Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

Full Version: Election 2020
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(08-25-2020, 02:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-25-2020, 01:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-25-2020, 12:59 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

If you are wrong, will you admit it after the election?

What?  Ask an ideologue to check against reality?  Shame on you!  Wink

I suppose I would have to ask, if Harris should win in 2024, if you would admit it after the election?  Wink

I think you can assume so, since I admitted my mistake about Hillary; although I also said both of my main astrological prediction methods (the horoscope scores and the new moon before election) were correct. But if someone with a 4-16 score actually won the presidency, I would probably not only admit it, but probably shelve my method.

I have actually voted for Kamala Harris 3 times, and if she were the nominated Democratic candidate, I would consider whether to vote for her or vote Green. But whether I would secretly root for her to lose in order to preserve my method, is something I would have to ask myself. My "enthusiasm level" would certainly be low. Since I early predicted Trump to be the nominee in 2016, I did find myself rooting for him to win the nomination over Ted Cruz (who scores 4-11); although that was a devil's choice to begin with.

I guess you know the candidates with scores like those of Harris (4-16) in the past. They include Al Smith (4-16), who lost in a landslide to Herbert Hoover, Adlai Stevenson (5-21), who lost twice in landslides to Ike, Michael Dukakis (2-10), who lost to a rather unimpressive vice president, and John Breckinridge (0-23) and John Bell (3-15) who lost to Lincoln. Among recent candidates who failed with scores like that include Lindsay Graham (1-5), Tim Ryan (3-12), and John Kasich (3-12). I looked through scores of earlier failed candidates, and I don't remember finding anyone else even running for the nomination OR as a nominee with a score this low except Samuel Tilden (3-14), who won the popular vote but was prevented from assuming office. Talk about destiny at work!

http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html
(08-25-2020, 12:59 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

You have a lot of ground to make up in order for your prediction to be true. Here's an article today about the election in Texas.

A Public Policy poll shows Democratic nominee Joe Biden with a one-point lead over President Donald Trump in Texas, a state that has voted Republican for president every year since Ronald Reagan started a winning streak in 1980.
The poll of 764 registered voters surveyed Friday and Saturday following the conclusion of the Democratic National Convention had 48% voting for Biden and 47% for Trump, according to USA Today, which obtained an early copy of the results scheduled for a Tuesday release.
Trump won Texas by 9 percentage points in 2016.
The poll, which had a margin of error of 3.6 percentage points, was similar to other polls which showed a closely contested race in Texas, although most others had Trump in the lead. A breakdown of the methodology of the Public Police survey was not disclosed in USA Today's story.

The Public Policy poll said nearly two-thirds of independents gave Trump low job-approval numbers, which contradicted somewhat with other recent polls. A CBS/YouGov poll released earlier Monday that showed the president with an 11-point lead over Biden, while The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll showed "swing" voters gave Trump a 10-point edge.
The Public Policy poll also showed 67% of white Texans planned to vote for Trump. While only 16% of Hispanics said they approve of Trump's job performance, he (got) support from 20% polled. Among Blacks, only 4% planned to vote for Trump.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/texas-...01041xuwe8

The generational divide is racially-driven, according to this report linked below by William H. Frey. Boomers and Silents created the backlash that elected Trump, after non-white youth created the election of Obama. Such gaps will continue. But as older white voters realize that programs that assist them depend on prosperous younger generations, support for candidates like Biden may grow among them.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenu...-politics/

(quote)
The generational confrontation came to a head during the just-concluded decade, epitomized by the presidential transition from Barack Obama to Donald Trump. Obama, the nation’s first African American president, received solid support from voters under 45 and racial minority voters, signaling the rising political power of a younger, diverse America.

In a not-so-hidden backlash, white, working-class baby boomers and their seniors were the core constituency that subsequently elected Trump, who preyed upon their fears of a changing America with messages of nostalgia, isolationism, immigrant deportation, and rants against political correctness.

In his first three years in office, Trump’s administration has done much to curtail programs that benefit younger families—health care, benefits to immigrant children, public education, housing assistance, and many other social supports. And, alongside a Republican-controlled Congress, it has handcuffed future spending on such programs with irresponsible tax cuts, virtually guaranteeing ever-larger budget deficits.

Younger generations—millennials and Gen Zers—are strongly supportive of issues that would positively impact their futures: greater racial justice and inclusion, more favorable treatment of immigrants, stronger environmental protection, and effective gun control. But policies that support such measures are low on the priority list for Trump’s aging base......

The only part of America’s white population that will grow appreciably in the 2020s will be those of retirement age—increasing 23% over the next 10 years. This bulging, boomer-driven group will become increasingly dependent on a much slower-growing (2%) and rapidly diversifying labor force to support the federal programs that will benefit them, such as Social Security and Medicare. It is therefore vital for these boomers’ own interests to encourage government programs that benefit young families and future workers, including education and job training, Head Start, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, children’s nutrition, and child care assistance. Such programs will especially help children of color—many of them first- and second-generation Americans—who will soon contribute to our young adult and labor force populations.....

If the political division between ages and races continues into the next decade, our social conflicts are sure to intensify. In 2030, the 50-and-under population—comprised of millennials and Gen Zers—is projected to be less than half white, nearly a quarter Latino or Hispanic, 14% Black, and 11% Asian American and other races, while the 65-and-older population will still over 70% white. Today’s oft-derisive and cynical cries of “white privilege” and “OK, boomer!” would likely escalate, and be more than justified if older whites continue to horde and benefit from the federal largesse while progressive polices to support criminal justice, immigrant rights, and racial equity are held at bay........

But these racial and generational identity politics do not have to continue. It is possible that older whites will eventually hold more generous attitudes toward today’s highly diverse younger generations as they age and disperse across the country into suburbs, exurbs, and currently red states, while the children and grandchildren of baby boomers marry those in other races. Millennials themselves can be positive role models as they age and take on leadership positions in business, politics, and public life, serving as a bridge generation between the boomer-dominated nation we have been and the multihued nation we are becoming.

Most importantly, if we are to keep our strength as a country, leaders of political parties and officials at all levels of government need to help their constituents understand the value of co-generational dependency between the old and the young. If this occurs, and I hope it does, the 2020s can be a decade of improved harmony and economic prosperity for Americans of all ages and races.
I am ready to redo my seat-of-the-pants estimates of Biden and Trump chances based on match-ups alone. I would need to do some interpolations, and at this I take the dangers of interpolation (much less dangerous than interpolation. Obviously 50-50 is 50% for both.

State data is from here:


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-d...8-16-2020/

August 10.


three months..... |...55%|....72%|.......87%|........98%|

lead likelihood

0 50 10 87
1 55 11 88
2 59 12 89
3 64 13 90
4 69 14 91
5 72 15 92
6 76 16 93
7 80 17 94
8 83 18 95
9 85 19 96

The interpolation is nearly linear, and that may be inadequate for small leads. This model suggests that even a 3-point edge for Biden at this point (late August) is far from trivial.

Here is a map of the probabilities of a Biden win based upon the edge that one or the other has. Numbers are not electoral votes this time: Data is from August 10, so convention bumps do not appear:

[Image: genusmap.php?year=1964&ev_c=1&pv_p=1&ev_...&NE3=0;1;6]

Biden likelihood 0 to 9 (saturation 8 )
Biden likelihood 10 to 19 (saturation 6)
Biden likelihood 20 to 29 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 30 to 39 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 41 to 49 (saturation 2)
white -- tie, exactly even

Biden likelihood 51 to 59 (saturation 2)
Biden likelihood 60 to 69 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 70 to 79 (saturation 5)
Biden likelihood 80 to 89 (saturation 6)
Biden likelihood 90 or higher (saturation 8 )

It is already two weeks obsolete, because the numbers are based on Senators winning elections based upon their leads at three months (I have done linear interpolation). This is also the last polling data that both

(1) comes from all 50 states,
(2) from the same time, and
(3) from the same source.

Senatorial and gubernatorial elections for statewide contests for electoral votes by Presidential campaigns. This may be far from a perfect model. Biden has an 80% chance of winning Wisconsin, which this map shows as the most likely tipping-point state. He also has a 69% chance of winning North Carolina and Florida (each), a 64% chance of winning Arizona, a 50% chance of winning Ohio, and a 41% chance of winning Texas . These six states are dissimilar enough that they could as well be considered independent events. Trump has about seven chances in 1000 to win all six states in question. (I am not considering Iowa, as Biden is not winning Iowa while losing Wisconsin).

At this point, Biden is trying to consolidate the states that he needs or might need. Trump is trying to keep his hope alive in states in which he has as little as a 20% chance of winning.

Another way of putting it: Trump has about as much chance of winning Wisconsin as Biden does of winning Kansas.
Classic Xer says that we liberal Democrats and progressives are going to face a terrible wrath and revenge from the real Americans soon unless we reject our own racism. A CNN report paints a different picture:

"..........In a recently released survey, the Public Religion Research Institute, like many other pollsters, found growing concern among Americans, including Whites, about racial inequities in policing and other aspects of American life. But it also found that Republicans had moved little, if at all, on those questions, widening the gap between the party and the rest of society.

From 2015 until 2020, the institute found, the share of both White Democrats and independents who said that police shootings of African American men are isolated incidents, rather than part of a pattern, dropped by more than 20 percentage points. That's produced a clear majority of Americans who say such shootings are part of a pattern. But 81% of White Republicans still describe these shootings as isolated incidents, down only minimally from 85% in 2015. Nearly two-thirds of White Republicans likewise still say discrimination against Whites is as big a problem as bias against African Americans, down only minimally from 2015. A growing share of all Americans, now slightly above 60%, reject that view.

On attitudes about racial bias, "Republicans have stuck it out and there is [virtually] no change, and one of their biggest base groups, White evangelical Protestants, are right there," says Jones. "Democrats have moved, independents have moved, other religious groups have moved, so it is a Republican Party and a shrinking, aging White Christian base that is increasingly out of touch with where the country is."".........

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/politics/...-isolation

Also from this article:

"Compared with the 2016 GOP convention, which rippled with unresolved tension and resistance to Trump's rise, the conspicuous absence of dissent at this year's event underscores how the President has stamped the party with his trademark as surely as if it were one of his downtown skyscrapers. The party's choice to skip passing a platform and instead approve a brief statement declaring it will "enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda" testifies to his triumph."

I am struck by the difference from the Democratic Convention. It was Biden's convention too, but the voices from the other contenders were included. One difference in particular was how it at one point was showcasing so many younger leaders coming up the ranks, presumably most of them Millennials. I didn't know almost any of them. I certainly don't know whether any of them have the talent and ambition to be elected president one day. But before long some of them may emerge as contenders. They seemed bright and energetic and willing to serve.

This contrasts sharply with the lack of prospects from Generation X. They grew up under Reagan and other influences that denigrated politics and public service. Most of their chief contenders have not been very skilled candidates so far, and a majority of them probably could be considered followers of Reagan. That generation were nomads, not civics. There are just as many talented people in their ranks. But they may not produce any presidents, because their best and most potentially-skilled candidates went into other lines of work. They may believe in business and other practical affairs, but not politics.

As the article points out, the demographics are changing. In the long run, at this point it looks like the Republicans will cling to their xenophobic nationalism and their other outdated ideologies, and fade away as they become ever more divergent with what American society and culture is becoming. In the meantime, some Generation X leaders like Kamala Harris may be in a position to be leaders, but since the most potentially-skilled leaders have gone into other lines of work, these Gen X politicians will fail. The Millennials will probably come along earlier in the 1T than usual, unless someone like Spencer Cox from the latter years of Gen X gains favor and turns out to be a typical nomad leader like Ike. The demographics and cultural shifts are changing society in the long run, but who actually leads America depends on who steps up and comes forward who can assume a leadership role.
I just got my hands on Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise (why so many predictions but some don't)It relates probability well, and as I have suggested, being up 5% in a binary election a year before means little, being up 5% a month before the election is huge. It is from 2012, and it relates much other than elections (like sports, poker, and even chess). What it says of electoral leads as a campaign approaches its conclusion is telling.

On page 63, Figure 2-4 shows the probability of a Senate candidate winning (1998 to 2008) with a certain lead (1, 5, 10, and 20 points) at one year, six months, three months, one month, one week, and one day. Because statewide races for President are much like statewide races for the Senate -- with the qualification that Presidential nominees do not usually make appearances where they see themselves losing -- unless they really are losing nationwide.

Time to election  |1 point|5 points||10 points|20 points|
one day............. |...64%|....95%|.....99.7%|.99.999%|
one week........... |...60%|....89%|.......98%|...99.97%|
one month......... |...57%|....81%|.......95%|.....99.7%|
three months..... |...55%|....72%|.......87%|........98%|
six months..........|...53%|....66%|.......79%|.......93%|
one year.............|....52%|...59%|.......67%|.......81%|

(I am going to put this back in my "electoral theory" section because it will remain relevant.

So what conclusions can I draw? You might be surprised that a five-point lead one month before Election Day is no less significant than a twenty-point lead one year before the election. Thus one hears things like Democrats saying "We have a chance of winning West Virginia if everything goes right" and Republicans say that they have a chance of winning Massachusetts... yadda, yadda, yadda. Or is it "Yabba, dabba, doo!" Likewise, being one point ahead on the day before the election is worth almost as much as being five points ahead six months before the election or even ten points ahead  a year before the election.

OK, we all thought in November 2019 that Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee unless the Grim Reaper took him away from us, but how many  of us could have predicted that Joe Biden would be the Presidential nominee? Many liberals were looking for grounds on which to impeach the President, but nobody predicted what those grounds would be, and what the consequences would be upon the 2020 election even if Trump got away with some impeachable behavior

But here we are now, slightly more than two months before the 2020 election. It seems an agonizing eternity for anyone who finds so much about this President, his policies, and his performance insufferable.

I am ready to redo my seat-of-the-pants estimates of Biden and Trump chances based on match-ups alone.  I would need to do some interpolations, and at this I take the dangers of interpolation (much less dangerous than interpolation. Obviously 50-50 is 50% for both.

State data is from here:


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/joe-biden-d...8-16-2020/

August 10.


three months..... |...55%|....72%|.......87%|........98%|

lead  likelihood

0   50    10  87
1   55    11  88
2   59    12  89
3   64    13  90
4   69    14  91
5   72    15  92
6   76    16  93
7   80    17  94
8   83    18  95
9   85    19  96

The interpolation is nearly linear, and that may be inadequate for small leads. This model suggests that even a 3-point edge for Biden at this point (late August) is far from trivial.

Here is a map of the probabilities of a Biden win based upon the edge that one or the other has. Numbers are not electoral votes this time: Data is from August 10, so convention bumps do not appear:

[Image: genusmap.php?year=1964&ev_c=1&pv_p=1&ev_...&NE3=0;1;6]

Biden likelihood 0 to 9 (saturation 8 )
Biden likelihood 10 to 19 (saturation 6)
Biden likelihood 20 to 29 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 30 to 39 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 41 to 49 (saturation 2)
white  -- tie, exactly even

Biden likelihood 51 to 59 (saturation 2)
Biden likelihood 60 to 69 (saturation 4)
Biden likelihood 70 to 79 (saturation 5)
Biden likelihood 80 to 89 (saturation 6)
Biden likelihood 90 or higher (saturation 8 )

It is already two weeks obsolete, because the numbers are based on Senators winning elections based upon their leads at three months (I have done linear interpolation). This is also the last polling data that both

(1) comes from all 50 states,
(2) from the same time, and
(3) from the same source.   

Senatorial and gubernatorial elections for statewide contests for electoral votes by Presidential campaigns. This may be far from a perfect model. Biden has an 80% chance of winning Wisconsin, which this map shows as the most likely tipping-point state. He also has a 69% chance of winning North Carolina and Florida (each), a 64% chance of winning Arizona, a 50% chance of winning Ohio, and a 41% chance of winning Texas .  These six states are dissimilar enough that they could as well be considered independent events. Trump has about seven chances in 1000 to win all six states in question. (I am not considering Iowa, as Biden is not winning Iowa while losing Wisconsin).

At this point, Biden is trying to consolidate the states that he needs or might need. Trump is trying to keep his hope alive in states in which he has as little as a 20% chance of winning.

Another way of putting it: Trump has about as much chance of winning Wisconsin as Biden does of winning Kansas.Joe Biden has an 80% chance of winning Wisconsin. At this point, Trump seems to have about as much chance of losing Kansas (usually an absurd possibility( as he has of winning Wisconsin.
"how many of us could have predicted that Joe Biden would be the Presidential nominee?"

Eric the Green raises his hand.

Surely you remember during the months before the primary when I posted the polls and the primary elections and the horoscope scores, and how all the Democratic candidates who melted away had lower scores than Biden and Sanders? Well, of course I could have predicted his nomination.....
Sorry But the GOP since Trump took over looks far more interested in solving actual political and social problems than the DNC is. The DNC simply highlights/inflames mostly social issues but has NO intention whatsoever of Making positive changes. In The 2020 election the Boomer left ideologues clearly realizing that their scam strategy is become less and less effective/the people you guys are hoping would fall for it are starting to see right through the boomer left. Blacks and Hispanics are starting to see the DNC's blatant pandering and younger minorities are either switching to the GOP or going third party/politcal insurgent. One poll of college students even has Trump support among young Black Men as higher than that of comparable age white women. Trump has improved with regards to the Hispanic vote as well. Biden/Harris are both clearly fake/hypocritical with very poor records on a variety of issues. The realignment is REAL. IMO, the DNC is instigating protests/riots in an attempt to prevent this party realignment.
(08-25-2020, 11:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Classic Xer says that we liberal Democrats and progressives are going to face a terrible wrath and revenge from the real Americans soon unless we reject our own racism. A CNN report paints a different picture:

"..........In a recently released survey, the Public Religion Research Institute, like many other pollsters, found growing concern among Americans, including Whites, about racial inequities in policing and other aspects of American life. But it also found that Republicans had moved little, if at all, on those questions, widening the gap between the party and the rest of society.

From 2015 until 2020, the institute found, the share of both White Democrats and independents who said that police shootings of African American men are isolated incidents, rather than part of a pattern, dropped by more than 20 percentage points. That's produced a clear majority of Americans who say such shootings are part of a pattern. But 81% of White Republicans still describe these shootings as isolated incidents, down only minimally from 85% in 2015. Nearly two-thirds of White Republicans likewise still say discrimination against Whites is as big a problem as bias against African Americans, down only minimally from 2015. A growing share of all Americans, now slightly above 60%, reject that view.

On attitudes about racial bias, "Republicans have stuck it out and there is [virtually] no change, and one of their biggest base groups, White evangelical Protestants, are right there," says Jones. "Democrats have moved, independents have moved, other religious groups have moved, so it is a Republican Party and a shrinking, aging White Christian base that is increasingly out of touch with where the country is."".........

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/politics/...-isolation

Also from this article:

"Compared with the 2016 GOP convention, which rippled with unresolved tension and resistance to Trump's rise, the conspicuous absence of dissent at this year's event underscores how the President has stamped the party with his trademark as surely as if it were one of his downtown skyscrapers. The party's choice to skip passing a platform and instead approve a brief statement declaring it will "enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda" testifies to his triumph."

I am struck by the difference from the Democratic Convention. It was Biden's convention too, but the voices from the other contenders were included. One difference in particular was how it at one point was showcasing so many younger leaders coming up the ranks, presumably most of them Millennials. I didn't know almost any of them. I certainly don't know whether any of them have the talent and ambition to be elected president one day. But before long some of them may emerge as contenders. They seemed bright and energetic and willing to serve.

This contrasts sharply with the lack of prospects from Generation X. They grew up under Reagan and other influences that denigrated politics and public service. Most of their chief contenders have not been very skilled candidates so far, and a majority of them probably could be considered followers of Reagan. That generation were nomads, not civics. There are just as many talented people in their ranks. But they may not produce any presidents, because their best and most potentially-skilled candidates went into other lines of work. They may believe in business and other practical affairs, but not politics.

As the article points out, the demographics are changing. In the long run, at this point it looks like the Republicans will cling to their xenophobic nationalism and their other outdated ideologies, and fade away as they become ever more divergent with what American society and culture is becoming. In the meantime, some Generation X leaders like Kamala Harris may be in a position to be leaders, but since the most potentially-skilled leaders have gone into other lines of work, these Gen X politicians will fail. The Millennials will probably come along earlier in the 1T than usual, unless someone like Spencer Cox from the latter years of Gen X gains favor and turns out to be a typical nomad leader like Ike. The demographics and cultural shifts are changing society in the long run, but who actually leads America depends on who steps up and comes forward who can assume a leadership role.
Well, a portion of the Republicans are doing their best to keep the country from naturally splitting apart and going their separate ways by siding with what's left of the old LIBERAL establishment and shoring it up and giving it some sense of stability and credibility that the Democratic side is seriously lacking these days. I've been saying that I hope that the Democratic is able to deal with all it's issues by itself because the Democratic party has already burned the bridge with the majority of the country.
(08-26-2020, 04:08 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]"how many of us could have predicted that Joe Biden would be the Presidential nominee?"

Eric the Green raises his hand.

Surely you remember during the months before the primary when I posted the polls and the primary elections and the horoscope scores, and how all the Democratic candidates who melted away had lower scores than Biden and Sanders? Well, of course I could have predicted his nomination.....
Well, the Democratic brand alone is probably good for 40 some percent support these days.
(08-26-2020, 10:01 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry But the GOP since Trump took over looks far more interested in solving actual political and social problems than the DNC is. The DNC simply highlights/inflames mostly social issues but has NO intention whatsoever of Making positive changes. In The 2020 election the Boomer left ideologues clearly realizing that their scam strategy is become less and less effective/the people you guys are hoping would fall for it are starting to see right through the boomer left. Blacks and Hispanics are starting to see the DNC's blatant pandering and younger minorities are either switching to the GOP or going third party/politcal insurgent. One poll of college students even has Trump support among young Black Men as higher than that of comparable age white women. Trump has improved with regards to the Hispanic vote as well. Biden/Harris are both clearly fake/hypocritical with very poor records on a variety of issues. The realignment is REAL. IMO, the DNC is instigating protests/riots in an attempt to prevent this party realignment.

I am seeing the conservatives using violence rather than listening to the people, while the Democrats are waiting on the hope of having the senate and White House to make their comprehensive changes. The Republicans have had their four years to do something, yet we have the protests, the bug and a hurricane running interference for their convention.

I wonder what the statute of limitations is for the Hatch Act?
(08-26-2020, 11:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-26-2020, 10:01 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry But the GOP since Trump took over looks far more interested in solving actual political and social problems than the DNC is. The DNC simply highlights/inflames mostly social issues but has NO intention whatsoever of Making positive changes. In The 2020 election the Boomer left ideologues clearly realizing that their scam strategy is become less and less effective/the people you guys are hoping would fall for it are starting to see right through the boomer left. Blacks and Hispanics are starting to see the DNC's blatant pandering and younger minorities are either switching to the GOP or going third party/politcal insurgent. One poll of college students even has Trump support among young Black Men as higher than that of comparable age white women. Trump has improved with regards to the Hispanic vote as well. Biden/Harris are both clearly fake/hypocritical with very poor records on a variety of issues. The realignment is REAL. IMO, the DNC is instigating protests/riots in an attempt to prevent this party realignment.

I am seeing the conservatives using violence rather than listening to the people, while the Democrats are waiting on the hope of having the senate and White House to make their comprehensive changes.  The Republicans have had their four years to do something, yet we have the protests, the bug and a hurricane running interference for their convention.

I wonder what the statute of limitations is for the Hatch Act?
DNC is a pro-corporate party, the Conservatives simply dislike seeing mass violence every day. The corporations the DNC increasingly support are to a large extent responsible for the inequalities. However the DNC, because they would be directly impacted politically if that contradiction comes to light instead deceives the democratic base that the republican side/supporters are responsible for their problems, when it is the very corporations that the DNC represents that are the guilty party (in creating the inequality). The DNC rigs its primaries so blatantly that political amateurs can see the rigging against the class based platform candidates, in favor of the identity based candidates. Sorry but more than half of people who are normally DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, regard the nominees as utterly ILLEGITIMATE, because they did not actually win their primaries. DNC effectively closed the primaries before most non-deep southern states had voted (conveniently using covid as an excuse) because the party elites/party bosses did not like what the likely votes of the North, West and New south would have voted for in a fair election.
(08-27-2020, 05:25 AM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]DNC is a pro-corporate party, the Conservatives simply dislike seeing mass violence every day. The corporations the DNC increasingly support are to a large extent responsible for the inequalities. However the DNC, because they would be directly impacted politically if that contradiction comes to light instead deceives the democratic base that the republican side/supporters are responsible for their problems, when it is the very corporations that the DNC represents that are the guilty party (in creating the inequality). The DNC rigs its primaries so blatantly that political amateurs can see the rigging against the class based platform candidates, in favor of the identity based candidates. Sorry but more than half of people who are normally DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, regard the nominees as utterly ILLEGITIMATE, because they did not actually win their primaries. DNC effectively closed the primaries before most non-deep southern states had voted (conveniently using covid as an excuse) because the party elites/party bosses did not like what the likely votes of the North, West and New south would have voted for in a fair election.

That is a very creative interpretation. The establishment Republicans are the ones with ties to the corporate and Wall Street elements. It is the Republicans who suppress the vote and gerrymander to conserve power. In out and out lying, you seem to have caught the spirit of the Republican convention,
(08-27-2020, 06:00 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-27-2020, 05:25 AM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]DNC is a pro-corporate party, the Conservatives simply dislike seeing mass violence every day. The corporations the DNC increasingly support are to a large extent responsible for the inequalities. However the DNC, because they would be directly impacted politically if that contradiction comes to light instead deceives the democratic base that the republican side/supporters are responsible for their problems, when it is the very corporations that the DNC represents that are the guilty party (in creating the inequality). The DNC rigs its primaries so blatantly that political amateurs can see the rigging against the class based platform candidates, in favor of the identity based candidates. Sorry but more than half of people who are normally DEMOCRATIC VOTERS, regard the nominees as utterly ILLEGITIMATE, because they did not actually win their primaries. DNC effectively closed the primaries before most non-deep southern states had voted (conveniently using covid as an excuse) because the party elites/party bosses did not like what the likely votes of the North, West and New south would have voted for in a fair election.

That is a very creative interpretation.  The establishment Republicans are the ones with ties to the corporate and Wall Street elements.  It is the Republicans who suppress the vote and gerrymander to conserve power.  In out and out lying, you seem to have caught the spirit of the Republican convention,
Establishment republicans Hate Trump and having been marginalized more and more from the GOP since 2010. Several of them Spoke at the DNC convention, while democrats who held what pre-2012 were traditional democratic party positions were systematically excluded (with the one speaker allowed only 90 seconds of speech). Another more typical democratic representative was excluded entirely from the convention despite winning some delegates.
(08-27-2020, 06:16 AM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Establishment republicans Hate Trump and having been marginalized more and more from the GOP since 2010. Several of them Spoke at the DNC convention, while democrats who held what pre-2012 were traditional democratic party positions were systematically excluded (with the one speaker allowed only 90 seconds of speech). Another more typical democratic representative was excluded entirely from the convention despite winning some delegates.

It shows you how out of step you are. Yes, the the Tea Party was originally against the establishment, but lately the establishment fears the Trump tweet. They have become his loyalist boot lickers for fear he will turn his base on him. Note how well they follow McConnell and turned the impeachment into a joke.
Pelosi now doesn't want Biden to debate Trump:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...644923002/

What a F'n joke candidacy. Boomer Libs; you should be ashamed of yourselves for running this guy, "Waaah running a class-based platform would hurt my feelings waaah".
(08-27-2020, 02:07 PM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Pelosi now doesn't want Biden to debate Trump:

From one perspective, I can see her logic. Biden has a big lead in the polls. The debates are one of the very few chances to turn it around. Why debate? The usual dynamic where the incumbent has an advantage has been reversed.

I am more interested in the collision of Earth One and Earth Two. Trump counts on being able to lie without question. If Biden memorizes the right facts, Trump's lies could be countered. I'd kind of like to see a debate. We'll see.
(08-27-2020, 06:16 AM)CH86 Wrote: [ -> ]Establishment republicans Hate Trump and having been marginalized more and more from the GOP since 2010. Several of them Spoke at the DNC convention, while democrats who held what pre-2012 were traditional democratic party positions were systematically excluded (with the one speaker allowed only 90 seconds of speech). Another more typical democratic representative was excluded entirely from the convention despite winning some delegates.

I don't doubt the Republican establishment hates and fears Trump. He is virtually destroying the Republican Party, ruining a gravy train that has been going on for decades. They expressed their true opinions before he got the nomination for 2016. That doesn't mean they haven't swallowed their pride and become bootlicker lackeys. He has enough sway over what is left of the Republican base and is vindictive enough to those who criticize him that he leaves them no choice but to go down with the ship.

It couldn't happen to a finer set of people.
(08-26-2020, 10:55 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-25-2020, 11:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Classic Xer says that we liberal Democrats and progressives are going to face a terrible wrath and revenge from the real Americans soon unless we reject our own racism. A CNN report paints a different picture:

"..........In a recently released survey, the Public Religion Research Institute, like many other pollsters, found growing concern among Americans, including Whites, about racial inequities in policing and other aspects of American life. But it also found that Republicans had moved little, if at all, on those questions, widening the gap between the party and the rest of society.

From 2015 until 2020, the institute found, the share of both White Democrats and independents who said that police shootings of African American men are isolated incidents, rather than part of a pattern, dropped by more than 20 percentage points. That's produced a clear majority of Americans who say such shootings are part of a pattern. But 81% of White Republicans still describe these shootings as isolated incidents, down only minimally from 85% in 2015. Nearly two-thirds of White Republicans likewise still say discrimination against Whites is as big a problem as bias against African Americans, down only minimally from 2015. A growing share of all Americans, now slightly above 60%, reject that view.

On attitudes about racial bias, "Republicans have stuck it out and there is [virtually] no change, and one of their biggest base groups, White evangelical Protestants, are right there," says Jones. "Democrats have moved, independents have moved, other religious groups have moved, so it is a Republican Party and a shrinking, aging White Christian base that is increasingly out of touch with where the country is."".........

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/politics/...-isolation

Also from this article:

"Compared with the 2016 GOP convention, which rippled with unresolved tension and resistance to Trump's rise, the conspicuous absence of dissent at this year's event underscores how the President has stamped the party with his trademark as surely as if it were one of his downtown skyscrapers. The party's choice to skip passing a platform and instead approve a brief statement declaring it will "enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda" testifies to his triumph."

I am struck by the difference from the Democratic Convention. It was Biden's convention too, but the voices from the other contenders were included. One difference in particular was how it at one point was showcasing so many younger leaders coming up the ranks, presumably most of them Millennials. I didn't know almost any of them. I certainly don't know whether any of them have the talent and ambition to be elected president one day. But before long some of them may emerge as contenders. They seemed bright and energetic and willing to serve.

This contrasts sharply with the lack of prospects from Generation X. They grew up under Reagan and other influences that denigrated politics and public service. Most of their chief contenders have not been very skilled candidates so far, and a majority of them probably could be considered followers of Reagan. That generation were nomads, not civics. There are just as many talented people in their ranks. But they may not produce any presidents, because their best and most potentially-skilled candidates went into other lines of work. They may believe in business and other practical affairs, but not politics.

As the article points out, the demographics are changing. In the long run, at this point it looks like the Republicans will cling to their xenophobic nationalism and their other outdated ideologies, and fade away as they become ever more divergent with what American society and culture is becoming. In the meantime, some Generation X leaders like Kamala Harris may be in a position to be leaders, but since the most potentially-skilled leaders have gone into other lines of work, these Gen X politicians will fail. The Millennials will probably come along earlier in the 1T than usual, unless someone like Spencer Cox from the latter years of Gen X gains favor and turns out to be a typical nomad leader like Ike. The demographics and cultural shifts are changing society in the long run, but who actually leads America depends on who steps up and comes forward who can assume a leadership role.
Well, a portion of the Republicans are doing their best to keep the country from naturally splitting apart and going their separate ways by siding with what's left of the old LIBERAL establishment and shoring it up and giving it some sense of stability and credibility that the Democratic side is seriously lacking these days. I've been saying that I hope that the Democratic is able to deal with all it's issues by itself because the Democratic party has already burned the bridge with the majority of the country.

And that majority is now a minority, and shrinking, so your side has gotten desperate, hiring a con man to make your case because he's good on TV.
(08-26-2020, 10:55 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-25-2020, 11:20 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Classic Xer says that we liberal Democrats and progressives are going to face a terrible wrath and revenge from the real Americans soon unless we reject our own racism. A CNN report paints a different picture:

"..........In a recently released survey, the Public Religion Research Institute, like many other pollsters, found growing concern among Americans, including Whites, about racial inequities in policing and other aspects of American life. But it also found that Republicans had moved little, if at all, on those questions, widening the gap between the party and the rest of society.

From 2015 until 2020, the institute found, the share of both White Democrats and independents who said that police shootings of African American men are isolated incidents, rather than part of a pattern, dropped by more than 20 percentage points. That's produced a clear majority of Americans who say such shootings are part of a pattern. But 81% of White Republicans still describe these shootings as isolated incidents, down only minimally from 85% in 2015. Nearly two-thirds of White Republicans likewise still say discrimination against Whites is as big a problem as bias against African Americans, down only minimally from 2015. A growing share of all Americans, now slightly above 60%, reject that view.

On attitudes about racial bias, "Republicans have stuck it out and there is [virtually] no change, and one of their biggest base groups, White evangelical Protestants, are right there," says Jones. "Democrats have moved, independents have moved, other religious groups have moved, so it is a Republican Party and a shrinking, aging White Christian base that is increasingly out of touch with where the country is."".........

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/25/politics/...-isolation

Also from this article:

"Compared with the 2016 GOP convention, which rippled with unresolved tension and resistance to Trump's rise, the conspicuous absence of dissent at this year's event underscores how the President has stamped the party with his trademark as surely as if it were one of his downtown skyscrapers. The party's choice to skip passing a platform and instead approve a brief statement declaring it will "enthusiastically support the President's America-first agenda" testifies to his triumph."

I am struck by the difference from the Democratic Convention. It was Biden's convention too, but the voices from the other contenders were included. One difference in particular was how it at one point was showcasing so many younger leaders coming up the ranks, presumably most of them Millennials. I didn't know almost any of them. I certainly don't know whether any of them have the talent and ambition to be elected president one day. But before long some of them may emerge as contenders. They seemed bright and energetic and willing to serve.

This contrasts sharply with the lack of prospects from Generation X. They grew up under Reagan and other influences that denigrated politics and public service. Most of their chief contenders have not been very skilled candidates so far, and a majority of them probably could be considered followers of Reagan. That generation were nomads, not civics. There are just as many talented people in their ranks. But they may not produce any presidents, because their best and most potentially-skilled candidates went into other lines of work. They may believe in business and other practical affairs, but not politics.

As the article points out, the demographics are changing. In the long run, at this point it looks like the Republicans will cling to their xenophobic nationalism and their other outdated ideologies, and fade away as they become ever more divergent with what American society and culture is becoming. In the meantime, some Generation X leaders like Kamala Harris may be in a position to be leaders, but since the most potentially-skilled leaders have gone into other lines of work, these Gen X politicians will fail. The Millennials will probably come along earlier in the 1T than usual, unless someone like Spencer Cox from the latter years of Gen X gains favor and turns out to be a typical nomad leader like Ike. The demographics and cultural shifts are changing society in the long run, but who actually leads America depends on who steps up and comes forward who can assume a leadership role.

Well, a portion of the Republicans are doing their best to keep the country from naturally splitting apart and going their separate ways by siding with what's left of the old LIBERAL establishment and shoring it up and giving it some sense of stability and credibility that the Democratic side is seriously lacking these days. I've been saying that I hope that the Democratic is able to deal with all it's issues by itself because the Democratic party has already burned the bridge with the majority of the country.


In the 1T, extremists Left and Right become more much less relevant. For one thing, the Establishment begins to recognize that practically everyone needs a stake in the system irrespective of... well, you know. People should not split between the all-powerful rich and the helpless poor. Work must be adequately rewarded. The economy must operate on thrift and private investment instead of upon financial legerdemain and cronyism.  The tax system must give small business a chance to give opportunity to entrepreneurs... and in all likelihood ensure that wealth not be so concentrated that mass poverty be a certainty for people who happen to be in the wrong part of the country. 

Yes, there was the infamous Senator Joseph R. McCarthy -- but he was so far out of the mainstream that responsible people could expose him for what he was.
President Trump cannot expect the military to aid him by stifling protests or facilitating a Trump win.


Quote:WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. armed forces will have no role in carrying out the election process or resolving a disputed vote, the top U.S. military officer has told Congress.

The comments from Gen. Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, underscore the extraordinary political environment in America, where the president has declared without evidence that the expected surge in mail-in ballots will make the vote “inaccurate and fraudulent,” and has suggested he might not accept the election results if he loses. Milley’s comments were released Friday.

Trump’s repeated complaints questioning the election’s validity have triggered unprecedented worries about the potential for chaos surrounding the election results. Some have speculated that the military might be called upon to get involved, either by Trump trying to use it to help his reelection prospects or as, Democratic challenger Joe Biden has suggested, to remove Trump from the White House if he refuses to accept defeat. The military has adamantly sought to tamp down that speculation and is zealously protective of its historically nonpartisan nature.

https://apnews.com/4716dbfa15de987d8d6118534ef3bd2b

Note well that the military typically makes voting by mail a near-necessity for most active-duty Service members.