Should the Dems really be "screaming bloody murder!"?

[Hardkill]

Hey guys, it's been a long time since I last posted on here. So, as we all know, it's currently election season for the U.S. and I have been constantly worried about the outcome of our upcoming Presidential election as well as the U.S. Congressional election. Now, I know that Biden this time has been put in a significantly better position for winning than Hillary was during the 2016 election due to the myriad current events having occurred within the past several months which have greatly worked in Biden's favor of winning the presidency. However, Michael Moore, who is a major political activist and was one of the few people who last time predicted that Trump would win the 2016 election, is saying that according to the Detroit Free poll, Biden's lead over Trump has lately shrunk from 16 points in June to 8 points during mid-September. I think if I recall correctly, after having read another post somewhere on this Forum, someone already mentioned this. However, I don't recall anybody actually responding to that post. 

Now, Michael Moore said that everyone should be "screaming bloody murder" because of that one poll which has shown Biden's lead having been cut in half. It's not just the tightening of that poll itself that worries him. It's the reason behind that which he believes is cause for great panic amongst everybody throughout the whole country. What he's talking about is that the Biden campaign has been doing an "invisible campaign," which Michael says is one of the major mistakes they are making because they should actually be doing pretty much the complete opposite of that, which is doing much more "ground game" campaigning than even Hillary and her entire campaign team did during her whole 2016 campaign. He also said that another big mistake that the Biden Campaign is doing is constantly trying to win over as many Republicans as they can for Biden. He says that instead of wasting so much time on that, the Biden campaign needs to do a number of things which include Biden himself needing to visit more of "Black Michigan", visit more of the Latino communities in each of the battleground states, put out a lot of Biden/Harris yard signs and billboards all over in each of the battleground states like in Michigan, have some IRL rallies in each of the battleground states, etc. His rationale is that the main reason why Hillary lost in 2016 was not just because of Hillary' weaker level of charisma and overall campaign strategy compared to Trump. It was also largely because of the significant reduction in overall turnout in 2016 compared to the voter turnout that occurred in the more previous presidential elections such as those in 2000, 2004, 2008, and 2012 respectively. The reduction in overall turnout during the 2016 election was indeed largely because there were a lot less blacks, Latinos, and leftists in 2016 than those during the earlier presidential elections who ultimately decided either not to vote at all or vote 3rd. 

Michael Moore indeed has a very valid point and he really alarmed me (maybe rightly so) when he further said that if the Biden campaign does not change up their strategy by doing what he has been greatly pleading them to do, then Trump might very well win again, and we cannot survive another 4 years of the Trump administration. What do you all think about this? 

Edited September 25, 2020 by Hardkill

[Gidiot]

Idk. Michael Moore has a really good political sense but what’s actually been working for Biden is to retreat and to let trump clog the news cycle with his own bull crap. Biden is guilty of pandering towards Latinos and the black community for sure and his ground game is weak as hell. I think a big reason Hillary lost was certainly the lack of ground game as well as the Corey email scandal just 11 days before the elections and also the fact that she was disliked and had a lot of baggage. 
 

Biden’s  reputation/ baggage is mostly bad policy, 1 credible rape allegation and his dementia , which sadly is still a lot less than the baggage of Hillary haha. 
 

as long as he shows up for the debates, does mediocre and doesn’ die  before the election he should win. Some of the voting is already being cast and how many people are actually voting for him as opposed to against trump. 
 

I think doing more ground game actually could hurt Biden but Michael certainly had a point, a progressive president should be all over the campaign trail and talking to everyone, but Biden certainly isn’t a populist and certainly isn’t a progressive. He won so many states on Super Tuesday without barely even stepping foot in them. 
 

I was perturbed by that but that’s how establishment candidates win, don’t go to too crazy and let things play out while not taking any risks.

[Preety_India]

 

Why only 4 more years? 

You could brace up for another term after those 4 years. 

How is that? 

I agree Biden needs to be more active, but given his reputation, I doubt he will ever be. 

Last time I heard him, there were sparrows chirping in the background and he was talking to a group of 10 people. It felt like he was doing a class rehearsal. 

Facepalm

 

[Hardkill]

15 hours ago, Gidiot said:

Idk. Michael Moore has a really good political sense but what’s actually been working for Biden is to retreat and to let trump clog the news cycle with his own bull crap. Biden is guilty of pandering towards Latinos and the black community for sure and his ground game is weak as hell. I think a big reason Hillary lost was certainly the lack of ground game as well as the Corey email scandal just 11 days before the elections and also the fact that she was disliked and had a lot of baggage. 
 

Biden’s  reputation/ baggage is mostly bad policy, 1 credible rape allegation and his dementia , which sadly is still a lot less than the baggage of Hillary haha. 
 

as long as he shows up for the debates, does mediocre and doesn’ die  before the election he should win. Some of the voting is already being cast and how many people are actually voting for him as opposed to against trump. 
 

I think doing more ground game actually could hurt Biden but Michael certainly had a point, a progressive president should be all over the campaign trail and talking to everyone, but Biden certainly isn’t a populist and certainly isn’t a progressive. He won so many states on Super Tuesday without barely even stepping foot in them. 
 

I was perturbed by that but that’s how establishment candidates win, don’t go to too crazy and let things play out while not taking any risks.

Yeah, I see your point. Well, I hope you're right. I wonder what highly skilled marketers like Leo have to say about what Michael Moore is saying.

[DocWatts]

Biden kind of strikes me as the textbook definition of what people think of as a bland, middle of the road career politician. Just happenstance that after four years of Trump's antics that a boring old guy is a breath of fresh air for much of the country.

As an aside, this Futurama quote comes to mind when I'm going in to vote for safe, middle of the road politicians without strong convictions or an inspiring vision because it's the only realistic alternative to right wing authoritarianism.

 

[LarryW]

I can only admire you Americans for your stamina through the long election process, which takes a whole year doesn't it? 

[Hardkill]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

Biden kind of strikes me as the textbook definition of what people think of as a bland, middle of the road career politician. Just happenstance that after four years of Trump's antics that a boring old guy is a breath of fresh air for much of the country.

As an aside, this Futurama quote comes to mind when I'm going in to vote for safe, middle of the road politicians without strong convictions or an inspiring vision because it's the only realistic alternative to right wing authoritarianism.

 

Yeah, I agree with you on that. I still worry that there may still be too many block-headed people who are still not getting it in their heads that Trump has become arguably the most unstable, most dishonorable, and most unqualified president ever in contemporary U.S. history, whereas Biden is a truly temperate, honorable, and qualified politician who absolutely gives off the impression and actually is much more presidential than Trump could ever be.  

[Gidiot]

@Hardkill yep, I don’t think Biden but Bernie is right, it’s democracy or trump

 

also yea he was up 16 points in July but I don’t think Hilary was up as much 8 points in September of 2016, could be wrong. 8 points is still outside the margin. The margin is usually about 1-5 points

Edited September 25, 2020 by Gidiot

[Hardkill]

28 minutes ago, LarryW said:

I can only admire you Americans for your stamina through the long election process, which takes a whole year doesn't it? 

Well, the election process is not a long series of steps that the candidates have to go through for about a whole year per se. What's really been happening since around the beginning of the new millennium is that presidential candidates such as Biden and Trump end up campaigning for about 2 years before election night. Also, all presidential candidates from the two main ("electable") parties, the Republican and Democratic parties, have to first go through a preliminary race called the primaries. This means that all of the Republican presidential candidates first have to compete against each other in their own party's race for the official title and position of being the Republican party's one and only presidential nominee for the main general election. The same goes for the Democratic presidential candidates, whereby they first have to compete against each other in their own party's race for the official title and position of being the Democratic party's one and only presidential nominee for the main general election. This is done by popular vote. The final determination of the single nominees for each of the respective parties usually occurs around the middle of the calendar years, and about a few months before the election night of the US presidential general election.

[Preety_India]

@Hardkill that's a very long process. But I'm confused. You said 2 years. How is it 2 years? 

 

[DocWatts]

1 hour ago, Hardkill said:

Yeah, I agree with you on that. I still worry that there may still be too many block-headed people who are still not getting it in their heads that Trump has become arguably the most unstable, most dishonorable, and most unqualified president ever in contemporary U.S. history, whereas Biden is a truly temperate, honorable, and qualified politician who absolutely gives off the impression and actually is much more presidential than Trump could ever be.  

I think you'd really have to reach back in American history to find another US president that's less qualified for the job. Maybe as far back as someone like Andrew Johnson who was extremely racist (even for the standards of the day) and bungled Reconstruction, eventually getting himself Impeached due to his obstructionism when it came to extending any sorts of rights or recognition for black people.

[LarryW]

@Hardkill  thanks for the explanation   out of interest, is the primary stage legally required, or just the internal rules of those 2 parties? The other thing which comes across  to me - at least at this  current stage of the main election - is how much of the debate is about personalities rather than policies, even though I'm sure they must have full manifestos. But I guess that's the same anywhere.  

[No Self]

I have the impression that Biden has science-based views on climate change. This would be the start of an amazing revolution and would change the entire world by legitimising serious environmentalism into global politics.

Just because he isn't a natural-born entertainer like Trump doesn't make him a bad politician. Do you insist that your postman be charismatic and entertaining also?

[Hardkill]

1 hour ago, Preety_India said:

@Hardkill that's a very long process. But I'm confused. You said 2 years. How is it 2 years? 

 

Well, I mean that they don't have to campaign for 2 years in order to be allowed to run for the office. However, most presidential candidates began their campaigns almost 2 years before the day or night of the actual presidential election. https://www.thoughtco.com/when-the-race-for-president-begins-3367552

I think the presidential campaigns that occurred respectively for the the 2008, 2012, 2016 presidential elections were way too ridiculously long. Even the presidential campaigns for these upcoming elections have not been any shorter.

[Hardkill]

45 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

I think you'd really have to reach back in American history to find another US president that's less qualified for the job. Maybe as far back as someone like Andrew Johnson who was extremely racist (even for the standards of the day) and bungled Reconstruction, eventually getting himself Impeached due to his obstructionism when it came to extending any sorts of rights or recognition for black people.

Yeah, that's what I am saying. How about Andrew Jackson who was president a few decades earlier than Andrew Johnson? Jackson was a terrible racist. 

[DocWatts]

7 minutes ago, No Self said:

I have the impression that Biden has science-based views on climate change. This would be the start of an amazing revolution and would change the entire world by legitimising serious environmentalism into global politics.

Just because he isn't a natural-born entertainer like Trump doesn't make him a bad politician. Do you insist that your postman be charismatic and entertaining also?

I mostly agree, but I would also argue that part of the President's job should be to instill a Vision for the country to aspire to, and be able to articulate it in a way that people can connect with. Agree or disagree with his politics, but Obama was very good at this. Biden... well he may be on board with some progressive policies, which is great, but I find him to be seriously lacking in that area.

Again when the competition poses an existential threat to Democracy, moralizing over this sort of thing is counter productive, but its still disappointing that our expectations for leadership are so low.

[Preety_India]

@Hardkill I see what you mean. I'm not very well versed in American politics. Thanks for the explanation. 

 

[DocWatts]

4 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Yeah, that's what I am saying. How about Andrew Jackson who was president a few decades earlier than Andrew Johnson? Jackson was a terrible racist. 

Andrew 'Trail of Tears' Jackson.

Or more recently Woodrow Wilson comes to mind for being incredibly racist even for his day.

[Hardkill]

33 minutes ago, LarryW said:

@Hardkill  thanks for the explanation   out of interest, is the primary stage legally required, or just the internal rules of those 2 parties? The other thing which comes across  to me - at least at this  current stage of the main election - is how much of the debate is about personalities rather than policies, even though I'm sure they must have full manifestos. But I guess that's the same anywhere.  

It's about both personalities and policies. However, generally, it's both the debate skills and the personality (presentation style and charisma) of each the candidates that primarily influence the voters' perception of how compelling each of the candidates were in the debates. However, I generally don't think that the general presidential debates greatly affect either nominee's chance of winning the election.

[Hardkill]

3 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Andrew 'Trail of Tears' Jackson.

Or more recently Woodrow Wilson comes to mind for being incredibly racist even for his day.

Wait, Woodrow Wilson was a great leader and a highly intelligent man.