USA elections 2020 - 2021

[alhoon]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...n-day-n1237621

"As Trump has watched his poll numbers slide..."

Casual misinformation as Trump's poll numbers are not sliding they are slowly increasing.
As mentioned somewhere else, if one reads the polls he or she would think that Trump is bleeding votes. He is not. He's back to pre-covid approvals and at least so far, he keeps raising during the DNC big convention. That convention didn't seem (so far) to give a bump to Biden's ratings either.

[Ludicus]

AOC just re-endorsed Sanders in her 90 second slot.

The DNC establishment is still living in the past. AOC talked about its future. Per a CBS News poll, many Democrats were eager to hear from Ocasio-Cortez.
From the new CBS poll of Democrats: Which of these people would you like to hear speak at the DNC?

Joe Biden 91%
Kamala Harris 91%
Bernie Sanders 68%
------
AOC vs Clintons,
AOC 63%
Hillary Clinton 58%
Bill Clinton 56%

---
10. What is the main reason behind your vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump in November?

Mainly because I like Joe Biden 29%
Mainly because Joe Biden is the Democratic nominee 22%
Mainly to oppose Donald Trump 49%

AOC twitted,

If you were confused, no worries! Convention rules require roll call & nominations for every candidate that passes the delegate threshold. I was asked to 2nd the nom for Sen. Sanders for roll call. I extend my deepest congratulations to @JoeBiden - let’s go win in November.

NBC apologizes,

Editor's note and clarification (2/2): Ocasio-Cortez was asked by the DNC to second Sanders' nomination. The nomination is a procedural requirement of the convention. Ocasio-Cortez has previously endorsed Biden, & her speech was similar in length to other nominating speeches.

DNC 2020: The controversy over AOC's nomination of Bernie ...

Her symbolic nomination was part of standard procedure at the convention.
Due in part to misleading tweets and articles from some media outlets like NBC News and the New York Post, people began accusing Ocasio-Cortez of snubbing Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden in her speech. (She did not mention his name in her remarks, but she’s made clear in the past that she supports his candidacy.)
Former Vice President Joe Biden surpassed the 1,991 delegates needed for the nomination earlier this year, and Ocasio-Cortez had already said in April she would be voting for him.
But in the course of the primary, Sanders won 1,073 delegates, which meant he could be symbolically nominated, too.
By implying that her nomination was a divisive snub to Biden, however, NBC News and MSNBC were among the outlets that had already fueled backlash to her remarks. Both ultimately posted clarifications and deleted their original posts, but at that point, these tweets had generated “an enormous amount of hatred and vitriol,” Ocasio-Cortez noted.

[Heathen Hammer]

It is quite ironic to see AOC and other "progressives" throw their hat in with a career politician like Biden, who literally passed same laws they attribute to "structural racism". When you cheer for progress, but your candidate has already been in office for almost 40 years, you are either a hypocrite or a fool.

[Gaidin]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...n-day-n1237621

"As Trump has watched his poll numbers slide..."

Casual misinformation as Trump's poll numbers are not sliding they are slowly increasing.
As mentioned somewhere else, if one reads the polls he or she would think that Trump is bleeding votes. He is not. He's back to pre-covid approvals and at least so far, he keeps raising during the DNC big convention. That convention didn't seem (so far) to give a bump to Biden's ratings either.

Given they're talking about an election, this might be the one you want: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ident-general/

[tgoodenow]

Given they're talking about an election, this might be the one you want: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ident-general/

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...tion-forecast/

Not really, no.

[B. W.]

I remember watching the 1960 Democratic National Convention on a black and white Philco TV that was made entirely in America. My, how times have changed.

[PointOfViewGun]

Back then in most states it was illegal for a white and black person to marry each other. Times change indeed...

[alhoon]

Back then in most states it was illegal for a white and black person to marry each other. Times change indeed...

Wait, what?
Why?

Given they're talking about an election, this might be the one you want: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ident-general/

That's not as easy to read so I use this: https://projects.economist.com/us-20...m_source=inf-a

The fourth graph has an option for polls and forecast. If you put it on polls, you see Biden flat-lining, while Trump is slowly increasing (as shown by his popularity ratings).
His chances to win are also slowly increasing. And that is for a forecast that gives Biden ~30% to win Texas and had it as at play a few days ago.

EDIT: Actually, yours had an option to put it on "National" that shows a nice graph. According to that both have flatlined.

[Gaidin]

Except there’s no national vote.

[alhoon]

Except there’s no national vote.

I am aware but that doesn't mean the national view is meaningless. As mentioned, it shows that both of them have flatlined and the DNC convention didn't give a bump to Biden nor dimmed Trump's numbers.

[Gaidin]

The DNC ended Thursday and polls take 3-4 days to administer and you expect them on Friday?

Sure, Jan.

[B. W.]

Back then in most states it was illegal for a white and black person to marry each other. Times change indeed...

Hmmm, I don't know so much about that. I know it was illegal in some states. Not sure about the timeline though. But here in the Texas swamp country there was a little bar called Blondie's where just about anything was possible and nobody said a word. The problems, as it were, didn't start until the northerners moved in en-mass in the late 70s and all of a sudden there were race hustlers. Even then, it still wasn't and isn't much of a problem.

My post was about American manufacturing and good paying jobs, but leave it to a Dem to bring up identity politics, as if that is the only thing that matters.

[PointOfViewGun]

Wait, what?
Why?

It was illegal in most states for a black and white person to marry each other. Interracial marriages and interracial sexual relations were banned by anti-miscegenation laws. It took two Supreme Court cases to force states to repeal the laws between 1948 and 1967.

Hmmm, I don't know so much about that. I know it was illegal in some states. Not sure about the timeline though. But here in the Texas swamp country there was a little bar called Blondie's where just about anything was possible and nobody said a word. The problems, as it were, didn't start until the northerners moved in en-mass in the late 70s and all of a sudden there were race hustlers. Even then, it still wasn't and isn't much of a problem.

My post was about American manufacturing and good paying jobs, but leave it to a Dem to bring up identity politics, as if that is the only thing that matters.

Wow. What a typical response. You clearly do not understand how it undermines your objection today.

[alhoon]

It was illegal in most states for a black and white person to marry each other. Interracial marriages and interracial sexual relations were banned by anti-miscegenation laws. It took two Supreme Court cases to force states to repeal the laws between 1948 and 1967.

I can understand some holdouts in 1948 ... but 1967 ?! That's after the civil rights movement and during the sexual liberation / revolution or how it's called.
And you said interracial sexual relations too were banned? Not just marriage? So the random white guy that had sex with his black secretary could be prosecuted 55 years ago?!

What if you married in a different state? Would you be arrested when you returned home?

[antaeus]

Wow. What a typical response. You clearly do not understand how it undermines your objection today.

I don't like it. I don't like it at all, but I have to agree with BW.

Saying everything/anything about the US in 1960 is bad because some things about the US in 1960 are bad is a logical fallacy. I don't think it undermines your point that times change and selective rose tinted glasses are problematic...

[PointOfViewGun]

I don't like it. I don't like it at all, but I have to agree with BW.

Saying everything/anything about the US in 1960 is bad because some things about the US in 1960 are bad is a logical fallacy. I don't think it undermines your point that times change and selective rose tinted glasses are problematic...

Nobody argued that though, did anyone?

[Pontifex Maximus]

Nobody is going to talk about how awful the DNC Convention was? Ok, I guess I will.

Remember when Democrats took Trump's bait and argued with him about the crowd size at his inaguration? Pepperidge Farm remembers. Not to be outdone, they couldn't even find 30 people to sit in on a zoom call and had to duplicate people clapping awkwardly as Biden talked to the screen. Probably a preview to how they intend to win in 2020, duplicating votes lol.

Who better than Bill Clinton to deliver a speech about how to be presidential and upholding the dignity of the office?

Who better than Elizabeth Warren to participate in the Native American caucus?

These are the most tone deaf people in the world and I love it, I LOVE it.

[Ludicus]

It is quite ironic to see AOC and other "progressives" throw their hat in with a career politician like Biden, who literally passed same laws they attribute to "structural racism"...your candidate has already been in office for almost 40 years, you are either a hypocrite or a fool.

No, it's a wise move.With all his shortcomings, Biden is still infinitely better than Trump. Trump is ushering America and the entire world into a new dark age.For the Democratic Party- conservatives and progressives- the highest priority is to defeat Trump. That being said, The Hill nailed it,

Biden unites Democrats — for now

And that, liberals say, is where the cooperation should cease.
Progressives are expected to grow their numbers in the House after knocking off Democratic incumbents such as Rep. Eliot Engel (N.Y.) and Wm. Lacy Clay (Mo.) in the primaries, which they hope will give them more influence.
Pelosi brushed off a question about whether progressives beating incumbents was awkward for her, noting that she was a “left-wing San Francisco liberal.”

--
AOC's speech is crystal clear,

Good evening, ​bienvenidos​, and thank you to everyone here today endeavoring towards a better, more just future for our country and our world.
In fidelity and gratitude to a mass people's movement working to establish 21st century social, economic, and human rights, including guaranteed health care, higher education, living wages, and labor rights for all people in the United States; a movement striving to recognize and repair the wounds of racial injustice, colonization, misogyny, and homophobia, and to propose and build reimagined systems of immigration and foreign policy that turn away from the violence and xenophobia of our past; a movement that realizes the unsustainable brutality of an economy that rewards explosive inequalities of wealth for the few at the expense of long-term stability for the many, and who organized an historic, grassroots campaign to reclaim our democracy. In a time when millions of people in the United States are looking for deep systemic solutions to our crises of mass evictions, unemployment, and lack of health care, and ​espíritu del pueblo​ and out of a love for all people, I hereby second the nomination of Senator Bernard Sanders of Vermont for president of the United States of America.

[Pontifex Maximus]

you mean the speech where AOC nominated Sanders?

[Heathen Hammer]

No, it's a wise move.With all his shortcomings, Biden is still infinitely better than Trump. Trump is ushering America and the entire world into a new dark age.For the Democratic Party- conservatives and progressives- the highest priority is to defeat Trump.

How is it a wise move and how is a career politician that spent past 4 decades in government passing laws that target black people a better option then Trump? You clearly don't care about your "democratic socialism" and "anti-racism" if you want to support a politician like Biden, who has confirmed track record of being racist to a much bigger extent then all of GOP combined.
"Orange man bad" isn't a political platform, Democrats are going to learn it the hard way in November. Again.