Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

The problem is many people want him to go away and are worried he may run as a third party out of sheer spite if he were to lose the primary. Feeling is that he needs to be put out swiftly and decisively so he does not entertain this option.

Also, it appears Trump is selfishly resistant to working on different methods of gathering votes because it will go against his never-ending message of a stolen election.

90sBear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

The problem is many people want him to go away and are worried he may run as a third party out of sheer spite if he were to lose the primary. Feeling is that he needs to be put out swiftly and decisively so he does not entertain this option.

Also, it appears Trump is selfishly resistant to working on different methods of gathering votes because it will go against his never-ending message of a stolen election.

---

From what I see, Trump has quietly gone into seclusion, apparently aware that he has really stepped into it this time.

And if you let your emotions make your decisions, you will see many bad outcomes.

Best course is to not hate Trump, not cheer him, not obsess on him, and don't make decisions based on what he might or might not do in response.

Oldbear83 said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

The problem is many people want him to go away and are worried he may run as a third party out of sheer spite if he were to lose the primary. Feeling is that he needs to be put out swiftly and decisively so he does not entertain this option.

Also, it appears Trump is selfishly resistant to working on different methods of gathering votes because it will go against his never-ending message of a stolen election.

---

From what I see, Trump has quietly gone into seclusion, apparently aware that he has really stepped into it this time.

And if you let your emotions make your decisions, you will see many bad outcomes.

Best course is to not hate Trump, not cheer him, not obsess on him, and don't make decisions based on what he might or might not do in response.

---

From Sam's post:

And last week, he wrote on Truth Social, "REMEMBER, YOU CAN NEVER HAVE FAIR & FREE ELECTIONS WITH MAIL-IN BALLOTS - NEVER, NEVER, NEVER. WONT'T AND CAN'T HAPPEN!!!"

That's not quietly secluded. And goes against commentary here about taking on Democrat methods for increased vote gathering.

I understand what you say about ignoring him, and that is absolutely the best policy for DeSantis right now. But this is a discussion board. I say criticize away when called for.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

The argument about weak candidates (at least mine) aren't about Trump as a weak candidate in 2020, but those critical national races the past election where he hand-picked/promoted some stinkers for candidates. As for the 2020 election, the primary factor that cost Trump and others were special COVID related election allowances that made ballot harvesting and vote manipulation much easier.

No one's obsessing on Trump except those who continue to give him runway by not shutting him down as an option. I'm not asking anyone to denigrate Trump, but at some point you simply have to give him a hard no. No support, no money, rejecting him as a viable option, etc. And I'm not talking about the hypothetical "if he's the nominee" exercise, I mean here and now so we don't get there.

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

Not at all. If you had been paying attention, you would have realized that I consider Trump to have destroyed his effective chances to win another election, and have said so for weeks.

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

The argument about weak candidates (at least mine) aren't about Trump as a weak candidate in 2020, but those critical national races the past election where he hand-picked/promoted some stinkers for candidates. As for the 2020 election, the primary factor that cost Trump and others were special COVID related election allowances that made ballot harvesting and vote manipulation much easier.

No one's obsessing on Trump except those who continue to give him runway by not shutting him down as an option. I'm not asking anyone to denigrate Trump, but at some point you simply have to give him a hard no. No support, no money, rejecting him as a viable option, etc. And I'm not talking about the hypothetical "if he's the nominee" exercise, I mean here and now so we don't get there.

---

Well said. I suspect most of us can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

So you chose Denial.

Noted.

---

So much irony here from a poster who literally can't admit that candidate quality played any role in the last election.

Sure, bro. It's ME in denial.

---

In this matter, yes.

---

So I am in denial unless I believe Trump's loss is 100% attributable to systemic issues such as ballot harvesting, and 0% attributable to candidate quality and lack of popularity? That's your position?

---

What I am warning you about, is that Trump did not primarily lose in 2020 to being a weak candidate, but to a mixture of differing factors, most of which can and will be brought to bear against the GOP nominee in 2024.

Obsessing on Trump means ignoring important work which needs to start now.

---

I don't disagree with the first paragraph in the least.

As for the second, I am not obsessing with Trump by suggesting he's toxic and we should drop him. There's no reason that discussion cannot be had now.

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

Sam Lowry said:

---

POLITICS
Republicans have a post-election epiphany on mail voting
There's just one main hurdle: Donald Trump isn't ready to drop his attack on the method.

By Meredith McGraw

As Republicans come to terms with their lackluster midterm performance, top GOP officials and conservative luminaries are acknowledging voters were led astray with calls to reject early and absentee voting.

They're just not naming the leading figure who helped get them there.

There is a growing sense of alarm among the GOP ranks that the conspiracy theories Trump pushed about early voting and mail ballots not only hurt them dearly in the just completed midterms, but could take multiple cycles to remedy. Republican committees and groups have been working to educate voters on laws regarding early voting and are planning to ramp up those efforts. But they are up against not only Trump and his outsized megaphone but also a sizable swath of conservative leaders who now falsely state early voting and mail ballots are tainted.

As Republicans begin laying the groundwork for the party to embrace early and mail-in voting, they are confronting one major obstacle: Trump has exhibited no eagerness to embrace the cause.

He has promoted conservative filmmaker Dinesh D'Souza's documentary "2000 Mules," which casts ballot harvesting as a nefarious and highly coordinated operation choreographed by Democrats. And last week, he wrote on Truth Social, "REMEMBER, YOU CAN NEVER HAVE FAIR & FREE ELECTIONS WITH MAIL-IN BALLOTS - NEVER, NEVER, NEVER. WONT'T AND CAN'T HAPPEN!!!"

Top operatives point to Georgia as a prime example of the problems Trump-like skepticism can create. The former president railed against mail voting during the 2020 cycle and GOP officials believe that, in doing so, he cost himself and Senate Republicans wins in the state. His campaign against the voting method only accelerated during the Senate runoffs in Georgia that followed his election loss, during which both GOP candidates lost. And it's persisted through the 2022 cycle.

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/12/07/republicans-have-a-post-election-epiphany-on-mail-voting-00072956

---

false dilemma.

turbo-charging legal mail-in voting operations does not mean there was no fraud. It actually expanded the horizon for fraud.

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Not a ton of stuff, but there are a few directly asking or banging around the margins of the question discussed here, proviso being that they are a couple of weeks old. Bottom line is, as of today, there is a small amount of data indicating that RDS is running 2-3 points better against Biden than Trump is. Same for popularity. Pretty close. Within margin of error. But a trend of "advantage RDS" seems to emerge.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

And then you have to add context. The last 6 weeks of polling on these questions are more favorable for Biden and RDS, and less favorable for Trump than the historical averages since the 2022 election. So it's early. The numbers are recent. And come during the "cooldown" period following an election, not the normal vicissitudes of everyday affairs. These numbers may hold. They may return to historic averages. They may yawn against Trump. Kinda hard to bet much on which way they will go.

---

I cannot see any scenario where Trump is best shot to win in 24. He also needs to stay away from the Walker, Oz type candidates!

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

...well, just to be balanced.....we'd have to note that, at this moment in time, RDS is also "just competitive" with Biden.

That should change. But it may not.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Not a ton of stuff, but there are a few directly asking or banging around the margins of the question discussed here, proviso being that they are a couple of weeks old. Bottom line is, as of today, there is a small amount of data indicating that RDS is running 2-3 points better against Biden than Trump is. Same for popularity. Pretty close. Within margin of error. But a trend of "advantage RDS" seems to emerge.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

And then you have to add context. The last 6 weeks of polling on these questions are more favorable for Biden and RDS, and less favorable for Trump than the historical averages since the 2022 election. So it's early. The numbers are recent. And come during the "cooldown" period following an election, not the normal vicissitudes of everyday affairs. These numbers may hold. They may return to historic averages. They may yawn against Trump. Kinda hard to bet much on which way they will go.

---

I cannot see any scenario where Trump is best shot to win in 24. He also needs to stay away from the Walker, Oz type candidates!

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

...well, just to be balanced.....we'd have to note that, at this moment in time, RDS is also "just competitive" with Biden.

That should change. But it may not.

---

To be balanced, RDS is an unknown quantity, and doesn't have the exposure and name recognition at this point. Difficult for a governor to be more than competitive against an incumbent 2 years into the incumbent's admin. The fact that he is even competitive at this point is a very good sign.

Trump, on the other hand, is a known quantity. He's never had an approval rating above 50%, and has averaged around 42%. In other words, he's very unpopular outside of his base. There's no reason to expect him to be anything more than competitive against Biden in the future.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

Not a ton of stuff, but there are a few directly asking or banging around the margins of the question discussed here, proviso being that they are a couple of weeks old. Bottom line is, as of today, there is a small amount of data indicating that RDS is running 2-3 points better against Biden than Trump is. Same for popularity. Pretty close. Within margin of error. But a trend of "advantage RDS" seems to emerge.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

And then you have to add context. The last 6 weeks of polling on these questions are more favorable for Biden and RDS, and less favorable for Trump than the historical averages since the 2022 election. So it's early. The numbers are recent. And come during the "cooldown" period following an election, not the normal vicissitudes of everyday affairs. These numbers may hold. They may return to historic averages. They may yawn against Trump. Kinda hard to bet much on which way they will go.

---

I cannot see any scenario where Trump is best shot to win in 24. He also needs to stay away from the Walker, Oz type candidates!

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

...well, just to be balanced.....we'd have to note that, at this moment in time, RDS is also "just competitive" with Biden.

That should change. But it may not.

---

DeSantis has alot of the same negatives as Trump, but to a lesser degree to many independents. DeSantis is also smarter, an adult, and less likely to create self-inflicted wounds. Many Independents and Dems only know DeSantis for his Disney conflicts and the basis of that. If he is to win, he will have to get the details of what his actions are about. Outside of Florida, he has not done that or had the opportunity to do it for a National audience. The impact changes when it comes out that many of his draconian actions protect children and those done wrong during pandemic.

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

sombear said:

---

The last 3 national polls have Trump barely behind Biden and have Desantis a few points ahead of Biden. If you're a Trump fan, this isn't awful news, although to still trail a historically unpopular president is concerning. If you're a Desantis fan, while it's very early, it's crazy good news. He should not be doing that well nationally when he still has very low name ID. That said, I have not seen the poll backup data so that could be keeping his negatives artificially low also.

---

DeSantis poll numbers will begin to slip once the Dem controlled media machine begins to unload on him in earnest .

Hopefully DeSantis will handle it better than Trump .

---

DeSantis has one thing that Trump doesn't, he can govern. Media is going to find it hard to come after him if he keeps handling his business well. DeSantis will have real numbers and real programs to show. Worst they will get him for is his personality, better than Trump but not warm and fuzzy by a long shot.

---

I'd go further than saying RDS can govern. He can turn a state RED. That's terribly important. Job gets a lot easier when statewide officials and legislative leadership are similarly minded on policy solutions

But Trump has a very good record of governance, too. Outstanding list of accomplishments on national & international issues, where RDS has nothing to match. (I do not doubt RDS would do well, just noting he hasn't....yet.) Trump's negatives are mostly on the political side of the job. RDS does seem to have an edge there. Much more disciplined.

Trump's greatest liability for 2024, though, is a policy issue which almost never gets mentioned, here or anywhere in the media.

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

sombear said:

---

The last 3 national polls have Trump barely behind Biden and have Desantis a few points ahead of Biden. If you're a Trump fan, this isn't awful news, although to still trail a historically unpopular president is concerning. If you're a Desantis fan, while it's very early, it's crazy good news. He should not be doing that well nationally when he still has very low name ID. That said, I have not seen the poll backup data so that could be keeping his negatives artificially low also.

---

DeSantis poll numbers will begin to slip once the Dem controlled media machine begins to unload on him in earnest .

Hopefully DeSantis will handle it better than Trump .

---

DeSantis has one thing that Trump doesn't, he can govern. Media is going to find it hard to come after him if he keeps handling his business well. DeSantis will have real numbers and real programs to show. Worst they will get him for is his personality, better than Trump but not warm and fuzzy by a long shot.

---

But Trump has a very good record of governance, too.

---

Think you're being a bit generous here. Of course Trump looks like a genius next to the total incompetence of the current admin, but his admin left a lot to be desired. Yes, economy was roaring before the pandemic, and you do have to give him credit for not screwing up what he inherited. I liked the push back against China, and the attempt to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. And perhaps foreign policy is where he accomplished the most, refusing to be drawn into foreign wars and skirmishes. I also loved his position on Israel/Palestine.

But there were also a lot of negatives. His spending was pretty much out of control. The guy had more in common with the Dems than Reps in that regard. Deficit and debt increased substantially under Trump. The handouts during the pandemic were a total disaster. He totally failed to deliver on his border wall promise, despite that being one of his key promises. Saw a statistic that under 5% of the promised wall was ever completed. His economic policies didn't do much to help the middle class, as the gap between them and the rich only continued to grow. He drove a wedge between the US and its allies, and cozied up to dictators and despots. I am fine with playing nice with our enemies, but to favor them while alienating allies seemed a big mistake. And of course, his COVID policies were a total disaster, IMO. He failed to do anything at all to reform or replace Obama care (though the Republicans in congress share much of the blame for that as well). And then of course there were the despicable actions at the end of his presidency and January 6th.

Hard for me to call that anything other than a very mixed bag of governance.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

---

Bad Republican candidates lost in 2022. Lake, Oz, Walker, Masters - none of these were good candidates. Lake had potential, but couldn't get past her personal vendetta against a dead man, and decided to shoot her mouth about him every chance she could get. And of course, instead of taking a nuanced approach to election fraud, she declared the 2020 election was stolen at every opportunity.

While I don't disagree with you that systemic changes need to occur in 2024, 2022 solidified in many people's minds that running bad Republican candidates who repeated Trump's stolen election b.s. is a recipe for disaster.

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.

---

They found three very good ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, and Fetterman elected: Lake, Walker, and Oz.

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

---

Thank you. The problem here in not Trump, but fear of Trump. I have not seen anyone in the past two months argue that Trump is the best candidate for 2024, but more than couple fanatics blaming the bulk of everything lost since 2018 on Trump.

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

---

Thank you. The problem here in not Trump, but fear of Trump. I have not seen anyone in the past two months argue that Trump is the best candidate for 2024, but more than couple fanatics blaming the bulk of everything lost since 2018 on Trump.

---

I would argue that fear of Trump is in fact a Trump problem. It's a candidate's job to make himself a desirable candidate, and not someone who scares people away from voting for him.

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

The last 3 national polls have Trump barely behind Biden and have Desantis a few points ahead of Biden. If you're a Trump fan, this isn't awful news, although to still trail a historically unpopular president is concerning. If you're a Desantis fan, while it's very early, it's crazy good news. He should not be doing that well nationally when he still has very low name ID. That said, I have not seen the poll backup data so that could be keeping his negatives artificially low also.

---

So, again, I'm no Trumpist arguing that he is the be-all to end-all.

---

You're the same poster who was critical of those who were critical of Trump, generally saying it serves no good purpose, while excusing his attacks on DeSantis. You still haven't explain that dichotomy.

I think you're more of a Trumpist than you make out.

---

At least twice here I have described his attack on DeSantis as a good attack poorly timed. Pretty much spot on. RDS is a bit more *****ly than Ted Cruz, and rarely uses humor, warmth, aspirational language. He's tough, resolute, combative, leaning into the fight. (And I love that about him.) But it does open him up to critiques like "glass jaw" and "sanctimonious." The error was in timing. It would have been more effect to praise RDS as a protege at that moment in time and save the barbs for the following week.

I am by wide measure the most balanced observer here on Trump. I can point out his flaws as well as his strengths. Same for RDS - I note his many strengths while observing some areas for improvement. (and if we do research, you will see I assessed RDS as the most obvious successor to Trumpism not long after the 2020 race). That objectivity also applies to the primary race. I noted that Trump was mathematically unassailable until the mid-term result came in, then recognized the outcome seriously damaged him and moved the assessment on the 2024 primary race to a coin-toss. Instead of calling him dead & done and anointing RDS, I avoided overemphasizing a short-term period when Trump has taken a huge amount of incoming fire (which usually does move needles) over an issue (mid-term outcome) which will abate. It's hardly Trumpist to note that other issues will arise which will help Trump, or to note that Trump is not entirely devoid of assets.

And yes, neverTrumpism is destructive. It cost us the Senate in 2022. It cost us a Governorship. Loyalty is the currency of political parties. Without it, parties do not function. I have no problem whatsoever with your position on Trump. It's hasty, but within proper boundaries. But the neverTrumpers.....they'll burn it down to get their way. Then call themselves moderates trying to save the party from destruction. Moderates who finally do let themselves get whipped up into a lather forget that the people they're trying to defeat have the harder heads.

My daughter has more award-ware than she can stack on top of her refrigerator. Best this, best that, going away plaques from units, etc..... One of them was engraved "You gotta be smarter than the cow." She used it enough times that her unit decided to memorialize it. It's a concept I taught her as a kid. A cow is an exceedingly dumb animal, near the bottom of intelligence among domesticated animals. But if you throw a rope around a cow's neck and trying to force into the pens, that cow will use superior physics to drag your ass all over the pasture. Sure, you can get on a horse and chase it around and try to crowd it into the pens. But it's high risk. Ropes, fences ,and gates (and sometimes cowboys) get broken doing that. It's better to learn to never go into the pasture without a sack of range cubes. Drive over to the herd. Pour some cubes on the ground. After a few times, they'll associate you and the truck with food. Then start honking the horn on the truck while they're eating. Then, move your location to the working pens. Repeat. Then on the day when you actually want to catch the cows, all you have to do is drive to the pens, honk the horn on the truck, and pour a handful or two of cubes on the ground. The whole herd comes running. As the last of them arrive, walk into the pens and pour some more cubes out. The whole herd crowds in, afraid they'll miss out on a snack. Then close the gate behind them. At that point, you can use superior physics (steel working pens) to crowd them into the chutes and do all kinds of unpleasant veterinary things to them.

That pretty much applies to neverTrumpism. If the neverTrumpers were half as smart as they think they are, they wouldn't have to be doing what they're doing.

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

---

Thank you. The problem here in not Trump, but fear of Trump. I have not seen anyone in the past two months argue that Trump is the best candidate for 2024, but more than couple fanatics blaming the bulk of everything lost since 2018 on Trump.

---

I would argue that fear of Trump is in fact a Trump problem. It's a candidate's job to make himself a desirable candidate, and not someone who scares people away from voting for him.

---

Of course you would, that way you can ignore your own responsibility to ignore the irrelevant and focus on someone who can make a difference.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

---

Thank you. The problem here in not Trump, but fear of Trump. I have not seen anyone in the past two months argue that Trump is the best candidate for 2024, but more than couple fanatics blaming the bulk of everything lost since 2018 on Trump.

---

I would argue that fear of Trump is in fact a Trump problem. It's a candidate's job to make himself a desirable candidate, and not someone who scares people away from voting for him.

---

Of course you would, that way you can ignore your own responsibility to ignore the irrelevant and focus on someone who can make a difference.

---

Huh? Man you have some ****ty and obtuse takes.

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

The last 3 national polls have Trump barely behind Biden and have Desantis a few points ahead of Biden. If you're a Trump fan, this isn't awful news, although to still trail a historically unpopular president is concerning. If you're a Desantis fan, while it's very early, it's crazy good news. He should not be doing that well nationally when he still has very low name ID. That said, I have not seen the poll backup data so that could be keeping his negatives artificially low also.

---

So, again, I'm no Trumpist arguing that he is the be-all to end-all.

---

You're the same poster who was critical of those who were critical of Trump, generally saying it serves no good purpose, while excusing his attacks on DeSantis. You still haven't explain that dichotomy.

I think you're more of a Trumpist than you make out.

---

At least twice here I have described his attack on DeSantis as a good attack poorly timed. Pretty much spot on. RDS is a bit more *****ly than Ted Cruz, and rarely uses humor, warmth, aspirational language. He's tough, resolute, combative, leaning into the fight. (And I love that about him.) But it does open him up to critiques like "glass jaw" and "sanctimonious." The error was in timing. It would have been more effect to praise RDS as a protege at that moment in time and save the barbs for the following week.

I am by wide measure the most balanced observer here on Trump. I can point out his flaws as well as his strengths. Same for RDS - I note his many strengths while observing some areas for improvement. (and if we do research, you will see I assessed RDS as the most obvious successor to Trumpism not long after the 2020 race). That objectivity also applies to the primary race. I noted that Trump was mathematically unassailable until the mid-term result came in, then recognized the outcome seriously damaged him and moved the assessment on the 2024 primary race to a coin-toss. Instead of calling him dead & done and anointing RDS, I avoided overemphasizing a short-term period when Trump has taken a huge amount of incoming fire (which usually does move needles) over an issue (mid-term outcome) which will abate. It's hardly Trumpist to note that other issues will arise which will help Trump, or to note that Trump is not entirely devoid of assets.

And yes, neverTrumpism is destructive. It cost us the Senate in 2022. It cost us a Governorship. Loyalty is the currency of political parties. Without it, parties do not function. I have no problem whatsoever with your position on Trump. It's hasty, but within proper boundaries. But the neverTrumpers.....they'll burn it down to get their way. Then call themselves moderates trying to save the party from destruction. Moderates who finally do let themselves get whipped up into a lather forget that the people they're trying to defeat have the harder heads.

My daughter has more award-ware than she can stack on top of her refrigerator. Best this, best that, going away plaques from units, etc..... One of them was engraved "You gotta be smarter than the cow." She used it enough times that her unit decided to memorialize it. It's a concept I taught her as a kid. A cow is an exceedingly dumb animal, near the bottom of intelligence among domesticated animals. But if you throw a rope around a cow's neck and trying to force into the pens, that cow will use superior physics to drag your ass all over the pasture. Sure, you can get on a horse and chase it around and try to crowd it into the pens. But it's high risk. Ropes, fences ,and gates (and sometimes cowboys) get broken doing that. It's better to learn to never go into the pasture without a sack of range cubes. Drive over to the herd. Pour some cubes on the ground. After a few times, they'll associate you and the truck with food. Then start honking the horn on the truck while they're eating. Then, move your location to the working pens. Repeat. Then on the day when you actually want to catch the cows, all you have to do is drive to the pens, honk the horn on the truck, and pour a handful or two of cubes on the ground. The whole herd comes running. As the last of them arrive, walk into the pens and pour some more cubes out. The whole herd crowds in, afraid they'll miss out on a snack. Then close the gate behind them. At that point, you can use superior physics (steel working pens) to crowd them into the chutes and do all kinds of unpleasant veterinary things to them.

That pretty much applies to neverTrumpism. If the neverTrumpers were half as smart as they think they are, they wouldn't have to be doing what they're doing.

---

Don't disagree with you about the Never Trumpers. I've posted it before - the reasonable and pragmatic Republicans are stuck between two rigid groups of extremes - those who as you said would rather burn down the party than support Trump, and the sycophants who think Trump is the only answer, no matter jhow many times he gets his ass kicked.

But I am still curious why it's ok for Trump to attack DeSantis, but other Republicans not to attack Trump. You've yet to explain that.

Balanced observer on Trump would appear to me to be one who can acknowledge the good while also recognizing his flaws, and I don't recall you saying anything negative about Trump - other than he should have doubled down on Trumpism during the 2022 midterms rather than listen to his consultants.

whiterock said:

---

Mothra said:

---

whiterock said:

---

sombear said:

---

The last 3 national polls have Trump barely behind Biden and have Desantis a few points ahead of Biden. If you're a Trump fan, this isn't awful news, although to still trail a historically unpopular president is concerning. If you're a Desantis fan, while it's very early, it's crazy good news. He should not be doing that well nationally when he still has very low name ID. That said, I have not seen the poll backup data so that could be keeping his negatives artificially low also.

---

So, again, I'm no Trumpist arguing that he is the be-all to end-all.

---

You're the same poster who was critical of those who were critical of Trump, generally saying it serves no good purpose, while excusing his attacks on DeSantis. You still haven't explain that dichotomy.

I think you're more of a Trumpist than you make out.

---

I am by wide measure the most balanced observer here on Trump.

---

Ridiculous statement, totally delusional

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

---

This is a Hall of Fame post...

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

---

This is a Hall of Fame post...

---

Is it? I don't recall much criticism of candidates by Republicans pre-Trump. Do you? The vicious personal attacks that he engaged in with his fellow candidates in 2016 set a new low watermark for politics. If anything, attacking other Republican candidates became a thing after Trump started engaging in it.

Mothra said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

---

This is a Hall of Fame post...

---

Is it? I don't recall much criticism of candidates by Republicans pre-Trump. Do you? The vicious personal attacks that he engaged in with his fellow candidates in 2016 set a new low watermark for politics. If anything, attacking other Republican candidates became a thing after Trump started engaging in it.

---

We hear a lot about Reagan's 11th commandment these days, but somehow it never seems to apply to the Donald.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Mothra said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

---

This is a Hall of Fame post...

---

Is it? I don't recall much criticism of candidates by Republicans pre-Trump. Do you? The vicious personal attacks that he engaged in with his fellow candidates in 2016 set a new low watermark for politics. If anything, attacking other Republican candidates became a thing after Trump started engaging in it.

---

We hear a lot about Reagan's 11th commandment these days, but somehow it never seems to apply to the Donald.

---

Yes, we need to all just shut up and ignore when Trump viciously attacks fellow Republicans, but invoke the 11th Amendment loudly when other Republicans do the same about Trump.

I guess it makes sense in whiterock's world.

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Mothra said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

"No one's obsessing on Trump"

Absolutely not true here.

---

Ok, I'll concede there may be some, but it does reach to both extremes for and against.

---

Thank you. The problem here in not Trump, but fear of Trump. I have not seen anyone in the past two months argue that Trump is the best candidate for 2024, but more than couple fanatics blaming the bulk of everything lost since 2018 on Trump.

---

I would argue that fear of Trump is in fact a Trump problem. It's a candidate's job to make himself a desirable candidate, and not someone who scares people away from voting for him.

---

Of course you would, that way you can ignore your own responsibility to ignore the irrelevant and focus on someone who can make a difference.

---

Huh? Man you have some ****ty and obtuse takes.

---

You are being very emotional today, Mothra.

And ducking the point.

My 'take' is a valid observation. Your reaction suggests you understand that but don't want to let go of your tantrum.

Mothra said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

whiterock said:

---

RMF5630 said:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Right now, he's very competitive.

More polling on Biden:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/12/10/poll-joe-biden-approval-under-water-nearly-every-key-issue/

---

You can say and show what you want, polling is polling. **** in, **** out. I deal with surveys, models and simulation everyday.

The polls showed a Red Wave, the polls underestimated Trump in 20, and the polls showed Clinton winning in 16. They are notoriously inconsistent. To the point that they are basically bar talk. You never know what poll and which race it will be accurate on. Look at the spread from the 2022 midterms, you have a better shot beating Vegas using a spread of sports betting sites!

https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2022/11/the-best-and-worst-polls-from-the-2022-midterm-elections/

There is a "feel" to elections that polling doesn't capture and analytics misses. You can feel how elections are going, you could feel Clinton was not going to win even though the polls gave her up to a 99% chance of winning. Just like now, you can feel that Trump is losing ground. As much as the "data people" want to say different, I am not buying it. He is self-destructing is what I am seeing and the constant attacks are starting to ***** the armor, see NY Tax Valuation Case. I suspect more is to come. Attaching your wagon to Trump is a losing proposition. I really hope GOP get's new blood, we can't survive another Biden type Presidency.

---

I agree with that statement in bold, and it is consistent with the available polling data, context being Trump was unassailable and now it's a horse race.

Polls are not the be all to end all. Some are better than others. And the "some" and the "others" vary from cycle to cycle. But when you spot a trend in nearly all the polls, it's hard to "yeah, but" it away. And they are the only data we really have directly speaking to whatever hypotheses or gut feelings we might have. In this case, they do not at all appear to conflict and seem to be pointing in the same direction.

A big part of analysis is reconciling what "should" happen with what "will" happen. Right now, the entirely reasonable proposition that Trump should go away seems quite strong among the chattering class and wizards of smart (this board). But the will go away proposition is not quite so clear, due to long timeframe (primaries are a year away), course of future events (the mid-term effect will diminish and we will see some issues arise which play to Trump's strengths), rules & calendars of the primaries (always a big factor), and the enduring nature of Trump's appeal with +33% of the GOP base (many of whom do not think the way we think here).

I like RDS. I want to know more about his campaign operations for mail-in voting. From what I understand, FL law is quite a bit more restrictive than the laws in the key battleground states, so we need to know how we plan to address that as a national campaign by BOTH party and candidate. If we do not spent $500m on such in about 6-8 key states, we have no chance to win no matter who is our candidate.

---

Unfortunately, the sycophants that comprise the GOP's base will indeed likely decide the candidate this next election cycle. But let's not pretend Trump is going to be competitive in a national election, at this point.

---

He will be competitive against Biden, as the above polling you posted clearly shows. Others maybe not.

---

That is the problem, he shouldn't be competitive with Biden! The GOP should be able to stomp this guy with the job he is doing. The fact that Trump is "just" competitive is a negative!

---

Shoulda stomped him in 2020. Biden was a very average machine politician before he entered into senescent decline. Yet he won a national election rarely leaving the basement of his home. Was the outcome really all about Trump's negatives? I mean, Trump got 10m more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Unheard of. Historic. How does a guy with supposedly fatal negatives do that? (answer: the negatives are not dispositive factors. other things matter too). He grew his share of the vote in almost every meaningful demographic. (a trend which the GOP largely accomplished in 2020, too).

Biden will enter 2024 with historically high negatives, too. We now know enough to conclude how he got 5m more votes than Trump - mail-in voting operations. If we plan on campaigning on Biden's negatives in 2024 rather than building a comparable the mail-in vote operation, 2024 will play out pretty much like 2020 and 2022.

We gotta focus on fixing what we can fix right now, and candidates are not one of them. We have a primary to do that, and it's a year away. We can fish then. Time now to mend nets. Starting with selling mail-in voting to our voters and building mail-in voting infrastructure. Every thing I hear from conservative voters is that they realize the realities about mail-in voting and are ready to get serious about it.

---

Yeah, but you keep failing to mention that Biden got 12 million more. The popular vote wasn't that close.

Oh yeah, Biden's 12 million were fraudulent. Trump's 10 million were legitimate, though...

2020 was a record turnout due to EXTREME relaxation of voter rules and both sides benefited. Biden benefited more. You can't say that Trump's increase is legit and Biden's is the result of nefarious activities. They both played under the same rules, as messed up as they were.

---

played under same rules with different game plans. Biden's was way better. If Trump had added a mail-in voter operation, he'd have won enough swing states to win the election.

Funny, though, nobody else in the GOP seems to have realized that. So in 2022, they doubled down and ran the same kind of campaign Trump did in 2020.....conventional GOTV efforts, fundraising efforts, etc.....seeking to drive election day turnout to counter Dem mail-in voting operations. Big time fail.

I would posit that the wizards of smart were so sure the 2020 loss was solely attributable to Trump that they didn't think they needed to do anything but put up a better candidate. Then, lo & behold, 2022 happened. And now, the wizards of smart are saying once again that it was all Trump's fault and we need to put up better candidates.

It's almost like having a good excuse is more important than having a win.

When have we EVER heard Dems criticize their candidates?
They can find out ways to get Hobbs, Warnock, Fetterman elected.
They can get an openly bi-sexual woman elected Senator over the first female fighter jet pilot in a State where moderates allegedly rule the roost.
How the hell does a progressive film-maker whose sole political experience was a losing House race win a Senate seat in GA?
Did Dems didn't cite lack of experience or nutty election-denying nonsense about Stacey Abrahms?
Have we hard a single critique from the left about Beto or Crist?
Mandela Barnes is a moderate candidate in a swing state?
(we could go on an on.)

Democrats never complain about their candidates.
They just figure out how to get them elected.

---

This is a Hall of Fame post...

---

Is it? I don't recall much criticism of candidates by Republicans pre-Trump. Do you? The vicious personal attacks that he engaged in with his fellow candidates in 2016 set a new low watermark for politics. If anything, attacking other Republican candidates became a thing after Trump started engaging in it.

---

No, the Dems doing what it take to win a seat, regardless of who is running.