2020 Presidential Election 4: How Much Longer?

[fraurosena]

A first glimpse at how willing people are to vote.

 

[formergothardite]

10 minutes ago, fransalley said:

I’m keeping most of my politics off of my main FB page because I have friends who feel opposite of what I do

I used to do this because I didn't want to rock any boats with people I know and I know that the moment I went public with how I felt politically, the people who have known me my entire life would start treating me differently. But then I realized we have children being locked in cages. We have the most horrible things happening. I've always wondered how so many people stood by quietly when all these awful things in history took place, and now I can see it. Because Trump and the people Trump surrounds himself  want to move towards an America where they have the power to lock American citizens up in detainment centers like what the government did during WW2. Anyone really think that if Trump and the republicans had the power they wouldn't start killing groups of people they disliked?  

I have found though, that people are shocked at first, but it also opens up real conversations. Yes, some people are very hateful, but not everyone. People will immediately toss out abortion, and that is a good starting point to delve into how democratic policies lower abortion rates. Most of these people have never been exposed to this, they have only heard certain talking points pushed by the GOP. I don't know if it will change any minds, but it is forcing people to look outside their "democrats kill babies" bubble. And that seems to be the main point they are stuck on when it comes to why many think they have to vote for Trump.  I have long maintained that democrats have totally dropped the ball on this since it is fairly easy to flip this around and show that republicans are the ones who push policies that lead to abortions. 

Not to say that you have to argue politics on FB, just to present a side that it is sometimes worth the headache. And sometimes you find out that there are other people who share your beliefs but have also been too scared to admit it lest they bring on the wrath of the Cult of Trump. And it isn't a daily or even a weekly thing for me. Debating  Trump fans can be soul crushing because many literally seem to worship him like he is a god. 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is an interesting analysis: "What the Trump and Biden town halls taught us about their upcoming debates"

Spoiler

This week, both presidential candidates faced voters live onstage for the first time in the general election. Their performances in these separate town halls in Pennsylvania forecast how President Trump and Democratic nominee Joe Biden might perform in their first presidential debate against each other, which is less than two weeks away, on Sept. 29.

Here are five insights from the town halls that could signal how the debates are going to go.

1. Trump struggles to handle tough questions

We saw this in high-profile TV interviews this summer, and now we see it in a town hall with skeptical voters. When the president is faced with tough questions, he stumbles, hard.

In July, Fox News’s Chris Wallace fact-checked the president on where the U.S. mortality rates for coronavirus rank and on whether Biden wants to defund the police (he doesn’t.) Each time Wallace pressed Trump, the president seemed so sure of his position, then was revealed to be relying on faulty information. In an August interview with Axios, it was a similar situation for Trump. “It is what it is,” the president said about the virus and Americans dying in both interviews.

In an ABC News town hall on Tuesday, Trump faced a number of skeptical voters who pressed him on questions that he had to know were coming, yet he struggled to have clear answers. Such as: his downplaying of the virus (he said he played it up, despite being on tape in March telling Washington Post associate editor Bob Woodward otherwise and Trump’s numerous public comments to the contrary) and how he defends his handling of the pandemic (his answers were largely incoherent.)

Trump will continue to face adversarial questions and fact checks from moderators and perhaps from Biden in the debates. (The first debate’s moderator is Wallace.) Trump doesn’t seem prepared for it.

2. Biden’s stumbles seem like less of a political issue by comparison

Biden is 77 and would be the oldest president inaugurated. Trump, at 74, has tried to make Biden’s age and mental acuity an election issue.

In his CNN town hall, Biden sometimes searched for words, or went on too long telling stories about his time in the Senate, or even stumbled in what he wanted to say. But Biden also touched on how two types of vaccines work in the body, and talked about his philosophy on supply-chain economics with China, or went on about the global world order and what he would do differently from Trump.

Biden has also talked movingly during this campaign about overcoming a stutter that sometimes still manifests in his public speaking. Given that context, if the president wants to attack Biden’s stumbles in real time in the debates, it risks seeming callous. And they were small, compared with the president’s struggles to answer basic questions about his own record.

3. Trump regularly dodges the crux of issues

At his town hall, Trump repeatedly fell back on blaming China for the virus, and he did not directly answer questions about what more he could have done to stop its inevitable spread in the United States. “We also have a very big country — we’re talking a lot bigger than most countries,” he said at one point to justify higher deaths per capita in the United States than in other industrialized nations.

He was pressed over and over to acknowledge that the United States struggles with institutional racism that holds back people of color. He wouldn’t. One telling exchange:

Voter: …. you have yet to address and acknowledge that there's been a race problem in America.

Trump: Well, I hope there’s not a race problem. I can tell you, there’s none with me, because I have great respect for all races, for everybody. This country is great because of it.

Polls show that this strategy is costing him in a key swing state like Wisconsin.

Biden had some questions he didn’t directly answer — like one about how he would get people back to work rather than living off generous federal unemployment benefits, other than raising wages for health-care workers. But he was nowhere near as slippery as Trump.

4. Empathy is Biden’s stronger suit

One of the places Biden thrives as a candidate is connecting with voters over struggles. (He lost two children and his first wife.) He also loves showing off his “regular Joe” persona by making small talk with voters. There was plenty of that in Thursday’s town hall for Biden — at times, it seemed as if voters wanted to guide him back to their question, as that was why they were there in the first place.

“First of all, I feel so badly for you,” Biden said as the first questioner shared losing a sister to coronavirus. “You know, we talk about almost 200,000 deaths, and it’s almost like background noise. But it means a lot of empty chairs, a lot of children without their mothers or fathers, a lot of people not able to see their parents, so my heart goes out to you and your sister, as well. And her children. It’s just incredible.”

But if Biden went on too much, the president struggled to make any connections at all during his town hall. And during his many coronavirus briefings this spring and summer, Trump sounded stilted when he offered condolences for families who have lost loved ones.

This may not manifest as much in the first debate, which is a traditional moderator-candidate format. The second presidential debate, in Miami on Oct. 15, will be a town hall.

But empathy is still a trait that voters look for in their leaders, especially during a pandemic and economic crisis. And right now Trump is facing an attack from within on this very topic: On Thursday, a former senior member of his coronavirus task force, Olivia Troye, said she’s supporting Biden because of Trump’s “flat-out disregard for human life,” and because his “main concern was the economy and his reelection.”

5. We still don’t know how the moderator, or the candidates, will fact check each other in real time

Biden seems well aware that a debate with a president so prone to false or misleading statements is going to be tricky. (Biden has offered his own false statements, too, but at a much slower rate than Trump.)

Biden has said he wants to be a fact-checker for the president in the debates. But more recently, he backed off that, saying “people know what a liar” the president is, and so there’s no need for Biden to always point that out.

Biden also said he didn’t want to get pulled into a personal fight on issues like family and appear angry onstage: “I hope I don’t get baited into a brawl with this guy, because that’s the only place he’s comfortable."

Trump’s strategy is less clear. He has not held a mock debate and has no plans to, reports NBC News. But during Biden’s town hall, Trump complained at a rally that the vice president was getting too-easy questions. (We thought the president got entirely predictable questions.)

Could Trump be signaling that he plans to work the refs and complain to the moderators if he thinks the debate is going unfairly? And how will the moderators respond? Are they going to regularly interrupt the candidates for fact checks, too?

This could get messy. (We’re not saying anything you didn’t already know.) And the town halls didn’t shed much light on a path forward on that.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Early voting in Virginia started today. This is my county:

[fransalley]

4 hours ago, formergothardite said:

I used to do this because I didn't want to rock any boats with people I know and I know that the moment I went public with how I felt politically, the people who have known me my entire life would start treating me differently. But then I realized we have children being locked in cages. We have the most horrible things happening. I've always wondered how so many people stood by quietly when all these awful things in history took place, and now I can see it. Because Trump and the people Trump surrounds himself  want to move towards an America where they have the power to lock American citizens up in detainment centers like what the government did during WW2. Anyone really think that if Trump and the republicans had the power they wouldn't start killing groups of people they disliked?  

I have found though, that people are shocked at first, but it also opens up real conversations. Yes, some people are very hateful, but not everyone. People will immediately toss out abortion, and that is a good starting point to delve into how democratic policies lower abortion rates. Most of these people have never been exposed to this, they have only heard certain talking points pushed by the GOP. I don't know if it will change any minds, but it is forcing people to look outside their "democrats kill babies" bubble. And that seems to be the main point they are stuck on when it comes to why many think they have to vote for Trump.  I have long maintained that democrats have totally dropped the ball on this since it is fairly easy to flip this around and show that republicans are the ones who push policies that lead to abortions. 

Not to say that you have to argue politics on FB, just to present a side that it is sometimes worth the headache. And sometimes you find out that there are other people who share your beliefs but have also been too scared to admit it lest they bring on the wrath of the Cult of Trump. And it isn't a daily or even a weekly thing for me. Debating  Trump fans can be soul crushing because many literally seem to worship him like he is a god. 

I recently shared an article about Alexandra Osacio-Cortez calling out a fellow Representative who verbally abused her.  

You would not believe the uproar that unleashed, with many of the responses being angry at HER and not HIM.

I don’t debate well, and that’s one reason I choose to mostly stay away from social media discussions on politics unless they are with relatively like-minded people.  Or, people who may not be like minded but who will treat me with respect.

[nausicaa]

I posted in the RBG thread about how a Supreme Court nom becoming a major issue could really hurt Trump and thought I'd bring it over here. I was reading some really interesting stats this morning about how this could possibly break up Trump's voter coalition. 

1. I think this will definitely increase Dem voter turnout. I actually suspect a lot of the savvier conservative strategists aren't happy about this. 

2. 22% of 2016 Trump voters leaned pro-choice. Trump picked up a lot of blue collar, anti-Bible thumping voters who had felt left behind by the Dems and liked that Trump was kinda pervy and crass. Biden is already doing better with this demographic than HRC, and this putting abortion and ACA-repeal front and center could move an even larger contingent of them over to Biden. Same for suburban women. This could even help tilt Pennsylvania to Biden. 

3. If the Republicans show they can push through a SC nominee while not being able to pass a Covid relief package, that's going to look really bad. Especially for these blue collar voters who are struggling.  

4. I wonder if it's in Trump's best interest to hold off on the pick, to pull conservatives and pro-lifers toward voting for him. He is egotistical enough to not accurately assess his chances of winning. That would be an interesting development. 

5. Most interesting--There is a theory that McConnell knows Trump will likely lose and McConnell will throw him under the bus to force through a nom even if Trump doesn't want to if it means a SC pick and the safety of his Senate seat. 

 

And not to stress anyone even more, but Stephen Breyer is 82. 

[smittykins]

I just applied for an absentee ballot online.  Fingers crossed. ?

[GreyhoundFan]

"How the fight over Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement is likely to affect the election"

Spoiler

In this stormy election season, an October Surprise has landed a couple of weeks early.

The death Friday of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was not unexpected, given how many health problems she had suffered in recent years. But the timing, just 45 days before the election and on a day when early voting began in four states, is certain to roil an already turbulent campaign.

The Democratic donation-processing site ActBlue reported it had raised a record $20 million during the four hours after the announcement of Ginsburg’s death. Don’t be surprised if Republican organizations also report some eye-popping fundraising numbers.

President Trump on Saturday made clear that he wants to see his nominee put on the closely divided Supreme Court “without delay,” which assures a monumental fight as Election Day approaches. If he succeeds, it would tip the balance of the court from a 5-to-4 conservative majority to 6 to 3, altering the legal landscape around issues that range from abortion and gay rights to health care and the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches.

Practically as soon as news of Ginsburg’s death got out, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) put out a statement vowing, “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

But that means Republicans will be put in a position of having to defend themselves against their obvious hypocrisy, given how they refused to do the same when President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland eight months before the 2016 election. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice,” McConnell said back then. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

McConnell has never put a priority on consistency over political imperatives, but he is surely weighing whether moving too quickly could further endanger his fragile Senate majority. His statement Friday night was conspicuous for the fact that it skirted the issue of timing. Will this take place before or after the election? And the majority leader quickly circulated a letter telling GOP senators to “be cautious and keep your powder dry.”

So which side stands to gain politically in the coming battle?

It is hard to tell what this additional factor will mean at a time when voters are already dealing with the covid-19 pandemic and the economic devastation it has caused, along with a national reckoning on racial justice that has brought violence to the streets of some major U.S. cities.

There are several demographic groups that are worth watching closely.

Traditionally, White evangelicals have been seen as the demographic most sensitive to the politics of court nominations. Exit polls in 2016 indicated that slightly more than a quarter of voters described themselves as White born-again or evangelical Christians, and they went for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton by a margin of 81 to 16 percent.

An array of recent surveys — including polls conducted by The Post and ABC News, Fox News, and NPR and PBS’s NewsHour — show little or no slippage in White evangelical support and enthusiasm for the president. That suggests that any additional benefit Trump receives from the energy surrounding a Supreme Court fight is likely to come only at the margins.

It might, however, bring back some of Trump’s sagging support among non-college-educated women, many of whom are conservative on social issues and oppose abortion. Particularly if Trump picks a woman, he can appeal to these voters by having something to talk about other than covid-19 and someone to talk about other than himself.

On the other hand, “Notorious RBG” was practically a superhero to young women, to the point that they wore her image on their earrings, their T-shirts and their socks. There have been concerns that former vice president Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, may be unable to mobilize the support he needs among young people.

Ginsburg’s dying wish that her successor be appointed by the next president may help the Democrats solve that problem. As Republican pollster Christine Matthews told me: “If they won’t show up to vote for Biden, they’ll vote for Ruth.”

Where the coming battle is likely to have its greatest effect is in key Senate races, in which a three-seat swing, coupled with a Biden win, could topple the Republican majority.

For instance, the Arizona contest is actually a special election to fill the vacancy left by the death of Republican John McCain. Democratic challenger Mark Kelly leads in the polls against Republican Martha McSally, who was appointed in 2018 to fill it in the interim.

If Kelly wins, he could be sworn in as early as Nov 30 — which conceivably would have him in place to vote on whomever Trump nominates.

Perhaps the only thing the coming battle to replace Ginsburg has made clearer is this: 2020 will be an election in which the stakes have rarely been higher.

 

[CTRLZero]

We received a mailer from our county auditor clearly spelling out how to register and then safely return a ballot in a timely manner.  (We had received DeJoy’s confusing mailer a few days ago.)  Of particular interest to me:

Quote

This election is expected to have the highest voter participation of any in recent memory.  Some election administrators are predicting turnout as high as 90 percent.  The August primary had the highest turnout of any primary since the 1960s. 

 

[fraurosena]

 

[GreyhoundFan]

A bunch of BTs harassed voters and workers here in Fairfax VA. They're trying to stop voters because Fairfax has been voting overwhelmingly blue and we are part of the largest population center in VA, which upsets and overwhelms the sparsely populated ruby red southern part of the state.

I walk with a cane, none of these assholes will get near me.

 

[adidas]

On 9/20/2020 at 9:51 AM, GreyhoundFan said:

"How the fight over Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s replacement is likely to affect the election"

  Reveal hidden contents

In this stormy election season, an October Surprise has landed a couple of weeks early.

The death Friday of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was not unexpected, given how many health problems she had suffered in recent years. But the timing, just 45 days before the election and on a day when early voting began in four states, is certain to roil an already turbulent campaign.

The Democratic donation-processing site ActBlue reported it had raised a record $20 million during the four hours after the announcement of Ginsburg’s death. Don’t be surprised if Republican organizations also report some eye-popping fundraising numbers.

President Trump on Saturday made clear that he wants to see his nominee put on the closely divided Supreme Court “without delay,” which assures a monumental fight as Election Day approaches. If he succeeds, it would tip the balance of the court from a 5-to-4 conservative majority to 6 to 3, altering the legal landscape around issues that range from abortion and gay rights to health care and the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches.

Practically as soon as news of Ginsburg’s death got out, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) put out a statement vowing, “President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

But that means Republicans will be put in a position of having to defend themselves against their obvious hypocrisy, given how they refused to do the same when President Barack Obama nominated Merrick Garland eight months before the 2016 election. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice,” McConnell said back then. “Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

McConnell has never put a priority on consistency over political imperatives, but he is surely weighing whether moving too quickly could further endanger his fragile Senate majority. His statement Friday night was conspicuous for the fact that it skirted the issue of timing. Will this take place before or after the election? And the majority leader quickly circulated a letter telling GOP senators to “be cautious and keep your powder dry.”

So which side stands to gain politically in the coming battle?

It is hard to tell what this additional factor will mean at a time when voters are already dealing with the covid-19 pandemic and the economic devastation it has caused, along with a national reckoning on racial justice that has brought violence to the streets of some major U.S. cities.

There are several demographic groups that are worth watching closely.

Traditionally, White evangelicals have been seen as the demographic most sensitive to the politics of court nominations. Exit polls in 2016 indicated that slightly more than a quarter of voters described themselves as White born-again or evangelical Christians, and they went for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton by a margin of 81 to 16 percent.

An array of recent surveys — including polls conducted by The Post and ABC News, Fox News, and NPR and PBS’s NewsHour — show little or no slippage in White evangelical support and enthusiasm for the president. That suggests that any additional benefit Trump receives from the energy surrounding a Supreme Court fight is likely to come only at the margins.

It might, however, bring back some of Trump’s sagging support among non-college-educated women, many of whom are conservative on social issues and oppose abortion. Particularly if Trump picks a woman, he can appeal to these voters by having something to talk about other than covid-19 and someone to talk about other than himself.

On the other hand, “Notorious RBG” was practically a superhero to young women, to the point that they wore her image on their earrings, their T-shirts and their socks. There have been concerns that former vice president Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, may be unable to mobilize the support he needs among young people.

Ginsburg’s dying wish that her successor be appointed by the next president may help the Democrats solve that problem. As Republican pollster Christine Matthews told me: “If they won’t show up to vote for Biden, they’ll vote for Ruth.”

Where the coming battle is likely to have its greatest effect is in key Senate races, in which a three-seat swing, coupled with a Biden win, could topple the Republican majority.

For instance, the Arizona contest is actually a special election to fill the vacancy left by the death of Republican John McCain. Democratic challenger Mark Kelly leads in the polls against Republican Martha McSally, who was appointed in 2018 to fill it in the interim.

If Kelly wins, he could be sworn in as early as Nov 30 — which conceivably would have him in place to vote on whomever Trump nominates.

Perhaps the only thing the coming battle to replace Ginsburg has made clearer is this: 2020 will be an election in which the stakes have rarely been higher.

 

This is really helpful, thank you. 

[GreyhoundFan]

The WaPo shared this powerpoint from a Repub lobbyist about the state of the election, including the impact of RBG's passing. It's a lengthy presentation, but interesting.

[GreyhoundFan]

From Jennifer Rubin: "Biden blows up the notion RBG’s seat helps the right"

Spoiler

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden gave his most compelling speech of the campaign Sunday, blowing away the notion that the Republicans’ effort to jam through a confirmation to fill the seat held by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is in any fashion a plus for the right. Rather, in a soberly delivered speech, Biden demonstrated why this newest wrinkle in the race serves as a boost to Democrats’ chances in winning the Senate majority and the White House — and ultimately reversing any damage two-faced Republicans would do in the meantime.

Biden accomplished several essential tasks. First, like Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democrats earlier Sunday, he formulated that the open seat boils down to preserving the Affordable Care Act. “In the middle of the worst global health crisis in living memory, Donald Trump is before the Supreme Court trying to strip health-care coverage away from tens of millions of families. This took away the peace of mind of more than 100 million Americans with preexisting conditions,” Biden said. “If he succeeds, insurers could once again discriminate or drop coverage completely for people living with preexisting conditions like asthma, diabetes, cancer and so many other problems.” The former vice president continued that “if Donald Trump has his way, the complications from covid-19 … like lung scarring and heart damage, could become the next deniable preexisting condition.” Biden did mention other issues such as abortion and voting rights, but plainly he is folding the fight over the court seat into the two best issues for him — Trump’s failure to handle the pandemic and his attempts to take away health-care coverage.

Second, he put the fight in simple terms of fairness. Republicans think they can make up rules and rewrite them for their benefit without regard to — indeed, despite — majority opinion. Bullying your way through fights with nonsensical blather to disguise your motives is antithetical to democracy. Biden stressed over and over again that voting is already underway, which means Trump is disenfranchising voters who want a say in the next justice.

Third, Biden made the most of his ability to appeal to the most persuadable senators while sending a message to moderates and disaffected Republicans that he intends to end the cycle of inflammatory partisanship. “I’m not speaking to President Trump, who will do whatever he wants. I’m not speaking to Mitch McConnell, who will do what he wants, and he does,” Biden said, acknowledging these men are beyond reason and utterly shameless. “I’m speaking to those Republicans out there, Senate Republicans, who know deep down what is right for the country … not just what’s best for their party.” That would be Republicans such as Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and any others with a speck of intellectual honesty:

To jam this nomination through the Senate is just an exercise in raw political power, and I don’t believe the people of this nation will stand for it. President Trump has already made it clear this is about power. Pure and simple. … Action and reaction. Anger and more anger. Sorrow and frustration at the way things are in this country now politically. That’s the cycle that Republican senators will continue to perpetuate if they go down this dangerous path they have put us on.

We need to de-escalate — not escalate. That’s why I appeal to those few Senate Republicans — the handful who will really decide what happens. Please, follow your conscience. Don’t vote to confirm anyone nominated under the circumstances President Trump and Senator McConnell have created. Don’t go there. Uphold your constitutional duty — your conscience. Let the people speak. Cool the flames that have been engulfing our country.

That message, delivered in sober and quiet terms, is one that less partisan Americans are hungering for. “We can’t keep rewriting history, scrambling norms, ignoring our cherished system of checks and balances,” Biden said. That’s precisely what voters who want to end the downward spiral of incendiary politics want to hear. Here is someone who understands that authoritarian power plays tear the country apart.

Toward the end of his remarks, Biden again drove that message home, promising relief from the insane, mean-spirited partisanship Trump has adopted. “I’ve said it many times in this election. We are the United States of America. There’s nothing we cannot do if we do it together,” he said. “Donald Trump wants to divide this nation between red states and blue states. Between representing those states that vote for him and ignoring those that don’t. I do not, I cannot, I will not be that president. I’ll be a president for the whole country. For those who vote for me and those who who vote against me. We need to rise to this moment, for the sake of our country we love.”

Fourth, Biden gave the best explanation for why presidents should not resort to lists of judges, pointing out that this Trump gimmick is also an assault on our democratic norms. “First, putting a judge’s name on a list like that could influence that person’s decision-making as a judge — and that would be wrong.” In addition to setting the nominee up for “unrelenting political attacks” without the ability to respond, putting together a list unilaterally violates the fundamental process of advice and consent. “Only after consulting Democrats and Republicans in the United States Senate — and seeking their advice and asking for the consent,” Biden said. “I will consult with senators in both parties about that pick, as well as the legal and civic leaders. In the end, the choice will be mine and mine alone, but I will consult. But it will be the product of a process that restores our finest traditions — not the extension of one that has torn this country apart.”

Finally, he signaled quietly to the left that Republicans’ chicanery will not stand. Liberals over the weekend poured out their grief, anger and defiance as they honored their icon, donating millions, gathering at memorials and vowing to fight for RBG as she fought for them. “That moment is now for the voters to get a chance to be heard — and their voice should be heard. And I believe voters are going to make it clear — they will not stand for this abuse of power,” he said. “There’s no discussion about what happens if the Senate confirms — on eve of election — or in a lame duck after Donald Trump loses — a successor to Justice Ginsburg.” He need not make the argument that the consequences will be far worse for Republicans than failure to steal another seat; activists, pundits and Democratic candidates can do that. With an open seat, however, Biden can seal the deal with ex-supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) who now understand the stakes and Biden’s ability to prevent their worst nightmares from coming to fruition. When he says that “this nation will continue to be inspired by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but we should not only be inspired by her, we should be guided by her,” the left hears that they must fight like RBG, with tenacity and purpose.

In short, Biden managed to appeal both to the left and the exhausted middle of the electorate. He framed the issue as one of fairness and of the ACA’s survival. And he made clear that responsibility for further destruction of our system rests with Republicans, who can choose to pull back. In many ways, it was the most intricate and multilayered speech of his career. It certainly was the most presidential.

 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is nicely done:

 

[GreyhoundFan]

I hope this helps mobilize more folks to come out and vote Dem:

 

[GreyhoundFan]

Cindy announced she's voting for Joe:

 

[GreyhoundFan]

This is terrifying and I can definitely see repugs going for it:

 

[fraurosena]

38 minutes ago, GreyhoundFan said:

This is terrifying and I can definitely see repugs going for it:

 

Oh yes, for sure they are going to attempt this. They know they are a dying breed. They know full well they will never, ever win in fair, democratic elections. So of course they are going to do whatever wackamamie antics they can come up with in their desperation.

Beware the rat when it's cornered; it's when they at their most dangerous.

[Not that josh's mom]

I have to rant! Trump/Pence 2020 signs are sprouting up in my area! That's bad enough but now there political type signs Jesus 2020! What???is He on the ballot too?  I read it as "sweet Jesus save us from Trump", but knowing some of the people where I see the signs, I'm pretty sure that's not it. I am beyond disgusted. I've never ripped a political sign out of the ground, but this might  do it! This election can't get over fast enough.

Edited September 23, 2020 by Not that josh's mom

[WarriorJane]

28 minutes ago, Not that josh's mom said:

I have to rant! Trump/Pence 2020 signs are sprouting up in my area! That's bad enough but now there political type signs Jesus 2020! What???is He on the ballot too?  I read it as "sweet Jesus save us from Trump", but knowing some of the people where I see the signs, I'm pretty that's not it. I am beyond disgusted. I've never ripped a political sign out of the ground, but this might  do it! This election can't get over fast enough.

If Jesus was running,  he'd be dismissed as a socialist.   (And they would actually mean Marxist,  but they're too uninformed to know the difference)

[KSmom]

2 hours ago, Not that josh's mom said:

I have to rant! Trump/Pence 2020 signs are sprouting up in my area! That's bad enough but now there political type signs Jesus 2020! What???is He on the ballot too?  I read it as "sweet Jesus save us from Trump", but knowing some of the people where I see the signs, I'm pretty sure that's not it. I am beyond disgusted. I've never ripped a political sign out of the ground, but this might  do it! This election can't get over fast enough.

I’ve ordered my Biden/Harris sign and just picked up a sign for Senate and House. Yes, I do believe that Kansas can elect a Democrat to the Senate!

[PennySycamore]

14 minutes ago, KSmom said:

I’ve ordered my Biden/Harris sign and just picked up a sign for Senate and House. Yes, I do believe that Kansas can elect a Democrat to the Senate!

I've got a Biden/Harris bumpersticker on my car and my Jaime Harrison bumperstickers are in the mail. I hope both of those Senate seats turn Blue in November.

Maybe I'm not watching the right channels, but I've I've seen maybe one ad for Lindsey Graham and tons for Jaime Harrison .  There are several ads for Harrison where people who'd always voted for Lindsey say they're voting for Harrison, including one by a 93 year old woman who points out that Graham is for a bill that would raise medical insurance rates for old people and the older you are, the higher the increase.   (You don't pay for Medicare A, but you might for Medicare B and Medicare supplements.)

[Marshmallow World]

24 minutes ago, PennySycamore said:

.

Maybe I'm not watching the right channels, but I've I've seen maybe one ad for Lindsey Graham and tons for Jaime Harrison.

I'd say you are 100% watching the right channels! I lived in SC during the 2008 election and was very disheartened at the outright racism I saw against Obama. There were some bumper stickers I saw that I can't even bring myself to re-type here. However, I did get to see Barack at Clemson (when he was running for the primary) and I was thrilled to see the size of the crowd there. I'm hopeful that Harrison wins, and wins big (or wins small - I don't care! Just get that idiot out of office!).

[Black Aliss]

3 hours ago, WarriorJane said:

If Jesus was running,  he'd be dismissed as a socialist.   (And they would actually mean Marxist,  but they're too uninformed to know the difference)

If you say "Marx" they think you're talking about Groucho. The funny* thing is, with his semitic appearance, there would be accusations of Jesus being a Muslim, bent on forcing Sharia law on the US. And also a commie socialist. And probably a pedophile. 

I have to keep reminding myself that there real Christians--people who follow the teachings of Christ--do exist.

 

*not really funny 

3 hours ago, Alisamer said:

The ones who are all "pull yourself up by your bootstraps"

I wonder when that saying came to mean that it was something a person could do. Originally it meant the only way out of a situation was an act that was physically impossible but in my own lifetime I've never heard it used that way, only to suggest that a person could solve any difficulty if they just tried hard enough.