HawkShack.com

It's probably a good time to start a new thread.

I came across an article describing what could be an impending disaster:

Millions of mail-in ballots haven’t been received by election offices in critical battleground states, where recent slowdowns in mail deliveries risk some votes not arriving in time to count for the presidential election.

As of Oct. 30, more than seven million mailed ballots had not been returned in the 13 most competitive states that require ballots to arrive on or before Election Day, a Wall Street Journal analysis of data from the University of Florida’s U.S. Elections Project found. That’s about 28% of the more than 24 million ballots that had been tallied in those states, the Elections Project data show.

Many of the states, including Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Florida, were narrowly won in the 2016 presidential election, in some cases by only a few thousand votes, making the outstanding ballots potentially critical to figuring a winner this time around.

Mail delays won’t help the situation: So far this week, first-class mail times have slowed from the week before in 12 of the 13 competitive states with tight deadlines, according to data from mail-tracking firm GrayHair Software.

Legal experts say mail delays in states with rigid ballot deadlines could lead to challenges that delay the election results.

“It increases the chance of litigation,” Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale University professor of constitutional law and political science said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/election ... d=msedgntp

I could easily see this winding up in the Supreme Court, with someone challenging the laws requiring that ballots arrive by election day in order to be counted.

Except for the most remote of locations, such as overseas and military personnel, we need to take USPS out of the loop and insist that voters either drop off their ballot at a drop box or vote in person on election day. Otherwise, you'll have someone like Trump claiming that someone is intentionally slowing down the mail in a red precinct or expediting the mail in a blue precinct.

RiverDog wrote:I could easily see this winding up in the Supreme Court, with someone challenging the laws requiring that ballots arrive by election day in order to be counted.

Exactly as Trump planned. Anything to cast doubt on the election results to justify his unacceptance of them.

RiverDog wrote:Except for the most remote of locations, such as overseas and military personnel, we need to take USPS out of the loop and insist that voters either drop off their ballot at a drop box or vote in person on election day. Otherwise, you'll have someone like Trump claiming that someone is intentionally slowing down the mail in a red precinct or expediting the mail in a blue precinct.

Totally disagree. We need to restore the USPS to full strength (I.E. repair the sabotage of the Trump administration) and until then the courts need to insure that every ballot that he has been successfully delayed gets counted in this election. Of course they won't though because Trump has also successfully loaded the courts with conservative and/or incompetent judges.

He has truly subverted our system of government. I can only hope that he loses in a sufficient landslide that it all becomes irrelevant to the outcome of this election.

I'm not sure how you restore the U.S.P.S. It was in trouble before Trump and will be in trouble after Trump. It has to compete against private companies for package delivery, another industry Amazon is entering strongly. Who sends letters any more when you can communicate instantly with relatives and whoever you want digitally with emails, phones, and messengers. U.S.P.S. is a doomed agency. Not sure what you could do to prop it up against so many competitors and a complete loss of business due to changing technology. The only mail I get any more are ballots, advertising, and general junk mail. I mostly do coupons and advertising online or with a phone app now. The younger generation won't even care about getting mail.

As far as lost ballots, I'm fairly sure you can argue a one time exception due to the coronavirus. Any good lawyer should be able to make this argument. Hopefully the Democrats weren't dumb enough not to have that language in any changes they made to voting due to the coronavirus. If the Democrats did not, then I guess they'll get what's coming to them.

I want an online voting system myself with resume based voting and a removal of the Party system. You vote for resumes for politicians. They are expected to follow the law and values of the nation, not this promising crap for votes. That is tyranny of the mob and complete corruption.

c_hawkbob wrote:Totally disagree. We need to restore the USPS to full strength (I.E. repair the sabotage of the Trump administration) and until then the courts need to insure that every ballot that he has been successfully delayed gets counted in this election. Of course they won't though because Trump has also successfully loaded the courts with conservative and/or incompetent judges.

USPS ought to be privatized. In the beginning, there was a need for a federal postal service as only the government had the resources to provide it. But those days are long past. They need to sell off all their assets and contract out their first class mail delivery to one of the many private companies that already have infrastructure in place. Besides, the vast majority of what they deliver is unsolicited junk. Most of my essential mail is delivered electronically.

But that wasn't my point. Even at it's peak, USPS is not a timely enough or reliable enough method to entrust with the handling and delivery of ballots. I would much rather enhance ballot drop off boxes, put them at fire stations, police stations, public utility offices, in multiple locations that are relatively easy to access and have a high level of security

c_hawkbob wrote:He has truly subverted our system of government. I can only hope that he loses in a sufficient landslide that it all becomes irrelevant to the outcome of this election.

Agreed, and I think it's more than just a hope, I think that a landslide win is likely.

I've had entirely enough of private corporations profiteering from every damn thing our government has grown too lazy or unconcerned with to do for itself. I wouldn't mind privatized medicine, phama, prisons and now postal service if you get your way, being allowed to rape the working class to the benefit of the corporate world.

Aseahawkfan wrote:As far as lost ballots, I'm fairly sure you can argue a one time exception due to the coronavirus. Any good lawyer should be able to make this argument. Hopefully the Democrats weren't dumb enough not to have that language in any changes they made to voting due to the coronavirus. If the Democrats did not, then I guess they'll get what's coming to them.

IMO the laws that require ballots arrive on election day should be ruled unconstitutional. They need to allow any ballot post marked on election day or earlier. It's not my fault that the post office screwed up.

c_hawkbob wrote:I want an online voting system myself with resume based voting and a removal of the Party system. You vote for resumes for politicians. They are expected to follow the law and values of the nation, not this promising crap for votes. That is tyranny of the mob and complete corruption.

Completely and categorically disagree! Balloting needs to be either one of two methods: Paper or a non electric, gear driven mechanical voting machine. Anything less invites hackers.

Having said that, I can agree with an online system as a method to confirm the eligibility of a voter. Things like death certificates should be automatically flagged so as to disqualify a deceased person, court records flagged to disqualify a felon, etc.

c_hawkbob wrote:I've had entirely enough of private corporations profiteering from every damn thing our government has grown too lazy or unconcerned with to do for itself. I wouldn't mind privatized medicine, phama, prisons and now postal service if you get your way, being allowed to rape the working class to the benefit of the corporate world.

We have two diametrically opposite views of government's role in our society. My view is that government should be limited to a regulatory or oversight function, ie the umpire or referee, rather than competing with private business such as the USPS is doing.

But let's leave that argument for another day. I didn't intend this to be about the USPS or the role of government in our society. I wanted to discuss the 2020 election, and this issue about the delayed delivery of ballots is concerning.

RiverDog wrote:Completely and categorically disagree! Balloting needs to be either one of two methods: Paper or a non electric, gear driven mechanical voting machine. Anything less invites hackers.

Having said that, I can agree with an online system as a method to confirm the eligibility of a voter. Things like death certificates should be automatically flagged so as to disqualify a deceased person, court records flagged to disqualify a felon, etc.

That's just old thinking. We have defense systems, financial systems, and many other systems that are conducted very securely. Hacking is no more of a problem than gerrymandering, missing ballots, hanging chads, hacked voting machines, voter suppression, or the like.

If we can trust our money, medical records, and information online, we can trust online voting. We can build a good system for online voting that works. We can provide a better, more informative experience for a voter who can read. The majority of candidate vetting is done online now anyway. I see no reason we can't shift to an online system in a modern tech savvy world.

c_hawkbob wrote:I've had entirely enough of private corporations profiteering from every damn thing our government has grown too lazy or unconcerned with to do for itself. I wouldn't mind privatized medicine, phama, prisons and now postal service if you get your way, being allowed to rape the working class to the benefit of the corporate world.

How you going to stop that? With technology moving as fast as it is how can you stop an innovative company like Amazon from construction trucks and drone technology the U.S.P.S. can't compete with? How you going to stop companies from digitalizing everything to delivery over the Internet making the U.S.P.S. obsolete? The government not being lazy or unconcerned, they can't just can't compete with private individuals who are super smart finding ways to do things in a more cost efficient, intelligent, and technologically advanced manner.

Hell, they even have a company called Teladoc who allows doctors to do virtual medical appointments and Livongo which allows remote monitoring of health issues like diabetes including reminds to take insulin and other medications. How does the government compete with industries in an age where technology is advancing as rapidly as it is?

You going to try to make it illegal for intelligent people to use technology in an more efficient and effective way to solve problems for profit? You going to take their technology they developed using private resources?

Though I am with you on a lot of nationalized medicine. I feel nationalized medicine would better support the capitalist structure at this point or some kind of hybrid system that decouples insurance from your job. Very hard for working people to take economic risks if they are forced to maintain full time employment to maintain insurance. That whole game has to go. If we had a nationalized medical system, people could set themselves up more as a contractor and negotiate higher incomes since companies could use the savings from not having to manage medical to better compensate people for work.

Aseahawkfan wrote:If we can trust our money, medical records, and information online, we can trust online voting. We can build a good system for online voting that works. We can provide a better, more informative experience for a voter who can read. The majority of candidate vetting is done online now anyway. I see no reason we can't shift to an online system in a modern tech savvy world.

That's just it. We can't trust our money, medical records, etc, online. We lose an estimated $400B per year to hackers. The FBI just got through issuing a warning to hospitals and other medical services of Russian hackers penetrating electronic record keeping:

CISA, FBI, and HHS have credible information of an increased and imminent cybercrime threat to U.S. hospitals and healthcare providers," the notice reads. "CISA, FBI, and HHS are sharing this information to provide warning to healthcare providers to ensure that they take timely and reasonable precautions to protect their networks from these threats."

https://www.newsweek.com/russian-speaki ... es-1543088

No way do I ever want to trust our most sacred of institutions to this type of sabotage. It's bad enough that they're waging a disinformation war on our election process. I do not want to be subjecting the actual voting process to this type of threat.

Let's get back to the topic.

With just two days to go before the election, Michigan and Wisconsin look like pretty safe bets. Pennsylvania looks like it's in good shape for Biden, too, but the final results there might not be available for several days due to their voting law that prohibits the counting of ballots until Election Day. The RCP average shows Biden ahead in MI by 7.3% and in WI by 5.7%, both well outside the margin of error. It would take a complete melt down that would make 2016 look like a minor hiccup for Trump to win those two states, and under the assumption that Trump doesn't flip any states he lost in 2016 (the closest is MN at 4.7% Biden), that would cut Trump's possible total to 270 electoral votes, or barely enough to win. All Biden would have to do would be to win one other state or one of the Congressional districts in Maine or Nebraska to win the election.

There's other ways Biden can win that wouldn't include any of those three states, such as Florida and Arizona, or North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona. If Biden were to flip Texas with its 38 electoral votes, that state alone would do the trick. But the most likely route to a Biden win is through the upper Midwest. So unless a big state like Florida or Texas falls to Biden on election night, pay attention to the results Michigan and Wisconsin on Election Night.

My election night plan is to channel surf between Fox News, CNN, and NBC, and I'll probably be popping my head in here from time to time.

RiverDog wrote:That's just it. We can't trust our money, medical records, etc, online. We lose an estimated $400B per year to hackers. The FBI just got through issuing a warning to hospitals and other medical services of Russian hackers penetrating electronic record keeping:

CISA, FBI, and HHS have credible information of an increased and imminent cybercrime threat to U.S. hospitals and healthcare providers," the notice reads. "CISA, FBI, and HHS are sharing this information to provide warning to healthcare providers to ensure that they take timely and reasonable precautions to protect their networks from these threats."

https://www.newsweek.com/russian-speaki ... es-1543088

No way do I ever want to trust our most sacred of institutions to this type of sabotage. It's bad enough that they're waging a disinformation war on our election process. I do not want to be subjecting the actual voting process to this type of threat.

Do I need to post all the problems with election tampering using the current voting method now and through the years? Is it more of a threat than the many other threats to voting? I doubt it. We can and will at some point build a secure online voting method. It is inevitable.

RiverDog wrote:Let's get back to the topic.

With just two days to go before the election, Michigan and Wisconsin look like pretty safe bets. Pennsylvania looks like it's in good shape for Biden, too, but the final results there might not be available for several days due to their voting law that prohibits the counting of ballots until Election Day. The RCP average shows Biden ahead in MI by 7.3% and in WI by 5.7%, both well outside the margin of error. It would take a complete melt down that would make 2016 look like a minor hiccup for Trump to win those two states, and under the assumption that Trump doesn't flip any states he lost in 2016 (the closest is MN at 4.7% Biden), that would cut Trump's possible total to 270 electoral votes, or barely enough to win. All Biden would have to do would be to win one other state or one of the Congressional districts in Maine or Nebraska to win the election.

There's other ways Biden can win that wouldn't include any of those three states, such as Florida and Arizona, or North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona. If Biden were to flip Texas with its 38 electoral votes, that state alone would do the trick. But the most likely route to a Biden win is through the upper Midwest. So unless a big state like Florida or Texas falls to Biden on election night, pay attention to the results Michigan and Wisconsin on Election Night.

My election night plan is to channel surf between Fox News, CNN, and NBC, and I'll probably be popping my head in here from time to time.

My buddies still read pollsters who are listing information Trump will win as he did in 2016 due to missed voter groups that pollsters are not tracking. So we will see how this plays out as the vote count that matters occurs on election day. Given Trump has already seeded the waters against mail-in voting, Trump voters are going to show up at polling stations on election day en masse or have already hit the voting stations. That is the count that matters, not polls. So post polls as much as you want, no one I know cares on either side. All anyone cares about is what occurs on election day and the immediate days following if this thing is close at all.

Trump pretty much convinced much of the conservative right that if they vote by mail, the Democrats will steal or lose their ballots. So they are focused on showing up in person.

I heard MIchael Moore (fwiw) talk about voters and he said that many Trump voters won't reveal that to pollsters
largely because of the fear of the so called 'deep state' and that an unknown number at this time who have call
display won't answer their phone. His suggestion was any lead Biden has in the polls should be cut in half at least.
He thinks this won't be a big win for Biden if he wins at all.

Aseahawkfan wrote:My buddies still read pollsters who are listing information Trump will win as he did in 2016 due to missed voter groups that pollsters are not tracking. So we will see how this plays out as the vote count that matters occurs on election day. Given Trump has already seeded the waters against mail-in voting, Trump voters are going to show up at polling stations on election day en masse or have already hit the voting stations. That is the count that matters, not polls. So post polls as much as you want, no one I know cares on either side. All anyone cares about is what occurs on election day and the immediate days following if this thing is close at all.

That's called a response bias, and since 2016 when pollsters missed in a couple of key states, most of the major ones have studied that phenomena and have supposedly factored it into their survey results.

A lot of people watch the polls, including the candidates themselves. That's why both are hammering the hell out of Pennsylvania but not as much in Michigan, because the polls are showing that PA is the closest of the states that Trump won in 2016 and the outcome of the election could depend on it. Personally, I can see one or two states going the opposite way of the polls, but not enough of them for Trump to pull out the win. Trump would have to win nearly all of those rated as toss ups. My view is that pollsters aren't going to make the same mistake twice.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Trump pretty much convinced much of the conservative right that if they vote by mail, the Democrats will steal or lose their ballots. So they are focused on showing up in person.

I'm not sure if he's convinced them that the Dems are going to steal or lose their ballots, but you're right, more Republicans intend to vote in person on election day, by about a 2 to 1 margin from what I've seen, while most of the Democrats have already voted.

I know that due to what happened in 2016, I do not trust the polls with Trump. This thing won't be over until it's over. If polls make you sleep better, glad to hear it. For me I will wait until election day, watch what happens as these votes are counted. As far as the people I know, not one of them changed their votes from 2016. They either strongly support Trump believing he is best for the nation by leaps and bounds or hate him and believe he is the devil. I don't think I've seen anyone on this forum change their mind either. I don't think I can name one person on this forum that changed their vote.

You and I didn't like him for various reasons and didn't vote for him then or now. Cbob or I5 almost always vote Democrat or leftist like Bernie. They both hate Trump. IDhawkman loves Trump still. Hawktawk still hates him. Hated him before he was voted into office and the entire time he was in office.
burrrton we were never sure if he held his nose and voted for Trump. He disappeared months ago. I've seen a handful of articles on people who have changed their vote either for or against Trump and that is going to be interesting to see. So the only way I'll know for sure that enough votes changed to eject this guy is on election day and the days after as votes are counted.

Do you recall anyone mentioning they changed their votes on this forum or that you know?

Aseahawkfan wrote:Do you recall anyone mentioning they changed their votes on this forum or that you know?

Nope. Both Hawktalk and I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 but will be, or in my case, already have voted for Biden. That's one of the indicators I was using, no viable 3rd party or independent. I'm not just using polls to come to my conclusions.

The key to the election won't be changing Trump votes to Biden or vice versa. The key will be which side gets their supporters out. Opinions of Trump have remained relatively flat and unlike 2016, there are a lot fewer undecideds in this election. I happen to think that the Dems have a lot of voters that were unenthusiastic about Hillary and sat out 2016 but are now motivated by their hatred of Trump and will turn out to vote against him. If Trump does have 'secret' or closet voters loitering out there, they're going to have to show up in droves as the Dems have built a huge advantage in the advance voting.

One of the other differences is that so many more voters have already cast their votes, so I'm not sure what the current polls are telling us. There had been a trend in PA and FL showing that Trump had closed the gap, but that might not be as relevant had it occurred several weeks ago.

So we'll see. I'm relatively confident that Biden will win handily, but I'll be the first to say that I've been wrong before.

RiverDog wrote:Nope. Both Hawktalk and I voted for Gary Johnson in 2016 but will be, or in my case, already have voted for Biden. That's one of the indicators I was using, no viable 3rd party or independent. I'm not just using polls to come to my conclusions.

The key to the election won't be changing Trump votes to Biden or vice versa. The key will be which side gets their supporters out. Opinions of Trump have remained relatively flat and unlike 2016, there are a lot fewer undecideds in this election. I happen to think that the Dems have a lot of voters that were unenthusiastic about Hillary and sat out 2016 but are now motivated by their hatred of Trump and will turn out to vote against him. If Trump does have 'secret' or closet voters loitering out there, they're going to have to show up in droves as the Dems have built a huge advantage in the advance voting.

One of the other differences is that so many more voters have already cast their votes, so I'm not sure what the current polls are telling us. There had been a trend in PA and FL showing that Trump had closed the gap, but that might not be as relevant had it occurred several weeks ago.

So we'll see. I'm relatively confident that Biden will win handily, but I'll be the first to say that I've been wrong before.

Hopefully that will be enough if people switch from a 3rd Party to Biden. Trump seems to live under a lucky star. Let's hope his luck has run out.

Yea, if it is a close election, it will make Florida in 2000 look like a church social. I just read an article where a judge in Texas denied a petition to disqualify 127,000 votes because they were cast at drive up ballot boxes.

But like I said, keep your eyes on Wisconsin and Michigan. If Biden wins those two states, then all it will take will be one of the 6-8 toss up states to fall. If Trump takes one or both, then we could be in trouble.

You literally know what news station a person watches by what they believe. Fox News is painting a completely different narrative than CNN and MSNBC. Both blatantly pushing the political agenda of their side with a few exceptions here and there. No idea how Americans find any truth in this mess any longer.

Americans seem unable to process evidence, information, and speech to see what each candidate is about. Both parties have such amazingly huge wholes in their platforms that are frightening whether Trump almost completely disregarding COVID or the left siding with the mob that is painting the police as some kind of racist organization that it's hard to see how many Americans can feel very good voting for either of these parties.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... n-bus.html

And there's this...and another pennsylvania rally with a bunch of old people left freezing outside for hours. And the orange baboon is threatening chaos, utterly ripping the fabric that binds our nation apart'

I got it in 2016. It was Hillary although in hindsight she would have been awesome compared to this. But now we have 4 years in and people are ramming busses in trucks. The man is mentally unraveling by the day, completely out of control cheering on supporters who would menace a campaign bus.This man has a track record, a history and it isn't good or normal in any sense of the word. That he is competitive in this race is chilling, terrifying.

Aseahawkfan wrote:You literally know what news station a person watches by what they believe. Fox News is painting a completely different narrative than CNN and MSNBC. Both blatantly pushing the political agenda of their side with a few exceptions here and there. No idea how Americans find any truth in this mess any longer.

Americans seem unable to process evidence, information, and speech to see what each candidate is about. Both parties have such amazingly huge wholes in their platforms that are frightening whether Trump almost completely disregarding COVID or the left siding with the mob that is painting the police as some kind of racist organization that it's hard to see how many Americans can feel very good voting for either of these parties.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are not wild eyed leftists painting police in general as racist although many are. But neither are they in favor of police brutality or the ridiculous notion cops are 99%good. I'm not overjoyed voting for a Democrat but I cannot understand how anyone could have a death wish bad enough to sign up for 4 more years of this lunacy.There is a clear choice.

Aseahawkfan wrote:You literally know what news station a person watches by what they believe. Fox News is painting a completely different narrative than CNN and MSNBC. Both blatantly pushing the political agenda of their side with a few exceptions here and there. No idea how Americans find any truth in this mess any longer.

It's crazy, isn't it? You really don't get an idea of how diametrically opposite the two agendas are until you watch them side-by-side. My solution is to watch both in the hopes that the truth lies somewhere in-between. I always chuckle when people go into fits when I tell them I watch Fox News or the time when Idahawkman was beside himself when I told him that I watch CNN.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Americans seem unable to process evidence, information, and speech to see what each candidate is about.

The Founding Fathers had it right. One of their justifications for the Electoral College was that the common man was too stupid to be entrusted with a responsibility as important as choosing a leader. Collectively we are a country of idiots.

There are some other races and initiatives besides the fight for the White House to keep our interest from waning tomorrow night, starting with the Senate. The Dems need to flip 3 states if Biden wins, 4 if Trump wins, in order to gain control of the Senate. There's a Democratic seat in Alabama that seems sure to go to the Republican, so if that holds true, it would increase the threshold to 4 and 5.

California has an initiative on the ballot backed by Uber and Lyft that would allow them to continue to pay their drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. They argue that the future of their business in that state hangs in the balance. Unions are opposing the measure.

Colorado has an abortion initiative on the ballot that would ban abortions after 22 days of gestation. Several mostly red states already have a similar ban, but Colorado would be the first purple state to adapt one.

Massachusetts and Alaska have measures on the ballot that would allow for ranked voting in Presidential elections. Voters would have an option of ranking their choices 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. If no candidate has more than 50%, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated and the ballots re-examined and tabulated a second time. Maine already has approved such a system and will be using it for the first time tomorrow. This method theoretically would help a 3rd party candidate.

It's going to be an interesting evening. The networks are adding election law as well as constitutional law experts to their election day coverage teams to explain to their audiences the legal challenges and voting irregularities that are sure to come up. I'm scheduling myself for a nice mid afternoon nap and a late supper on Tuesday so I can stay away late as the results begin to come in.

RiverDog wrote:
The Founding Fathers had it right. One of their justifications for the Electoral College was that the common man was too stupid to be entrusted with a responsibility as important as choosing a leader. Collectively we are a country of idiots.

Its never been more true of many american voters. Low information or in the case of the trumpanzees their brain has been eaten by a cult.

Its why completely disagree about the electoral college. Low information voters gave the nuclear football to a madman only because there is an electoral college that allots enough winner take all votes to a candidate who got 47.1% to their opponents 46.9% in states such as pennsylvania . Republicans have won a majority of the vote one time in the last 32 years. Biden will almost certainly eclipse Clintons 3 million vote lead by a ways. What's the electoral college fans # of losing popular vote and being appointed president where we have to make adjustments at least to the amount of electoral votes these swing states get? 5 million? 10 million? I get tired of hearing California shouldn't pick the president. Then why should Florida or Georgia or Ohio, pennsylvania?At a minimum there should be proportional allotment of votes that represent the clear will and popular sentiment of the american people. This antiquated system with its repeated proven failures needs to be reformed regardless of the results of this election but dont count on Republicans who have lost the soul of the nation. They like power but they hate individual voters deciding who gets it. they hate american voters, dont trust them.

One person one vote. Polls show 52% of the people are not idiots. 42% truly are and placing the entire future of America in mortal peril.

Let's save the debate about the electoral college for another day. There's plenty to talk about over the course of the next few days. No need for a distraction.

The fact that Trump is concentrating his efforts in these final few days on Pennsylvania is telling. Of the 3 "blue wall" states that he cracked in 2016, PA is the one that's the most competitive. There are not many viable paths to a Trump victory, and they all involve at least one of the two big blue wall states, ie MI and PA. With Biden holding comfortable leads in MI and WI, he desperately needs the Keystone State in his column, and polls have shown him behind but within the margin of error and gaining. He needs a heavy in person turnout as the assumption is that Biden has built a big lead in early voting.

I saw where Texas has had nearly 10 million ballots already cast which would equal 57% of voters state wide. They are estimating that election day turnout will push the total vote from 66% to 75% of eligible voters. That's one of the reasons why I'm optimistic about a Biden victory as high turnouts generally favors the Democrat. If Texas falls to Biden, the election is over. Trump could win every other state he won in 2016, ie PA, MI, WI, FL, and so on, but if he loses Texas's 38 electoral votes, his total would fall below the magic 270 mark.

Hawktawk wrote:Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are not wild eyed leftists painting police in general as racist although many are. But neither are they in favor of police brutality or the ridiculous notion cops are 99%good. I'm not overjoyed voting for a Democrat but I cannot understand how anyone could have a death wish bad enough to sign up for 4 more years of this lunacy.There is a clear choice.

Have you watched Kamala Harris speak on the police? She is firmly on the other side against the police or at least she has publicly made it seem so. Whether or not she'll actually follow up her words when elected, time will tell. Kamala Harris is very politically and doesn't want to rock the boat too much.

Biden is more sensible. But at the same time Bernie Sanders and The Squad stated in an interview that Fox News got ahold with them stating they plan to push Joe Biden to be the next FDR. Likely Fox News hyping up election fears, but I am absolutely certain Ocasio-Cortez will definitely try to push Joe Biden farther left.

Let's not pretend that this is a good move for those of us that don't believe in the Trump or Democrat platform. I have a hard time imagining that once Trump is gone and you see what the Democrats start doing if they take all three houses if you don't start to look for some other candidate once Trump is gone.

I'll watch the Presidential election and the Senate Election. If they all flip Democrat, then we're pretty much at the mercy of the Democrats for 2 years at least and 4 at the presidential level. I'm not exactly looking forward to that, but it should be more tolerable than Trump constantly running his mouth.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Have you watched Kamala Harris speak on the police? She is firmly on the other side against the police or at least she has publicly made it seem so. Whether or not she'll actually follow up her words when elected, time will tell. Kamala Harris is very politically and doesn't want to rock the boat too much.

Harris is going to be almost completely out of the picture for 4 years. The vice presidency is perhaps the most inconsequential of offices in the federal government. Unless the POTUS gives them some sort of project, like Trump gave Pence with the coronavirus task force, all they are ever called on to do is to break ties in the Senate. Otherwise, they're nothing more than a glorified advisor to the POTUS and a backup in case he can't carry out his duties. If it were a football team, the VP would be carrying a clipboard. John Nance Garner, one of FDR's VP's, once said of the vice presidency that it wasn't worth a warm bucket of piss.

Aseahawkfan wrote:Biden is more sensible. But at the same time Bernie Sanders and The Squad stated in an interview that Fox News got ahold with them stating they plan to push Joe Biden to be the next FDR. Likely Fox News hyping up election fears, but I am absolutely certain Ocasio-Cortez will definitely try to push Joe Biden farther left.

That's my worry about Biden, that he will be manipulated by the progressive wing of the party, especially if they have a majority in the Senate. He's already given subtle signs that he will move in that direction.

I may or may not get blasted for this, and I am not trying to change opinions or have mine changed, but I think this one will be close; too close to call it either way. For my part, I am voting Trump. Not because I think he is a great person or an awesome leader; it's because of:
1. The Kavanaugh hearings.
2. Rioting and looting. No one ever gets made whole from having their business robbed and torn/burned down, and jobs are lost while you're at it.
3. Woke and cancel culture. Give it a rest. When I saw videos of protesters rolling up on people minding their own business at restaurants to try and force these people to join them and subsequently running them out of the place, I was done. When Gina Carano is being called ugly and fat and should lose her job because she won't put "pronouns" in her actress bio, I was done. Sorry SJWs, that's not how it works.

More than anything, a vote for Trump is my middle finger to all of those types of shenanigans. I am curious how many voters feel the same way.

For the record, no ill will towards anybody voting for Biden. You have your reasons, and Trump certainly accounts for his fair share of legitimate reasons. I have avoided being outspoken about where I stand because the tone of the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. I respect all of you, and, not matter how this shakes out, 1. y'all are good in my book, and 2. we will likely be just fine as a country regardless of outcome.

I may or may not get blasted for this, and I am not trying to change opinions or have mine changed, but I think this one will be close; too close to call it either way. For my part, I am voting Trump. Not because I think he is a great person or an awesome leader; it's because of:
1. The Kavanaugh hearings.
2. Rioting and looting. No one ever gets made whole from having their business robbed and torn/burned down, and jobs are lost while you're at it.
3. Woke and cancel culture. Give it a rest. When I saw videos of protesters rolling up on people minding their own business at restaurants to try and force these people to join them and subsequently running them out of the place, I was done. When Gina Carano is being called ugly and fat and should lose her job because she won't put "pronouns" in her actress bio, I was done. Sorry SJWs, that's not how it works.

Totally respect your opinion, but what is the logic on why rioting and looting would change in a 2nd term for Trump? He presided over the first one with rioting and looting like we never saw under previous presidents. Wouldn't that suggest the same ingredients are there for it to continue? Also, mutiple incidents of rioting and looting has been shown to be instigated NOT by protestors, but by other forces including far right to sabotage the peaceful protests. It's an effective tool, and I would do the same if I was trying to discredit the peaceful protests, because it does just that. If Trump has been president the whole time, what will he do differently, and why isn't he doing it now? This is not a smart aleck questtion...I really want to know what the difference would be in the 2nd term and why not do it now.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I may or may not get blasted for this, and I am not trying to change opinions or have mine changed, but I think this one will be close; too close to call it either way. For my part, I am voting Trump. Not because I think he is a great person or an awesome leader; it's because of:
1. The Kavanaugh hearings.
2. Rioting and looting. No one ever gets made whole from having their business robbed and torn/burned down, and jobs are lost while you're at it.
3. Woke and cancel culture. Give it a rest. When I saw videos of protesters rolling up on people minding their own business at restaurants to try and force these people to join them and subsequently running them out of the place, I was done. When Gina Carano is being called ugly and fat and should lose her job because she won't put "pronouns" in her actress bio, I was done. Sorry SJWs, that's not how it works.

More than anything, a vote for Trump is my middle finger to all of those types of shenanigans. I am curious how many voters feel the same way.

For the record, no ill will towards anybody voting for Biden. You have your reasons, and Trump certainly accounts for his fair share of legitimate reasons. I have avoided being outspoken about where I stand because the tone of the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. I respect all of you, and, not matter how this shakes out, 1. y'all are good in my book, and 2. we will likely be just fine as a country regardless of outcome.

I applaud you for your honesty and courage. As you noted, all of those of us that are left and that regularly contribute to this forum are steadfastly against DJT, and I appreciate your friendly gestures.

I understand your reasoning and see where you're coming from. I don't like those shenanigans, either. But in my view, there are larger issues than the culture war that is currently going on. Besides, maintaining DJT as our President is only going to make that culture war worse. He is largely responsible for the ugliness and divisiveness that currently plagues our country.

In any event, don't let the tone of our comments prevent you from giving us your 2 cents worth more often.

I-5 wrote:Totally respect your opinion, but what is the logic on why rioting and looting would change in a 2nd term for Trump? He presided over the first one with rioting and looting like we never saw under previous presidents. Wouldn't that suggest the same ingredients are there for it to continue? Also, mutiple incidents of rioting and looting has been shown to be instigated NOT by protestors, but by other forces including far right to sabotage the peaceful protests. It's an effective tool, and I would do the same if I was trying to discredit the peaceful protests, because it does just that. If Trump has been president the whole time, what will he do differently, and why isn't he doing it now? This is not a smart aleck questtion...I really want to know what the difference would be in the 2nd term and why not do it now.

I can answer that for Washington State. The Democrats seem to be doing absolutely nothing to stop the riots. They would rather spend their time fighting Trump than stopping riots and property damage. So you should tell Mack what the Democrats intend to do to stop the rioting and looting when they are doing nothing to stop it right now?

Trump tried to send help, but was repudiated by Democratic leadership in those cities who told him they didn't need help. Why are you trying to spread a lie that Trump did not try to help?

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I may or may not get blasted for this, and I am not trying to change opinions or have mine changed, but I think this one will be close; too close to call it either way. For my part, I am voting Trump. Not because I think he is a great person or an awesome leader; it's because of:
1. The Kavanaugh hearings.
2. Rioting and looting. No one ever gets made whole from having their business robbed and torn/burned down, and jobs are lost while you're at it.
3. Woke and cancel culture. Give it a rest. When I saw videos of protesters rolling up on people minding their own business at restaurants to try and force these people to join them and subsequently running them out of the place, I was done. When Gina Carano is being called ugly and fat and should lose her job because she won't put "pronouns" in her actress bio, I was done. Sorry SJWs, that's not how it works.

More than anything, a vote for Trump is my middle finger to all of those types of shenanigans. I am curious how many voters feel the same way.

For the record, no ill will towards anybody voting for Biden. You have your reasons, and Trump certainly accounts for his fair share of legitimate reasons. I have avoided being outspoken about where I stand because the tone of the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. I respect all of you, and, not matter how this shakes out, 1. y'all are good in my book, and 2. we will likely be just fine as a country regardless of outcome.

My opinion is that your reasoning is akin to poking a hive with a stick as a big middle finger to the bees 'cause you don't like getting stung.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:I may or may not get blasted for this, and I am not trying to change opinions or have mine changed, but I think this one will be close; too close to call it either way. For my part, I am voting Trump. Not because I think he is a great person or an awesome leader; it's because of:
1. The Kavanaugh hearings.
2. Rioting and looting. No one ever gets made whole from having their business robbed and torn/burned down, and jobs are lost while you're at it.
3. Woke and cancel culture. Give it a rest. When I saw videos of protesters rolling up on people minding their own business at restaurants to try and force these people to join them and subsequently running them out of the place, I was done. When Gina Carano is being called ugly and fat and should lose her job because she won't put "pronouns" in her actress bio, I was done. Sorry SJWs, that's not how it works.

More than anything, a vote for Trump is my middle finger to all of those types of shenanigans. I am curious how many voters feel the same way.

For the record, no ill will towards anybody voting for Biden. You have your reasons, and Trump certainly accounts for his fair share of legitimate reasons. I have avoided being outspoken about where I stand because the tone of the forum is decidedly anti-Trump. I respect all of you, and, not matter how this shakes out, 1. y'all are good in my book, and 2. we will likely be just fine as a country regardless of outcome.

You don't get much honesty on this forum about Democrats. They hate Trump and will give the Democrats a free pass on almost everything and believe almost anything the Democrats are selling. They are very much in the Democrat and leftist camp even when evidence is contrary.

I'm glad you have legitimate reasons for your vote.

I'll tell why I did not vote for Trump. I voted No Confidence in this crop of candidates.

1. I believe any change that will occur is because Americans choose to make change happen. You cannot continue to vote for the same parties, policies, actions, and people and expect change. These current politicians are so wrapped up in what they believe, they forget they are governing for an entire nation with a clear Constitution and set of values. So they promise what is contrary to the beliefs of this nation.

2. Trump is a selfish, narcissistic force of chaos. He likes to stoke people's hate, fears, and push every vindictive and petty fight he can. He can't manage his ego to do what is necessary and right for the nation.

3. Trump has stated multiple times he does not want to help citizens and cities based on political affiliation. I have never heard a president state something like this in my life. Regardless of your party affiliation, when you take over as president you are president of all the people. You should never threaten half the nation that you will not assist them or send them help if needed due to their political affiliation. That is some third world dictator type of garbage.

4. The coronavirus response has been terrible on a Federal level. A global pandemic and virus does not care about political affiliation, Constitutions, or what not. Fear-mongering that our liberty will be taken away by a virus is rubbish. We had a flu pandemic in 1918. Our liberty and life came back fine from that and it is worse. I do not think a president disregarding the science on this virus, not doing contact tracing, implementing national standards for virus control, and taking national measures to gain control of this is smart at all. America should have been taking global leadership on this with our vast resources and power, but instead Trump decided to politicize this, use it to attack China, and engage in terrible, irresponsible, and foolish behavior.


I did not vote for Biden for many of the reasons you listed. Democrats are offering no quality vision of the future. Just more race-baiting, pandering to mob justice, no standards for behavior or education, just tax and spend money into a holes they don't want to admit exist. And they are every bit as corrupt as Trump as anyone who reads deeper than a puddle can see with Hunter Biden. If Joe didn't know his son was going around using his name and his political connections to make money, then Joe is dumb. I think he knew and it is a standard behavior for even Democratic politicians who are every bit as wealth as Republicans.

We're in a no win situations if we let these two parties continue to run our country into the ground.

I-5 wrote:Totally respect your opinion, but what is the logic on why rioting and looting would change in a 2nd term for Trump? He presided over the first one with rioting and looting like we never saw under previous presidents. Wouldn't that suggest the same ingredients are there for it to continue? Also, mutiple incidents of rioting and looting has been shown to be instigated NOT by protestors, but by other forces including far right to sabotage the peaceful protests. It's an effective tool, and I would do the same if I was trying to discredit the peaceful protests, because it does just that. If Trump has been president the whole time, what will he do differently, and why isn't he doing it now? This is not a smart aleck questtion...I really want to know what the difference would be in the 2nd term and why not do it now.

Aseahawkfan wrote:I can answer that for Washington State. The Democrats seem to be doing absolutely nothing to stop the riots. They would rather spend their time fighting Trump than stopping riots and property damage. So you should tell Mack what the Democrats intend to do to stop the rioting and looting when they are doing nothing to stop it right now?

Trump tried to send help, but was repudiated by Democratic leadership in those cities who told him they didn't need help. Why are you trying to spread a lie that Trump did not try to help?

The answer is that you're both right. I5 is right in that this is Donald Trump's America. He is doing nothing but pouring gas on the fire, with his rhetoric and his refusal to repudiate white supremacy. As General Mattis once said, Trump is the first POTUS that doesn't even try to unite us. He derives his power by dividing people.

On the other hand, ASF is correct in that the Dems have done absolutely nothing to stop the rioting and looting and have created a situation where WSE's see the unrestricted violence as an opportunity to get in on the action themselves and confront what they see as a threat to their way of life. The Democrats refusal to protect lives and property is largely responsible for the problems we've had this summer.

I-5 wrote: Totally respect your opinion, but what is the logic on why rioting and looting would change in a 2nd term for Trump? He presided over the first one with rioting and looting like we never saw under previous presidents. Wouldn't that suggest the same ingredients are there for it to continue? Also, mutiple incidents of rioting and looting has been shown to be instigated NOT by protestors, but by other forces including far right to sabotage the peaceful protests. It's an effective tool, and I would do the same if I was trying to discredit the peaceful protests, because it does just that. If Trump has been president the whole time, what will he do differently, and why isn't he doing it now? This is not a smart aleck questtion...I really want to know what the difference would be in the 2nd term and why not do it now.

Not a smart aleck question, but I didn't say it would stop with a Trump win. It is possible we could see more unrest, initially, if Trump pulls out a win. I think a lot of it will die down with whoever wins, with a Trump win keeping the flame burning a little longer, but that too will fizzle out once people have to accept reality. I don't know the motivations and intentions of all protestors. Maybe some really believe they are justified in destruction and stealing, maybe some are just opportunists using it to their advantage, I don't know. My perception is that the left is okay with it and the people participating know it.

Besides recommending governors to deploy their National Guardsmen to help protect citizens and property and publicly decrying rioting and looting, I can't think of anything else he has done. Well, there was the federal agents deployed in Portland. Beyond that, what can he do? Martial law? I say that knowing it is an exaggeration, but I really don't know what else you want him to do. What I haven't seen is anybody any Democrat leadership giving anything more than lip service to condemning rioting, looting, and violence. In my opinion, they haven't come out strongly against it (i.e. supporting arrest and prosecution to the extent lawfully possible) because they worry they'll turn off some of their base. Hell, the CHOP lasted a hell of a lot longer than it should have and that was one of the dumbest things I have seen allowed to happen by a state governor. I don't believe there has been a unified front against this behavior because the Democrats don't want to lose support while the GOP knows that a hard stance will go over well with it's voter base. So, no, I am not voting for the side that I perceive as supporting it/not strongly opposing it.

c_hawkbob wrote:My opinion is that your reasoning is akin to poking a hive with a stick as a big middle finger to the bees 'cause you don't like getting stung.

I don't know that that refers to points 1 and 2; I am assuming you are referring to my 3rd point about woke cancel culture. Perhaps you don't see it as a big deal, but it is indicative, to me, of how far left things could go, and I have no interest in seeing that happen. I am not a big fan of anything the left represents right now.

I would actually say I was referring more to points 1 and 2 than 3. #3 is just a further manifestation of the PC culture than anything else and IMO is less political in nature than it is just the evolution of an ever growing and increasingly diverse society.

"The good old days" are gone and they ain't coming back. Which is fine by me, they were not as good as they are remembered.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Not a smart aleck question, but I didn't say it would stop with a Trump win. It is possible we could see more unrest, initially, if Trump pulls out a win. I think a lot of it will die down with whoever wins, with a Trump win keeping the flame burning a little longer, but that too will fizzle out once people have to accept reality. I don't know the motivations and intentions of all protestors. Maybe some really believe they are justified in destruction and stealing, maybe some are just opportunists using it to their advantage, I don't know. My perception is that the left is okay with it and the people participating know it.

The intensity and duration of the protests and riots were due to the pandemic and associated lockdowns and layoffs. When the pandemic is over and business is back to normal, things will quiet down.

And I, too, have the impression that the left regards the protests as collateral damage. They'll justify the violence by noting that 'most' of the protests are peaceful.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:Besides recommending governors to deploy their National Guardsmen to help protect citizens and property and publicly decrying rioting and looting, I can't think of anything else he (Trump) has done....Beyond that, what can he (Trump) do? Martial law? I say that knowing it is an exaggeration, but I really don't know what else you want him to do.

It's not what Trump did or didn't do, it's how he went about it. He made the potential use of the National Guard political, taunting the Dem governors and mayors by his use of very public, very caustic language and tweets, said if they didn't take care of it, he would. He made it personal. Those Governors and mayors didn't want to be seen as caving into Trump's demands, so they did nothing more than make a superficial response. What Trump should have done is picked up the phone and talk to them in private.

MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:What I haven't seen is anybody any Democrat leadership giving anything more than lip service to condemning rioting, looting, and violence. In my opinion, they haven't come out strongly against it (i.e. supporting arrest and prosecution to the extent lawfully possible) because they worry they'll turn off some of their base. Hell, the CHOP lasted a hell of a lot longer than it should have and that was one of the dumbest things I have seen allowed to happen by a state governor. I don't believe there has been a unified front against this behavior because the Democrats don't want to lose support while the GOP knows that a hard stance will go over well with it's voter base. So, no, I am not voting for the side that I perceive as supporting it/not strongly opposing it.

If that were the only issue, or even one of the major issues, then I would be with you. But in my mind, the number one issue is Donald Trump's leadership, or lack thereof. He horribly mismanaged the coronavirus response and turned things like mask wearing into a violation of personal rights. In my opinion, he does not have the intellect nor the discipline to do an effective job managing the executive branch. He acts like a jerk, like a professional wrestler, rather than the leader of 330 million people. He is a racist, a sexist, a xenophobe, a narcissist, and a moron.

I could go on, but I suspect that you've heard that from me for quite some time so I'll stop.