WI-Marquette: Biden +3%

[JRP1994]

https://law.marquette.edu/poll/

Biden: 48%
Trump: 45%

Trump: 47%
Sanders: 45%

[JRP1994]

The glorious land of good cheese and overrated pro quarterbacks shall deliver us from evil. YUGE numbers!

[JRP1994]

Trump will win Wisconsin by 5 points, for if Wisconsin had the votes to reject Trump in 2020, they would have in 2016 as well. Voter suppression has only gotten worse, and the state has moved further to the right since 2016.

Yes, Tony Evers will do far more to purge voter rolls and limit access than Scott Walker did. Galaxy brain right there

[JRP1994]

Anecdotal, but it seems to be the two most prevalent complaints about Hillary were her inauthenticity and arrogance. That a) she seemed painfully fake trying to come across as relatable, and b) acted like she was owed the presidency; that it was her turn.

Biden is neither. Whatever one things of his political positions, far fewer people see him as arrogant and self-entitled or fake. There's an element of sexism to that no doubt, but there's also a good bit of it being that Hillary was just a bad candidate in some ways Biden just simply isn't.

[JRP1994]

Anecdotal, but it seems to be the two most prevalent complaints about Hillary were her inauthenticity and arrogance. That a) she seemed painfully fake trying to come across as relatable, and b) acted like she was owed the presidency; that it was her turn.

Biden is neither. Whatever one things of his political positions, far fewer people see him as arrogant and self-entitled or fake. There's an element of sexism to that no doubt, but there's also a good bit of it being that Hillary was just a bad candidate in some ways Biden just simply isn't.

So? The public didn't see McCain or Dole as fake or arrogant either and both of them lost and those men had decorated war records. Yes Biden is not as disliked as Hillary but the polls are showing  Trump has a good deal more enthusiasm behind his candidacy. This cannot be discounted because it helped Bush in '04 and Obama in 2012 to win re-election. People were FOR them and not just against the other guy.

McCain had the misfortune of being in the same party as an incumbent President with an approval rating in the 30s, a massive economic crisis, an unprepared running mate, and running against a charismatic rising star with favorability ratings north of 60%. No Republican was beating Obama in 2008. And Dole was running against a charismatic, popular incumbent President with approval well north of 50%. I'd argue neither are particularly good comparison

To the extent Biden has a good historical precedent it might be Kerry, but he also pretty significantly over-performed fundamentals. Bush entered 2004 with an approval rating near 60% and held an 8 point lead after the RNC. Kerry closed furiously and nearly pulled off a monumental comeback

[JRP1994]

Anecdotal, but it seems to be the two most prevalent complaints about Hillary were her inauthenticity and arrogance. That a) she seemed painfully fake trying to come across as relatable, and b) acted like she was owed the presidency; that it was her turn.

Biden is neither. Whatever one things of his political positions, far fewer people see him as arrogant and self-entitled or fake. There's an element of sexism to that no doubt, but there's also a good bit of it being that Hillary was just a bad candidate in some ways Biden just simply isn't.

So? The public didn't see McCain or Dole as fake or arrogant either and both of them lost and those men had decorated war records. Yes Biden is not as disliked as Hillary but the polls are showing  Trump has a good deal more enthusiasm behind his candidacy. This cannot be discounted because it helped Bush in '04 and Obama in 2012 to win re-election. People were FOR them and not just against the other guy.

McCain had the misfortune of being in the same party as an incumbent President with an approval rating in the 30s, a massive economic crisis, an unprepared running mate, and running against a charismatic rising star with favorability ratings north of 60%. No Republican was beating Obama in 2008. And Dole was running against a charismatic, popular incumbent President with approval well north of 50%. I'd argue neither are particularly good comparison

To the extent Biden has a good historical precedent it might be Kerry, but he also pretty significantly over-performed fundamentals. Bush entered 2004 with an approval rating near 60% and held an 8 point lead after the RNC. Kerry closed furiously and nearly pulled off a monumental comeback

Not really. He lost by 3 million votes. He nearly lost Wiscosnin too. Almost doesn't count. I actually think Biden is even worse candidate than Kerry. Kerry could at least debate. Biden is seriously sounding very senile and everyone besides his hardcore supporters can see that. This race could be over before it begins.

That's just not what we've been seeing in the Dem debates though. Biden's last 3-4 debates have been his best of the entire primary, and his last two have been his sharpest. He's getting better at debates, not worse.

[JRP1994]

Not really. He lost by 3 million votes. He nearly lost Wiscosnin too. Almost doesn't count. I actually think Biden is even worse candidate than Kerry. Kerry could at least debate. Biden is seriously sounding very senile and everyone besides his hardcore supporters can see that. This race could be over before it begins.

If GDP really contracts by double digits in Q2, yes, the race might be close to over before it begins, but the other way around.  In that scenario, Biden (who I agree is a very flawed candidate!) could get ALS and be roaming around in a wheelchair and probably still win.

Fundamentals matter so much more than many people on this forum realize/acknowledge. When those fundamentals are extreme or unusual, they matter way more than personalities or people.  Trump will try to argue the economy was out of his control or that its all Democratic governor's faults, but its not going to work imo, even if the former is completely true. Historically, voters always hold the incumbent responsible for a severe economic downturn, fairly or not.

Also, a thing people don't like to admit but is clearly true is that the debates don't actually matter very much. They create temporary bounces that always fade away quickly into whatever the status quo was pre-debates.  Maybe the 1980 Reagan-Carter debate actually mattered since that one was a few days before the election. The Comey letter mattered 100x more than the debates in 2016 because voters have very short memories.

People forget just how damaging the Access Hollywood tape was for Trump. He was in freefall for a week after it came out, and by about mid October, Clinton was leading nationally by 7% and on track for an Obama 2008 style win. That came back down to earth a little bit, but on the day of the Comey letter, she was leading by about 4-5%. Within a week of the Comey letter, that was down to 1% and only rebounded to about 2-3% by election day.