Err on the side of caution. I get it.
off, you tucked tail and ran when you were shown to be the idiot you are. Then you return like it never happened. You don't get to just monologue like a momma's boy and not take your lumps, lumpy.
Err on the side of caution. I get it.
you think your juvenile angry ranting is doling out "lumps." Like I said, zero sense of self awareness.
And I did come back. You should get your memory checked.
I'm mostly interested in how metrics were adjusted post '16, more than anything. I mean, my life doesn't circle around who's the POTUS, and frankly, I never understood the team sport aspect outside of the trolling part.
2018 I thought was a rebound year for pollsters, but I suppose the litmus test is this election considering it's Trump again.
The main reason I'm giving MoE states to Trump has to do with the fact that I don't think Joe is a very likable candidate that will really know how to drive turnout, especially on election day.
I think he's going to be largely the beneficiary of not sucking as much as Hillary, and the fact that a large majority of people are tired of Trump's bull .
"angry"
Lumpy with the white flag move early in the match
Yes, angry. You reflexively start frothing at the mouth when I post.
Surrendering to what? Your juvenile insults. When you make an actual argument instead of the "you're not really smart" argument and frothing diatribe I might take you seriously.
What your reading is me not taking you seriously in the least. It's been that way ever since you tried to link the genetics to skin melanin to a gene for violent criminal behavior. When I pointed out your racism and lack of critical thinking in your argument, you actually did exit stage left. That is when your frothing reflexive responses started.
That type of behavior is typical in hypervigilant narcissism btw.
Anywho I am not going to respond to you anymore unless you start having intelligent on-topic comments or arguments. I won't hold my breath.
you start off lecturing the forum like you're someone.
You're a got. Just accept it and move on.
So you don't think "likely voters" are determined accurately? I think that there is more to what drive people to or away from the polls than a charismatic candidate. The unappealing nature of Trump is as much of a draw.
At the end of the day, I think The Clinton foundation, emails, and Comey's October surprise drove the turnout mostly in 2016 as opposed the either candidate inherent appeal.
Well, I think I'm going to disagree on that. I think Hillary was extremely unlikeable, and somebody that looked both en led and arrogant. She was damaged goods in a lot of ways.
You also have to credit Trump for making people believe things he knew he couldn't deliver on (bringing back manufacturing, cheap and great healthcare, hedge funds will have to leave money on the table, etc), which is a lot easier to do when you're more or less an unknown.
Now, I don't think Joe is a likeable candidate either, but I don't think your average voter dislikes him as much as Shillary and/or Trump.
And in bency will hurt Trump simply because he can't keep pulling a fast one on the promises department. He didn't deliver, and it's pretty clear he's not interested either.
You're worried that he's lost 2 points due to ty C- republican polls?
I'm just paying attention to PA and Wisconsin right now. As long as they keep out of the margin of error than there is some room to play for potential Trump gain and still win.
I get that she has the charisma of a toilet seat. At the same time I think Bannon's Uranium 1, Clinton Foundation, and emails propaganda was much more significant. Bannon is now working against Trump.
I think she lost, basically, due to losing the Rust Belt. Those guys cared about the anti-globalization sentiment, and the rosy promises of manufacturing coming back, more than anything Bannon or the emails said or did. But that's certainly my opinion.
At this point you have to be pretty dumb not to tell you were conned if you are in any of those States. All that said, that was then. With a relatively good economy, going up and no pandemic. The environment has obviously changed now.
Sure, but people still need jobs, and coal miners aren't going to be retasked as medical professionals.
And Trump failed on his promise to deliver them.
And she failed to campaign much in the midwest.
That's when you need a serious plan for re-training. Coal is simply slowly going away, no matter if the president is (R) or (D). Same with combustion engines, radio, CD-Roms, etc.
The idea we needed to save BlockBuster video because it employed 84,000 people is ridiculous (BTW, that's how many people they employed at it's peak. Nowadays, the Coal industry employs barely over 52,000 people).
It's all smoke and mirrors. Manufacturing is not coming back to the US. Not without the US dramatically lowering it's standard of living, which is unlikely in the near future.
no, lowest unemployment in history, pre-COVID.
Plan or not, you can easily explain and even predict the support from states that are heavy on low wage manual labor because the mythical retraining plan is individual choice, just like voting. Coal is just an example. There are many people in this country who basically live week to week. They don't have any real marketable skills. They are the shade tree mechanics of all trades, or they fell into the trap of their father's trade which was often dependent on things technology is rendering obsolete.
I think Trump gets Florida & North Carolina. Then Nate gives it a 50/50 race basically
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...p/?cid=abcnews
Really comes down to the "blue wall" states Hillary the bed in. Did they really move towards the GOP or was Hillary just that bad? I've never been to those states and never known anyone from those states so I have no idea.
Sure, but the question is what are you offering them and are you telling them the truth? You can outright lie and try to sell them smoke and mirrors, like Don did, and then it's inevitable it's going to come back to you because you just cannot deliver.
Taking on your example, coal jobs have been on the decline for a long time now. It's damn near impossible to bring manufacturing jobs back here unless workers accept to work for 12+ hour shifts, and cents an hour. You need 10 jobs to make ends meet with our standard of living, it's just simply economically non-viable, we're not compe ive.
Those jobs are as good as gone and not coming back. So you better explain that to people and offer them assistance while they transition to something else. Move to solar installations, until the solar fad goes away, etc.
This economy shifted from primarily manufacturing to primarily services many years ago. A lot of re-training went into that, mostly from private companies as they were shifting their focus, and it wasn't really optional or an individual choice if you wanted to keep or have a job.
Joe is campaigning on bringing back manufacturing jobs
Well, I think Biden gets Michigan (polling there has been waaaaay out of the MoE for a long time now), and then it's more of a 63/37 chance.
To your later point, that's what we're discussing now. I think Shillary was that bad, but also Trump got away promising things that were really appealing to them (manufacturing, etc) that he knew he couldn't deliver.
I can't think that's not a major factor to what we see in the blue wall states now.
Joe is promising another "Made in America" cash giveaway, which I'll admit is also bull .
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)