NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 05:22:55 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7
Author Topic: NYT/Siena Polls of 6 Battleground States  (Read 13190 times)
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,592
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #125 on: November 04, 2019, 03:50:48 PM »

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.

Lose with Warren, get a Dem landslide in 2022 and impeach Trump after taking the Senate.

Taking the Senate isn't enough; you need 67 votes to convict and remove Trump.  But even if you manage that, Trump would still have had at least two more years to inflict further damage on the country.  And even then you're left with Pence (or whoever replaces him on the ticket) as President. 

Would you REALLY prefer four more years of Trump or Trump/Pence to four years of Biden?  Wouldn't you rather have Trump out in January 2021? 

Some of the Berniebros just prefer to keep a corrupt and inept moron in office with whom they agree on basically nothing, rather than have a mainstream Democrat with whom they agree at least on two thirds of the stuff and who has, unlike Bernie, a real shot in getting this done. I mean, even if Bernie was elected and had narrow senate majority, he still wouldn't pass most of his program in its current form. It's actually kind of sad some one the left are on this #puristorbust lane.
Logged
Gone to Carolina
SaltGiver
Rookie
**
Posts: 227
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #126 on: November 04, 2019, 04:52:24 PM »

I'm looking at the crosstabs, and noticing that this poll's sample deviates pretty significantly from the 2016 exit polls.  Examples:  In PA, 2016 exits for education level showed 22 HS diploma or less, 30 some college, 29 bachelors deg, 19 postgrad.  This poll's sample shows 37-28-21-14.  In MI, 2016 exits showed some college or less 58%, bachelors degree or higher 42%.  This pol's sample has those numbers at 69-30.  Also in MI, 2016 exits showed party ID at 40 Dem, 31 Rep, 29 Ind.  This polls sample is 29-24-44.  Not saying that these numbers are necessarily wrong, but it would be interesting to hear the pollster's explanation as to why they think the 2020 electorate will look so much different than in 2016.

As far as education goes the Sienna crosstabs are probably more in line with what the actual 2016 electorate looked like. The CNN Exits drastically overstated how educated the electorate was. For instance in PA, while the exit said 41% of the electorate was college-educated whites whereas the Center for American Progress' post-election analysis of the voter files pegged the number of college-educated whites in the electorate as closer to 30%. 
Logged
Fargobison
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,692


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #127 on: November 04, 2019, 05:06:49 PM »

I still think Warren is a much weaker candidate than many realize. She has really no appeal outside of her base, and her policy ideas are not something that will play well with those not on the far left. These are the polls you have to pay attention to for the election. Nationwide polls should be ignored because it is unlikely that Trump wins the popular vote in any circumstance.

This election is far from a slam dunk to get Trump out of office.

She is weak, plus she has bad instincts as well. Rolling out a comprehensive Medicare 4 all plan was beyond dumb. She pretty much sunk any momentum she had and is taking shots from both the right and her own party.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,021


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #128 on: November 04, 2019, 05:19:21 PM »

I still think Warren is a much weaker candidate than many realize. She has really no appeal outside of her base, and her policy ideas are not something that will play well with those not on the far left. These are the polls you have to pay attention to for the election. Nationwide polls should be ignored because it is unlikely that Trump wins the popular vote in any circumstance.

This election is far from a slam dunk to get Trump out of office.

She is weak, plus she has bad instincts as well. Rolling out a comprehensive Medicare 4 all plan was beyond dumb. She pretty much sunk any momentum she had and is taking shots from both the right and her own party.

She was forced into releasing it by her opponents, but there was no way it was going to come out well. To avoid middle-class tax hikes, she had to overcompensate by putting on a lot of these unconstitutional taxes and payments, which will be challenged and likely defeated in the court system. She also hast his rosy view that she can close all loopholes so the rich will not be able to avoid taxes.

I still don't see Medicare for all as a realistic policy proposal when it includes extinguishing the private and employer provided insurance industry. What is realistic is including a public option within Obamacare and expanding medicaid in all 50 states.

I, for one, like my health insurance plan and have no interest in trading it in for a government plan.
Logged
Frenchrepublican
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,278


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #129 on: November 04, 2019, 05:25:56 PM »

My takeaways (keeping in mind that this is just one poll):

- Is there really a good reason to believe that NC is more likely to flip than GA? I could see it voting 1% to the left of GA, but not more than that. It doesn’t make much sense to rate NC a Tossup and GA Lean R, if you ask me. Agree
- MI can’t be taken granted by Democrats and is not Lean/Likely D in a close race (although I don’t buy the Trump +6 result vs. Warren in particular--their MI numbers might be too R-friendly). Agree
- WI can’t be taken for granted by Republicans and is not Lean R in a close race, especially if there’s a collapse in R support in WOW (in line with the suburban trends we’ve seen across the country) and urban WI (especially Milwaukee) looks more like 2018 than 2016. That said, I still think it’ll be more Republican than PA at least. Hmm, partly agree
- Democrats would be colossally stupid if they didn’t go all in on Florida. Conceding 29 electoral votes when their path to 270 is already fairly narrow and other swing states might be trending away from them would be beyond dumb. It will definitely require some effort, but it’s not unwinnable even in a close race. They surely must go after Florida, nobody is telling that. But FL has a lot of older white voters who prefer moderate candidates. I buy that Biden will win, while Sanders and Warren will lose FL. Don't forget they overestimated Gillum in FL as well.
- IA isn’t a swing state and certainly not as "elastic" as people are making it out to be, but I’m not going to dwell on that. We could see a regression to the mean here (similar to NV 2012), but if IA is even close, Democrats already have the Senate + presidency. It's elastic and still winnable for Democrats. IA might end up being close or swing state, but I agree with your take that if IA flips, the presidency is already taken
- I’ve said repeatedly that AZ is one of the (if not the) shakiest states for Trump, and I don’t see it voting Republican if he’s losing other swing states like WI or FL. I’d argue that this one is actually a must-win for Democrats. I disagree. I think AZ will be fairly close, but still favouring Trump.
- Overall pretty bad numbers for Democrats considering that Trump seems to be trailing nationally by 5-8%. They’re probably slightly favored, but the PV/EC split will probably be even more dramatic this time if they can’t win the PV by 3.5-4%. I agree

Biden would still lose FL, being a white, old, boring dude is not a guaranteed winning key.
Example : Bill Nelson
Logged
Frenchrepublican
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,278


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #130 on: November 04, 2019, 05:29:08 PM »

Obviously these polls are good for Trump. What I don't get, though, is Biden in a tie w/ Trump in MI but ahead in FL? MOE and everything, but I don't see a scenario where FL is blue and MI isn't.

Based on Cohn's comments about their trouble polling MI I think their poll there should be taken with a grain of salt. The others are likely accurate though.
Logged
Frenchrepublican
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,278


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #131 on: November 04, 2019, 05:30:08 PM »

A 13 point difference between this and Emerson for Warren in Michigan.  Yeah one of these is really wrong, and it isn't Emerson this time.

Emerson’s Michigan sample was 46% college educated. Michigan is around 32% educated. Emerson is much more wrong.
Logged
Frenchrepublican
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,278


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #132 on: November 04, 2019, 05:31:46 PM »

Im not gonna pick apart Siena, especially after 2018. Its not surprising that Trump is holding up better in the midwest compared to the other regions of the country.

I also wished they polled his job approvals. He was at 45/54 in 2018 exit polls, that seems about where he still is in these states too. Maybe a few points better than that.




In the swing states in the 2018 exit polls he was at 51% approval in Florida, 50% in Arizona, 48% in Wisconsin and 45% in Pennsylvania & Michigan.

Yeah, Democrats should not count on FL
Logged
Dr. Arch
Arch
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,452
Puerto Rico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #133 on: November 04, 2019, 05:37:57 PM »

↑ Again, everyone is having a discussion about these polls without even knowing what the electorate will actually look like in 2020. It could look like 2016, or it could not. It's more likely that it won't because a lot changes in four years to keep that as steady as some may hope.

The electorate could very well be more educated (by function of lower non-educated turnout), younger (by function of younger voters not being captured by models, as they have tended to have lower turnout thus far), etc. and in numerous combinations thereof.

And this is all a year from the actual election.
Logged
Brittain33
brittain33
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,933


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #134 on: November 04, 2019, 06:47:03 PM »

Im not gonna pick apart Siena, especially after 2018. Its not surprising that Trump is holding up better in the midwest compared to the other regions of the country.

I also wished they polled his job approvals. He was at 45/54 in 2018 exit polls, that seems about where he still is in these states too. Maybe a few points better than that.




In the swing states in the 2018 exit polls he was at 51% approval in Florida, 50% in Arizona, 48% in Wisconsin and 45% in Pennsylvania & Michigan.

Yeah, Democrats should not count on FL

Literally no Democrats are counting on Florida.
Logged
MT Treasurer
IndyRep
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,284
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #135 on: November 04, 2019, 06:50:14 PM »


Democrats aren’t the ones making overconfident predictions about FL this time.
Logged
💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)
peenie_weenie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,416
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #136 on: November 04, 2019, 09:10:43 PM »

This tweet is the clearest way of summarizing:



How has this changed my priors? First, Warren's support (and to a lesser degree, Sanders's) are limited beyond the base. These numbers are horrible considering how unpopular Trump is. That isn't insurmountable - Trump's support was also perceived to be limited in its appeal. If either of these candidates wins the nom they'll have to be much smarter than they have been about adopting leftist positions. Neither has really shown much restraint here and that's a pretty smart way of interpreting these results.

With that said, there's still plenty of room for things to change. Even as Trump was running away with  polling in late 2015 there was still a polling consensus that he'd get slaughtered in the general against Clinton. There are elements of Warren and Sanders's campaigns that show some ability to adjust here - Warren's campaign was steadliy gaining traction in a crowded field (until recently) and Sanders has an image as a fighter for the common person. But they need to be very strategic in how they campaign because there's still plenty of room to turn off people who dislike Trump but not enough to vote for, e.g., health care for illegal immigrants.

E: Also worth noting that Dems are underperforming what you'd expect for Trump's polls because the mean education levels are so much lower than they are in other solid D areas.
Logged
Annatar
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 976
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #137 on: November 04, 2019, 09:14:14 PM »

I'm looking at the crosstabs, and noticing that this poll's sample deviates pretty significantly from the 2016 exit polls.  Examples:  In PA, 2016 exits for education level showed 22 HS diploma or less, 30 some college, 29 bachelors deg, 19 postgrad.  This poll's sample shows 37-28-21-14.  In MI, 2016 exits showed some college or less 58%, bachelors degree or higher 42%.  This pol's sample has those numbers at 69-30.  Also in MI, 2016 exits showed party ID at 40 Dem, 31 Rep, 29 Ind.  This polls sample is 29-24-44.  Not saying that these numbers are necessarily wrong, but it would be interesting to hear the pollster's explanation as to why they think the 2020 electorate will look so much different than in 2016.


The 2016 exit polls got education levels wrong, they corrected that error in 2018, if you want to know the actual makeup of the electorate in 2016, look at this analysis from Center for American Progress.

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/democracy/reports/2017/11/01/441926/voter-trends-in-2016/


Logged
Calthrina950
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,937
United States


P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #138 on: November 04, 2019, 10:17:21 PM »
« Edited: November 14, 2019, 07:16:55 PM by Calthrina950 »

Quote
There is a full year before Election Day, and a lot can change. Ms. Warren is an energetic campaigner. She could moderate her image or energize young and nonwhite voters, including the millions who might not yet even be included in a poll of today’s registered voters. Mr. Biden could lose the relatively conservative voters who currently back him; the president could be dealt irreparable political damage during the impeachment process.

This is an important section.

Quote
The major demographic cleavages of the 2016 election also remain intact. Mr. Trump struggles badly among college-educated white voters and nonwhite voters, though there are signs his standing among the latter group has improved modestly since the last presidential election. He counters with a wide lead among white voters who did not graduate from a four-year college.

Quote
The poll offers little evidence that any Democrat, including Mr. Biden, has made substantial progress toward winning back the white working-class voters who defected to the president in 2016, at least so far. All the leading Democratic candidates trail in the precincts or counties that voted for Barack Obama and then flipped to Mr. Trump.

As a result, Democrats appear to have made little progress in reclaiming their traditional advantage in the Northern battleground states, despite their sweep there in the 2018 midterms. Respondents in these states said they voted for Democratic congressional candidates by an average of six points, all but identical to their actual winning margins.

I agree with you here. 2018 made it clear that most of the Obama-Trump white-working class voters are gone for the Democrats, permanently. Democratic wins in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania last year (and yes, Sherrod Brown's win in Ohio too), as well as in Illinois, New York, Maine, etc., were fueled by college-educated white voters in the urban areas and suburbs, by younger voters, and by nonwhite voters.

Bob Casey, who once used to do extremely well in the traditionally Democratic working-class and rural areas of Southern and Central Pennsylvania, lost those regions decisively last year, yet demolished  Barletta in the Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg metropolitan areas. And both Gretchen Whitmer and Debbie Stabenow in Michigan relied upon traditionally Republican suburban counties like Kent and Oakland for their victories. Biden's leads in the polls, as we've seen thus far, are deriving from exactly these same kinds of sources. Even "ol' Scranton Joe" is going to do much worse than Obama in the white working-class and rural areas next year, if he is the nominee.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,793
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #139 on: November 04, 2019, 10:22:52 PM »

Im not gonna pick apart Siena, especially after 2018. Its not surprising that Trump is holding up better in the midwest compared to the other regions of the country.

I also wished they polled his job approvals. He was at 45/54 in 2018 exit polls, that seems about where he still is in these states too. Maybe a few points better than that.




In the swing states in the 2018 exit polls he was at 51% approval in Florida, 50% in Arizona, 48% in Wisconsin and 45% in Pennsylvania & Michigan.

Yeah, Democrats should not count on FL
[/quote


Trump only won FL in 2016 due to Rubio being on ballot. Ms. GRAHAM would have run a more competitive race against DeSantis than Guillium. If he runs again in 2022, with Rubio on ballot, he will lose again
Logged
Annatar
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 976
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #140 on: November 04, 2019, 10:31:34 PM »
« Edited: November 05, 2019, 03:20:04 AM by Annatar »

Nate Cohn reckons the swing states are about 5% more R than the nation.

"Over the summer, we did an analysis of what we thought the President’s approval rating was in every state. And in these states we thought the President’s approval rating was five points better than nationwide. So, if Biden is up two in these states, I would say maybe that he is up seven nationwide. That would make Warren up three nationally."

https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/the-times-nate-cohn-on-elizabeth-warrens-odds-against-donald-trump

So this poll would suggest a Biden lead nationally of around 7%, comparable to Obama in 2012. Since Trump won these states by 2% in 2016 and lost the NPV by 2%, it would also suggest his advantage in the EC/NPV split has increased from 3% in 2016 to 4% today.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #141 on: November 04, 2019, 10:38:31 PM »



While I doubt it would happen, something weird like this map (Trump 275-Dem 263) can't be ruled out. It'd be a HELL of a post-election discussion.

Hmm..this is a very plausible map. Big swings in the acela corridor flips PA but WI and MI don't flip. FL would be very close as well.
Logged
JA
Jacobin American
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,956
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #142 on: November 05, 2019, 06:12:02 AM »

While it's true that we must remember this poll is still a year before the actual election, which is an eternity in modern American politics, we have to acknowledge that 2020 won't be a cakewalk for the Democratic candidate and that in terms of the Electoral College, Trump has an advantage. Even if Trump's approval ratings remain in the gutter, that doesn't mean people want the Democratic candidate either; they could very well break for the evil that they know or are simply so turned off by the Democrat that they vote for whom they perceive to be the least bad option (which, for them, could be Trump).

At this point, Warren appears to be the most likely candidate to replicate Clinton's failed electoral strategy by being unable to expand beyond the Democratic base. Many voters repulsed by both major party candidates may simply vote third party again or abstain; suburban voters who are traditionally Republican may simply vote for Trump. At this point, she seems like the most likely to lose against Trump, honestly. I don't think Biden is quite prepared for how dirty Trump's campaign will be against him; they will dig up every single gaffe, questionable policy decision, and potential scandal and use it mercilessly against him, no matter how hypocritical. Biden's numbers will likely fall during the general election; that's my belief, at least. Sanders likely wouldn't move much from his current position and aside from the perceived radicalism of his policies and other already well-known issues, Trump won't have too much new material to use against him. But Sanders's base isn't likely to grow or shrink; which isn't a terribly great position to be in either. Basically, all three of the front runners are entering this race in a not-so-great position against the Republican nominee and although anything can happen, we must be prepared for a competitive race where the Democrat is disadvantaged in the electoral college.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #143 on: November 05, 2019, 09:17:19 AM »

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

These are mostly pretty good polls for Trump, from a very good pollster.  Democrats shouldn't try to pick holes in them, but should recognize that Trump does have a realistic possibility of replicating his electoral inside straight from 2016.  However, neither should Republicans use these polls to assume that Trump is a strong favorite for reelection; he isn't.  It's possible to draw two inside straights in a row...but it sure isn't a good bet.

It's true that the election is still a year away.  There are one or two people here who routinely say "polls this far in advance are meaningless" -- at least when they don't like the results.  For those who really think polls are meaningless at this point, why are you wasting your time on a polling board?  Check back in July or so.

Polling this far in advance indeed has low predictive value for the state of the race a year from now.  But it's not zero, and the value is gradually increasing as the election gets closer. Also, although the polls don't tell us much about the November 2020 state of the race, they do tell us quite a lot about the state of the race now, especially when there are many polls that can be averaged together.

Those polls do tell us a story: Trump is the underdog at this point, but certainly not out of it yet.  And he does better against some candidates than others.  In particular, the large majority of polls show that Biden has the best results against Trump, and looking at the average (don't cherry pick individual polls) he does significantly better than Warren does.  

This is not just a matter of name recognition at this point.  Anyone who's following the campaign at all (and polls consistently show a record level of interest and enthusiasm for this election) knows who Warren is at this point.

Could Warren beat Trump?  Sure, it's very possible.  But at this point in the race, Biden looks like a significantly stronger candidate against Trump.  If this doesn't match your preferences, it's too bad; that's what the data says.  As an old poker buddy of mine once said: no matter how long you stare at a deuce in your hand, it will not transform into an ace.

Why is Warren running behind Biden?  Polls that probe this question, as the Upshot polls did, tend to show that she has specific weakness especially among the working class voters who, for better or worse, have a disproportionate electoral influence at this point in presidential politics.  Perhaps this isn't justified or fair, but it's the way that it is.  Again, look at the damn data.

Personally, I'll vote for any Democrat over Trump, but I'm rooting for Biden, and not just because I'm a moderate.  At this point, he has the best chance to beat Trump.  That's my ONLY concern right now, and I think it should be every Democrat's only concern.

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.
How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #144 on: November 05, 2019, 09:19:53 AM »

A few thoughts, in no particular order:

These are mostly pretty good polls for Trump, from a very good pollster.  Democrats shouldn't try to pick holes in them, but should recognize that Trump does have a realistic possibility of replicating his electoral inside straight from 2016.  However, neither should Republicans use these polls to assume that Trump is a strong favorite for reelection; he isn't.  It's possible to draw two inside straights in a row...but it sure isn't a good bet.

It's true that the election is still a year away.  There are one or two people here who routinely say "polls this far in advance are meaningless" -- at least when they don't like the results.  For those who really think polls are meaningless at this point, why are you wasting your time on a polling board?  Check back in July or so.

Polling this far in advance indeed has low predictive value for the state of the race a year from now.  But it's not zero, and the value is gradually increasing as the election gets closer. Also, although the polls don't tell us much about the November 2020 state of the race, they do tell us quite a lot about the state of the race now, especially when there are many polls that can be averaged together.

Those polls do tell us a story: Trump is the underdog at this point, but certainly not out of it yet.  And he does better against some candidates than others.  In particular, the large majority of polls show that Biden has the best results against Trump, and looking at the average (don't cherry pick individual polls) he does significantly better than Warren does. 

This is not just a matter of name recognition at this point.  Anyone who's following the campaign at all (and polls consistently show a record level of interest and enthusiasm for this election) knows who Warren is at this point.

Could Warren beat Trump?  Sure, it's very possible.  But at this point in the race, Biden looks like a significantly stronger candidate against Trump.  If this doesn't match your preferences, it's too bad; that's what the data says.  As an old poker buddy of mine once said: no matter how long you stare at a deuce in your hand, it will not transform into an ace.

Why is Warren running behind Biden?  Polls that probe this question, as the Upshot polls did, tend to show that she has specific weakness especially among the working class voters who, for better or worse, have a disproportionate electoral influence at this point in presidential politics.  Perhaps this isn't justified or fair, but it's the way that it is.  Again, look at the damn data.

Personally, I'll vote for any Democrat over Trump, but I'm rooting for Biden, and not just because I'm a moderate.  At this point, he has the best chance to beat Trump.  That's my ONLY concern right now, and I think it should be every Democrat's only concern.

Again, it's certainly possible that Warren can beat Trump.  But that sure looks like a shakier proposition than Biden beating Trump.  Every Democrat out there needs to ask themselves: would I rather lose with Warren or win with Biden?  Of course neither of those outcomes is a given, but right now it sure looks like Biden is more likely than not to beat Trump, while Warren is IMO a 50-50 bet.
How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

Because Trump is a threat to this nation and must be removed.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #145 on: November 05, 2019, 09:21:12 AM »

Didn't see this posted. Article on undecided voters. Confirms a lot of anecdotes I've heard: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/05/upshot/swing-voters-2020-election.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,352


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #146 on: November 05, 2019, 09:22:45 AM »

How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

I don't particularly like either of them, but I believe the country would survive four years of their Presidency, especially as they will have difficulty getting more extreme programs through Congress.  I don't believe it will survive another four years of Donald Trump.

It's an either-or choice.  Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, rather than between good and bad.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #147 on: November 05, 2019, 09:26:36 AM »

Wow, five pages for a poll that just came out.

Even though I believe the numbers are little too Trump-friendly in states other than North Carolina and Florida,  it's warning sign for Democrats if they go with the wrong candidate. Liz would be riskier, and she didn't perform well with the healthcare debate in recent days and weeks. A lot of Michigan workers have their union plans for healthcare and don't want the system to be overthrown completely with a plan that costs many billions. It's much smarter (and realistic) to fix Obamacare as Joe Biden proposes.
Yep but I doubt they go with Biden.
Logged
SN2903
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,676
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.48, S: 3.91

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #148 on: November 05, 2019, 09:31:07 AM »

How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

I don't particularly like either of them, but I believe the country would survive four years of their Presidency, especially as they will have difficulty getting more extreme programs through Congress.  I don't believe it will survive another four years of Donald Trump.

It's an either-or choice.  Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, rather than between good and bad.
Trump isn't proposing 27 trillion in new spending. How can you honestly say Warren or Bernie would be a better president? Trump is presiding over the best economy since the 60s. You may hate him as a person but there is no denying he is managing the country effectively.

Also I disagree with you slightly about the inside straight. I think if anything Trump is in a stronger position in the electoral college than even 2016. The advantage of incumbency is going to put other states possibly in his column: Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire. Trump could lose by 1-2 million votes and still win an electoral college mini landslide: 320-350 electoral votes. I also am not sure Biden is as great of a candidate as you think he is. I agree with a previous poster that the Trump campaign will dig up every bit of dirt on Biden and I think his strength in the polls is largely based off of name recognition. When Trump and his team really start spending then negative advertising on Biden (if he gets the nomination which looks less than 50% right now) I think his numbers would drop significantly nationally and in the state polls.
Logged
GeorgiaModerate
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,352


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #149 on: November 05, 2019, 09:42:47 AM »

How can you claim to be a moderate and say you would vote for Bernie Sanders or Warren who are both socialists.

I don't particularly like either of them, but I believe the country would survive four years of their Presidency, especially as they will have difficulty getting more extreme programs through Congress.  I don't believe it will survive another four years of Donald Trump.

It's an either-or choice.  Sometimes the choice is between bad and worse, rather than between good and bad.
Trump isn't proposing 27 trillion in new spending. How can you honestly say Warren or Bernie would be a better president? Trump is presiding over the best economy since the 60s. You may hate him as a person but there is no denying he is managing the country effectively.

Also I disagree with you slightly about the inside straight. I think if anything Trump is in a stronger position in the electoral college than even 2016. The advantage of incumbency is going to put other states possibly in his column: Minnesota, Nevada, New Hampshire. Trump could lose by 1-2 million votes and still win an electoral college mini landslide: 320-350 electoral votes. I also am not sure Biden is as great of a candidate as you think he is. I agree with a previous poster that the Trump campaign will dig up every bit of dirt on Biden and I think his strength in the polls is largely based off of name recognition. When Trump and his team really start spending then negative advertising on Biden (if he gets the nomination which looks less than 50% right now) I think his numbers would drop significantly nationally and in the state polls.

Trump and the Republicans are going to dig up all the dirt they can find on whoever his opponent is. 

Polls consistently show Biden running better against him than any other Democrat.  And no, it's not just name recognition; the NYT/Siena polls (which you tout highly) went into this question in depth.  They found that among voters who were familiar with both Biden and Warren, a strong majority preferred Biden.  To put it simply: there probably aren't a lot of persuadable voters left in the American electorate, but it looks like more of them can be persuaded to vote for Biden than Warren.

Also, "fiscal responsibility" is probably not a card that Republicans can play after the way they've zoomed up the deficit since Trump took office.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.081 seconds with 14 queries.