Topic: [BET] Trump or not Trump 2020, eddie13 vs suchmoon - page 37. (Read 11730 times)

New NYT/Siena poll was released today that's looking extremely good for Biden. Sample size 1337 registered voters conducted 6/17 - 6/22.

Biden 50, Trump 36.

Age demographic breakdowns of this poll is pretty crazy too, among 65+, Biden 47%, Trump 45%. Among the 45 - 64 year old age demographic, Biden 44%, Trump 44%.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_biden-6247.html

Put's Biden's RCP average lead at 10.2 points.

I guess older folks really did not like Trump's coronavirus response. Not a good sign when he's losing with boomers.

Even in the debates all he needs to do is just stay awake and have prepared answers to the common attack vectors and whatever the crisis of the day is. If he can find something to poke Trump with that's great, but probably not necessary... you know Trump will inevitably go off script and start rambling about Hillary and too much coronavirus testing and confederate statues matter etc.

But obviously that's easier said than done for Biden.

Democrats also demand loyalty, but the difference between Trump and Obama is that Obama was able to get loyalty from his staff, while Trumps staff has learned that it is more profitable to turn into “anti-Trump” even if this means fabricating things (Bolton).

Look at former AG Holder who describes his role as being Obama’s “wing man”. Look at how infrequently the liberal SC justices vote differently from the rest, look at how liberal Senators and congresspeople vote, they almost always vote as a unanimous block. Look at how the left wing MSM describes various current events on the sane day, they use the same talking points.   

Totally true on the loyalty portion of things. Trump demands blind loyalty -- which may work fine in a business environment where the stakes are a lot smaller and there isn't such a massive bureaucracy. In a government position, while the President may want blind loyalty from everyone in the administration, that's not really the job of many people in government minus the Presidents advisors and such.

Totally going to be rough, though I am expecting (based on what the judge said in the case regarding Boltons book) that he will have both a civil and criminal case that he will most likely lose. Dems aren't going to give him leeway b/c he didn't go and testify.


Not sure that that'll be possible when the debates start. People are going to want him in the spotlight.

Fingers crossed that Sleepy Joe "pervy paws" Biden will stick to the winning strategy of staying quiet and letting Trump defeat himself. And that he doesn't fall off the stage and doesn't mix Trump up with his sister during the debates.

I've always thought that the presidential election is a bit of a clown show... but this year... my oh my.

Looking better than ever for suchmoon.

https://projects.economist.com/us-2020-forecast/president?utm_campaign=us2020-forecast




Of course, if there's anything to be learned from last time, its that its not over until the fat lady sings...

Oh please. The only reason the WH and Barr are "unhappy" is because of how the book paints Trump and the administration. When has there EVER been a time when some tell all book comes out and the author isn't branded a liar, criminal and yada yada yada.. It's so people like you drink more coolaid like a good little serf.

I read the book. Big deal. It's Trump being Trump, an executive branched filled with boot licking yes man as well as those that think they know better and do their own thing. Guess what. That exists in every WH and corporation although maybe the current one is worse than some. Who knows. But getting all worked up about it is a waste of time. Besides. Do you really think it's in Trumps best interest to go after Bolton? Probably end up having more information released as a result, hearings and the like. Keeping it all in the news longer than it needs to be? No. Just let it blow over and move on.

He also asks people that work for him to do things that are not legal.

I have a feeling that there aren't many honest people lining up to work for Trump. He seems to demand loyalty over everything else so he gets (1) crooks who pretend to like him or (2) not very bright individuals who might genuinely like him but are shit at their jobs.


It's going to be interesting to watch how this shakes out. Bolton claims that he made all edits he was asked to make and that some information may have been classified retroactively. Neither side can really be trusted in their rhetoric.

Yeah, I think it's his tendancy to want people around him that are 'anti establishment' but it really doesn't seem to be working out too well. Would make a lot more sense to pick some (at least some) tried and true advisors. They seem to stick out of trouble and don't ya know -- go and write some book deals for millions.

Bolton is a criminal, DOJ is going to go after him HARD for this. Barr isn't happy at all.

It sounds like a case of sour grapes on part of Trump if he loses the 2020 election because he will no doubt blame it on rigging but if he wins re-election for a second term he will say the vote was not rigged and people voted him in and rejected Biden.

Trump is clearly taking a pre-emptive strike just to shout "rigged" if he loses and then say "we stopped the rigging" if he gets re-elected.

Bolton has already been labeled as all sorts of criminal by trumpists (and of course he isn't a particularly credible person), which makes me wonder why Trump tends to surround himself with these horrible people who quit or get fired after a few months and then denigrate him. There must be a common denominator in this uber-complex equation - what (or who) could it possibly be...

Trump is trying to make it as difficult politically as possible for states to allow widespread mail in voting, and is setting up for any lawsuit about the election after widespread voter fraud by democrats.

I have lived in several different locations throughout my life, and I have always received mail addressed to multiple prior what I assume are residences. A few weeks ago I also received a bill in the mail from over a year ago that was addressed to an old address of mine and was marked return to sender. I can only imagine the accuracy of voter registration roles with regards to voter addresses, but my guess is that it is not as high as it should be and is certainly well above the margin of victory that most candidates get.

The moron never wanted to be president in the 1st place.
The prospect of another 4 years of being the most ridiculed potus in history (deservedly so)
doesn't appeal to him, and the novelty of being impotus has long since worn off.
He doesn't give a shit and rambles on incoherently about anything his feeble brain thinks will feed his like minded minions.
It's a total farce that a bloviating reality tv clown host who can't even get through an asinine tweet without a spelling error is now commander-in-chief.
Suchmoons odds are getting better everyday.


Speaking of which, this ought to get techy's all the blowhards' tongues wagging eh?.

You'd think that his Tulsa fiasco would have proven that even his supporters are not too eager to socialize these days so encouraging them to vote by mail would be the smarter strategy.

I wouldn't say that undermines the legitimacy of his office. But it's not really a bright thing to be complaining about from Trump because it really isn't something that happens all that often -- election fraud that is.

Does mail in ballots increase the chance of voter fraud? Yes, totally. But it's still not a very high chance and states should just put safeguards in place to try to stop this.

We don't want thousands of people going to the ballot in November, in the middle of (maybe) a second wave and flu season and have to vote and all that. Sounds like a recipe for disaster all around the US.

On the posts about Stormy -- I'm not sure why she is even relevant anymore.

Thank you for the reply but I think what you wrote is probably not true on several fronts.

Firstly, as far as I am aware I think her current profession is described as an "adult movie star". Secondly lots of people do care about what Stormy say as long as it is related to Trump because there is a comical aspect to it including what was stated in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/08/stormy-daniels-talks-about-trump-and-the-worst-90-seconds-of-my-life-on-stand-up-tour

I do not know how she can be described as a gold digger. By all intent and purposes it seems Trump had an approximate 90 second sexual relationship with Stormy while he was married to his wife Melania. When he entered the race to become President his past was always going to catch up with him therefore it seems a payment was received by Stormy in order for her to stay silent about their affair. In my opinion receiving a payment for signing a supposedly legally binding non-disclosure document does not constitute anything close to the allegation you made against her.

Maybe Trump has no interest in what Stormy says but she may yet provide to be play a massive part in his downfall. Add along to that various women that alleged sexual misconduct on his part it still might bring about his political end in the November 2020 Presidential elections. The manner in which Trump disgraced himself with highly questionable statements regarding the current massive public demonstrations, it too just might contribute towards his failure making him a one-term President.

You misinterpreted what I said. I didn't say Trump was "running the election." As the head of state, Trump is the top representative of the federal government -- the one that upholds the constitution which created the electoral college who elects the president. By claiming the vote is "rigged" before it even happens, he is undermining the constitution and thus the legitimacy of his own office.

The elections are run by the states. The president has nothing to do with running the election.

It would appear Trump is getting cold feet about the election...



Of course, Trump wouldn't be Trump without undermining the validity of the institution he is the head executive of. The election of course hasn't happened yet, and he's already declaring it to be "rigged." Will this still be the case if he wins?

It's great that he can make such proclamations before something has happened, without any evidence whatsoever, and his followers will just unquestionably swallow them whole. That way if he loses, it wasn't his fault. And if he wins, well who cares what he said before because he already won.