Joe Biden beats Donald Trump, officially making Trump a one-term twice impeached, twice popular-vote losing president

[SaysWho?]

Big lines in Ohio.

 

 

Don't forget that polls account for people who already voted, so regardless as to what polls say, people who early vote are considered likely voters to pollsters.

[finaljedi]

4 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

Big lines in Ohio.

 

 

Don't forget that polls account for people who already voted, so regardless as to what polls say, people who early vote are considered likely voters to pollsters.

 

I'm early voting next week in Ohio, my county is largely rural though so the line shouldn't be too bad.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

behold, voter suppression

 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 minute ago, finaljedi said:

 

I'm early voting next week in Ohio, my county is largely rural though so the line shouldn't be too bad.

Aren't you from the cincinnati area?

[Keyser_Soze]

35 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

102-year-old woman makes sure she votes.

 

 

 

You'd think at 102 years old she would have retired from beekeeping but she's still going strong!

[finaljedi]

1 minute ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Aren't you from the cincinnati area?

 

Yeah, but I live in Warren County, just outside of Mason.  I say Cincinnati because it's easier.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 minute ago, finaljedi said:

 

Yeah, but I live in Warren County, just outside of Mason.  I say Cincinnati because it's easier.

Ah makes sense. I always tell people in virginia that I'm originally from cincinnati even though I grew up in Scioto/Adams which is even further away lol

[CayceG]

Re: the 102 year old voting in a hazmat suit. 

 

We shouldn't have it be that this person has to do that to cast a vote. This isn't a wonderful story of democratic determination (even though women didn't have the vote when she was born). It's a bleak tale of how bad things have gotten. 

 

 

Additionally, my mom asked my 93 year old grandfather if he wanted her to take him to vote early this year. He said that with everything going on with the pandemic, and with the choice between Trump and Biden, there wasn't any point in him going to vote. 

[Jwheel86]

1 minute ago, CayceG said:

Additionally, my mom asked my 93 year old grandfather if he wanted her to take him to vote early this year. He said that with everything going on with the pandemic, and with the choice between Trump and Biden, there wasn't any point in him going to vote. 

 

If I wasn't in a swing state I imagine that be my attitude too. 

[outsida]

4 hours ago, PaladinSolo said:

 

 

How polls like this do we have to get before they stop calling them outliers?

[SaysWho?]

Biden puts $6 million into Texas starting today.

 

Biden makes $6M bet on Texas, ending drought for Democrats who’ve written off state for decades

WWW.DALLASNEWS.COM

---

WASHINGTON — With President Donald Trump hamstrung by a bout with COVID-19, Joe Biden is eyeing opportunity in Texas and doing something no Democratic...

 

Also, +11 Biden in Pennsylvania via Monmouth. The previous PA poll from Monmouth was actually one of Trump's better polls.

 

 

[Joe]

4 minutes ago, outsida said:

How polls like this do we have to get before they stop calling them outliers?

 

Who's they?

[Massdriver]

Biden is making bang for your buck investments into Texas. The amounts are low but seem appropriate. 

 

+11 Biden in PA has to have Republicans in a panic. It is really looking like Trump may lose this. I'm trying to imagine what could happen that would tighten the results and can't think of anything that would change how steady the race is short of some massive Biden fuck up, such as a video of him in black face or something. 

[SaysWho?]

2 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

Biden is making bang for your buck investments into Texas. The amounts are low but seem appropriate. 

 

+11 Biden in PA has to have Republicans in a panic. It is really looking like Trump may lose this. I'm trying to imagine what could happen that would tighten the results and can't think of anything that would change how steady the race is short of some massive Biden fuck up, such as a video of him in black face or something. 

 

A good reminder never to rest on your laurels.... even though this is all objectively good for Biden.

 

 

I have no idea what happens this month. Fortunately, there's no FBI director to open up an investigation into emails, but who knows, I guess? 

 

As Joe has said, though, it's a different election: fewer undecideds, and someone said it really well that Hillary's polling was like a heart monitor (up and down month to month, a good June/August/October but a bad July/September/November), while this one has been steady. So it's different, and this could be more like 2008 than 2016.

 

But each election is different, so until Biden is declared the winner, I'm not 100% satisfied. I'd rather be Biden right now than Trump, though.

 

[Firewithin]

is it too hopeful to think that all this broad daylight suppression and bullshit mail ballot stuff is going to be an epic backfire for these ghouls?

[Massdriver]

I'm still prepared for a Trump victory. It could easily happen, but the stability of the race combined with Biden making some steady gains and the virus being back as the main issue all looks very unfavorable to Trump right now. There isn't enough time for Trump to make a come back unless something drastic happens. 

[Jason]

11 minutes ago, Massdriver said:

I'm still prepared for a Trump victory. It could easily happen, but the stability of the race combined with Biden making some steady gains and the virus being back as the main issue all looks very unfavorable to Trump right now. There isn't enough time for Trump to make a come back unless something drastic happens. 

 

They're gonna have SCOTUS give it to Trump. 

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

3 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

They're gonna have SCOTUS give it to Trump. 

This 1,000,000x

 

You're a damn fool if you think otherwise

[Ghost_MH]

5 minutes ago, Jason said:

They're gonna have SCOTUS give it to Trump. 

 

States that Republicans control will just baselessly claim that the election results were fraudulent, appoint their own electors, and vote Trump in. That's when SCOTUS will rule that is a perfectly legal thing to do. Most of those battleground states that say Biden is ahead in polls for are under Republican control between now and December 14, so who's going to stop them?

[SaysWho?]

2 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

This 1,000,000x

 

You're a damn fool if you think otherwise

 

Wait, you think Biden is 100% not going to win because SCOTUS will hand the election to Trump no matter what?

[Ghost_MH]

Just now, SaysWho? said:

Wait, you think Biden isn't going to win 100% because SCOTUS will hand the election to Trump no matter what?

 

Republicans across the country are already PUBLICLY talking about propping up their own electors to vote for Trump because mail in voting has shattered people's faith in the voting process.

[SaysWho?]

1 minute ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

Republicans across the country are already PUBLICLY talking about propping up their own electors to vote for Trump because mail in voting has shattered people's faith in the voting process.

 

The only thing I saw was Florida Republicans calling the idea idiotic. And all of them could say no and this board would go, "Yeah but they SECRETLY are planning  to do this."

 

I just want people to be clear: are you guys saying, 100%, that Biden is not going to win and SCOTUS is going to make Trump the winner, guaranteed, this is what's gonna happen, Biden could landslide and he still loses?

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

The only thing I saw was Florida Republicans calling the idea idiotic. And all of them could say no and this board would go, "Yeah but they SECRETLY are planning  to do this."

 

I just want people to be clear: are you guys saying, 100%, that Biden is not going to win and SCOTUS is going to make Trump the winner, guaranteed, this is what's gonna happen, Biden could landslide and he still loses?

 

What If Trump Refuses to Concede? - The Atlantic

WWW.THEATLANTIC.COM

---

If the vote is close, Donald Trump could easily throw the election into chaos and subvert the result. Who will stop him?

 

 

Quote

In Pennsylvania, three Republican leaders told me they had already discussed the direct appointment of electors among themselves, and one said he had discussed it with Trump’s national campaign.

“I’ve mentioned it to them, and I hope they’re thinking about it too,” Lawrence Tabas, the Pennsylvania Republican Party’s chairman, told me. “I just don’t think this is the right time for me to be discussing those strategies and approaches, but [direct appointment of electors] is one of the options. It is one of the available legal options set forth in the Constitution.” He added that everyone’s preference is to get a swift and accurate count. “If the process, though, is flawed, and has significant flaws, our public may lose faith and confidence” in the election’s integrity.

 

Nothing is 100%, but if you don't think the White House has this plan already put together you're blind. Democrats should also be planning what to do if this were to happen, but we already know they're blind. Thanks to Gore v Bush, it wouldn't even take overruling a previously established precedent. They'd only need to reaffirm the previous ruling that state legislatures can take these actions if the election results are in question and they're already questioning the election results.

 

Someone has to explain why I'm wrong here, because I don't see it.

[SaysWho?]

4 minutes ago, Ghost_MH said:

 

What If Trump Refuses to Concede? - The Atlantic

WWW.THEATLANTIC.COM

---

If the vote is close, Donald Trump could easily throw the election into chaos and subvert the result. Who will stop him?

 

 

 

Nothing is 100%, but if you don't think the White House has this plan already put together you're blind. Democrats should also be planning what to do if this were to happen, but we already know they're blind. Thanks to Gore v Bush, it wouldn't even take overruling a previously established precedent. They'd only need to reaffirm the previous ruling that state legislatures can take these actions if the election results are in question and they're already questioning the election results.

 

Someone has to explain why I'm wrong here, because I don't see it.

 

Nothing is a hundred percent, but it seems like you guys are saying is that you already know the outcome. And ironically would help to demotivate the people you want to be motivated.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

17 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Wait, you think Biden is 100% not going to win because SCOTUS will hand the election to Trump no matter what?

If it's even remotely close, yes. If it's not, I give it a tossup. Especially if only one state is required to flip the election, like Biden with 279 electors. 

 

I agree with the assessment of@Ghost_MH here

[SaysWho?]

A toss-up even if it's not close. Interesting.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

2 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

 

Nothing is a hundred percent, but it seems like you guys are saying is that you already know the outcome. And ironically would help to demotivate the people you want to be motivated.

Nothing is set in stone but they're already making overt moves for this, see why they NEED ACB on the court, for questions regarding the election allegedly

[Ghost_MH]

4 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

Nothing is a hundred percent, but it seems like you guys are saying is that you already know the outcome. And ironically would help to demotivate the people you want to be motivated.

 

Everyone should vote. It's not just the White House at stake here. People have Congress seats to fill and ballot questions to answer. If a Trump were to steal the election, it would need a blue House and Senate to impeach. In Massachusetts we have a right to repair and ranked voting referendums to vote on. All very important.

 

Still don't believe for a second that Trump goes away into the night were he to lose, even in a landslide.

[Joe]

25 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

This 1,000,000x

 

You're a damn fool if you think otherwise

 

My man, you know I take receipts.

[SaysWho?]

But you guys literally just said damn fool if you think otherwise. So I'm trying to get a clear answer as to whether or not you think they're going to do this regardless and damn fool if you think otherwise.

[Keyser_Soze]

Just now, SaysWho? said:

But you guys literally just said damn fool if you think otherwise. So I'm trying to get a clear answer as to whether or not you think they're going to do this regardless and damn fool if you think otherwise.

 

 

 

[Joe]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

But you guys literally just said damn fool if you think otherwise. So I'm trying to get a clear answer as to whether or not you think they're going to do this regardless and damn fool if you think otherwise.

 

There's not even going to be any like self-reflection when almost none of their insane predictions come to fruition. It's just going to be something to the effect of "derp who cares, Dems ain't going to do shit in power any way." Mark my words.

[Ghost_MH]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

But you guys literally just said damn fool if you think otherwise. So I'm trying to get a clear answer as to whether or not you think they're going to do this regardless and damn fool if you think otherwise.

 

I certainly think they'll try it regardless of the theoretical margin by which Biden wins. The issue then comes with how quickly Democrats act and how well the media covers it.

 

I laughed as I wrote that, by the way.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

1 minute ago, SaysWho? said:

A toss-up even if it's not close. Interesting.

Yes. The entire current republican project, from CJR to Trump to Cruz is predicted upon voter suppression and counter majoritarian rule; you see it now in gerrymandered state legislatures and you see it in their overt and open questioning right now of the ballots cast in the upcoming election, looking for any technical reason to throw out ballots in "the right areas"

3 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

My man, you know I take receipts.

I want to be wrong, trust me.

3 minutes ago, SaysWho? said:

But you guys literally just said damn fool if you think otherwise. So I'm trying to get a clear answer as to whether or not you think they're going to do this regardless and damn fool if you think otherwise.

Scotus will come down on Trump's side, whether it gets sent up to them is the tossup

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

3 minutes ago, Joe said:

 

There's not even going to be any like self-reflection when almost none of their insane predictions come to fruition. It's just going to be something to the effect of "derp who cares, Dems ain't going to do shit in power any way." Mark my words.

I'll be happy, thrilled even, to be wrong.

 

But re: Dems, history indicates that nothing will happen, especially given the centrist push to not have judicial reform or filibuster reform. Again, I'd be thrilled to be wrong but I'm not setting myself up for disappointment or disillusionment.