Trump vs. Biden - the Final Showdown

[Holman]

Washington Post OpEd

Ah, yes. One of those open-minded what's-best-for-everyone solution finders at the [checks notes]... American Enterprise Institute.

[El Guapo]

Yeah. IIRC, last time Democrats had big leads (not this big, though) in early voting in most of the swing states and we saw how that turned out.

And yeah, if there's a big pandemic surge (especially in important states) that makes people more reluctant to go to the polls on Election Day that could make a major difference.

This is different this time. NC for example has over 10 times as many mail in ballots as usual. The old trends may not be relevant.

They may not, but at the same time we have zero data points for what the new trend would be here. So I don't think this adds much to me beyond what the polls show.

[LawBeefaroni]

A digital ad released by a fundraising arm of the Trump campaign on Sept. 11 calling on people to “support our troops” uses a stock photo of Russian-made fighter jets and weapons.

The ad, which was made by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, features silhouettes of three soldiers walking as a fighter jet flies over them. The ad first appeared on Sept. 8 and ran until Sept. 12.

How many times can this keep happening and continue to be chalked up to incompetence?


For the Grogs:

“That’s definitely a MiG-29,” said Pierre Sprey, who helped design both the F-16 and A-10 planes for the U.S. Air Force. “I’m glad to see it’s supporting our troops.”

He noted the angle of the aircraft’s tail, the way the tail is swept far back, and the spacing of the engines, along with the tunnel between them.

Ruslan Pukhov, director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies in Moscow, confirmed that the planes are Russian MiG-29s, and also said the soldier on the far right in the ad carries an AK-74 assault rifle.

[Zaxxon]

Washington Post OpEd

Ah, yes. One of those open-minded what's-best-for-everyone solution finders at the [checks notes]... American Enterprise Institute.

It's interesting, as even if all the 'fears' she mentions came true, that would objectively be a far better outcome for everyone.

[Holman]

The soldier silhouettes don't look US to me. The helmets and gun barrels are the wrong pattern. That's an AK-74 on the right.

The whole image looks like something done in a Russian context.

Is the Trump campaign outsourcing its image work to the Moscow office? "Support OUR Troops" is a nice touch.

EDIT: Do I get Grog points for typing before I saw the "For the Grogs" note?

[malchior]

Washington Post OpEd

Ah, yes. One of those open-minded what's-best-for-everyone solution finders at the [checks notes]... American Enterprise Institute.

I also came to find out she worked for Jesse Helms for 10 years. So I went back and can't help but notice all the issues she brought up and somehow didn't touch on his rampant racism being an issue for her. *What a shock*.

It's interesting, as even if all the 'fears' she mentions came true, that would objectively be a far better outcome for everyone.

That's the problem. She wants the white ahem right people getting helped. Not everyone.

[LordMortis]

creating an executive-legislative monolith of unlimited political power; an increase in the number of Supreme Court seats to ensure a liberal supermajority; passage of devastating economic measures

Sure, I don't like this stuff here that he's doing but this other stuff over here that he's doing right now I'm going to accuse the democrats of doing because that's what envision them doing based on the theories of underpants to profit.

Ummm.... I heard you out. I find you to be either ostrich like or dishonest and unworthy of publication. I don't know how you are or what the American Enterprise Institute represent but you hit three strikes and you're out. The window to be heard has closed.

[Holman]

It's part of a push to bring NeverTrumpers back home.

It's really something when your campaign messaging is down to "Sure, you know our guy is an incompetent lying asshole, but his opponent is a [caricature] controlled by [scary boogeyman of the month]!!"

[malchior]

creating an executive-legislative monolith of unlimited political power; an increase in the number of Supreme Court seats to ensure a liberal supermajority; passage of devastating economic measures

Ummm.... I heard you out. I find you to be either ostrich like or dishonest and unworthy of publication. I don't know how you are or what the American Enterprise Institute represent but you hit three strikes and you're out. The window to be heard has closed.

AEI is interesting because it at one time it was one of the top Conservative think tanks. It sank into hackery along with almost all of the Conservative intellectuals over the last 20 years. Still some of the older crowd are still principled conservatives. They even have a few rebels such as Norm Ornstein who broke with Conservative orthodoxy and has loudly spoken out against Trumpism. I hadn't looked at their 'scholars' page in a while to see who is involved now. Let's say...it's a really, really, really white crowd.

Edit: And they have some demons - I didn't even notice John "torture memo" Yoo at first. Fuck that guy.

[El Guapo]

It's part of a push to bring NeverTrumpers back home.

It's really something when your campaign messaging is down to "Sure, you know our guy is an incompetent lying asshole, but his opponent is a [caricature] controlled by [scary boogeyman of the month]!!"

This is a pretty good Never Trump response.

Basically it's absurd to argue that the right needs to support Trump out of a fear of the left, because if Trump wins reelection, what's very likely to happen is everyone will regard the Bernie wing's arguments as having been validated, and the likely 2024 Democratic nominee will be very much farther to the left.

[malchior]

It's also a case of saying that any Democrat is no better than a socialist. She even implicitly evades this by making him a 'figurehead' to AOC or something because the premise is absurd without that canard. The whole thing is disingenuous which really puts into relief the point made in the Bulwark piece that this is one of the few angles they can fall back on. The old reliable so to speak. Trump is such a dumpster fire that they are scrambling for any votes outside the cult that they can.

[LawBeefaroni]

EDIT: Do I get Grog points for typing before I saw the "For the Grogs" note?

Yes, 7.62 points!

[Holman]

EDIT: Do I get Grog points for typing before I saw the "For the Grogs" note?

Yes, 7.62 points!

Alas, only 5.45 for this one.

[Holman]

It's also a case of saying that any Democrat is no better than a socialist. She even implicitly evades this by making him a 'figurehead' to AOC or something because the premise is absurd without that canard. The whole thing is disingenuous which really puts into relief the point made in the Bulwark piece that this is one of the few angles they can fall back on. The old reliable so to speak. Trump is such a dumpster fire that they are scrambling for any votes outside the cult that they can.

They've got a point. Has there ever been a fifty-year party-establishment veteran who *wasn't* secretly controlled by a handful of controversial freshman representatives?

[Grifman]

The figurehead thing is just an excuse. Biden ran a middle of the road primary contest, and he consistently pushed back, even after his nomination, against some of the more far left positions of the people such as Saunders, AOC and others. Biden has obviously slowed down but that doesn't mean he's incompetent or not his own man. This is just a BS excuse not to vote for him.

[Little Raven]

That could include the abolition of the filibuster, creating an executive-legislative monolith of unlimited political power; an increase in the number of Supreme Court seats to ensure a liberal supermajority; passage of devastating economic measures such as the Green New Deal; nationalized health care; the dismantling of U.S. borders and the introduction of socialist-inspired measures that will wreck an economy still recovering from the pandemic shutdown.

Huh. Well, to be fair, once politicians start packing the courts, you're generally looking at everything going rapidly downhill. And if you honestly believe that your political opposition is going to do that sort of thing, well, sure, you can justify doing some pretty extreme stuff. Maybe even voting for a total idiot.

But the idea that the Democrats are going to do any of this is wacky nonsense. It's "Obama is going to build FEMA extermination camps under the local Walmart" type material. Democrats are many things, but "effective movers of policy" is not really a label they've earned. Of everything on that list, the only one that is halfway feasible is the elimination of the filibuster, and Democrats are far from united about that. Everything else is just delusions of persecution.

[malchior]

It appears negatives aren't going to work against Trump. Everyone who would be negative on him likely are already set. We don't know if Joe is set there. Will a sudden Barr investigation announcement hurt him? Is there some bombshell coming his way? Maybe. It doesn't mean they'll vote Trump instead but they might not vote at all. This is going to hinge on how stable Joe's lead remains and turnout...during a pandemic. We are heading into white knuckle time.

https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1306036512870416384

[Paingod]

It appears negatives aren't going to work against Trump.

Nope. Anyone who was willing to walk away from him has by now. Those who hate him aren't going to suddenly be won over by him. The few on the fence or with their heads buried in the sand may come up for air - but I don't expect them to.

Political spending on both sides is pointless right now except to keep fanning the flames. Votes aren't going to change, but you can encourage people to get to the polls or mailboxes. That should be Biden's entire focus. Vote. Vote. Vote.

I can't think of a more important election in recent history. On one hand we have a bowl of plain oatmeal. On the other we have a flaming mountain of excrement surrounded by chanting cultists trying to summon up an elder god of destruction through mass human sacrifice.

I thought Trump was grossly incompetent and unfit for the office in 2016. He was the reason I got out and voted for the first time in my adult life. There was finally a politician that stood out to me, and not in a good way. I plan to vote against his party as long as it lives for the rest of my life.

[Unagi]

I can't think of a more important election in recent history.

Without hyperbole or drama, I honestly think this is the most critical election since, well, what ever you want to call the process that selected Washington as our first.

If Trump gets re-elected, what it says about the core of America will be undeniable (as we know who he is very well now), and then, politically, the next four years would see a change in America that makes these last 3.5 years look like ‘training lessons’. Russia.

I sincerely think this country is a shitty place to raise a family if he is re-elected and we will honestly probably scram if he is.

[GungHo]

God how I loathe those diatribes (I see the same thing on Facebook).

"Trump is a horrible racist person who can't keep his mouth shut, is destroying the Constitution with his criminality, and can't say a single honest word, but I have to vote for him because Biden might provide healthcare for everybody."

I'd give anything to be living in the "left-wing apocalyptic hellscape" that was America under Obama's administration when Democrats were in control of Congress.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... y-want-do/

Pretty good rebuke to that American Institute piece

[pr0ner]

God how I loathe those diatribes (I see the same thing on Facebook).

"Trump is a horrible racist person who can't keep his mouth shut, is destroying the Constitution with his criminality, and can't say a single honest word, but I have to vote for him because Biden might provide healthcare for everybody."

I'd give anything to be living in the "left-wing apocalyptic hellscape" that was America under Obama's administration when Democrats were in control of Congress.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... y-want-do/

Pretty good rebuke to that American Institute piece

Alexandra Petri is REALLY good at that kind of article.

[Fireball]

Washington Post OpEd

Ah, yes. One of those open-minded what's-best-for-everyone solution finders at the [checks notes]... American Enterprise Institute.

If Democrats can't win the votes of former Jesse Helms staffers who write op-eds for the Washington Post, well, then, umm... there are a couple of precincts in Maryland that might slip out of reach?

[Isgrimnur]

NYT

A somewhat awkward moment on the campaign trail Tuesday — when Joseph R. Biden Jr. played a few bars of “Despacito” from his phone after being introduced by its singer, Luis Fonsi — took a turn early Wednesday morning when President Trump shared a manipulated video of the moment with N.W.A.’s anti-police anthem “____ tha Police” dubbed in.

The doctored video, which Mr. Trump shared twice, was in line with his frequent attempts to suggest that Mr. Biden opposes law enforcement, including his false claim that Mr. Biden wants to defund the police — a position the former vice-president has repeatedly emphasized that he opposes.

As a senator, in fact, Mr. Biden was the architect of much of the hard-line criminal justice legislation of the 1980s and 1990s, a fact that some progressive groups have criticized.

“What is this all about,” Mr. Trump wrote in a message that accompanied the video. Twitter later added a “Manipulated media” warning to it.

The doctored video was created by the pro-Trump meme-makers behind the account “The United Spot.” They describe their content as “100% parody/satire,” but their YouTube page offers a wide range of disinformation narratives targeting Democratic politicians, the United States Postal Service and Anthony Fauci, while also amplifying toxic conspiracies like Pizzagate.

[Defiant]

Onion: Fox News Slams CNN For Providing Biden Each Question Seconds Before He Answered It

“Biden’s responses to CNN’s questions clearly show that he’d been tipped off as to what the question was going to be at least several seconds beforehand when it was being asked—how is that fair?” asked Tucker Carlson Tonight host Tucker Carlson, echoing the criticisms of several other conservative media outlets that Biden was given an unfair advantage by getting to hear the entire question before replying

[Defiant]

https://twitter.com/ryanstruyk/status/1 ... 3049700355

Joe Biden, g-d slayer?

[Kraken]

God's a Republican, so that's just one more point in ByeDon's favor.

[Scoop20906]

I sincerely think this country is a shitty place to raise a family if he is re-elected and we will honestly probably scram if he is.

If he does, we will have to start a thread for that.

[Little Raven]

Ok, not loving this.

Young Americans favor Joe Biden over President Trump, according to a new survey, but Trump's supporters appear more enthusiastic about that choice.

Sixty percent of likely voters under the age of 30 say they will vote for Biden, compared with 27% for Trump, according to a poll from the Harvard Kennedy School Institute of Politics out Monday. But 56% of likely voters who support the president are "very enthusiastic" about voting for him, compared with 35% of likely voters who back the Democratic nominee when asked about their enthusiasm.

It's hard enough to get young voters to actually vote when they ARE enthusiastic. (eh, Bernie?) A 20 point gap sounds insurmountable, but a determined minority can absolutely punch above their weight at the polls.

That said, there is some good news.

Sixty-three percent of respondents said they will "definitely" be voting in November's election. At the same time four years ago, slightly less than half (47%) of young Americans polled said they would definitely vote.

[Skinypupy]

Of course Trumpers are more enthusiastic...they're part of a cult. That wild enthusiasm comes with the territory.

I don't know many people (including myself) who are particularly "enthusiastic" about Biden. I think he's objectively the better choice and support many of his positions, but the only thing I'm really enthusiastic about is putting an end to Trump's lunacy, and that has more to do with Trump simply leaving than Biden coming in.

[noxiousdog]

Of course Trumpers are more enthusiastic...they're part of a cult. That wild enthusiasm comes with the territory.

I don't know many people (including myself) who are particularly "enthusiastic" about Biden. I think he's objectively the better choice and support many of his positions, but the only thing I'm really enthusiastic about is putting an end to Trump's lunacy, and that has more to do with Trump simply leaving than Biden coming in.

And, I'm guessing they are pretty enthusiastic about voting against Trump.

[Paingod]

I'm pretty damned enthusiastic about voting against Trump and every Republican party option that comes across my ballot until Republicans in general seem to recover a sense of dignity and standards. I don't plan on ever missing another election.

It makes me sad to say I actually voted for Collins in the last election. At the time she had a pretty good reputation with her constituents.

[El Guapo]

Of course Trumpers are more enthusiastic...they're part of a cult. That wild enthusiasm comes with the territory.

I don't know many people (including myself) who are particularly "enthusiastic" about Biden. I think he's objectively the better choice and support many of his positions, but the only thing I'm really enthusiastic about is putting an end to Trump's lunacy, and that has more to do with Trump simply leaving than Biden coming in.

And, I'm guessing they are pretty enthusiastic about voting against Trump.

Yeah, measuring voter enthusiasm only in terms of "who are you enthusiastic to vote for" is missing half the equation.

[Unagi]

I will never fill in a little black circle with more intent.

[YellowKing]

Sixty-three percent of respondents said they will "definitely" be voting in November's election. At the same time four years ago, slightly less than half (47%) of young Americans polled said they would definitely vote.

I'll believe that when I see it.

[LawBeefaroni]

Sixty-three percent of respondents said they will "definitely" be voting in November's election. At the same time four years ago, slightly less than half (47%) of young Americans polled said they would definitely vote.

I'll believe that when I see it.

I believe it. All the young anti-maskers are fired up.

[Paingod]

I will never fill in a little black circle with more intent.

If it could lend more weight to my vote, I'd use a drop of blood.

[Defiant]

Sixty-three percent of respondents said they will "definitely" be voting in November's election. At the same time four years ago, slightly less than half (47%) of young Americans polled said they would definitely vote.

I'll believe that when I see it.

Last time, voter turnout was in the low 40s, which doesn't seem far off from the results. But 63% would be higher than the overall turnout in the election last time, which was historically high, so that makes me a touch skeptical (still possible, but then I would also expect other age groups to turn out in even higher percentages)

On the other hand, if 2018 was any indication, where their voter turnout jumped from around 20% (in previous midterms) to just over 30%, that would suggest it's possible.

But yeah, I'll believe it when I see it. Please make me see it.

[El Guapo]

I would be shocked if voter turnout (including youth voter turnout) wasn't higher in 2020 than in 2018 and 2016 (especially 2016). How *much* higher is I think impossible to estimate, though.

[Grifman]

It appears negatives aren't going to work against Trump. Everyone who would be negative on him likely are already set. We don't know if Joe is set there. Will a sudden Barr investigation announcement hurt him? Is there some bombshell coming his way? Maybe. It doesn't mean they'll vote Trump instead but they might not vote at all. This is going to hinge on how stable Joe's lead remains and turnout...during a pandemic. We are heading into white knuckle time.

https://twitter.com/HeerJeet/status/1306036512870416384

I think that was pretty obvious a long time ago. When asked what she would do if Trump went out on the street and shot someone as he famously said, aTeumper's response was, "It depends - who did he shoot?" They literally don't care. He's done so much stuff that would have in the past caused huge drops in support that he should be polling in negative numbers now. But it is almost cult like at this point - why else do you have people refusing simple steps like wearing masks and keeping social distance, why do you have people risking their lives, why do you have people believing Trump more than medical experts. The leader is infallible and their word is the final word, he is the source of all knowledge (how many times has Trump said he knows subject X better than anyone) and cannot be challenged. Trumpism is a massive cult, plain and simple.

[malchior]

I would be shocked if voter turnout (including youth voter turnout) wasn't higher in 2020 than in 2018 and 2016 (especially 2016). How *much* higher is I think impossible to estimate, though.

I think the estimate is indeed impossible because the uptick in turnout you'd expect is going to be tempered by pandemic, active suppression, and mail-in ballot rejection impacts just to name a few major headwinds.