US Presidential Election 2020

[bryant.coleman]

I do not trust surveys after all because not all of it are legit and they are just surveying specific people and not random people. Trump will gonna win in the next election for sure even Joe Biden is leading in online polls and survey because most of the polls and surveys are fixated and controlled by some people or even organization, so basically it is biased. I do not know why there are a lot of American citizens do not appreciate what Trump did in their country.  Trump is really a good leader and in order to proved it, he have a lot of books that been published in the past.

For the past few decades, the opinion polls conducted in various developed nations (including the United States) have proved to be very close to the actual results. What happened in 2016 can be termed as an outlier, but even then the polls indicted that Trump was surging in the rust belt states, during the last few days. But this time, neutral voters have deserted Trump and he retains votes only from his core support group.

[1714764215]

1714764215

[1714764215]

1714764215

[1714764215]

1714764215

[Captain Corporate]

 Oh come on, I get that being careful is cool and all but the game is over, he did his 4 years and people saw what type of person he was and thats it, we are not seriously considering Trump to be president again are we? I mean yeah he became one last time while nobody gave a chance but when nobody gave him a chance and said that Hillary Clinton will certainly be the president, that allowed a lot of people to not vote for her, and for her to not go seek for voters, it was just too much of "hillary clinton will win hands down without a doubt" during all of that 2016 and that caused a lot of advantages for Trump that worked out for him, he worked hard for each vote and spent hundreds of millions of dollars to get there. Clinton just cruised her way into election.

 Biden now may not be doing much, he is not out there canvassing and campaigning too much and you do not see or hear about him all that much but at this point things are different. Back in the day there was two talking points of "trump will lose anyway" and "clinton and trump is basically the same, they are both bad, I am not going to vote for either of them" and those two talks caused him to win. Today you can put an empty bucket against Trump and there are tens of millions of people who will go out to vote for it over Trump. There is no way he could win it again.

[fullhdpixel]

I find that November presidential elections are obviously very important but what people are forgetting once again is the fact that there are a ton of senate races going on as well. Not just in November which will be the bulk of them I think but there is also a lot of them until that day as well. If democrats somehow manage to get the Senate we are talking about actually have both the house and the senate which would give them insane amount of power. The difference is not that big neither.

As far as I know it is 53 to 47 and that is quite close, with just 4 senate seat changes we are talking about a whole lot of changes to everything. Now don't get me wrong, it is quite close to impossible to change 4 seats all at once and it requires hard work, but it looks like democrats do put in that work. If they can manage to do it, we are talking about Trump not being that important even if he gets elected.

[STT]

I remember last time even Trump didnt think he'd win or that was the impression and maybe that did him good because apparently people believed every vote counted and they had to goto the polls or 'their candidate' wouldnt win.   You need people who are heavily attached to that cause and they'll vote no matter what not tactically or because others are.    So I dont find its especially proven.   Trump ran a term similar to how he ran his candidacy, quite bizarre at times and yet he remains and might be there another four years.   If people feel as strongly to vote the democrat candidate then I guess he would not survive that, if people aren't motivated the default win goes to the guy in power the last four years.   Happens in lots of countries that way I think.

Heres a good chart to show how population distribution varies to terrority, its not showing the electoral collage really but shows how the polls just showing raw numbers isnt enough.   Besides that stats are about probability and possibilities, it cant tell you what will happen just the best guess.

[Cnut237]

Heres a good chart to show how population distribution varies to terrority

That's a nice visualisation. Particularly the bottom two images. It does show how simple geographical charting can be very deceptive, and can overemphasise the success of candidates who are popular in rural and less populous areas. There are obviously a lot of complicating factors that mean that a simple 'x% of voters back Trump' doesn't translate very well to chances of electoral success. The 'winner-takes-all' method that most states use means that a lot depends on the outcome in those few crucial swing states, so votes there really have a lot more weight than those in perennial safe states. Here's another chart, this time of the last election, demonstrating how 'winner-takes-all' is not particularly representative of the way that people actually vote.

[bbc.reporter]

I remember last time even Trump didnt think he'd win or that was the impression and maybe that did him good because apparently people believed every vote counted and they had to goto the polls or 'their candidate' wouldnt win.   You need people who are heavily attached to that cause and they'll vote no matter what not tactically or because others are.    So I dont find its especially proven.   Trump ran a term similar to how he ran his candidacy, quite bizarre at times and yet he remains and might be there another four years.   If people feel as strongly to vote the democrat candidate then I guess he would not survive that, if people aren't motivated the default win goes to the guy in power the last four years.   Happens in lots of countries that way I think.

Heres a good chart to show how population distribution varies to terrority, its not showing the electoral collage really but shows how the polls just showing raw numbers isnt enough.   Besides that stats are about probability and possibilities, it cant tell you what will happen just the best guess.

However, in America the presidency is won not because of the popular vote but because of the electoral college. It takes a different type of campaign strategy to win, I reckon.

[Emitdama]

I believe because of the 2016 elections we are not going to actually know what is going to happen until it is too late and we see the results, right now it is not possible to make a prediction.

If it was any other candidate versus Biden or just two random any candidate, I would have said that Biden will win 100% sure without a single shred of doubt, I would have put all my money, I would have sold my house and go all in (okay not really just making a point) and bet on Biden.

However this is Trump we are talking about, he has this cult type of followers that will vote for him no matter what, republicans became party of old people for the longest time and Trump manage to get young people to vote and speak their racist and xenophonic and sexist thoughts freely. Dude had zero chance to win 2016 and I didn't even consider him, yet he won. So, just because it is Trump and not someone else, I will not declare Biden winner until last vote is counted.

[bryant.coleman]

However, in America the presidency is won not because of the popular vote but because of the electoral college. It takes a different type of campaign strategy to win, I reckon.

Electoral college may not be the perfect solution, but it is much better than those popular vote-based elections. It prevents the deep-blue states such as California and New York from stealing the election by allowing uncontrolled invasion of illegal immigrants.

Let's look at an example. In 1950, California had a population of 10.7 million. Back then, Oklahoma's population was 2.2 million. Since then, the population of California increased by almost 4 times, but that of Oklahoma increased by less than 2x. The reason is that California allowed a lot of illegal immigrants to stay. Now Do you want to give more power to California, just because they broke the law and invited the illegals? I am against that idea. And that's why I always say that electoral college-based system is much better when compared to any popular vote based election systems.

[coinfinger]

Electoral college may not be the perfect solution, but it is much better than those popular vote-based elections. It prevents the deep-blue states such as California and New York from stealing the election by allowing uncontrolled invasion of illegal immigrants.

Let's look at an example. In 1950, California had a population of 10.7 million. Back then, Oklahoma's population was 2.2 million. Since then, the population of California increased by almost 4 times, but that of Oklahoma increased by less than 2x. The reason is that California allowed a lot of illegal immigrants to stay. Now Do you want to give more power to California, just because they broke the law and invited the illegals? I am against that idea. And that's why I always say that electoral college-based system is much better when compared to any popular vote based election systems.

"Illegal immigrants" can't vote, they are illegally there, hell they practically can't even let anyone know they are there, they have to keep quite about it, in order to vote you have to register to vote, how can an illegal immigrant can register to vote if they are illegal?

Also by that same logic there are places like Florida and Texas that gets a ton of electoral college rights as well which they actually use for Republicans most of the time, hence why it is both good and bad for both parties and I think gives equal chances.

Finally popular vote is not the right way for sure, but electoral college is not the right way neither, both of them sucks. Ranking based should always be the choice, that way you get to see two candidates people want most, but also a third and a fourth one getting good amount of attention too which could help american democracy a lot if allowed. Two person for presidential election doesn't sound fair to me, there should be a lot more candidates if you ask me.

[bryant.coleman]

"Illegal immigrants" can't vote, they are illegally there, hell they practically can't even let anyone know they are there, they have to keep quite about it, in order to vote you have to register to vote, how can an illegal immigrant can register to vote if they are illegal?

Illegal immigrants can't vote. That's true. But anchor babies can vote when they become 18 years of age and then they can sponsor their parents as well. Eventually, the entire family becomes US citizens and everyone can vote in the elections. The current wave of illegal invasion started in the 1970s. Most of the first generation illegals have become US citizens by now.

And I don't agree with the argument that illegals need to hide their status. There are sanctuary cities all over the United States (hundreds of them), where it is not possible for the immigration authorities to detain or deport any of the illegals.

[Juggy777]

"Illegal immigrants" can't vote, they are illegally there, hell they practically can't even let anyone know they are there, they have to keep quite about it, in order to vote you have to register to vote, how can an illegal immigrant can register to vote if they are illegal?

Illegal immigrants can't vote. That's true. But anchor babies can vote when they become 18 years of age and then they can sponsor their parents as well. Eventually, the entire family becomes US citizens and everyone can vote in the elections. The current wave of illegal invasion started in the 1970s. Most of the first generation illegals have become US citizens by now.

And I don't agree with the argument that illegals need to hide their status. There are sanctuary cities all over the United States (hundreds of them), where it is not possible for the immigration authorities to detain or deport any of the illegals.

@bryant.coleman while illegal immigrants can’t directly vote but they can always alter electoral college results to hand advantage to the Democrats, and that’s why Trump was keen to change the laws relating to illegal immigration. Furthermore in 2019 he had even threatened to release illegal immigrants in Americas sanctuary cities, to strike a political blow. Lastly it’ll be really interesting to see, what kind of effect will these voters actually have on the upcoming elections.

When President Trump threatened to release throngs of illegal immigrant detainees into America’s sanctuary cities last week, the media and Democrats went bonkers. While the scheme may not pass legal muster, it was “pure genius” as a political ploy.

No, illegal immigrants aren’t allowed to directly vote for the commander-in-chief yet, but in vast numbers they can dramatically alter the Electoral College to favor Democrats for at least a decade because a state’s electoral votes are based on the number of people residing within that state, not the number of citizens present when the Decennial Census is taken.

Sources:

https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration/440136-if-you-dont-think-illegal-immigrants-are-voting-for-president-think-again

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_policy_of_Donald_Trump

[Vishnu.Reang]

@bryant.coleman while illegal immigrants can’t directly vote but they can always alter electoral college results to hand advantage to the Democrats, and that’s why Trump was keen to change the laws relating to illegal immigration. Furthermore in 2019 he had even threatened to release illegal immigrants in Americas sanctuary cities, to strike a political blow. Lastly it’ll be really interesting to see, what kind of effect will these voters actually have on the upcoming elections.

Let's not forget the fact that a section of the Republicans have supported illegal immigration in to the United States. The GOP is generally regarded as a pro-business party and the business firms need cheap labor in the form of undocumented aliens. Large number of Senators and House members belonging to the GOP have voted in favor of the illegal immigrants in the past. The three pro-immigration bills which were tabled between 2006 and 2008 were supported by the American corporations, which spent somewhere around $350 million to shore up popular support.

[Daniel91]

I believe because of the 2016 elections we are not going to actually know what is going to happen until it is too late and we see the results, right now it is not possible to make a prediction.

If it was any other candidate versus Biden or just two random any candidate, I would have said that Biden will win 100% sure without a single shred of doubt, I would have put all my money, I would have sold my house and go all in (okay not really just making a point) and bet on Biden.

However this is Trump we are talking about, he has this cult type of followers that will vote for him no matter what, republicans became party of old people for the longest time and Trump manage to get young people to vote and speak their racist and xenophonic and sexist thoughts freely. Dude had zero chance to win 2016 and I didn't even consider him, yet he won. So, just because it is Trump and not someone else, I will not declare Biden winner until last vote is counted.

I agree with you.

Already in the 2016 presidential elections, the polls proved to be unreliable and inaccurate.
Trump is charismatic in a way and knows how to motivate his followers.
I believe that one part of his voters is highly motivated to go to the elections, much more than the average Democrat voter.
A lot more can happen by November and it is too early to make definitive predictions about the winner.

[Cnut237]

Biden is comfortably ahead in the polls, but we all know that polls can be inaccurate, can change, and are not representative of the way the EC works.

But probably the most important thing for Biden as we get closer to election time is his relationship with the most powerful man in US politics - Mark Zuckerberg.
Past evidence suggests that Facebook will put its full might behind Trump, and could keep him in power. Biden has come out before as anti-Facebook, anti-Zuckerberg, and has suggested revocation of 230. We have the below for example, from a Biden interview with the NY Times in January:

Charlie Warzel: Sure. Mr. Vice President, in October, your campaign sent a letter to Facebook regarding an ad that falsely claimed that you blackmailed Ukrainian officials to not investigate your son. I’m curious, did that experience, dealing with Facebook and their power, did that change the way that you see the power of tech platforms right now?

No, I’ve never been a fan of Facebook, as you probably know. I’ve never been a big Zuckerberg fan. I think he’s a real problem. I think ——

CW: Can you elaborate?

No, I can. He knows better. And you know, from my perspective, I’ve been in the view that not only should we be worrying about the concentration of power, we should be worried about the lack of privacy and them being exempt, which you’re not exempt. [The Times] can’t write something you know to be false and be exempt from being sued. But he can. The idea that it’s a tech company is that Section 230 should be revoked, immediately should be revoked, number one. For Zuckerberg and other platforms.Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says that online platforms aren’t held liable for things their users post on them, with some exceptions. In July, The Times’s Sarah Jeong weighed in on proposed updates to Section 230, arguing that “we should reopen the debate on C.D.A. 230 only because so much of the internet has changed,” but “the discourse will be improved if we all take a moment to actually read the text of C.D.A. 230.”

CW: That’s a pretty foundational laws of the modern internet.

That’s right. Exactly right. And it should be revoked. It should be revoked because it is not merely an internet company. It is propagating falsehoods they know to be false, and we should be setting standards not unlike the Europeans are doing relative to privacy. You guys still have editors. I’m sitting with them. Not a joke. There is no editorial impact at all on Facebook. None. None whatsoever. It’s irresponsible. It’s totally irresponsible.

CW: If there’s proven harm that Facebook has done, should someone like Mark Zuckerberg be submitted to criminal penalties, perhaps?

He should be submitted to civil liability and his company to civil liability, just like you would be here at The New York Times. Whether he engaged in something and amounted to collusion that in fact caused harm that would in fact be equal to a criminal offense, that’s a different issue. That’s possible. That’s possible it could happen. Zuckerberg finally took down those ads that Russia was running. All those bots about me. They’re no longer being run.In October, a 30-second ad appeared on Facebook accusing Mr. Biden of blackmailing Ukrainian government officials. The ad, made by an independent political action committee, said: “Send Quid Pro Joe Biden into retirement.” Mr. Biden’s campaign wrote a letter calling on Facebook to take down the ad. He was getting paid a lot of money to put them up. I learned three things. Number one, Putin doesn’t want me to be president. Number two, Kim Jong-un thinks I should be beaten to death like a rabid dog and three, this president of the United States is spending millions of dollars to try to keep me from being the nominee. I wonder why.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/17/opinion/joe-biden-nytimes-interview.html?searchResultPosition=3

[stellgod]

Biden is right about facebook and there should be something done about them but doing that before an election is quite risky. Normally if I were him I would just say that he likes Mark Zuckerberg and there is a problem that they need to fix but they are working on that and I would say if I become a president I would sit down with Mark and will help him overcome this issue and government could lend help with anything they need to fix this problem and so forth.

That way you are both saying it is not Mark's fault even though it is, and you are also saying that you see the problem and you will fix the problem, you are not ignoring it, while also not making facebook and mark a monster. Now that he said these things which are all true, mark will be on full force attack, try to ban or diminish all anti-trump and pro-biden things and will try to publish all anti-biden and pro-trump things.

[Captain Corporate]

 What really matters in this election cycle is the fact that there has been a ton of stuff that made people take to streets and the response to that was basically trying to silence the people who are rioting right now instead of trying to make a clear contact with them. In a proper nation when people go out to protest a good president would try to understand whats wrong and try to create a sort of communication channel where there could be a middle ground found, yet Trump didn't do that, not only he tried to give cops a lot more power, he also allowed them to go out there without a badge number and an unmarked vehicle to arrest anyone they know to be taken at a place unknown as well, thats some China/Nazi germany type of stuff we are talking about.

 Normally why do democrats lose most commonly in the past 20 or so years since Bill Clinton left office? Most of the time it was due to democrats voting a lot less, we are talking about 50 thousand people voting Bernie last election just to piss off DNC, we are talking about people not waiting in lines. And believe me, this year that won't happen. Trump did so many bad things that, all the people who hate trump will be waiting in lines for 24 hours if they have to, doesn't matter what the maximum amount is, they will wait that amount, they will make a line at the voting booth, we are talking about a national crisis level president here, if they have 2 IQ to rub against each other everyone will go out to vote.

 Thats the reason why Biden is ahead, people hate Trump so much that they will do whatever it takes. People didn't hate Trump as much when he wasn't president and Hillary was the candidate, dude was unknown and just an idiot, now everybody knows him, everybody thinks he is the worst president ever and they will outvote him a lot. I can sense about a 5-7 million difference in votes this time, and probably 300+ Electoral votes for Biden to reeaally sink that in to Trump and not even make it close. If Trump loses Texas (which is very very difficult I know) that would be nail in the dagger, I feel like it will be time for Republicans to become more centrists when Democrats become more progessive (instead of what it is now, Republicans being far right whereas democrats going Centrist).

[tyz]

A new Cato national survey finds that self‐​censorship is on the rise in the United States. Nearly two-thirds—62%—of Americans say the political climate these days prevents them from saying things they believe because others might find them offensive. The share of Americans who self‐​censor has risen several points since 2017 when 58% of Americans agreed with this statement.
Source https://www.cato.org/publications/survey-reports/poll-62-americans-say-they-have-political-views-theyre-afraid-share

Unfortunately, this is not only the case in the USA, but is also increasing in Europe. Very sad. The whole discussion is now only moving within a narrow corridor of opinion. If you are outside of this corridor, you quickly feel the consequences.
The bad thing is that those who say yes to this are those who want to contain the political spectrum left and right, but do not realise that such narratives strengthen these spectrum even further. Freedom of speech without any consequences is the only way to preserve freedom.

[STT]

You practically qualify as combative just by admitting you vote Trump or even worse putting up a sign, somehow thats become the reality yet its 50% of the vote in there so somebody must be putting those votes in.   Obviously there is a vocal amount who enjoy the argument but most people are busy just doing life paying the bills and just so happen to support this candidate or at least that party.    This factor alone that we know for sure is there, makes these polls at least 10% more inaccurate then normal I think.   Maybe if the polls are taken in secret not in the street or at the door, that stands a better chance of reflecting the later private votes.
   I think alot of people will just vote whatever benefits their industry, the job they work in.

https://t.co/TR4y6qNrzs?amp=1

[verita1]

The first debate for the 2020 US presidency. It will take place in Cleveland, Ohio on September 29.
Trump and Biden will have 3 debates before the vote on November 3.

2) Miami on October 15.
3) Nashville on October 22.

Remember that Biden has a national advantage of 15 percentage points.

Trump has lost his popularity due to the way he has handled the fight against Covid19 in the US and to the case of the brutal murder of George Floyd and the USA community said that stopping racism "Black lives matter."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-53562432

[erikoy]

The first debate for the 2020 US presidency. It will take place in Cleveland, Ohio on September 29.
Trump and Biden will have 3 debates before the vote on November 3.

2) Miami on October 15.
3) Nashville on October 22.

Remember that Biden has a national advantage of 15 percentage points.

Trump has lost his popularity due to the way he has handled the fight against Covid19 in the US and to the case of the brutal murder of George Floyd and the USA community said that stopping racism "Black lives matter."

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-53562432

That is really a disadvantage on part to trump but this debate could lead also his way to winning depending on how he will going to answer questions especially with the current events. There are many things that could be ask on him because he has already had the position and easier to be scrutinized. So it is up to trump if he can make people believe that he is doing right to the majority. I do believe also trump has the advantage because he is tge current or incumbent official to which he could ask the support of other groups for his gain and to them. This js how politics works. Support a candidate and your group will be bless if he will going to take the position.