The Long March to 11/24

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
We will know in about 3 months how much of a threat he will be because the SCOTUS should rule by then on the primaries, unless they want confusion in the states with some excluding Trump and others not. After that his legal troubles become a sideshow and entertainment. It could mean trouble for Joe though with a more electable republican and less baggage as the nominee and plenty of time to put lipstick on the pig and line up big doners. I'm hoping with abortion and a lot of pissed off women and youth will show up at the poles, the republicans are losing in court over many of the things they tried to suppress or rig the vote with in various red states. I fear 24 might be another close year in the struggle for the soul of the nation despite everything that has transpired.

With Trump suddenly jerked out of the primaries and his standing in the GOP polls, it's hard to say how his fans will react when he isn't on the ballot and then there will be the summer of abject humiliation for Trump in court next year with a lot of it being on national TV live from Georgia. He stands a very good chance of appearing on TV in orange coveralls if Jack convicts him in DC first.

It will sure be an interesting political year that is for sure, historic, in the sense of, may you live in interesting times, the old Chinese imprecation!
Did I somehow connect with you through some wormhole into an alternate reality?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Trump has not been jerked out of the primaries and he has been polling quite well, even beating Biden in some polls, not that they mean anything about elections results at the moment. It's completely possible though not likely that he can win next November. He's nowhere near being convicted, much less sentenced to jail and nobody has removed him from any ballots, especially since they aren't even due to be printed for the primaries until December.
 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Did I somehow connect with you through some wormhole into an alternate reality?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Trump has not been jerked out of the primaries and he has been polling quite well, even beating Biden in some polls, not that they mean anything about elections results at the moment but its completely possible though not likely that he can win next November. He's nowhere near being convicted, much less sentenced to jail and nobody has removed him from any ballots, especially since they aren't even due to be printed for the primaries until December.
I'm looking at some possible scenarios for 24, if Trump is disqualified this winter before the primaries. We don't know that he will be at this point but there are good odds that he will be. It will be interesting to see how the bookies call it. There are also good odds that Jack will nail his ass in DC and a possible Georgia trial starting in May according to some experts. I'm wondering about the implications if Trump is disqualified from the primaries, and I'm not comforted. Convictions over J6 in DC and Georgia would disqualify him for sure or they would break the US constitution and all Hell would break loose with him on the ballot against the plain and clear language of the 14th.

Trump is even with Biden now and has a 46 point lead over his closest rival in the GOP Desantis, with the indictments making no difference and the convictions are unlikely to move them as well. If he is disqualified by the SCOTUS before the primaries it will land like a bomb among the fanatics who would still vote for him despite all that has transpired and all his criminal convictions. He might also have plenty of time to cause trouble for the republicans before being locked up mid primary in the spring, he will likely attack the nominee or extort a public pardon promise. If he told his fans it was all rigged and their votes didn't count he would likely screw the republicans into a landslide with them buried. The future is still wide open with Donald around!
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Did I somehow connect with you through some wormhole into an alternate reality?

I have no idea what you are talking about. Trump has not been jerked out of the primaries and he has been polling quite well, even beating Biden in some polls, not that they mean anything about elections results at the moment but its completely possible though not likely that he can win next November. He's nowhere near being convicted, much less sentenced to jail and nobody has removed him from any ballots, especially since they aren't even due to be printed for the primaries until December.
What would you call the 46% of registered voters who say they will vote for Trump, if not fanatics disconnected from reality. It would be nice to say I'm biased, but the facts dictate otherwise, these people are assholes or idiots with not many other options I'm afraid.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
What would you call the 46% of registered voters who say they will vote for Trump, if not fanatics disconnected from reality. It would be nice to say I'm biased, but the facts dictate otherwise, these people are assholes or idiots with not many other options I'm afraid.
I don't know what source you are citing. I put zero faith in polls to predict what will happen more than a year from now. Just saying that some reports show Trump doing well against Biden.



Wall Street Journal has Trump and Biden polling even on August 30 in a hypothetical presidential election

I'd be happy if Biden were polling 12% ahead of Trump but anything less than that tells me that there are a lot of unhappy voters who don't care about the same issues that you and I care about.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I'm looking at some possible scenarios for 24, if Trump is disqualified this winter before the primaries. We don't know that he will be at this point but there are good odds that he will be. It will be interesting to see how the bookies call it. There are also good odds that Jack will nail his ass in DC and a possible Georgia trial starting in May according to some experts. I'm wondering about the implications if Trump is disqualified from the primaries, and I'm not comforted. Convictions over J6 in DC and Georgia would disqualify him for sure or they would break the US constitution and all Hell would break loose with him on the ballot against the plain and clear language of the 14th.

Trump is even with Biden now and has a 46 point lead over his closest rival in the GOP Desantis, with the indictments making no difference and the convictions are unlikely to move them as well. If he is disqualified by the SCOTUS before the primaries it will land like a bomb among the fanatics who would still vote for him despite all that has transpired and all his criminal convictions. He might also have plenty of time to cause trouble for the republicans before being locked up mid primary in the spring, he will likely attack the nominee or extort a public pardon promise. If he told his fans it was all rigged and their votes didn't count he would likely screw the republicans into a landslide with them buried. The future is still wide open with Donald around!
I'll play the devil's advocate in this post. I think Trump and his co-conspirators are guilty as all hell but that doesn't mean anything in court.

Two things.

When a result comes down to what one judge says, throw out statistics. One can look at a judge's past history as a guide but they call it reading tea leaves for a reason. Anything can happen when a case is tried in court, jury or not. So, it's not a slam dunk that Smith will prevail in his cases against Trump.

Mark Meadows is pursuing moving his trial for election fraud to federal court. If that happens, there is a chance that his case will be thrown out because he was a federal official at the time and federal officials cannot be charged if they were doing their duty. If it works for Meadows, it might also work for Trump. In this scenario, they both walk free.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
I'll play the devil's advocate in this post. I think Trump and his co-conspirators are guilty as all hell but that doesn't mean anything in court.

Two things.

When a result comes down to what one judge says, throw out statistics. One can look at a judge's past history as a guide but they call it reading tea leaves for a reason. Anything can happen when a case is tried in court, jury or not. So, it's not a slam dunk that Smith will prevail in his cases against Trump.

Mark Meadows is pursuing moving his trial for election fraud to federal court. If that happens, there is a chance that his case will be thrown out because he was a federal official at the time and federal officials cannot be charged if they were doing their duty. If it works for Meadows, it might also work for Trump. In this scenario, they both walk free.
And that is precisely why I hope Meadows’s request is rejected.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I'll play the devil's advocate in this post. I think Trump and his co-conspirators are guilty as all hell but that doesn't mean anything in court.

Two things.

When a result comes down to what one judge says, throw out statistics. One can look at a judge's past history as a guide but they call it reading tea leaves for a reason. Anything can happen when a case is tried in court, jury or not. So, it's not a slam dunk that Smith will prevail in his cases against Trump.

Mark Meadows is pursuing moving his trial for election fraud to federal court. If that happens, there is a chance that his case will be thrown out because he was a federal official at the time and federal officials cannot be charged if they were doing their duty. If it works for Meadows, it might also work for Trump. In this scenario, they both walk free.
Like I said, with Trump still in the game the future is wide open, but if I were a bookie I've be betting Trump will be disqualified and found guilty on all counts. There is a mountain of evidence and witnesses in both cases and a lot of legal facts in the disqualification. In attempting to predict the future we use probabilities, and the probabilities are high for disqualification, and I believe the SCOTUS will seek unanimity in the decision. Thomas should recuse, since his wife was involved with the crimes leading to Trump's disqualification, she was directly involved in trying to overturn the election.

Even though it might be bad for Joe and the democrats if Trump is disqualified early, the constitution and law must be followed where it leads. Equally it could be good for Joe and the democrats as Trump rips the GOP apart on his way down, calls them RINOs for not defying the SCOTUS, even though it will be the individual states disqualifying him from the ballot.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
I don't know what source you are citing. I put zero faith in polls to predict what will happen more than a year from now. Just saying that some reports show Trump doing well against Biden.



Wall Street Journal has Trump and Biden polling even on August 30 in a hypothetical presidential election

I'd be happy if Biden were polling 12% ahead of Trump but anything less than that tells me that there are a lot of unhappy voters who don't care about the same issues that you and I care about.
It is very early, but those numbers spell trouble to me and are a general reflection of sentiment. I think the wealth imbalance is at the root of much discontent, people feel they are getting screwed by the economic system that favors billionaires. The good economic news does no good, the stock market and billionaires are doing fantastically well while everybody else is short of cash, including governments, but good jobs are plentiful, and unemployment is low. It will take the democrats gaining power and then overcoming their right-wing lead by Schumer from NY to do anything meaningful about it. Sure, there is racism and bigotry, but there is also simmering discontent and I think its roots are economic. With the gains in productivity brought about technology we should be living better than in the 70's FFS. IMO, it all started when Reagan killed the new deal and changed the rules of the economic game to favor the monied class.

I don't think all rich people are evil or there is a class war, but they are now so rich in comparison to everybody else, that the few who turn fascist can do a lot of damage. Many can buy and sell elections and politicians with pocket change, and it is not good for democracy or equality under the law.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
It is very early, but those numbers spell trouble to me and are a general reflection of sentiment. I think the wealth imbalance is at the root of much discontent, people feel they are getting screwed by the economic system that favors billionaires. The good economic news does no good, the stock market and billionaires are doing fantastically well while everybody else is short of cash, including governments, but good jobs are plentiful, and unemployment is low. It will take the democrats gaining power and then overcoming their right-wing lead by Schumer from NY to do anything meaningful about it. Sure, there is racism and bigotry, but there is also simmering discontent and I think its roots are economic. With the gains in productivity brought about technology we should be living better than in the 70's FFS. IMO, it all started when Reagan killed the new deal and changed the rules of the economic game to favor the monied class.

I don't think all rich people are evil or there is a class war, but they are now so rich in comparison to everybody else, that the few who turn fascist can do a lot of damage. Many can buy and sell elections and politicians with pocket change, and it is not good for democracy or equality under the law.
A general reflection of sentiment is not to be confused with information. You act as if polls were
1) accurate
2) predictive.

They’re not. Discussing them wastes space and (worse) legitimizes their being used as a stand-in for journalism.

They’re worse than useless. They’re deceptive. You didn’t grow up here, but you might know about this ad campaign against littering.

1693958328520.jpeg


Let’s do the same in our little corner and keep polls in their proper container.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
A general reflection of sentiment is not to be confused with information. You act as if polls were
1) accurate
2) predictive.

They’re not. Discussing them wastes space and (worse) legitimizes their being used as a stand-in for journalism.

They’re worse than useless. They’re deceptive. You didn’t grow up here, but you might know about this ad campaign against littering.

View attachment 5324151


Let’s do the same in our little corner and keep polls in their proper container.
They let us know where people in the country stand and are not predictive of election results at this point in time, we don't even know who is running for the GOP at this point. These polls are more of a barometer for the support of fascism in America and how great the danger is with that many miscreants in the country. We are beyond regular politics here this is about the rule of law and constitution, or as Joe would say the soul of the nation.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
They let us know where people in the country stand
no. They don’t. That’s the whole point: small sample sizes of selected demographics being fed loaded questions lead to tailored results exploited by political engineers. You greatly overvalue them.
and are not predictive of election results at this point in time, we don't even know who is running for the GOP at this point. These polls are more of a barometer
again no. The error exceeds the value. Were they a clock, they’d be the one that is right twice a day.
for the support of fascism in America and how great the danger is with that many miscreants in the country. We are beyond regular politics here this is about the rule of law and constitution, or as Joe would say the soul of the nation.
Reading about polls whose reliability as as great as any other sales pitch adds no value. Please meditate upon that, and consider how the zero information value, and often negative value, propagates through subsequent analyses.
These things might be fine for a political diary or an obscure blog, but they don’t improve the local scenery. Imagine having to share space with a public whistler. ~shudder~
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
no. They don’t. That’s the whole point: small sample sizes of selected demographics being fed loaded questions lead to tailored results exploited by political engineers. You greatly overvalue them. again no. The error exceeds the value. Were they a clock, they’d be the one that is right twice a day.
Reading about polls whose reliability as as great as any other sales pitch adds no value. Please meditate upon that, and consider how the zero information value, and often negative value, propagates through subsequent analyses.
These things might be fine for a political diary or an obscure blog, but they don’t improve the local scenery. Imagine having to share space with a public whistler. ~shudder~
Polls are taken seriously by politicians, but this particular poll has no political value this early and with Trump's future disqualification uncertain. Why do I say it is a measure of fascism in America? Because of Donald Trump and his recent past, current indictments and clearly unconstitutional behavior, supporting someone like him after J6, incompetence, corruption and indictments tells ya something, doesn't it? I mean 46% of registered voters think he is fit to be president and have the nuclear codes, that astounds most thinking people.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Polls are taken seriously by politicians, but this particular poll has no political value this early and with Trump's future disqualification uncertain. Why do I say it is a measure of fascism in America? Because of Donald Trump and his recent past, current indictments and clearly unconstitutional behavior, supporting someone like him after J6, incompetence, corruption and indictments tells ya something, doesn't it? I mean 46% of registered voters think he is fit to be president and have the nuclear codes, that astounds most thinking people.
Imo polls were taken seriously by politicians last century, when there were a very few polling organizations (Gallup was the bull among goats) whose methods led to a good amount of trust. Now there are a thousand two-bit partisan polling enterprises with no or negative information hygiene.* The noise has consumed the signal.

If there is one thing I’m asking you to seriously consider, it is that polls are not news but manipulation. Who else in this forum regularly posts poll-derived opinion? Think about not playing into the hands of those who are real good at putting a palatable coating on an attempt to herd composite opinion.

*Today in an online news piece I encountered an invitation to answer a poll with the question
Should illegal aliens get Social Security?
Loaded, ambiguous question premised on a dishonest nonissue, self-selected sample pool, value negative because the result will be nonrepresentative or antirepresentative and of benefit to the fascists running it. At least the ad openly disclosed that a hard-right sthink tank was running it.
Most polls do not have such transparent disclosure of bias. So I strongly caution against lending them any credence.
 
Last edited:

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Imo polls were taken seriously by politicians last century, when there were a very few polling organizations (Gallup was the bull among goats) whose methods led to a good amount of trust. Now there are a thousand two-bit partisan polling enterprises with no or negative information hygiene.* The noise has consumed the signal.

If there is one thing I’m asking you to seriously consider, it is that polls are not news but manipulation. Who else in this forum regularly posts poll-derived opinion? Think about not playing into the hands of those who are real good at putting a palatable coating on an attempt to herd composite opinion.

*Today in an online news piece I encountered an invitation to answer a poll with the question
Should illegal aliens get Social Security?
Loaded, ambiguous question premised on a dishonest nonissue, self-selected sample pool, value negative because the result will be nonrepresentative or antirepresentative and of benefit to the fascists running it. At least the ad openly disclosed that a hard-right sthink tank was running it.
Most polls do not have such transparent disclosure of bias. So I strongly caution against lending them any credence.
Parties still use internal polling on issues if nothing else, do you think the polling on abortion is right? How about guns? Polls are the best metric we have and when and how they are done is as important as their results. The questions asked too, particularly about Trump in 2016, some people were afraid to give even pollsters an honest answer. I just happen to think the one showing Trump and Biden is significant, but not directly to the coming election. Trump is such an extreme polarizing figure that would have been unthinkable as POTUS less than a generation ago. It says something about the level of his support and the fanaticism of his support considering what he stands for, which is nothing but the destruction of the constitutional order. It is not just 80% of the republican base, it is 46% of registered voters who are disloyal to the constitution and don't support the rule of law. 46% of registered voters are ok with J6 and all the indictments, policy makes no mark on them at all.

When policy doesn't affect how people vote (Trump has no real policies), they aren't really playing politics are they? They are playing something else. Politics is about policy, or it used to be not long ago, policy is important to democrats, and I'll bet policy is important to you too, or would be more if liberal democracy itself weren't under threat. All the patriots forgot their differences on policy when it came to the constitution and liberal democracy, from former conservative republicans to Bernie Sanders and AOC, all are united about the most important issue. Those 46% Trump supporters are on the other side of it apparently, existing in an alternative reality of convenience and choice.
 

cannabineer

Ursus marijanus
Parties still use internal polling on issues if nothing else, do you think the polling on abortion is right? How about guns? Polls are the best metric we have and when and how they are done is as important as their results. The questions asked too, particularly about Trump in 2016, some people were afraid to give even pollsters an honest answer. I just happen to think the one showing Trump and Biden is significant, but not directly to the coming election. Trump is such an extreme polarizing figure that would have been unthinkable as POTUS less than a generation ago. It says something about the level of his support and the fanaticism of his support considering what he stands for, which is nothing but the destruction of the constitutional order. It is not just 80% of the republican base, it is 46% of registered voters who are disloyal to the constitution and don't support the rule of law. 46% of registered voters are ok with J6 and all the indictments, policy makes no mark on them at all.

When policy doesn't affect how people vote (Trump has no real policies), they aren't really playing politics are they? They are playing something else. Politics is about policy, or it used to be not long ago, policy is important to democrats, and I'll bet policy is important to you too, or would be more if liberal democracy itself weren't under threat. All the patriots forgot their differences on policy when it came to the constitution and liberal democracy, from former conservative republicans to Bernie Sanders and AOC, all are united about the most important issue. Those 46% Trump supporters are on the other side of it apparently, existing in an alternative reality of convenience and choice.
You still didn’t reference that 46% number. Link please.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
You still didn’t reference that 46% number. Link please.
It was already posted and was consistent over a couple of polls


In a poll matchup excluding other candidates, Trump and Biden were tied with 46% each, with the remaining 8% of respondents undecided.




 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
No working its way up the judicial food chain. The SCOTUS is stepping up to the plate early for a swing, we will know before long.

Judgement day for Donald is just over a month away... His fans plan to write in a disqualified candidate on the ballot, good luck with spoiled ballots! That is something patriots should encourage, support their movement to write Trump in on the ballot, Donald will be all for it and the republicans will be horrified! :lol:

 
Last edited:

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
It was already posted and was consistent over a couple of polls


In a poll matchup excluding other candidates, Trump and Biden were tied with 46% each, with the remaining 8% of respondents undecided.




It's a Wall Street Journal poll.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
The fact that the SCOTUS is taking Trump's disqualification up directly and should have a finding by October 9th, will remove a lot of ambiguity and cause a shit storm. I'll place my virtual bet and say they will disqualify him from the republican primary on October 9th, if that is the day they announce the finding. The magats and Trump will freak out, it could even be the event that gets Trump jailed, if he goes off the deep end on social media, attacks the justices and generally breaks the conditions of his release! :lol: We now have another data point coming up a potentially terminal one for Trump, if he doesn't go to jail, he will attack the GOP. His fans say they will write his name in on the ballot if he is disqualified, much to the delight of Joe and patriots should encourage such stupidity whenever they can! If Donald gets wind of it, he will like the idea of all those votes written in to salve his injured ego, the republicans might not like the idea though, or his fans could just stay home on election day crying into their beer.

If Donald can't run, he will endorse a candidate for the nomination, after extorting the promise of a pardon in writing, witnessed and notarized! :lol:
 
Last edited:
Top