Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

Oddly, the Fox polling is about the worst polling out there for PDJT.

My point was that if Ds and Rs are about equally for/against on the opposite end that Is would be slightly higher than then average. I guess Rs apparently love PDJT more than Ds hate him. So, hey, if 36% amongst Is is his number then this election is already over.

[iam416]

But I suspect I'm right...the more Independents you include in the poll the closer their average approval will match the overall approval number. Because as a group they will be far closer to 50-50 than either Dem or Republican party ID

We're probably saying the same thing. I assumed that Ds would be 10/90 and Rs would be 90/10 (it may be 5/95 and 90/10--I dunno). If you included the same number of Ds as Rs you'd end up at 50/50, more or less. But, there are more Ds, so you end up with something like 46/54. I assume Independents are between Rs and Ds. so if the average is titled slightly toward the Ds then the Is would be slightly higher.

But, yes, adding more Is would bring it closer to 50/50.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Take heart, Talent. I saw an interesting finding regarding Sanders versus Biden Iowa polls. Among people who are confirmed to have voted in past primaries/caucses, Biden leads. Among people who simply say they have voted or plan to vote, Sanders leads. I'm assuming Biden's people are more likely to actually show up on Caucus day.

[Dr. Strangelove]

One last bit of polling weirdness and food for thought.

In today's ABC/WP poll, men favor Trump over Biden 56-39%. Women favor Biden over Trump 62-32%. This is a significantly bigger gender gap than the actual 2016 results where Hillary only won 54% of women. Approval numbers aren't the same thing as actual voters but it would be interesting to know what the gender balance is in the various battleground states and make some projections based on that.

[iam416]

Take heart, Talent. I saw an interesting finding regarding Sanders versus Biden Iowa polls. Among people who are confirmed to have voted in past primaries/caucses, Biden leads. Among people who simply say they have voted or plan to vote, Sanders leads. I'm assuming Biden's people are more likely to actually show up on Caucus day.

I hope to christ that you Leninist motherfuckers can somehow give me someone that I can vote for.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Talent is a no on Stalin, but a yes on Josef Trotskii Bidenov

[Jeff Buchanan]

LMFAO!

BTW, interesting poll numbers discussion between you two diametrically opposed red blooded, American voters.

I too would like to see some polling numbers on the gender gap in swing states where independents are probably going to decide the popular vote and possibly that of the EC.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Ken Starr delivering a lengthy, boring-ass lecture on how impeachment is an illegitimate process is not how I expected the President's day to begin. We live in weird times

[froot loops]

You have to admire chutzpah of these guys using Ken Starr. That dude is as corrupt as he is sleazy.

[Jeff Buchanan]

On Bolton and the witness debate ....... seems like Collins and Murkowski have made statements to the press that they are leaning towards supporting witness testimony under oath. The release of statements from the Bolton book seems to be moving them in that direction.

I haven't seen the excerpts although I get the point. Trump knew exactly what he was doing with Zelenski, Ukraine, Bidens and withholding aid until they dug up some dirt on those two. Still, is this an impeachable high crime as a stand alone charge of abuse of power? Does it endanger the national security or US interests?

Of course, I know what Jon and DSL will say and I know what talent will say.

My position remains that if the House had begun building a case that Trump was unfit to hold the office of the presidency from day one of his long list of corrupt behaviors, the case for impeachment would have been greatly aided. That's because the R's would have had to accede to the political winds and the pressures of the voters to sack him. Instead the Senate is dealing with a host of legal issues and a weak case of a single act that, IMO, does not cross the bar as a high crime. His history of such corrupt behaviors in the collective sense, however, does.

[iam416]

That's because the R's would have had to accede to the political winds and the pressures of the voters to sack him.

That isn't really based in reality. You would need 20 R Senators to peel off. There are not 20 R Senators who represent constituencies that want or would ever want PDJT removed. Period. End of Story.

This remains a ginormous partisan carnival act of nothing.

[froot loops]

Jeff - First off the House wasn't going to do anything the first two years. But you keep on repeating this theory on the House since Pelosi re-assumed power and it continues to not make one bit of sense. He could murder Mary Poppins on 5th Avenue and 43 percent of the American electorate would say she had it coming. We have so much polling data that absent a recession that the 43 percent is the true reflection that he is the lodestar of their lives. I truly don't get the worship but it is there and it is undeniable. Any of the people who say they voted for them and disagree with some of his vulgarities are simply virtue signaling, they love absolutely everything he does.

We have 4 years of evidence now on how much they idolize him, whether that is because they are addicted to Fox News or something else I don't know. If Adam Schiff tried making a case on 1/20/2019, what was that charge going to be? If you think a stronger case was going to be made on Trump self dealing corruption, I don't see it, most of the crazed Trump 100 hundred percent true believers love that he is self dealing, that is what they would do if they ever got into that position of power, Cash in!

[froot loops]

That isn't really based in reality. You would need 20 R Senators to peel off. There are not 20 R Senators who represent constituencies that want or would ever want PDJT removed. Period. End of Story.

This remains a ginormous partisan carnival act of nothing.

It shows what an outlier the Nixon impeachment/resignation was in retrospect. That maybe appears to be a one time thing that maybe will never happen again because it did happen to Nixon. There is such direct through-line of that underpins everything of today, whether it is Fox News or any of the actors involved with the Trump campaign.

[iam416]

This remains a ginormous partisan carnival act of nothing.

[Dr. Strangelove]

The Nixon impeachment wasn't really the bipartisan stuff of legend either. Nixon had the support of most Republicans up until he lost at the Supreme Court and the tapes went public. He was gone in 3 weeks after that.