US Elections 2020

[broncofan]

According to this article his lead is well ahead of Hillary Clinton's at the same stage in 2016, though she did have leads that were almost as large at later stages. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...matchup-369261

The best antidote to pessimism about the election is Trump himself. The man can't seem to help making himself the issue, and as long as the election is a referendum on him I don't think he can win.

Thanks. So it says her lead was about 7 points after the "grab her by the pussy" audio came out. My optimistic interpretation is that a lot of the things that made Trump's poll numbers dip in the past election cycle had to do with his indecency and memory of that can fade in two or three weeks. On the other hand, 140,000 people aren't suddenly going to spring to life.

I am curious what the postmortem is on the accuracy of the poll numbers for the last election. I recall on election night 538 gave Trump a 30% chance of winning and Nate Silver was being harangued by some Bernie Bro journalist who kept insisting Trump really had something like a 2% chance of winning. I'm pretty sure the guy pulled the 2% figure out of his ass and basically just wanted to call Silver a right wing shill.

You could see this guy grow embarrassed as the numbers came in. Then when Trump ended up winning the story was that 538 and other pollsters were way off.

And yet, I still have faith in polling as a statistical science, even though I don't know shit about it. I think sometimes it is tough to get representative samples and a lot can change in three months. And margin of error etc. But if the polls say Trump is down 10% nationally, that is very real. Let's see how durable it is.

[Stavros]

So, with the President's Private Army in Portland, and about to be deployed against the citizens USA in other Democrat-run cities -citizens he has described as 'total scum, they're human scum'- and with him casting doubt on him accepting the result of November election, if it goes ahead, it now is claimed the President can rule by decree anyway, so what is the purpose of Congress or the Supreme Court which will probably decline to make a judgment, while rule by decree/Executive Order will be endorsed by William Barr.

If this is not the start of anothe civil war, what is it? After all, is it not a) encouraging protestors to congregate in a threatening manner so that b) military force can be justified, aong with c) summary arrest and detention without trial of Americans 'threatening' Federal property? After all, how else do you clear the streets of 'human scum'?

"The Trump administration has been consulting the former government lawyer who wrote the legal justification for waterboarding on how the president might try to rule by decree.
John Yoo told the Guardian he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders on whether to apply existing federal laws.
“If the court really believes what it just did, then it just handed President Trump a great deal of power, too,” Yoo, a professor at Berkeley Law, said.
“The supreme court has said President Obama could [choose not to] enforce immigration laws for about 2 million cases. And why can’t the Trump administration do something similar with immigration – create its own … program, but it could do it in areas beyond that, like healthcare, tax policy, criminal justice, inner city policy. I talked to them a fair amount about cities, because of the disorder.”
In a Fox News Sunday Interview, Trump declared he would try to use that interpretation to try to force through decrees on healthcare, immigration and “various other plans” over the coming month. The White House consultations with Yoo were first reported by the Axios news website."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-waterboarding

[broncofan]

"Some of Blum’s cases have had such an impact that even he has been taken aback. Nowhere is that truer than with Shelby County v Holder, a case he sponsored that in 2013 led the supreme court to overturn a key provision of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Blum told the Guardian he has worried over the fallout from that ruling, which spurred conservative legislators in Texas, North Carolina and elsewhere to revive laws that the Justice Department had previously blocked or was expected to block on the grounds that they were vehicles for minority vote suppression."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rmative-action

I didn't know who this guy is but I'm glad I do now. From looking at his wikipedia page it looks like he has spent his career fighting so-called reverse racism in the form of diversity policies that are intended to increase representation of discriminated against minority groups. Now he claims that his lifelong crusade to fight efforts to remedy this country's racism have led to the "unintended" consequence of disenfranchising minority voters. I'm afraid he has to own that one cause it's perfectly in accord with his other efforts.

Just a random thought but some people have way too much confidence. This guy is not a lawyer but his job is to match clients with lawyers for the purpose of creating test cases to challenge laws. How is that a job? It said before that he was a stockbroker! lol

[broncofan]

I recall on election night 538 gave Trump a 30% chance of winning and Nate Silver was being harangued by some Bernie Bro journalist who kept insisting Trump really had something like a 2% chance of winning. I'm pretty sure the guy pulled the 2% figure out of his ass and basically just wanted to call Silver a right wing shill.

You could see this guy grow embarrassed as the numbers came in. Then when Trump ended up winning the story was that 538 and other pollsters were way off.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016...s-chances.html
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/...twitter-230815

This is an article on their disagreement written the day before the election. You can see from the nymag article's conclusion that at least some people had almost completely discounted Trump's chances.

Silver gave Hillary a 64.7% chance of winning on election night, which holds up better than the 98% chance Huffington Post gave her.

[KnightHawk 2.0]

So, with the President's Private Army in Portland, and about to be deployed against the citizens USA in other Democrat-run cities -citizens he has described as 'total scum, they're human scum'- and with him casting doubt on him accepting the result of November election, if it goes ahead, it now is claimed the President can rule by decree anyway, so what is the purpose of Congress or the Supreme Court which will probably decline to make a judgment, while rule by decree/Executive Order will be endorsed by William Barr.

If this is not the start of anothe civil war, what is it? After all, is it not a) encouraging protestors to congregate in a threatening manner so that b) military force can be justified, aong with c) summary arrest and detention without trial of Americans 'threatening' Federal property? After all, how else do you clear the streets of 'human scum'?

"The Trump administration has been consulting the former government lawyer who wrote the legal justification for waterboarding on how the president might try to rule by decree.
John Yoo told the Guardian he has been talking to White House officials about his view that a recent supreme court ruling on immigration would allow Trump to issue executive orders on whether to apply existing federal laws.
“If the court really believes what it just did, then it just handed President Trump a great deal of power, too,” Yoo, a professor at Berkeley Law, said.
“The supreme court has said President Obama could [choose not to] enforce immigration laws for about 2 million cases. And why can’t the Trump administration do something similar with immigration – create its own … program, but it could do it in areas beyond that, like healthcare, tax policy, criminal justice, inner city policy. I talked to them a fair amount about cities, because of the disorder.”
In a Fox News Sunday Interview, Trump declared he would try to use that interpretation to try to force through decrees on healthcare, immigration and “various other plans” over the coming month. The White House consultations with Yoo were first reported by the Axios news website."
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-waterboarding

US Citizens should be extremely concerned that Donald Trump has vowed to send federal officers to several american cities lead by democrats to boost his bid for re-election, this latest example clearly shows that he is willing to do anything to stay in power by any means necessary,including using federal officers in democratic cities to suppress the votes,because he's afraid of losing the november general election againist Joe Biden. And those enablers in the US Congress and Senate won't intervene,and will enable and allow him to continue disregard the US Constitution and do what he wants,because it will benefit them.

[MrFanti]

US Citizens should be extremely concerned that Donald Trump has vowed to send federal officers to several american cities

Agreed - no doubt one can definitely say that this goes against the 'tenants' (for lack of a better word) of states governing themselves.

That being said, my questions is when are the responsible mayors going to handle the violence and crime and get control of their cities?

[Stavros]

What the Mayors can do-

-Law Enforcement Reform: Create a Community Policing culture that puts 'bobbies on the beat' that residents can see every day, that tackles the dominance by gangs of the streets, by day and night. Boston has done it, and while Boston is not free of crime or drugs or gangs, the argument is that the levels of street crime have fallen.
-Jobs: young men and young women need the dignity of work, a dignity they can carry into their mature years.
-Education: young people need an education that will prepare them to become active and responsible adults in the workplace and society at large. Education requires money, the money to sustain a teaching cohort that students see throughout their school days, and even beyond, and schoolrooms that radiate the joy of learning, that have the resoures to make school a place children want to be, and yes, if necessary, the one place they can be guaranteed one hot meal a day.
-Legalize and control narctics: take away the crime, and give it the time: to become a market commodity. I understand the probems legalization brings, but if a 15 year old can make $100 a day slinging, what is the point of flipping burgers at McD, or studying to be an engineer, or even learning to read and write?
-Repeal the 2nd Amendment, or amend it to reduce access to firearms, limied to farmers in remote areas.
-Raise Taxes, and use Taxation to completely reform the Education system, to use Taxes as the foundation of a New Deal in educaiton for all, with one Federal, Nation-wide Curriculum that gives every American an equal opprtunity to thrive.
-Reimagine Cities: the Urban environment is heading into a crisis as the Coronavirus makes the congrgation of humans in small spaces a threat to public and private health. But even if Cities lose their commercial buildings if companies move out of town and people work from home, the City can become a place of Culture and Sport: it also needs looking after, thus
--Garden Cities: recruit young people into Garden City Commodores: create in the most run-down slums and Projects a respect for the streets and parks by cleaning them up, and planting tress and plants, with a permanet cadre of citizens looking after their neighborhood. The aim is not just to smarten a place up, but to make it a desirable place to be, to visit. Stick a stage in the park and have regularly Satuday or Sunday concerts, for free. Create tennis courts, basketball courts and so on, supervised with the option to train promising athletes.

Those are a few ideas of mine, Mr Fanti. What are yours?

[blackchubby38]

What the Mayors can do-

-Law Enforcement Reform: Create a Community Policing culture that puts 'bobbies on the beat' that residents can see every day, that tackles the dominance by gangs of the streets, by day and night. Boston has done it, and while Boston is not free of crime or drugs or gangs, the argument is that the levels of street crime have fallen.
-Jobs: young men and young women need the dignity of work, a dignity they can carry into their mature years.
-Education: young people need an education that will prepare them to become active and responsible adults in the workplace and society at large. Education requires money, the money to sustain a teaching cohort that students see throughout their school days, and even beyond, and schoolrooms that radiate the joy of learning, that have the resoures to make school a place children want to be, and yes, if necessary, the one place they can be guaranteed one hot meal a day.
-Legalize and control narctics: take away the crime, and give it the time: to become a market commodity. I understand the probems legalization brings, but if a 15 year old can make $100 a day slinging, what is the point of flipping burgers at McD, or studying to be an engineer, or even learning to read and write?
-Repeal the 2nd Amendment, or amend it to reduce access to firearms, limied to farmers in remote areas.
-Raise Taxes, and use Taxation to completely reform the Education system, to use Taxes as the foundation of a New Deal in educaiton for all, with one Federal, Nation-wide Curriculum that gives every American an equal opprtunity to thrive.
-Reimagine Cities: the Urban environment is heading into a crisis as the Coronavirus makes the congrgation of humans in small spaces a threat to public and private health. But even if Cities lose their commercial buildings if companies move out of town and people work from home, the City can become a place of Culture and Sport: it also needs looking after, thus
--Garden Cities: recruit young people into Garden City Commodores: create in the most run-down slums and Projects a respect for the streets and parks by cleaning them up, and planting tress and plants, with a permanet cadre of citizens looking after their neighborhood. The aim is not just to smarten a place up, but to make it a desirable place to be, to visit. Stick a stage in the park and have regularly Satuday or Sunday concerts, for free. Create tennis courts, basketball courts and so on, supervised with the option to train promising athletes.

Those are a few ideas of mine, Mr Fanti. What are yours?

Mayors can't repeal the 2nd amendment nor should it be repealed. Also NYC has some of the strictest gun laws in the country and yet gun violence is still a problem.

I think if you legalize and control narcotics, it will have a trickle down effect that can solve some of the other issues that you have mentioned. First you remove a major source of income from the gangs and therefore it impacts their dominance on the streets. It will make the cops' job a lot easier and they won't feel like when they're on patrol, they're doing it in the middle of a war zone. It will also allow them to concentrate on more serious offenses as well as reduce the amount of street crime.

Second, it gives a municipality another source of revenue so they can invest in education and job training programs. If you also legalize gambling and prostitution, there is another source of revenue to draw from. This should make raising taxes unnecessary and you use the existing tax revenue for things like infrastructure repairs.

I think reimagining cities sounds good in theory, but you're still going to have companies that are going to be resistant to having their employees working from home on a permanent basis. So for the ones that want to keep their commercial buildings, make it more viable for them to do so. For the ones that do want to move out of the city, find something some to replace the existing structures with that is beneficial for the city. Like more hospitals, affordable housing, small sized manufacturing centers or an Amazon distribution center. Thanks alot AOC!

As for the garden cities, speaking as a New Yorker. We have done tennis courts, basketball courts, etc thing. Parks are continually being renovated. But its up to the individual citizens to help keep them clean. There is park across the street from house that has been renovated and still people treat it like a dumping ground and don't clean up after themselves when they have cookouts. Which happen to be against the law in the first place.

Having said all that, you still need strong leadership make it happen at the local level. Something that is severely lacking here in NYC.

[blackchubby38]

Another thing I want bring up when it comes to education. We need begin to realize that college isn't for everybody and there really is nothing wrong with learning a trade. Because no matter how technologically advanced we get as a society, we still need plumbers, mechanics, and people to do HAVC work.

[filghy2]

Agreed - no doubt one can definitely say that this goes against the 'tenants' (for lack of a better word) of states governing themselves.

There is a better word: tenets https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dic.../english/tenet

It's lucky for you that you are absolutely unembarrassable.