Donald Trump

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

nice! And I really hope for the sake of the world that comes in for you.

but keep reading from posters how it’s definitely over for him in November when it clearly isn’t.

There is a long way to go. Trump had a few things in his favour last time, he was the outsider and Hilary was not popular at all outside the kind of places that would vote for the Dem candidate by default. Add to that the fact the media generally over hyped her lead and dismissed Trump and the motivation to turn out in key states was not there. The 'E-mails' thing in the last few days shifted the dial just enough. It was all down to turnout in the swing states, she bossed the red states but that doesn't win you the big prize.

I think we can expect the same again, it will be close and many will write trump of prematurely. He works better as the underdog and that might suit him. The narrative of the last few days going into the vote may be enough to swing it again. This time though I suspect that Trump will look to engineer the narrative and it will just look like more BS. The other variable is the impact of the virus on physically voting. Likely to hit both sides but very difficult to predict.

 

[kaz7]

The French government has said doctors are no longer allowed to use hydroxychloroquine to treat coronavirus patients after two advisory bodies said it could pose serious health risks

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-52815845lx-commentary-top

 

[JASR]

I agree mate.

Hillary was 10 points in front going in to the last election.

If the last 5 years has taught us anything, it’s that right wing politicians will say or do absolutely anything in order to win.

Bolinasaro (Brazil), Belosconi (Italy), Putin (Russia), Netanyahu (Israel) agree with this statement.

 

[JASR]

...and in all the twitter fake news/trump spat... the US ticked over to 100,000 deaths from the Virus.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Well . . . Inhofe and Feinstein investigations should have been dropped given the facts as we know them, and Burr's is continuing, as his is clearly the most egregious. Loeffler's I'm not so sure about -- probably should have kept digging. Of course the comments from her spokesperson are typical ("fake news media", "politically motivated", blah, blah).

Of course, this $1M donation to a Trump Super PAC on the 29th April doesn't have anything at all to do with the Justice Department dropping the investigation.....

 

[Blue Hefner]

 

[bluethrunthru]

...and in all the twitter fake news/trump spat... the US ticked over to 100,000 deaths from the Virus.

which is why he just tweeted about Obamagate again

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

nice! And I really hope for the sake of the world that comes in for you.

but keep reading from posters how it’s definitely over for him in November when it clearly isn’t.

Who's saying that?

Turnout, turnout, turnout, turnout.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

Of course, this $1M donation to a Trump Super PAC on the 29th April doesn't have anything at all to do with the Justice Department dropping the investigation.....

Of course. Nothing at all. But we can bury it by ending her investigation along with the other two that were both flimsy cases to begin with.

What a country.

 

[Vic]

The trouble now is if Twitter don't label all his tweets "misleading" does that imply there is any truth in them?

 

[BlueHammer85]

Who's saying that?
.

a lot on here every-time there’s a twitter link about an investigation on him

 

[Uncle Wally One Ball]

The trouble now is if Twitter don't label all his tweets "misleading" does that imply there is any truth in them?

That's a good point. Trump may have accidentally stumbled upon a way to validate his nonsense in the eyes of the slackjaws. Just shows that there is virtually no way of tackling the problem of fake news being made, and then any sensible challenge to it or arbiter just also being called fake news. Im all for techno advances but social media has truly fucked up this world im my view

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

a lot on here every-time there’s a twitter link about an investigation on him

I don't think anyone has confidently predicted anything like that, or if so, it's a relative few.

But the math(s) say(s) that if blues turn out, Trump will struggle. His base isn't as big as the Democratic base. Hence his desperation to poison the electoral well (Obamagate, mail-in ballot fraud, voter ID, etc.)

 

[SWP's back]

a lot on here every-time there’s a twitter link about an investigation on him

And I’ve put my money where my mouth is.

The numbers don’t support him being re-elected.

 

[BlueHammer85]

And I’ve put my money where my mouth is.

The numbers don’t support him being re-elected.

they didn't last time, or Brexit etc, seen to many false dawns in recent times - i just want it go the way i want!

 

[cjn]

She wasn’t, @cjn has posted before about the polling being within the margin of error going into voting day.

It's kind of funny that seemingly the one lesson people learned from 2016 happens to be wrong. Once more for the people in the back (cc @Shaelumstash): National polling in 2016 was quite accurate, state polling less so. The average of the 13 final national polls taken right before the 2016 election had Clinton ahead in the popular vote by 3.1 points, a measure she would go on to win by 2.1 points.

The reason she lost the presidency was because Trump drew an inside straight in the swing states and somehow won Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by something like 80k combined votes across all three states (out of 13m total votes cast within them). It is not because he dramatically outperformed his national polling. The general consensus is that a 4 to 5 point national margin eliminates any possibility of a similar win in the popular vote and a loss in the electoral college.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

It's kind of funny that seemingly the one lesson people learned from 2016 happens to be wrong. Once more for the people in the back (cc @Shaelumstash): National polling in 2016 was quite accurate, state polling less so. The average of the 13 final national polls taken right before the 2016 election had Clinton ahead in the popular vote by 3.1 points, a measure she would go on to win by 2.1 points.

The reason she lost the presidency was because Trump drew an inside straight in the swing states and somehow won Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin by something like 80k combined votes across all three states (out of 13m total votes cast within them). It is not because he outperformed his national polling. The general consensus is that a 4 to 5 point national margin eliminates any possibility of a similar win in the popular vote and a loss in the electoral college.

The narrow victory is what he has to defend and getting the turnout for a second term should be more difficult. If trumpers assume he has it won and there is a hint of complacency then he will lose. I cant see Biden failing to match Hilary, the dems have all the motivation in the world to get out and vote.

 

[babyape]

Im all for techno advances but social media has truly fucked up this world im my view

Couldn't agree more. What started off as a harmless, fun platform, has become all consuming. And now a very easy way for anyone to gain access to a worldwide audience and spread utter shite... and seemingly manipulate elections.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

Donnie has a strange view of facts. It seems Twitter still won't do anything about this bullsh*t.

 

[super_city_si]

That's a good point. Trump may have accidentally stumbled upon a way to validate his nonsense in the eyes of the slackjaws. Just shows that there is virtually no way of tackling the problem of fake news being made, and then any sensible challenge to it or arbiter just also being called fake news. Im all for techno advances but social media has truly fucked up this world im my view

wholeheartedly agree. Social media has had a terrible impact on society.