Someone Has To Do It: US Elections 2020

[Sporting]

Is the black vote crucial in the borderline states?

[Satchmo Distel]

Lack of black turnout in Florida was a factor last time, but then they lost the Governor election with a black candidate, so it could just be that Florida is unhinged from all reason right now.

[Tactical Genius]

Is the black vote crucial in the borderline states?

Trump won a lot of states with a small margin in states a good black turnout will flip.

see below:
https://www.nytimes.com/elections/20...ults/president

[Tactical Genius]

Lack of black turnout in Florida was a factor last time, but then they lost the Governor election with a black candidate, so it could just be that Florida is unhinged from all reason right now.

The large Latino population in Florida is hardcore Republican. Especially the White Cuban migrants.

[Sporting]

Anyway, where is the smart money going on his running mate?

[anton pulisov]

Is it possible that Trump holds on to the White House but the Dems flip the Senate?

[anton pulisov]

Regarding Trump, yes, he lost the popular vote in 2016, by about 2%.

But it's worth analysing the complete popular vote breakdown in 2016:

Trump 46.1%
Clinton 48.2%
Johnson 3.3%
Stein 1.1%
McMullin 0.5%
Castle 0.2%

If you add up left vs right there, then you get:

Left: 48.2+1.1 = 49.3%
Right: 46.1+3.3+0.5+0.2 = 50.1%

So there are still marginally more potential Trump voters out there than Democratic, but how much will the Libertarians siphon away from the Trump vote this time around?

[San Bernardhinault]

Is it possible that Trump holds on to the White House but the Dems flip the Senate?

Very, very unlikely unless there's some serious shenanigans. To flip the Senate with Trump in power they need 51 Senators (50-50 has the VP make the deciding call) , which means a net 4 seat pick-up. They'll lose Doug Jones in Alabama, which means they have to take 5 new seats. They might win Arizona and Colorado in a Trump win. There's an outside chance they could take out Collins in Maine, although in a year with a narrow Trump with it's unlikely. They then have to find 2 more. Iowa and North Carolina are most likely, but if a Democrat ousts a sitting Senator in those two states, you're looking at a very strong year for the Democrats and Biden will already have won.

Of course, even with a 50-50 senate and a Biden win, they're still dependent on Joe Manchin so any Senate "wins" will be small and marginal and centrist. This isn't "hamstringing themselves", of course. The alternative in West Virginia isn't a progressive. The alternative is a very Trumpy Republican.

There needs to be an incredibly good year with pick-ups in the very long-shot states like Georgia and Montana to give the Democrats 53 or 54 Senators to have any hope of getting anything vaguely progressive through.

[San Bernardhinault]

As a tweet I saw yesterday said: "It takes a very special sort of privilege to choose to not vote for the person with a chance of defeating actual fascists".

It really shouldn't matter how underwhelmed you are by Biden and the Democrats.

[Sporting]

As a tweet I saw yesterday said: "It takes a very special sort of privilege to choose to not vote for the person with a chance of defeating actual fascists".

It really shouldn't matter how underwhelmed you are by Biden and the Democrats.

Completely agree.

[Tactical Genius]

As a tweet I saw yesterday said: "It takes a very special sort of privilege to choose to not vote for the person with a chance of defeating actual fascists".

It really shouldn't matter how underwhelmed you are by Biden and the Democrats.

There is a third way, vote for neither and take to the streets which seems much more effective looking at the current state of American politics.

[Diable Rouge]

Surely the Democratic congressional group will move significantly to the left, between the DSA influence and the growing Squad contingent?

[ad hoc]

Surely the Democratic congressional group will move significantly to the left, between the DSA influence and the growing Squad contingent?

I don;t see that happening.

[San Bernardhinault]

There is a third way, vote for neither and take to the streets which seems much more effective looking at the current state of American politics.

I don't see the route through which that will lead to meaningful change, particularly with an increasingly fascist Trumpist regime entrenched in power.

[ad hoc]

I don't see the route through which that will lead to meaningful change, particularly with an increasingly fascist Trumpist regime entrenched in power.

But how does a Biden presidency lead to meaningful change?

[Diable Rouge]

That would come at state and city council level, if at all.

[ad hoc]

(to be clear, I would hold my nose and vote for Biden if it were my vote. But I think he'll be an absolutely awful president and will entrench all the things that have put the country where it is today. He's just notTrump. In a fight against Trump, the notTrump is my choice, but let;s not kid ourselves that his election will be positive - over and above it being not an utter disaster)

[San Bernardhinault]

But how does a Biden presidency lead to meaningful change?

It depends what you mean by meaningful change.

It doesn't lead to meaningful change from pre-2016 US.

It does mean that we don't have an entrenched, increasingly anti-democratic, fascist regime like Orban or Netanyahu or Putin in the US.

[Tactical Genius]

But how does a Biden presidency lead to meaningful change?

Now that's an excellent point right there.
He is as racially polarising as Trump.

[Tactical Genius]

It depends what you mean by meaningful change.

It doesn't lead to meaningful change from pre-2016 US.

It does mean that we don't have an entrenched, increasingly anti-democratic, fascist regime like Orban or Netanyahu or Putin in the US.

The system in the US is anti-democratic and Fascist regardless who the figurehead is. The only difference is that Trump is bad PR for the image the US is trying to push throughout the world.
It's hard to claim to be the leader of the free world, the land of the free etc when you have an open unapologetic bigot in the WH instead of the closet one like the previous 44.

[ursus arctos]

Not to mention a federal court system that will serve to perpetuate that fascism for generations even if the party that institutes it is eventually voted out of office

[S. aureus]

ad hoc speaks for me here.

[Tactical Genius]

Not to mention a federal court system that will serve to perpetuate that fascism for generations even if the party that institutes it is eventually voted out of office

Indeed.

[Cal Alamein]

Regarding Trump, yes, he lost the popular vote in 2016, by about 2%.

But it's worth analysing the complete popular vote breakdown in 2016:

Trump 46.1%
Clinton 48.2%
Johnson 3.3%
Stein 1.1%
McMullin 0.5%
Castle 0.2%

If you add up left vs right there, then you get:

Left: 48.2+1.1 = 49.3%
Right: 46.1+3.3+0.5+0.2 = 50.1%

So there are still marginally more potential Trump voters out there than Democratic, but how much will the Libertarians siphon away from the Trump vote this time around?

Nitpicking, but there's no way you give all 3.3% of Johnson's vote to Trump. His pot legalization stance siphoned a large number of Democrats (as well as some long-haired Republicans ).

[Tactical Genius]

Nitpicking, but there's no way you give all 3.3% of Johnson's vote to Trump. His pot legalization stance siphoned a large number of Democrats (as well as some long-haired Republicans ).

Can you be a long haired Republican, I guess you can get away with a mullet.