Market politics

[bkp_duke]

21% of mail-in ballots in NYC primary disqualified.

Over 80,000 mail-in ballots disqualified in NYC primary mess

Some of those were obviously USPS faults - no post mark, late mail delivery.

But the Board of Elections freely admitted that they were mailing out ballots up till the DAY BEFORE the election deadline.

Federal Judge ruled that thousands of voters were disenfranchised.


Oh, and this is an area where Republicans could do pretty much . . . nothing to cause this problem, given the level of deep blue in all elected offices, and that this was the Democratic Primary.


November is going to be a contested election on a level never before seen if things are not fixed, and quickly.

 

[wdolson]

One thing in the post office debate that hasn't been touched on is the 2006 law passed by the Republicans in the lame duck session that requires the post office to fund retiree medical expenses for decades in advance. Some of the critics have details wrong, but it is having a tremendous impact on the post office
PolitiFact - Widespread Facebook post blames 2006 law for US Postal Service’s financial woes

It's estimated that if not for this requirement, the post office would have been profitable most years. It is also interfering with their ability to modernize. There is enough in the fund now to fund the medical program pretty much forever if the money was invested, but Congress won't change the law.

The post office worked out a deal with Amazon to do Sunday package delivery to reduce overtime. Before they started Sunday package service, packages would pile up at the post office on Sundays and Mondays were always huge delivery days that required drivers to deliver later and make more trips back to the post office. Sunday service was an innovation to help smooth out volume and ultimately reduce costs.

21% of mail-in ballots in NYC primary disqualified.

Over 80,000 mail-in ballots disqualified in NYC primary mess

Some of those were obviously USPS faults - no post mark, late mail delivery.

But the Board of Elections freely admitted that they were mailing out ballots up till the DAY BEFORE the election deadline.

Federal Judge ruled that thousands of voters were disenfranchised.


Oh, and this is an area where Republicans could do pretty much . . . nothing to cause this problem, given the level of deep blue in all elected offices, and that this was the Democratic Primary.


November is going to be a contested election on a level never before seen if things are not fixed, and quickly.

Democrats in Congress have been trying to get money allocated to help states unfamiliar with mail in voting in volume to help work out the kinks before November. Quite a few states had mail in volumes less than 10% in the 2018 election. New York and Texas are among them.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/politics/vote-by-mail-states/

New York has a government that believes it is there for the benefit of the people and that in person voting is dangerous during a pandemic, so they expanded their mail in voting system. Before this year, you could only vote by mail with an excuse in New York. Now anyone can get a mail in ballot. New York is the largest state to do a wholesale expansion of its election system this year.

The election officials, the election workers, and the public are all unfamiliar with a system that relies on mail in balloting to a large degree, so everyone is making mistakes. I don't know about Utah, Colorado, or Hawaii, but in Washington when it went to 100% mail in, it was already over 80% mail in. The infrastructure and voter education efforts to go the last step was minor. Additionally the state had already adopted the fill in the bubble ballots everywhere so even people who were going to polling places were familiar with the ballot type.

New York isn't going 100% vote by mail this year, but they are allowing anyone who wants to do it to be able to no excuse. That is trying to ramp a system that was used to about 5% mail in to a substantially higher volume essentially overnight (10X or more). There are bound to be problems.

And Democratically controlled states are not free of problems, or even corruption. New York state has had a number of state legislators go to prison in recent years and I believe all of them were Democrats.

 

[JRP3]

Anyone who's seen Biden's recent appearances would know there is still a good chance for him to blow this election. Stumbling over his words, getting frustrated and irritated, and making completely avoidable gaffs. He may be the only candidate capable of losing to Trump in 2020. It wouldn't take much to tip the scales.

 

[ZeApelido]

Anyone who's seen Biden's recent appearances would know there is still a good chance for him to blow this election. Stumbling over his words, getting frustrated and irritated, and making completely avoidable gaffs. He may be the only candidate capable of losing to Trump in 2020. It wouldn't take much to tip the scales.

Just lock him down in some bunker and release some deepfake videos to appease voters.

 

[wdolson]

Anyone who's seen Biden's recent appearances would know there is still a good chance for him to blow this election. Stumbling over his words, getting frustrated and irritated, and making completely avoidable gaffs. He may be the only candidate capable of losing to Trump in 2020. It wouldn't take much to tip the scales.

This is a re-election, not an election for an open seat. A re-election is always an initiative on the incumbent. Without any significant third party candidates the incumbent always gets very close to their approval rating as a percentage of the popular vote.

Before Carter there were rarely polls close to election day. And a significant third party candidate can skew the results (Kanye West is not going to be significant). Trump has never had an approval rating average over 50% and his fivethirtyeight average is around 41% now. In recent polls that ask people why they were for a particular candidate, 80% of Biden voters said they were an anti-Trump vote. A very high percentage of Biden voters also say they will not change their mind.

In a two person race with no significant third party vote, if the vote is close to 50/50 a candidate who loses the popular vote has a shot at winning the electoral college. But the wider the popular vote gap, the harder it is to win the electoral college. Right now Trump's average in the polls is within one point of his average approval rating. Right side bar here:
FiveThirtyEight

Additionally Biden is ahead in a lot of states Trump needs to win. The path to victory (short of massive and obvious cheating) for Donald Trump is exceedingly narrow. But Trump is already trying to sow the seeds of doubt about the election. To ensure he has no wind in his sails, the election has to be a blowout. The score needs to look like the New England Patriots vs a high school junior varsity team.

Trump would have to do a 180 degree turn around. Significant strides would have to be made fixing the economy, making people feel safe, and curbing COVID. He's doing none of these and shows no signs of even being capable of doing them. Mary Trump, his niece, has said Donald Trump is incapable of even conceiving of what he needs to do to be a good president. It isn't in his wiring.

Cheating or managing to break the constitution on the part of Trump are my biggest concerns.

 

[bkp_duke]

This is a re-election, not an election for an open seat. A re-election is always an initiative on the incumbent. Without any significant third party candidates the incumbent always gets very close to their approval rating as a percentage of the popular vote.View attachment 573318

Before Carter there were rarely polls close to election day. And a significant third party candidate can skew the results (Kanye West is not going to be significant). Trump has never had an approval rating average over 50% and his fivethirtyeight average is around 41% now. In recent polls that ask people why they were for a particular candidate, 80% of Biden voters said they were an anti-Trump vote. A very high percentage of Biden voters also say they will not change their mind.

In a two person race with no significant third party vote, if the vote is close to 50/50 a candidate who loses the popular vote has a shot at winning the electoral college. But the wider the popular vote gap, the harder it is to win the electoral college. Right now Trump's average in the polls is within one point of his average approval rating. Right side bar here:
FiveThirtyEight

Additionally Biden is ahead in a lot of states Trump needs to win. The path to victory (short of massive and obvious cheating) for Donald Trump is exceedingly narrow. But Trump is already trying to sow the seeds of doubt about the election. To ensure he has no wind in his sails, the election has to be a blowout. The score needs to look like the New England Patriots vs a high school junior varsity team.

Trump would have to do a 180 degree turn around. Significant strides would have to be made fixing the economy, making people feel safe, and curbing COVID. He's doing none of these and shows no signs of even being capable of doing them. Mary Trump, his niece, has said Donald Trump is incapable of even conceiving of what he needs to do to be a good president. It isn't in his wiring.

Cheating or managing to break the constitution on the part of Trump are my biggest concerns.

Like many on the left you are putting possibly way too much stock in polls.

1) Trump supporters and likely voters do NOT reply to these polls, or do not reply truthfully (see the "Bradley effect" - Bradley effect - Wikipedia).

We all know how I voted last time, I've been open about that. I have friends with similar view points that voted the same way. I can tell you for fact that these people do not reply to anything done by CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WP, etc. If those organizations called most Trump supporters, they would simply hang up on them. There is a large "SELECTION BIAS" in these polls because of Trump supporters "self selecting" themselves to not participate in those polls (but you can bet they will go out and vote). Similar if CNN tried to stop these people on the street - which brings up a SECOND selection bias - Trump supporters are far less urban, so if you do in-person polls they will be under represented (if they even stop to talk with CNN, etc. at all - which they loath).

2) If Biden gets on stage with Trump, there is a serious risk he will lose votes of key independents compared to his support now. I don't say this maliciously, I simply am stating that going into a debate, Biden has a ton more to lose right now. Especially given his "gaff" problem.


Trump's base is also, I believe, far more enthusiastic about him than Biden's base. For voter turnout, enthusiasm matters a @#$% ton.



And, legitimately, there are ample seeds of doubt about various Election commissions, etc. being able to properly do mail-in balloting. See my post above about the MAJOR screw up of the Democratic primary by New York City (who admitted they majorly screwed up). And that's an election that Trump and the GOP had no horse in what so ever, so it really should be viewed as a strong warning sign. Would Biden contest the election if 21% of mail-in ballots were considered ineligible come November and he lost? You bet. Same thing, rightly so, would happen if Trump lost and 21% of mail-in ballots were considered ineligible come November.


Don't shoot the messenger, just reading the tea leaves here. My point, you are trying to compare Trump to "historical norms" in regards to polling, and thereby extrapolate how you expect the election to pan out based upon that. That is an inaccurate analysis because, simply, Trump's support base does not follow the same ruleset that you are applying to everyone else.

 

[wdolson]

The Bradley Effect is an American election myth that has been around for decades. In the election where Tom Bradley lost the governor's race, late polling showed the polls moving towards his opponent. These polls hadn't been published on election day, but the Bradley campaign was aware of this going on from internal polling they had done.

Back in 2008 Nate Silver wrote about it a lot. In the primaries Barack Obama tended to over perform the polls by about 3.3 points.
The Persistent Myth of the Bradley Effect

A few weeks ago fivethirtyeight had a discussion in which Nate Silver asserted that he doesn't think there are many shy Trump voters out there.
Politics Podcast: There Aren’t Secret Trump Voters

Their latest article shows Biden has been consistently performing better in the polls than Hillary ever did.
Biden Is Polling Better Than Clinton At Her Peak

Rachel Bitecofer who nailed the 2018 midterm predictions has a new theory she calls negative partisanship. In this highly politicized political environment voters are more driven by hatred of one candidate or party than affection for a candidate. Trump has a rabid band of people who like him, but the rest of the electorate do not like him.

As for gaffs, Trump is a bigger gaff machine than Biden ever was. Trump was bad in 2016, but he's dramatically worse now. Biden does put his foot in his mouth, but he is not any different than he always was.

Biden misspeaks sometimes, but he has message discipline and an actual idea of what he's talking about. He can articulate the details of all of his policy ideas. Trump has been asked in interviews what his goals are for a second term and he can't even answer that. He rambles on for 10 minutes about his ratings or something else irrelevant to the question.

As far as the debates go Biden has agreed to 3 debates, but the Trump campaign is yet to agree to any. I suspect Trump will come up with some excuse to not have any debates. In 2016 he could talk in some vague ways about policy, but he hasn't given a straight answer to a policy question in at least a year. Or if he has, I'm not aware of it.

In 2016 there was a campaign by the Russians and Republicans to get liberals to vote for Jill Stein and a lot of people turned off by Hillary Clinton just didn't bother to go through the hassle of voting. Especially in states where it was made difficult by the government. This year most of the liberals who didn't bother voting or voted third party are feeling guilty and are determined to vote for Joe Biden, even if they aren't thrilled with him.

A friend of my SO who is very, very liberal only admitted a couple of months ago she voted for Jill Stein. She felt so ashamed it took a long time to admit it to anyone.

Polls showed that in 2016 the people who disliked both Trump and Hillary broke for Trump in large numbers. They probably thought better the devil they didn't know. But now Trump is a known quantity. He has been an absolutely awful president and this year has been an utter disaster. Polls show now that the people who dislike both Trump and Biden are breaking for Biden in large numbers. They are going for sanity over the clown show.

There are going to be problems in states that are trying to scale up their mail in voting systems. I do agree with you there. The states that already have a large number of mail in votes, or are 100% mail in should do OK. But there will be delays in getting the votes counted. In the recent fivethirtyeight discussion I linked above they said that it's likely we won't know the results of the November election in every state for weeks. Washington's primary was Tuesday this week and around the state 1.7 million ballots have been counted with over 600K still to count. There will probably be more coming in over the next few days. The state just requires ballots be postmarked by election day.

Trump and his allies will also be working to sow as much doubt as possible during the period where the results are unknown. That's the biggest concern I have.

 

[ZeApelido]

Like many on the left you are putting possibly way too much stock in polls.

1) Trump supporters and likely voters do NOT reply to these polls, or do not reply truthfully (see the "Bradley effect" - Bradley effect - Wikipedia).

We all know how I voted last time, I've been open about that. I have friends with similar view points that voted the same way. I can tell you for fact that these people do not reply to anything done by CNN, MSNBC, NYT, WP, etc. If those organizations called most Trump supporters, they would simply hang up on them. There is a large "SELECTION BIAS" in these polls because of Trump supporters "self selecting" themselves to not participate in those polls (but you can bet they will go out and vote). Similar if CNN tried to stop these people on the street - which brings up a SECOND selection bias - Trump supporters are far less urban, so if you do in-person polls they will be under represented (if they even stop to talk with CNN, etc. at all - which they loath).

2) If Biden gets on stage with Trump, there is a serious risk he will lose votes of key independents compared to his support now. I don't say this maliciously, I simply am stating that going into a debate, Biden has a ton more to lose right now. Especially given his "gaff" problem.


Trump's base is also, I believe, far more enthusiastic about him than Biden's base. For voter turnout, enthusiasm matters a @#$% ton.



And, legitimately, there are ample seeds of doubt about various Election commissions, etc. being able to properly do mail-in balloting. See my post above about the MAJOR screw up of the Democratic primary by New York City (who admitted they majorly screwed up). And that's an election that Trump and the GOP had no horse in what so ever, so it really should be viewed as a strong warning sign. Would Biden contest the election if 21% of mail-in ballots were considered ineligible come November and he lost? You bet. Same thing, rightly so, would happen if Trump lost and 21% of mail-in ballots were considered ineligible come November.


Don't shoot the messenger, just reading the tea leaves here. My point, you are trying to compare Trump to "historical norms" in regards to polling, and thereby extrapolate how you expect the election to pan out based upon that. That is an inaccurate analysis because, simply, Trump's support base does not follow the same ruleset that you are applying to everyone else.

Except the polls weren't that far off last time.

And pollers have "adjusted" for expecting higher turnout of uneducated whites this time.

And currently the polling margins are so wide that if they stayed that way, the margin of error wouldn't be an issue.

 

[JRP3]

2) If Biden gets on stage with Trump, there is a serious risk he will lose votes of key independents compared to his support now. I don't say this maliciously, I simply am stating that going into a debate, Biden has a ton more to lose right now. Especially given his "gaff" problem.


Trump's base is also, I believe, far more enthusiastic about him than Biden's base. For voter turnout, enthusiasm matters a @#$% ton.

These are my main concerns.

Biden does put his foot in his mouth, but he is not any different than he always was.

He's much different than he used to be, plus he's under a lot more scrutiny. He used to be a coherent speaker who could often make a good speech. Now...not so much.

 

[JRP3]

Another progressive upset, environmental activist Marquita Bradshaw wins in Tennessee, even though she was out raised by 250-1 in campaign money.

 

[bkp_duke]

Another progressive upset, environmental activist Marquita Bradshaw wins in Tennessee, even though she was out raised by 250-1 in campaign money.

She won the D primary. While impressive, she has practically zero chance of defeating Bill Hagerty (R) come November.

 

[jdw]

Just lock him down in some bunker and release some deepfake videos to appease voters.

Isn't that what's happening?

Biden Cancels Trip Upstairs

ABC, NBC, CBS edit Bidens Gaffes

 

[wdolson]

He's much different than he used to be, plus he's under a lot more scrutiny. He used to be a coherent speaker who could often make a good speech. Now...not so much.

It's a re-election. All Biden has to be is better than Trump. Even at his worst Biden is more coherent than Trump on his best day. Biden is up against an utter failure with most of the country turned against him.

Look at the recent polls
Latest Polls

I looked at the Global Strategy Group poll from today as an example. Trump's favorability is
Strongly Favor - 27
Some Favor - 17
Some Unfavor - 7
Strong Unfavor - 46

This is typical of the polls I've dug into. In fact this one is a little more favorable to Trump than most recent polls. In most Trump is closer to 40% approval. In any case that 46% are people who will not change their minds and are very motivated to vote against him. There is a video that went viral of a 2016 Trump voter from somewhere in Appalachia who says he will vote for a can of soup over Trump and he will do anything to make sure he votes and his vote counts. That's the attitude of that 46%.

In a fair fight Trump loses to just about anyone remotely reasonable. The problem is Trump and his people are looking for every opportunity to cheat.

 

[bkp_duke]

For anyone that had any mis-conceptions that the Seattle "CHAZ/CHOP" zone was a "homeland for racial justice", the NYT just published a piece that where one of their reporters actually went there and talked with citizens and business owners that stayed in CHAZ/CHOP during the abandonment by police.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/us/defund-police-seattle-protests.html

“But that was not what he saw through the windows of his Seattle coffee shop. He saw encampments overtaking the sidewalks. He saw roving bands of masked protesters smashing windows and looting,” the Times reported, noting the man saw “young white men wielding guns.”

“Business crashed as the Seattle police refused to respond to calls to the area. Officers did not retake the region until July 1, after four shootings, including two fatal ones,” the Times reported, noting that local businesses owners are now suing the city.

Only the leftest of the left thought this was going to turn out "well". I hope those business owners get the fair ruling they deserve - that the city abandoned them. I think about 100 million dollars sounds about right.

 

[JRP3]

In a fair fight Trump loses to just about anyone remotely reasonable. The problem is Trump and his people are looking for every opportunity to cheat.

That's my point, it's not a fair fight and Biden may not look remotely reasonable in a few months. Just imagine an early vaccine candidate rushed out with some mildly promising results, a bit of a boost in the economy, and Biden having some major senior moments sounding like a lunatic right before the election. Throw in some election shenanigans and Trump wins again. Trump has an uncanny "ability" to fail upwards in life.

 

[wdolson]

For anyone that had any mis-conceptions that the Seattle "CHAZ/CHOP" zone was a "homeland for racial justice", the NYT just published a piece that where one of their reporters actually went there and talked with citizens and business owners that stayed in CHAZ/CHOP during the abandonment by police.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/07/us/defund-police-seattle-protests.html

“But that was not what he saw through the windows of his Seattle coffee shop. He saw encampments overtaking the sidewalks. He saw roving bands of masked protesters smashing windows and looting,” the Times reported, noting the man saw “young white men wielding guns.”

“Business crashed as the Seattle police refused to respond to calls to the area. Officers did not retake the region until July 1, after four shootings, including two fatal ones,” the Times reported, noting that local businesses owners are now suing the city.

Only the leftest of the left thought this was going to turn out "well". I hope those business owners get the fair ruling they deserve - that the city abandoned them. I think about 100 million dollars sounds about right.

This is why the vast majority of people (including me) are not in favor of eliminating the police. Some uber idealists (on both ends of the political spectrum) think that things will be fine if the regulators were eliminated. On the right, the ideal is to eliminate all government regulators like the EPA, the SEC, etc.

Alan Greenspan was one of these people. When the credit default swap was invented, someone who saw where it could go felt strong enough that he sought out a restaurant where Alan Greenspan ate frequently and buttonholed him. He laid out the case for how this could bring down the economy if freebooters started taking advantage of it. Greenspan saw where it could go wrong, but he could not conceive that anyone would do things that would destabilize the entire economic system. He was wrong.

On the left the ideal is to get rid of the regulators people see more in everyday life, the police. Again the ideal is that people can be trusted to always do the right thing and a peaceful utopia will happen if given a chance.

In an environment with no rules or very lax ones, you can get over 90% of people to treat others fairly and behave appropriately, but psychopaths and others with greed or desire for control gravitate to places where the rules are lax and with no rules, they end up taking over. The results are usually not pleasant. All it takes is a few or even one person to start taking advantage of the situation and things spin out of control very quickly.

While Chaz was going on I saw an interview with a reporter who had gone into the zone. He said that during the day it was like a hippie festival and very peaceful, but he said there were some very scary guys who were the de facto rulers who ended up beating up the reporter when they they caught him recording them on his cell phone. They chased him for blocks after he got out of the Chaz.

With most things humans do, the extremes are not good and the highest good is usually achieved when things go to some point in the middle. I know there are a number of people reading on both ends of the political spectrum who might be yelling BS at this point, but that's been my observation in most things in life, both personal and society at large.

Policing in many areas of the United States has some problems with being too authoritarian right now. The healthy solution is not to eliminate the police, but figure out where we went wrong and make changes to fix the worst problems. We will never fix all the problems. Any human institution will have problems. It's baked into human nature. If we expect perfection or let the perfect become the enemy of just improved, we won't get anything fixed.

The US system of government has a number of checks and balances baked into the system, but there are some areas where we don't have any or not enough. I think we need some way to check in on regulation and regulators and see if it's really doing what it's supposed to do. The regulated should not be allowed to do wrong and harm others, but they also shouldn't have to deal with a lot of extra hassle with the regulators either. There is a fine line in there where the most good for the least harm is achievable.

That's my point, it's not a fair fight and Biden may not look remotely reasonable in a few months. Just imagine an early vaccine candidate rushed out with some mildly promising results, a bit of a boost in the economy, and Biden having some major senior moments sounding like a lunatic right before the election. Throw in some election shenanigans and Trump wins again. Trump has an uncanny "ability" to fail upwards in life.

If Biden was up against a golden tongued president who could speak eloquently, he'd be in trouble. But he's up against a whiny toddler with the vocabulary of a 5 year old. Biden has been one of the worst public speakers in American politics for most of his life, but of the two men capable of being president in January he's the eloquent one.

The fact Biden has a pulse and is saner than Trump are the only two requirements for over half of American voters. Biden is a very well known politician. People know he makes gaffs, but the only people who are likely to get upset about his gaffs at this point are those who would never vote for him anyway.

On another note, a Canadian anthropologist has published a piece in Rolling Stone that is interesting
The Unraveling of America

 

[TSLAopt]

That's my point, it's not a fair fight and Biden may not look remotely reasonable in a few months. Just imagine an early vaccine candidate rushed out with some mildly promising results, a bit of a boost in the economy, and Biden having some major senior moments sounding like a lunatic right before the election. Throw in some election shenanigans and Trump wins again. Trump has an uncanny "ability" to fail upwards in life.

Not many people are enthusiastic about Biden with his mental decline especially now...his handlers know that. He is on the verge of picking a VP, I believe it will be Harris. Perhaps she will take over soon after as Biden is convinced to admit he has health concerns and needs his VP to take over from here...she will be a much more formidable foe for Trump to debate and go head to head with...but not sure she can win either as his policies have proven to be great for the economy and defense Vs previous presidencies...and people are upset with all the fake news media hoaxes against him for the past 4 years.

 

[ggr]

Biden's "mental decline" is fake news. Always accuse your opponent of your own failings.

 

[wdolson]

Biden's "mental decline" is fake news. Always accuse your opponent of your own failings.

Exactly. Trump will never admit any of his failings, but he's quick to project them onto other people. If he's going on about something wrong with someone else, he is saying more about himself than about the other person.

 

[Favguy]

Not many people are enthusiastic about Biden with his mental decline especially now...his handlers know that. He is on the verge of picking a VP, I believe it will be Harris. Perhaps she will take over soon after as Biden is convinced to admit he has health concerns and needs his VP to take over from here...she will be a much more formidable foe for Trump to debate and go head to head with...but not sure she can win either as his policies have proven to be great for the economy and defense Vs previous presidencies...and people are upset with all the fake news media hoaxes against him for the past 4 years.

Trumps policies have been great for the stock market, I'm not sure about the greater economy as a whole. The US military, frankly is already too dangerous for the world and didn't need even more money, most of which ends up in the pocket of corrupt, Trump friendly, defense contractors anyway. As for media bias, without doubt there has been a lot of this, (there is also a heck of a lot of extreme right wing biased media!) but frankly, most proper thinking people are OK with bias against a lifelong rampant criminal & grifter with dangerous narcissistic and sociopathic tendencies, who is also of low intelligence and woefully incapable of undertaking the basic requirements of the office of President. As for hoaxes & witch hunts, Trumps own shouting about this aside, I see little evidence that any of the investigations into the criminal were any such things.