2020 Presidential Election - Trump versus Biden

Donovan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,844
Reaction score
526
Points
113
Another Republican who didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 will be in 2020. Good argument in the article for Republicans hesitant to vote for him:
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,761
Reaction score
2,456
Points
113
Another Republican who didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 will be in 2020. Good argument in the article for Republicans hesitant to vote for him:
A very reasonable take. Spoofin needs to read this. Ari Fleischer has a very similar take on Trump as Spoofin. I would like Spoofin to vote for Trump, but I respect his personal objections to Trump. The lefties don’t have respect for his differences with the left and Biden.

That’s what worries me about giving the left control. The left’s extremes know no bounds.

What are the Right’s extremes? *Banning all abortions? Not going to happen. *Letting people keep more of their own incomes, even if they’re wealthy? Hey, the wealthy are paying a disproportionate amount of taxes already. I’m not talking about billionaires. I’m talking about the top 1%. *Not wanting to forfeit the benefits of energy independence? If the rest of the world isn’t going to, whatever handicaps we put on ourselves are stupid.

It’s really hard to think about what is so extreme about a conservative agenda. Not so hard to think about the left’s desire to ”fundamentally change America”.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
2,863
Points
113
Didn’t the court’s ruling uphold the existing law? I don’t believe they changed the law. The real question is what bonehead created/approved the letter. It was wrong the day it was printed.
I don't pretend to know what federal law the two judges refer to in their ruling TBH. All I know is that this amounts to potential ex post facto invalidation of properly enacted rule making, at least at the state level. The obvious question, though, is why is this ruling inconsistent with other concurrent rulings in the U.S. in recent days that uphold those other states' rights to regulate their elections? Where is that cited federal law in those cases?
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
2,863
Points
113
Another Republican who didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 will be in 2020. Good argument in the article for Republicans hesitant to vote for him:
A more courageous thing for him to do is go on record about specific policies and why they justify his vote. He agrees with the family separation (child kidnapping) policy? Say so. He agrees with the do-nothing herd-immunity approach to the COVID pandemic? Say so. Trump's offensive manner has been the LEAST offensive aspect of his presidency.
 

Bad Gopher

A Loner, A Rebel
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
18,868
Reaction score
2,863
Points
113

As this notes, even if Trump goads Republican legislatures to appoint electors counter to vote totals, that still doesn't work in the key state of Pennsylvania, where that action can be vetoed by the governor.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,745
Reaction score
3,339
Points
113
I agree it's broad brushed which was the point. I have many family members and friends who lean conservative and liberal and they don't fit under those agendas. It's harmful to assume that the extremes speak for the majority when it's not true.
Here it is, the naked truth, in all its impotence: the loudest and angriest get to have the face time and the microphone, in this country.

And they are, by definition, always a small fraction of people.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,745
Reaction score
3,339
Points
113
I'm with you and the Tweet in spirit, but unfortunately the state law in Minnesota is pretty clear, and the SOS's order/opinion did not go through the legislature. I'm afraid we're going to be hamstrung by our law. Simply, no one has cared enough before to challenge a SOS's order, because mail-ins never really mattered before.

Hopefully the state law can be updated to officially give a week grace period for ballots postmarked by Election Day.

After all, the electors don't meet until Dec 14. Kinda absurd not to count perfectly valid ballots through Nov 10 ...
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,745
Reaction score
3,339
Points
113

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
17,745
Reaction score
3,339
Points
113
Per my write up:
  • News flash: Tina has not won her election handly, voting runs through next Tuesday. Not sure why you'd say something so stupid, but that's you.
  • News flash: TIna is most definitely distancing herself from the Democrats. This was a huge pivot in her advertising. Her whole message right now is how she's not a lock-step Democrat and tries to work across the aisle with Republicans. She's gone from "all in with Biden and the Democratic Party" to "I work with Republicans".
  • News flash: JL has been getting much larger crowds and has a significantly larger ground game than Tina. Tina is barely coming out of hiding to campaign.
  • News flash: There isn't any significant down-ticket issue this year like there has been in the past.
  • News flash: All across the state, Democratic candidates are pivoting away from their party and towards the Republicans. Numerous Dem mayors are actively supporting Trump and Congressional candidates are running adverts that they're an independent voice, willing to vote against Pelosi and the Dems. Republicans are running adverts that show their opponents do vote lock-step with the Dems.
  • New flash: The best indicator of how the Presidential race is going in a state is what the current candidates are doing, and what they are doing is showing that MN is going to Trump.
- She did win her election handily, as you were referring to previous elections
- She isn't distancing herself from Biden
- He isn't getting larger crowds and doesn't have a better ground game
- Down-ticket is irrelevant, as you were talking about getting people out to vote. You can't be so dishonest as to believe that people will vote for President and then not vote for US Senate? Literally the next box down.
- What number is "numerous" re: "dem" mayors? Number. Likely few
- The current candidates have been and continue to be aligned away from Trump
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,761
Reaction score
2,456
Points
113
Whew. That tricky woman almost penetrated your echo chamber! Thank God you smoked out her awful Bush-ism and could go back safely wrap yourself in your Tarflagger blanket.
Apparently, “that tricky woman” is coming around. She’s wrong on Michigan and possibly Wisconsin, but she just has too much faith in polls that were wrong in 2016. Note: she’s not even considering Trafalgar howie.


 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
17,505
Reaction score
2,708
Points
113
I don't pretend to know what federal law the two judges refer to in their ruling TBH. All I know is that this amounts to potential ex post facto invalidation of properly enacted rule making, at least at the state level. The obvious question, though, is why is this ruling inconsistent with other concurrent rulings in the U.S. in recent days that uphold those other states' rights to regulate their elections? Where is that cited federal law in those cases?
The MN Court ruling you cited in your post was a MN Court upholding a MN Law. Every State has different laws in regards to when ballots have to be where. You are misdirecting your blame.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
18,761
Reaction score
2,456
Points
113
The MN Court ruling you cited in your post was a MN Court upholding a MN Law. Every State has different laws in regards to when ballots have to be where. You are misdirecting your blame.
It’s not a real election if Democrats can’t try to change the rules in the middle of the game.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,515
Reaction score
3,402
Points
113
Apparently, “that tricky woman” is coming around. She’s wrong on Michigan and possibly Wisconsin, but she just has too much faith in polls that were wrong in 2016. Note: she’s not even considering Trafalgar howie.


Deep down she knows that the polls are BS. This is a late shot at getting some cover. In her universe Texas is tight.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
1,195
Points
113
Early voting has surged to unprecedented levels in the 2020 election, especially in Texas where the number of early votes has already surpassed the total number of ballots cast four years ago.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
42,515
Reaction score
3,402
Points
113
Early voting has surged to unprecedented levels in the 2020 election, especially in Texas where the number of early votes has already surpassed the total number of ballots cast four years ago.
Hmmm, now Texas is typically a Republican state and the enthusiastic voters are..... I don't know but this seems like good news to me. Here is a good resource. One can actually go county by county here and see early voting trends through yesterday in terms of percentage of registered voters who have already voted. Despite the propensity of Democrat voters to vote early by mail or in person, there is no appreciable difference between early voting percentages in heavy R counties versus heavy D counties.
That tells me that Rs are turning out in amazing numbers considering that a much higher percentage of Rs will show up on election day.
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
1,195
Points
113
Hmmm, now Texas is typically a Republican state and the enthusiastic voters are..... I don't know but this seems like good news to me.
You better get with the playbook, you think there is no data behind Republicans extensive voter suppression operations. They do it because they know more voters is bad for them...
 
Top Bottom