New Poll Shows Mighty Joe Biden Beating Trump in Every Swing State

So long, Shitler!

Joe Biden was not my first, second, or third choice among the Democratic candidates up for the party nomination. But I've never in my life wanted anyone to win so badly in the general election in November. I will vote for Joe early and I will vote for him often.

Here we go again...

Defeat motherfucking Trump. Are you listening Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania?

Don't fuck it up again, please.

R3, I don't think many people were focusing on individual states (I know I wasn't) in 2016. Now it's ALL we're focusing on. Not saying things won't fluctuate in the coming months (they will), but I think we're a bit more savvy now in how we interpret the polls AND which polls we're actually paying attention to.

Good to hear. Now we just need for the Bernie people to stop trying to destroy him before the election. If Dem voters wanted to feel the Bern they would've voted for him, but they didn't, so stop trying to torch everything down/resorting to conspiracy theories for his defeat.

August 22, 2016: "7 States Shift Toward Clinton in Electoral College: Democrat projected to win 332 electoral votes — she needs 270 to win."

So yeah... I'll trust the polls after Election Day.

Oh yes, and what did the polls say about Clinton 4 years ago, right about this time ? So, lets go back to believing polls !

can't happen soon enough

The anti-Biden crowd is flustered. First when he was winning in the national polls, they told us only battleground states matter. Now that he’s winning in battleground state polls, they say polls don’t matter at all.

Of course if the roles were reversed and Joe was losing in these new state polls, they’d have five different threads on here by now telling us how Biden is doomed.

Thanks, OP, so we shouldn't be concerned about anything and if we don't vote, that's ok? Is that right, Boris?

I think it's going to come down to who had the fewest rape accusations.

R8 This "oh, the polls were so wrong in 2016!!" trope is wrong. Comey's letter, 11 days before the election, fueled an anti-Clinton momentum, basically reducing Clinton enthusiasm (turnout) and boosting Trump enthusiasm (turnout). The final polls the weekend before the election put Clinton ahead by 3-4% - very close to the final result. Turnout in PA, MI, WI elected Trump.

I think the worries that "oh, look, it's 2016 again" is one of the many things that assure that it won't be 2016. Most particularly, a term of Trump assures that anti-Trump turnout will be at high levels.

It's not assured that Biden will beat Trump. There are so many things to happen between now and November (including Republican efforts to suppress turnout). But 2020 is not 2016, polls or otherwise.

R2 reminded me of the time I said I would "vote early, vote often" for Obama back in 2012 or something and got hounded by trolls who didn't realize it was a joke. Probably not Americans, in retrospect.

But yes, everyone GET OUT and VOTE. Don't just assume Biden will win without your vote. Vote Biden every chance you get!

There was a woman on The Last Word a while back who said Biden can win without Ohio or Florida. There are a number of paths to win the electoral college.

[QUOTE] Thanks, OP, so we shouldn't be concerned about anything and if we don't vote, that's ok? Is that right, Boris?

😐 What kind of moronic logic would lead one to this conclusion? “If we don’t vote, that’s ok?” No, you dickhead.

Joe can win Ohio. The John Deere cap-wearing Angry Old White Men here are tired of Trump's empty promises and malarkey. As long as he doesn't pick a colored for VP- they'll vote for him.

No shit R15. Are you new to this country? All Biden needs additional to 2016 states is WI, MI and PA.

Always remember that a Presidential election is not a "national" election, but it is 50 statewide elections, so individual state polls a re much more credible than any national poll.

But winning both the state polls and national polls certainly bodes well for your prospects. Regardless, this is not 2016 and Joe Biden will not be taking Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin for granted. Hell, the Dems will actually be fighting hard for Arizona this year. Hillary made one lousy visit to Arizona and none in Wisconsin.

R6

Hey, numbnuts. For the billionth time, the "Bernie people" aren't trying to "destroy" Joe Biden.

I voted for Bernie in the 2016 primaries and subsequently volunteered literally thousands of hours for Hilary's campaign despite never having liked her or her husband for that matter. And I did the same for Governor Whitmer's campaign subsequently, despite her being a center-left moderate.

Guess who at least half of the campaign staff in our local Clinton field office had voted for in the primaries? BERNIE. You are IGNORANTLY insulting a huge number of people who will be putting blood, sweat, and tears into supporting YOUR candidate in order to beat Trump.

Fuck off with constantly trying to villainize progressives like we're all out to get you. A small minority of progressives refuse to vote blue no matter who, NOT most of us, NOT even a large minority of us. Stop fucking painting us with a broad brush because you're so hysterical about your keeping your grubby little mitts on your precious little pot of gold.

We don't deserve to have you endlessly kicking sand in our faces like a petty, paranoid little bully because you're so obsessively panicked about the big, bad socialists taxing you 1% more in order to, you know, help your fellow countrymen who are vulnerable including possibly yourself at some point in life.

NEWSFLASH: You're insulting a group of people who overwhelmingly are in support your candidate FOR NOT SUPPORTING YOUR CANDIDATE. The insults in and of themselves make it less likely that progressives will support your candidate. So, you are effectively driving away the people who are already with you. You hate us so much that you're actively trying to create the reality that you delusionally criticize us for.

Bernie is consistently sending the message that, and I quote, it would be "IRRESPONSIBLE" to not vote for Biden. MOVE ON.

R6

Hey, numbnuts. For the billionth time, the "Bernie people" aren't trying to "destroy" Joe Biden.

I voted for Bernie in the 2016 primaries and subsequently volunteered literally thousands of hours for Hilary's campaign despite never having liked her or her husband for that matter. And I did the same for Governor Whitmer's campaign subsequently, despite her being a center-left moderate.

Guess who at least half of the campaign staff in our local Clinton field office had voted for in the primaries? BERNIE. You are IGNORANTLY insulting a huge number of people who will be putting blood, sweat, and tears into supporting YOUR candidate in order to beat Trump.

Fuck off with constantly trying to villainize progressives like we're all out to get you. A small minority of progressives refuse to vote blue no matter who, NOT most of us, NOT even a large minority of us. Stop fucking painting us with a broad brush because you're so hysterical about your keeping your grubby little mitts on your precious little pot of gold.

We don't deserve to have you endlessly kicking sand in our faces like a petty, paranoid little bully because you're so obsessively panicked about the big, bad socialists taxing you 1% more in order to, you know, help your fellow countrymen who are vulnerable including possibly yourself at some point in life.

NEWSFLASH: You're insulting a group of people who overwhelmingly are in support your candidate FOR NOT SUPPORTING YOUR CANDIDATE. The insults in and of themselves make it less likely that progressives will support your candidate. So, you are effectively driving away the people who are already with you. You hate us so much that you're actively trying to create the reality that you delusionally criticize us for.

Bernie is consistently sending the message that, and I quote, it would be "IRRESPONSIBLE" to not vote for Biden. MOVE ON.

R21 (and R22, ha) Thanks for that refreshing message. The truth. All this internecine bitching about Bernie Bros undermining the democratic nominee is 1) not true to the fact 2) just inflamed by trolls.

2020 will not be like 2016. There will be an energized center-center left-left progressive coalition to get rid of the Dictator. Make no mistake, Trump and his reactionary supporters, with all the subversive and powerful players will work everything to keep him in office (no vote by mail, purge voting lists, deny the results, possibly even try to delay the election).

But 2020 is not like 2016. There's a fire in the belly of anti-Trump voters.

[quote] Guess who at least half of the campaign staff in our local Clinton field office had voted for in the primaries? BERNIE.

And there’s sooooooo much proof

Biden didn't 'rape' anyone. He's not even accused of it. He inappropriately ( in her opinion) touched her neck or hair or elbow or some shit, in a manner she found uncomfortable. That's it. end of story. He didn't grab her by her pussy then tell Billy Bush that's how you win em over!

r22, you sound really upset. Forgive me for triggering you.

Maybe I am basing my view of Bernie supporters on the subset I see on Twitter who keep loudly and proudly proclaiming they won't vote for Biden. For generalizing, I apologize. But considering how irresponsible it would be for any anti-Trump person to consider voting for Trump over Biden/not voting at all, I hate that particular subset of Bernie voters with a passion. They do not truly care about the causes they purport to, they only care about their messiah.

R21- the very fact that your saying “YOUR CANDIDATE” instead of “our candidate” shows you weren’t completely committed to Hillary. And the people we’re upset at are the 15% Bernie voters that voted for Trump. They are idiots.

[quote]I think it's going to come down to who had the fewest rape accusations.

Well Trump has more than 40! Stormy Daniels and the other one he paid off the bunny, forgot her name were just the tip if the iceberg. There are a lot more that just are not getting media attention right now but they are out there if you search.

[quote]And the people we’re upset at are the 15% Bernie voters that voted for Trump.

Actually is was closer to 20% You left out those who just sat home and didnt vote and those the went for Jill Stien.

Foe all the critics, there's nothing wrong with discussing and debating the presidential race now regardless of the poll, up or down. We have got to keep Biden in the news and continually remind people that Trump must be defeated. Because of the damn Electoral College, state-by-state polls are generally more important, but national polls also provide encouragement and an overview and perhaps show some momentum and enthusiasm especially for those undecided--although I can't imagine anyone on the fence and wanting to vote for Trump.

Biden was never my favorite, but I will be enthusiastically be voting for him in November. Everyone should! Vote for Biden. Defeat Trump.

Trump needs to go. Simple as that. Vote.

[quote] Thanks, OP, so we shouldn't be concerned about anything and if we don't vote, that's ok? Is that right, Boris?

Only a true idiot could read the OP and conclude it was written by a Russian troll.

Seniors sour on Trump’s handling of Coronavirus crisis, according to Morning Consult poll:

Just like Hillary's polls. So fucking what?

Polls Polls Polls !!! Have you learned NOTHING!? You sound dimmer than a day old glow stick.

Biden has more support than Clinton did and A LOT MORE DIRT has come out on The Godtoddler since 2016.

Trump has been exposed as a crook and a phony. He was impeached for just one of about 3 dozen crimes the media knows about. Trump commits — and admits— crimes on television in front of millions of witnesses.

And Trump has failed to deliver on his key promises. There is no "Wall." Trump's trade wars have backfired, as he was warned they would do, which put hundreds of thousands of Americans out of work BEFORE the coronavirus. Trump didn't repeal Obamacare and his cuts to the needy while doling out massive tax cuts to the rich and ballooning the national debt are wildly unpopular.

Trump's handling of the coronavirus is criminal, too. The public is watching him profiteer and punish blue states out of the crisis. Plus, Trump is encouraging infection rates to rise with premature openings and retaliating against his own officials who know what they're talking about.

The Trumpster Fire is a shitshow and even Republicans are turning against him. 2020 IS NOT going down like 2016 and the Republicans will lose both the Senate and the White House.

But r3 is welcome to relax inside his Conservative Bubble. Deplorable complacency is good for the Democrats and r3 is going to join the Republicans in lying themselves right out of power.

It’s better to up in polls in April than to be behind, but I don’t understand why anyone finds such polls indicative of the outcome of the election. We have six and a half months to go, and anything can happen to sway the election until then. No one should be excited by these polls

Yes, it will be a close election and it's too soon to predict who will win.

But one good sign for Biden at the moment is that he's leading Trump with voters over 65 -- by nearly double digits:

I don't think Nevada is a swing state. Two blue senators and a blue governor. More and more Californians relocating to Nevada is going to keep it blue.

Jesus, Americans are so fucking stupid. Voters here are basically split 50/50 on every issue they polled.

That article is deceiving R41, its mostly red states who are divided. And they should be all in for Trump which they are not.

Arizona = full of retired white boomers with Republican ideation.

Florida = The swamp version of Hillbillies and Red Necks. They don't call it the Red Neck Riviera for nothing!

there are people out here who still think they can sabotage Biden's nomination and prove to be disruptive at the convention...even if it's a virtual convention. ((Ultimately supporting Trump or 3rd parties, never Biden people never Dems.) Bernie has a little over 900 delegates. Joe has over 1300. He needs 1991 to lock the nomination. There are still primaries to get through. We need to make sure people turn out to vote in the remaining primaries for Joe. Because if BErnie gains enough delegates he can be a spoiler and head in to a brokered convention. Possible though improbable.

I thought Bernie dropped out. Once you do that even if votes come in you cant sudden get back in the race. And now that he has dropped out and supported Biden, how many of his bros are even going to bother to vote? They are just going to sit home like they always do an whine and dine on gummy bear eatables.

R44 Bernie still keeps his delegates, and he and they will decide what to do with them. And his name is still on the ballot and he is still getting votes. Dropping out yes, releasing delegates, no. And he publicly said, on the day he dropped out, that he wanted "leverage" at the convention to have ane ffect on the platform. So he wanted his people to vote. Now he is no longer campaigning. He no longer has apath to nomination, but he can still be ashit.

More swing states possible.

VP panel to be named by May 1.

Governor Jay Inslee strongly endorses Biden.

Inslee is kind of sexy for a man his age. Yum.

Equating 2020 with 2016 is specious. Many dems/independents didn't vote for Clinton because they thought she'd win safely, and any neg feelings for her kept them from making the effort to go to the polls.

In 2020, we all know what Trump has wrought through his deliberate maliciousness and deep ineptitude. That will be the primary motivator in November and, if he doesn't figure out a way to steal the election, he will be crushed. (The economy will turn around eventually but not by November.)

Biden wasn't my first or second choice. But he is a decent man and he'll surround himself with good people. He's not offensive to most voters (except for some Bernie Bros), so he doesn't have Hillary's emotional baggage. We all know him and we know his faults--and none of us gives a damn. And we especially don't give a damn about Hunter's activities.

So, let's settle the fuck down, figure a path out of this covid crisis, and then get our lazy asses to the polls.

Inslee is Very sexy for a man his age. Or any other. Also, 'the coloureds'??? I have to assume either [R17] was being sarcastic, or given the spelling, not a US citizen and hopefully unable to vote.

Cheeto is desperate to get back to his rallies.

Do they even continue to have primaries with only one candidate?

Good, r52, the sooner the better because he'll just keep offending and repulsing everybody. Nobody is in any mood to put up with Trump's fucking nonsense. In fact , if his re-election staff thought he'd take their advice, they'd be telling him to stay off ALL stages, whether it's at his daily snivelings or at a rally.

What r13, r36 and r50 wrote.

PollTroll would know more about this than I do, of course, but my understanding of polls results, correctly perceived, is that they don't predict, they measure.

That where the mistake comes in- a poll result is taken as a prediction of a future result. Really, it's not a prediction, it's measuring a particular position in a set point in time.

So, even with that caution, these results can't be anything but good news, right now, for Biden. Big Momentum needs to continue.

All the latest polls.

It all depends who the electorate thinks is more demented come November. COVID will not deter the Trumpanzees either way.

R50 It is interesting. Given the current international crisis, most of these expected political discussions, with attacks and the snarky trolling, seem really dated, irrelevant. As it turned out Biden may be the correct image for moving forward (not backward) into a status where government is trusted, the rituals of empathy are observed, science is accessed to achieve desired outcomes, and energy is spent on trying to establish a more equitable and sustainable economy. The lack of social safety net and hobbled healthcare system are much, much more interesting as a problem than they were three months ago. Not directly related in the public's mind, but a subscript running there, the viral pandemic will suggest much more attention be given to the fact that the planet is about ready to kill us off so it itself survives. Paris Accords? Sniff, barely a first step.

So many of the discussions like on this thread are quaintly self-indulgent. The list of things to do has changed. And the Trump phenomenon, the reality TV entertainment show, has jumped the shark.

Survive the current moment. Change the government. The rest is unknown.

I think many who at this point think Trump can't regain momentum are the same people who said he'd be removed from office after impeachment.

The world is much, much darker, and more evil and perilous, than you think.

R54 Yes and no. A single poll measures (or claims to measure) a static point. However series of "points" do, or can, determine a trend line, and in that sense are predictive.

That's great! Stay focused on your strong points, don't get pushed off your clear message, stay out of the mud and don't sink down to the opponent's level.

Get a double-digit lead heading into you're own convention, and you're set!

R60 Not only is 2020 not 2016, but shocker!, 2020 is not 1988.

Hey I just wanted to chime in to say that turnout is key. When turnout goes up, Democrats win.

Also, R61 is correct. In times of national emergency, be sure to repeatedly point out how your opponent didn't prepare and didn't manage the crisis competently. Always look for elements in your own record and personal story that prove you would have managed it better.

Hey there! I also just wanted to say that sometimes the differences between two candidates are so clear and obvious, that for any thinking person there can only be one choice.

In the end the American people will vote for someone with a real personal sense of self, someone with strong values of decency, morality, and integrity.

I am so enthusiastically voting for Biden it is unreal. He was not my first, second or third choice but I, and everybody I know, are casting their votes for him with so much enthusiasm. Nothing and I mean nothing (hear me trolls) will dampen that. Biden could be shown to be a serial killer. Don't care. He gets my vote. He is going to be our answer to "shoot someone on 5th ave and not lose any votes" I can tell you that. People are fucking FED UP with what we have in the WH now. Nobody wants to see 4 more years of that.

Always tactically smart to pick a female running mate

R66 But you gotta pick the right one

R64 That person in the party whose conversation indicates there is a mental health problem... your smile freezes a bit.. you look for a point where you can end the contact and move away....

Thank You, r59

Florida Poll: Biden 46% vs. Trump 42%

And no demographic votes at a greater rate than senior citizens, r33.

They're retired and depend on Social Security. They don't have anything to do all day but gripe and vote. And they turn out in DROVES.

[quote] Biden didn't 'rape' anyone.

Link?

About that 'rape' claim: just curious - why wait 30 years to tell your story? How come you can't remember the basic details? I know she's a Warren/Bernie ideologue who praised Vladimir Putin. Also, to be quite honest, she's a dog, he could do much better. I think I'll wait for the trial to take a side because I wasn't there to witness it.

All true, R61. Yet so many Democrats think it's always 1972.

[quote]Biden didn't 'rape' anyone. Link?

You can't prove a negative. I'ts your responsibility to prove that he did what you claim. And by proof I mean actual facts, not claims. Facts include things like finger prints, pictures, video, DNA. Not some fat skank from 30 years ago that suddenly decided 30 years later that's what happened.

R59, R69. It's true that a series of polls over time can point to a trend which indicates that one candidate really is leading. Any one single poll could be simply an outlier (occasional outliers are impossible to avoid in polling), or a rogue poll caused by 'house effects' at that polling company (what methodologies they use to get a representative sample). So, ideally you would be able to point to a range of polls from different polling companies with different methodologies which all had Biden in the lead by more than the margin of error - usually 3%. Then you would be able to say with some confidence that he really was in the lead.

Thank You, r76

Fox news poll:

Pennsylvania Biden 50 Trump 42

Michigan Biden 49 Trump 41

[quote] so he doesn't have Hillary's emotional baggage. We all know him and we know his faults--and none of us gives a damn.

Biden has a lot of the same baggage that Hillary had. But this is not an ordinary election, and between the choice of him and the current occupant, any rational person will of course choose Biden.

If Biden were running in 2016, it would have been a much different story, and he would have been subjected to the same scrutiny that Hillary got.

[QUOTE] Fox news poll:

[QUOTE]Pennsylvania Biden 50 Trump 42

[QUOTE]Michigan Biden 49 Trump 41

The great people of South Carolina delivered unto us the only candidate who was guaranteed to win Pennsylvania. I’m telling you folks, PA is the key to everything. If Trump can’t win Pennsylvania, he can’t win this election.

[QUOTE] Meanwhile, Biden has a net positive favorable rating by 9 points (52 favorable, 43 unfavorable), while Trump is underwater by 9 points (44 favorable, 53 unfavorable).

[QUOTE]Nearly half of Pennsylvanians, 45 percent, have a “strongly” negative opinion of Trump, while only 30 percent say the same for Biden.

[QUOTE]Keystone State voters like their governor. 58% have a favorable view of Democrat Tom Wolf, and 65% approve of the job he is doing.

Another thing to bear in mind: there were a lot of undecided voters in 2016, right up to November. People didn't like Hillary but weren't sure about Trump. He won because the undecideds ultimately broke for him (after the Comey letter, especially).

This time, there are VERY FEW undecided voters. So it's much less likely that the numbers will fluctuate a lot at the last minute. If Biden has the lead now, he's more likely to be able to keep the lead than Hillary was (or Michael Dukakis, for that matter).

Oh no, looks like Biden has better choose Abrams - or else.

Joe Biden will likely be consulting with Barack Obama on his VP selection, and they’ll choose whoever is best prepared to lead this nation on day one should something happen to President Biden. I highly doubt that person will be Stacey Abrams, but we’ll see. I personally couldn’t care less. Joe Biden will be carrying the baton, not his running mate.

Stacy needs to shut up sit down and stop spewing shit through that big gap in her teeth. Biden has done more the the black community than any other candidate, time to let others on the bus to get a ride Dear. If anything Biden should pick a gay man, doesn't have to be Pete, just a gay man, any gay man, like just a black woman. See how that works?

Where do these people get off with threats and blackmail? It better be a black woman. It better be a Latina... It better be someone who can deliver a crucial state, like Whitmer. Georgia isn't going blue this time.

Where do these people get off with threats and blackmail? It better be a black woman. It better be a Latina... It better be someone who can deliver a crucial state, like Whitmer. Georgia isn't going blue this time.

Good polls for Biden from the swing states today.

What is giving him his current advantage over Trump is his strong numbers with voters over age 65.

R88 Biden said he was picking a woman.

And the black voters in South Carolina gave him back his momentum. He was struggling badly up until that.

I have a feeling it will be Elizabeth Warren, especially because of Covid. This country's economy needs re-architecting from top to bottom - healthcare needs to be de-coupled from employment, infrastructure rebuilt, regulation around bailouts. All those roads lead to Warren.

*House Update from Dave Wasserman*:

[quote]In Feb. 2019, House Rs announced a target list of 55 Dem seats (they need 20+ to win the majority).

[quote]Today, the median Dem in these 55 seats has $2.2 million cash on hand, vs. just $366k for the median leading R challenger. That's a 6-to-1 advantage.

[quote]Pretty devastating for Rs.

The black voters in South Carolina didn’t vote for him because they felt he’d select a black running mate. They voted for him because they felt he was best suited to beat Donald Trump in November, and they were right.

Whoever Biden’s VP is, they will have to run in another crowded primary come 2024. If it’s a black woman of color who looks like she can’t win a general election while another white male candidate is there looking like he’s got what it takes to win, then guess what? Those same black South Carolina voters will line up behind the white candidate. They don’t give a shit about race.

And yet ...

Dave Wasserman:

[quote]To put this in perspective, in April 2018, @CookPolitical rated 56 GOP House seats as vulnerable. The median R in these seats had $956k cash on hand, vs. $705k for the median D challenger.

[quote]Not only are '20 Rs at a much more severe deficit, they now must catch up in a pandemic.

Think ahead six months. What condition is our country in? What will the unemployment rate be in Florida, Michigan, and Pennsylvania? Dr. Fauci says the virus will surge again in the fall. If so, how can Trump run from the fact that he fired the pandemic response team in 2018? How can he run from his record of denial and assigning blame instead of acting?

R93 Those black voters saved him from having to drop out of the race. Black people are the most loyal voting block of the party, like it or not. It would be seen as an act of appreciation.

Biden's the one who said he was considering a woman of color as his VP, so why anybody else is being blamed for the words that come out of his own mouth is beyond me. He opened that can of worms, no one else did.

I think was Biden was premature in promising he would nominate a woman as vice-president. Andrew Cuomo is a rockstar right now. I think he would secure the election.

[quote]Hillary made one lousy visit to Arizona and none in Wisconsin.

Ok, Berner. The whole "Hillary ignored Wisconsin" has been debunked a hundred times. She spent almost the entire campaign in swing states. We will never know what GOP/Putin shenanigans did to actual vote totals, but you'll still insist on blaming Hillary!

Biden's the one who said he was considering a woman of color as his VP

Link Please. I thought he only said a woman, not specifically a black woman.

What he did say is that he would like to put a black woman on the supreme court. I'm ok with that but the idea that all his important pics need to be black woman is ridiculous and entitled.

195 days left. I wish it were all over.

I trust Obama and Biden to select a good VP.

I hope the campaign doesn’t pull a Mook and become too cocky.

I’m worried about the difference in the sizes of the war chests. Please tell me I shouldn’t be worried.

If Joe Biden picks Gov. Jay Inslee or Sen. Michael Bennet for VP he'd win in a stroll. Black voter turnout is usually high and was actually over 60% in 2004 yet Dems still lost. Assuming black voter turnout will always be around that level (high), the place to make progress is with white voters, although nobody wants to hear that truth. Biden should pick a white guy if he wants to win, and if not, then pick the woman who loses him the fewest votes, probably Amy Klobuchar. Warren is a weirdo and the Pocahontas embarrassment isn't going away. Harris is polarizing, though capable, and Abrams who I felt favorably about is provng to be a bit of a loose cannon, and has not proven to be a vote getter even in Georgia.

Dems have to decide if they want to feel good or if they want to win.

[quote]Link Please.

Here you go.

[quote] the idea that all his important pics need to be black woman is ridiculous and entitled.

Who said all of his important pics had to be black woman?.

And why are others being blamed for the words that come out of Biden's own mouth? I don't care who he nominates, but this notion that people are being entitled for believing the promises that someone else is making to them is ridiculous at best.

I will switch sides honey, I gots nothing else to do.

[quote]Sen. Michael Bennet

Who failed miserably with his own Presidential run.

He has all the charm and interest of a department store mannequin.

"I’m worried about the difference in the sizes of the war chests. Please tell me I shouldn’t be worried."

You shouldnt be worried. Biden is behind partly because Democratic donations were atomized amongst all candidates who ran. Now - there is just one. That's where all the money goes to now. Besides, this is a referendum on Trump and most people have made up their minds on who they're voting for. All the money in the world won't change that.

"Biden should pick a white guy if he wants to win, and if not, then pick the woman who loses him the fewest votes, probably Amy Klobuchar. Warren is a weirdo and the Pocahontas embarrassment isn't going away."

Yet Warren always outpolled Klobuchar. By a lot. And the Pocahontas thing is a tempest in a teapot. It's only an issue to Republicans such as yourself.

I reiterate: 99.9% of people have made up their minds. It's about turnout at this point. Warren, Harris, Abrams or Klobuchar aren't going to cause someone who was going to vote Democratic to suddenly change their minds and vote for Trump. Or stay home. That is a simplistic notion and ignores the absolute apocalyptic shitshow upending politics as usual right now.

Trump will still probably win. But it's suddenly not a foregone conclusion (which it was before Covid-19).

And either way, I predict we get the senate.

[quote]Yet Warren always outpolled Klobuchar. By a lot. And the Pocahontas thing is a tempest in a teapot. It's only an issue to Republicans such as yourself.

Nope, I'm a lifelong Democrat, a lot longer than you most likely, and I hate throwing elections away, and I know bullshit when I smell it.

Elizabeth Warren did horribly in the primary as well, coming in a distant THIRD in her own state because people see through her shrill (yes, SHRILL!) New England School Marm act. Men are NOT voting for her, get a clue! She of the "I'm letting a trans child pick my Secretary of Education" foolishness! That shit lost a ton of voters and would be back to haunt her. I imagine you know that during the MANY years Warren was a Republican she let Harvard refer to her as a "Woman of COLOR"? No, she wasn't appropriating the Native American culture for gain! No way!

We ALL SAW that other than Bernie the theme of the primary was "Sneer at Mediocre White Men!", even though Inslee and Bennet are both well-qualified candidates. You want a fighter? See Bennet on the Senate floor fighting for traditional Democratic values, go ahead! He's a loud, angry street fighter who will let Joe be a kindly gentleman while he tears Trump a new asshole. Any woman candidate would be called a bitch and would never be allowed to do that.

I can see you'd rather name call and pat yourself on the back for being a good little SJW and lose election after election. Not me. I want America to win, feelings be damned!

Sunny Hostin is getting on my last nerve. Nobody is owed shit, Sunny. It's rhetoric like Sunny's that's going to hurt the election this time around.

And Stacey does need to take a seat. There are far more women of color more qualified than Stacey Abrams? Susan Rice being one of them.

[quote] Inslee and Bennet are both well-qualified candidates

Bennet did worse than all of the women candidates put together, including Gabbard and Williamson. Not going to happen.

Just because Inslee is growing a pair with 45 over the last week does not make him an automatic Vice Presidential candidate. Not going to happen.

It's going to be a woman. Harris, Abrams and Warren and maybe Kloubachar (the weakest of the group).

You got a problem, blame Biden because he promised it.

I'd say a 22 person primary with ridiculous "debates" was no way to investigate many of the candidates running. ONLY the women candidates (and BERNIE) were given huge free media exposure because that was our media's desired theme this election. Even Joe Biden struggled to be seen or heard until the VOTERS forced the media to alter their playbook.

The inherent misogyny of American voters is still in effect regardless of who is selected was my point.

Castro, Steyer and Buttigieg didn't seem to have a problem with it.

If you can't run a better campaign than Marianne Williamson, then you don't deserve shit.

This is starting to come off like trolling, because you couldn't have picked a more lackluster, inspiring name to try and make a point.

uninspiring

[quote]Warren is a weirdo and the Pocahontas embarrassment isn't going away

It's already gone away. No one cares about it. You haven't noticed because you're a sexist (and/or Republican).

An incumbent president presiding over a financial disaster has never been reelected. His approval rating is 42 percent. Biden is ahead in ALL the swing states. Congress will hold hearings this summer about what went down at the White House during the beginning stages of this pandemic. Dr. Fauci predicts the virus will roar back in the fall - just in time for the election!

Uninspiring? Fuck you - with something sharp and hard. There should be two countries, one for idiots that want four more years of Trump and one for rational people.

[quote]This is starting to come off like trolling, because.....

I can't help your skin-deep observations. You seem trapped in a juvenile binary where everyone who doesn't agree with your strategy is a Republican troll. I'm way past that sort of confirmation bias.

Reuters/Ipsos polls: 2020 election

MICHIGAN Biden 46%, Trump 38%

PENNSYLVANIA Biden 46%, Trump 40%

WISCONSIN Biden 43%, Trump 40%

They need to get Arizona in the mix. We may not need Wisconsin if we can flip Arizona (but we still go down fighting like hell for Wisconsin).

r108 is the VEHEMENT CAPS KWEEN. She types certain words in ALL CAPS. FOR EFFECT!!!!

Referring to a woman as shrill (yes, SHRILL!) is right out of the misogynist's handbook. And perpetuating the name "Pocahontas" is racist as well as totally wing nut. Only Republicans call her that.

Which is why I called you out as a Republican. Also:

" can see you'd rather name call and pat yourself on the back for being a good little SJW"

Social justice warrior? Really? And you're not a Republican? ROoooight.

r119, you get to define everything from your dream bubble, don't you?

You should watch against being so highly "TRIGGERED" (ALL CAPS FOR YOU, MARY!) lol.

You seem like a slight bully who surrounds himself with timid types too afraid to ever disagree with you and face your wrath, so my lack of obeisance is unspeakable, I get it. Like I said, your political strategizing is like a child's....an angry, petulant child's, and it just doesn't get us far.

Were you a big Bernie supporter?

Is good. Machines programmed.

Now you have glass of best Russian vodka.

Annoying.

new polls out from WI, PA, MI, Biden is clobbering Trump

I fear how the Times and the rest of the both-sides media will try to attack Biden. I fear them more than Fox News because of their supposed credibility.

R107, the results of the pre-coronavirus Michigan primary belie your assertion that Trump was then assured of re-election. Biden's great show of support in republican counties central to Trump's '16 win in the state evidenced that Trump was in deep trouble not only in Michigan but the surrounding states, including Wisconsin.

Wisconsin voted for a liberal on the state Supreme Court. The same court that ruled that they had to go out and vote in the pandemic.

I frequently cross Trumpsters who say "were the polls right in 2016?!" Yes, they were. The national polls were right, HRC won 2.85 million more votes than Trump. Who knew 50k voters in PA, WI, and MI were going to stay home? The polls were also correct in November 2018 (the "Blue Wave") and in November 2019 (Dems won in KY, LA, VA, and PA). Moscow Mitch isn't dumb, he's packing those courts with as many Republicans as he can because they're going to l-o-s-e across the board.

R127, were you one of DLers who said Cheeto would be removed by the Senate?

Americans still don’t know fear. Optimism is insane right now.

This DL thread reminds me of the ones in 2016 that had Hillary beating Trump in nearly every single one around this time.

R127 well said! Nothing is certain, however. Has everyone made a contribution?

Get with it you bitches.

R99 She spent too much time in states like Texas & Utah.

Those weren't swing states honey.

We also lost the Senate, US House, lots of circuit court chairs & a couple of US Supreme Court chairs to her genius decision making skills.

The repubs (due to her awesome campaigning performances) were almost able to rewrite the US Constitution.

She was a toxic insider who lost to a toxic outsider.

So many people keep forgetting all of that down-the-ballot winning on her part.

Remember that the polls try to predict the likelihood of a certain man winning the vote. If a poll says that Trump has a 25% chance in favor, it’s not saying that he’ll lose, just the odds of it happening, or not.

I think that Biden doesn’t have to do anything to win the next election, except stay alive. More seriously, as long as he chooses a good VP, has no major gaffes, and survives until voting day, he’ll win. Not a high bar.

Oh, and as long as Putin doesn’t arrange for Biden to catch pneumonia, Biden will win. Putin’s security services have been discreetly poisoning foreign adversaries for over a decade. It’s obvious that Putin would order it, if he thought he could get away with it. I will always wonder if he infected Hillary with pneumonia.

Clinton LOST seniors by 7 points to Trump, 52-45%

Biden LEADING Trump with seniors by 9, 52-43%.

Seniors=most concerned about health > economy

that's ballgame right there unless Trump turns things around

R127, whenever I hear “were the polls right in 2016?” from someone, I remind them that popular opinion does not make Trump a good President, or a good man. I might also add, if “little Jimmy down the street” jumped of a bridge, would you do so, too!?

When I’ve been asked about Benghazi or Hillary’s emails in the past, I’d respond by saying that it’s the Republicans’ job to try to discredit Hillary, and that is just them doing their job, even if they’re being ridiculous in their baseless accusations. That’s the same thing, behind the labeling Joe as sleepy, senile Joe. It’s just gossip.

I also might say to those whiners, upset about Hillary’s emails and the raid on the CIA station in Benghazi, what they seem to have forgotten about is what a real scandal is. It’s things like colluding with a foreign power to improve electoral chances. It’s shilling a worthless medication on TV during a pandemic. It’s trying to discredit the Press, and members of the judiciary who are hearing a matter where you are losing. It’s about illegally depriving people the right to vote. It’s about Power, and/or money. Hillary didn’t take a dime from her public service, whereas Trump is guilty of all these things. That’s a scandal.

Seeing Hillary rebound so quickly after fainting at that 9-11 memorial service, and being diagnosed with pneumonia, my thoughts were, “now that is one tough ol’ broad”. Meanwhile, Trump rides a golf cart while golfing; isn’t fit to climb a half-flight of a stairs; and flew all the way to Europe for a WWI remembrance, but didn’t bother to go to the service. He did manage to make time for a private meeting with Putin while there, so there’s that.

It’s not too late to make Trump the only person to be impeached more than once. I think that would be fitting.

Why would we want to carry swing states? Haven't they proved themselves disloyal?

Breakdown of today's FOX News poll:

Biden leads with women by 20 points, with boomers by 18 points:

R136, either you’re a 5-year-old who somehow stumbled onto this board, or you meant “swinger states,” and you’re looking for a good time. In either case, 😳😳😳😳😳😳.

Yep, Hillary was gonna win in 2016, too. The polls said so.

R139 obviously read no posts in this thread. The 2016 polls said Hillary would get more votes than Trump. Every one of them was right. Now go post on the Moscow Times boards.

"She was a toxic insider who lost to a toxic outsider."

except Trump was no insider. He was considered an iconoclast (though that word certainly wasn't used)...

If Trump believes he'll lose big in November, he'll drop out of the election.

The valorous act of "going down swinging" takes honor and integrity.

[quote] Yep, Hillary was gonna win in 2016, too. The polls said so.

I can't wait to never hear this stupid misrepresentation of reality ever again.

R3 is an idiot.

The top 6 Democrats, including Bernie and Warren, have trounced Trump in Pennsylvania polls for 2 years, r81.

They were all going to beat the Trumpster Fire.

And only an asswipe would call the people of South Carolina "great."

Medieval is more like it.

A sudden bump of sexual threads is keeping Cheetolini's losses off the front page.

Della/r142 I've been saying the same thing. I really think we're going to see a nominating convention for the Republicans. The only wildcard is how fast things bounce back to normal before then.

It's crazy that Trump can lose this election by over 5-7 million votes and still win the electoral college. Also, its worth noting that the betting odds are close but Trump still leads Biden in people who bet money on this stuff....there is a lot of conventional wisdom and study packed into those numbers and probably the best "expert" indicator that we have to gauge what people who really study this stuff think at the moment. As of today, Trump leads Biden 51-45 in betting odds. (also worth noting that due to the way betting works, that's actually very close as opposed to an opinion poll, which would be outside the margin of error and can be viewed as an actual lead)

R148 I am one of those who is dismissive about the "oh the polls said Hillary was going to win!" comments about how polls aren't reliable. (Most of the analyses of the polling in 2016 is wrong - the polls were pretty accurate). 2020 is completely a different year with completely different elements. Having said that, the betting odds on November 1, 2016 were prohibitively in Clinton's favor.

R146 is that on purpose? I noticed the same thing.

Don’t let them bury threads.

Please. Sex threads are a staple of DL. The only people bumping those threads are DL's pron addicts who have been here since the dawn of time.

It will warm the cockles of my little black heart if a lot of those virally deceased older people that Deplorables find expendable were Trump voters.

If you look at the pool that Polltroll posted at r132, it's GenX and not Boomers who are the problem this time around.

[quote]If you look at the pool that Polltroll posted at [R132], it's GenX and not Boomers who are the problem this time around.

Yes, R153. That's the big difference we are seeing in the polls between Hillary 2016 and Biden 2020. Whereas Hillary lost boomers to Trump, Biden is currently leading Trump with boomers by double digits.

Maintaining that advantage with older voters will be crucial for Biden heading to November.

Biden’s strength with older voters could threaten Trump’s electoral path in 2020

2020/04/23/

A string of recent polls shows troubling signs for President Trump with older voters, a group central to his reelection effort that appears to be drifting away from him amid a pandemic that has been especially deadly for senior citizens.

Former vice president Joe Biden, whose support from older voters helped him lead the primaries, appears to be carrying over some of that appeal into the general election. With Trump’s approval ratings sagging over his handling of the coronavirus crisis, Biden’s campaign is attempting to capitalize with a group that has traditionally leaned Republican.

The most 2020 thing to happen in November 2020 would be a Trump re-election... it just... fits the current times..

2020 hasn’t been all that bad. It gave us “Tiger King,” afterall.

I think folks are too hopeful on the senior front.

Most are religious & will be reprogrammed when they start going back to church with voter guides in the fall.

The older generation is the most "pro life" & they smell blood in the water with 2 past-their-prime liberal SC judges just ripe for replacement.

They are also the group who is most anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-LGBT & anti-college loan forgiveness. He won't have to give them many reasons to return home.

Whatever Trump does to them in the next couple of months will be forgiven/forgotten by the time the conventions, debates & billions of dollars in print/air wave money is used.

Ha! So 'okay Boomer' no longer applies!

Trump won't debate.

[quote]That's the big difference we are seeing in the polls between Hillary 2016 and Biden 2020. Whereas Hillary lost boomers to Trump, Biden is currently leading Trump with boomers by double digits.

I think if he picks Abrams as his running mate, then he could lose some of his Boomer support. I don't think they would want to see her as president, which is certainly possible considering Biden's age.

Abrams may be popular with Millenials and Gen Z, but they are not reliable voters. It makes more sense to please Boomers and Gen X by going with a more moderate running mate like Harris.

He hasn't had to go toe to toe with Trump. He will crumble. He has dementia.

The Democratic candidates Joe defeated were all far better debaters than Donald Trump.

Not true - he mopped the floor with Bernie Sanders in the last debate. Everyone said "Oh, Bernie's going to win! Just watch!" Didn't happen.

Doesn't matter, Trump has already hinted he's not going to debate and if he is languishing in the polls like he is now, he won't set himself up for failure.

Datalounge is going to be crying come January 2021. You guys never learn.

R166 A good third of the posts on DL are "Trump is going to win again, you fools!"... so when you say "DL", hard to know what you really mean. (Well, not that hard...)

[quote]I think if he picks Abrams as his running mate, then he could lose some of his Boomer support.

Valid point. Biden's VP selection committee has to look at the numbers very carefully. He has an advantage with older voters right now so he has to be careful to choose a VP who will resonate with the voters he needs to beat Trump.

[quote]here is a lot of conventional wisdom and study packed into those numbers and probably the best "expert" indicator that we have to gauge what people who really study this stuff think at the moment. As of today, Trump leads Biden 51-45 in betting odds.

That's the problem with conventional wisdom, it only works with established norms. We don't live in that world anymore. The biggest problem with choosing to see betting odds as some kind of accurate poll is that it is almost entirely skewed by the people who participate in it, mainly cash flush financially secure men. Woman are no where to be seen and they are half the vote as are all the other ethnic, middle and lower income people in the US. So your poll based on betting odds is really based on white rich guys want. Trump in the lead, gee what a surprise.

Does Trump owe money to cities in swing states for rallies?

R162 - there is a plethora of reasons why Biden should go with Harris over Abrams actually. Qualifications, abilities, far less scandal (NOT that this matters anymore with Dump in office..), overall appeal - too many to mention. Abrams is great but not ready to be a running mate who will be positioned for the Presidency. She needs to pad her resume and clean up her financial mess first. Kamala is the one. Her abundant Senatorial work (to aid workers, protect lives and protect voter's rights this November) during the COVID-19 pandemic is just icing on the cake.

Well if he's the best we got...

The same thing they said about Pete I say about Abrams, she dose not have enough experience for that job. In fact less I would argue, as well as not serving her country or anything like that.

Totally agree R173. Both are great people and I hope to see them pad their resumes with more experience and stay politically active in the future. We need both in our party.

It’s going to be Warren. Again, she’ll be the project manager tasked with re-architecting the economy including healthcare.

All of this is moot however. Trump is going to suspend the elections. Mark my words.

Warren doesn’t excite black people. She also doesn’t really add Midwest and North Carolina, Florida appeal.

We don’t need a VP to excite black people. You know who excites black people? Joe Biden. That’s why he won the nomination.

R176, Biden already has black people. He didn’t have anyone in South Carolina with him, and black people came out in droves for him and saved his candidacy. Stop thinking he needs to put a black woman on the ticket, that’s the least demographic he needs to woo, because he has them already. He needs to bolster white suburban women (he’s got them now) and midwest voters, as well as perhaps build on the boomers.

If you want two, one term presidents back-to-back then Warren is the pick. Warren will be 75 at the end of Biden's first term and should she run after Biden she would be 79 at the end of her first term. Biden needs someone younger to carry the baton for eight years after he leaves office.

Warren would be worse than Tim Kaine. At least a lot of people don’t despise Kaine

This is what I've been saying and reinforces the idea that Abrams would be a bad choice:

"Biden's pitch is less racialized than Clinton's, increasing his prospects with WWC and older voters and hurting them with non-whites and woke young ppl. On balance, he's now doing better in the EC than Clinton."

"Warren would be worse than Tim Kaine. At least a lot of people don’t despise Kaine"

Republicans despise Warren because she represents an existential threat to their inhumane, thoroughly rotten and nihilstic agenda.

People like her tend to be hated by repubs.

The VP pick isn't about identity politics. It's about the EC. Can't dems ever think about the damn thing?

Biden doesn't need a Mass. lib like Warren on the ticket. A Mass. anything doesn't unlock the EC evah (see Dukakis & Kerry).

She is too far left too attract the over 40 folks wanting to build/keep their nest egg. Indies don't care for her.

Warren is grating & self righteous (the East coast Harris).

Since Biden came out for a woman on the ticket, he needs someone from a battleground state that folks could warm up to if he croaks in office.

Dems never think of the Commander-In-Chief role but the E favors someone who has military experience or is a tough talker (Obama & Trump are recent examples of this).

Abrams has zero cred in this role & Warren & Harris are also problematic.

Senators Amy Klobuchar or Mary Landrieu would be better choices with their tougher demeanors & records but neither come from a battleground state.

Landrieu is from the South which might give him some extra votes in contested Florida & Virginia.

Former Kansas Governor (born 1948) Kathleen Sebelius would be a great addition to the ticket.

She is an outsider female with a proven record, no problem personality traits (like Amy K.) & isn't a turnoff to independents like Warren or Harris. Since she has experience with the National Guard of her state that gives her some cred in the Commander-In-Chief role (which is better than nothing like Abrams). Time called her 1 of the top 5 governors in 2005. I can't find where Pence ever made the Time list.

Interesting post, R183. Wasn’t she associated with the rocky Obamacare rollout?

A cautionary note.

R183 I disagree on much of your analysis of Warren (one point: she appeals to the white women in the suburbs of Philly - that demographic alone can swing PA to Biden... and Trump will not be re-elected).

I do think Sebelius would be a stealth smart pick. As HHS Sec she was connected to Obamacare (no longer a net negative) but he "expertise" in handling national health initiatives... at a time when the primary issue will still be COVID19, would help. Anytime Joe would stumble over the national response (a likelihood) his go to talking point would be "I'm putting Kathleen on it, and she respects science, can be trusted... " etc.

I don't like Klobuchar. I thought she treated Pete pretty badly during the debates.

Otoh, Pence better have somebody X-Raying his food.

Nikki Haley awaits off-stage.

From the daily newsletter of Mark Halperin (yes, I know):

The recent ample-ish public and private state polling from the Big 3 states of Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, plus from Florida -- along with a real turn in the optimism of Democratic strategists and the worry of Republicans as reflected in this Politico story --- has led me to revise my overall sense of the presidential race. Joe Biden has gone from substantial underdog (in large part because history demonstrates that it is difficult to beat an incumbent and because the former VP lacks a substantial message on the economy) to slight favorite. Of course, there is a long way to go and many twists and turns along the way before November. But on the current trajectory, unless America comes roaring back from the current crisis by the early fall (which my sources believe is unlikely), Donald Trump is on track to be a one-term president. Biden is still not generating massive excitement; he never will. But * While the denizens of the left are still grumbling, the Democrats can win enough of them in the Big 3 to get there. * There are no emerging third-party or independent candidates in the Big 3 likely to draw enough votes to allow Trump to win those states with less than 47% or 48% of the vote, and he will likely struggle to break that level of support in those places. * Trump’s overall job approval numbers and on the handling of the current challenges are absolutely horrible by historical standards. Unless he repels a Martian invasion, it is virtually impossible to imagine his job approval standing improving in the states that matter anytime soon. * Until the virus, Trump’s prospects for reelection rested entirely on the twin imperatives of turning the election from a referendum on his first term to a choice election where voters picked between him and Joe Biden – and then on disqualifying Biden in the eyes of enough voters. That Queens two-step is substantially harder to do now. * The Wisconsin Democratic Party is a hyper-efficient building machine (as opposed to a “killing machine”). As of this moment, Biden would get slightly more than the 270 electoral votes needed to win. And/but: Trump still retains many advantages and, given the almost-certain closeness of the outcome no matter who prevails, it is highly doubtful that there will be any sure bets in this one.

I LOVE this Joe Biden. Biden and Giuliani have hated each other for more than 3 decades apparently. It makes complete sense why Trump put Giuliani on his legal team.

[quote] Rudy Giuliani, there's only three words he mentions in a sentence: a noun, a verb and 9/11. He is NOT qualified to be president.

R186 Sounds like you're counting on the map being similar to 2016.

Hillary was supposed to win NH handily but Trump came within just 2,736 votes of upsetting her victory there.

Kaine was also supposed to put Virginia easily in her column but on election night, her campaign hit a snag there which signaled the beginning of the end for her. Trump came about 5 points of winning it.

Kathleen Sebelius would be a guaranteed Tim Kaine - no name recognition, no excitement, no aid to electability for the overall ticket. If we want a female superstar to be the first VP (and perhaps first President years later) - then pick a female superstar. Warren has 2 giant negatives that will rule her out. A Rethug will be named her replacement in the Senate and additionally she is too old. Then you have that little annoyance that she and Biden don't like one another and likely never will. Kamala Harris is the run away favorite for the odds maker community for good reason. She checks all the boxes is the clear front runner for good reason.

Never ever go with a Massachusetts politician. Biden needs to bolster and enhance his Middle America cred, make it possible for more swing states in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Arizona, Colorado, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Ignore northeast liberals.

Massachusetts has the demeanor people love to hate

Uh Warren

Hillary almost lost Minnesota, which tells just how much a disaster she was

Not since LBJ has the VP been about electoral math. That is just flat wrong. It's about balancing the ticket: young/old, black/white, male/female, domestic policy/foreign policy, moderate/liberal.

I have always believed it will be Warren and I am sticking to my guns. Of course, there are reasons not to pick her. But I agree with the poster upthread that she will be picked and will be put in charge of the recovery.

The thing I keep thinking about in this era of Trump and Obama is that you really have to have a national, almost celebrity-like presence to be Prez or VP. I think Warren is very famous, she's known nationally, she is a national figure, and she has a brand that fits the moment: anti-corruption and "I have a plan for that." I think the latter alone gives her the edge against Harris.

I also agree that Biden will gamble that he is strong enough with AfAm voters that he can go with a white VP. That's why, in the debate with Bernie, he said he would go with a woman for VP and a "black woman" on the Supreme Court-- he was signalling that VP may not be a woman of color, and he covered his bases.

I don't think Biden is an outstanding candidate (though you cannot argue with success), but he is a very, very good politician. He has been around forever and knows how to make relationships, how to reach voters, how to connect, how to create policy and how to implement it. He is not progressive enough for my taste, but he will be the most progressive president we've ever had, and he will incrementally shift the US in a progressive direction in the areas where incremental movement is possible. In other places, he will go as bold as he can--like an AfAm woman on the Supreme Court, and so forth.

But being president does not mean you can just throw a switch, despite the power of executive orders.

Anyway, I really think it will be Warren and that will excite progressives and younger voters, which is where Biden needs a boost.

No to Warren

I would be disappointed if he went with Warren. Her age is a huge drawback for VP and I think there are many better candidates for that position. And most Americans can't stomach the idea of her as president, or else she'd have done better in the Primary. This matters much more than normal, with Joe's age.

Even her own state don't want her as president. That should tell you all you need to know.

*didn't want her as president

Globe: Elizabeth Warren’s natural political base comprises white, upscale, highly educated progressives with woke social attitudes and white-collar jobs in big cities on the coasts. That’s a species commonly found in the newsrooms of major media outlets, which helps explain why Warren attracted so much adoring press coverage during her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. In the end, that campaign went nowhere. Warren turned out to be a bust when it came to generating votes. She didn’t come close to winning a single primary or caucus, and she quit the race on March 5.

Everyone should read r197. Spot on.

r197 Yep, that almost made me happy.

Conventional wisdom (electoral college, balanced ticket, young enough to be elected President later) seem less relevant than the reality we find now: we've got a very unstable dictator who will corrupt our electoral process; the appeal to replace him will be made most successfully if there is a confidence on competence, a plan. to respond to the greatest health and economic threats of our lifetime. Here, Liz, you take over the Recovery effort. The misogynist trollers hate her schoolmarmishness, but no one doubts her intelligence, preparation for such a task, and competence.

That only thing that matters is motivating people to get out the door and vote. Which VP pick would best accomplish this?

From an ideological standpoint I’d be thrilled if he picked Warren. But it would possibly make it harder to Dems to take control of the senate. The GOP governor would be able to appoint an interim senator. And the GOP governor is one of the most popular governors in the country. If he threw his hat in the ring, that seat could potentially become very competitive in a special election next year.

Thank you R205 - this thread is in need of some logical thought.

[quote]Kaine was also supposed to put Virginia easily in her column but on election night, her campaign hit a snag there which signaled the beginning of the end for her. Trump came about 5 points of winning it.

The Virginia result was actually pretty good for Hillary. She won Virginia by a larger margin than Obama did in 2012. Not as high as Obama's 2008 margin, but better than 2012.

R207 Exactly. It was the early results (not from the DC suburbs) that showed Trump ahead then, FL, that seemed to suggest, "oh, it's going to be closer than 'we' thought"... folks remember it as the start of the horror. But the final result in VA was good... the results from suburbs just took a while to come in.

R206 R205 The argument for Warren (which you may disagree with) is that presenting a coherent, competent, reassuring team to respond to the pandemic and world-wide Depression (which will be clear by December) is exactly what will drive turnout in this election. The argument is that conventional logic won't hold... identity politics, ideological or geographical balance, age... what will drive turnout will be an image of safety, rescue, expertise. The only element in the usual (before April 2020) speculation is gender.

Another version of presenting The Rescue to American voters would be presenting a whole cabinet etc. in August. Time enough to drive the point home... there's a fire - do you want to elect gasoline or water?

Duh R207. I didn't say the Virginia result wasn't good for Hills (a win is a win).

We were talking about the VP pick & how it's used to win a tossup state handily.

Kaine didn't give her an easy win on Election night. Her campaign shockingly hit a stumbling block there & never recovered nationally EC wise as R208 says in her first paragraph.

NOBODY votes for VP, this has been proven again and again. When is the last election where the bottom of the ticket was proven to have added a swing state to a win?

That being said, don't pick a candidate that would scare voters away like Warren, Abrams, or maybe Harris.

You win in the EC, not the hearts and minds of the base who will vote for you anyway, nor the SJW keyboard warriors and lefty newsroom pundits who think the Iowa Caucuses are determinative. None of those people matter at all.

A thought: have a feeling Joe won't seek reelection due to his age, so his VP pick is crucial as she will likely be the nominee in 2024. Warren will be 75. Gretchen Whitmer will only be 52, still relatively young (for a politician) and photogenic with four years as VP under her belt.

Joe has already said he a one termer.

Yes, his VP pick will be the most important VP pick since FDR picked Truman. Not an exaggeration. We can't afford to let these deplorables win again.

I have said it before and will continue to say it again. R210 is correct that no VP delivers a swing state, but I do think that a running mate cements the overall ticket in a way that delivers a more stable, competent overall ticket. Choosing a known commodity who is accomplished and well-spoken in their own right is important. Perception is often reality when it comes to politics. In Dump's case - he SEVERELY lacked morals, ethics, decency, "religion", etc. Closet homosexual "Mother Mike Pence" is in reality none of those things but was perceived by the party's ignorant voting base to have them in spades. Trumpy Bear desperately needed this perception in order to win over the hypocritical evangelical GOP base and receive the "church backing" needed to get voters to the polls in droves. He and Moscow Mitch delivered them nasty conservation judges (SCOTUS and hundreds of lower judges), a hatred for abortion and gays and an unabashed string of racist decisions and war chants that appeased this "moral" base who believes that the ends justify all sorts of God-awful means to get them.

In Biden's case a younger, highly intelligent, great orator and skilled debater with a solid political resume who is both direct and effective will round out his perceived flaws. A woman will represent a ying to his yang and balance out his "white, male, career politician" persona. That leaves us a few choices - the 3 best being former candidates (Warren, Harris and Klobuchar). Warren is too old and can't risk her Senate seat being replaced with a Republican (which it WILL - no debate there). Klobuchar is fine but somewhat lacks charisma, warmth and empathy. She comes off to many as a less accomplished Hillary 2.0. Harris rounds out the ticket for Biden most successfully. My money is on Harris. Being African American makes her that much more appealing, but not even necessary.

Harris doesn't really add anything to the ticket. Biden is already well-liked by the black community. I think Duckworth is the best choice.

Duckworth would be an amazing choice. Her or Whitmer. My preference is Duckworth.

Tammy Duckworth was born in Thailand... can’t wait for the asshole birthers to have a field day with that one.

Duckworth who? Yeah, not going to happen.

Aren't deplorables already having a field day with Whitmer due to her orders? Most of the country knows her because of the freeper protests that got their start in Michigan. Not a good way to introduce yourself to the country.

Harris, Warren, Abrams, Kloubachar are all well known names to the public at this point. People are familiar with them. With a DNC convention that will most likely be done online as well as seriously hindered if not completely scrapped campaigning schedules, you're going to need someone who already has a large amount of public clout. You can't afford just sticking in someone with no nation wide name recognition if they can't go out and meet the public in person.

This isn't a traditional election. The "rules" do not apply this time out.

Deplorable will have a field day with any Democrat. As someone upthread said, it has to someone who’s yard to Joe’s yin.

I like Kloubachar and Harris, too.

Abrams doesn't have enough experience and Warren is too old.

Fuck the Birthers. They're trash. Duckworth coined the phrase 'Cadet Bonespurs'. If you do know who she is, R218, it's your loss

[quote]Harris, Warren, Abrams, Kloubachar

No Abrams is not. Stop trying to make that loser happen. She's was never on the public stage to be a presidential candidate. Most people outside her state have never heard of her.

*don't know

R215 and R216 see R218. No name recognition (great person however)...

Shit, too many typos at r220. It has to be someone who’s yang to Joe’s yin.

Trump only leads Biden by 5 points in new TEXAS poll:

-

April 25, 2020

University of Texas/Texas Tribune poll

(1,200 registered voters, April 10 to April 19)

Trump - 49%

Biden - 44%

For Texas, that's really amazing that Biden is doing that well.

Agree, R227. I'm shocked

The Bernie bros are trying to make this accusation thing stick. They really want Joe to crash and burn badly. Between that and Hillary's emails. The bros really solidified themselves as a base not to make concessions with in the future.

They're tanty throwing trash, R229. Dudes who refuse to take "No." for an answer. Bunny Boilers.

Giving them any more attention than we have already is a mistake. They couldn't even muster themselves to vote for their Daddy. Their twitter campaign against Joe won't go anywhere.

These Bernie Bros are so ass hurt that their candidate lost and it is blowing their minds that the rest of the country doesn't subscribe to their views, regardless of what they say. They just can't get over it. They need to.

Why is Abrams acting like she's the only black woman in the running?

Harry Enten explains Trump's likeability deficit:

[quote]In recent live interview polls, there's been a small but clear gap between Trump's approval & favorable rating w/ Trump's fav rating trailing... suggesting a likability deficit. Since 80, incumbent fav ratings seem to correlate better w/ election outcomes

[quote] R192: Re: Warren - A Rethug will be named her replacement in the Senate and additionally she is too old

The Massachusetts Republican Governor could appoint a Republican placeholder, but a special election is required to be called soon thereafter. The horrified statehouse passed that provision over the Governor's veto when Ted Kennedy’s seat was filled by an appointed Republican. I don’t think this, alone, would stop Joe from choosing Liz as VP.

Is there anyone Joe can pick from Florida? Because he doesn’t need much, if anything at all, to win that state. And it will counter Trump if he picks Scott or Rubio. Rubio would be a real problem for a Florida win.

Congresswoman Val Demmings is from Florida. But that’s a big bet to take on a state with a Republican Governor and a history of cheating.

I wonder how the state of Pennsylvania will feel about this...

R210 "SJW keyboard warriors" is redundant, isn't it? Clean it up if you're going to be a successful troll.

Anusmouth is doing that to a swing state, R237? Wow. The fuck kind of strategy is that? Are the voices in his head telling him it's a good idea?

I hope Pennsylvania fucks Trump and the Republicans, right back in November. Dry and hard.

Kloubachar practically had a nervous breakdown during the last debate. She thought Pete was beneath her and couldn’t let it go. She’d be a horrible VP.

Floridians are unemployed and unable to collect unemployment. They did not have these problems in 2016 while that other administration was in office, none of us did.

r226 Beware any state polls like the one you cite in Texas. Dems can often hit 40% in Mississippi too. That doesn't make it a competitive race. As we saw with Stacey Abrams in Georgia and Beto's campaign, even a national fundraising operation, national media, a candidate who Dems go nuts over, still can not get to 50% plus one. And those were close, more often than not the margin escalates after the votes are tallied. Check out Mitch McConnell's last race as an example.

What’s the magic number?

AP reports in a new article that some of Trump's advisers are thinking of giving up on Michigan:

[quote]But the coronavirus has threatened to rewrite the Electoral College map, and Trump’s campaign has become concerned about losing support in several key swing states, particularly Florida and Wisconsin. Some advisers have all but written off Michigan, which Trump captured in 2016 by fewer than 11,000 votes. He is now locked in a feud with the state’s Democratic governor.

r244 Bullshit. A head fake at best. Maybe an effort to let Biden tilt away from Whitmer (not that it would make a difference, although all that matters is Trump's reading of it and he's dumb enough to think that she might get Biden some votes). The Trump campaign will be very, very active in Michigan. Whether its winnable is another issue.

A new SurveyUSA poll in North Carolina finds Joe Biden leading President Trump in the presidential race, 50% to 45%.

“Among voters who say Trump’s handling of coronavirus is a major factor, Biden leads 61% to 34%, but Trump is ahead among voters who call the pandemic a minor factor in the race and those who say it plays no role in how they will vote.”

Republican Candidates, Start Your Shitters!

NORTH CAROLINA Biden 48% (+3) Trump 45% . #NCgov: Cooper (D-inc) 55% (+19) Forest (R) 36%

Garin-Hart-Yang / Put NC First (D) 4/13-18

So that's 2 new polls putting Biden ahead of Trump in North Carolina.

Poll Troll!

The Washington Post says Trump gets in a foul mood if you tell him he's behind in the polls:

"President Trump’s advisers presented him with the results of internal polling last week that showed him falling behind former vice president Joe Biden in key swing states in the presidential race, part of an effort by aides to curtail Trump’s freewheeling daily briefings on the coronavirus pandemic, according to three people with knowledge of the conversations..."

Aides described Trump as in a particularly foul mood last week because of the polling data and news coverage of his administration’s response to the pandemic, according to two of the people familiar with the discussions. In one call, he berated Parscale over the polling data, the two people said."

“I’m not losing to Joe Biden,” Trump said at one point, both of these people said, adding that the president used profanities throughout the call."

I LOVE hearing about Anusmouth flipping out over poor polling and general bad reviews of his performance and news conferences! It cheers me up like nothing else. More, more, more!

Former VP Joe Biden will lay out his general election economic argument in an exclusive address tomorrow on NowThis. His remarks will come on the heels of a jobs report expected to show U.S. unemployment at a historic high. Tune in tomorrow 12 pm ET.

The Economic Poll Trump-licker is getting ahead of himself.