Discussion 2024 USA Election Thread: Biden and Dems might have problems in 2024 swing states - The Gaza Issue

[manly]

It really is. Biden has an amazing record to run on from the accomplishments of his first term. Between that actual on the job performance, and the fact that his one perceived shortcoming (age/health) is also present to an even greater degree in his main challenger, make this all a pointless conversation.

The problem is that Americans by and large are too stupid to recognize the accomplishments or the job performance. And many are seemingly too stupid to understand that Trump was unelectable in 2016 and 2020, and is even more unelectable now after J6. I'm not morose about the election a year from now, but am I nervous? Of course because the stakes have never been higher. Keep in mind Obama's approval ratings a year before election 2012 were also fairly weak, BUT he ultimately turned it around. Obama didn't have to face severe angst over his age, or over his running mate (this is a huge double whammy for Biden in the eyes of voters).

Biden ultimately needs approval ratings above 46% to win the Electoral College, although things are much harder to predict if crazy Kennedy or Cornel West are still in the game. West in particular siphons votes away from Biden (Kennedy might be net neutral on votes).

 

[MrSquished]

The problem is that Americans by and large are too stupid to recognize the accomplishments or the job performance. And many are seemingly too stupid to understand that Trump was unelectable in 2016 and 2020, and is even more unelectable now after J6. I'm not morose about the election a year from now, but am I nervous? Of course because the stakes have never been higher. Keep in mind Obama's approval ratings a year before election 2012 were also fairly weak, BUT he ultimately turned it around. Obama didn't have to face severe angst over his age, or over his running mate (this is a huge double whammy for Biden in the eyes of voters).

Biden ultimately needs approval ratings above 46% to win the Electoral College, although things are much harder to predict if crazy Kennedy or Cornel West are still in the game. West in particular siphons votes away from Biden (Kennedy might be net neutral on votes).

This x 10000000

This is the main point. Accomplishments us political junkies are aware of do not matter to the mostly politically illiterate masses that vote. This is such flawed thinking. Voting is for a lot of people more of an emotional process than a logical one. I'm not sure what people don't get. I think David Axelrod gets it, and he was the chief strategist behind Obama's victories. He knows what wins elections.

I still think Biden has a 50/50 shot it's not like I am counting him out, but if you even dare to state that you think the Dems can do better and that might be necessary, you get shot down like a loon, which is what is crazy here.

I've also seen a ton of leftists post they are not voting for Biden and they kind of understand if anybody else doesn't either. I get into arguments with them that this is an existential election and there is no other moral choice. We all hate the two party system and the flawed Dems, but this is a no brainer.

 

[fskimospy]

The problem is that Americans by and large are too stupid to recognize the accomplishments or the job performance. And many are seemingly too stupid to understand that Trump was unelectable in 2016 and 2020, and is even more unelectable now after J6. I'm not morose about the election a year from now, but am I nervous? Of course because the stakes have never been higher. Keep in mind Obama's approval ratings a year before election 2012 were also fairly weak, BUT he ultimately turned it around. Obama didn't have to face severe angst over his age, or over his running mate (this is a huge double whammy for Biden in the eyes of voters).

Biden ultimately needs approval ratings above 46% to win the Electoral College, although things are much harder to predict if crazy Kennedy or Cornel West are still in the game. West in particular siphons votes away from Biden (Kennedy might be net neutral on votes).

Yes, if I were forced to bet today I would comfortably pick Biden over Trump, but it’s far from certain, and Trump winning means the end of American democracy.

I’ve seen people argue that the most important election of our lifetimes already happened in 2016 and I think that’s a fair point because it sent us down this path. Now, at least until Trump is gone every election is about the preservation of two and a half centuries of democracy.

 

[fskimospy]

Seems bad @PumpkinCake, what do you think about voting for him again?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724183969409749143

 

[Fenixgoon]

Seems bad @PumpkinCake, what do you think about voting for him again?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1724183969409749143

I am shocked that the wannabe dictator had no intention of leaving office

 

[Pens1566]

That's not really news, IMHO.

 

[nOOky]

The problem is that Americans by and large are too stupid to recognize the accomplishments or the job performance. And many are seemingly too stupid to understand that Trump was unelectable in 2016 and 2020, and is even more unelectable now after J6. I'm not morose about the election a year from now, but am I nervous? Of course because the stakes have never been higher. Keep in mind Obama's approval ratings a year before election 2012 were also fairly weak, BUT he ultimately turned it around. Obama didn't have to face severe angst over his age, or over his running mate (this is a huge double whammy for Biden in the eyes of voters).

Biden ultimately needs approval ratings above 46% to win the Electoral College, although things are much harder to predict if crazy Kennedy or Cornel West are still in the game. West in particular siphons votes away from Biden (Kennedy might be net neutral on votes).

100%. Folks that voted for Biden probably will again. Idiots that voted for Trump probably will again. Anecdotally I doubt any conservatives are going to switch over and vote Biden due to his accomplishments. If you know any Trumpanzees or conservatives in general their talking points are inflation of goods prices and the price of gas. Like it or not things are quite a bit more expensive right now, and it happened under Biden. 401K's are not doing as well either generally right now. If Biden could tout his accomplishments and get inflation under control it would make a lot stronger case with swing voters.

His position on Israel certainly isn't helping his chances of re-election, nor will it swing any conservative votes his way regardless. In my view he can only hurt himself, not improve his position with policy as he is generally unpopular.

 

[Pens1566]

Inflation is under control.

 

[fskimospy]

100%. Folks that voted for Biden probably will again. Idiots that voted for Trump probably will again. Anecdotally I doubt any conservatives are going to switch over and vote Biden due to his accomplishments. If you know any Trumpanzees or conservatives in general their talking points are inflation of goods prices and the price of gas. Like it or not things are quite a bit more expensive right now, and it happened under Biden. 401K's are not doing as well either generally right now. If Biden could tout his accomplishments and get inflation under control it would make a lot stronger case with swing voters.

His position on Israel certainly isn't helping his chances of re-election, nor will it swing any conservative votes his way regardless. In my view he can only hurt himself, not improve his position with policy as he is generally unpopular.

I really don't get why people keep saying this - American public opinion is very strongly in favor of helping Israel.

Again, people might think this is a bad policy idea on the merits, but if your only goal is to win re-election then Biden is doing the right thing.

 

[MrSquished]

I really don't get why people keep saying this - American public opinion is very strongly in favor of helping Israel.

Again, people might think this is a bad policy idea on the merits, but if your only goal is to win re-election then Biden is doing the right thing.

Well this is a discussion about trying to win votes at any moral cost, and I'm sure you just want the votes. I think there is a balance to be had.

But in regards to support of Israel, there are deep divisions in the Dem party, especially among younger voters, which did help us a lot in the midterms. Sure if you look at american opinion overall, the GQP support will make it seem like a no brainer.

But Biden is not getting any GQP votes though by supporting Israel to the point he can't even ask for a ceasefire. So who cares about them.

Turns out 80% of the Democratic party supports a ceasefire, but its leadership and politicians aren't listening and doing shit. And like I said, the younger Dems are seriosly split on support of Israel to keep doing the evil they have and are doing, about 50/50 for millenials.

 

[Brainonska511]

A humanitarian pause and a ceasefire are functionally the same thing, and the administration has spoken out for the former. Some people's obsession over using very specific wording is stupidity incarnate.

 

[MrSquished]

A humanitarian pause and a ceasefire are functionally the same thing, and the administration has spoken out for the former. Some people's obsession over using very specific wording is stupidity incarnate.

nein. Pauses are a few hours at a time, a ceasefire would be for days, there is quite a big difference when you are getting the shit bombed out of you willy nilly.

 

[Brainonska511]

nein. Pauses are a few hours at a time, a ceasefire would be for days, there is quite a big difference when you are getting the shit bombed out of you willy nilly.

A pause can be whatever amount of time people want, just like a temporary ceasefire can be hours or days...

 

[MrSquished]

A pause can be whatever amount of time people want, just like a temporary ceasefire can be hours or days...

not the same.

“Ceasefire or cessation of hostilities suggests [an agreement] that is, or at least could be, a permanent end to hostilities, and ceasefire agreement suggests negotiation, of course,” Duffy said. “Whereas 'humanitarian pause' sends a clear message that it is temporary and for one purpose only.”Nov 5, 2023

Humanitarian pause v ceasefire – the debate over how to ease Gaza’s suffering

While there is growing consensus on the need to help civilians, there is fierce division over how to go about it

www.theguardian.com

as per the UN as well

From Ceasefires to Pauses: Shedding Light on the Lexicon of War

As the world calls for humanitarian pauses, truces, and ceasefires in the Middle East, it's important to understand the lexicon of war.

betterworldcampaign.org

 

[Brainonska511]

I see you're going to get hung up on semantics.

 

[MrSquished]

I see you're going to get hung up on semantics.

that's what you got from that? fascinating. you should call the UN and let them know they don't know what they are talking about.

or you could just say, interesting, there is a difference.

 

[Brainonska511]

that's what you got from that? fascinating. you should call the UN and let them know they don't know what they are talking about.

or you could just say, interesting, there is a difference.

Ceasefire carries it's own issues politically, because they have declared a war on Hamas. You're basically calling for them to stop fighting the people that did Oct 7.

Humanitarian pause is a nice, neutral term that highlights the plight of the people caught in the middle between Hamas and Israel's war machine. Such pauses can be too short, but they could also be longer, if Israel's right-wing government would actually listen to the Biden administration.

So yes, functionally, they can be the same thing. But feel free to keep dooming and getting hung up on words.

 

[MrSquished]

Ceasefire carries it's own issues politically, because they have declared a war on Hamas. You're basically calling for them to stop fighting the people that did Oct 7.

Humanitarian pause is a nice, neutral term that highlights the plight of the people caught in the middle between Hamas and Israel's war machine. Such pauses can be too short, but they could also be longer, if Israel's right-wing government would actually listen to the Biden administration.

So yes, functionally, they can be the same thing. But feel free to keep dooming and getting hung up on words.

The numbers I provided were from polls of the different parties public opinion on the Israel-Palestine conflict. IF 50% of the younger voters that helped propel your last midterm election pretty well think you are being an immoral shithead in regards to a passionate issue, it's not good. And when most of your party does want a ceasefire, even of course if they support Israel, some still think the situation is kinda fucked up.

it's pretty clear the UN has a very different definition for a pause vs ceasefire, the only reason for you to avoid accepting that is because you won't allow anything to question your POV on this, it's all set in your mind, facts be damned.

i know you can do better!

 

[Brainonska511]

Relying and expecting some sort of youth wave is a losers game politically.

 

[fskimospy]

Relying and expecting some sort of youth wave is a losers game politically.

It’s also dumb, in a political sense, to preference the opinions of the smallest part of the electorate.

If people want to argue for a position on this conflict because they think it’s the right thing to do that’s fine, I just wish they would stop writing fan fiction about how doing unpopular things are actually secretly popular because of the voices in their head or whatever.

 

[MrSquished]

Relying and expecting some sort of youth wave is a losers game politically.

Where did I say to rely on it? Listen, you can't even get past the point of a clear UN definition difference of two words because you are too stubborn. It's also the 80% of Dems who want a ceasefire.

It’s also dumb, in a political sense, to preference the opinions of the smallest part of the electorate.

If people want to argue for a position on this conflict because they think it’s the right thing to do that’s fine, I just wish they would stop writing fan fiction about how doing unpopular things are actually secretly popular because of the voices in their head or whatever.

in order to understand any voices in my head, can you tell me about the voices that keep telling you Biden's victory was the largest and most crushing ever? Which pretty much discards the entire reality of an electoral college, which is, to say, bonkers. Simply in order to back your own POV that the Dems are incapable of doing better than BIden. Which is, frankly, pathetic if that's what you think of your party.

Help me help myself by telling me about these voices.

 

[MrSquished]

Wait I'm having some self-discovery. Turns out one of the voices in my head is NPR! Now I can't wait to talk to the rest!

https://www.npr.org/2022/11/15/1136563709/young-voters-helped-democrats-win-the-senate-and-other-midterm-elections

 

[manly]

100%. Folks that voted for Biden probably will again. Idiots that voted for Trump probably will again. Anecdotally I doubt any conservatives are going to switch over and vote Biden due to his accomplishments. If you know any Trumpanzees or conservatives in general their talking points are inflation of goods prices and the price of gas. Like it or not things are quite a bit more expensive right now, and it happened under Biden. 401K's are not doing as well either generally right now. If Biden could tout his accomplishments and get inflation under control it would make a lot stronger case with swing voters.

His position on Israel certainly isn't helping his chances of re-election, nor will it swing any conservative votes his way regardless. In my view he can only hurt himself, not improve his position with policy as he is generally unpopular.

It's not quite this simple though. Trump won in 2016 because a small number of votes in the Rust Belt flipped (and some Dems stayed home instead of voting). In 2020, many of those same Rust Belt voters felt comfortable enough with Biden to carry us by narrow margins. It's not like those margins of victory in the Rust Belt reverted back to comfortable pre-2016 norms. Elsewhere although it didn't affect any states that I know of, minority voters actually shifted towards Trump in 2020, AFTER all the menace he had wreaked in his first term! It took Herculean efforts to flip Georgia.

So yes the vast majority of the electorate isn't changing its minds, but a sliver of swing voters (as you mentioned) in a handful of states have outsized influence on the outcome.

Generally speaking, Americans do not care about foreign policy unless we have "boots on the ground." Most probably couldn't point to Israel on a map if you asked them, and they don't give two fucks about the Middle East.

Having said that, I disagree with the blanket statement that Americans overwhelmingly want a more robust pro-Israel policy. That might have been the case in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas attacks, but public sentiment has definitely shifted in recent days. Also, give the administration some credit where it's due. Diplomatically we're leaning tirelessly on Israel to not ignore humanitarian needs; unfortunately their leadership generally refuses the message. You may think a 4 hour daily pause isn't much, but that is a direct result of Biden applying pressure on Israel.

Inflation is under control.

This is not the right way to look at things, because inflation is clearly a top reason why the electorate is judging Bidenomics very harshly right now. Although economists will tell you inflation is under control, the average Joe is not an economist. What do I mean? There were some "transitory" spikes such eggs a year ago, fuel, and Tesla autos. Those prices are now back to where they were before the supply chain melted down, so those price spikes were not permanent.

BUT in many goods and services, prices went up a lot and will stay there for good. Your $11 Big Mac combo isn't going back down to $9 because inflation has ebbed. Americans don't much care that the interest rate policy has tamed inflation; they're just mad about the cost of things in general. And because Biden is POTUS, he gets the lion's share of the blame.

And notice that while people harshly blame POTUS for price levels, he gets zero credit for $3/gal gas as 50M people get ready to hit the road for Thanksgiving gatherings.

 

[MrSquished]

It's not quite this simple though. Trump won in 2016 because a small number of votes in the Rust Belt flipped (and some Dems stayed home instead of voting). In 2020, many of those same Rust Belt voters felt comfortable enough with Biden to carry us by narrow margins. It's not like those margins of victory in the Rust Belt reverted back to comfortable pre-2016 norms. Elsewhere although it didn't affect any states that I know of, minority voters actually shifted towards Trump in 2020, AFTER all the menace he had wreaked in his first term! It took Herculean efforts to flip Georgia.

So yes the vast majority of the electorate isn't changing its minds, but a sliver of swing voters (as you mentioned) in a handful of states have outsized influence on the outcome.

Generally speaking, Americans do not care about foreign policy unless we have "boots on the ground." Most probably couldn't point to Israel on a map if you asked them, and they don't give two fucks about the Middle East.

Having said that, I disagree with the blanket statement that Americans overwhelmingly want a more robust pro-Israel policy. That might have been the case in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas attacks, but public sentiment has definitely shifted in recent days. Also, give the administration some credit where it's due. Diplomatically we're leaning tirelessly on Israel to not ignore humanitarian needs; unfortunately their leadership generally refuses the message. You may think a 4 hour daily pause isn't much, but that is a direct result of Biden applying pressure on Israel.



This is not the right way to look at things, because inflation is clearly a top reason why the electorate is judging Bidenomics very harshly right now. Although economists will tell you inflation is under control, the average Joe is not an economist. What do I mean? There were some "transitory" spikes such eggs a year ago, fuel, and Tesla autos. Those prices are now back to where they were before the supply chain melted down, so those price spikes were not permanent.

BUT in many goods and services, prices went up a lot and will stay there for good. Your $11 Big Mac combo isn't going back down to $9 because inflation has ebbed. Americans don't much care that the interest rate policy has tamed inflation; they're just mad about the cost of things in general. And because Biden is POTUS, he gets the lion's share of the blame.

And notice that while people harshly blame POTUS for price levels, he gets zero credit for $3/gal gas as 50M people get ready to hit the road for Thanksgiving gatherings.

Beautifully written and spot on. While some delusional folks keep yipping about Biden's historic win in 2020, they are useless when, as you point out and has been pointed out, there is this thing called the electoral college, and we were on pins and needles for days waiting for Biden to squeak through in just a few states. In reality his race was way too close for comfort. The only thing historic about Biden's win was how narrow the actual margin was to defeat a clear lunatic fascist rascist piece of shit. Like, historically fucking worrying.

And again, you hit the nail on the head with the fact that reality does not equal to public perception. It doesn't matter what Biden has accomplished when the majority of the voting public, including his own party, still blames him for certain things. And the economic-related polls show that Biden is doing very poorly in all those metrics about the perception of his leadership and the average voter's economic well-being ACROSS both parties.

What did they say during Clinton's campaign? James Carville I think? It's the economy, stupid.

But there has been a bit of a cult building up among some Dem political junkies around Biden or bust, and that they can't even consider the entire Dem party could possibly do better than his baggage-ridden candidacy, ridden with terrible polling on crucial issues, across parties, and just an absolute lack of wanting to even see him run, and, of course, his age, which whatever you think about it, is a huge massive perception issue. and he is not popular with young voters, and we need them to turnout, as older folks tend to run more conservative. a lot of progressives held their noses and voted Biden against Trump, and a chunk of them won't do it again. people seem to forget humans can often be emotional people, not so logical, and do stupid things. and in this case, it's a low-effort stupid thing, just don't go vote.

 

[fskimospy]

It's not quite this simple though. Trump won in 2016 because a small number of votes in the Rust Belt flipped (and some Dems stayed home instead of voting). In 2020, many of those same Rust Belt voters felt comfortable enough with Biden to carry us by narrow margins. It's not like those margins of victory in the Rust Belt reverted back to comfortable pre-2016 norms. Elsewhere although it didn't affect any states that I know of, minority voters actually shifted towards Trump in 2020, AFTER all the menace he had wreaked in his first term! It took Herculean efforts to flip Georgia.

While Trump did make some gains among minority voters he lost support among white suburbanites, who are higher propensity voters than minorities. If a 'trade' of voters has to be made, this is an advantageous one for Democrats, as has been shown in the midterms/special elections over the last few years.

Also, the tipping point state this time was Wisconsin, which is only kinda Rust Belty, much of the state is not. If anything Wisconsin reverted to its pre-Obama status as always being a close state.

So yes the vast majority of the electorate isn't changing its minds, but a sliver of swing voters (as you mentioned) in a handful of states have outsized influence on the outcome.

Yes, this is always how it is - I keep trying to tell people this but they won't listen. Swing voters exist, and they are decisive for election outcomes, which is why people should not adopt a base mobilization strategy like Trump did. Swing voters also tend to be to the right of the Democratic base and so people should keep this in mind.

Generally speaking, Americans do not care about foreign policy unless we have "boots on the ground." Most probably couldn't point to Israel on a map if you asked them, and they don't give two fucks about the Middle East.

Having said that, I disagree with the blanket statement that Americans overwhelmingly want a more robust pro-Israel policy. That might have been the case in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas attacks, but public sentiment has definitely shifted in recent days. Also, give the administration some credit where it's due. Diplomatically we're leaning tirelessly on Israel to not ignore humanitarian needs; unfortunately their leadership generally refuses the message. You may think a 4 hour daily pause isn't much, but that is a direct result of Biden applying pressure on Israel.

Well if you have some more recent polling that indicates the public has changed its mind on this I'm open to looking at them. Mostly what I've seen in recent days though are cherry picked results from questionable pollsters.