• mipadaitu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Polls don’t matter, especially this far out.

    Vote. Put pressure on politicians to do better. But more than anything. Vote.

    If the polls say he’s 100% going to win. Vote. If you’re in a state that goes blue every time for the last 100 years. Vote. If you’re in a state that goes red every time for the last 100 years. Vote.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      I see people saying their vote doesn’t matter when they’re in a highly partisan district, which is most of them.

      News flash: Even the dumbest politicians can look at arithmetic. If they see their margins shrinking, they’ll adjust. Or go full retard and double-down. And then get a worse beating.

      • Julian@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Also local elections can be decided by one vote and can be just as important.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            After trading leads several times, Simitian and Low each finished with 30,249 votes in the original tally, which was finalized earlier this month, shortly before the recount began. Liccardo finished with 38,489 votes, well ahead of the other two candidates.

            So the two runners-up were competing for who gets to lose in a run-off election?

            The attacks reached a fever pitch late last month, when a local prosecutor filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Liccardo’s campaign illegally coordinated with “a newly formed dark money Super PAC to do his CD-16 recount bidding.”

            :-/ It’s not the votes that count, but who counts the votes.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        I see people saying their vote doesn’t matter when they’re in a highly partisan district

        I see people saying it when they’re in heavily gerrymandered districts and deeply disenfranchised states. Dems have been playing the “Just go out and vote!” game in Florida for a quarter century, and Repubs keep finding new ways to yank the football. Even ballot initiatives don’t work, as the Florida gerrymandered legislature just reverses out whatever voting rights or decriminalization laws the public passes.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Okay, then protest. And also VOTE.

          Throwing your hands up in the air saying “voting doesn’t work so I’m not going to do anything” is just allowing them to dictate everything that will happen.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Okay, then protest.

            Throwing your hands up in the air saying “voting doesn’t work so I’m not going to do anything”

            Studying the history of the electoral system and the patterns of disenfranchisement isn’t equivalent to “doing nothing”. And in the end, you have to be rational rather than idealistic. When Vladimir Putin is counting the votes, you’re not going to vote him out of office.

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              When Vladimir Putin is counting the votes, you’re not going to vote him out of office.

              Russians that literally live under Vladimir Putin risk their lives to protest. You have politicians that you admit want to become the next Putin but won’t say anything or of fear of pepper spray.

              There’s an internet meme about France surrendering. French politicians try to increase the retirement age and the population takes to the streets. American politicians try to take away your democracy and American citizens just roll over to expose their belly.
              It’s not the French that surrender at the slightest bit of difficulty.

              • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Russians that literally live under Vladimir Putin risk their lives to protest.

                So do American college kids.

                French politicians try to increase the retirement age and the population takes to the streets.

                French politicians have been squeezing the pension system since at least 2006, and the street protests have come and gone without discouraging new efforts to dismantle the system.

                Bully to them for trying, but without material control over industry, they’re all sound and fury.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I’m not going to vote for Biden until he stops funding a genocide. You cannot say put pressure on them and vote for them no matter what. They do not give a fuck what you think if you’re going to automatically vote for them. That’s why the uncommitted votes in the primaries scared them so much.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Oh no, you’re only the thousandth person to tell me that. It’s so persuasive. Either I vote for the guy funding a genocide or the Boogeyman gets elected1!!111!!1

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              If the choice is people dying or people dying then the system is no longer legitimate.

          • samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Yes, that’s the reality of the situation, whether you like it or not. If you don’t care if that happens, fair enough. But don’t try to say that not voting for Biden doesn’t help Trump.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I didn’t say that. I said that at this point, months into this debacle, it’s obviously not persuasive to me. I am not willing to sell the lives of Palestinian children to make my life marginally more comfortable.

              • samus12345@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Those children will die regardless of who you vote for or if you don’t vote at all. It’s a horrific tragedy that is completely out of anyone who isn’t in power’s control. So instead of worrying about that, worry about what you CAN control - preventing fascists from gaining more power and making things even worse than they already are.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  No a tragedy is a plane crash. A tragedy is a tornado directly hitting the school gym everyone sheltered in.

                  This is a war crime, a massacre, an act so vile that civilized countries have agreed it should not be done, ever.

                  And we do not have to be complicit.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  You can’t get extra dead. Here’s the IPC’s take on Gaza right now-

                  The famine threshold for household acute food insecurity has already been far exceeded and, given the latest data showing a steeply increasing trend in cases of acute malnutrition, it is highly likely that the famine threshold for acute malnutrition has also been exceeded. The upward trend in non-trauma mortality is also expected to accelerate, resulting in all famine thresholds likely to be passed imminently.

                  Those kids aren’t going to be alive in November.

          • cowfodder@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Vote for the guy that’s unfortunately not willing to break with decades worth of support for Israel or the guy who’s said he’d send in ground troops wins.

            • Maggoty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              There is actually a third option this time around, not that he’s any better with bird flu on the way. But no it’s never an either/or proposition. You are in fact allowed to leave that spot on the ballot blank.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Yet another fallacy meant to coerce votes for bad candidates. I’m not politically disengaged. This is a political choice.

      • Starkstruck@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Cause letting the guy who wants to send in the us military to “wipe em all out” win is waaaaay better for those people you pretend to care about.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Hilariously that would give them more access to aid than Israel is giving them. Trump wouldn’t be able to stop the US military from distributing aid as part of its normal operations mode. As usual he has no clue how the military works.

      • Wiz@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Mathematically, either Biden or Trump will win, with 100% certainty.

        As lamentable as it is for Palestinians, you drawing the line in the sand over foreign policy in Palestine & Israel will not help Palestinians. I would even go as far to say that Biden’s policy on Israel is marginally better than what Trump’s would be. The GOP is actively hostile against Palestine. At least with Biden we are getting (gentle) push-back on Israel.

        So, if it’s a given that either Biden or Trump will win, you have one of four options, depending on your political leaning:

        1. Liberal and vote for Biden. Helps Biden.
        2. Conservative and vote for Trump. Helps Trump.
        3. Liberal and don’t vote for Biden. Helps Trump.
        4. Conservative and don’t vote for Trump. Helps Biden.

        I don’t see any other option, but if someone has one - one that helps Palestine - I’d be interested to hear option 5.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          If the choice is genocide or genocide then it’s not a real choice and this election is not legitimate.

          • Wiz@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            In spite of you saying it’s not a real choice, you seem to be choosing #3 or #4.

            Bold choice. We’ll see how it goes.

              • Wiz@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                It is my categorization. But it’s a logical framing.

                I’d be interested to hear if there are any other logical possibilities outside the four I named.

                You might be making an illogical choice, and that’s ok. It is you, and you can make your own choice.

                • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  The democratic party realizes it’s losing voters instead of gaining them and reverses course. And yes that requires being willing to carry out the threat of not voting for Biden in November.

      • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Classic Lemmy. They’re quicker to blame you than they are Biden for bad policy.

        A true optimist would suggest that Joe Biden could absolutely reverse course. It’s like they’ve all given up on that possibility.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Pretty much. I’m open about the fact that I would vote for him if he reversed course. Nope, still just shouting at me and calling me a trump supporter.

    • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Put pressure on politicians to do better

      And even if they dont do better, elect them anyway. That’ll teach them.

      • samus12345@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Don’t vote and help their much worse fascist opponents get elected instead, which will affect the general population, not the wealthy elites. That’ll teach them!

          • samus12345@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            You’re correct. But they get fucked much harder one way than the other. It’s all about harm reduction.

            • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Harm reduction is a myth, people have been preaching harm reduction for decades and there’s been no reduction in harm. Quite the opposite, poverty has increased. Homelessness is at a rate not seen since the Great depression, income inequality is the highest ever recorded. The most percentage of people living paycheck to paycheck is higher than any other level recorded. There has been no reduction in harm.

                • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Let’s see. The government tells us that poverty is trending down for decades, yet the number of people living paycheck to paycheck has been increasing. The number of renters that cannot afford their rent has been increasing, homelessness is at the largest level ever recorded, but the claim is poverty is decreasing. Have you ever stopped to consider? Maybe they are lying?

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Polls always matter, you just have to understand polls.

      This is with third party options and show Biden up 2% which is probably close to margin of error.

      It doesn’t mean Biden has it in the bag, but it means his chances are improved.

      But Biden risks the same dangers Hillary did in 2016.

      People don’t really want to vote for them, they just don’t want trump. So there’s a risk if Biden is polling too well (I don’t think it will be an issue) people will stay home thinking they don’t need to compromise their morals because trump will lose.

      It’s a dangerous game, and we wouldn’t have to play it if we ran a candidate popular with Dem voters.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        So there’s a risk if Biden is polling too well (I don’t think it will be an issue) people will stay home thinking they don’t need to compromise their morals because trump will lose.

        That’s largely how Romney lost to Obama in 2012. Republican turnout sagged in a year when both candidates’ approval ratings were underwater. Mitt lost a bunch of midwestern states that a candidate like Bush or Trump could have won, thanks to his vulture capitalist career alienating blue-collar conservatives and his weird knock-off religion alienating evangelicals.

    • TimmyDeanSausage @lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Crazy how, in a country with 255 million (in 2020) citizens of voting age, more people will come out to vote against a wannabe dictator. What could possibly possess people to want to protect their rights, right!? Must be fake.

      • StaySquared@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Brah… Trump’s opposition is nearly in comatose. Which rights are threatened by Trump? I’m genuinely concerned.

  • drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I find it exceedingly hard to believe that a conservative will not vote for Trump when it really comes down to the day. I think there are plenty that will say they won’t all the way up to that point though.

    • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      There are plenty of Conservatives who aren’t voting for Trump, they just get drowned out by the extremely loud cultists. Just look up Republicans against Trump.

      • shastaxc@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yeah the real surprise is why they are still registered with the Republican party when the party leaders clearly have thrown their support behind him.

        • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Because they find voting Democrat to be more distasteful, for whatever reason. I have to imagine the people who swing the swing states have to be a really interesting mix of uninformed and having close relationships with people from both major parties. Like they only know the ideas at super high levels, basically just the slogans and spokespeople. It’s all vibes.

          Or I could be way off, I dunno. World’s a wacky place

          • TachyonTele@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can only vote in the primarys if you are registered with the party having the primary.

            They probably want to keep being able to vote within the Republican party.

                • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Perhaps my point didn’t come across. I’m not trying to explain why a swing voter would stay in one party. I was trying to understand what might cause someone in the US in today’s world to be the kind of person who could feasibly vote for either party when they are wildly different on the major topics in the zeitgeist.

  • Bosht@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Why the fuck is Trump even able to run? He’s literally a fucking criminal, and was impeached. I dont understand how our political system or even judicial systems work at this point.

    • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Disclaimer: Fuck Trump.

      That being said, convicted “criminals” should still be able to run for any public office in my opinion. A tyrant CAN capture the judiciary and imprison their political opponents. This is in fact what happened in the Indian elections right now. This is in fact what happened in the US elections in the early 1900s, where a socialist candidate ran for President from prison. What was his crime? Striking when the State had deemed it illegal to do so.

      • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        In most us states they take your voting right when you are convicted. This is not compatible with running for president as a convict imo.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Have you considered that maybe that’s tyranny as well?

          What if, for example, someone decided to make weed a felony because he couldn’t outright make being black illegal?

            • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Oh sweet summer child, everyone smokes weed. Cannabis prohibition was about giving police the power to arrest anyone they want to - and they used that power to arrest Black people.

              And if you don’t smoke weed? Well what about this little baggy we “found in your pocket”?

              • Feathercrown@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                I really, really, really hate the phrase “Oh sweet summer child”. Is it possible to be any more patronizing? Couldn’t you just say it normally?

                • Cursed@lemmus.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Not that I care about either of you guys or your argument, but I gotta point out that it’s a phrase intended to be insulting and condescending. You’re just letting the other guy know they got to you by writing this.

    • bluewing@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      He IS a felon. But while he went through the impeachment process several times, he was never convicted. And there is no rule or law that says a felon can’t be president.

      While voting for Trump, or even entertaining his views, is a red flag warning. Like it or not, he is legally entitled to run. Perhaps the rules and laws should be changed. But to do that would require either a unified congress or a super majority of a party willing to do so. And I suspect, that as it currently stands, neither side wants to limit themselves from gaining the power and status of national or state office brings to them for any reason.

      • Evotech@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        This is by design. So you can’t just get some charges on your opponent and disqualify them

          • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            The serious argument about felons being allowed to vote is that voting is a civic duty, and you want felons to re-integrate into society. If they have tons of restrictions following them around for the rest of their lives, they’re always going to be a little bit outside. Feeling like they’re stuck outside of society makes recidivism rates higher, so restoring the right to vote is an important step in rehabilitation.

            It would take a lot of people having felony convictions to be able to seriously sway an election, but given the racially polarized way that the criminal justice system is often applied, I think that’s probably happened.

    • evatronic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      There are no hard requirements for being president beyond those listed in the Constitution:

      1. Be a natural born US citizen
      2. Be at least 35 years old
      3. Have resided in the US for 14 or more years.

      That’s it. The framers of the Constitution presumably felt being a convicted felon would be enough for an electorate (or the electoral college, at least) to simply not vote for that person.

      • Mio@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        I would like to see more requirements:

        1. Upper age restriction
        2. Does not lie about well known facts from scientist, like Covid-19.
        • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Upper age restriction

          instead of this I would like to see independent physical and mental acuity tests performed and released publicly. no need to bring age into it if they are fit. and if they aren’t fit they shouldn’t be able to run even if they’re young.

          • Mio@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Sure but I also want that the person to be able to last the whole 4 years period without running into any of those health issues with time. Might be hard to get the health measurements right and get people to accept it. Easier for people to just understand the person did not meet the age criteria.

        • UraniumBlazer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Upper age restriction

          And what happens when medical science increases life expectancy? U would have to amend the constitution to pass this. Think of how nightmarish it is to do this. Now think of amending this AGAIN when life expectancy increases every year.

          Does not lie about well known facts from scientist, like Covid-19.

          Who decides what “well known facts” are? A particular non-political committee? The supreme court was supposed to be this committee. It clearly became political quickly…

          • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            And what happens when medical science increases life expectancy?

            Make the upper age limit be average life expectancy minus X years. This has the added bonus of motivating politicians to actually try to increase average life expectancy.

            Who decides what “well known facts” are?

            The scientific community, and certainly not the Supreme Court. Not sure how you came to that conclusion.

            • Wiz@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              The scientific community, and certainly not the Supreme Court.

              Because there are different “scientific communities” - some of them rogue and stupid. I’m not the poster you were responding to, but I would assume that the arbiter of your hypothetical of which scientific communities would be valid would go to the Supreme Court.

              • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                No. The scientific community polices* itself with peer review. The rogue and stupid communities are peer reviewed out of existence. You can submit all the falsified “research” you want, but if your published results can’t be replicated, you will be labeled a quack and your “findings” will go ignored by the rest of the scientific community.

                No government-affiliated judicial body is involved in verifying science, because judges are experts in law, not science.

                • Wiz@midwest.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Do you know how long it takes to replicate another’s studies? Sometimes that never happens.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Why the fuck is Trump even able to run?

      Because nobody is actually stopping him. Republican state level leaders all love him. Dems are too terrified to threaten him with more than a wrist slap. The police are in his corner. Big Business is bankrolling him. The Media keeps accidentally falling face first onto his dick. And 1:3 Americans still insist he’s better than The Other Guy.

      So he’s still listed on all the ballots. He’s still the GOP’s nominee. And if he wins the lion’s share of electoral college votes (by hook or by crook) he’s going to be the President in January.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    President Joe Biden has overtaken his Republican challenger Donald Trump in three battleground states, according to polls five months before the presidential election.

    In March, the incumbent and the former president won enough primary races to secure, respectively, the Democratic and Republican nominations in the 2024 presidential election.

    Polls have so far shown that the results will be tight as the pair are statistically tied in most surveys, or enjoying only marginal leads.

    However, speaking to Newsweek Todd Landman, a professor of political science at Nottingham University in the U.K., said it was “still too far out from the election” to read much into swing state polls.

    He said: “The race remains highly volatile, and it is still too far out from the election to make any firm conclusion from changing polls across these swing states.”

    “The Hunter Biden proceedings in Delaware are just underway and there is a very long time to go politically, with many unknown events that will have effects on voter preferences and choices at the national and state level,” he said.


    The original article contains 538 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • morphballganon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      “The Hunter Biden proceedings in Delaware are just underway and there is a very long time to go politically, with many unknown events that will have effects on voter preferences and choices at the national and state level,” he said.

      And that has what to do with Joe’s electability?

      • AmidFuror@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        If Biden’s son is convicted, it reflects poorly on Joe Biden. If Trump is convicted, it reflects poorly on Joe Biden.

        Essentially, everything is Joe Biden’s fault.

        • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s Murc’s Law. People think Democrats are responsible for everything that happens in politics. To a lot of people, Republicans are just an obstacle that if Dems fail to hurdle, it’s all the Dem’s fault. Republicans have been broken for so long, many people have just written their agency out of politics entirely.

          • PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            What other option do we really have? If there’s only one set of adults in the room, it’s their job to stop the children. If they just sit while the children start killing each other, then who’s responsible?

            I’m not saying it’s not the Republicans fault. I am saying, though, that Democrats really need to up their game if they want to save the country.

  • Xero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Man, I’d love to be an American right now, they have to choose between a senile old man and a convicted criminal to be their leader. It sounds like it came straight from a comedy skit.

      • Veneroso@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        You’re forgetting the one with brain fog due to brain worms, who drove his ex wife to suicide, and is an antivaxer.

        • Ragnarok314159@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Is that the same one who is a draft dodging little bitch and raped his ex wife so much that the state of NY changes their spousal rape laws?

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    I wouldn’t exactly claim 2% polling gains as a big victory, tbh.

    I check fivethirtyeight and 270towin pretty often and it hasn’t changed much in the last 6 months. Still dystopian.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I wouldn’t exactly claim 2% polling gains as a big victory, tbh.

      Its preferable to the 5-pt lag he was suffering a month ago. But nothing to brag about. Hillary squandered a 10-pt lead in the month before the general election, as the media turned into a “Buttery Males” feeding frenzy.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Couldn’t we just vote by phone now? It’s just a suggestion anyway… I mean, our vote is just a suggestion, not actually a vote. I vote Biden because the guy is not crazy. But could we also get started on looking for a person younger than 30 to be president? Maybe a woman?

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s a rule that should stay. They are literally no qualified candidates under 35. There are barely any qualified candidates over 35! There needs to be an upper limit though. At 70 IRAs force you to take withdrawals; it should be the same for the president.

  • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Confirmation bias on full display. Downvote all polls and discredit them if they show trump beating Biden. The other way around and they are credible polls and up voted.

    This is why we see no difference between BlueMAGA and MAGA

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is a big deal. I’m extremely excited to get a look into these data. This would be an INCREDIBLE thing considering that Biden has been lagging Trump in the polls for over 450 days.

    And whoever tells you polls don’t matter has their head up their ass. Polls do matter, a lot, especially this far out. People aren’t a monolith. People do change their minds and perspectives.

    Apparent viability matters. Even a 2-5% hit in polling to Trump can take him from the range of viable to non-viable.

    And yes, polling is flawed. In 2016 and 2020, the polling massively underestimated support for Trump. We need to keep this in mind when we look at these numbers,.

    Keeping in mind that the trajectory of Bidens polling was into the carpet, pretty much since the inauguration.

    If Biden can shift this towards an upward trend, he’s suddenly back in the game. Thats a sea change. Thats huge.

    • spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Polls matter a lot when they start moving. There are plenty of people who pay no attention at all to news or politics. and those people are slowly finding out that Trump is now a convicted felon and may soon be wearing an orange jumpsuit.

      No matter how the “Law and Order” GQP attacks the American Criminal Justice System, western societies have centuries of experience dealing with convicted felons. It is a stain that won’t wash out.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Agreed. I’m holding back to do any real analysis of this for about 10 more days.

        People love to say polls suck, they don’t mean anything, its total none-sense, etc. Interestingly its always when their candidate is losing.

        Now that these polls are shifting, my guess is the dorks who can’t tell up from down start shifting their stories, and soon after that, they’ll be pretending it was always their view.

        Polls are important, especially in terms of this far out, and especially in-terms of the ‘appearance’ of electability. These are the weeks and months where momentum builds. A sudden breakout, or sudden drop in polling numbers is extremely consequential.