General Election 2024 Biden vs Trump (1 Viewer)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

As we head toward the summer and the National Party Conventions, it might be handy to have a thread focused on the upcoming matchup of current President Biden vs Former President Trump.
As of April 28,2024 , CNN's poll shows Trump leading. Yet polls are not always accurate and they are constantly changing.
Feel free to use this thread for all things relating to Biden vs Trump.
*
*

CNN Poll: Trump maintains lead over Biden in 2024 matchup as views on their presidencies diverge

Donald Trump continues to hold an advantage over President Joe Biden as the campaign – and Trump’s criminal trial – move forward, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS. And in the coming rematch, opinions about the first term of each man vying for a second four years in the White House...

www.yahoo.com

 

[LA - L.A.]

I mean he just joined as well. He is also simply an advisor. This is an extremely flimsy motive to disregard an opinion you disagree with.

In my worthless opinion. you use the flimsiest of arguments all the time to justify you years long bias against Biden. So what I see is more projecting of yourself onto others. No hate intended. I'm just doing like you and calling it how I see it.

Let's see if you go to your other favorite tactic of telling me I should bow out of the discussion. I wonder what the odds on that should be. I'm thinking 50/50.

 

[SaintForLife]

Looks like a small venue for Biden

 

[SamAndreas]

OK we're done here, wrap it up. This has all been solved for us, we get to go home now.

Taylor Swift named our new Presidential Candidate for us while performing a concert in Kiev, Ukraine.

He's Francis Fukuyama. a well know scholar, and writer. He was a neocon, but too much of that changed him into a socialist of sorts.

Many people I know rave about his works. I follow him on Twitter, as do almost all of the sources I use in the Ukrainian war thread.

He was apparently in the audience, in the front row. She saw him there, and gave him a nice shout out from the stage.

Francis Fukuyama - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'm looking for video now.

 

[MT15]

Wait, so somebody is actually claiming that the economy/inflation - which is doing much better and the border - which is also doing much better and Ukraine - lololololol will mean more to women than the thought that they or someone they love might bleed out on a bathroom floor because of the GOP antiabortion laws? Tells you a lot doesn’t it?

And we all know how the “but Trump has more people at his rallies!” worked out in 2020.

 

[MT15]

Meanwhile Trump in Michigan is denigrating Harris and Pelosi as crazy, which is projection and talking about a Democratic incumbent running for Senate from Michigan that doesn’t exist. Totally normal stuff.

 

[J-DONK]

Yes, you have used that tactic several times. In fact, you're doing it right now.

A whole lot of projection comes from you.

I would rather have a discussion around the ideas, and not if the person is "pure" enough for you, or MT15. If pointing that out is projection to you, IDC.

FYI: that last discussion got completely derailed into Nate Silver's employment instead of his views.

 

[MT15]

I would rather have a discussion around the ideas, and not if the person is "pure" enough for you, or MT15. If pointing that out is projection to you, IDC.

FYI: that last discussion got completely derailed into Nate Silver's employment instead of his views.

Well, part of deciding if a view has merit is considering the source and their own biases. The polling is all over the map, I’m not sure how we can know anything from it.

When I looked at a poll that included a total of 17 black voters and over 600 white voters, and they then extrapolated the black vote, I mean that doesn’t look like a valid sample to use.

When I saw the sentence I posted in your article - that the polling firm isn’t highly rated, but the fact that it exists is more important than its accuracy, well as someone who worked in science my entire life, that is a load of crap.

You could be entirely right about everything you say, but the evidence for either side isn’t as cut-and-dried as you make it out to be. There’s risk either way the Dems go here. It’s an individual judgement which way entails the higher risk.

 

[J-DONK]

Well, part of deciding if a view has merit is considering the source and their own biases. The polling is all over the map, I’m not sure how we can know anything from it.

When I looked at a poll that included a total of 17 black voters and over 600 white voters, and they then extrapolated the black vote, I mean that doesn’t look like a valid sample to use.

When I saw the sentence I posted in your article - that the polling firm isn’t highly rated, but the fact that it exists is more important than its accuracy, well as someone who worked in science my entire life, that is a load of crap.

You could be entirely right about everything you say, but the evidence for either side isn’t as cut-and-dried as you make it out to be. There’s risk either way the Dems go here. It’s an individual judgement which way entails the higher risk.

I sometimes wonder if you create strawman to respond too.

Here are the post you are respondng to before the "Is Nate Silver a Peter Theil bot?"

This big spat on polling, here is some on if Biden drops out in some key swing states:

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/west-wing-playbook/2024/07/18/so-you-wanted-some-harris-polling-00169524

It gives some insight on who to have as a VP pick.

Also, 538 post Nate Silver is apparently trash. He tore into thier current model.

The only definitely statement in there is that 538 has gone downhill. I'll stand by that. The rest of this is speculation about potential VP picks. I don't personally feel you need a Emerson or NYTimes poll to start that discussion.

This should have been a good stepping off for a discussion on potential VP picks. I have no idea what went through your brain, but it wasn't that.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I would rather have a discussion around the ideas...

You keep saying that, but your actions keep saying otherwise. Anytime someone says something that is reasonable and inconvenient for you to acknowledge you make up strawman bullshirt like this:

"...and not if the person is "pure" enough for you, or MT15."​

Pointing out that someone may have a conflict of interest is valid and has nothing to do with them being "pure" enough. You chose to make up a strawman to dismiss a valid point and to try to shut the discussion down, instead of having "a discussion around the ideas."

Practice what you preach or stop preaching, brother.

FYI: that last discussion got completely derailed into Nate Silver's employment instead of his views.

You derailed the discussion as soon as valid points were made that you did not want to acknowledge. You're the one who derailed it to try to control it.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I sometimes wonder if you create strawman to respond too.

Rather than discuss the valid points that were made, you create a strawman by complaining that the other person created a strawman. Why not just discuss the relevant things they brought up, instead of attacking them with a strawman?

This should have been a good stepping off for a discussion on potential VP picks. I have no idea what went through your brain, but it wasn't that.

There's the problem. You want everyone to discuss only what you want to discuss and only on your terms. That's not how true discussions actually work.

You keep trying to control the conversation to spin force it to conform to your desires, beliefs and opinions. You aggressively insult anyone who disagrees with your desires, beliefs or opinions.

You're trying to control what other people say and think. That's not how discussions work. Before you deny that you don't, when you tell someone they should bow out of a discussion. you are absolutely trying to control what they say.

 

[J-DONK]

Rather than discuss the valid points that were made, you create a strawman by complaining that the other person created a strawman. Why not just discuss the relevant things they brought up, instead of attacking them with a strawman?


There's the problem. You want everyone to discuss only what you want to discuss and only on your terms. That's not how true discussions actually work.

You keep trying to control the conversation to spin force it to conform to your desires, beliefs and opinions. You aggressively insult anyone who disagrees with your desires, beliefs or opinions.

You're trying to control what other people say and think. That's not how discussions work. Before you deny that you don't, when you tell someone they should bow out of a discussion. you are absolutely trying to control what they say.

I'm not trying to control what you say, but people need to figure out how to have an actual discussion on this board. If you are going to engage in ad hominem arguments. It's not productive.

You went to so far as to dig up years worth of post to try and discredit anything I'm saying now. You skipped over ever single pro-Biden post, and made an extremely bad faith argument.

The lack of self awareness to make this kind of post after doing something like that is amazing.

I get it. You don't like me. You can put me on ignore.

 

[SaintForLife]

Biden has to win Michigan right?

 

[bdb13]

Biden has to win Michigan right?

Trump was +3 in their previous iteration of the poll. Biden would be in need of a significant polling error at +7, not something I would expect.

Of course, this is just a moment in time with the election still 3 and 1/2 months away.

 

[Saint Jack]

 

[bdb13]

Boom (real?!?!)

 

[Saint Jack]

Boom (real?!?!)

Its his official Twitter.

 

[bdb13]

Its his official Twitter.

Yeah I clicked on it right after, sorry, knee jerk reaction.

 

[zztop]

whoa
I had to read this several times, to make sure I was reading this correctly