2020 Presidential Election

[JasonEvans]

I think it’s fascinating that Trump said in a speech that “He is against God” when talking about Biden and it barely even registered in the news. The man claimed that a political opponent was AGAINST GOD.

If you watch the sound byte, it seems to me like Trump was just riffing and happened upon those words. I don't think it was a calculated attack or something he really thought about in advance, it just kinda tumbled out as Trump was railing against Biden for the 2nd amendment. Have a look:



Does that make it forgivable? No, probably not, but I don't see this as something Trump is going to hammer again and again and try to turn into an issue on the campaign trail.

As for how much the media covered it, it was in CNN and MSNBC reporting that I saw today but it wasn't a big story. There seemed to be more focus on Trump saying that a vaccine would be here by election day and saying that kids are immune to the Coronavirus. Oh, and the news also talked about the fact that Trump's meeting with Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine was called off after DeWine tested positive (DeWine later got a 2nd test that was negative).

If we see Trump returning to the "Biden hates God" line in future appearances, then I am sure the media will recognize it as a bigger deal and press him harder on what makes him say that.

[dudog84]

If you watch the sound byte, it seems to me like Trump was just riffing and happened upon those words. I don't think it was a calculated attack or something he really thought about in advance, it just kinda tumbled out as Trump was railing against Biden for the 2nd amendment.

This isn't the first time he's said it.

[elvis14]

It was clear to me, even from that :13 clip that the Trump campaign posted, that he was using "diversity" to speak about diversity of thought, especially on the issues, not having anything to do with race. It is not good wording by Biden, and he is certainly over-simplifying in a way that will not help, but the mere fact that something like 90% of AfAms tend to vote Democratic while only about 65% of Latinos do would seem to indicate that the Latino community is more divided on the issues than the Black community is.

But, again, the smarter course for Biden would have been to make that point in a more delicate kind of way.

By the way, Biden was talking specifically about immigration and pointing out that Latinos in Florida (who are predominantly or Cuban descent) have different feeling about immigration than Latinos in Arizona (where they are mostly of Mexican/Central American descent). And he is 100% correct about that statement.

Since Jason already covered this one, I'll copy his response above. Biden didn't have a bad day. As Jason said, not good wording but the headline of that right-wing article is "Biden Insults Black People - Again" which is simply a lie. People (and very biased sites like the one that link leads to) took what he said out of context and tried to turn it into something it wasn't. Nice try though.

[Devilwin]

Notice they jumped all over DT's God comment. Which was not good either. CNN said nothing about Biden's comment did they?
Both could have phrased their comments better, knowing how the divided media sees it.

[AustinDevil]

Notice they jumped all over DT's God comment. Which was not good either. CNN said nothing about Biden's comment did they?
Both could have phrased their comments better, knowing how the divided media sees it.

There's no point in me or anyone debating you on what qualifies as "jumping all over," though a statement that one's opponent will "hurt God" and "hurt the Bible" is far more inflammatory than a comment about how comparatively diverse the views of the Black and Latinx communities are.

But you are actually, objectively wrong when you announce that "CNN said nothing about Biden's comment."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/06/polit...rse/index.html

[elvis14]

Notice they jumped all over DT's God comment. Which was not good either. CNN said nothing about Biden's comment did they?
Both could have phrased their comments better, knowing how the divided media sees it.

Just checked fox'news', no mention of DT's 'God' comment. Big headline about DT "Stoking the fire" and how he claims Biden will lose the black vote. The difference is that Biden's comments have to be taken out of context and have their true meaning not shown whereas DT's comment...taken on face value, IN CONTEXT are literally saying that Biden is against God.

Here's a link in case anyone wants to hear DT's comments: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us...s-against-guns

The false equivalency and double standard that people are trying to push is just ridiculous. Biden words something in a way that he shouldn't have while making a valid point. DT literally says Joe is against God, hurting the Bible, etc. Come on.

[sagegrouse]

Notice they jumped all over DT's God comment. Which was not good either. CNN said nothing about Biden's comment did they?
Both could have phrased their comments better, knowing how the divided media sees it.

There's no point in me or anyone debating you on what qualifies as "jumping all over," though a statement that one's opponent will "hurt God" and "hurt the Bible" is far more inflammatory than a comment about how comparatively diverse the views of the Black and Latinx communities are.

But you are actually, objectively wrong when you announce that "CNN said nothing about Biden's comment."

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/06/polit...rse/index.html

Just checked fox'news', no mention of DT's 'God' comment. Big headline about DT "Stoking the fire" and how he claims Biden will lose the black vote. The difference is that Biden's comments have to be taken out of context and have their true meaning not shown whereas DT's comment...taken on face value, IN CONTEXT are literally saying that Biden is against God.

Here's a link in case anyone wants to hear DT's comments: https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-us...s-against-guns

The false equivalency and double standard that people are trying to push is just ridiculous. Biden words something in a way that he shouldn't have while making a valid point. DT literally says Joe is against God, hurting the Bible, etc. Come on.

Not a productive line of discussion, I believe. back to the "horse race."

[OldPhiKap]

Not a productive line of discussion, I believe. back to the "horse race."

I was about to say the same thing.

Biden supporters see bias in conservative media, often with justification.

Trump supporters see bias in non-conservative media, often with justification.

Which of two dumb comments was dumber? Depends on your perspective I guess.




(Meanwhile, independents weep)

[elvis14]

Not a productive line of discussion, I believe. back to the "horse race."

You're right. I should have tied it into the horse race by basically saying, neither statement, taken in or out of context, is going to move the needle.

Here's an article from a fairly non-partisan source, Cook Political. That talks about the imperfections of polling and mentions improvement of late for DT.

[JasonEvans]

You're right. I should have tied it into the horse race by basically saying, neither statement, taken in or out of context, is going to move the needle.

Here's an article from a fairly non-partisan source, Cook Political. That talks about the imperfections of polling and mentions improvement of late for DT.

Great read, strongly recommend folks take a moment to peruse that link. The major point Cook makes is that we have not been getting many high-quality polls lately. As he explains:

Most of the networks and papers that sponsor the kinds of surveys that are worth putting great credence in are holding off polling until after Biden chooses a running mate.

We may be in this quality-poll desert for a while longer. It might be a good time for us to dial back on our poll habit.

Noooooooooooo!!

[JasonEvans]

So, I was wondering about Biden and his VP pick. We are exactly 10 days from what would have been the start of the Democratic convention. So, how does Biden's timetable match up with past VP picks?

2016 - Hillary picks Tim Kaine on July 22nd. The convention starts on July 25th, just 3 days later.
2016 - Trump picks Pence on July 15th (it leaked on the 14th). The convention starts on July 18th, just 3 days after the pick.
2012 - Romney picks Paul Ryan on August 11th. The convention is August 27th, 16 days after the pick.
2008 - Obama picks Biden on August 22nd. The convention is August 25th, 3 days later.
2008- McCain picks Palin on August 29th. The GOP convention is Sept 1, 3 days later.

So, it seems most of these picks happen 3 days before the convention. So, Biden still has another week to make his selection in a normal VP window.

[CameronBornAndBred]

So, I was wondering about Biden and his VP pick. We are exactly 10 days from what would have been the start of the Democratic convention. So, how does Biden's timetable match up with past VP picks?

2016 - Hillary picks Tim Kaine on July 22nd. The convention starts on July 25th, just 3 days later.
2016 - Trump picks Pence on July 15th (it leaked on the 14th). The convention starts on July 18th, just 3 days after the pick.
2012 - Romney picks Paul Ryan on August 11th. The convention is August 27th, 16 days after the pick.
2008 - Obama picks Biden on August 22nd. The convention is August 25th, 3 days later.
2008- McCain picks Palin on August 29th. The GOP convention is Sept 1, 3 days later.

So, it seems most of these picks happen 3 days before the convention. So, Biden still has another week to make his selection in a normal VP window.

Being that there is no true convention this year, and because of that, no true "bump", his pick is going to be the only true excitement for his campaign in the next few weeks. Might as well take his time building up anticipation. Of course some will love it, some will hate it, some will be "meh", but until that pick is made, it generates excitement. Not many other ways to do that nowadays. Might as well take time to make it a good one.

[Skydog]

Being that there is no true convention this year, and because of that, no true "bump", his pick is going to be the only true excitement for his campaign in the next few weeks. Might as well take his time building up anticipation. Of course some will love it, some will hate it, some will be "meh", but until that pick is made, it generates excitement. Not many other ways to do that nowadays. Might as well take time to make it a good one.

Also every day Biden delays his pick means one less day available for Trump camp to ramp up and run their attack ads against said VP candidate. For Biden the ideal scenario would be him being allowed to announce his VP late in the night of Nov 2nd.

[budwom]

Also every day Biden delays his pick means one less day available for Trump camp to ramp up and run their attack ads against said VP candidate. For Biden the ideal scenario would be him being allowed to announce his VP late in the night of Nov 2nd.

Yes, I think there has been WAY too much fretting in some quarters about his VP pick, why this choice or that is so obviously good or bad.

I think this election is a referendum on Trump, that's the main event, and while a VP pick will sway some people this way or that, the VP show isn't a gargantuan deal.

[Steven43]

Being that there is no true convention this year, and because of that, no true "bump", his pick is going to be the only true excitement for his campaign in the next few weeks. Might as well take his time building up anticipation. Of course some will love it, some will hate it, some will be "meh", but until that pick is made, it generates excitement. Not many other ways to do that nowadays. Might as well take time to make it a good one.

An interesting aspect of this is whether or not he will pick a candidate who could potentially be viewed as a legit challenger for the presidency in 2024 or 2028 or whether he is focused solely on helping himself won in 2020 with little thought to 2024 and beyond.

I don’t know if Biden is thinking of this election as strictly a single-term thing (due to his age) with the main purpose being to get rid of Trump and at least be president for one term or if he is fully committed in his mind to two terms.

If he is thinking of only serving one term and he wants to choose a VP who could be seen as a legitimate contender for the presidency in 2024 who would it be? And is there a candidate who could both help him win in 2020 and also be viewed as a legitimate contender in 2024? Is there such a candidate(s)?

[PackMan97]

An interesting aspect of this is whether or not he will pick a candidate who could potentially be viewed as a legit challenger for the presidency in 2024 or 2028 or whether he is focused solely on helping himself won in 2020 with little thought to 2024 and beyond.

I don’t know if Biden is thinking of this election as strictly a single-term thing (due to his age) with the main purpose being to get rid of Trump and at least be president for one term or if he is fully committed in his mind to two terms.

If he is thinking of only serving one term and he wants to choose a VP who could be seen as a legitimate contender for the presidency in 2024 who would it be? And is there a candidate who could both help him win in 2020 and also be viewed as a legitimate contender in 2024? Is there such a candidate(s)?

I think given the current weakness in the Republican stable, he has to go into this thinking he can have two terms.

Trump has really thrown the Republican party for a loop. I'm not sure what they'll look like in 4 years. One thing is certain, I think it will look very different depending on whether Trump wins, or he losses badly. Is it too early to start talking about the 2028 race? Sadly my oldest will be three months too young to vote in that one. YIKES!

[budwom]

I think given the current weakness in the Republican stable, he has to go into this thinking he can have two terms.

Trump has really thrown the Republican party for a loop. I'm not sure what they'll look like in 4 years. One thing is certain, I think it will look very different depending on whether Trump wins, or he losses badly. Is it too early to start talking about the 2028 race? Sadly my oldest will be three months too young to vote in that one. YIKES!

Maybe the president then will recommend delaying the election for a few months

[Steven43]

Maybe the president then will recommend delaying the election for a few months

Classic

[OldPhiKap]

Is it too early to start talking about the 2028 race?

Reported.

[Bluedog]

If he is thinking of only serving one term and he wants to choose a VP who could be seen as a legitimate contender for the presidency in 2024 who would it be? And is there a candidate who could both help him win in 2020 and also be viewed as a legitimate contender in 2024? Is there such a candidate(s)?

I think Harris is the closest. She was competitive in the Democratic primary field this time around, even being considered a favorite for a brief moment.

I personally think Cory Booker would also check both boxes but obviously he's not going to be chosen.