Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

Printable View

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-03-2024, 12:23 PM
Suppressed Poet

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You are mistaken. The latest poll, taken after the debate, shows Biden and Trump tied, which I find shocking, considering Biden's debate performance. It also shows that in a hypothetical matchup, Harris trails Trump by one point, well within the 3.5 point margin of error.

I am not mistaken. The poll article you just linked literally says first in the headline:

Quote:

Only Michelle Obama bests Trump as an alternative to Biden in 2024
The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that about one-third of Democrats say Biden should drop out of the presidential race after the debate

By your own admission, Harris would do worse than Biden. You are also ignoring the fact that winning the national popular vote does not win you the election. A handful of battleground states will decide this election, and I hate to tell you that it’s not looking good for the Dems. You’re playing checkers in a game of chess.

But hey…I hope the Dems do us all a favor and pick Kamala as their nominee. They will be handing the election to Trump on a silver platter.
07-03-2024, 01:32 PM
Methais

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You are mistaken. The latest poll, taken after the debate, shows Biden and Trump tied, which I find shocking, considering Biden's debate performance. It also shows that in a hypothetical matchup, Harris trails Trump by one point, well within the 3.5 point margin of error.

You’re going to have to do better than that if you want a shot at upgrading that Intercontinental retard belt to the Retard Championship belt.

Dumbass.
07-03-2024, 01:43 PM
Tgo01

Even Nate Silver says Trump has a 66% chance of winning.

Keep in mind this is the guy who said Hillary would win in 2016, so if he's that wrong when he clearly favors the Democrats, imagine how wrong he is when he says Trump ONLY has a 66% chance of winning.

But a lot could change between now and election day. Maybe he will revise his prediction to Trump having a 95% chance of winning.

Also Nate Silver doesn't factor in Democrat cheating, so that's always a possibility for how Biden worms his way into a second term.
07-03-2024, 02:34 PM
Methais

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Even Nate Silver says Trump has a 66% chance of winning.

Keep in mind this is the guy who said Hillary would win in 2016, so if he's that wrong when he clearly favors the Democrats, imagine how wrong he is when he says Trump ONLY has a 66% chance of winning.

But a lot could change between now and election day. Maybe he will revise his prediction to Trump having a 95% chance of winning.

Also Nate Silver doesn't factor in Democrat cheating, so that's always a possibility for how Biden worms his way into a second term.

https://i.imgur.com/EsYdNtF.png
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1808230685494370446
07-03-2024, 03:23 PM
Parkbandit

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClydeR

You are mistaken. The latest poll, taken after the debate, shows Biden and Trump tied, which I find shocking, considering Biden's debate performance. It also shows that in a hypothetical matchup, Harris trails Trump by one point, well within the 3.5 point margin of error.

You're even wrong about the useless national poll.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/03/u...den-trump.html
07-03-2024, 03:43 PM
Furryrat
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClydeR

Harris is the obvious choice for several reasons..

Although her name was not on the ballot during the primaries, voters knew that a vote for Biden was a vote for Biden/Harris, giving her electoral legitimacy and avoiding the problem of having party insiders choose the candidate.
As Biden's current running mate, she is the only person who has the legal right to use the campaign war chest Biden has accumulated. If the nominee is anyone other than Harris, Biden can either contribute the money to the national party which can then spend it on the nominee's behalf, or Biden can return the money to donors, who would then be free to contribute it to the new nominee.
In the 2020 general election, a majority of voters expressed confidence in her ability to succeed to the presidency. She is already vetted.
Choosing someone else when she is the obvious successor would be divisive.

What you believe is a problem, others see as an opportunity.
They also have the problem of history. Only one sitting Vice President has won the Presidency since before the Civil War, and that was George H. W. Bush, the VP for Ronald Reagan.
07-03-2024, 04:08 PM
Gelston

Quote:

Originally Posted by Furryrat

They also have the problem of history. Only one sitting Vice President has won the Presidency since before the Civil War, and that was George H. W. Bush, the VP for Ronald Reagan.

Only 4 sitting VPs have ever ran in the national election, counting Bush. You have 5 VPs in the same time period that became President due to assassination and death in office. I don't think it is a matter of history, I think it is more a matter of being VP is usually where old people go to retire out of politics.
07-03-2024, 04:11 PM
Suppressed Poet

Not to challenge but just off the top of my head, didn’t LBJ win a landslide election victory in the 60s?

Edit: Yeah I guess he wouldn’t count since he became the sitting President after Kennedy’s assassination.
07-03-2024, 04:14 PM
Methais

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Not to challenge but just off the top of my head, didn’t LBJ win a landslide election victory in the 60s?

He was already president when he ran.
07-03-2024, 04:16 PM
Gelston

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Not to challenge but just off the top of my head, didn’t LBJ win a landslide election victory in the 60s?

He wasn't a sitting VP. He was already President.

Show 200 post(s) from this thread on one page