Page 503 of 848
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
by RedFromMI
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:14 am
by jhu72
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
Yup. I think we are done with those needless exercises.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:19 am
by wgdsr
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
evidently he was lethargic as well. so def showing symptomatic and suggests he got it days ago. maybe at the debate!
he's 74 and overweight. two bad checkmarks. as far as the debate goes... IF he were able to clear symptoms in some kind of short order, this will set out a discussion on cdc guidelines and ct cycles will come into play. will he have to post test negative or 72 hours no fever and symptoms decreasing?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:23 am
by jhu72
... just occurred to me this gives Trump another excuse when he loses. I am sure he has figured this out already.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:19 am
by Peter Brown
jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:14 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
Yup. I think we are done with those needless exercises.
Democrats sure do hate democracy (not to mention freedom of speech, and well, just speech in general if it's not approved by the Politburo)
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:34 am
by jhu72
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:19 am
jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:14 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
Yup. I think we are done with those needless exercises.
Democrats sure do hate democracy (not to mention freedom of speech, and well, just speech in general if it's not approved by the Politburo)
Democrats love democracy, that's why it is the root of the party name. RepubliCONs love CONS.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:39 am
by Peter Brown
jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:34 am
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 10:19 am
jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:14 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 9:04 am
Somehow I think the probability of a next debate may have dropped to near zero.
Trump had a "raspy" voice yesterday, so he may already have symptoms, and I am not sure anyone would believe he had completely cleared of the virus by the next scheduled meeting.
Yup. I think we are done with those needless exercises.
Democrats sure do hate democracy (not to mention freedom of speech, and well, just speech in general if it's not approved by the Politburo)
Democrats love democracy, that's why it is the root of the party name. RepubliCONs love CONS.
You're right, I forgot, democrats love democracy:
- Dems.jpg (199.51 KiB) Viewed 801 times
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:44 am
by jhu72
These kids (or are they children) are really scary. Some apparently like expressing an opinion while having their hand raised to the sky. I am amazed they can do that while not carrying an automatic riffle. Republicans can't seem to do anything without an automatic riffle in their hands.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:58 am
by Peter Brown
jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 11:44 am
These kids (or are they children) are really scary. Some apparently like expressing an opinion while having their hand raised to the sky. I am amazed they can do that while not carrying an automatic riffle. Republicans can't seem to do anything without an automatic riffle in their hands.
Like this Republ..., errrr, I mean Democrat:
- Hodgkinson.jpg (179.2 KiB) Viewed 779 times
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:08 pm
by njbill
Can’t see there being any more in person debates. Health concerns just too high. Trump unlikely to be cleared in any event.
Debates by video? Can you imagine if the debate the other night had been by video?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:41 pm
by Brooklyn
Why the RepubliCONS have a good chance of "winning" again:
Outrage as Texas governor orders closure of multiple ballot drop-off sites
Counties told to offer voters one single place to return ballots
Greg Abbott’s order ‘prejudicial and dangerous’, critics say
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-election
Texas is already one of the hardest places in America to vote, and Greg Abbott, the Texas governor, on Thursday made it even harder.
The announcement from Abbott, a Republican, limits an executive order from July that made it modestly easier for voters to return their ballots during the pandemic. Texas usually only lets voters return their mail-in ballots in person on election day, but Abbott’s July order said voters could return their ballots in person to the election clerk’s office earlier. He also extended early voting by six days.
As a result, some of the biggest counties in the state had planned to offer voters multiple places to drop off their ballots. Harris county, the most populous in the state, planned to let voters return their ballots at 11 of the clerk’s annex offices around the county. Travis county, home of Austin, planned to offer four places to return their ballots. But the move drew backlash within his own party; Republicans sued the governor over the changes ....
Texass political corruption, again.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
by RedFromMI
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:41 pm
Why the RepubliCONS have a good chance of "winning" again:
Outrage as Texas governor orders closure of multiple ballot drop-off sites
Counties told to offer voters one single place to return ballots
Greg Abbott’s order ‘prejudicial and dangerous’, critics say
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-election
Texas is already one of the hardest places in America to vote, and Greg Abbott, the Texas governor, on Thursday made it even harder.
The announcement from Abbott, a Republican, limits an executive order from July that made it modestly easier for voters to return their ballots during the pandemic. Texas usually only lets voters return their mail-in ballots in person on election day, but Abbott’s July order said voters could return their ballots in person to the election clerk’s office earlier. He also extended early voting by six days.
As a result, some of the biggest counties in the state had planned to offer voters multiple places to drop off their ballots. Harris county, the most populous in the state, planned to let voters return their ballots at 11 of the clerk’s annex offices around the county. Travis county, home of Austin, planned to offer four places to return their ballots. But the move drew backlash within his own party; Republicans sued the governor over the changes ....
Texass political corruption, again.
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:56 pm
by wgdsr
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:41 pm
Why the RepubliCONS have a good chance of "winning" again:
Outrage as Texas governor orders closure of multiple ballot drop-off sites
Counties told to offer voters one single place to return ballots
Greg Abbott’s order ‘prejudicial and dangerous’, critics say
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-election
Texas is already one of the hardest places in America to vote, and Greg Abbott, the Texas governor, on Thursday made it even harder.
The announcement from Abbott, a Republican, limits an executive order from July that made it modestly easier for voters to return their ballots during the pandemic. Texas usually only lets voters return their mail-in ballots in person on election day, but Abbott’s July order said voters could return their ballots in person to the election clerk’s office earlier. He also extended early voting by six days.
As a result, some of the biggest counties in the state had planned to offer voters multiple places to drop off their ballots. Harris county, the most populous in the state, planned to let voters return their ballots at 11 of the clerk’s annex offices around the county. Travis county, home of Austin, planned to offer four places to return their ballots. But the move drew backlash within his own party; Republicans sued the governor over the changes ....
Texass political corruption, again.
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
not only did i expect this to be opposed, but i expect them to lose if it was. i don't know the calculus as well as the texas governor thinks he does, but it also looked like this was far from a prudent move from the perspective of actual voting totals (over 65 year olds).
they won the restriction in the summer to keep it from mail in being universal. he probably got cocky and thinks what he wants will go. it wouldn't surprise me if the democratic counties get the right to do what they want individually (if they don't have that right already), and they'll be prepared to mobilize. and republican counties won't.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:02 pm
by Brooklyn
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
A lawsuit means nothing if the judge is a biased Republican who bases his/her decision on their political affiliation.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:04 pm
by Peter Brown
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:02 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
A lawsuit means nothing if the judge is a biased Republican who bases his/her decision on their political affiliation.
Like Amy Berman Jackson? Or Emmet Sullivan? THAT biased?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:17 pm
by ggait
Democrats love democracy, that's why it is the root of the party name.
And the GOP loves tropical fruit. Hence Banana Republicans.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:46 pm
by runrussellrun
njbill wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:08 pm
Can’t see there being any more in person debates. Health concerns just too high. Trump unlikely to be cleared in any event.
Debates by video? Can you imagine if the debate the other night had been by video?
laughable that the candidates and Wallace the Small were not wearing masks. Said so right from the start on Tuesday .
It's like private jetters and huge carbon footprinters trying to guilt us into.........making them more money.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:46 pm
by RedFromMI
From the Hill (political news site thehill.com):
New polls feed GOP fears of Biden rout over Trump
Results were from _before_ the postitive CV tests for Trump.
Quinnipiac, on South Carolina: Trump up only one, and Lindsay Graham getting swamped on the airwaves by D Jaime Harrison (and mostly positive ones about Jaime himself - the negative ads are coming from groups like the Lincoln Project).
Alaska - Trump won by 15 in 2016, and currently in a statistical dead heat (Harstead Strategic Research)
Iowa 538 average has Biden up slightly, while Joni Ernst is fighting for her political life. Trump won here by 9 in 2016.
Tossup in GA. Both Senate races competitive.
CNBC survey post debate has Biden at a 13 point national lead... Landslide margin if true.
But - given the structural advantage in the EC, Trump still is at a 20% chance in 538's estimation for a win. Final prediction for 538 in 2016 was 38%.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:02 pm
by runrussellrun
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:02 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
A lawsuit means nothing if the judge is a biased Republican who bases his/her decision on their political affiliation.
isn't THAT the real problem, our third branch. Why don't we pay, and pay well above the local median, 24 peers, for five years, to train and vote on who gets appointed. But, the only, real , problem with that, IS, whom is going to choose the 24 peers? round and round we go
How about supporting the legal right to MORE Representatives. Mandated in the very first part of the US Consitution. And why we have a census. To add more members of congress, if required. SUddenly, right about the same time woman got the right to vote,
Congress slammed the door shut on 150 years of US House of Representatives and increasing numbers.
But, no one thinks beyond the status quo. Even those that claim themselves Constitutionalists . Stuck at 435 for a century. Even tho the United States actually GAINED two states, in those 100 years. Even tho the US population grew and grew, to the tune of 200 million US residents in that same time span. You see the problem yet?
And, many, many multiple parties, or independents, would thrive.
so, they could actually vote on the BILL, instead of the party
But, even AOC wouldn't ask a Supreme nominee their thoughts on what the US Census is for, getting the nominee to back into the crux of why we are stuck on 435. Seeing that is most likely not the intent of the US Constituion. AOC asks, " In fact, the action of creating a law, without a US Constitutoinal amendment, IS un-constitutional, don't you think SUpreme court nominee?"
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:17 pm
by RedFromMI
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 2:02 pm
Brooklyn wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 1:02 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Fri Oct 02, 2020 12:49 pm
Already a lawsuit filed, which includes the League of Women Voters as a plaintiff...
A lawsuit means nothing if the judge is a biased Republican who bases his/her decision on their political affiliation.
isn't THAT the real problem, our third branch. Why don't we pay, and pay well above the local median, 24 peers, for five years, to train and vote on who gets appointed. But, the only, real , problem with that, IS, whom is going to choose the 24 peers? round and round we go
How about supporting the legal right to MORE Representatives. Mandated in the very first part of the US Consitution. And why we have a census. To add more members of congress, if required. SUddenly, right about the same time woman got the right to vote,
Congress slammed the door shut on 150 years of US House of Representatives and increasing numbers.
But, no one thinks beyond the status quo. Even those that claim themselves Constitutionalists . Stuck at 435 for a century. Even tho the United States actually GAINED two states, in those 100 years. Even tho the US population grew and grew, to the tune of 200 million US residents in that same time span. You see the problem yet?
And, many, many multiple parties, or independents, would thrive.
so, they could actually vote on the BILL, instead of the party
But, even AOC wouldn't ask a Supreme nominee their thoughts on what the US Census is for, getting the nominee to back into the crux of why we are stuck on 435. Seeing that is most likely not the intent of the US Constituion. AOC asks, " In fact, the action of creating a law, without a US Constitutoinal amendment, IS un-constitutional, don't you think SUpreme court nominee?"
I have to agree with rrr on this one - enlarge the House to over 1K...