US election 2020

[David]

^ Honestly, the pair of them really just need to be packed off to the nursing home at this stage. Both Biden and Trump are showing signs of advanced senility.

[stui magpie]

^

So the guy is as dumb as a bag of doorknobs.

It doesn't matter what Trump says anymore, whatever he says some people will twist it and get outraged, before the outrage has a chance to build and go nuclear he's said at least 2 other things that provoke outrage.

So you have 1 group in perpetual outrage until they either implode or stop caring, another group who hang on his every word and lap it up and the rest who just don't care.

Psychiatrists, Psychologists and various other counsellors should collectively build a shrine to him, he's making them rich.

[pietillidie]

Biden might not be an infantile nutcase like Trump, but FFS is that the best they can do?

This brief Q&A with all of the candidates on the NYT website is worth a look, despite being somewhat canned: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/us/politics/2020-candidate-interviews.html

In fact, the degree to which the answers are canned probably tells you a bit about the candidates.

[David]

Thanks PTID! Interesting stuff. Says a lot that Biden refused to participate – probably realises that if anyone scrutinises his ideas too closely they’ll realise he’s an empty vessel.

[Skids]

Trump has now firmed in to odds on for 2020.

The Don - $1.90
Loopy Joe $6
Pocahontas - $6.50
Harris - $7.50
The Colonel - $10
Buttigieg - $12
Yang $21

Upwards others....

[Pies4shaw]

Punters are, of course, notoriously wrong about most matters - and certainly about election predictions: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

[David]

Quite a few contenders are starting to drop off, and the upcoming TV debate mercifully features only (!) ten candidates:

Joe Biden
Cory Booker
Julián Castro
Pete Buttigieg
Kamala Harris
Amy Klobuchar
Beto O'Rourke
Bernie Sanders
Elizabeth Warren
Andrew Yang

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2019/08/28/democratic-debate-lineup-nearly-set-gabbard-steyer-among-those-who-dont-make-the-cut/#3dd2b96a1ed9

Others sticking around for now despite failing to qualify for the debates are Tulsi Gabbard, Marianne Williamson and a handful of the just-along-for-the-ride clown-car posse whose names nobody will remember or ever need to know. Relatively high-profile candidates who have dropped out include Kristen Gillibrand, John Hickenlooper, Jay Inslee and Eric Swalwell.

Meanwhile, Biden, until recently the clear front-runner, has finally fallen below Sanders and Warren in a poll, but I suspect one should take that with a grain of salt for now:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/26/politics/monmouth-august-democrats-biden-warren-sanders/index.html

Also, Trump has another primary challenger on the Republican side, Joe Walsh, who seems roughly twice as awful, but at any rate stands no chance whatsoever.

[Wokko]

Gabbard is getting the Ron Paul treatment. The powers that be hate that she took down their darling Kamala.

[thesoretoothsayer]

[David]

I suspect you're both right that the Democratic party and media establishment hate her and have been giving her pretty short shrift, but still ... I did wonder why she was running to begin with or who exactly she thought would vote for her. You can fit the staunch anti-imperialist left that gravitate towards her in a shoebox. She backed Sanders in 2016 and got some love from his crowd for that, but he's running again. Otherwise, she has such a chequered history with the Hindu nationalism stuff and homophobic campaigning that it was always going to be a really steep uphill climb to get support from any sector of mainstream Democrat voters, let alone leftists.

It's a pity as she is a genuinely interesting candidate in many ways and she probably offers more than most of her competitors – I still can't for the life of me figure out why anyone would vote for Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Pete Buttigieg et al – and I admire her courage in being the only one to stick her neck out for Assange, but beyond that I genuinely don't understand how she or anyone in her supporter base could have ever thought she had a realistic chance of winning.

[Jezza]

[stui magpie]

Recent history says the US typically gives a president 2 terms. The last one to get a single term was Bush snr, but he was also the 3rd consecutive Republican term after 2 of Reagan, so the odds favour a 2 term Trump

[Jezza]

^ Correct, Stui.

Further, the last time a party was in power of the Presidency for only one term was the Democrats under Jimmy Carter (1977-1981).

[David]

Surely Trump throws all notions of precedent out the window, doesn’t he? I think he’s a 50/50 chance of winning again – incumbency is a big advantage – but I suspect it’ll be a close one regardless of whoever he’s up against.

[Wokko]

Obviously we can't get a read on it while they're playing up to their base but if the Dems keep careening off the cliff of leftism then, like Shorten and Corbyn theyre no chance. They have to reconnect with middle class white America. Biden, despite being a flog is probably best positioned to do that.