2020 Presidential election simplified

a reply to: dawnstar

I don't think "Biden's ties" will adversely affect him as much as rudy's plan to enlist the help of yet another foreign government to dig up dirt on another political opponent will.

To be clear, I don't like any foreign involvement in our democratic process, none, not even from "allies".

But Biden's (family) ties should worry the nation in theory. If they were so oppressed with allegations that a country with the purchasing power of Texas was going to have leverage on our nation, than you'd think there would be skepticism of a candidates son finding their riches with our rival. Do you not think Biden would at least consider what's best for his son with the reigns of our country?

But I am not sure about Biden for other reasons

The main reason is that America is fed up with status quo politicians. If 2016 didn't show that, I don't know what will. Bernie and Trump were both against the grain, and the nation from both sides showed that's what they wanted.... Not BS party figure heads.

One of the newest entrants has caught my attention. He seems that he may be someone who might be able to work with both parties

Both parties have shown they're not willing to work with one another... I don't know how one person could change that, but I don't profess to know everything and could very well be wrong.

I think Biden should be treated with the same intensity and "respect" as Trump.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I think Biden should be treated with the same intensity and "respect" as Trump.

He will be, there will be no shortage of negative responses to his run... Just as it should be.

Those who try to get the seat need to earn the trust and respect of the voters. Hillary learned the hard way that seniority in a party doesn't entitle you to the throne.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I agree. I just don't think there are innocents in the propaganda cycle.

Expect for those of us who would like to hear debates about the actual future we are ignoring and not have culture war tactics employed to distract from lack of ideas.

Pennsylvania?

Is that the same place where Hillary threw a big celebrity party right before the election, and paid a guy to sing the same trashy words that Trump said to Billy Bush?

The same place she lost?

originally posted by: Willtell
So actually, the candidates just have to go to these 4 states and campaign there mostly, they don’t have to run all around the country.

Remember Hillary's book:
"Too Many Naps"

With your new information, Sleepy Joe Biden can now take even more naps than Hillary did.

a reply to: Willtell

Those " Swing States " are Populated by Card Carrying Idiots , but they also Contain the " Silent Majority " of American Citizens who have Decided out of Necessity to do their Civic Duty of Voting for the Greater Good of the Country . Case in Point , 2016 Presidential Race ..........

I strongly suspect that Trump will win by a much larger margin than he did in 2016.

It is a trend for re-elected incumbents to improve on their mandate over time.

Idk I think it may get interesting this election

I hope schultz runs and takes as many votes away from the dems as possible - that could make the results less straightforward.

OHHH they'll be sooo angry at that, they may actually stop drinking starbucks... for a few days lmao

Dems are scared of him running because they claim he'll take votes from them
The fear in the dnc is real XD

The Dems have no idea what the hell they are doing. They can't go head to head with someone who is making real changes. They are used to the fluff that career politicians are used to. I hope the days of having career politicians as presidents are over. We need people who both understand politics and at least to some extent understand the real world!

They are highlighting Biden for the sole reason that they think people who aren't them will vote for him. They want to put up someone that would have won the last election.

Like what kind of logic is actually going on at the dnc? Just pick a viable candidate, stop trying to manipulate everyone to vote for "anyone but trump". The last election is over, move the # forward or lose it all (if they haven't already lost it all)

a reply to: spiritualarchitect

It’s the truth. Why would a democrat even step foot in New York or California? Only to raise money. Why would Trump even bother to Texas or the Dakotas?

The point is any democrat all they have to do to win is win Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan and there in, they can't lose.

originally posted by: Willtell

The point is any democrat all they have to do to win is win Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan and there in, they can't lose.

Well Trump must have read your post because he just had rallies in all those states.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Puppylove

It is a serious issue, and you are correct in that most Americans do not see the issue as black or white, but a shade of grey. The new anti-abortion legislation is necessary to get the cases to the Supreme Court, however, to stop the extreme pro-abortion stances taken by other states.

With any other issue, at any other time, the whole thing could be hashed out in Congress, which is supposed to be representative of the people. Not with Roe vs. Wade. That 'law' was instituted by 9 people who were never elected to any office. Worse, by stating that there is a right to abortion, the Supreme Court effectively overrode both other branches of government without any possibility of checks and balances on their power.

The abortion debate goes far beyond just abortion. If Roe vs. Wade is allowed to stand, the next law could be a prohibition on states making smoking restrictions... it could be a decision that everyone in the US must receive vaccinations without question. It could be a declaration that states cannot prohibit rape! There is no check and no balance to such an action.

Yes, they are extreme examples... but they all fall under the same category: nine people who were never elected to office made a law where none exited before and barred the Congress or the President from challenging it.

Now to the election: Not a single person running for national office, including Trump, has had any impact on any of the new anti-abortion laws. I know the media would like to conflate Trump with Alabama's law, but the simple fact is that Trump does not tell Alabama what to do. State law is not the business of the Executive Branch; only the courts have the ability to interfere there. So while it might be a big issue for the DNC, it is not a national issue... merely a fear inducer to call out the masses. Considering it is a year and a half before the election and the news cycle rarely holds a topic for more than a month, the abortion fight will be long forgotten by the time 2020 rolls around.

TheRedneck

The supreme court does not make laws. They interpret them as to whether they follow the constitution.

a reply to: Willtell

Because of public perception. By going to those places they give of the perception they give a damn, to more than just those states. Something snoozing Hillary and a whole bunch of people on this thread do not see get. The more places they go, the more people they reach, it affects the election in more places than just where they went. It shows they have fight, and are willing to give their time to the people rather than just take them for granted. You're all making the mistake that people can win by treating people like numbers and statistics. People don't like that, and if one side does that while the other doesn't, some of those other states they are taking for granted will start flipping and then, even if they win the states you're talking about it won't even matter, because many of the states they took for granted will no longer be theirs and bam, they lose anyway. One of the reason Trump took some of the states he did that caught everyone by surprise was this exact attitude being shared here.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
Biden doesn't really electrify the left, he is just the most known brand they have to offer.

Are you saying that people on the left are not excited by the Quicker Sniff Her Upper's actions when it comes to women? What's not to like?

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I am excited beyond belief. I mean who doesnt want 80 year old men running the fastest changing society the world has ever known.

Plus surely nobody told joe about all the spying. So even if he is waterboarded in a new TV program called beat the president he wont know anything.

originally posted by: luthier
I mean who doesnt want 80 year old men running the fastest changing society the world has ever known.

I totally do, I mean it's not like he isn't completely out of touch with reality or anything.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: luthier
I mean who doesnt want 80 year old men running the fastest changing society the world has ever known.

I totally do, I mean it's not like he isn't completely out of touch with reality or anything.

Neither of the parties want or even like reality.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: luthier
I mean who doesnt want 80 year old men running the fastest changing society the world has ever known.

I totally do, I mean it's not like he isn't completely out of touch with reality or anything.

He has heard of laptops and the Google. His great grandson has a smartwatch.

a reply to: Puppylove

Great post Puppy!

And have I told you how great you look today.
My how that pink fits you well.
Have a happy Memorial Day Weekend.
Summers here!