2024 Pre-Election Political Polls | POLL - Trump would have had 7 point lead over Biden

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 6K
  • Views: 144K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:


Confused Rooster Teeth GIF by Achievement Hunter
Click to expand...

I don't think party ID matters very much -- and certainly a lot less than in the past. But the folks who can really answer that question better than me are CFord, lawtig, Krafty. Hey guys, you used to be Republicans; now you hate them. Do you self-identify as Dems, or as independents who hate Trumpism? I'm pretty sure the answer from two of them are "independents" and probably the third as well.

That graph, with the inflection point in 2004, is less meaningful than you'd think. For one thing, it doesn't go back that far. The Dem party advantage starts the graph on a downward trend. My guess is that Dem party share was trending downward from there, meaning that Pubs were winning elections even when Dem party ID was higher. That's because a lot of those Dems, especially in the South, were DINOs. What we see in 2004 was the acceptance by Southern and rural Dems that they were now Pubs. It took a bit of time. I would say that 2004 marks the point at which the political realignment was more or less complete. It wasn't what caused Bush to win in 2004. It was just a realization by Bush voters as to who they were.

Same thing in 2024. The Lincoln Project people are basically like Richard Shelby in 1986. He was party-wise a Dem when he was first elected, but policy wise a Pub. So he switched parties in 94 after recognizing the situation and not caring to pretend any more. Well, the Lincoln Project folks are Dems now. They just won't admit it. Same with the Bulwark.
 
Zoo_View said:
He’s said he wants to create an “Independent Caucus” in the Senate. He’s said he won’t caucus with the Democrats.
Click to expand...
He has to caucus with someone, unless he plans to sit out the vote for Majority Leader. And he will not be caucusing with the Pubs. So we can read between the lines. All the Independents in the Senate caucus with Dems. Even if this guy pulls a Synema, he will still be voting for Schumer.
 
superrific said:
He has to caucus with someone, unless he plans to sit out the vote for Majority Leader. And he will not be caucusing with the Pubs. So we can read between the lines. All the Independents in the Senate caucus with Dems. Even if this guy pulls a Synema, he will still be voting for Schumer.
Click to expand...
Tell Angus King to give him a call and tell him how it works.
 
UNCBAdookJD said:
Looks like a shit pollster though
Click to expand...
I want to hope that Sherrod pulls it out, but we should realistically expect him to fall short. Split Congressional delegations are rapidly falling away, and Ohio isn't even that split. It's Brown versus the GOP for state office. His seat will fall. It might take his retirement to do so, but I doubt it. I think he loses this year, and if not, he won't survive 2030 unless something happens to politics in Ohio (e.g. a MAGA collapse).

The best thing that happened to his campaign was all the Haitian bullshit. So maybe he can eke it out.
 
superrific said:
He has to caucus with someone, unless he plans to sit out the vote for Majority Leader. And he will not be caucusing with the Pubs. So we can read between the lines. All the Independents in the Senate caucus with Dems. Even if this guy pulls a Synema, he will still be voting for Schumer.
Click to expand...
Why couldn’t he caucus by himself (King and Sanders are going to caucus with the Democrats) and negotiate his vote?

The Democrats and the country might be better off if he’s not affiliated with the Democrats, as he would be if he’s caucusing with the Democrats.

In the unlikely event that Osborn wins the Nebraska Senate race, I’d like to see him win re-election. I’d like to see him inspire other “blue collar” Independents who aren’t Republicans with an “I” after their names run for office and win.

If we have 5 US Senators from red states like Osborn in 5 years, I’m good if they don’t caucus with the Democrats.
 
Zoo_View said:
Why couldn’t he caucus by himself (King and Sanders are going to caucus with the Democrats) and negotiate his vote?

The Democrats and the country might be better off if he’s not affiliated with the Democrats, as he would be if he’s caucusing with the Democrats.

In the unlikely event that Osborn wins the Nebraska Senate race, I’d like to see him win re-election. I’d like to see him inspire other “blue collar” Independents who aren’t Republicans with an “I” after their names run for office and win.

If we have 5 US Senators from red states like Osborn in 5 years, I’m good if they don’t caucus with the Democrats.
Click to expand...
It depends if he wants to win in 2030. The only reason he's competitive now is that the Dems didn't run a candidate. Basically, all the NE Dems are supporting him. Well, they aren't going to do that again if he's just a Pub lite. If he doesn't vote for Schumer, the Dems will run a candidate and he will lose.

And it's precisely because of that scenario (of an independent caucus forming in the Senate) that he will find slim pickings from either side, I would think, if he tries to negotiate. The Pubs definitely don't want an independent caucus. Their entire brand is that "we're the non-Dems." They aren't going to give him anything to be an I who caucuses with him. The Dems would probably welcome an (I) caucus so long as the (I)s come from Pub states. So far, that's not really what has happened, right? King would win as a Dem. Sanders would definitely win as a Dem. It sure looks like the (I) Synema will be replaced by a Dem. This guy, if elected, would be the first I from a red state. But that's not really enough for the Dems to justify supporting a guy who can't even vote for Schumer.

I guess what I'm saying is that the Dems will expect him to be at least Joe Manchin.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top