2020 Election Polling

[Terraceth]

That being said, the Senate will always be a struggle for the Dems.

Is it? The Democrats had an 8-year period of Senate control from 2007-2015, and at their height during that period had more Democrats in the Senate than the Republicans had since the 1920's (don't tell me that it was a tie between Democrats and Republicans in 2007, Bernie Sanders counts as a Democrat and you know it).

Admitting Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. as states would rebalance that, but that is not likely to happen so long as Republicans have a majority in either the House or the Senate. Republicans know they would likely be handing four Senate seats to the Democrats.

does apply to Washington D.C. though. The Republicans are absolutely opposed to it (it's stated as such in their platform right after the Puerto Rico discussion) and it would be absolutely be a guarantee for two extra Senators for the Democrats... it'd be the most solidly blue state in the entire country if admitted.

[simplicio]

Oh there is no doubt Trump's base is rock solid. Likewise, I think those who share my antipathy for Trump are just as rock solid, and our numbers seem to be about equivalent to the size of the base. The real question is what happens to the gap in between. They are the ones who will decide the election.

And I agree that we are 6+ months out from 11/3, so there is lots of time for pretty much anything to happen. Heck, 2016 taught us that one week out is still a lot of time for stuff to happen.

"There is no doubt that Trump's base is rock solid". Actually there is doubt. I read an article just yesterday, but could not find it this morning, so I'll try to recap it.

There is a likelihood of significant cracks opening up over the coronavirus. The epidemic hotspots are colored blue on the map, the red areas are spared so far. But in those areas that are red and have become hotspots, Trump has a low approval rating on epidemic response. One conclusion is that Trump approval rating on epidemic response is dependent on how the virus spreads.

And Republicans respect the military. The split between the political leadership of the Navy (deskbound side) and the line officers and the sailors is becoming apparent, both over the Gallagher and Crozier incidents. The self described war time president sent a Navy ship into New York where the hospitals were like a war zone, yet the Navy did little of substance to aid New York City. The symbolism may come to haunt the Navy and the administration. Iran and China are getting porky, some attribute it to ships like the TR going off line, but it is more likely to our adversaries capitalizing on the split between the line officers and the political leadership.

The latest gaffe on injecting disinfectant is fascinating, like watching a train wreck happen in real time. It places any number of mis-steps over the last several years in a peculiar context. It does not highlight any air of competence.

Who has Trump surrounded himself with as advisers? Ron Vara, the alter ego of the trade adviser Peter Navarro? Jared Kushner? The latest one (I can't remember his name) who deleted tweets about eating bats? Conservative excoriated Obama for some of his early advisers, the various czars who created a parallel cabinet, and they were right for doing so. But we have the same thing.

The list can go on, but each of these show the potential for cracks opening in the rock solid base. For each person who will excuse anything and everything, there is a moral majority, which is a silent majority that might split off this time around. And yes, I chose those descriptions for their shock value (Falwell Sr, and Nixon used them). But the descriptions are appropriate. Only the first point is based on polling data.

My prediction? A Trump defeat, a prediction I would not make before the epidemic. And the media will post a series of articles about the demise of the Republican Party, similar to the 1972 articles wondering the the Dems could recover. Will the religious right examine itself? I wonder.

[carpedm9587]

Is it? The Democrats had an 8-year period of Senate control from 2007-2015, and at their height during that period had more Democrats in the Senate than the Republicans had since the 1920's (don't tell me that it was a tie between Democrats and Republicans in 2007, Bernie Sanders counts as a Democrat and you know it).

Sanders is NOT a Democrat!

He's a Democratic Socialist who regularly caucuses with the Democrats and ran as a Democrat for national office twice.

does apply to Washington D.C. though. The Republicans are absolutely opposed to it (it's stated as such in their platform right after the Puerto Rico discussion) and it would be absolutely be a guarantee for two extra Senators for the Democrats... it'd be the most solidly blue state in the entire country if admitted.

So you have edumacated me on something - for which I thank you. I had not taken the time to read the platforms before I made my comments - and my comments were off-base, at least with respect to Puerto Rico. Thanks for the correction! As a professional educator, being the source of misinformation is something that always haunts me...

[carpedm9587]

I realize we are still early, but a poll that shows Biden up by one point over Trump in TEXAS is eye-opening. This is a dynamic that has repeated itself in elections since 2016: places that should be a slam-dunk for Republicans are suddenly in play and Republicans are having to sink enormous amounts of money and do everything in their power to reduce voting in order to keep the office.

And Trump keeps tripping all over himself mismanaging the pandemic.

November is looking better every day.

[EvoUK]

Republicans are having to [...] do everything in their power to reduce voting in order to keep the office.

I know this is a thing and it's pretty uncontroversial that Republicans try to do everything they can to reduce the numbers able to vote through various means - as the more people vote the less likely they are to win. What I was wondering if this is just taken as read now, or if there's actually any efforts to try to stop them messing about with people's ability to vote?

[carpedm9587]

I know this is a thing and it's pretty uncontroversial that Republicans try to do everything they can to reduce the numbers able to vote through various means - as the more people vote the less likely they are to win. What I was wondering if this is just taken as read now, or if there's actually any efforts to try to stop them messing about with people's ability to vote?

There are efforts across the board towards reversing extensive gerrymandering, reversing voter ID laws, placing restrictions on purging voter rolls, and placing limits on how far before an actual election a decision can be made to close a polling place. These are all tactics that have been used in one place or another to reduce minority and Democratic turn-out or skew the outcome of the elections towards the minority party.

Democrats aren't 100% innocent of messing around with voting either with this or that dirty trick, and they have at least one badly gerrymandered state. However, the tactics that are systemic and attempting to be coded into law are generally coming from the Republicans and the right under the umbrella claim of "protecting against voter fraud." Unfortunately, they still cannot show any significant existence of voter fraud, AFAIK, and insignificant instances are not enough to warrant denying Americans access to the vote.

[carpedm9587]

This article is an opinion piece, so it is hardly "evidence" of anything, but the author expresses something I have been thinking for some time now - since the pandemic started and Trump's mismanagement became evident.

Generally, Trump's approval rating is pretty much back to where it was pre-pandemic and not likely to slip much further or gain any significant ground. The extremes are entrenched, leaving just the center to sway one way or the other. Unless a miracle happens in the next six months, I don't see Trump surviving this.

[Cow Poke]

This article is an opinion piece, so it is hardly "evidence" of anything, but the author expresses something I have been thinking for some time now - since the pandemic started and Trump's mismanagement became evident.

Generally, Trump's approval rating is pretty much back to where it was pre-pandemic and not likely to slip much further or gain any significant ground. The extremes are entrenched, leaving just the center to sway one way or the other. Unless a miracle happens in the next six months, I don't see Trump surviving this.

And, once again, 6 months is an ETERNITY in politics.

[carpedm9587]

And, once again, 6 months is an ETERNITY in politics.

Yes - it is...

But eternity keeps getting shorter...

[Cow Poke]

Yes - it is...

But eternity keeps getting shorter...

Can you show that to me on a graph?

[carpedm9587]

Please delete - it's messing with my Fung Shui

[Cow Poke]

Not a graph...but...


[ATTACH=CONFIG]44617[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]44618[/ATTACH]

You are my pride and joy!

[carpedm9587]

Can you show that to me on a graph?

Not a graph...but...

Picture1.jpg

[carpedm9587]

You are my pride and joy!

My second post was better...


Unfortunately, once you link a picture - you cannot UNLINK it!

[Cow Poke]

My second post was better...


Unfortunately, once you link a picture - you cannot UNLINK it!

You can, but it's not real obvious - you have to edit, then go down further on the edit page and "manage attachments".

manage.jpg