DMac wrote: ↑Sun Dec 01, 2019 9:17 am
No need to buckle up if it's Biden v Trump, more like give it up.
Biden's not beating Trump (neither is Lizzie). I don't believe the Ds can win on an anyone but Trump/we have to get him out of office campaign. The impeachment hearings will not get Trump out of office either, and frankly, I believe that it'll be viewed as a big fat W for Trump and the Rs which will help him in the next go 'round. He'll drive that home big time and make the Ds look like a bunch of whining fools (which a lot of them are, IMO). The Ds really need to get it together and come up with a likable and formidable opponent in order to beat Trump, and so far I'm not feeling as if they have. If I had to put my money on who is going to win the election right now it would go on Trump.
Yup, could happen again that the D wins big in popular vote but loses in the Electoral College.
If looking simply at the economy and incumbency, a President in this position should win in landslide fashion. And that may be enough for Trump to squeak by in the EC.
I would not underestimate, however, the degree of motivation to 'dump Trump' that he inspires, nor the fatigue some of his former voters feel, the disappointment that he did not actually become 'Presidential'.
We've seen dramatic shifts in suburban white voters, not just women (though led by women), and that's impacting turnout #'s in red and purple states, not just blue. The 2018 #'s were epically suggestive of this movement, however I'd agree that the national candidate chosen by the Dems could impact the close situations in those key states that will make all the difference in the EC.
Warren is plummeting in the polling, most likely because D voters are correctly identifying that her more leftward proposals will indeed lose those key swing states, or at least make the odds of winning substantially lower. Bernie is understood as a non-starter as well.
Harris is nearly out of the picture now. As are a number of others from Booker to Klobuchar.
Biden would beat Trump IMO, but is not inspiring confidence from either the activist wing nor the donors.
Mayor Pete is on the rise, big time, but needs to break through with black voters. He appears to be working hard in this regard and is beginning to get some kudos for doing so. My bet would be that he'll be the leading D candidate by summer. I also think that he'd beat Trump down the stretch like a drum, though most red states will remain red. But the purple are going to respond to the moderate, smart tone, the military veteran, and his great comfort in speaking about his faith. He understands the language of evangelicals, indeed I think this will be his best inroad with black voters. It will also pull younger white evangelicals who might otherwise have voted R.
I don't think Patrick will get even a look, too late to the table.
I'd vote for Bloomberg in a heart beat, and I know a whole lot of Trump voters who would do the same, and I certainly don't think we can discount the impact of the kind of spending he's going to do, but I'm skeptical that he'll win the primary voters sufficiently.
As to the impeachment process, I think Pelosi agrees that it's unlikely to result in Trump's removal, and I think she wants to get it behind them sooner rather than later, however I think they recognize that they have to go through with it. I think they know that they need to do it methodically with a minimum of hyperbole, letting the facts speak for themselves. However, it's likely that hyperbole will flow from both sides.
But no worries DMac, they are not trying to persuade hard core Trumpists, nor those expressing the sorts of pre-judgments you appear to have. They need only to persuade the few remaining persuadable that Trump indeed abused the powers of his office, corruptly for his personal political benefit. The facts are overwhelmingly supportive of that case. They need for those facts to resonate sufficiently that whatever the voter's views about removal this way rather than in an election, they will understand the need to ultimately remove him, period, else expect more and worse abuses of power.
It's all about persuading the persuadable in the middle of that reality.
But getting the trial process over appears to be a priority. Personally, I think they should not rush it, they should pursue their subpoenas in court, as establishing that
any President and Administration can't ignore subpoenas, can't obstruct justice and Congressional oversight this way, is more important than 'impeachment'.
I also think we're quite likely to see criminal indictments of, or other gross revelations, about other players, including Guiliani, DiGenova, and Toensing (along with Lev and Igor), before we're done. I think there's going to continue to be lots and lots of evidence of the corruption around this President and this process will be one part of such impression.
Of course, if you only watch Fox and Trump's Twitter feed etc, you will continue to be told, falsely, that Mueller 'exonerated' Trump, that the 'call was perfect', etc, etc.
Keep up the divisive narrative pretends
31,177 voters identified
