2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[Gig em Aggies]

I doubt they will fully release it to the public :/

That is one thing I'm worried about too. Even if it does hurt Dems, it's important for stuff like this to be released to the public. We already saw how messy things can be with Watergate, the Pentagon Papers and Iran-Contra, it's probably best not to have a repeat of those.

Speaking of Iran-Contra, I saw someone say that the whole Mueller thing will probably be Trump's Iran-Contra, and I think that that's pretty accurate.

to be fair the Pentagon papers were released by unauthorized means and sources it was no investigation its just like the WikiLeaks incidents there were no investigations unlike Mueller.

[Far Easter Republic]

The Media wanted Clinton to win. When Trump won, they acted like the world was about to end.

I don't really see how "the Media" (as if it's some unified organization actively conspiring against Trump) wanted Clinton to win if all they did was basically report what Trump said on the campaign trail, most of which were great sound bytes because what he said was political career suicide for any other politician.

By "Media" I mean CNN, MSNBC, etc.(excluding FOX).

[Vassenor]

I don't really see how "the Media" (as if it's some unified organization actively conspiring against Trump) wanted Clinton to win if all they did was basically report what Trump said on the campaign trail, most of which were great sound bytes because what he said was political career suicide for any other politician.

By "Media" I mean CNN, MSNBC, etc.(excluding FOX).

That doesn't really address the points raised.

[Far Easter Republic]

By "Media" I mean CNN, MSNBC, etc.(excluding FOX).

That doesn't really address the points raised.

Go to 3:11

[Vassenor]

That doesn't really address the points raised.

Go to 3:11

Or rather than blind-linking a random YouTube video you could actually explain your points.

[Port Jefferson]

I'm kinda ambivalent on Biden, he's lost two bids for President before but most Americans are longing for a return to normalcy and "Obama Era" stuff that he could represent.

His actual political record and tokenism with Abrams are just anysmally bad, imo.

I can understand that, but his charisma and Midwest appeal can lead to flipping back Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and possibly Ohio or Iowa in 2020. Other 2020 Democrats are far too liberal for rural America, with the exception of Amy Klobuchar as she is less liberal than Sanders or Gillibrand persay,

But, Biden also has problems with putting his foot in his mouth and alienating his base. We have seen that in his past presidential campaigns. Recently, he said that Vice-President Pence was a decent guy. That went over like a fart in church with Democrats. He has other problems (plagiarism and exaggerations of his academic performance) that sunk his 1988 candidacy.

If he can overcome the above, he could flip back the states you mention. It isn't because he is more moderate than most of the other Democrats running (he has definitely moved to the left since 1988).....it is because he is more pragmatic. He believes in reaching out to Republicans, finding common ground, and building from there.

[Port Jefferson]

All of those small states are irrelevant now. You only need to win the 11 largest states in the nation to win the presidency. Hell currently candidates only campaign in a few select states. They don’t give a shit about the small states

https://www.270towin.com/maps/XRNlL

Things won't change that much if we go to the popular vote though. Instead of seeing the race to 270, we see the race to 50%+1, which can be determined by the total number of votes and registered voters.

2016: No candidate won 50%+1
2000: No candidate won 50%+1
1996: No candidate won 50%+1
1992: No candidate won 50%+1
1968: No candidate won 50%+1

How would we deal with Third and minor party candidates that gain enough votes to deprive the major-party candidates from getting 50%+1?


In 2016, there were about 157 million registered voters while 138 million actually voted. So, do we go with 50%+1 of actual voters or of registered voters?

[Port Jefferson]

I don't know if you realise this, but you don't actually get anything for "supporting" the candidate who wins.

There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end. Yes, I absolutely abhor how Trump can't embrace getting off of fossil fuels. But the alternative is that the US will become diverse at an even faster pace than if Trump is in office doing a lot to curb undesirable immigration.

"There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end."

LOL!

Substitute 2020 with 2004, 2016 with 2000, and Trump with George W. Bush. Reminds me of what I heard and saw in 2003. We know how that turned out!

[Zurkerx]

Things won't change that much if we go to the popular vote though. Instead of seeing the race to 270, we see the race to 50%+1, which can be determined by the total number of votes and registered voters.

2016: No candidate won 50%+1
2000: No candidate won 50%+1
1996: No candidate won 50%+1
1992: No candidate won 50%+1
1968: No candidate won 50%+1

How would we deal with Third and minor party candidates that gain enough votes to deprive the major-party candidates from getting 50%+1?


In 2016, there were about 157 million registered voters while 138 million actually voted. So, do we go with 50%+1 of actual voters or of registered voters?

Simple: a runoff vote would be needed, or rank voting works. Several countries have some form of a runoff, including France. I'm sure some Americans wouldn't be happy with voting again, but if you want someone to get 50%+1, then it's necessary.

[Tobleste]

The Media wanted Clinton to win. When Trump won, they acted like the world was about to end.

I don't really see how "the Media" (as if it's some unified organization actively conspiring against Trump) wanted Clinton to win if all they did was basically report what Trump said on the campaign trail, most of which were great sound bytes because what he said was political career suicide for any other politician.

Id say CNN loves Trump. He's a ratings guarantee. His supporters view it as bias because he guarantees ratings by acting like a cruel idiot but it's not CNNs fault for reporting it as it is.

[Tobleste]

I am a hardcore republican and I bet Trump will win. I don't see him losing to a socialist.

Who's the socialist?

Whoever wins the democratic nomination. Basically the same way it is every year. With Obama, they even got bored of accusations of socialism and threw in some racism with birther conspiracies. I wouldn't mind but they clearly don't know what socialism actually is and their ignorance of the definition almost hurts me.

[Mystic Warriors]

I am a hardcore republican and I bet Trump will win. I don't see him losing to a socialist.

Who's the socialist?

Nobody. That is just a right wing boogeyman used to scare people. Trump will lose.

[Mystic Warriors]

There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end. Yes, I absolutely abhor how Trump can't embrace getting off of fossil fuels. But the alternative is that the US will become diverse at an even faster pace than if Trump is in office doing a lot to curb undesirable immigration.

"There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end."

LOL!

Substitute 2020 with 2004, 2016 with 2000, and Trump with George W. Bush. Reminds me of what I heard and saw in 2003. We know how that turned out!

Lol


You crack me up. Those are nothing alike. Enjoy your 8 years of Democratic rule.

[North Libya]

Trying to jump into the debate, but wouldn't the voting system like the Ranked Choice in Maine work best? It makes voting easier in my opinion.

[Blargoblarg]

So uh yes im still feeling the bern any new news on my boi bernie?

I gotchu fam
Bernie Sanders, rallying in San Diego, calls for Mueller report to be made public

Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign pledges to offset 'all carbon emissions'

[Port Jefferson]

"There is reason to be even angrier in 2020 than in even 2016. There is a good chance that Trump will lose but 2016 has at least shown me that polls are a bunch of BS and that it can pay off to stick with someone to the very end."

LOL!

Substitute 2020 with 2004, 2016 with 2000, and Trump with George W. Bush. Reminds me of what I heard and saw in 2003. We know how that turned out!

Lol


You crack me up. Those are nothing alike. Enjoy your 8 years of Democratic rule.

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

[Telconi]

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

Difference is, Trump is much much less experienced than Bush and cannot appeal to Independents and Swing Voters without a Hillary-like Figure. Plus half of Americans are dead set against voting for Trump.

Trump also is much stupider than Bush, with many more corruption scandals, true or not, the majority of Americans believe them.


This isn't 2004, it's 1980, with the Democrats as Reagan and Trump as Jimmy Carter.


I'm sorry Jimmy Carter, I basically slandered you with that comparison, comparing you to such an unchristian vile satanic man.

Implying any Dem candidate has Reagan's potential.

[Washington Resistance Army]

I actually had an interesting talk with someone the other day and he raised some good points that, depending on the actions taken during the primary, Biden might actually not be a super guaranteed win. If Biden pushes too far to the left to try and win over the younger progressive wing during the primaries it could seriously haunt him into the general and alienate much needed older Dem voters in places like the Rust Belt.

CNN ran a piece that was somewhat similar the other night where they talked to older voters in that same region and they were seemingly all against the AOC style super progressive types and more in favor of Trump if it came down to it.

[Mystic Warriors]

Lol


You crack me up. Those are nothing alike. Enjoy your 8 years of Democratic rule.

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

Bush won because Nader played spoiler, nothing like 2016. Bush and Trump are both morons and the Democrats worked WITH Bush not against him. Try learning more about those times to get an idea of why. Bush and Trump got in under totally different circumstances.

[Vassenor]

Lol


You crack me up. Those are nothing alike. Enjoy your 8 years of Democratic rule.

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

And just like the Republicans did to Obama.

[Mystic Warriors]

I actually had an interesting talk with someone the other day and he raised some good points that, depending on the actions taken during the primary, Biden might actually not be a super guaranteed win. If Biden pushes too far to the left to try and win over the younger progressive wing during the primaries it could seriously haunt him into the general and alienate much needed older Dem voters in places like the Rust Belt.

CNN ran a piece that was somewhat similar the other night where they talked to older voters in that same region and they were seemingly all against the AOC style super progressive types and more in favor of Trump if it came down to it.

No. Just no. Older people support Biden most of all and represent a higher voting block. But them voting Trump, prove it.

[Mystic Warriors]

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

And just like the Republicans did to Obama.

What they did to Obama was disgraceful.

[Phoenicaea]

^ @Tobleste, if i intended it well, the property of Cnn, Times, which is Murdoch, it rather aligns with Trump. not that the paper and the tv do, still you have to count this.

so at the bill, they don t praise Trump, still you can t count them as meaningfull opposition, even if some heavy-shoulder journalist oppose, and write their good articles agaist.

i noticed, when i can i read some british and even american thing (last months i read them much fewer however), many are not opposed to Trump, istead i feel like they fall with him.

i ve read some free-article on a on line paper, called 'politico', and i went there months later and i could notice the difference: it sides with Trump, while it hadn t submit before.

same for the magazine's titles i read, not so often. i know well this because in my country it has been the same, all papers aligned or they where bought (in my country it was worse).

instead, i noticed there is this agency, that now has got an online paper, 'associated press', this case i can see instead evedently, apart being great journal, it is good.

apnews is just and tremendous against Trump, the best on my opinon in america, as 'all presidents men' movie. you have to count i may read some free article and i do it rarely.

as a foreigner's suggestion, i would say that online paper i last cited, it appears to me amongst the best for its indipendence, nowadays.

[Shrillland]

Trying to jump into the debate, but wouldn't the voting system like the Ranked Choice in Maine work best? It makes voting easier in my opinion.

Absolutely. Australia's had it for 100 years and they don't complain.

[Ifreann]

Lol


You crack me up. Those are nothing alike. Enjoy your 8 years of Democratic rule.

What do you mean that they are nothing alike? The Democrats were butthurt over the 2000 election....just like they are now. The media portrayed Bush as an idiot.....like they are doing to Trump right now. If Bush proposed something, the Democrats would oppose it immediately.....just like the Democrats do to Trump now.

It is deja vu!

Bush was stupid on purpose(mostly) because people like a simple country boy who loves his mama and apple pie.

Trump's just a moron.