By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
rapsuperstar31 2 days ago
firebush03 said:
RolStoppable said:

Those 100k+ voters could afford to do what they did in the primary because it didn't have any negative impact on their cause. But they should be smart enough to realize that abstaining from voting will be an action against their own cause. When presented with only two options, and both of them being bad, you still have the moral obligation to select the less bad one to prevent the worse one from happening. There's no doubt whatsoever about which one is the less bad option here.

That's why your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.

“That’s why your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.” sounds like you are open to discussion, and not just one-sided agreement with your claims lol. In any case, we’ll see if your assertion is or is not correct come November.

What you have to understand, though, is that uncontested voters literally went out of their way to vote against Biden in the primary. They are making a statement: These aren’t ppl looking at which side is the lesser-of-two-evils, these are ppl who are *protesting* a war. If these countries are what you call home (which, in the case of the much of the uncontested voters, they are), you aren’t gonna be focused on damage control. Your people are being executed under the assistance of the party which you would be voting for: You and they have far different voting motives.

Some may not vote, or vote for Stein but it wont be 100k.  What Trump did screw up was the Polish vote with his hate of Ukraine and love of Russia taking over it's neighbors.  The Polish population in MI is 784,200, in Pa it's 757,627, in WI it's 481,126.



Around the Network
the-pi-guy 2 days ago
firebush03 said:

Those ppl who care abt woman’s rights and such will show up, but you have understand that they are far different from the uncontested. To repeat my previous comment, many of these ppl’s family/communities are being slaughtered. Their uncontested registration isn’t just a simple trivial display during the primary, but a demonstration of legitimate leverage as to force one party to side with their cause. (And do you rlly think abortion, trans, etc., is gonna be very appealing to ppl of the Middle East? Their culture is far different than ours…you have to keep this in mind.) As bad as Trump may be, I am whole-heartedly cheering these ppl on to fight for their cause. The DNC needs to change their ways…just tragic that it now comes at the cost of a potential nationwide abortion ban.

Again, we will see in November. No point in arguing speculation. If Harris loses Michigan, you’ll have some words to be eating.

There's going to be some overlap.

It's not like 100% of the uncontested are not going to vote in November. Some of them are going to vote, some of them aren't. 

We can't exactly look at the 100k and make a good estimate on how many won't vote in November. There are also going to be some people that voted for him and changed their mind afterwards, and there's going to be some people who didn't vote whatsoever who strongly feel that way. 

There's not enough information to be definitive, that's really all I'm saying. 

Biden also won by ~154k votes, if Harris only loses 100k votes, Michigan is still fine. 

The election also doesn't particularly hinge on Michigan. Biden could have lost all of Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota and still would have been president in 2020. 



firebush03 2 days ago
the-pi-guy said:
firebush03 said:

Those ppl who care abt woman’s rights and such will show up, but you have understand that they are far different from the uncontested. To repeat my previous comment, many of these ppl’s family/communities are being slaughtered. Their uncontested registration isn’t just a simple trivial display during the primary, but a demonstration of legitimate leverage as to force one party to side with their cause. (And do you rlly think abortion, trans, etc., is gonna be very appealing to ppl of the Middle East? Their culture is far different than ours…you have to keep this in mind.) As bad as Trump may be, I am whole-heartedly cheering these ppl on to fight for their cause. The DNC needs to change their ways…just tragic that it now comes at the cost of a potential nationwide abortion ban.

Again, we will see in November. No point in arguing speculation. If Harris loses Michigan, you’ll have some words to be eating.

There's going to be some overlap.

It's not like 100% of the uncontested are not going to vote in November. Some of them are going to vote, some of them aren't. 

We can't exactly look at the 100k and make a good estimate on how many won't vote in November. There are also going to be some people that voted for him and changed their mind afterwards, and there's going to be some people who didn't vote whatsoever who strongly feel that way. 

There's not enough information to be definitive, that's really all I'm saying. 

Biden also won by ~154k votes, if Harris only loses 100k votes, Michigan is still fine. 

The election also doesn't particularly hinge on Michigan. Biden could have lost all of Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota and still would have been president in 2020. 

Harris needs the whole Midwest to win. GA, AZ, NC seem like they will be going to Trump. And I wouldn’t bet on a razor thin margin of ~54k in Michigan, especially when (a.) Biden was polling 4pts better in 2020 than Harris this election and (b.) you now have the Lebanese-Americans joining the movement. (And again, I have no further interest in arguing projections regarding the uncontested.)



the-pi-guy 2 days ago

It's always an uphill battle, no matter what.



RolStoppable 2 days ago
firebush03 said:
RolStoppable said:

Those 100k+ voters could afford to do what they did in the primary because it didn't have any negative impact on their cause. But they should be smart enough to realize that abstaining from voting will be an action against their own cause. When presented with only two options, and both of them being bad, you still have the moral obligation to select the less bad one to prevent the worse one from happening. There's no doubt whatsoever about which one is the less bad option here.

That's why your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.

“That’s why your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.” sounds like you are open to discussion, and not just one-sided agreement with your claims lol. In any case, we’ll see if your assertion is or is not correct come November.

What you have to understand, though, is that uncontested voters literally went out of their way to vote against Biden in the primary. They are making a statement: These aren’t ppl looking at which side is the lesser-of-two-evils, these are ppl who are *protesting* a war. If these countries are what you call home (which, in the case of the much of the uncontested voters, they are), you aren’t gonna be focused on damage control. Your people are being executed under the assistance of the party which you would be voting for: You and they have far different voting motives.

The only two options here are either a chance for restraint in the war or an all-out slaughter. Picking neither of these two will make the latter option more likely to become reality. It's a straight-forward choice for any American who sincerely cares about the lives in Gaza.



Legend11 correctly predicted that GTA IV will outsell Super Smash Bros. Brawl. I was wrong.

Around the Network
firebush03 2 days ago
RolStoppable said:
firebush03 said:

“That’s why your assumptions and conclusions are wrong.” sounds like you are open to discussion, and not just one-sided agreement with your claims lol. In any case, we’ll see if your assertion is or is not correct come November.

What you have to understand, though, is that uncontested voters literally went out of their way to vote against Biden in the primary. They are making a statement: These aren’t ppl looking at which side is the lesser-of-two-evils, these are ppl who are *protesting* a war. If these countries are what you call home (which, in the case of the much of the uncontested voters, they are), you aren’t gonna be focused on damage control. Your people are being executed under the assistance of the party which you would be voting for: You and they have far different voting motives.

The only two options here are either a chance for restraint in the war or an all-out slaughter. Picking neither of these two will make the latter option more likely to become reality. It's a straight-forward choice for any American who sincerely cares about the lives in Gaza.

Tell that to them. Don't kill the messenger lol. If you don't believe these individuals should be protesting a cause which they care deeply about (which has likely killed many who they have known and loved), then you are free to think this. I personally disagree...I'm hoping their message can be heard. Biden has the power to stop sending military aid to the madman Israel, but he chooses not to, effectively saying to these ppl "if you wanna protest, then fine. We'll just shoot ourselves in the foot and ruin our election."



sundin13 2 days ago
firebush03 said:
RolStoppable said:

The only two options here are either a chance for restraint in the war or an all-out slaughter. Picking neither of these two will make the latter option more likely to become reality. It's a straight-forward choice for any American who sincerely cares about the lives in Gaza.

Tell that to them. Don't kill the messenger lol. If you don't believe these individuals should be protesting a cause which they care deeply about (which has likely killed many who they have known and loved), then you are free to think this. I personally disagree...I'm hoping their message can be heard. Biden has the power to stop sending military aid to the madman Israel, but he chooses not to, effectively saying to these ppl "if you wanna protest, then fine. We'll just shoot ourselves in the foot and ruin our election."

You do realize that if Biden were to cut funding for Israel, he would lose pro-Israel votes, right? Making any major moves against Israel would likely be political suicide at this point.



firebush03 2 days ago
sundin13 said:
firebush03 said:

Tell that to them. Don't kill the messenger lol. If you don't believe these individuals should be protesting a cause which they care deeply about (which has likely killed many who they have known and loved), then you are free to think this. I personally disagree...I'm hoping their message can be heard. Biden has the power to stop sending military aid to the madman Israel, but he chooses not to, effectively saying to these ppl "if you wanna protest, then fine. We'll just shoot ourselves in the foot and ruin our election."

You do realize that if Biden were to cut funding for Israel, he would lose pro-Israel votes, right? Making any major moves against Israel would likely be political suicide at this point.

According to this poll from GlobalAffairs.org (conducted through late-June) (non-politically partisan Western organization), a heavy plurality of (non-Republican) Americans believe the USA "is providing too much aid to Israel" and "support putting restrictions on US military aid to Israel". This would be one of the most popular moves that the DNC could dream of! Furthermore, you are forgetting the USA has leverage with its weapons: Ronald Reagan with a swift and stern threat utilizing legitimate leveraging powers was able to stop the madman Israel during its bombings in 1982. If Biden wanted, he could have Netanyahu agreeing to a ceasefire by the end of this week. It is solely with the weapons which Biden had given Israel which these bombings occur. So, in other words, by stripping aid to Israel, I'm suggesting that a ceasefire would likely follow shortly thereafter, further making popular the move.



Ryuu96 2 days ago

Real Clear Polling

  • PA = Tie
  • MI = Harris +1.3%
  • NV = Harris +1.1%
  • WI = Harris +0.8%
  • NC = Trump +0.6%
  • AZ = Trump +1.7%
  • GA = Trump +1.5%

Race to the White House

  • PA = Harris +1.7%
  • MI = Harris +1.8%
  • NV = Harris +2.3%
  • WI = Harris +2.3%
  • NC = Trump +0.4%
  • AZ = Trump +1.2%
  • GA = Trump +0.8%

The Hill

  • PA = Harris +0.9%
  • MI = Harris +0.5%
  • NV = Harris +1.9%
  • WI = Harris +1.1%
  • NC = Trump +0.7%
  • AZ = Trump +1.2%
  • GA = Trump +0.7%

270 to Win

  • PA = Harris +0.5%
  • MI = Harris +1.3%
  • NV = Harris +2.2%
  • WI = Harris +1.3%
  • NC = Trump +0.5%
  • AZ = Trump +1.2%
  • GA = Trump +1%

538

  • PA = Harris +0.7%
  • MI = Harris +1.8%
  • NV = Harris +1.0%
  • WI = Harris +1.8%
  • NC = Trump +0.6%
  • AZ = Trump +1.4%
  • GA = Trump +1.2%

Nate Silver

  • PA = Harris +1.3%
  • MI = Harris +2.1%
  • NV = Harris +1.9%
  • WI = Harris +2.1%
  • NC = Trump +0.4%
  • AZ = Trump +1.2%
  • GA = Trump +1.0%

There's been countless of events in which we've assumed they would hugely change polling and yet they barely made a blip on polling, it isn't the first time Iran has lobbed missiles at Israel, even in 2024. GA and AZ seem to be going to Trump but I wouldn't be so sure on NC and MI is polling well for Harris but a lot still within toss-up territory.



sundin13 2 days ago
firebush03 said:
sundin13 said:

You do realize that if Biden were to cut funding for Israel, he would lose pro-Israel votes, right? Making any major moves against Israel would likely be political suicide at this point.

According to this poll from GlobalAffairs.org (conducted through late-June) (non-politically partisan Western organization), a heavy plurality of (non-Republican) Americans believe the USA "is providing too much aid to Israel" and "support putting restrictions on US military aid to Israel". This would be one of the most popular moves that the DNC could dream of! Furthermore, you are forgetting the USA has leverage with its weapons: Ronald Reagan with a swift and stern threat utilizing legitimate leveraging powers was able to stop the madman Israel during its bombings in 1982. If Biden wanted, he could have Netanyahu agreeing to a ceasefire by the end of this week. It is solely with the weapons which Biden had given Israel which these bombings occur. So, in other words, by stripping aid to Israel, I'm suggesting that a ceasefire would likely follow shortly thereafter, further making popular the move.

I put extremely limited stake into polls like that because issues are susceptible to framing. It is why a ton of people supported the ACA but didn't support Obamacare (despite them being the same thing). It isn't hard to see the risk in anti-Israel policy and I wouldn't imagine that any political analyst would seriously assert that that risk is non-existent. Should the US government do more to reign in Israel? In my opinion, yes, but ignoring those risks and acting like that course of action would only have political upsides is willful ignorance. 

Also, while the US has leverage for sure (something I never denied or "forgot"), we don't control Israel's foreign policy. I don't know what course of action they would take if the US cut weapon supplies, but I do know that it would cause an avalanche of political counter-messaging from both Republicans and Israel allied groups, even moreso if an attack on Israel happened after this weapons embargo.