I’m just gonna do us all a favor and vote for ignore forever. Because this is like the 5th time we’ve had this stupid conversation and I’m tired of it. I enjoy differing opinions, but every time you come off ignore, it lasts like 2 weeks and then it’s this again.
So God Bless, take care, the best to you and yours, but I’m out.
One trend I’ve noticed is once a place flips once to the Dems, Republicans tend to win hard for a while afterwards. This is what happened in NC. The Republicans start going all-out.
This is why NC hasn’t flipped presidentially since Obama, it’s been a combination of Republicans fighting all-out (including their base), and Dems hurt themselves a bit with some weak candidates for Senator. (This time they’re gonna have a good one in Jackson)
‘Kay, ‘bye.
This might be interesting.
Michigan going GOP in 2016 seems like it was a fluke.
Nevada went for the Democrats in 2008, and hasn’t look back since.
North Carolina is just Michigan in reverse.
Ohio is just flippy flipperton
PA has gone Democratic every year, except 2016
Virginia started its trend as a Democratic State in 2008, and unlike North Carolina, never looked back.
Wisconsin went R in 2016, but its been solidly Blue for a while, and it’s back again.
What I’m trying to say is that North Carolina is a cosmic fluke in 2008. It might be that Georgia and Arizona will be for 2020, but you can say the same thing about Pennsylvania and Wisconsin in 2016. They flipped red once but have voted blue for the presidential races in every race since Bill Clinton (also, how many trends started in 1992 with Bill Clinton?)
I don’t really follow what you’re arguing here. Normal campaign strategy for any candidate would be to look at areas (or in this case states) that you or the previous candidate for your party lost by very close margins in the previous election and direct your campaign efforts at producing more votes in those areas/states. In addition to this you would attempt to ramp up the GOTV campaign for your party to increase overall turnout across all areas/states to reap the additional votes, hoping not only to win areas you narrowly lost previously, but build unassailable leads in areas already considered favorable to you. This is how campaign strategy has always worked. It is absolutely about trying to identify the right places to pick up votes, then campaigning heavily in those places.
Trump is getting a huge assist on this in the form of GOP legislatures in those narrow loss states working to negate enough votes that it becomes easier for him to close the gap. Do you think it is coincidence that Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin, etc. are passing laws that essentially suppress votes in traditionally Democrat areas?
I mean, sure, there is always the outside chance that Ohio, Florida or Texas could flip Blue in 2024 and totally torpedo the GOP’s best laid plans…so sure, I guess if your argument is that nobody can 100% predict where and how to gain votes to secure an election in advance, then you’re right. But nobody is arguing that.
The reason NC was a fluke was because the Republicans were very effective here in 2010.
To me, 2020 showed that all things being equal, Republicans still win here though.
Dems have won statewide races here plenty, and not just because Cooper is a masterfully good politician (If Biden retires, Cooper would be the best pick for the Dems)
What you are saying is that by flipping 37,500 votes, the Democrats could win North Carolina? That seems easier than Trump getting Michigan, or Pennsylvania.
By the way, if Biden can flip 75,000 in Iowa, that can be flipped Blue as well. Only 18,500 votes are needed to flip Alaska.
So, that 25 Electoral votes 131,000 votes.
Florida can be gotten by flipping 190,000 votes, and Texas, we just need to flipp 350,000 votes.
Honestly, the math goes both ways.
Georgia and Arizona were close, and it would be scary to lose them
It’s hard to get those votes here, as the turnip has been squeezed dry. The votes are going to be mostly people coming into the state.
I wonder if we should like, ship 60,000 Confirmed Dems into North Carolina to flip it.
Yes, of course, sorry. My point is not that you would ignore the states you think are in play based on history, but rather that the actual historical result isn’t really useful for gauging how much better you have to do because 1) things change, and 2) you can’t target as finely as ‘flip 13,000 votes’. Trump or another GOP candidate has a chance to win in states like e.g. Georgia, because it was close, but we really have no idea if flipping 13,000 votes is enough to win it next time, because next time will be different in any case.
Or, more simply, because it was close in Georgia last time, it will probably be close in Georgia next time, but we don’t really know how close it will be.
Edit: Take Pennsylvania as an example. Trump won PA by ~45,000 votes in 2016. The Biden campaign, looking back, could say we were within that number, so we have to do better by that much. But if that were true, they would have lost PA in 2020, because Trump got 400,000 more votes this time around! So the ‘closeness’ of PA in 2016 didn’t really tell us anything at all about Trump’s chances of winning it in 2020 or how much better Biden had to do to win it. In a similar vein, the closeness of the race in Georgia or Arizona in 2020 probably doesn’t tell us what either candidate has to do better to win it in 2024.
standby for Griftr
Not that he can’t do it all, but I feel like a social media platform, which depends massively on scale, is not a great use of Trump’s resources. Instead, he should focus on creating a news network, which only requires people watch, and you don’t need scale to make it valuable.
Perfect.
Nice of them to put in the scare quotes for us.
That would mean… GASP… spending money. Which he needs for his legal team.
If he can find one.
The social network could also make him money, if he steals enough from it.
OMG, can you imagine being the developer who has to build an application to that man’s personal specifications, conceived and communicated in his inimitable style? The ultimate bad stakeholder.
Having worked for people with similar traits, yes, and thank goodness putting up with that shit is no longer a condition for the ability to pay my mortgage.
I mean, the Constitution is clear on the matter of Constitutional responsibilities on the part of privately held technology companies.
This lawsuit isn’t meant to win. It’s for internet points.
Probably 230 truthers again.