that could come from their actions to steal a presidential election.

    And yet… instead of sounding the alarm, Joe Biden and Kamala Harris seem to have settled on a “nothing to see here” approach.

    The Biden-Harris campaign has been proceeding as if everything is fine, rolling out some transition team names and announcing that Biden has talked to some world leaders. Biden’s comments today about the election were even more sedated and anodyne than Al Gore back during the 2000 Florida recount. The most he could muster was an assertion that the GOP’s behavior is embarrassing and might hurt Trump’s legacy — as if this is a West Wing episode inanely presuming that any single Republican elected official in the country cares about such things.

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124164
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    <
    It will be state by state and decided by the highest court in each state-not the US Supreme Ct. Each state has it’s own constitution and the final determinations of any alleged violation of state election laws are not reviewable by the US Supreme Ct. unless the state’s election procedure has violated federal law or the US Constitution. Bush v Gore was a very unusual circumstance and arguably the single worst decision ever made by the Court with separate opinions by each jurist sitting. How the court found a US federal violation either by federal statute or the Constitution is what baffles scholars today. The order by the US Supreme Court that Florida Supreme Court’s decision to keep counting Florida votes must stop was based on the simple notion that the USSC had jurisdiction because the founders had provided for each state to make its own election laws. How circular is that ? Most Constitutional scholars believe the matter should have ended with the Florida Supreme Court.

    I’m sure there is a far better explanation re Bush v Gore. All I know is that most constitutional lawyers-at least the ones I drink with-don’t believe the US Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the issues being raised in these Trump lawsuits alleging voter fraud. The Republicans can’t argue voter fraud in Pennsylvania is against federal law-its against Pennsylvania’s election laws. So it is only about overturning the state’s election and not the entire election. Its a state by state jurisdiction.
    c

    Interesting. Thanks.

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124153
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Which reminds me, Zooey. How did your proposed imitation of the Ginger Man go the other day?

    Tequila, or Whiskey?

    I went with tequila, but I made it only two shots deep into my drinking before the fun went out of the evening. I had some tentative plan to make up a game with names I would toast to when they got defeated, but the election did not go well, and I shut it off when it was looking like a 50/50 toss-up.

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124140
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    <
    For the last five years, Trump has broken one law after another, destroyed umpteen “norms,” and far too many Americans are just numb to it.

    Why isn’t this a “hair on fire” moment for the entire country? First time ever an incumbent loser has done this. And it might work. He’s flooded the zone with lawsuits, and set the table to win the one in Pennsylvania, primarily because they already sequestered the mail-in stuff. So a loyal Trump judge, and then the far-right SCOTUS, could just say throw them all out.

    And, of course, he’s ordered the entire executive to refuse all requests from the Biden team, and is stoking serious unrest among the far-right that it’s a “stolen election.”

    If Trump gets away with this, he’s president for life. If he lives long enough to implement further changes, the GOP will be the permanent ruling party, and we’re likely going to have the Trump family “inherit” the presidency.

    I don’t trust the Dems to put up an actual fight to stop this. Hope I’m waaay wrong. But I think we’re witnessing a . . . at least potentially . . . a successful fascist coup.

    The task is enormous, though. They have to have some kind of legal pretext to throw out votes, and it has to pass at least 2 courts, a state court, and the SCOTUS. At least, I think that’s how it works. They really cannot just say, “These ballots were mailed, so they should be thrown out.” That just won’t fly.

    Then…they have to throw out results from at least 3 states. Even if they twisted PA, it wouldn’t matter. They have to execute three successful challenges. That seems like a Herculean task to me.

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #124133
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    70,000,000 people voted for 4 more years of this shit.

    The mind reels.

    in reply to: A little up beat from the cynicism #124106
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    My sister, wv-ewe, still cannot relax. The Monster-Trump cant die, she says. He’s too evil.

    She told me, she’s seen too many Monster movies where in the last scene, the monster’s hand pushes up through grave to the surface…

    No dancing for her. She’s…waiting. For the hand.

    w
    v

    She was always a closet Vikings fan, though.

    in reply to: political tweets #124101
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: reflections after 8 games? #124094
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    offense is worse than i thought it would be.

    defense is better than i thought it would be.

    special teams are a dumpster fire.

    overall the rams are slightly worse than i thought they would be. i didn’t think they’d be capable of the huge brain fart they had to end the first half of the season. i mean what a disaster.

    i still think goff is capable of being a top 10 qb. with this defense and this running game, i think goff is capable of leading this team.

    i wonder how the second half of the season goes for this defense. they’re already ranked number one overall in total yards at this point. but i think they can get better. they can get better in run defense and better in the pass rush. when i think of the rams, i think mostly about robinson and lewis. and what kind of contributions they can make in the second half of the season. robinson especially. just loads of potential. loads of power and athleticism. the rams defense hasn’t really had anyone like him since possibly suh. but suh was near the end of his career. robinson is only 25 but has disappointed so far. was he playing the wrong system? is the system to unlock his talents? i’ll be curious to find out. but i also like lewis. he’s a rookie so expectations should be tempered. but at the same time, i could see him making a bigger impact as the season wears on.

    The punting team is fabulous. Johnny Hekker is fabulous.

    Why they can’t find a mediocre placekicker is a unfathomable mystery. I mean…that bartender dude
    was good enough. Not ideal. But…good enough.

    Kicking is obviously a hell of a lot more difficult than it looks, but still. There aren’t 32 people in the country who can kick the ball? I woulda thought that Diego Maradona would be available. You know.

    McVay is interesting. On the one hand, the guy is a certifiable genius. But his overall playcalling is questionable. He’s got a bit of Martz blood in him. He’s young, and he may not have “hit his ceiling,” but he isn’t the game day tactician that Bellichucker is. Though nobody else is, either, so…. But McVay still has some room to grow. I think he will, but right now, I’d say he cost us a win against Miami.

    The defense is also fabulous.

    Like wv said…10-6, good enough for a game or two in January. I’ll take it.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #124088
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #124086
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    This is a video. I don’t know if I can embed it, so here’s the link. I hope this works.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-voters-what-happens-if-trump-loses-election-day-2020-11?jwsource=cl

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photoZooey.
    in reply to: Election Day(s) #124065
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #124037
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    ZN, do you mean someone other than Booker? Apologies in advance if this is something I’ve just missed, but I thought he was firmly entrenched in Jersey politics.

    He meant Charles Booker. Slip of the keyboard.

    in reply to: political tweets #124032
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photoZooey.
    in reply to: what will the Bidenidency look like #124010
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    He’ll be Obama/Clinton, I assume. He will be a mass-murderer as all modern Dem-Presidents have been. He will use drones to murder countless people-of-color abroad.

    He will raise tensions with nuclear-power-Russia.

    He will do whatever the CIA/NSA tells him to do. So, he will get effusive praise from all the ex-cia-celebrity-pundits on Dem-Corporate-media.

    He will funnel money to the rich as all corporate-Dems have done. The poor will continue to be arrested often, and live under great stress, and die sooner than the comfortable-wealthy liberals.

    He will continue to allow fracking to poison children all over my area of Appalachia. They will die much sooner than the wealthy-dem-donor-Biden-neolibs.

    He has to be better on the environment than Trump, though I dont know how ‘much’ better.

    He has to be better on Covid than Trump, but i dont know how ‘much’ better.

    He’ll tinker a bit with police reform but it will be all show and no substance. He will leave it to cities to figure out their own ‘reforms’.

    He will be Clinton. Ya know. A moderate Republican. He will listen to moderate-republican-centrists and the corporotocracy will go back to the dem-version.

    A lot of progressives think “we could have had Bernie”. We will never know.
    Leftists often think the country is more left than it really is. Imho.

    The only way change will ever happen in this hellscape is for progressives to run for office downticket and upticket and Win. From schoolboards to The House and Senate. Nothing will change unless that happens. Right now the scoreboard is still 99-1. More or less, everywhere.

    w
    v

    Bali

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #124009
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Well, my “feeds” aren’t any better. Worse, even.

    Everyone gloating.

    And…it’s Joe Fucking Biden we’re gloating about.

    I mean….

    in reply to: political tweets #123976
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123941
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123940
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Sounds like you are both on the same page.

    Disillusionment with the American Dream accompanied by placing the blame on liberals.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123879
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I’m too nervous to watch any of this. I need something like NFL-Replay, so i could watch it all if Trump loses. I hope this is fucking over at some point today so i can breathe.

    Yeah, I shut off the TV Tuesday night when it became clear we have a nail-biter.

    AP has called AZ for Biden, but the NYT has not.

    Biden still needs one more state, and he is behind in all of them except NV where he leads by fewer than 8K votes.

    So…you know…if there’s any chance of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, you would have to bet that the Democrats were the most likely to pull that off.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123878
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    https://www.dailyposter.com/p/six-takeaways-from-election-night

    Six Takeaways From Election Night
    Dems’ weak economic message helped Trump, the Lincoln Project embarrassed itself, and a ton of grassroots money was set on fire.

    David Sirota, Andrew Perez, and Julia Rock
    Nov 3

    As the country awaits the final results of the presidential election, there are already six key lessons to be gleaned from election, campaign finance and public opinion data.

    1. Democrats’ Weak Economic Message Hugely Helped Trump
    The Democratic ticket pretty much ran away from economic issues — sure, it had decent position papers, but economic transformation was not a huge part of its public messaging, and that failure buoyed Trump, according to exit polls from Edison Research.

    Trump won 81 percent of the vote among the third of the electorate that listed the economy as its top priority. Even more amazing — Trump and Biden equally split the vote among those whose priority is a president who “cares about people like me.”

    2. The Lincoln Project And Rahm Emanuel Embarrassed Themselves
    The Lincoln Project, the anti-Trump cash cow for veteran Republican consultants, has raised $40 million from MSNBC-watching Brunch Liberals in just the last few months, and is now set to launch a media brand off the idea that its GOP operatives are political geniuses.

    Their ads focused on trying to court disaffected Republican voters and attack Trump’s character, as Biden loaded up the Democratic convention with GOP speakers. When polls during the summer showed that the strategy wasn’t working, galaxy brain Rahm Emanuel defended it to a national televised audience, insisting that 2020 would be “the year of the Biden Republican.”

    Now survey data show the strategy epically failed, as Trump actually garnered even more support from GOP voters than in 2016. Indeed, Edison Research exit polls on Tuesday found that 93 percent of Republican voters supported Trump — three percentage points higher than in 2016, according to numbers from the same firm.

    The takeaway: There may be a lot of so-called “Never Trump Republicans” promoted in the media and in politics, but “Never Trump Republicans” are not a statistically significant group of voters anywhere in America. They basically do not exist anywhere outside of the Washington Beltway or cable news green rooms — and after tonight’s results, we shouldn’t have to see them on TV or even see their tweets ever again.

    As for the Lincoln Project’s focus on trying to scandalize Trump’s character, the exit polls found that voters are far more concerned about policy issues than personality. Seventy-three percent of voters said their candidate’s positions on the issues were more important in their vote for president than their candidate’s personal qualities.

    3. People Don’t Love The Affordable Care Act
    While it may have made short-term sense for Democrats to focus on the GOP’s efforts to repeal protections for patients with pre-existing conditions, Americans actually aren’t particularly pleased with the Affordable Care Act at a moment when millions have lost health insurance and insurers’ profits are skyrocketing because people can’t or don’t want to go to the doctor.

    Edison Research exit polls found that 52 percent of voters think the Supreme Court should keep Obamacare, while 43 percent said the court should overturn it.

    A Fox News Voter Analysis survey, which went to more than 29,000 people in all 50 states between Oct. 26 and Nov. 3, found similar numbers but suggests the ACA’s support is fairly thin: 14 percent of people want to leave the law as is while 40 percent of people would like to improve it.

    The same poll asked voters if they would support changing the health care system so that any American can buy into a government-run health care plan if they want to — also known as a public health insurance option — and found that 71 percent of people support the idea and only 29 percent oppose.

    Although Biden and Senate Democrats both supported a public health insurance option plan, their campaigns and outside spending groups spent more time messaging around protecting the ACA. The Kaiser Family Foundation’s tracking poll has shown consistently middling support for the ACA — and showed that during the summer COVID burst, the law was underwater among Americans aged 50-64.

    The ACA’s protections for patients with pre-existing conditions was a key topic in recent weeks in the lead-up to new Trump Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation, with the court set to hear a challenge to the law soon.

    In a speech that Biden gave from Wilmington on Oct. 28, focused on COVID-19 and his health care plan, Biden spoke about the importance of trusting science and mask wearing, and highlighted Trump’s attacks on the ACA, but he only mentioned a public option once.

    4. A Lot Of Grassroots Money Was Set On Fire
    Democrats raised roughly a quarter billion dollars for senate races in Kentucky, South Carolina, Texas and Alabama — and their candidates all appear to have gone down to defeat by 10 points or more.

    These are tough states for Democrats, but there’s a cautionary tale about resource allocation among Democrats’ donor base. While grassroots-funded advocacy and media organizations are starved for resources, a handful of candidates can snap their fingers and be awash in cash at election time — and still get crushed.

    Democratic Senate candidates saw a massive surge in donations after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death in September — before the party barely put up a fight and Justice Amy Coney Barrett was quickly confirmed to the Supreme Court.

    5. Democrats’ Court Calculation Was Wrong
    When Trump nominated right-wing extremist Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, the conventional wisdom was that Democrats shouldn’t seriously combat the nomination, because a court fight would primarily motivate conservative voters. Exit polls prove that false: 60 percent of voters said the court was a significant factor in their vote, and a majority of those voters supported Biden — who barely spoke up against the nomination. Had there been a more intense fight, it might have helped the Democrats.

    All but one of the top tier Democratic Senate candidates shied away from talk of adding new Supreme Court court seats if their party won control of the Senate — which doesn’t matter now, since many of them lost anyway.

    6. A Large Percentage Of Americans Have Lost Their Minds
    In mid-October, Bloomberg News reported that “the proportion of Americans dying from coronavirus infections is the highest in the developed world” — and yet exit polls show 48 percent of Americans believe their government’s efforts to contain the coronavirus pandemic are going very well or somewhat well.

    After a season of destructive wildfires and hurricanes, the same exit polls show 30 percent of Americans say climate change is not a serious problem.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123876
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I am surprised to see Trump’s vote total topping 67 million. He had 60 million in 2016, and I did not expect him to get much higher than that, and would have expected that number to drop a tad, actually. I just didn’t think that his 4 years would have attracted anybody who wasn’t already attracted to him in 2016, but that is over a 10% increase which is quite a lot.

    I suppose it is due to higher turn out – people who WOULD have voted for Trump in 2016 if they had voted. But that’s just a guess.

    I also expected Biden’s popular vote win to exceed Hillary, who won by 2.9 million. 8 hours ago, Biden’s popular vote lead was 2.5 million. So…a lot closer than I expected.

    The voting seems to have gone very well, all things considered. A bunch of absentee ballots were never delivered, it seems, and we will have to wait to see if anybody follows that story…but there were no ugly incidents at polling stations, or any significant claims of voter suppression.

    Given all that…what do we make of the weakness of the Democrats in this election? They underperformed from Biden right on down the ballot. Perhaps some Republicans DID vote for Biden, but kept to their party line the rest of the way.

    Looks like we are going to have two years of nothing happening in Congress while the economy collapses. Can’t be good for 2022. Gotta assume 2024 will have someone else on top of the ticket. Buttigieg is pretty clearly the guy the DNC wants there.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123875
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Mackeyser, I don’t think you have those numbers right. Every site I look at has Biden at 253 (264 now that AZ has been called for JB), including the NYT which shows the ME vote going to Trump (btw…anyone here from ME? WTF, man? I would’ve laid $ on Collins losing).

    The NYT also has a flow chart of all the possible outcomes, and a tie can only be achieved by is if Biden wins GA, and Trump wins all the others. And now that AZ has gone to Biden, a tie is no longer possible.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123853
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123850
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/the-2020-election-result-completely-discredits-the-democratic-leadership

    As of the time of this writing, Joe Biden has a lead in enough states that, if present trends hold, he will narrowly win the presidency. This would be a huge relief, because Donald Trump is a monstrosity and four more years of his authoritarian leadership would be an utter disaster for workers, immigrants, and the climate. I would be hugely relieved if Joe Biden became president, not because I think his presidency will in any way be good but because it averts the worst possible catastrophe.

    But even assuming Biden is sworn into office, Election Night 2020 was a rude awakening for Democrats, because many of them were hoping to see Donald Trump resoundingly repudiated by the electorate. This did not happen. Turnout massively increased in this election (a greater percentage of eligible voters turned out than in any election since 1900), but this was not because the public rose up in unison to defeat Donald Trump. In fact, millions who didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 voted for him this time. Biden actually appears to have done far worse among certain constituencies than Hillary Clinton did in 2016. Some heavily Hispanic parts of South Texas that broke overwhelmingly for Clinton split far more evenly between Biden and Trump. Trump managed to make inroads among voters of color that I am certain the Biden campaign never thought was possible.

    The fact that this election is so close is a serious indictment of the Democratic Party leadership. Hundreds of thousands of people are dead from a pandemic that the Trump administration has handled with the grossest incompetence. My colleague Eli Massey sums things up accurately:

    Even if Biden ends up squeaking out a victory, it’s a huge indictment of him, his campaign, and the politics that he represents that after [230,000] people died, the economy collapsed, and the last 4 years we’ve been led by a fascist game show host the election is this close.

    If Joe Biden couldn’t thrash Trump under these circumstances, God only knows how he could have won if COVID-19 hadn’t happened. Trump has been an abysmal president. His approach to climate change threatens the lives of countless human beings. The case against him should be open-and-shut. Yet the Democratic Party lost to him once and has come close to doing it again. How?

    I have already seen some Democrats on social media blaming the voters. Americans just must be more irredeemably stupid and racist than we thought. I do not think this attitude is correct or helpful. Why are the native Spanish speakers of Miami and South Texas less enthusiastic about Biden than they were about Hillary? Do we simply blame them for “not knowing their own self-interest”?

    The answer to what is going on is not actually mysterious. The left has been saying it over and over ad nauseum: the Democrats have failed to offer a compelling alternative. Joe Biden has been an uninspiring corrupt corporate candidate. He’s been, incredibly, less politically competent than Hillary Clinton. He opposes policies that are hugely popular with voters. He’s been unable to generate enthusiasm—we rightly criticized Trump for holding giant rallies in the middle of a pandemic, but we also know Trump is right that Biden couldn’t hold giant rallies even if he was willing to pay people to come.

    Democrats have taken voters of color for granted. We know this. My colleague Malaika Jabali, in “The Color of Economic Anxiety,” documented how Black voters in Wisconsin felt completely unseen and unheard by the Democratic Party. My colleague Briahna Joy Gray has spent the entire election cycle warning that Joe Biden was treating voters of color like they were obligated to vote for him. The Biden campaign’s outreach to Latino voters was infamously abysmal, sometimes not even rising to the level of being patronizing. It was just lazy and insulting, such as Biden pulling out his iPhone and playing the song “Despacito” for 15 seconds.

    There were reports that his campaign didn’t even consider these voters “part of the path to victory” and there were warnings before the election that this was going to cause problems:

    Biden’s primary campaign had a distant, if not “tense,” relationship with Latino voters as he not only neglected to reach out to them but never quite rectified “his connection to the Obama administration’s aggressive deportation policy,” Politico reports. Biden became the presumptive Democratic nominee “in spite of, not because of” his Latino outreach, Politico writes, but more than 20 Latino political operatives say his luck may not hold in the general election.

    Indeed, it did not hold, because it turns out you need more than luck. You also need hard work, and there was little sign throughout the campaign that Biden’s team was actually putting in the work necessary to resoundingly defeat Trump. The Biden campaign seemed to be coasting on a sense of self-assurance, convinced that Donald Trump couldn’t possibly be reelected. Some of us were horrified when we realized how little campaigning Biden was actually doing; there was a period where Trump’s campaign was knocking on a million doors a week and Biden’s was knocking on zero. The Biden campaign’s messaging was all over the place. He completely screwed up the first presidential debate, sounding weak and incoherent. As with Clinton, there was no clear set of things that Biden was telling voters he would actually do for them. I do not know if anyone could name Biden’s signature promises, beyond “not banning fracking,” “not passing the Green New Deal,” and “not wanting Medicare for All.” These points he hammered consistently.

    Trump did not do well either in that first debate (both improved in the second debate) and it was notable how bad Trump’s own campaign was. His messaging was incoherent (was Joe Biden an Antifa-loving socialist or a corrupt Washington elite?) and he wasted giant piles of his campaign cash. He lost the powerful populist rhetoric that swept him into office in the first place, in favor of attacks on Biden’s ne’er-do-well son Hunter, a strange issue to choose for an electorate focused on the pandemic and the economy. Trump made serious missteps and often seemed desperate. Defeating him should have been a cakewalk.

    It was truly shocking to see many Democrats learn absolutely nothing from 2016. I tend to be politically cynical, but to see none of the lessons learned was remarkable. The central points that I and others on the left have been emphasizing over and over since that election were:

    Donald Trump will not destroy himself. You cannot rely on his badness to be your main argument. Many people like Trump, as hard as this may be to believe.
    You have to be able to inspire people with a bold agenda and a clear message that gives them a reason to vote for you.
    Corporate Democrats are weak, corrupt, and not well-liked. We must have a populist Democratic Party that is willing to take on Wall Street and the insurance industry.
    The fact that you think Trump shouldn’t do well doesn’t mean he won’t do well. Polls can be deceptive. Do not count your chickens before they hatch. Complacency kills.
    This last point should have been one of the absolutely central lessons from 2016, an election in which Trump outperformed his polls and shocked the nation. But, incredibly, the complacency of 2016 returned in 2020. I was rather shocked myself, because I thought we had all learned that polls can underestimate Trump’s support, since many Trump voters don’t like to admit they’re Trump voters (and some are QAnoners who probably think pollsters are part of the socialist globalist pedophile-cannibal ring). I spent months arguing with people who insisted that the polls had been “fixed” since 2016 and the same thing that happened once could not happen twice. I even heard this from leftists skeptical of Biden, and I suspect that there was a certain “wishful thinking” bias creeping in. Nobody on the left wanted to have to actually work to get Biden elected, because he was transparently awful, so there was an inclination not to question polls showing Biden with a comfortable lead.

    The polls were not reliable, just as they were not reliable in 2016. Dave Wasserman of the Cook Political Report says they have “rarely led us more astray.” FiveThirtyEight’s final Florida average, for instance, put Biden ahead in the state by 2.5 points. As of right now, Trump is winning the state by 3.4 points. The site put Trump ahead in Texas by 1.1 according to the polls, but he’s winning right now by 6.1. In Ohio, Trump was ahead in the polls by 0.8, but he’s winning by 8 points. Though it appears Biden will win, polls actually led to predictions of a “Biden landslide,” and it’s obvious that this was not only a complete mirage, but hugely irresponsible to even discuss. When people falsely assumed Biden was this far ahead, they could wrongly assume that the Democrats had everything under control and all the average person needed to do was keep scrolling Twitter and checking to make sure everything was still in hand.

    I have warned people before not to ever listen to polling pundit Nate Silver, and this election showed exactly why. He offered people the reassuring observation that for Trump to win would require a serious polling error of the kind unlikely to occur. Well, a serious polling error did occur, and though it may not have been quite enough to give Trump the win, it is obvious that these sorts of statements from people like Silver put the country at risk by downplaying the possibility of Trump seriously outperforming expectations. Silver, as I noted in my analysis, is always careful to hedge by saying that he’s only commenting on what is probable, but this actually shows why his work is extremely unhelpful. He predicts that anything could happen (even a big polling error), so that whatever happens, he can say “I predicted that.” Indeed, when I asked him if a Trump victory would mean his analysis was useless, he told me that it wouldn’t, because a Trump victory was one of the set of things he said could happen. This means that he has carefully made sure he never issues a “falsifiable” prediction. But it also means that taking his probabilities as meaningful commentaries on reality is very, very dangerous. The best approach to an election you want to win is to assume you’re likely to lose and do whatever it would take to reverse that outcome.

    Let’s be very clear: the Democratic Party screwed this election up massively. Trump actually did better than he did in 2016 in areas with high COVID-19 deaths. Union members in Ohio appear to have gone for Trump, and most of the people who saw the economy as the top issue voted for Trump, even though this should theoretically be the issue on which the Democratic Party is strongest.

    Now, Democrats are not going to take the Senate. The candidate that the leadership hand-picked to run against Mitch McConnell (instead of progressive Charles Booker) got crushed. The massive amount that was spent to defeat Lindsey Graham went nowhere, predictably. The Democrats squandered money on pitifully unpersuasive messages in races that they should have been able to win. They failed to flip Republican target seats in the House and even lost important seats. Even though a popular progressive policy, the $15 minimum wage, attracted overwhelming support in Florida, the Democratic candidate did not.

    The fact that there were many voters in Florida who voted for both Donald Trump and a $15 minimum wage should be a puzzle for the Democratic leadership. Why do they support a candidate who opposes the very thing they seem to support? Fox News recently published results of polls of voters confirming that large numbers support government-run healthcare, restrictions on gun rights, the preservation of abortion rights, and a pathway to citizenship for unauthorized immigrants. How, then, could Donald Trump, a person who is doing exactly the opposite on all of these issues, come so close to winning reelection?

    There is nothing surprising here, however, to anyone who has read, say, Thomas Frank’s Listen Liberal, or Whatever Happened To The Party of The People, or who was paying attention to Michael Moore’s warning in 2016 that Trump would win. (Current Affairs also expressed its concern.) Current Affairs contributing cartoonist Matt Lubchansky puts it well when they say “if I were the opposition party candidate or candidates I would simply espouse policies with broad-based support that improve people’s material conditions in clear and accessible language.” That’s exactly what hasn’t happened, and heads need to roll in the party over this. Pelosi, Schumer, Tom Perez: these people need ousting. They have failed.

    • This reply was modified 5 years, 12 months ago by Avatar photoZooey.
    in reply to: Election-Bottom line #123823
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I think I would refine that a little bit. I think people like things narrowed down and simplified. Black and white.

    Simple answers to difficult questions, and then be “tough” about that.

    Reduce the extremely problematic immigration problem to simple black and white, right and wrong terms, and get tough.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123807
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    ABC thinks the Republicans will hold onto the Senate.

    in reply to: Election Day(s) #123806
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I’m not really seeing anything here that I’m in love with. This is just not going well.

Viewing 30 posts - 3,901 through 3,930 (of 8,310 total)