ADVERTISEMENT

Democrats BEST course of action...

my criteria:
1) anyone but Trump
2) anyone but Biden, in any party

If it stays Trump-Biden I have to stop after #1, hold my nose, vote Biden, vote D for president the 3rd straight time after voting R 9 straight times 1980-2012.
If I could decide that would be my criteria also.
 
None of which is relevant now.

Sure it is. She never got support from the party or its electorate then and she definitely isn't now. She is further left than Joe, meaning she won't appeal any more to the middle than Trump.
 
Best course is to announce he’s not going to accept the nomination and not “endorse” Harris. He should say a few nice things about her but not encourage his electors to switch their loyalty to her.

He should instead encourage interested Democrats to throw their hats in the ring over a few days and get busy campaigning. Harris can run too if she wants to. I say this because anointing Harris wouldn’t be best for Dems to have the best candidate and it wouldn’t be best for Harris either. She had one poor debate and dropped out before the first primary vote was cast. She hasn’t proven she’s a good candidate. She’s essentially untested.

A short “primary” would allow her and the other candidates to show what they got and to test each other. The DNC should announce the rules and hold debates, maybe weekly. The strongest two or three candidates would emerge for a contested convention. That would be great entertainment and could result in the best candidate to defeat Trump.
You seem to have thought quite a bit about this. It's always good to keep the mind sharp, war planning ways to win, for those that you oppose their political views. You are using the reverse stance debate theory, aren't you.
Bravo, nice job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
You seem to have thought quite a bit about this. It's always good to keep the mind sharp, war planning ways to win, for those that you oppose their political views. You are using the reverse stance debate theory, aren't you.
Bravo, nice job.
I’ve said I’ll put up with a Democrat for next four years to finally be rid of Trump. Now don’t get all butthurt about it. I know you’re really sensitive about a Republican who won’t support Trump. No crying, whining and carrying on is necessary. 😎
 
  • Like
Reactions: Indyhorn
I’ve said I’ll put up with a Democrat for next four years to finally be rid of Trump. Now don’t get all butthurt about it. I know you’re really sensitive about a Republican who won’t support Trump. No crying, whining and carrying on is necessary. 😎
AHHHHHHH I've cracked the code. FINALLY.
You are using reverse, reverse campaign planning. Plan out the the enemy, and publish it so Team MAGA picks it up to help Trump win.
Now that.... Is pretty dang shrewd. Only 2nd shrewd to me figuring it out. I just sank your tug boat. winner winner biden for dinner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
Don't underestimate the unpopularity of Trump. Lots of people will be looking for any excuse to vote against him. Anything that would change the current Biden narrative hurts Trump. Doesn't really matter who it is, as long as it's someone not nearing death.

While I agree with a lot of what you’re saying here, the two most likely possibilities for Dems are Biden and Harris.

While I’d guess that Harris would be marginally better than Biden, I think she’d struggle in the areas that will decide the election.

If the Dems could muster the will to nominate somebody like Whitmer or Shapiro (or, better yet, both), then I think they’d win. Because, you’re right, Donald Trump is very unpopular and is only leading polls right now because his current opponent is even more unpopular.

But the chances of the Dems doing that seem slim. Whoever is a better choice between Biden and Harris, it’s clear that they’re both ultimately bad options.
 
Nah, people don’t care that much. Dems won’t have to apologize for anything. Simply giving people a viable alternative to Trump will be enough.

Trump will call her heels up Harris or worse and alienate a shit load of people who would otherwise possibly vote for him. He’d say something stupid that the media would play up as racist.

I’m surprised the Dems haven’t made the switch yet.
Heels up Harris is funny 😆
 
Meanwhile the press questioned Ms. Jean Pierre about a Parkinson’s specialist visiting the White House 8 times, during today’s press conference.

The name of the specialist and the name of the patient are not available. (Privacy concerns).
 
Think she has any tats?

Asking for a friend . . .

200w.gif
 
While I agree with a lot of what you’re saying here, the two most likely possibilities for Dems are Biden and Harris.

While I’d guess that Harris would be marginally better than Biden, I think she’d struggle in the areas that will decide the election.

If the Dems could muster the will to nominate somebody like Whitmer or Shapiro (or, better yet, both), then I think they’d win. Because, you’re right, Donald Trump is very unpopular and is only leading polls right now because his current opponent is even more unpopular.

But the chances of the Dems doing that seem slim. Whoever is a better choice between Biden and Harris, it’s clear that they’re both ultimately bad options.

Probably so. But it's really their only option.

For many reasons... But the most basic being the campaign infrastructure and funding. Her name is on all of those funds and could immediately be transferred to her. Anyone else would be starting from scratch... Just not feasible at this short time frame. Pls don't think any of the other possible names would be willing to jump in front of her and attempt to battle it out at an open convention.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 76-1
Meanwhile the press questioned Ms. Jean Pierre about a Parkinson’s specialist visiting the White House 8 times, during today’s press conference.

The name of the specialist and the name of the patient are not available. (Privacy concerns).
Even though his name is already known... Doctor Kevin Cannard.

 
Probably so. But it's really their only option.

For many reasons... But the most basic being the campaign infrastructure and funding. Her name is on all of those funds and could immediately be transferred to her. Anyone else would be starting from scratch... Just not feasible at this short time frame. Pls don't think any of the other possible names would be willing to jump in front of her and attempt to battle it out at an open convention.
Infrastructure, maybe. But I honestly don’t think the funding would be much of a problem if they went with somebody other than Kamala.

For one thing, funds can be transferred to Super PACs or the DNC. It can also be refunded, with the expectation that the funds be reapplied to the new candidate. It might even end up helping - as they’d have a reason to beckon more money from the honeypots.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
She's not competent or likable. Which is puzzling to why some on the left are suddenly supporting her after even they have bashed her lackluster performance during this Administration.
Don't confuse politics with reality. Harris is still the same person I have never liked, but we are a couple months out from the election, and she has a better chance of winning than Biden does. It's not any more complicated than that.

Again, I still think she loses, but it's a closer thing with her.
 
Don't confuse politics with reality. Harris is still the same person I have never liked, but we are a couple months out from the election, and she has a better chance of winning than Biden does. It's not any more complicated than that.

Again, I still think she loses, but it's a closer thing with her.
All things considered, I would have to agree with you. It's quite odd how historical data and poll info has a way of changing, once election 4 months arrive.
 
Probably so. But it's really their only option.

For many reasons... But the most basic being the campaign infrastructure and funding. Her name is on all of those funds and could immediately be transferred to her. Anyone else would be starting from scratch... Just not feasible at this short time frame. Pls don't think any of the other possible names would be willing to jump in front of her and attempt to battle it out at an open convention.
… Most all of those ‘anyone else’ names will likely have the political calculus solution that a “We need to put the adults in charge again” campaign in 2028 would be a better bet than taking one for the team as the 2024 sacrificial lamb.

Add that to the campaign finance laws … and the quid pro quo for taking one for the team will need to be pretty big … like being the favored son/daughter for 2028 election.

2016 and 2020 were smoked filled rooms for Hillary (over Biden?) and the Biden (over Bernie) … 2024 may be two smoke filled rooms (Biden over the field) and the replacement candidate (over Biden).
 
Take Biden out? Get behind him? Time is running out, and I think the absolute worst course of action would be to continue what it looks like they've been doing for a fair bit now...which is cover for him, and let public perception of DNC leadership continue to erode.

There needs to be some decisive action taken, and taken very soon. And since one of those decisions relies on Biden, and his team, to agree to be "taken out"... With Biden certainly not appearing to be on board with that. THEN, I think they need to end all the speculation, and get back to fully backing him. But more importantly, enlisting Harris, Newsome, Whitmer, Obamas, etc... to become HEAVILY involved in general campaigning for down ticket races.

Biden is not going to beat Trump. Unless Trump finally figures out how to hang himself. Practically though, Trump is going to win in November. Even if Biden backed out today, I think Harris or whoever the replacement would be, wouldn't have time to clean up the mess and rally everyone to beat Trump.

So, get behind him. Hide him. Be strategic and use him however he is most effective. But GET TO WORK, with more believable and potentially popular campaigners, and salvage as much of the House and Senate as possible.

The silver lining, if they're effective at saving one or both of them, is having a split White House and Congress "should" limit the damage Trump can do in 4 years. And if this whole Biden thing has resolved the party, at all, to take the POTUS candidacy more seriously, and they actually work to prop up a couple good candidates... The damage Trump will end up doing to the GOP's image over the next 4 years could set the DNC party up well in 2026, 2028, and forward.

They're losing the Oval Office no matter what, at this point. As an Independent...I really, really, really hope they figure out how to avoid losing the Senate and House as well. That should be what matters most right now.

What's the working theory on this. Is the assumption that '20 Biden voters will stay home on Election Day?

I live in a city of 104K that is heavy GOP but Trump lost by 10 points in '20. Small sample size, but I hang out in the diviest of dive bars, many of whom would likely would've had a Trump flag stitched to their underwear in '20. Many of them are voting for RFK Jr.

I have yet to come across a Biden voter who is a) sitting out, b) not voting for him, neither of which is an endorsement of him beyond being the lesser of two ev....effectively him not being an idiot. We all know how awesomely accurate polls in July are, but while early polling after the debate showed Trump went .5 lead to 2.5 lead, it's started to narrow back down.
 
What's the working theory on this. Is the assumption that '20 Biden voters will stay home on Election Day?

I live in a city of 104K that is heavy GOP but Trump lost by 10 points in '20. Small sample size, but I hang out in the diviest of dive bars, many of whom would likely would've had a Trump flag stitched to their underwear in '20. Many of them are voting for RFK Jr.

I have yet to come across a Biden voter who is a) sitting out, b) not voting for him, neither of which is an endorsement of him beyond being the lesser of two ev....effectively him not being an idiot. We all know how awesomely accurate polls in July are, but while early polling after the debate showed Trump went .5 lead to 2.5 lead, it's started to narrow back down.
You really think Biden is going to make it to November? One thing about old age is that once it starts going south the progression of the problem can be exponential. I honestly don't think he's fit to be president. I wish it were different, but it's the reality now.

I predict the pressure from the dems to quit will be so intense that he'll be gone this week or next.
 
We all know how awesomely accurate polls in July are, but while early polling after the debate showed Trump went .5 lead to 2.5 lead, it's started to narrow back down.

People pay too much attention to national polls. They're OK to measure general sentiment and trends. But I wouldn't go beyond that -- not, anyway, in an election that is certain to come down to outcomes in a small handful of states.

The national popular vote is skewed by what you could call "excess votes" -- margins of victory in a state beyond what is necessary to secure its electoral votes.

Biden won blue states in 2020 by 15M votes.
Trump won red states in 2020 by 8M votes.

So it's mathematically possible that 7 million more people could've voted for Trump without changing the Electoral College by even a single vote.

It's also worth noting that 10.3M of Biden 2020's 15M excess votes came from his top 5 MoV states: CA, NY, MA, IL, and MD. Biden's winning margins in these states were all >1M votes -- with CA a whopping 5.1M votes.

Trump 2020's excess votes were more spread out. His top 5 MoV states (TN, TX, AL, KY, OK) only accounted for 3M of his 8M excess votes. Trump didn't win any state by >1M votes. His largest MoV was TN (708K votes).

In 2016, Clinton won blue states by 11.3M votes. Trump won red states by 8.6M votes. So there were fewer excess votes that time -- but, as we all know, this led to a situation where the popular vote winner didn't win the electoral vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
Don't confuse politics with reality. Harris is still the same person I have never liked, but we are a couple months out from the election, and she has a better chance of winning than Biden does. It's not any more complicated than that.

Again, I still think she loses, but it's a closer thing with her.
She might be their best choice but she’d be a stronger choice should she win the nomination after a short pre-convention “primary” against other candidates. This needs to happen and it needs to start ASAP. Biden needs to announce he’s not accepting the nomination this week. This will steal the news cycle from the RNC and increase the Dems’ chances of defeating Trump.
 
Take Biden out? Get behind him? Time is running out, and I think the absolute worst course of action would be to continue what it looks like they've been doing for a fair bit now...which is cover for him, and let public perception of DNC leadership continue to erode.

There needs to be some decisive action taken, and taken very soon. And since one of those decisions relies on Biden, and his team, to agree to be "taken out"... With Biden certainly not appearing to be on board with that. THEN, I think they need to end all the speculation, and get back to fully backing him. But more importantly, enlisting Harris, Newsome, Whitmer, Obamas, etc... to become HEAVILY involved in general campaigning for down ticket races.

Biden is not going to beat Trump. Unless Trump finally figures out how to hang himself. Practically though, Trump is going to win in November. Even if Biden backed out today, I think Harris or whoever the replacement would be, wouldn't have time to clean up the mess and rally everyone to beat Trump.

So, get behind him. Hide him. Be strategic and use him however he is most effective. But GET TO WORK, with more believable and potentially popular campaigners, and salvage as much of the House and Senate as possible.

The silver lining, if they're effective at saving one or both of them, is having a split White House and Congress "should" limit the damage Trump can do in 4 years. And if this whole Biden thing has resolved the party, at all, to take the POTUS candidacy more seriously, and they actually work to prop up a couple good candidates... The damage Trump will end up doing to the GOP's image over the next 4 years could set the DNC party up well in 2026, 2028, and forward.

They're losing the Oval Office no matter what, at this point. As an Independent...I really, really, really hope they figure out how to avoid losing the Senate and House as well. That should be what matters most right now.
I never answered your question. Democrats best course of action is to blow up their party. Apologize to the entire world for being a terrible socialist party and embark on a journey of self discovery. All former Biden voters should be forced to read The Bible, Bitcoin Standard, and Basic Economics.
 
She might be their best choice but she’d be a stronger choice should she win the nomination after a short pre-convention “primary” against other candidates. This needs to happen and it needs to start ASAP. Biden needs to announce he’s not accepting the nomination this week. This will steal the news cycle from the RNC and increase the Dems’ chances of defeating Trump.
This is what James Carville is advocating.

It sounds good in theory. But I can also see it backfiring and making matters worse -- depending largely on how Kamala Harris and her folks welcome this kind of process when she's the sitting Vice President. If she welcomes this -- from beginning to end, regardless of the outcome -- then it could be helpful. If she doesn't, then it's a whole different ball of wax.

I read where Whitmer ruled out seeking the nomination. So I'm guessing that the other interested candidate would be Newsom? Anybody else....JB Pritzker, maybe?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
She might be their best choice but she’d be a stronger choice should she win the nomination after a short pre-convention “primary” against other candidates. This needs to happen and it needs to start ASAP. Biden needs to announce he’s not accepting the nomination this week. This will steal the news cycle from the RNC and increase the Dems’ chances of defeating Trump.
They aren't leaving.

 
They aren't leaving.

Man, I don't know.

I'll say this much...Biden's refusals have been awfully resolute. Especially the phone interview he did with Joe Scarborough. He didn't sound like somebody who was saying "I'm staying in" merely to say it while he's making other plans behind closed doors. He said something to the effect of "Challenge me at the convention if you want to, you scummy 'elites.'"

But there's still a big part of me that has a hard time imagining him holding out against the pressure much longer. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if, despite all his recent defiance, he finally just throws in the towel. But I also wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he continues to fly the bird to those suggesting he call it a day.
 
Man, I don't know.

I'll say this much...Biden's refusals have been awfully resolute. Especially the phone interview he did with Joe Scarborough. He didn't sound like somebody who was saying "I'm staying in" merely to say it while he's making other plans behind closed doors. He said something to the effect of "Challenge me at the convention if you want to, you scummy 'elites.'"

But there's still a big part of me that has a hard time imagining him holding out against the pressure much longer. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if, despite all his recent defiance, he finally just throws in the towel. But I also wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he continues to fly the bird to those suggesting he call it a day.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: DANC
You really think Biden is going to make it to November? One thing about old age is that once it starts going south the progression of the problem can be exponential. I honestly don't think he's fit to be president. I wish it were different, but it's the reality now.

I predict the pressure from the dems to quit will be so intense that he'll be gone this week or next.
That's likely too soon, but my point is he's not going anywhere without it being his decision. However, I'm having a hard time believing he's going to lose enough votes compared to Trump to lose. Granted it's anecdotal, but I haven't had a discussion with anyone in my actual life who thinks moving off of a Biden is a good idea, let alone thinking they'll vote for a third party.

I know more people who just won't show up, but I know a lot of those on both sides. And as noted above, I know a decent amount who are moving off of Trump to vote for RFK, but that's in a city Trump lost by 10 points.
 
People pay too much attention to national polls. They're OK to measure general sentiment and trends. But I wouldn't go beyond that -- not, anyway, in an election that is certain to come down to outcomes in a small handful of states.

The national popular vote is skewed by what you could call "excess votes" -- margins of victory in a state beyond what is necessary to secure its electoral votes.

Biden won blue states in 2020 by 15M votes.
Trump won red states in 2020 by 8M votes.

So it's mathematically possible that 7 million more people could've voted for Trump without changing the Electoral College by even a single vote.

Biden won Wisconsin by 20k (I'm rounding). Trump would just have to flip 10k + 1 to win Wisconsin (not accounting for recount triggers). However, that's assuming even a 1:1 between Biden losing votes and Trump gaining votes.

Biden flipped five states that Hilary lost -- Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Arizona and Georgia combined totaled about a 20k variance. Those would be the two easiest states to flip, unless there is an overriding trend shifting both states further into blue. That's not enough for Trump to win. He has to flip three of those flipped states back.
 
I wish I shared your optimism. The direction of the parties, particularly given the dynamics of primary elections, has crushed the moderates. Look at guys like McCain or Romney. They're treated with vitriol and disgust by most of the GOP, the same way Manchin is by Dems.

Part of the reason that more polarizing figures are gaining popularity are because of primaries, which only serves to galvanize the extremes, not the moderates or independents. Someone like yourself who has voted across the aisle, is less likely to participate because they have less influence.

And thus, we land at figures that are more right or left than you'd expect. I foresee this disappointing cycle continuing to occur over and over until something changes, which doesn't appear to be any time soon.

McCain & Romney are disgusting because they did not have the balls to take on the MSM and the corruption of the deep state. Part of the problem, not of the solution.
 
Biden won Wisconsin by 20k (I'm rounding). Trump would just have to flip 10k + 1 to win Wisconsin (not accounting for recount triggers). However, that's assuming even a 1:1 between Biden losing votes and Trump gaining votes.

Biden flipped five states that Hilary lost -- Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Arizona and Georgia combined totaled about a 20k variance. Those would be the two easiest states to flip, unless there is an overriding trend shifting both states further into blue. That's not enough for Trump to win. He has to flip three of those flipped states back.
He only needs GA, AZ, and NV (where he has massive leads) along with NE-02 that he won in 2016. Likely doesn't need any of the upper Midwest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Biden won Wisconsin by 20k (I'm rounding). Trump would just have to flip 10k + 1 to win Wisconsin (not accounting for recount triggers). However, that's assuming even a 1:1 between Biden losing votes and Trump gaining votes.

Biden flipped five states that Hilary lost -- Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

Arizona and Georgia combined totaled about a 20k variance. Those would be the two easiest states to flip, unless there is an overriding trend shifting both states further into blue. That's not enough for Trump to win. He has to flip three of those flipped states back.
I agree with all of this.

If we assume that Trump wins AZ, NC, GA, and NV and Biden wins MN, NH, and VA (all 7 of these seem likely right now) and there aren't any Black Swan surprises, then:

It comes down to WI, PA, and MI (with one potential caveat in Nebraska's 2nd CD). Basically, if Trump wins any one of these 3 states, he'll win. Biden has to win all 3 of them.

The NE-2 caveat is that if Trump loses WI, PA, and MI -- but wins that district (Biden won it by 6.5% in 2020, Trump narrowly won it in 2016), then we're looking at a 269-269 electoral vote. In that case, the election will be decided by a vote of House delegations -- where each state's delegation gets a single vote.

All that said....

My point above is that one has to be careful putting too much value on national polls. And the reason is that (if recent elections are any guide), Democrats will get a whole bunch more votes in the states they win than Republicans will get in the states they win. That difference was 7 million votes in 2020 -- and it was 2.7 million votes in 2016. Whatever this vote total is going to be (and we don't know that, obviously) has to be discounted from any national poll.
 
He only needs GA, AZ, and NV (where he has massive leads) along with NE-02 that he won in 2016. Likely doesn't need any of the upper Midwest.

Technically, this is true. However, it seems unlikely that Trump would lose all 3 of WI, MI, and PA....and still win NE-2. You're right that he won it in 2016. But he lost it in 2020 by 6.5%.

I'd be surprised if NE-2 ends up being decisive. But you're right that it could happen.

That said, the head-to-head polling right now seems closer to 2016 than it does to 2020.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamieDimonsBalls
McCain & Romney are disgusting because they did not have the balls to take on the MSM and the corruption of the deep state. Part of the problem, not of the solution.
Don't you think "disgusting" is too strong? Maybe "they're not admirable because . . . " or "They weren't ideal conservative candidates because . . . "
 
I agree with all of this.

If we assume that Trump wins AZ, NC, GA, and NV and Biden wins MN, NH, and VA (all 7 of these seem likely right now) and there aren't any Black Swan surprises, then:

It comes down to WI, PA, and MI (with one potential caveat in Nebraska's 2nd CD). Basically, if Trump wins any one of these 3 states, he'll win. Biden has to win all 3 of them.

The NE-2 caveat is that if Trump loses WI, PA, and MI -- but wins that district (Biden won it by 6.5% in 2020, Trump narrowly won it in 2016), then we're looking at a 269-269 electoral vote. In that case, the election will be decided by a vote of House delegations -- where each state's delegation gets a single vote.

All that said....

My point above is that one has to be careful putting too much value on national polls. And the reason is that (if recent elections are any guide), Democrats will get a whole bunch more votes in the states they win than Republicans will get in the states they win. That difference was 7 million votes in 2020 -- and it was 2.7 million votes in 2016. Whatever this vote total is going to be (and we don't know that, obviously) has to be discounted from any national poll.
Got darn, how much time do you spend calculating all of this stuff? (all really cool to read BTW) . We need to get you introduced to drugs, STAT !! Get outside and look at the clouds that look like elephants and giant spiders.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT