Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 1 minute ago, GrimTuesday said: We need to break the electoral college. No shit. How are you going to do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 Just now, illrede said: or not and wait for a Colorado-like effect to start kicking in with time. Eating edibles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 25 minutes ago, Iskaral Pust said: Pretty depressing so far. Perhaps Biden will still pull it off in the rust belt, but the fact that so many voters are still turning out for Trump is even worse than him getting elected in the first place. Agreed. The fact that it's a close race is depressing in itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illrede Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, DMC said: Eating edibles? Commodities-orientated states get metropolitan centers that eventually shift the politics. EDIT: I think just being more appealing (or less unappealing) to those states is the answer, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said: No shit. How are you going to do it? 2 minutes ago, DMC said: Eating edibles? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: Yes. They never do much for me, but I'd still take them if this election was effectively a push. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disturber of Peace Posted November 4, 2020 Author Share Posted November 4, 2020 Gotta go with someone who is more than just an empty suit who licks his finger and puts it in the air. And don't go for Obama wannabes like Beto or Buttigeg. I even saw enthusiasm for Castro here who is as insencere as Harris. In March you fortunately realized that you can't go with a socialist. Dont go for someone with AOC type ideas but rather for someone with Yang type ideas even tho he isn't perfect either ofc. Then you will get the republican douchebags out and you won't be picked on by eurodouchebags like me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illrede Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 I voted Yang in the primary. It was clearly a minority choice, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disturber of Peace Posted November 4, 2020 Author Share Posted November 4, 2020 1 minute ago, illrede said: I voted Yang in the primary. It was clearly a minority choice, though. EC sucks but what you need more is preferential voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindwalker Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 24 minutes ago, Lollygag said: I’m not sure that any polls were off exactly. So many people *do not* like change in general, including politics, and this is what Dems are all about lately and Dems really do not get this. Trump’s back to the past, Covid-denialism no scary change is like a siren’s song to their survivalist lizard brain. This silent majority stuff is crap, but people who see change as an irrational existential threat is real. It’s one thing to toy with change for the novelty of the idea all along and side with Biden, but when it comes time to actually pull the trigger, that’s very different. Think as long as the country is in this space with a major cultural change on the ballot, it's going to be tough to factor in how people land on that. A lot of Biden's pitch was "get back to normal from Covid", "don't let them take your healthcare", "get back to old-fashioned decency"... not exactly the wild kind of change you're implying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rippounet Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 It might be small comfort, but 538 had done a piece on the election with 2016-like polling errors: https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/what-the-2020-election-map-would-look-like-if-theres-a-2016-sized-polling-error/ Long story short, it could end up 270-268 for Biden. But he needs Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada (for example). In short, the polls need to be correct somewhere. And if they aren't, well, one has to wonder how the fuck the same thing happened twice in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lollygag Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 12 minutes ago, Simon Steele said: I guess I never really got your point in the first place then. Biden was about as milquetoast as a candidate can be. Yeah, that's why the right has pushed so hard on their headcanon Biden really being addled and controlled by the "radical left" and having a secret lefty agenda and he's just lying about his positions. All change-is-an-existential-threat lizard brain appeals. Dem's haven't counter messaged this properly because they're wired to more likely see change as exciting rather than threatening. https://www.salon.com/2016/06/06/study_liberals_and_conservatives_have_different_brain_structures_partner/ Quote "What’s really fascinating is that there have been a number of recent studies looking at brain structural differences between liberals and conservatives," said Saltz. "And what’s been found in several studies is that liberals tend to have a larger anterior cingulate gyrus. That is an area that is responsible for taking in new information and that impact of the new information on decision making or choices. Conservatives tended on the whole to have a larger right amygdala. Amygdala being a deeper brain structure that processes more emotional information—specifically fear-based information," Saltz explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 2 minutes ago, illrede said: I voted Yang in the primary. It was clearly a minority choice, though. That is so racist. Spoiler Definitely kidding Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 4 minutes ago, illrede said: EDIT: I think just being more appealing (or less unappealing) to those states is the answer, though. It’s not like they don’t get any support in these areas. And this same argument could be made for getting rid of it “if you want the presidency, you need more popular support of the people voting for you”. Crazy thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illrede Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 Just now, Disturber of Peace said: EC sucks but what you need more is preferential voting. Oh hell no. Extreme recursive granularity would be very bad. Our strength is clear outcomes and stark choices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGP Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 A significant portion of the US appears to have PTSD and no patience... and the other doesn't care while clearly having plenty. Sounds like a clear picture won't emerge until early morning. --- Regardless, Dejoy should be strung up by his Achilles tendons and bled out through his fucking ears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illrede Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 Just now, aceluby said: It’s not like they don’t get any support in these areas. And this same argument could be made for getting rid of it “if you want the presidency, you need more popular support of the people voting for you”. Crazy thought. You're going to have to disappoint environmentalists enough to matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 My prediction was 2016 + Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania for Biden. That doesn't look a bad guess right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 1 minute ago, Rippounet said: It might be small comfort, but 538 had done a piece on the election with 2016-like polling errors: https://fivethirtyeight.com/videos/what-the-2020-election-map-would-look-like-if-theres-a-2016-sized-polling-error/ Long story short, it could end up 270-268 for Biden. But he needs Michigan, Wisconsin, and Nevada (for example). In short, the polls need to be correct somwehere. And if they aren't, well, one has to wonder how the fuck the same thing happened twice in a row. Polls are looking relatively correct in NH, which Biden won far more easily than Clinton did. NH has some similarities with ME-2 and (to a lesser extent) PA and MI. Not sure I'm hanging my hat on that, but it's something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lollygag Posted November 4, 2020 Share Posted November 4, 2020 12 minutes ago, illrede said: Or the democrats could expand their geographic appeal, or not and wait for a Colorado-like effect to start kicking in with time. This. A lot of rural people outright say they only vote Republican because Dems ignore them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.