IheartIheartTesla

The new job numbers are quite good, which Trump is (right now) promoting in a news conference, even though he did absolutely nothing to make it happen. Still at 11% unemployment though, but expect a slight uptick in his numbers (his wayward supporters are just looking for a reason to go back in the fold)

Both the New Deal and the Civil Rights Act were ushered in by moderates, but who embraced radical change partly in response to the changing environment around them (and in Johnson's case, he did use a lot of arm-twisting to accomplish his goals, so there is something to be said for that style of accommodation). So I guess its not just how the person would fall under the political spectrum in normal times, but also how they respond to externalities. I am hopeful Biden would be in the Johnson mold.

It didnt take too long for PPP to come out with a Colorado Senate ad, and its Hickenlooper up by 11 against Gardner. Also, another poll out of NC that has Tillis down by 10, but I prefer to think its much closer than that. Peters also up fairly comfortable here in Michigan.

Steve Doocey (or whatever that muppet's name is) and Lamar Alexander have called on Trump to wear a mask...sometimes, so hopefully he will take their advice. It's quite worrisome that the US is having an uptick all over again, and even a small gesture from him can mean some of his supporters may follow suit (of course, they'll swear up and down Trump was never opposed to wearing masks). I dont see any hope for him regaining support by November since the COVID situation is not going to get better. Look for lots of demonization of the BLM protests though.

Maybe the Obama outlier points to what increased AA turnout in polls can do (I have no idea what the demographics are in Kansas City or St Louis, but it is plausible). I think AA turnout may be decisive in some states this time around, actually.

So I've heard mutterings from conservatives that the polls must be wrong, and they invariably point to the Trafalgar group that was most accurate in swing states in 2016, and which is again showing competitive races in MI/WI in 2020. Dont want to dismiss this completely out of hand, but I should note that they used a somewhat unusual methodology in 2016 that looked for 'shy' Trump voters etc...(one of their tricks was to ask who their neighbor was voting for...something I dont fully understand). Anyhoo, something to keep in mind, but again, there are reasons why 2016 methodology wont work in 2020.

Double post, but NC is somewhat important since Cunningham can ride the Biden coat tails to beat Tillis, Some of the recent polls have seen him pull ahead, so for this snapshot in time the Senate races look exciting too.

I'm not worried, but more curious about some of the states like NC that are almost too good to be true. At the same time, I know Nate Cohn and Silver have had quite the debate about the lessons from 2016, so I am also curious about the innards of these new polls (for instance, about weighing by education). At the same time, we got some good polls out of PA, and I feel more comfortable about Biden's lead there. Wisconsin too. Would be nice to see where Georgia is at the moment.

The NYT/Siena College (Upshot, I guess) polls also have good news for Biden, in nearly all the battleground states. I am concerned it may have some built in bias though (for instance, it has NC +9 for Biden among RVs). I thought Nate Cohn recognized some of the pitfalls of 2016, so we'll have to wait and see how it stacks up against other polls.

Conservatives have some sort of fantasy tied into the "Biden has dementia' strategy that Trump will wipe Biden in the debates leading to his resurgence in the polls. Of course, in reality Biden may stumble a little bit, while Trump does his usual third grade mashing of words into some stream of consciousness gibberish. In the end, it will not convince anyone and the numbers should be fairly static (in fact, in recent past elections most post-debate bumps reverted back to the pre-debate mean, IIRC). BTW, the Marquette poll with +9 is for RV, with LV it is +6. They also had a polls of Trump against Biden (LV) that was +6 end of March, so maybe they have a slight D lean?

Before discussions get too heated, let me bring up something else everyone can agree on, which is of course the British empire (unless you are Niall Ferguson). Back in the 90s (if I have my times right), India went through a period where the vestiges of colonialism were being removed, This resulted in renaming cities (Bombay became Mumbai, Madras became Chennai etc.). Even good old Victoria Terminus, train station for over a million commuters, became the Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus. Dont think any statues came down, but I also dont think there For was too much pushback regarding renaming. To me, the greater danger was and is conflating Indian identity with Hindu identity. For instance, replacing the names of places or things associated with invaders who happened to be Muslim (predating the British empire). I'd rather the names remain, rather than align myself with the ideology of a political party/movement I find loathsome.

I was looking at 2016 data, and it appears that HRC never crossed the 50 mark in 538's poll average. Biden has already done so in his 9 point lead (50.3 to 41.4, leaving about 10 percent unaccounted for). A good place to be at this time.

In my opinion the risk of a nuclear confrontation is quite low. I dont know what will eventually happen, but any conflict will be confined to ground and air only.

Boy, at this point, Trump must be looking for any good news. I dont even know what form it will take. A somewhat V shaped recovery looks unlikely, so his economic numbers are toast. Packing the courts didnt do anything for the big ticket cases (particularly immigration, his signature issue). And his mugging with a bible may even piss off some of the more....moderate evangelicals. The new 538 average puts Biden up 9 points nationally. But some of my more Trump friendly in-laws still seem to think Trump has a chance to win in a landslide, so there is that.

Yes, of course hindsight is 20/20, but the point is that impeachment today would have greater odds than 6 months ago. I think that is not such a crazy notion.