Moderators: $iljanus, LawBeefaroni
Exactly.LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 1:57 pm I still suspect for many, "undecided" usually just means "still searching for a somewhat socially acceptable excuse for going with Trump."
I get that he couldn't have known before, but at the time of this tweet the reporter knows the person is a birther and still labels them "an undecided voter".ImLawBoy wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 2:02 pm Sure, but unless the reporter is a mind reader (or the person otherwise made it obvious), the person was rightly categorized as "undecided" at the time.
This is why I finally dropped the charade of being a registered Independent. Not that it made a difference to anyone else, but for me personally I felt I was just lying to myself.Skinypupy wrote:I have yet to meet an "undecided" or "independent" person who wasn't simply a conservative looking for cover.
Don't forget apathy. I think some "undecideds" just aren't going to bother voting.Skinypupy wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 2:39 pmExactly.LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 1:57 pm I still suspect for many, "undecided" usually just means "still searching for a somewhat socially acceptable excuse for going with Trump."
I have yet to meet an "undecided" or "independent" person who wasn't simply a conservative looking for cover.
This is our concern, Dude.LordMortis wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:27 pmThe best case any GOP position can hope from me is that I find their competitor so distasteful I sit out.
What I am worried about is the shame factor for those who are not vociferous about their Trumplove. Preference falsification is a thing, and I bet it's an even bigger thing considering the douchebaggery over the past 4 years. As someone else commented on in another thread, those suburban moms vote. Team Trump was targeting them for a reason, and it wasn't because they thought they had no chance in hell of getting their vote.El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:05 pm FWiW the number of undecideds in the polls is considerably smaller than in 2016, and Biden is generally a little bit north of 50% in the polls. Meaning that Trump has to win over at least some current Biden supporters, not just win "undecideds" / independents.
Not that it's in the bag or anything, but just saying that he's in a better position than Clinton.
FWIW there is very little statistical evidence supporting the notion of a hidden or shy Trump voter.Carpet_pissr wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:24 pmWhat I am worried about is the shame factor for those who are not vociferous about their Trumplove. Preference falsification is a thing, and I bet it's an even bigger thing considering the douchebaggery over the past 4 years. As someone else commented on in another thread, those suburban moms vote. Team Trump was targeting them for a reason, and it wasn't because they thought they had no chance in hell of getting their vote.El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:05 pm FWiW the number of undecideds in the polls is considerably smaller than in 2016, and Biden is generally a little bit north of 50% in the polls. Meaning that Trump has to win over at least some current Biden supporters, not just win "undecideds" / independents.
Not that it's in the bag or anything, but just saying that he's in a better position than Clinton.
It's the "my sister-in-law" types that NEVER say peep about politics, and really only care about their little insulated world. The chaos of protests spreading and news headlines about dark skinned people kicking white people out of their homes and breaking shit, etc. If you ONLY care about your little bubble, which candidate, just based on headlines, is MORE likely to protect your current lifestyle?
I think I've mentioned it before, but I do know quite a number of people that I guarantee you will vote for Trump, but would never say it, and might deny it even, if you asked. They likely can't stand Trump himself, but some of his talking points hit home, combined with the fact that these people have ALWAYS voted R straight ticket...they don't have a choice. Again, it's "which candidate is MORE likely to protect my safe, carefree, wealthy lifestyle?"
On the national level, I put it to you like this: I really don't like Stabenow. She's not even in the same zip code as so distasteful I won't vote her. I really don't like Peters, again not in the neighborhood of voting for John James. I have some unhappiness with Talib but honestly she's more good than bad. I'm not annoyed at having to support her.Carpet_pissr wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:02 pmThis is our concern, Dude.LordMortis wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 3:27 pmThe best case any GOP position can hope from me is that I find their competitor so distasteful I sit out.
Statistical evidence that's typically drawn from people indicating who they will vote for?El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:28 pmFWIW there is very little statistical evidence supporting the notion of a hidden or shy Trump voter.Carpet_pissr wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:24 pmWhat I am worried about is the shame factor for those who are not vociferous about their Trumplove. Preference falsification is a thing, and I bet it's an even bigger thing considering the douchebaggery over the past 4 years. As someone else commented on in another thread, those suburban moms vote. Team Trump was targeting them for a reason, and it wasn't because they thought they had no chance in hell of getting their vote.El Guapo wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 4:05 pm FWiW the number of undecideds in the polls is considerably smaller than in 2016, and Biden is generally a little bit north of 50% in the polls. Meaning that Trump has to win over at least some current Biden supporters, not just win "undecideds" / independents.
Not that it's in the bag or anything, but just saying that he's in a better position than Clinton.
It's the "my sister-in-law" types that NEVER say peep about politics, and really only care about their little insulated world. The chaos of protests spreading and news headlines about dark skinned people kicking white people out of their homes and breaking shit, etc. If you ONLY care about your little bubble, which candidate, just based on headlines, is MORE likely to protect your current lifestyle?
I think I've mentioned it before, but I do know quite a number of people that I guarantee you will vote for Trump, but would never say it, and might deny it even, if you asked. They likely can't stand Trump himself, but some of his talking points hit home, combined with the fact that these people have ALWAYS voted R straight ticket...they don't have a choice. Again, it's "which candidate is MORE likely to protect my safe, carefree, wealthy lifestyle?"
I thought it was pretty clear he was talking about her as a previously undecided voter who is now leaning Trump.Ralph-Wiggum wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 2:45 pmI get that he couldn't have known before, but at the time of this tweet the reporter knows the person is a birther and still labels them "an undecided voter".ImLawBoy wrote: Wed Aug 26, 2020 2:02 pm Sure, but unless the reporter is a mind reader (or the person otherwise made it obvious), the person was rightly categorized as "undecided" at the time.
Two women at last night's naturalization ceremony said they were never told they would be showcased at a political convention, and no one sought their consent. The Trump campaign declined to comment.
Option 3 - they are going with what actually works - social media targetting.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:29 pm This is interesting. The Trump campaign has cancelled all TV ad buys for the next couple of weeks. That's a total TV blackout as we move into the height of the campaign season. Two reasons have been suggested - one that they are short of cash (not likely), two, that their current ads just aren't working and they are having to retool. I'd say it's the latter, I've seen their ads and I just don't think they are working. I don't think any of the crap they are throwing at Biden are sticking to him.
A lot of their prime target, the elderly, aren't on social media but devour TV.malchior wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:45 pmOption 3 - they are going with what actually works - social media targetting.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:29 pm This is interesting. The Trump campaign has cancelled all TV ad buys for the next couple of weeks. That's a total TV blackout as we move into the height of the campaign season. Two reasons have been suggested - one that they are short of cash (not likely), two, that their current ads just aren't working and they are having to retool. I'd say it's the latter, I've seen their ads and I just don't think they are working. I don't think any of the crap they are throwing at Biden are sticking to him.
Do they? Most of the elderly I know don't care for television. "Nothing is on and there are more ads than show.", though I don't know if that applies to their consumption of TV news or current affairs programming.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:48 pm A lot of their prime target, the elderly, aren't on social media but devour TV.
Fox News is only turned off at my in-laws (74 and 78) house when I am there, because they know my politics and don't want to fight about it, or when there is a tennis grand slam on. On the other hand, Trump ads are redundant for them.LordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:50 pm I don't know about going forward but either his campaign or PACs advertise on nearly every page with advertising I open. Most especially google related pages, aka youtube. Ironically, every time I check worldometers for the latest covid stats there are adverts "asking" how Trump is doing or throwing shade at Biden.
Do they? Most of the elderly I know don't care for television. "Nothing is on and there are more ads than show.", though I don't know if that applies to their consumption of TV news or current affairs programming.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:48 pm A lot of their prime target, the elderly, aren't on social media but devour TV.
CNN kept showing the lawn get fuller...and fuller...and fuller. Masks? Ha!malchior wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 8:41 pm Just saw the opening of the RNC tonight and drive a stake through the Hatch Act. It has been circling the drain but it is dead*.
*Only applies when the GOP occupies the WH.
Edit: Also this sobering note. This whole thing is a fuck you to reason.
https://twitter.com/ChrisMegerian/statu ... 7015422976
malchior wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 8:41 pm Just saw the opening of the RNC tonight and drive a stake through the Hatch Act. It has been circling the drain but it is dead*.
Republicans argued that the South Lawn forms part of the President's residence, and therefore should not be classed as part of a federal building
It was lying. He lied. It isn't hard. They even fact check them and show how the speech is completely inaccurate throughout. If it was one inaccuracy...that's a slip. An entire speech of them is somehow just exaggeration. The NY Times' standards can't keep up with this mendacity. 
I've heard there this thing called FOX NewsLordMortis wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:50 pm I don't know about going forward but either his campaign or PACs advertise on nearly every page with advertising I open. Most especially google related pages, aka youtube. Ironically, every time I check worldometers for the latest covid stats there are adverts "asking" how Trump is doing or throwing shade at Biden.
Do they? Most of the elderly I know don't care for television. "Nothing is on and there are more ads than show.", though I don't know if that applies to their consumption of TV news or current affairs programming.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:48 pm A lot of their prime target, the elderly, aren't on social media but devour TV.
They speak of Covid in the past tense now. I'm glad it's finally behind us.Smoove_B wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:13 pm What pandemic? But seriously. It's like he's working down a bucket list of norms to violate.
I legit need to go take a shot of liquor after seeing this photo
wait till you see the 10 minute firework display...Enough wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:32 pm Woah guys with your silly cancel culture, I'm sure the RNC will be reimbursing taxpayers for the costs for renting the White House, security and setup!
I really hope future presidents don't follow this example, ugh.
I just did, GTFO. OMG.naednek wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:08 amwait till you see the 10 minute firework display...Enough wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 10:32 pm Woah guys with your silly cancel culture, I'm sure the RNC will be reimbursing taxpayers for the costs for renting the White House, security and setup!
I really hope future presidents don't follow this example, ugh.
Option 4 - he's figured out how to funnel that money into his coffers instead.malchior wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:45 pmOption 3 - they are going with what actually works - social media targetting.Grifman wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:29 pm This is interesting. The Trump campaign has cancelled all TV ad buys for the next couple of weeks. That's a total TV blackout as we move into the height of the campaign season. Two reasons have been suggested - one that they are short of cash (not likely), two, that their current ads just aren't working and they are having to retool. I'd say it's the latter, I've seen their ads and I just don't think they are working. I don't think any of the crap they are throwing at Biden are sticking to him.
He's clearly hoping that Law and Order can be his Build That Wall for this election cycle. If I were a betting man, I wouldn't take those odds, but I suppose it's all he has.malchior wrote: Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:19 pmThis speech is horrible but it is clear he's really hammering on law and order.