*Raises bat to pavilion*

Wait a second, this is an HD thread but there is no reference to weed?
 

Ahem: Trump will lose Arizona because legalisation is on the ballot and that drives young and Democrat turnout.

The cosmic balance of the universe is restored.

Phew.

it was a somewhat prosaic century HB. won't live long in the memory i'm afraid

So... just glancing at the news, there seems to be reports of a Trump bounceback?

Am I reading that wrong?

What are the actual polls showing (I don't know enough about swing states to anaylse them correctly)

Obs... fingers crossed and all that....

Here's an exit poll of the 2016 Georgia result and an analysis of how Biden's support differs from Trump's

https://edition.cnn.com/election/2016/results/exit-polls/georgia/presid…

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/why-biden-s-poll-lead-d…

Basically in Georgia Trump won the over 45s, and won whites by a big margin. Biden does a lot better with over 65s and amongst whites than Hilary did.

So even though Biden appears to be doing slightly worse amongst blacks and latinos than Hilary, the better performance amongst whites and seniors in Georgia might be enough.

If Biden doesn't get Georgia?  

Is it me or is the news only really reporting Obama campaigning?  I don't see Kamala really at all and little Biden.

I wish rof did a fingers crossed emoji in their, pitifully shit, emoji section....

and I can't post pictures

Here you go 

🤞

Hotblack - yes that is exactly what I am saying. The polls are even more wrong today than they were in 2016  and Trump will win because of that. 

Abbeywell28 Oct 20 09:45

Reply | 

Report

Polls mean diddly squat

Gosh  all these experts on here who know FVCK ALL  about polls.....

Last time he won key swing states by very fine margins but it pushed him over the line for Electoral College votes.
 

The Economist is giving Biden something like a 96% chance of winning the EC this time not just the popular vote. And the Dems to win majority in Senate and hold majority in the House. 

Will be quite spectacular if the polls get it wrong again. 
 

UK polls predicted GE last time after having got it wrong for the one before. 

This suggestion that Latinos are all going to fall behind Biden is a nonsense. I have a feeling that a greater proportion of Latinos swinging towards Trump is going to be an election theme just as the white working class was the theme of 2016. 

The amount of ignorance in these comments is astounding:

1. Preventing Americans from having affordable health care

No, he wants to reform the system to make it better. Obamacare is a disaster. 

2. Stopping women from having abortions

No, no-one wants to do that. Even if Roe v Wade was overturned (which it never will be), that would simply mean that each State would make it's own laws with regards to abortion. The Democrats want "post-birth abortions" - does that sit well with anyone here? 

3. Continuing policies of mass incarceration of blacks and Latinos 

You have Biden, who authored the Criminal Justice Bill that is responsible for mass black incarceration for minor drug offences, Harris, who locked up thousands of blacks for minor drug offences and withheld evidence that would have overturned the convictions of innocent people. Then you have Trump, who has enacted criminal justice reform, pardoned numerous black people who were unfairly convicted and has committed $500bn to help black communities over the course of his next term. The Democrats have never done a thing for black people - just look at the cities where they have been in power for decades. 

4. Inability to control violence in Philadelphia, etc. 

It's not the President's job to control violent mobs in a City. That is the mandate of the Mayor and police department. The same people saying that the riots are "Trump's" America are the same morons who would be calling him a fascist if he sent in the National Guard or Army. Every single city where there's been mass violence has been Democrat run. Minnesota, NY, LA, Philly, Kenosha, Portland, and on and on. That tells you all you need to know

If Biden gets in, the Dems will use the 25th Amendment to get rid of him soon after and usher in a far-left administration under Harris (the most left-wing member of the entire Senate). Sure, we could all do without Trump's moronic tweeting but if he loses America will enter a massive decline. 

@ Jonatton - Can you be a little more specific?  Which of the facts I mention do you disagree with? 

Odd then that you said "start to finish" . 

If you can be bothered, you should search for Virginia governor Ralph Northam's comments and the bill he proposed to provide an option for parents to decide whether to abort after the baby has been born. It's an extreme position but he's not alone in this view among Democrats.

I can feel an ass-kicking coming on:

AHEM:

1. Preventing Americans from having affordable health care

No, he wants to reform the system to make it better. Obamacare is a disaster. 

"The Obamacare is a disaster" meme is a false claim propagated by the Republicans and private healthcare lobbyists. It has not worked perfectly. No system does. But it has increased access to healthcare for many who were previously denied it and reduced cost to users. Trump's reforms have simply increased costs to users, by cutting federal subsidies, and restricting the scope of cover that employers (including such organisations as you know, Walmart, Amazon, Apple, General Motors, people who are short a bob or two). Given that Trump has simultaneously cut taxes for the rich, it is difficult to see his cuts to Obamacare subsidies as anything other than mean-spirited.

2. Stopping women from having abortions

No, no-one wants to do that. Even if Roe v Wade was overturned (which it never will be), that would simply mean that each State would make it's own laws with regards to abortion. The Democrats want "post-birth abortions" - does that sit well with anyone here? 

"Post-birth abortions" is not "Democrat" policy. Trump has actively restricted access to abortions worldwide (even in cases of incestuous rape) by cutting US government funding to any health organisation that provides terminations under any circumstances.

He also packed the Court with conservatives precisely in order to restrict abortion access. That pretty much looks like trying to stop women from having abortions, by, you know, actively taking steps to make it harder for women to have abortions both in the US and worldwide.

3. Continuing policies of mass incarceration of blacks and Latinos 

You have Biden, who authored the Criminal Justice Bill that is responsible for mass black incarceration for minor drug offences, Harris, who locked up thousands of blacks for minor drug offences and withheld evidence that would have overturned the convictions of innocent people. Then you have Trump, who has enacted criminal justice reform, pardoned numerous black people who were unfairly convicted and has committed $500bn to help black communities over the course of his next term. The Democrats have never done a thing for black people - just look at the cities where they have been in power for decades. 

Both Biden and Harris have history in the war on crime, but now repent on their sins, and promote respectively cannabis decriminalisation at the federal level, and legalisation at Harris' case. As marijuana arrests continue to exceed all arrests for crimes of violence in the US despite legalisation in certain states, federal decriminalisation is the single biggest reform that could be implemented to stop mass incarceration of blacks and Latinos. Trump has had four years and done nothing in this regard.

Trump "enacting" legislation just means he signed the fvcking bit of paper. The criminal justice reform legislation was bipartisan, but mostly Democrat. He just signed it, and then had the fvcking temerity to say that without him there would have been no reform. 

As for his use of the executive pardon, if only there were a publically available list of who he pardoned?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency…

I wonder how that compares to other recent presidents. Oh, again, if only there was a list of people given clemency by Obama

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_granted_executive_clemency…

Looks to me like Obama pardoned and commuted a lot more ordinary people per year in office than Donald, and that many of Donald's pardons were for his corrupt mates.

I mean you are right in one sense. He has pardoned some Black people. Conrad Black.

BOOM!

4. Inability to control violence in Philadelphia, etc. 

It's not the President's job to control violent mobs in a City. That is the mandate of the Mayor and police department. The same people saying that the riots are "Trump's" America are the same morons who would be calling him a fascist if he sent in the National Guard or Army. Every single city where there's been mass violence has been Democrat run. Minnesota, NY, LA, Philly, Kenosha, Portland, and on and on.

That tells you all you need to know

Erm, not true

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53991722

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_George_Floyd_protests_in_the_Unit…

and anyway since the cities with the most urban poor are democrat run, that is what you would expect, irrespective of the precise policies pursued. Indeed as per the BBC article 64 of the top 100 cities are run by Democrats, so even if urban rioting and crime were evenly distributed, there would be twice as many Democrat run cities.

If Biden gets in, the Dems will use the 25th Amendment to get rid of him soon after and usher in a far-left administration under Harris (the most left-wing member of the entire Senate).

Erm, are you out of your fvcking mind? Earlier you were berating Harris for being too right wing in her prosecutor days. And since Bernie Sanders is in the Senate, you have just demonstrated just how full of hot wet sh1t you are because Sanders was clearly more left wing than Harris, hence why the establishment closed ranks around Biden.

Sure, we could all do without Trump's moronic tweeting but if he loses America will enter a massive decline. 

Well that's one way of looking at it. Others might regard pivoting to a greener economy, social justice, ending the war on drugs and mass incarceration, fairer taxation as an improvement.

Pwnsville. Population you.

Gerry, Bernie Sanders would like a word with you about your suggestion that Harris is the most left wing senator

"It takes about 5 seconds on google to show this up for the bollox" 

Jonathan Yeah: Maybe you should get some training on how to use google.

The BBC (legit source) has the following story about Northam and his abortion bill in Virginia: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47066307

The story contains the following direct quote from Northam:

"The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

The wording "what the mother and the family desired" is clearly saying that the mother would have a choice as to whether or not a born infant would be given medical care or left to die. That's exactly what Gerry Atric said.

"It takes about 5 seconds on google to show this up for the bollox" 

Jonathan Yeah: Maybe you should get some training on how to use google.

The BBC (legit source) has the following story about Northam and his abortion bill in Virginia: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47066307

The story contains the following direct quote from Northam:

"The infant would be delivered, the infant would be kept comfortable, the infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

The wording "what the mother and the family desired" is clearly saying that the mother would have a choice as to whether or not a born infant would be given medical care or left to die. That's exactly what Gerry Atric said.

Ralph Northam is a paediatric neurologist. The quote he gave was in the context of NON VIABLE FETUSES:

Here is the full quote:

"There may be a fetus that's nonviable. So in this particular example, if a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen," Northam, a pediatric neurosurgeon, told Washington radio station WTOP. "The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired. And then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother."

What you are talking about is a brain dead baby. He is a paediatric neurologist. He knows what he is talking about. It looks to me as no different from the policies in fact adopted in the UK in relation to non-viable babies and the policy in fact adopted in the UK in relation to people with "Do not resuscitate" orders.

It certainly is not  a position in favour of infanticide. But a statement by one Democrat, who just so happens to have enormous experience in the relevant medical and ethical field.

Pwnsville. Population 2.

This relates to cases of severe deformities or where the foetus is not viable. I am fine with it. Clearly preferable to terminate these pregnancies earlier if detectable. The unnatural thing here is keeping these poor creatures alive artificially to suffer.

Sad to see this twisted to an agenda.

Blimey, Gerry, that was an impressive stream of gobshite right there.

If nothing else, it was a useful insight into the moronic “thought” processes of the Trump apologist...

"What you are talking about is a brain dead baby. He is a paediatric neurologist. He knows what he is talking about. It looks to me as no different from the policies in fact adopted in the UK in relation to non-viable babies and the policy in fact adopted in the UK in relation to people with "Do not resuscitate" orders."

"This relates to cases of severe deformities or where the foetus is not viable. I am fine with it."

Non-viable =/= brain dead =/= severe deformities

Non-viable fetus means fetus cannot survive outside the womb. If that's the case it's a non-issue because there would not be a live born infant. There would be no resuscitation or discussion with mother. 

Brain dead infant. One cannot tell a newborn infant is brain dead on sight. This is how such cases are handled in the UK: https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/people/parents-brain-dead-baby-life…  Put them on a machine, check for signs of brain activity, if none over reasonable period, turn off machine. It's complete nonsense to start talking about "the policy in fact adopted in the UK" when that's not the policy.

Severe deformities. Now we get into the real substance of this. What are "severe deformities"?  Okay for the mother to have the choice whether or not to resusitate the infant that displays down's syndrome on birth? 

Infanticide is still infanticide even if the infant left to die has "severe deformities". 

I AGREE WITH ROB CANNON: WE SHOULD FORCE WOMEN TO BRING NONVIABLE FOETUSES TO TERM - ALL THE WHILE KNOWING THAT THE FOETUS DEVELOPING INSIDE THEM WHICH THEY HAD HOPED WOULD BE A HEALTHY HAPPY CHILD IS NONVIABLE - AND THEN GIVE BIRTH TO THEM

AND I AM OPEN TO THE QUESTION OF WHETHER WE THEN PROSECUTE THOSE WOMEN FOR MURDER AFTER THEY WATCH THEIR BABY DIE

AFTER ALL, WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE STATE IN PEOPLE’S LIVE IF NOT THIS?!?

Jonatton Yeah: "Northam made no reference to deformities as you can see from the above"

I used google to find the Northam interview on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkTopSKo1xs

In the interview (at 1 minute in), Northam says "They're done in cases where there may be severe deformities. There may be a fetus that’s non viable." 

HB in his "full quote" omitted the underlined wording that preceded his quote.  You relied on HB rather than checking yourself.  A lesson in the the importance of checking the primary sources.

So no dispute that Northam is clearly referring not only to non-viable fetuses (not that it is a fetus once it is born) but also to severe deformities.  Respect to LL for at least having the decency not to try to spin this point like you and HB did.

However LL is wrong equating "severe deformities" with "keeping these poor creatures alive artificially".  I was kept alive in an incubator for two months after I was born.  If my deformities were worse than they were should my parents have had the option to deny me medical care?

@Hotblack Desiato - The fact you've used the phrase "packing the court" to describe a President nominating judges to fill vacant Supreme Court seats tells me all I need to know about your mindset. 

Harris is not ideological, hence why she acted like a fascist when in power yet also has the single most left-wing voting record of any Senator (including Sanders). She is a purely self-centred, pathological politician. She will do whatever is expedient to her ambitions at any time. This is her history (her affair with Willie Brown, her behaviour during the Kavanaugh hearing and the fact she insinuated that Biden was a racist and rapist prior to accepting his offer of VP are all examples of how there are no limits to what she will do for ambition). If she's elected it will presumably be accompanied by a younger Democrat-majority congress who will influence her and the radical agenda that she ran on as a Presidential candidate. 

"Well that's one way of looking at it. Others might regard pivoting to a greener economy, social justice, ending the war on drugs and mass incarceration, fairer taxation as an improvement." - You're very naive if you think such policies will result in an improvement in society or the well-being of the people in it, but from reading your comment you seem very young which may explain the lack of perspective. 

This right here is a fabulous example of how the "hot button" issues of abortion completely derail political discussion, and how the Republicans keep getting away with their sh1t. Sensible people are debating the minutiae of comments by a paediatric neurosurgeon (and thus to be assumed to be an expert in the practical implication and ethics of viable and non-viable babies with mental deformities), who is governor of one state in the US, as to whether or not this amounts to "post birth abortion" and whether that represents the policy of "the Democrats". Maybe he is wrong. Maybe he is right. It doesn't make him a monster either way, or the Democrats beyond the pale.

It is an issue on which there are no easy answers. It is also an issue which affects a tiny number of people and does not, contrary to hysterics, lead to Auschwitz.

Far more important in terms of child suffering and death in the US are:

1. the appalling rate of infant mortality in the US due to violence and neglect in the family home, which is far in excess of a level that any civilised country would tolerate:

https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/fatality.pdf

An average of five children a day in the US die from abuse or neglect in the family home or a rate of 2.39 every 100,000 infants 

2. The appalling rate of child homicide (over 3,000 deaths a year)

https://www.thetrace.org/2019/08/children-teens-gun-deaths-data/

The factors that drive those appalling statistics include: access to birth control and abortion, poverty, lack of government social services (the rates are higher in states with lower per capita social service spending), mass incarceration removing fathers from the community, lack of investment in education, job losses due to globalisation etc, gun control.

Largely, but not exclusively issues on which Trump is in the wrong (the only thing he is right about is the need for tarriffs to protect domestic jobs)

But instead of focussing on those issues, which are issues where political change is possible and would make clear benefits, instead discussion gets sidetracked into the emotive and moral gray area of late abortion and the treatment response to severely mentally disabled/non-viable babies

f she's elected it will presumably be accompanied by a younger Democrat-majority congress who will influence her and the radical agenda that she ran on as a Presidential candidate. 

Bring it on I say. Since Obama cannot stand again, and given what W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Trump and Mike Pence are like, I'd take Harris everytime.

Oh, and by the way, I don't like Biden. I didn't want him to be the Democrat candidate. I think he is a depressing choice. But whatever is true about Biden is true in spades about Trump.

This election, unlike 2016, there is a clear worse outcome which is four more years of Trump: a massively corrupt complusive narcissist who openly brags about sexually assaulting women and throws out inflammatory tweets inciting political violence (Proud Boys Stand By) 

how there are no limits to what she will do for ambition

Erm, insinuating that Biden is racist and a bit rapey isn't naked ambition. Its calling a spade a spade. In any normal year, Biden would be a lousy candidate.

It is a sign of how low US politics has sunk that the choice last time was between:

1. A massively corrupt compulsive liar psychopath

2. A massively corrupt compulsive liar rapey narcissist

This time we have:

1. A corrupt rapey machine politician with senile dementia

2. A massively corrupt compulsive liar rapey narcissist.

Although at least this time there is a clear choice as to which would be better or worse.

Basically:

Biden is less corrupt, unstable, rapey, inflammatory and incompetent than Trump. And because Biden is more on the right side of history now in relation to ending the war on drugs/mass incarceration/wealth inequality/affordable healthcare/reproductive rights/climate change/gun control he is obviously a better outcome than Trump.

He's on the right side of the zeitgeist.

Only history can determine if he's on the right side of history.

And, yes, history is written by the winners.

But still and all, whether he is on the right side remains to be seen.

@Tangent Boy

I didn't claim that post-birth abortion was official Democrat policy but some Dems are in favour of it, not just Northam. They are on the wrong side of every issue (see the current attempt to legalise discrimination in California via article 1 section 16 of the California constitution). Whether well-meaning or purely cynical, their policies are destructive and cause breakdown of society. Can you name a single Democrat city that you think is being run well right now?  

As for Nandy, I was clearly being flippant, so it is actually you who is quoting out of context. However, her exact quote was "Antisemitism is a particular kind of racism, that punches up instead of punching down". If you don't have a problem with that sentiment then you might want to sit and think about it. 

'ending the war on drugs'

Hopefully you desperate drug users will swing it

The fact that Trump thinks he can win (and you only have to follow his tweets to know this) means there is more than 50% chance he can win. There are articles out there in established political magazines that point to gaps in the polls but do not get enough attention. Dems still have organisational issues on the ground like 2016. They have done very little door knocking in swing states due to the pandemic. Advanced voting maybe high but due to pandemic, I think it is a false metric. Pandemic maybe causing more people on both sides to vote earlier than expected. The two sides are very polarised and both knew weeks ahead who they will vote for. 

My feeling is if Trump wins it, it will be a narrow electoral college win with losing the popular vote. 

Abbeywell30 Oct 20 10:59

Reply| 

Report

What do American's call left wing?  is that what we call a Liberal Democrat?
 

Basically anyone to the left of Attila the Hun is a socialist/communist/marxist*
 

*that they use these terms interchangeably underlines their ignorance on this issue. 

HB absolutely bossing this thread. 
 

Biden with a landslide. Sensible Americans have been waiting 4 years to get their country back. No-one who voted HRC or abstained in 16 is thinking Trump has been such a success they’ll vote for him this time. 
 

Over 50% of the electorate have already voted. Most of those who haven’t will be Trumpers who don’t give a fook about queuing with hundreds of others in the middle of a pandemic. Biden has the votes already in the bag. Trump has to hope those who want to vote for him but haven’t yet done so actually turn up on Tuesday.

Biden could take a shit in a sock, put an elastic band round the top and that shit in a sock would beat Trump.

invictvs30 Oct 20 20:18

Reply| 

Report

The fact that Trump thinks he can win (and you only have to follow his tweets to know this) means there is more than 50% chance he can win. 
 

Trump clearly has some form of degenerative brain condition. If you look at the interviews he gave in the 80s/90s he was actually quite articulate. A conversation with him now sounds like something you’d hear in the local dementia ward. 
 

The fact Trump thinks something has nothing to do with that something being grounded in reality or being in any way logical. 

I disagree, write him off at your own peril. He is not smart in the conventional sense but he is very shrewd at bending and breaking the rules to fit his ego and needs. 

"Trump clearly has some form of degenerative brain condition. If you look at the interviews he gave in the 80s/90s he was actually quite articulate. A conversation with him now sounds like something you’d hear in the local dementia ward."

This is the difference between Trump and Biden.  Biden might seem like he has dementia now, but back in the 80s/90s he was just as inarticulate and confused.  So clearly no deterioration there.

It seems crazy that the two candidates for president are aged 74 and 77 (almost 78). Both are older than Bill Clinton, who was first elected president 28 years ago. By comparison Angela Merkel is 66 and is planning to step down as Chancellor next year - and she's been in the job for 15 years.

I watched a little bit of the trump road show in Michigan today. Either it was really cold there or his Covid meds are taking a toll on him. Something unusual when you hear him speak, cant tell exactly what 

I disagree, write him off at your own peril. He is not smart in the conventional sense but he is very shrewd at bending and breaking the rules to fit his ego and needs.
 

but how does this help him win an election?

are you saying he will use the presidency to manipulate the vote?

that seems to be a worry on the dem side

Gerry and Rob have been badly brutalised here. 
The authoritarian mindset is sort of awfully fascinating to see close up, but for real authoritarian nutters we already have the Middle East and Afghanistan. Don’t want them in the West too. 

I don't actually think there's anything wrong with their ages per say. I think the issue is that Trump's a massive twot and Biden is an uninspiring candidate who'd be useless against anyone who wasn't a massive twot.

The "shy Trump" supporter is not a thing this time. It might well have been a thing last time, because there were lots of "undecideds" in the polls running up to the election itself, who ended up voting for Trump. Maybe they genuinely made their mind up at the last minute. Maybe they were Trump all along but were too embarrassed to say.

But it isn't a thing this year for a number of reasons.

1. There are almost no undecideds in the polls. Everyone has already made their mind up. It is one thing to hypothesise that someone might internally intend to vote Trump but not be willing to say so, and so says that they are undecided, but quite another to suppose that they would say that they were voting for Biden but actually they were voting for Trump.

2. The turnout is already 2/3 of the 2016 turnout nationally, and in Texas, is at 100.7% of the 2016 turnout. So when people run polls, most of the people they ask HAVE ALREADY VOTED.  Particularly in places like North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Arizona, Texas, and Nevada. The turnout in North Carolina is already 96% of the 2016 turnout. This means if you do an opinion poll now about voting intentions in North Carolina, 9/10 of it is an exit poll. So supposing that there are "shy Trump" supporters means that people who voted Trump are lying and saying that they voted for Biden.

3. Polls are a mixture of live caller, automated and online. The hypothesis that when people are filling in an anonymous online poll they are going to lie because they are embarrassed, is less compelling than in a face to face interivew.

4. Early voting statistics for many states reveal the voter registrations. They show a heavy Democrat turnout. Other states don't reveal voter registrations, but do record ethnicity, whether people voted in the previous election, and gender. These show high female turnout, high black and Latino turnout.