Cimber posted:

I would put myself into the "I don't love Biden, but he's sure as poo poo better than the alternative."

I really hope this is the last gasp of the Boomer Generation of presidents. Its time for someone born in the 60s or 70s to take over.

zoux posted:

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1765396713051730112

I saw a lot of speculation that McConnell was withdrawing from leadership because he was not going to endorse Trump, but these people don't know ball.

zoux posted:

Trump, ever gracious in victory, continues his bromides against a candidate who performed relatively well against him and whose voters say by supermajority margins they will never vote for Trump. "My opponents supporters are not allowed to vote for me" is an interesting electoral strategy.

Eric Cantonese posted:

The story of the guy who ran against Marjorie Taylor Green in 2020 breaks my heart. He stepped up and it ruined his life.

https://www.ajc.com/politics/politics-blog/why-marjorie-taylor-greenes-opponent-quit-the-house-race/E3TYSMAAPRDUPPB6F3BBQAFCME/

EDIT: The Washington Post piece is better, but behind a paywall. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/10/17/kevin-van-ausdal-qanon-marjorie-greene-georgia/?arc404=true

Angry_Ed posted:

Probably the same sort of speculators who also thought he totally would've voted to impeach Trump.

Discendo Vox posted:

For the record, "bromides" as statements are usually soothing or placating, so the term doesn't fit Trump.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

There's a difference between polling being non-predictive right now vs. all polling being meaningless right now.

quote:

Mr. Robinson has said that growing up poor in Greensboro had shaped his political philosophy. He wrote in his autobiography “We Are The Majority!” that his father was an alcoholic and abusive toward his mother, and that his parents relied on government assistance to support their 10 children. Mr. Robinson was the second youngest.

“Even as a child, I felt the imbalance, the wrongness of it,” Mr. Robinson wrote of the abuse. “At an early age, I began to think of the world in terms of what is fair or unfair, right or wrong.”

Like former President Donald J. Trump, Mr. Robinson has also expressed anger at the North American Free Trade Agreement for causing manufacturing jobs to shift from North Carolina to countries with lower labor costs in the ’90s. Mr. Robinson has said that the trade pact made him lose two jobs.

quote:

Mr. Robinson has also been criticized for posting comments that were widely perceived as antisemitic and for quoting Adolf Hitler on Facebook. But he has insisted to reporters that he has never been antisemitic, pointing to a trip he took last fall to Israel and outreach he has made to Jewish organizations as evidence.

zoux posted:

The NYT asks, who is this firey outsider (who is also the sitting Lt. Gov. )

Economic anxiety!

Not an anti semite! Out of context!



Well, maybe a little anti-semite.

From slate:


Firebrand!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Ryan Coogler is a public Satanist?

zoux posted:

Xombie posted:

I actually like gauging them based on their unprecedented post-integration support of the GOP by black voters. Or the fact that the poll is 100% "people who both pick up the phone for unlisted numbers and will have a conversation with the anonymous person on the other end".

small butter posted:

Actually, you have other things you can look at, such as actual election results. There is a strong correlation between special election results and the subsequent general election results, especially when the swing is large (like Democrats getting +11 last year). And before you say "Gaza," note that the Democrats won big a month after the Gaza campaign started last year.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...six-years-later

https://abcnews.go.com/538/democrats-winning-big-special-elections/story?id=103315703

Republicans lost in 2022 with the highest inflation of my lifetime, alleged roving gangs committing crimes in the cities, and new stock market lows. Democrats had one of the best performances in the midterms as incumbents for a long time. How the gently caress are Republicans going to get a better environment than that in 2024, with Trump now under 4 indictments and owing money for fraud and rape, no less?

You can also see actual election results right now in which Trump is underperforming his primary polls and Biden overperforming.

Regarding polls this far out, I'll just keep repeating myself here:

I will keep saying this to everyone who will listen: the polls are still not predictive yet and are literal coin flips. They start to get marginally predictive around mid-April, not now, and their predictive power will increase very slowly but linearly until election day.

https://archives.cjr.org/united_states_project/its_way_too_early_for_2016_polls_to_be_predictive.php



Clinton was leading Trump by around 10 points in the summer of 2016 during which I remember reading The Economist with a "meltdown" cover story with Trump melting down.

mobby_6kl posted:

Clinton was also leading until the day of the election. Everyone thought she was going to win easily.

One thing that is completely this time though is that both candidates are a well-known to the public and both served a term. Why would the perception change significantly between now and the election? Are many people going to wake up from a coma not knowing who either of them are? (Obviously a lot of things could happen, but we can't just assume they will move the needle one way).

So yeah you can never know with 100% certainty that polls are going to correctly predict an election, not in March, not the day before. But that a convicted fraudster and rapist with 90 other indictmetns hanging over his head is within the margin of error of a relatively scandal-free incumbent is pretty disconcerting.

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

you vastly overestimate how much people are paying attention. lots of people assuming Trump won't be the nominee, for example.

haveblue posted:

The front page of CNN is now full of different ways to say "it's gonna be biden-trump again" so this attitude probably isn't going to last much longer

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

you vastly overestimate how much people are paying attention. lots of people assuming Trump won't be the nominee, for example.

zoux posted:

The NYT asks, who is this firey outsider (who is also the sitting Lt. Gov. )

Economic anxiety!

Not an anti semite! Out of context!



Well, maybe a little anti-semite.

From slate:


Firebrand!

DaveWoo posted:

Seriously, what the hell is going on at the New York Times lately? It's getting ridiculous.

DaveWoo posted:

Seriously, what the hell is going on at the New York Times lately? It's getting ridiculous.

DaveWoo posted:

Seriously, what the hell is going on at the New York Times lately? It's getting ridiculous.

Angry_Ed posted:

You underestimate how utterly ignorant the average American is.

Angry_Ed posted:

You underestimate how utterly ignorant the average American is.

FlamingLiberal posted:

As this election gets closer I am getting more and more pessimistic about Biden losing. I just don’t get the impression that the WH has any idea that he is not popular and also that he just has a lot of underlying issues that are not going to improve before November. Voters are not going to get over the age thing. People are also pissed about the economy even if inflation has gone down compared to where it was in 2021/2022. They seem to think that Trump’s legal scandals will sink him but he’s always had some degree of that and it didn’t stop him from getting elected the first time. It’s also almost a certainty that he will not get convicted of anything before November with his trials all getting held up. There are a ton of warning signs for Biden and at least right now I see no indication that the WH is going to do anything to change course.

Blue Footed Booby posted:

I haven't gotten the impression the public really cares that much about the border poo poo. Like, it sucks, but the average Dem voter seems to also suck on this one. The people who don't like it don't consider it a priority.

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

And somehow the Dems are the party that's picking up the anti-semetic rep

zoux posted:

The NYT asks, who is this firey outsider (who is also the sitting Lt. Gov. )

Economic anxiety!

Not an anti semite! Out of context!



Well, maybe a little anti-semite.

From slate:


Firebrand!

FizFashizzle posted:

fwiw Lt Governor in NC is a nothing position without any actual power.

Roy Cooper won reelection in 2020 even as the state went to Trump.

This idiot is going to get dog walked.

quote:

Big Pharma is “coming to the table” on price negotiations as it loses in court
Federal health officials this week trumpeted progress in negotiating lower Medicare drug prices as big pharmaceutical companies faced another legal loss in their efforts to have the negotiations ruled unconstitutional.

This week, the Department of Health and Human Services announced that it had received the first counteroffers from pharmaceutical makers for all 10 drugs up for price negotiation. The negotiations—a provision in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022—kicked off late last year with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announcing the 10 drugs selected for bargaining. Those 10 drugs have seen significant price hikes over recent years and, combined, cost Medicare $50.5 billion in gross during 2022, with an additional $3.4 billion in out-of-pocket costs for patients. The health department sent its opening pricing offers to drug makers on February 1.

"We are committed to constructive dialogue and are glad the drug companies are coming to the table," HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement. "These are good-faith, up front negotiations," he said, which will "keep money in the pockets of millions of Americans instead of Big Pharma."

CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure called the receipt of counteroffers "another negotiation milestone."

But while the big pharmaceutical companies are at the bargaining table, they're also in the courts trying to get judges to strike down the negotiations as unconstitutional. The pharmaceutical industry has filed at least nine lawsuits around the country challenging the negotiations. So far, it's not going well.

Last month, a federal judge in Texas dismissed a lawsuit brought in part by the heavy-hitting pharmaceutical trade group PhRMA. US District Judge David Ezra in Austin ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction for the case because the plaintiffs' claims must first go through an internal review process with the CMS, as required by the Medicare Act.

And last week, a federal judge in Delaware dismissed a similar case brought by AstraZeneca—though for different reasons. In his 47-page ruling, US District Judge Colm Connolly provided a biting critique of AstraZeneca's claims that the negotiations injure the company and violate its Fifth Amendment right to prevent the government from depriving it of property without due process.

mobby_6kl posted:

One thing that is completely this time though is that both candidates are a well-known to the public and both served a term. Why would the perception change significantly between now and the election? Are many people going to wake up from a coma not knowing who either of them are? (Obviously a lot of things could happen, but we can't just assume they will move the needle one way).

Main Paineframe posted:

Polling has consistently suggested that the border is the #2 most important issue to the American public right now, second only to inflation.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Which is gobsmacking because "the border" is just racism rebranded. Every actual study or analysis of immigration ever shows a massive net benefit to society from immigrants and a massive problem from cutting off Immigration. It's even true of the goddam Roman Empire. (https://acoup.blog/2021/07/16/collections-the-queens-latin-or-who-were-the-romans-part-iii-bigotry-and-diversity-at-rome/ )


The left wing failure to fight this issue is just utterly shameful.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

Which is gobsmacking because "the border" is just racism rebranded. Every actual study or analysis of immigration ever shows a massive net benefit to society from immigrants and a massive problem from cutting off Immigration. It's even true of the goddam Roman Empire. (https://acoup.blog/2021/07/16/collections-the-queens-latin-or-who-were-the-romans-part-iii-bigotry-and-diversity-at-rome/ )


The left wing failure to fight this issue is just utterly shameful.

small butter posted:

Actually, you have other things you can look at, such as actual election results. There is a strong correlation between special election results and the subsequent general election results, especially when the swing is large (like Democrats getting +11 last year). And before you say "Gaza," note that the Democrats won big a month after the Gaza campaign started last year.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...six-years-later

https://abcnews.go.com/538/democrats-winning-big-special-elections/story?id=103315703

Republicans lost in 2022 with the highest inflation of my lifetime, alleged roving gangs committing crimes in the cities, and new stock market lows. Democrats had one of the best performances in the midterms as incumbents for a long time. How the gently caress are Republicans going to get a better environment than that in 2024, with Trump now under 4 indictments and owing money for fraud and rape, no less?

You can also see actual election results right now in which Trump is underperforming his primary polls and Biden overperforming.

Regarding polls this far out, I'll just keep repeating myself here:

I will keep saying this to everyone who will listen: the polls are still not predictive yet and are literal coin flips. They start to get marginally predictive around mid-April, not now, and their predictive power will increase very slowly but linearly until election day.

https://archives.cjr.org/united_states_project/its_way_too_early_for_2016_polls_to_be_predictive.php



Clinton was leading Trump by around 10 points in the summer of 2016 during which I remember reading The Economist with a "meltdown" cover story with Trump melting down.

zoux posted:

Trump, ever gracious in victory, continues his bromides against a candidate who performed relatively well against him and whose voters say by supermajority margins they will never vote for Trump. "My opponents supporters are not allowed to vote for me" is an interesting electoral strategy.

quote:

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that "over the past two decades, most efforts to estimate the fiscal impact of immigration in the United States have concluded that, in aggregate and over the long term, tax revenues of all types generated by immigrants—both legal and unauthorized—exceed the cost of the services they use." While the overall fiscal impact on the US is beneficial, unauthorized immigrants have an adverse impact on the budgets of state and local governments. While cautioning that the reports are not a suitable basis for developing an aggregate national effect across all states, they concluded that:

"State and local governments incur costs for providing services to unauthorized immigrants and have limited options for avoiding or minimizing those costs";

"The amount that state and local governments spend on services for unauthorized immigrants represents a small percentage of the total amount spent by those governments to provide such services to residents in their jurisdictions";

"The tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to those immigrants"; and

"Federal aid programs offer resources to state and local governments that provide services to unauthorized immigrants, but those funds do not fully cover the costs incurred by those governments."

Wang posted:

To be fair it looks like this truth social post was in January so this wasn't a post drop out jab at her, just him being a usual prick.