2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

The assumption that "the incumbent always wins" as the baseline isn't necessarily a bad one to start from when talking about an average president.

Trump, on the other hand, is almost record-settingly unliked, and that's consistent too. Heck, most Dems don't even care who the nominee is, so long as they can beat Trump (and that's backed by polling data), so I'm of the mind that Trump faces a more difficult campaign in 2020 regardless of who the Democratic nominee is. Not insurmountable, to be sure, but if Dems field more likeable candidates a la Sanders or Biden, then it's less "anyone's game" and more "holy fuck something would have to go disastrously wrong for Trump to win".

Which, granted, is a similar position we were in with 2016, but still.

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

I like how you cherry picked those three examples when in that same site it's noted that he has lower approval rating then W Bush, H.W. Bush, Eisenhower, JFK , Truman and, Johnson.

The conservative Democrats are also being affected by the massive polaration of Trump. If there anything like the centrist Republicans they are most likely criticising Trump and want anyone else to beat him.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

Danny De Vito you are awesome.

[Hediacrana]

No, he's more popular than Reagan, who then went on to win a landslide.

If your eyesight or mathematical aptitude is so bad, please voluntarily choose not to engage in a debate with higher intellectuals.

Kindly look at the graph you yourself posted, and note that the little line that denotes Reagan - a really short blip aside - is higher than Trump's.

[Trumptonium1]

He's doing perfectly ok. He has his 39-42% base and only needs 11-13% of conservative Democrats to consider the Dems batshit crazy with Harris or some other SJW, or 11-13% of wealthy Democrats to consider their wealth too important for their champagne socialism/armchair altruism with Warren or Sanders.

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.



* 11-13% putting him at that circa ~46% of the vote he would roughly need to win, ceteris paribus state-wise.

I like how you cherry picked those three examples when in that same site it's noted that he has lower approval rating then W Bush, H.W. Bush, Eisenhower, JFK , Truman and, Johnson.

The conservative Democrats are also being affected by the massive polaration of Trump. If there anything like the centrist Republicans they are most likely criticising Trump and want anyone else to beat him.

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

[Hediacrana]

Congrats, you have found one (1) counterexample from a set of twelve (12) examples.

He didn't do even that; Reagan's approval, a short blip aside, is shown as higher than Trump's.

[Ism]

I like how you cherry picked those three examples when in that same site it's noted that he has lower approval rating then W Bush, H.W. Bush, Eisenhower, JFK , Truman and, Johnson.

The conservative Democrats are also being affected by the massive polaration of Trump. If there anything like the centrist Republicans they are most likely criticising Trump and want anyone else to beat him.

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

I don't know, how did you forget about Truman's second term?

[Valrifell]

I like how you cherry picked those three examples when in that same site it's noted that he has lower approval rating then W Bush, H.W. Bush, Eisenhower, JFK , Truman and, Johnson.

The conservative Democrats are also being affected by the massive polaration of Trump. If there anything like the centrist Republicans they are most likely criticising Trump and want anyone else to beat him.

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

So now what you're being forced to admit is, at best, approval has little correlation with re-election chance and Trump's position isn't as secure as you present

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

I like how you cherry picked those three examples when in that same site it's noted that he has lower approval rating then W Bush, H.W. Bush, Eisenhower, JFK , Truman and, Johnson.

The conservative Democrats are also being affected by the massive polaration of Trump. If there anything like the centrist Republicans they are most likely criticising Trump and want anyone else to beat him.

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

Truman had a second Term. JFK would have likely had a second Term.

Yes Johnson did not get a second term and neither did H.W Bush.

Imagine how hard it will be for Trump to get a second Term when he is nowhere near popular as H.W Bush or Johnson.

[Valrifell]

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

I don't know, how did you forget about Truman's second term?

It was a quite famous campaign. If only for the famous picture of him holding a copy of The Chicago Tribune prematurely claiming Dewey had won.

You'd think a Trump supporter would remember that, considering people were drawing parallels for about two years.

[Liriena]

Yeah the famous second terms of JFK, Truman, Johnson and H.W. Bush

How did I forget them

So now what you're being forced to admit is, at best, approval has little correlation with re-election chance and Trump's position isn't as secure as you present

THE POLLS ARE ANTIFA FALSE FLAGS!

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

So now what you're being forced to admit is, at best, approval has little correlation with re-election chance and Trump's position isn't as secure as you present

THE POLLS ARE ANTIFA FALSE FLAGS!

GEORGE SOROS CONTROLLED SJW POLLS!! FAKE NEWS!

[Valrifell]

So now what you're being forced to admit is, at best, approval has little correlation with re-election chance and Trump's position isn't as secure as you present

THE POLLS ARE ANTIFA FALSE FLAGS!

He's already been through the "all polls are fake news" phase. For some reason, now they're fine and prove his argument.

[Vassenor]

THE POLLS ARE ANTIFA FALSE FLAGS!

He's already been through the "all polls are fake news" phase. For some reason, now they're fine and prove his argument.

Polls are only valid when the results are pro-Trump or can be readily spun as pro-Trump. We've been through this.

[Liriena]

THE POLLS ARE ANTIFA FALSE FLAGS!

He's already been through the "all polls are fake news" phase. For some reason, now they're fine and prove his argument.

Using 538 as a source is pure political cuckoldry. I'm very disappointed in the once based Trumptonium.

[Cannot think of a name]

Is it too late to reopen the midterms thread?

The North Carolina Board of Elections voted unanimously on Thursday in favor of holding a new election in the 9th Congressional District after an investigation into absentee ballot irregularities.
The decision comes shortly after Mark Harris, the Republican leading in the contested race, said a new election should be called. He told the state board he does not condone the activities that have come to light after testimony this week and he feels that the public's confidence in the process is shaken.
...
The new election will come after months of chaos in which North Carolina remained the only state without settled election results from November. Red flags had been raised regarding irregular and potentially compromised absentee ballots stemming from the work of a political consultant hired by Harris' campaign, which led many people from both sides of the aisle to call into question the integrity of the election.
The state board of elections had voted in December not to certify the results in which Harris, a Baptist minister, led Democrat Dan McCready, a businessman and retired Marine, by 905 votes.
North Carolina's governor, Democrat Roy Cooper, wrote in a statement, "I thank the Board for unanimously doing the right thing. People must have confidence that their vote matters and this action sends a strong message that election fraud must not be tolerated."

This was the only active election thread.

[Liriena]

Is it too late to reopen the midterms thread?

The North Carolina Board of Elections voted unanimously on Thursday in favor of holding a new election in the 9th Congressional District after an investigation into absentee ballot irregularities.
The decision comes shortly after Mark Harris, the Republican leading in the contested race, said a new election should be called. He told the state board he does not condone the activities that have come to light after testimony this week and he feels that the public's confidence in the process is shaken.
...
The new election will come after months of chaos in which North Carolina remained the only state without settled election results from November. Red flags had been raised regarding irregular and potentially compromised absentee ballots stemming from the work of a political consultant hired by Harris' campaign, which led many people from both sides of the aisle to call into question the integrity of the election.
The state board of elections had voted in December not to certify the results in which Harris, a Baptist minister, led Democrat Dan McCready, a businessman and retired Marine, by 905 votes.
North Carolina's governor, Democrat Roy Cooper, wrote in a statement, "I thank the Board for unanimously doing the right thing. People must have confidence that their vote matters and this action sends a strong message that election fraud must not be tolerated."

This was the only active election thread.

Holy shit. Is there any Republican talking point that isn't hugely hypocritical?

GOP: "we gotta disenfranchise millions of black voters cause muh voter fraud"
also GOP: "just fucking stealing an election to own the libs"

[Shrillland]

Is it too late to reopen the midterms thread?

The North Carolina Board of Elections voted unanimously on Thursday in favor of holding a new election in the 9th Congressional District after an investigation into absentee ballot irregularities.
The decision comes shortly after Mark Harris, the Republican leading in the contested race, said a new election should be called. He told the state board he does not condone the activities that have come to light after testimony this week and he feels that the public's confidence in the process is shaken.
...
The new election will come after months of chaos in which North Carolina remained the only state without settled election results from November. Red flags had been raised regarding irregular and potentially compromised absentee ballots stemming from the work of a political consultant hired by Harris' campaign, which led many people from both sides of the aisle to call into question the integrity of the election.
The state board of elections had voted in December not to certify the results in which Harris, a Baptist minister, led Democrat Dan McCready, a businessman and retired Marine, by 905 votes.
North Carolina's governor, Democrat Roy Cooper, wrote in a statement, "I thank the Board for unanimously doing the right thing. People must have confidence that their vote matters and this action sends a strong message that election fraud must not be tolerated."

This was the only active election thread.

No,I have a miscellaneous thread for this year for just such an occasion.

[Valrifell]

I suppose it belongs in the misc. 2019 thread, CTOAN.

[Hediacrana]

Between Biden, Klobuchar, Bernie, and Beto, 4 candidates I really like(Brown just outside those 4 due to his policy on free trade, Bernie's policies make up for his free trade and foreign policies to me), this election will be the toughest for me to decide who to vote for in my lifetime probably, at least in choosing between candidates I really like. I do admit, Beto of those 4 is the weakest of them in how much I like him. But still strong to me.

My dream scenario in a dual ticket is a Biden-Klobuchar/Klobuchar Biden or Biden-Beto Ticket, with the loser of those two being in a high Cabinet position.

For Bernie, I don't have a dual-ticket dream scenario, it's all him that I'd focus on. But if he threw in Klobuchar, I'd be extremely happy.

What about Bernie-Harris?

[Philjia]

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

[Vassenor]

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

You're forgetting that anything the Democrats do will guarantee a Trump victory in his mind.

[Philjia]

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

You're forgetting that anything the Democrats do will guarantee a Trump victory in his mind.

The Democrats most significant advantage this time around is that for once they can guarantee a large proportion of voters a tax cut, since the GOP managed to raise taxes for a lot of middle income brackets.

[Trumptonium1]

Unless Democrats choose a moderate like Biden or Delaney, Trump has already won.

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

They put up a robot, not a moderate. Biden at least has principles. Clinton changes them based on what the latest focus group says.

I mean shit, Hillary wasn't even pro-anything. She was pro motherhood and apple pie. And pro Hillary.

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

You're forgetting that anything the Democrats do will guarantee a Trump victory in his mind.

[Liriena]

(Image)

This is some necrophilic memery. You might as well use the old trollface.

[Liriena]

They put a moderate up against Trump last time. It didn't work. Biden's a terrible choice because he's too associated with Obama. Delaney's slightly better, but apart from having a cock he's broadly the same as Clinton.

They put up a robot, not a moderate. Biden at least has principles. Clinton changes them based on what the latest focus group says.

I mean shit, Hillary wasn't even pro-anything. She was pro motherhood and apple pie. And pro Hillary.

In other words, they put up a moderate but admitting it hurts your argument so we're going to redefine moderate to exclude the candidate whose policy proposals were moderate and largely in line with the Obama/Biden doctrine.