Jump to content

The Dog

Burnt Ends
  • Posts

    9432
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    54

Posts posted by The Dog

  1. 12 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

    I’m not literally saying neither he nor Hillary don’t have a a single policy initiative- I’m saying it’s just not at all part of any coherent messaging- what they plan on doing- beyond- not be that guy. 

    I think this is a good point and we have reached the moment where Trump has unloaded all of his clips into his feet (for now). Biden needs to now say what his vision is and do so simply.

    I'm very surprised Biden's campaign hasn't focused on Trump's elimination of the Pandemic Response Team. That's a tangible action he took that Biden and the Democrats could argue handicapped our response to the virus and lead to all of the problems we are facing today. Biden can say "hey, the administration I was a part of tried to be prepared for this, and this idiot got rid of it! are you better off as a result?" Boom, point made and roasted. And it affected EVERYONE in this country. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  2. 4 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

    The last GOP president to carry Iowa was Reagan in 1984- who carried every state except Minnesota.  I could be wrong and W might have snuck out an 04 win in Iowa, but prior to Trump it was an even bluer state in the presdiential than MI, PA, WI and a couple other blue wall states.

    I think it's flipped more or less red forever now, but I could be wrong. We shall see this time around.

    Anecdotally from my time in Iowa (lots) the IA dems are very liberal and the IA GOP are very conservative.  Like a different species. 

    W did win in 2004 - and Gore BARELY won it in 2000. Obama won it easily the next two before Trump crushed Hillary there. 

  3. 1 hour ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

    G Elliot and Nate S at each other’s throats.  Former calling the latter a fraud, latter blocking the former. Lulz. 
     

     

     

    TBH they are both right - Nate is right that the "Trump is gonna steal the election" stuff is getting waaaay over played and might have an impact on Democratic turnout and Morris is right that Nate should have kept it to himself. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  4. Re: NYT poll in Texas - kind of a mixed bag IMHO. For one it's a quality pollster showing a statistical dead heat. However, the sample was Trump +5 from four years ago (he won Texas by 9) and to me that means Trump may actually lead by more even though it's an R +7 sample. Either people in the poll didn't want to admit they voted for Trump or they got a lot of third party voters who identify as Republicans (or people who just sat out last time). 

     

    All that said you have 9% of Texas likely voters in that sample saying they are undecided. That's a LOT compared to other states. In fact, all three of those states (including Iowa and Georgia) have a lot of undecideds. Having that many undecideds at this stage with those polls being as close as they are definitely puts those states in play IMHO and is going to lead to a wild and EXPENSIVE finish. 

  5. 3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

    Knock this shit off. It's being reported by reputable media that the Trump campaign is considering these options. Even if the likelihood is "very low", the fact it's even being discussed is a massive red alert. 

    Sure Trump can ask them to do it, but that requires state legislatures and governors to actually change their statues for choosing electors after election day and prior to the electors meeting. 

    That's the part that's never going to occur.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  6. Won't be able to do that in most "battleground' states as the only one where that's feasible is Florida since all the rest are divided governments. 

    Even then it requires a change to the statutes in Florida and Texas. The likelihood that occurs in either state is very, very low unless you are just completely bought in to the conspiracy theories like the QAnon freakazoids. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  7. So we now have recent polls from three heavily R districts (TX-3, TX-21, and TX-31) that show Trump and Biden basically in a dead heat in those districts. TX-3 is Biden +3, TX-21 is Biden +2, and TX-31 is Trump +1. All three districts are rated as R +10 or higher by the Cook Political Report. 

    Very interesting. Wish there was more Texas polling so we could see how real this is.

    • Hook 'Em 1
  8. 3 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Oh, I know what you meant man. I'm just terrified of the whole "Hillary is going to win" taken for granted mentality. Although the follow up post that if he wins Florida it's a coin flip is also terrifying AF for me. 

    Scott Rasmussen addressed this back in April. Thought it was a good take: https://scottrasmussen.com/the-polls-werent-wrong-in-2016-but-the-analysis-of-the-polls-was-horrible/

     

    • Like 1
  9. 13 minutes ago, Red Five said:

    I didn't phrase that well. Of course Biden "needs" every state, but Trump literally must have Florida in order to have a chance of winning, mathematically. 

    I mean there are plausible scenarios where Biden wins Florida but still loses. This is perfectly plausible (but unlikely based on current polling):

    image.thumb.png.62326d4b15b27e1b3d6d2ceff6b27f5f.png

     But notice that Trump would have to sweep Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and North Carolina to do it. Any of those flip to Biden and it's Biden who wins.

  10. 17 minutes ago, Scholz said:

    Maybe the recruiting pitch of "Come lose in the SEC!!" has lost its luster?

    This. aggy has been selling the SEC to recruits more than themselves, and that's opened the door for the programs that actually contend in the SEC to swoop in and make their pitch. 

    So basically they've been selling their opponents to the players they recruit, and now those chickens have come home to roost. If you're good enough to have an offer from LSU or Alabama then why even consider aggy? 

    • Like 1
  11. 18 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

    They're really burying the lede to call Wisconsin "close."  A challenger polling at 52% among likely voters does not make for a particularly close election.  And don't give me any MOE bullshit--not when that tracks with every other Wisconsin poll out recently.  CNN also had Biden at 52% earlier this week.  NYT had Biden up 5% (48-43) also this week.  And before that, during the first two weeks in September you had four different polls of likely voters all showing Biden at either 50% or 51%. 

    All of which is to say fuck the MOE.  Maybe you have some herding among pollsters, but I doubt it.  What I think it reflects instead is a very stable race in which Biden has a small majority and there are very few undecideds.  

    I'm becoming very comfortable about Biden's position in Wisconsin.

    It's Pennsylvania that might give me an ulcer.  

    Yeah I thought the Wisconsin comments were a bit dubious in context. Biden's RCP average for Wisconsin is currently at 50.1% and has been polling at or above 50% in the state pretty consistently. Hillary never polled near 50% and was mostly in the mid 40s all the way to election day, which left enough undecideds out there to swing to Trump and pull off the win. If Biden simply performs at his RCP polling average then he's going to win the state. 

    Biden has also been polling at or near 50% in Pennsylvania for quite some time as well. 

×
×
  • Create New...