ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 7th February 2020, 03:32 PM   #81
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,501
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
He doesn't need more, he just needs about as many.

In 2016 he was on the nose with many traditional Republicans who quickly swung behind him after he won, so he has them now.
This is debatable. I don't believe many traditional Republicans swung back towards Trump but abandoned the party altogether. Republicans traditionally have done well in the suburbs and with college educated. Most polls show the suburbs no longer a strength and support among the college educated is a weakness for Trump.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:44 PM   #82
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,919
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
.....
All of whom had significant economic downturns during their presidency. I omitted Gerald Ford because he was not elected in the first place, but he also had a soft economy dragging him down.

That said, Trump seems to be the guy who breaks all the molds. I certainly did not predict his rise to the presidency or even his nomination as the GOP standard-bearer.
.....
Let's just note that the current strong national economy has particularly benefited people who own stock, one way or another. But Trump was elected largely for promising to revive the Rust Belt states, and he hasn't. Factories haven't moved back (as if they ever would or could), some industries are worse off because of his tariffs, and farmers have certainly been hurt. Trump voters will never admit they made a mistake, but a certain percentage might say "Let's give the new guy a chance."
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:47 PM   #83
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
I will also say that the vitriol directed at Trump from the Democrats is nothing new; in my lifetime almost every Republican president running for re-election has been vilified: Nixon yes, Reagan yes, GW Bush yes. About the only one who wasn't considered evil incarnate was Poppy Bush.
Can you name a President of any party who wasn't vilified?

Even Poppy Bush and Carter were vilified.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:51 PM   #84
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,345
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
That point doesn't seem relevant to this thread. Can you bring it home somehow?
Trump is a showman, a carnival Barker a PtBarnum, all you have to do is just come up with a better show and show how dumb his show was.
That will shift the vote to the Democrates side the problem is politicians like Hillary who didn't understand show Buisness.
The best way to win over voters Trump has might be a line of cheer leaders with punch cards with holes over female body parts.
I hate to say it but it's true that's how dumb down the Electorate has become.
To fall for slimey John.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:54 PM   #85
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,345
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
Can you name a President of any party who wasn't vilified?

Even Poppy Bush and Carter were vilified.
It goes back two centuries Remember the Called Abe, Ape.
Just most President's Try not too earn it so much!
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:58 PM   #86
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 24,649
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What a weird thing to say. Why should I do that?
Sorry, I wrote the odds down wrong - should have been $2-30.

Why would you bet on it?

Two excellent reasons:

1 - if you believe what you're typing, it would show you're not just trolling.
2 - if you believe what you're typing, there's easy money to be made. I can't imagine anywhere else giving you 230% for a 10-month deposit.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 03:59 PM   #87
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 17,540
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Bush was a truly terrible president. His policies where awful and he enabled dangerous developments in US political and social life. He was - however - not as bad as Trump. Trump is to Bush what Bush was to Obama.

I don't think it's that difficult to understand that liberals were outraged with Bush. That outrage, however, does not mean that today's outrage over Trump is worth less or means anything different than what is obvious: Trump is a truly horrible president. Easily the worst in modern times. He's so bad that he has single handedly made the US a joke around the world. Seriously. We are laughing at you.

I think people took all the wrong lessons from the old fable "The Boy Who Cried Wolf". Here's a hint: The point wasn't that there was no wolf.
The point was that when you cry wolf all the time, people will ignore your cries for help when there really is a wolf.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 04:51 PM   #88
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,501
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Let's just note that the current strong national economy has particularly benefited people who own stock, one way or another. But Trump was elected largely for promising to revive the Rust Belt states, and he hasn't. Factories haven't moved back (as if they ever would or could), some industries are worse off because of his tariffs, and farmers have certainly been hurt. Trump voters will never admit they made a mistake, but a certain percentage might say "Let's give the new guy a chance."
It should be noted that higher stock prices is not necessarily indicative of a better economy.

Take a moment and ask this question.

If you are already incredibly wealthy and find yourself with more money, what do you do with that cash? There's a high probability you will buy stock. What happens when you increase the demand on something?
the price increases.

And if companies aren't profitable those stock prices will fall. The bubble will burst.

I want to know what the demand is for every day items. Has the demand for durable goods like automobiles increased or decreased? Do every day Americans have more or less disposable income? There is no sign of that.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 04:55 PM   #89
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,345
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The point was that when you cry wolf all the time, people will ignore your cries for help when there really is a wolf.
As Garak Deepspace 9 said just never tell the same lie twice.
Crazy Chainsaw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:02 PM   #90
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Upchurch View Post
As opposed to all of Trump's verbal blunders during the campaign, which were ....what? Astute political judgement?
Give me an example.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:03 PM   #91
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,690
I don't think the economy is going to play into this election. If the economy were a factor, it would be reflected in Trump's approval rating. I also don't think voters look at the economy the same way today that they did before the financial crisis. A good economy and full employment isn't much use to working people when there's wage stagnation or minimal wage growth. If you're fully employed and can't afford an apartment on your own, your economy sucks. Add income inequality to that mix and you've got one pissed off person.

Not all sectors of the economy are doing well. Manufacturing is already in a recession and that will hurt Trump in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. Coal is on life support which won't do much for him either.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:04 PM   #92
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,690
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
Give me an example.
Seriously?
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:14 PM   #93
The Atheist
The Grammar Tyrant
 
The Atheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 24,649
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
I don't think the economy is going to play into this election.
Certainly will be if a recession bites in the middle of the year, and that looks increasingly likely.
__________________
The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.
The Atheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:19 PM   #94
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,134
It's amusing how often 'skeptics' actually give weight to the existence of a claim as a way to bypass discussions of the evidence for it.

Even more so when different claims are grouped together as a way to dismiss them all. 'Your house couldn't have burned down. They said my house burned down, and that didn't happen.'
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:25 PM   #95
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Seriously?
Yes, seriously.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:31 PM   #96
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
Yes, seriously.
And not something that lost him a bunch of votes in California.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:31 PM   #97
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 11,454
After Nov 2016, I gave up predicting how the American electorate will vote. Never did I think so many people would vote for someone as despicable and disgusting as Trump. I was wrong. I'm dismayed by it, but I think the Orange Turd may well be re-elected. This time, I hope I'm wrong.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 05:58 PM   #98
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 13,660
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
You're not alone:

Bitecofer, a 42-year-old professor at Christopher Newport University in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, was little known in the extremely online, extremely male-dominated world of political forecasting until November 2018. That’s when she nailed almost to the number the nature and size of the Democrats’ win in the House, even as other forecasters went wobbly in the race’s final days. Not only that, but she put out her forecast back in July, and then stuck by it while polling shifted throughout the summer and fall.

And today her model tells her the Democrats are a near lock for the presidency in 2020, and are likely to gain House seats and have a decent shot at retaking the Senate.


https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...heory-108944?f
What happens if Democrats win the House and the Presidency, but Republicans hold onto the Senate?

If the House passes legislation, and then either Moscow Mitch will not put to a vote, or if he does, it gets voted down by the Senate, can the President simply take that legislation and sign it into Law by executive order? After all, Trump has now set that precedent a few times now (the Muslim country travel ban, the wall that Mexico was going to pay for etc).

If so, and that starts happening, I will enjoy the following four years of watching Moscow Mitch's face grow more turtle-like as he becomes more and more pissed off with his Senate being made irrelevant.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 7th February 2020 at 06:00 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 06:02 PM   #99
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,819
Originally Posted by Robin View Post
Now look at the low voter turnout in Iowa. Democrat voters are not enthused by any of the candidates and they will likely stay home in November.
I don't think that your conclusion follows from the premise at all. I don't have a very strong preference for which Democrat to choose, but the choice between Trump and the Democratic nominee is easy-peasy.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 06:10 PM   #100
bobdroege7
Master Poster
 
bobdroege7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,955
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't think that your conclusion follows from the premise at all. I don't have a very strong preference for which Democrat to choose, but the choice between Trump and the Democratic nominee is easy-peasy.
Me too, I would really go for a moderate democrat, but Klobachar is the closest to my political views other than the billionaire who has climate as issue number one.

And Iowa, last I heard was a red state anyway, making prediction based on the turnout in that state is folly.

I don't care, at the end I'll vote against Trump, even if it's Bernie.
__________________
Un-american Jack-booted thug

Graduate of a liberal arts college!

Faster play faster faster play faster
bobdroege7 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 06:53 PM   #101
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 13,660
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Certainly will be if a recession bites in the middle of the year, and that looks increasingly likely.
As long as America keeps living a long way beyond its means, a recession is always going to be just the next bit of bad financial news away. The USA has a total deficit of almost US$23 trillion, rising by US$1 million every 48 seconds (US$1.8 billion per day!)

https://www.worldometers.info/us-debt-clock/

This is unsustainable in the long term.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 07:12 PM   #102
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,494
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
You're not alone:

Bitecofer, a 42-year-old professor at Christopher Newport University in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, was little known in the extremely online, extremely male-dominated world of political forecasting until November 2018. That’s when she nailed almost to the number the nature and size of the Democrats’ win in the House, even as other forecasters went wobbly in the race’s final days. Not only that, but she put out her forecast back in July, and then stuck by it while polling shifted throughout the summer and fall.

And today her model tells her the Democrats are a near lock for the presidency in 2020, and are likely to gain House seats and have a decent shot at retaking the Senate.


https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...heory-108944?f
Interesting article.

Republicans have structural advantages in presidential elections. How was Carter able to win over Ford? Historical scandal. How was Clinton able to prevail over Bush? Twelve years of Republican rule, theoretically Southern running-mates, a bad economy, and a third party run from Perot (who won nearly 20% of the electorate -- and exactly zero Electoral Votes). How was Obama able to defeat to McCain? Eight years of a disastrous Cheney presidency, and a deep recession (Bernie would've won that election).

Democrats are helped by recent demographic changes in color-fluid states, but Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, and liddle New Hampshire will not represent a huge victory if they can't count on Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Trump's vulnerable, but he's an incumbent.

During the course of the last election, I remarked on the fragmentation of the Republican Party: "Usually it's the Democrats mired in infighting, unable to hold their coalition together." In retrospect, this was probably mistaken and the GOP's fiercer tribalism helped carry Trump to victory (along with an undemocratic Electoral College, Russian meddling, and Fox News brainwashing).

Throughout the 90s, Republicans were criticized as "fierce ideologues," but now the WSJ's editorial page has pretty much gone along with Trump's trade agenda. Lindsey Graham said GOP voters need to choose between conservatism and Trumpism, urging the "soul" of the party was at stake. The "leaders" more pliable than I gave them credit for, all too willing to accommodate a frankly deplorable base for some of that GOP Inc. money and power.

If people want to say obese nincompoops braving the Iowa cold to see Trump at a rally are cult members, sure, I'll accept that. But the leaders in the Senate chamber are not. The people at meetings who take turns saying what they most love about Trump are not believers. Mike Pence prays to an invisible god, not an orange one.

The conventional wisdom had been a version of Hotelling applied to political campaigns: The person closest to the center will win the most votes. Romney's campaign manager said they'd win the primary running as a "severe conservative," and then, like an Etch-A-Sketch, Romney2.0 would paint his opponent as the real extremist.

Now people want to say that it's not about running to the center but galvanizing the base. Clinton blaming "Bernie Bros" and progressives who refuse to vote for her means that the Democratic Party's solution is to nominate more leftist candidates.

The election with perhaps the highest percentage of ignorant voters is the one at the top of the ticket. There definitely is something to "negative partisanship" and people voting against candidates. It's why Senators rarely win the presidency in the modern era (they have a national record). Obama was an exception because he wasn't in Congress for the Iraq War vote, among other things. Trump could brag about how he'd save things, rarely golf, and so on because there was no actual record.

For this reason, I think Buttigieg is the Democrats' best bet for winning. Gay is the new Black. I prefer Sanders, who would also have a chance at beating Trump, but he's less likely to win.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.

Last edited by Cain; 7th February 2020 at 07:13 PM.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 07:12 PM   #103
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 11,454
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
As long as America keeps living a long way beyond its means, a recession is always going to be just the next bit of bad financial news away. The USA has a total deficit of almost US$23 trillion, rising by US$1 million every 48 seconds (US$1.8 billion per day!)

https://www.worldometers.info/us-debt-clock/

This is unsustainable in the long term.
If and when it crashes, Trump will blame it on Obama.
Stacyhs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 09:30 PM   #104
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't think that your conclusion follows from the premise at all.
I didn't state a syllogism. If I had stated a syllogism then be assured that the conclusion would have followed from the premise. I give no guarantee that the premises would be true.

The issue is a statistical one. The turnout at primaries is more or less a predictor of the turnout at the elections.

So if the turnout is low for the primaries it suggests that there will not be the required high turnout to beat Trump.

In 2016 Trump actually lost ground in the swing seats with respect to the Republican vote for Romney. But Clinton lost even more ground with respect to the Democrat vote for Obama.

Those people need to come back.
Quote:
I don't have a very strong preference for which Democrat to choose, but the choice between Trump and the Democratic nominee is easy-peasy.
I am guessing you voted against Trump in 2016, right? This year you will do the same, so your vote won't be any change on 2016.

What we are looking for is people who were not galvanised to vote against Trump in 2016 but will be galvanised to vote against him in November.

Whoever gets the nomination will need to start to generate that momentum.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 10:05 PM   #105
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,440
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
The point was that when you cry wolf all the time, people will ignore your cries for help when there really is a wolf.
That would only work if the Republicans stopped fielding wolves.
__________________
ETTD
Everything Trump Touches Dies
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 10:09 PM   #106
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,863
If the last 30 years are any indication, Trump has favorable odds of winning a second term due to:

A) Being an incumbent - I cautioned about this in 2016 with Clinton
B) Benefitting from the economic performance.
C) Trump said a million things in his 2016 douche-baggery that would have sunk any other candidate

That being said. 2016 should be a lesson for everybody; Not because Trump won that election, but because polls were wrong. Those polls drove a significant portion of the press coverage and estimates on the results.

People keep saying Bernie wouldn't stand a chance against Trump. I would say I'd not bet my money Trump loses... But I'm NOT into writing people off either
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 7th February 2020 at 10:13 PM.
Grizzly Bear is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 10:40 PM   #107
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
That being said. 2016 should be a lesson for everybody; Not because Trump won that election, but because polls were wrong. Those polls drove a significant portion of the press coverage and estimates on the results.
And yet I could only find one poll that was wrong outside of its margin of error.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 10:43 PM   #108
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 8,401
Two factors that people keep getting all wrong in these predictions...

1. The myth of the "good economy": It isn't and it hasn't been in decades. If it were, Trump's appeals to common people's troubles wouldn't have worked. Americans identified with talk of things going badly in the USA because they feel things going badly for themselves.

2. Dividing political positions primarily along the left-right spectrum and talking about the "middle" between them: That might have been the most relevant division or spectrum before, but now it's secondary to the one with one side favoring the mega-rich, who are associated with government & career politicians & intellectual arrogance, and one side favoring the rest who keep getting poorer, who are associated with private business & down-to-earthiness. The last election was a classic example of the former versus the latter, and the latter lost. The "middle" and "independents" and "undecideds" aren't actually that at all; they're just picking their position based primarily on this other spectrum instead, which ends up merely looking like it's a bit to the left or right by coincidence (whether they're even aware of this themselves or not; it's easy to be misled because both parties are essentially trying to sell themselves as being on the same end of this spectrum and say the other party is at the other end).

Point 1, as long as the real-world economy continues its gradual erosion for normal people or even just levels off but still doesn't start to get noticibly better (forget about indicators that only indicate how much richer the already-mega-rich keep getting), favors the party that's had less power for the last few years of not helping, which is currently the Democrats. It will stop favoring the out-of-power party only if & when things start turning around, or at least the people see a party actually finally start trying to turn things around.

Point 2 is more precarious; which side it favors depends on which kind of Democrat we end up with. If they hand Trump another corporate-political machine insider like last time, Trump has the advantage again because he'll still pretend to be populist and even a fake populist beats a CPMI. Putting this factor on the Democrat's side requires sending in a populist against the fake populist. (And, because of the high correlation between Republicanism and Christianity, which today manifests largely as a victim/martyr complex with gods & magic thrown in, point 2 might have a bit of a tendency to favor Republicans built in, which a Democrat would need to be especially far from a CPMI to overcome.)

Last edited by Delvo; 7th February 2020 at 10:47 PM.
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 10:56 PM   #109
Robin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 11,659
Originally Posted by bobdroege7 View Post
Me too, I would really go for a moderate democrat, but Klobachar is the closest to my political views other than the billionaire who has climate as issue number one.

And Iowa, last I heard was a red state anyway, making prediction based on the turnout in that state is folly.
As I originally said that the Iowa result is too early to spot a trend. Watch the next primaries. Low turnout in them predicts low turnout in the Presidential election. Not consistently, but enough for it to be an issue.
Quote:
I don't care, at the end I'll vote against Trump, even if it's Bernie.
And did you vote against Trump last time?

The question, how many who did not vote against Trump last time, will vote against him this time?

I don't know. Maybe there are some who didn't vote against him because they did not think there was a serious possibility of him becoming President and this time they will vote.

Or maybe there are those who couldn't be bothered to vote against Trump in 2016 have seen that the sky hasn't fallen and this time will be even less likely to vote against him.

I don't know, but we do have the correlation between primary turnout and Presidential
election turnout, and this indicator is, so far, looking in Trump's favour.
__________________
The non-theoretical character of metaphysics would not be in itself a defect; all arts have this non-theoretical character without thereby losing their high value for personal as well as for social life. The danger lies in the deceptive character of metaphysics; it gives the illusion of knowledge without actually giving any knowledge. This is the reason why we reject it. - Rudolf Carnap "Philosophy and Logical Syntax"
Robin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th February 2020, 11:46 PM   #110
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,440
Any ambiguity favors Trump: enough people will look for excuses to vote for him to validate their 2016 decision.
__________________
ETTD
Everything Trump Touches Dies
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 12:46 AM   #111
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 28,151
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
If and when it crashes, Trump will blame it on Obama.
And more importantly there is a right-wing propaganda machine in the shape of FoxNews and talk radio who will convince a significant chunk of the electorate that it was Obama's fault.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 12:52 AM   #112
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 28,151
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Two factors that people keep getting all wrong in these predictions...

1. The myth of the "good economy":
It might very well be a myth (for all bar the top n%) but it's a myth that people are willing to believe. People's memories are very malleable and so if they keep getting told that things were terrible 4 years ago when President Trump came to office and they're much better now then they may be inclined to believe it.

So much of the economy is driven by debt these days and that debt is drive by sentiment. Someone might believe that they are better off now than they were 4 years ago because they have a nice new truck parked in the driveway. The fact that they borrowed to buy the truck and so from a "net worth" point of view they're actually worse off is neither here nor there - they felt confident enough about future earnings to take on that debt.

As long as the economy ticks over, they are fine because they can continue to make payments on that truck. When there is a contraction and the truck has to go back then they'll blame the person who is President at the time, not the one who crashed the economy and certainly not themselves for needlessly taking on debt.
The Don is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 03:06 AM   #113
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,690
Originally Posted by The Atheist View Post
Certainly will be if a recession bites in the middle of the year, and that looks increasingly likely.
A recession will take time to impact working people. I'm not sure there is enough time left before the election for that pain to translate to the electorate. The Dems need to be on a negative message of Trump is crazy, Trump is stupid, Trump is corrupt, Trump is a bigot. They should be on a positive message of, MEDICARE and MEDICADE if you need it, cheaper college (not free) and rewrite the tax cut to put money in the hands of consumers.

The mind reels at why there is not a Dem PAC running constant negative adds on Trump all over social and traditional media.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 10:55 AM   #114
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 19,690
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Right, right. Bush may have been Literally Hitler, but Trump is Hitler 3000, or Double Hitler, or Super Turbo Hitler Extreme, or something.
Trump is certainly no Hitler. Hitler's death camps were way more efficient than Trump's are.

https://www.propublica.org/article/s...nt-to-know-why
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band. A vote for Trump is a vote for treason.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 12:14 PM   #115
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 3,865
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
The mind reels at why there is not a Dem PAC running constant negative adds on Trump all over social and traditional media.
There's no need for that with CNN, the NY Times, MSNBC, and the Hollywood glitterati. If they ran negative ads on Trump, they'd only be interrupting the already non-stop TDS programming.

"We now interrupt our normal TDS feature programming to bring you an anti-Trump advertisement by a Dem PAC".
__________________
I drink to the general joy o' th' whole table. --William Shakespeare
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 12:25 PM   #116
newyorkguy
Penultimate Amazing
 
newyorkguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: NY
Posts: 10,494
I'm torn because, as I have posted before, if I'm a Trump supporter the numbers don't really work. He loses the popular vote by 2.9 million votes, the biggest losing margin any presidential 'winner' ever had. He wins the electoral college because he won two states by a total of less than 200,000 votes. His poll numbers have been bad. Overall, the worst of any president ever.

People who don't like him really don't like him. He's done a lot of strange things that even his supporters don't try and defend. His major claim is the economy has been very good while he's been in office but I don't know if he can make a credible case that it's because he is president. His supporters will say they believe it but tracking indicates it is all part of a trend that began when the 2009 recession ended. Trump was just in the right place at the right time.

As a candidate, he's got so many negatives that in normal times he'd be unelectable. Except these are not normal times. I guess that's what Trump has going. These are not normal times.

Last edited by newyorkguy; 8th February 2020 at 12:26 PM.
newyorkguy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 12:40 PM   #117
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,919
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
There's no need for that with CNN, the NY Times, MSNBC, and the Hollywood glitterati. If they ran negative ads on Trump, they'd only be interrupting the already non-stop TDS programming.
....
You and the Trumpers seem to confuse "negative ads" with "accurately reporting facts."
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 01:02 PM   #118
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,919
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
It might very well be a myth (for all bar the top n%) but it's a myth that people are willing to believe. People's memories are very malleable and so if they keep getting told that things were terrible 4 years ago when President Trump came to office and they're much better now then they may be inclined to believe it.
.....

For some people they really were terrible 4 years ago. Let's hope they realize that Trump hasn't made them better.
Quote:
President Trump boasts constantly about the economy. The stock market is near record highs! Unemployment remains near record lows! As Friday’s jobs release reveals, discouraged workers are returning to the workforce!

Au contraire, say many on the Democratic side — it’s a mirage. Manufacturing is in the doldrums. Capital spending is decreasing. We are living through a retail apocalypse. In a New York Times opinion piece, Obama-era treasury counselor Steven Rattner sums it up: “The economy is not as good as it looks.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...about-economy/

Quote:
The Economy Is Not as Good as It Looks
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/o...sultPosition=1
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 01:10 PM   #119
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,494
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
It might very well be a myth (for all bar the top n%) but it's a myth that people are willing to believe. People's memories are very malleable and so if they keep getting told that things were terrible 4 years ago when President Trump came to office and they're much better now then they may be inclined to believe it.
It's also disturbing how much of the economy is based on faith. To Trump's credit, if he can get people to believe things are going well, a little irrational exuberance, then it's self-fulfilling, to an extent. Despite all of the lies in the 2016 campaign, I was momentarily taken aback when Trump held out the BLS job numbers for his first complete month in office. Journalists said, "but you called those numbers fake." He declared that they used to be fake but now they're real. Of course, the methodology was unchanged.

Trump wants tax cuts and rate cuts. We're running relatively high deficits in a juiced economy, so what fiscal and monetary tools will be available when a recession inevitably strikes? I wouldn't be surprised if Trump figured he needs to "put America back to work" and intensifies his trade wars. The worst-case scenario is if he decides to start real wars.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2020, 01:14 PM   #120
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,501
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
There's no need for that with CNN, the NY Times, MSNBC, and the Hollywood glitterati. If they ran negative ads on Trump, they'd only be interrupting the already non-stop TDS programming.

"We now interrupt our normal TDS feature programming to bring you an anti-Trump advertisement by a Dem PAC".
Only a nut job would refer to reporting the actual facts about Trump and his administration as Trump Derangement Syndrome. That you don't care about the facts doesn't make them less factual.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:21 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.