Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sinn Fein

2020: The Race For the White House - The Good Place

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I think Booker, O'Rourke, and Klobuchar will be happy with that draw - gives them a better chance to stand out.

The downside might be TV audience - but that group goes first, so I think they should do ok - and media reaction will be just as important as actual eyeballs on the debate itself.

I'd disagree. Every candidate should want to be vs Biden, particularly the 3 you mention. They are going to get movement vs him, not vs Warren or others. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the top 10 would be on one night and the bottom 10 the next.  I didn't realize they would be mixed up like that.

Do they all get an equal amount of questions/time?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Juxtatarot said:

I thought the top 10 would be on one night and the bottom 10 the next.  I didn't realize they would be mixed up like that.

Do they all get an equal amount of questions/time?  

They were specifically trying to avoid a kid's table to give everyone a fair shake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, prefontaine said:

They were specifically trying to avoid a kid's table to give everyone a fair shake. 

I know they were trying to do that, but I think that's dumb. What's the point in putting De Blasio and Gabbard on the same stage as Warren or Beto? The first two aren't really viable candidates.

I mean - I guess I get it for the first debate. But I hope its the only one that's like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, prefontaine said:

I'd disagree. Every candidate should want to be vs Biden, particularly the 3 you mention. They are going to get movement vs him, not vs Warren or others. 

At this stage they just need to stand out - its not about Biden, yet.  In fact, I would argue their race is actually against each other - just to get into the top-tier of candidates.  Once you are in the top-tier - then you can target Biden.

I think they will get ample air time on the Warren night to have a moment, and stand above the crowded field.  On the Biden night - I expect he and Sanders will get the bulk of the airtime.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sinn Fein said:

At this stage they just need to stand out - its not about Biden, yet.  In fact, I would argue their race is actually against each other - just to get into the top-tier of candidates.  Once you are in the top-tier - then you can target Biden.

I think they will get ample air time on the Warren night to have a moment, and stand above the crowded field.  On the Biden night - I expect he and Sanders will get the bulk of the airtime.

 

 

Beto is going to rock it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, whoknew said:

I know they were trying to do that, but I think that's dumb. What's the point in putting De Blasio and Gabbard on the same stage as Warren or Beto? The first two aren't really viable candidates.

I mean - I guess I get it for the first debate. But I hope its the only one that's like this.

July debate(s) will have the same set-up.

 

The 3rd debate (not sure if it is scheduled) will be pared down significantly - maybe to only the top-8.  Candidates have to poll at 2% in 3 polls this summer, and have 130,000 unique donors.  Right now, I think 6 would qualify - with Klobuchar and Booker also likely to qualify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

July debate(s) will have the same set-up.

 

The 3rd debate (not sure if it is scheduled) will be pared down significantly - maybe to only the top-8.  Candidates have to poll at 2% in 3 polls this summer, and have 130,000 unique donors.  Right now, I think 6 would qualify - with Klobuchar and Booker also likely to qualify.

 

That's disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, whoknew said:

 

Beto is going to rock it. 

I certainly think this is his chance.  I also think another reason you don't want to be up against Biden (at least at this stage) if you are O'Rourke - I think you want to make your own case about why you should be President, and act like you are the front-runner, and not someone trying to knock off the front-runner.  I think Beto can pull that off on his night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NEW — the internal polling data by the Trump campaign in March showed a double digit lead for Biden in Pennsylvania 55-39 and Wisconsin 51-41, and had Biden leading by seven points in Florida. Story w/

@Santucci

&

@wsteaks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sinn Fein said:

Looks like Warren got stuck at the kids table.
Plus side is that she should be able to stand out quite easily in that group
Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg and Harris - its going to be a tough group for them to stand out - but they get the side-by-side comparison.

My 1st reaction was that this was fantastic for Warren being separate for the others in Top 5. Are you thinking it'll have a Kids table stigma even though unintentionally?
Wish it wasn't so top heavy Night Two,  "the lower six" candidates can't be happy. It was going to be bad enough to get air time with just Biden/Sanders together.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A not-so-nice part of me likes seeing conservatives overreach with efforts to roll back progressive legislation because of the backlash it will get from people who might not normally vote Democratic or even at all. Because if we are heading towards a record turnout and the under-40s, with their 20-35 blue voting edge, vote at record levels, Donald is toast next November. The votes can't fall crazily enough for him to withstand 75-80 million popular votes for the Dem candidate.

I have trouble seeing a 156 million turnout but people who study it for a living apparently don't. That would be something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

At this stage they just need to stand out - its not about Biden, yet.  In fact, I would argue their race is actually against each other - just to get into the top-tier of candidates.  Once you are in the top-tier - then you can target Biden.

I think they will get ample air time on the Warren night to have a moment, and stand above the crowded field.  On the Biden night - I expect he and Sanders will get the bulk of the airtime.

 

Q: were the groups chosen by the DNC, DCCC, or another entity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mystery Achiever said:

My 1st reaction was that this was fantastic for Warren being separate for the others in Top 5. Are you thinking it'll have a Kids table stigma even though unintentionally?
Wish it wasn't so top heavy Night Two,  "the lower six" candidates can't be happy. It was going to be bad enough to get air time with just Biden/Sanders together.

 

 

I think its inevitable when you get 4 of the top 5 in one side, and Warren in the other side.  I know everyone wanted parity - but the better way would have been to take Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow, and draft up teams, with a snake draft.

 

1.1 - Biden

1.2 - Sanders
2.1 - Warren

2.2 - Harris
3.1 - Buttigieg

3.2 - O'Rourke
4.1 - Booker

4.2 - Klobuchar
5.1 - Yang

5.2 - Gillibrand
6.1 - Inslee

6.2 - Castro
7.1 - Gabbard

7.2 - Hickenlooper
8.1 - Bennet

8.2 - Ryan
9.1 - Delaney

9.2 - Swalwell
10.1 - Williamson

10.2 - de Blasio

 

Night 1 - Biden, Harris, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Yang, Castro, Gabbard, Ryan, Delaney, de Blasio

Night 2 - Sanders, Warren, O'Rourke, Booker, Gillibrand, Inslee, Hickenlooper, Bennet, Swalwell, Williamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Quint said:

Q: were the groups chosen by the DNC, DCCC, or another entity?

per NBC:

To decide the matchups, candidates' names were drawn manually at NBC News’ headquarters at 30 Rockefeller Plaza in New York. One representative from each of the qualifying campaigns was invited to attend the draw along with officials from the Democratic National Committee. Campaign representatives saw the paper slip with their respective candidate's name on it before it was folded and placed inside the box.

A representative from NBC News Standards & Practices conducted the draw.

Candidates were divided into two groups: those who polled on average at or above 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday, June 12, and those who polled on average below 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sinn Fein said:

per NBC:

To decide the matchups, candidates' names were drawn manually at NBC News’ headquarters at 30 Rockefeller Plaza in New York. One representative from each of the qualifying campaigns was invited to attend the draw along with officials from the Democratic National Committee. Campaign representatives saw the paper slip with their respective candidate's name on it before it was folded and placed inside the box.

A representative from NBC News Standards & Practices conducted the draw.

Candidates were divided into two groups: those who polled on average at or above 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday, June 12, and those who polled on average below 2 percent through midnight on Wednesday.

thanks. i would have preferred the Snake Draft Method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

 

7 Senators

3 Representatives

2 Mayors

2 Former Representatives

1 Former Vice President

1 Governor

1 Former Governor

1 Former Cabinet Member

1 Author

1 Entrepreneur 

 


 

Prior to Barack Obama in 2008, it used to be that being a governor was the best way to win the nomination. Americans in both political parties seemed to believe that the executive experience of governorship was the closest thing to Presidential experience.  But we seem to have moved away from that now. First Obama, then Trump, and now 2 governors out of 20 candidates (and very unlikely that either of them will be the nominee.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I think its inevitable when you get 4 of the top 5 in one side, and Warren in the other side.  I know everyone wanted parity - but the better way would have been to take Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow, and draft up teams, with a snake draft.

I have to say, when I first heard about the process, Sanders and Rice drafting Pro Bowl teams went through my mind. :lol:
I do like your lineups. :thumbup:

Edited by Mystery Achiever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

 

I think its inevitable when you get 4 of the top 5 in one side, and Warren in the other side.  I know everyone wanted parity - but the better way would have been to take Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow, and draft up teams, with a snake draft.

 

1.1 - Biden

1.2 - Sanders
2.1 - Warren

2.2 - Harris
3.1 - Buttigieg

3.2 - O'Rourke
4.1 - Booker

4.2 - Klobuchar
5.1 - Yang

5.2 - Gillibrand
6.1 - Inslee

6.2 - Castro
7.1 - Gabbard

7.2 - Hickenlooper
8.1 - Bennet

8.2 - Ryan
9.1 - Delaney

9.2 - Swalwell
10.1 - Williamson

10.2 - de Blasio

 

Night 1 - Biden, Harris, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Yang, Castro, Gabbard, Ryan, Delaney, de Blasio

Night 2 - Sanders, Warren, O'Rourke, Booker, Gillibrand, Inslee, Hickenlooper, Bennet, Swalwell, Williamson

Howard Schultz, coffee boy for the events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

Looks like Warren got stuck at the kids table.

Plus side is that she should be able to stand out quite easily in that group.

 

Biden, Sanders, Buttigieg and Harris - its going to be a tough group for them to stand out - but they get the side-by-side comparison.

 

ETA - tough group for Yang - wish he was in the other group.  Gillibrand won't be happy either.

I bet Gabbard gives her a run for her money.

Edited by rustycolts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

 

I think its inevitable when you get 4 of the top 5 in one side, and Warren in the other side.  I know everyone wanted parity - but the better way would have been to take Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow, and draft up teams, with a snake draft.

 

1.1 - Biden

1.2 - Sanders
2.1 - Warren

2.2 - Harris
3.1 - Buttigieg

3.2 - O'Rourke
4.1 - Booker

4.2 - Klobuchar
5.1 - Yang

5.2 - Gillibrand
6.1 - Inslee

6.2 - Castro
7.1 - Gabbard

7.2 - Hickenlooper
8.1 - Bennet

8.2 - Ryan
9.1 - Delaney

9.2 - Swalwell
10.1 - Williamson

10.2 - de Blasio

 

Night 1 - Biden, Harris, Buttigieg, Klobuchar, Yang, Castro, Gabbard, Ryan, Delaney, de Blasio

Night 2 - Sanders, Warren, O'Rourke, Booker, Gillibrand, Inslee, Hickenlooper, Bennet, Swalwell, Williamson

Not sure why it bugs me that Bullock and Moulton are being written out as they both seem like good people, but anyway...

 

Another way I thought of this was brackets: moderate-liberal side or conference & a progressive-DemSoc side or conference.

 

I don't really see Sanders and Biden competing for the same ground really. They will ultimately for some portion of the undecided, but right now Warren is competing with Sanders not Biden IMO. Maybe this is more like DNC Establishment vs Changemaker. 

I'm almost 100 certain I will botch this, but so:

DNCe:

Biden

Harris

Klobuchar

Booker

Hickenlooper

Bennet

Swalwell

Gillibrand

Bullock

Castro

Ryan

 

Changemaker:

Sanders

Warren

Buttigieg

O'Rourke

Yang

Inslee

Moulton

Gabbard

Delaney

Williamson

de Blasio

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Another way I thought of this was brackets: moderate-liberal side or conference & a progressive-DemSoc side or conference.

Its not a terrible idea, but two challenges I see are that you are pre-defining the candidates (and probably not how they would define themselves), and assuming you found the perfect ideological divide - then you end up with two nights of people largely agreeing with each other.

I think you want a mix of opinions to be able to compare and contrast.  Obviously there are a lot of similar positions among the candidates, but the more differences you can highlight for the voters, the better, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/14/2019 at 1:50 AM, krista4 said:

Can you sell me on Yang?  I don't mean that as a challenge, but I know virtually nothing about him and respect your views.  He is, however, the only person for whom I've already seen posters/yard signs, so going on that infallible metric, he's likely to win.

https://go.cnn.com/?type=episode&id=2195502

This is Yang's town hall on CNN (need a cable subscription to watch)

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8la_6gtnKA

This is a Yang town hall in Des Moines - via Des Moines Register (no subscription necessary)

 

ETA - watching the 2nd one now - worthwhile to watch.  He raises some really good points - specifically around automation and job loss, and how his Freedom Dividend can help.

Edited by Sinn Fein
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a primary debate in June.  The first caucus is six months and change away.  The election is nearly a year and a half away.  Does it really matter that much how they populate this thing?  Three weeks after the debate, everybody will have forgotten who was on stage with who.

Edited by IvanKaramazov
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

It's a primary debate in June.  The first caucus is six months and change away.  The election is nearly a year and a half away.  Does it really matter that much how they populate this thing?  Three weeks after the debate, everybody will have forgotten who was on stage with who.

yes and no.

It won't change the front runners.  But, it could shift the order a bit - and heading into the fall, momentum is important.  And, it could lift someone out of the masses and into the next level.  At the next level, people will get a better chance to see and hear policies, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they’re having multiple tiers, randomizing them seems the right way to do it. Varsity and JV (based on objective criteria) also seems defensible. I don’t think there’s any other reasonable way to go about it.

Also, to me, letting 20 people qualify seems like the absolute upper limit. If, the week before the first debate, you’re not in the top 20 by a reasonable and predetermined set of criteria, go ahead and end your campaign now or join a third party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New @postandcourier-@ChangePolls 2020 Democratic primary poll in South Carolina: 

 

- @JoeBiden 37%

- @ewarren 17%

- @PeteButtigieg 11%

- @KamalaHarris 9%

- @BernieSanders 9%

- @CoryBooker 5%

- @BetoORourke 4%

- @AndrewYang 3%

 

All others at 1% or below.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mystery Achiever said:

That's a big deal number for Pete in SC.

I hate to be blunt about this but I strongly suspect its 100% white. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if he has a ceiling on that front, that could still get him some delegates (I don't know what the threshold is)

ETA- Threshold is 15%, but there would probably be some gains for all at the top tier(which may  not be the same when we hit 2020, of course) as others drop out.

Edited by Mystery Achiever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, timschochet said:

I hate to be blunt about this but I strongly suspect its 100% white. 

It’s not

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CBS Snapshot of early primary states.

Quote

 

CBS News first asked which candidates voters are considering supporting — and told them they could pick as many or as few as they liked. (As with many decisions people make, early in the process they'll narrow their options before settling on one.) 

Biden gets the most consideration, from a majority 55% of Democrats. Warren (49%), Harris (45%) and Bernie Sanders (43%) are trailing closely in that regard. 

Pete Buttigieg is being considered by just under a third (32%) across the earliest states. And in keeping with their view that the field is too large, on average the number of candidates voters are considering is actually relatively small — just under four.

Biden is the most effective at translating consideration into a first-choice vote. He leads across the early states in vote preference with 31% of Democratic primary voters, compared to Warren's 17%, Sanders' 16%, and Harris' 10%. Biden converts most of those considering him into picking him as their first choice when pressed, but fewer of those considering Warren or Sanders — roughly a third – pick those candidates as their first choice.

 

Joe Biden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31%
Elizabeth Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17%
Bernie Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16%
Kamala Harris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%
Pete Buttigieg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8%
Beto O’Rourke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5%
Cory Booker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2%
Amy Klobuchar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2%
Andrew Yang . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%
Julian Castro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%
Kirsten Gillibrand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More internal polling from the Trump campaign:

 

Trump v Biden:

Trump down by 7 in Iowa

Trump down by 8 in North Carolina

Trump down by 17 in Virginia

Trump down by 1 in Ohio

Trump down by 6 in Georgia

Trump down by 14 in Minnesota

Trump down by 15 in Maine

  • Like 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

I hate to be blunt about this but I strongly suspect its 100% white. 

Peteyjudge is a verrrry white guy and that's all some folk need to know to assume he won't care about them. I am not from an oppressed or emerging class, but i had given up on the process as much as any Nazi or wore-out person of color. I watch a late nite show and see a guy who cares about me, who cares about everybody, wants everybody to care about everybody and everybody to get the care they need and makes me believe he can have an effect on that. I pay attention, start shouting him up, here & elsewhere, and now i'll be working for him for the first time i done politics in 35 years.

Folks called him out for not having policies, he didnt right off go "well, here - thisthis&this, i'm your policy #####" He said "i want you to know my values before i tell you my plans". And he took #### and folks backed off him when they say momentum is everything but, months later, just before he has to debate competitors on poicy, vvvvroomp, out comes policy that's knockin the naysayers out.

To sum it up, if you don't like da Bootyjudge, you aint paid attention. I get it if you havent, maybe even when you wont, but i know he'll be our next President because i know what will happen when you do. nufced

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bucky86 said:

More internal polling from the Trump campaign:

Trump v Biden:

Trump down by 7 in Iowa

Trump down by 8 in North Carolina

Trump down by 17 in Virginia

Trump down by 1 in Ohio

Trump down by 6 in Georgia

Trump down by 14 in Minnesota

Trump down by 15 in Maine

2015 polls:

  • Iowa (August 7): Clinton +3 (Final result: Trump +9.5)
  • North Carolina (July 2): Clinton +3 (Final result: Trump +3.6)
  • Virginia (July 15): Clinton +10 (Final result: Clinton +5.4)
  • Ohio (August 7): Clinton +5 (Final result: Trump +8.1)
  • Georgia (October 15): Trump +9 (Final result: Trump +5.1)
  • Minnesota (July 30): Clinton +5 (Final result: Clinton +1.5)
  • Maine: no head-to-head polls in 2015 (but a multi-candidate poll in October showed a stronger preference to Sanders or Clinton) (Final result: Clinton +2.9)

The takeaway for me is that the leading candidate lost ground in every poll (by an average of 7.4 points). Also, Trump at -1 in Ohio is very good news for him. He won't lose Ohio or Georgia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NYT interactive piece: 

18 Questions.
21 Democrats.
Here’s What They Said.
We tracked down the 2020 Democrats and asked them the same set of questions.

 

THE QUESTIONS
1. In an ideal world, would anyone own handguns?
2. Would your focus be improving the Affordable Care Act or replacing it with single payer?
3. Do you think it’s possible for the next president to stop climate change?
4. Do you think Israel meets international standards of human rights?
5. Who is your hero, and why?
6. Would there be American troops in Afghanistan at the end of your first term?
7. How many hours of sleep do you get a night?
8. Do you think illegal immigration is a major problem in the United States?
9. Where would you go on your first international trip as president?
10. Describe the last time you were embarrassed. Why?
11. Do you think President Trump has committed crimes in office?
12. Do you support or oppose the death penalty?
13. Should tech giants like Facebook, Amazon and Google be broken up?
14. Are you open to expanding the size of the Supreme Court?
15. When did your family first arrive in the United States, and how?
16. What is your comfort food on the campaign trail?
17. What do you do to relax?
18. Does anyone deserve to have a billion dollars?

 

 

ABOUT THE PROJECT

The New York Times reached out to 22 Democratic presidential candidates to ask them the same set of questions on video. Twenty-one accepted the invitation.

Joseph R. Biden Jr. declined to participate despite repeated requests since late April.

Most of the candidates visited the studio in our New York City office; for a few who could not, we traveled to Iowa, Texas and Washington, D.C. The sessions took place between the beginning of March and early June. During the interviews, we asked candidates to answer each question briefly — with a simple yes or no, or another terse, direct reply — before explaining their views at greater length.

One candidate, Elizabeth Warren, who was the first to be interviewed, returned for a second session after we added a number of questions to our initial list. We did not ask John Hickenlooper when his family first arrived in the United States because we added that question after his interview.

In the case of one question — regarding President Trump’s legal issues — the candidates answered at different points during the completion of the investigation by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III, so their answers reflected the facts available to them at the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/16/2019 at 11:46 AM, Bucky86 said:

More internal polling from the Trump campaign:

 

Trump v Biden:

Trump down by 7 in Iowa

Trump down by 8 in North Carolina

Trump down by 17 in Virginia

Trump down by 1 in Ohio

Trump down by 6 in Georgia

Trump down by 14 in Minnesota

Trump down by 15 in Maine

These two are huge. If you assume the Dems are gonna win back Michigan and Pennsylvania, which seems likely IMO, they need to find two more EC votes. I'm skeptical of Wisconsin (very non-college white, very into voter suppression) and Florida (Florida), so the more legitimate options they have to get them over the threshold the better.

Edited by TobiasFunke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TobiasFunke said:

These two are huge. If you assume the Dems are gonna win back Michigan and Pennsylvania, which seems likely IMO, they need to find one two more EC votes. I'm skeptical of Wisconsin (very non-college white, very into voter suppression) and Florida (Florida), so the more legitimate options they have to get them over the threshold the better.

If the Democrats win Pennsylvania, they win the Presidency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, timschochet said:

If the Democrats win Pennsylvania, they win the Presidency. 

This is not remotely true and you should probably stop saying it. 

Example

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, timschochet said:

It will be true for 2020. 

It might end up being correct, but it also might be correct that if the Dems win California they win the presidency.  That doesn't make Pennsylvania the lynchpin or the "tipping point" state. That's most likely going to be Wisconsin, Arizona, Iowa or North Carolina. I strongly suspect every election expert would agree with that analysis- here's one that does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TobiasFunke said:

It might end up being correct, but it also might be correct that if the Dems win California they win the presidency.  That doesn't make Pennsylvania the lynchpin or the "tipping point" state. That's most likely going to be Wisconsin, Arizona, Iowa or North Carolina. I strongly suspect every election expert would agree with that analysis- here's one that does.

I think Tim is more right, than wrong on this.  Obviously its not simply winning Pennsylvania, but I think if you win Pennsylvania, you are likely to win similar states - like Michigan and Wisconsin.

And, if you flip those three states - its very difficult for the GOP to win.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sinn Fein said:

I think Tim is more right, than wrong on this.  Obviously its not simply winning Pennsylvania, but I think if you win Pennsylvania, you are likely to win similar states - like Michigan and Wisconsin.

And, if you flip those three states - its very difficult for the GOP to win.

Yeah there's obviously correlation, but the margins are so thin that it is definitely possible to win Pennsylvania without Wisconsin, especially given the slight differences in the demographics.

If the Dems win Pennsylvania by 5 points, that's another story of course. Hard to imagine they don't win Wisconsin in that scenario (I consider Michigan closer to "leans Dem" than a tossup). But if they only win Pennsylvania by a point or so, I think they lose Wisconsin. So they need a backup plan involving states with different demographics, or ideally multiple backup plans.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

Yeah there's obviously correlation, but the margins are so thin that it is definitely possible to win Pennsylvania without Wisconsin, especially given the slight differences in the demographics.

If the Dems win Pennsylvania by 5 points, that's another story of course. Hard to imagine they don't win Wisconsin in that scenario (I consider Michigan closer to "leans Dem" than a tossup). But if they only win Pennsylvania by a point or so, I think they lose Wisconsin. So they need a backup plan involving states with different demographics, or ideally multiple backup plans.

Certainly the Dems should also be targeting Iowa, North Carolina, and Florida - at a minimum.  Maybe toss in Arizona and Georgia.

 

I think Team Trump obviously see Florida as an important, yet not secure, state - hence the launch rally in Orlando.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.