[Teaboy]

Can anyone explain to me why restrictions on postal voting will hamper Democrats more than the GOP?

[abarro81]

I think it's to do with the placement of polling stations and their ease of accessibility - fewer in certain democrat-strong areas, harder for poorer people (no cars) to get to them (accentuated when public transport is more dangerous due to COVID etc. Whatever the causes (probably a mix of multiple things), I'm sure I've seen stats that Dems do better than Republicans in postal ballots

[Sasquatch]

Due to the fact that a significant number of republicans still believe covid is "no big deal" or a hoax.  Therefore they'll go to the polls.  Democrats on the other hand seem to view Covid as a real concern, so going to a crowded indoor location to vote is dangerous, and will therefore result in lower turnout.

The only reason is the reaction to covid.  In the past republicans have been pro mail in voting.

[andy popp]

As Barrows suggests, an increase in mail-in voting has been seized on as an excuse to close polling stations, often in largely black or low income neighbourhoods. This has happened numerous times in primaries this year, resulting in huge lines etc. Milwaukee went from 180 polling stations to five.

The irony is that Trump has voted by mail in Florida, where is registered to vote at Mar a Lago, which registration is probably illegal as it is zoned as a club and may not be used as a private domestic residence.

[TobyD]

Not content with trying to cripple the postal service,  Trump is airing a 'birther' conspiracy about Kamala Harris,  as widely reported. This does feel like desperation and I wonder how much hes really starting to worry about the election.  The Israeli/ UAE deal is another example of using power for thinly veiled electioneering.

I hope hes unsuccessful,  but I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.

[mrjonathanr]

I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.

Or dispute the result.

[TobyD]

I'm concerned that as hes clearly prepared to sink to any depth to retain office, he will find a way to 'win'.

Or dispute the result.

That's exactly the sort of thing I mean. But I'm sure that however low you or I might guess he'll sink, he'll do something worse.

[andy popp]

What's especially gross about the Kamala Harris "birther" smears is that it's all by his normal innuendo - "Well, I don't know but some people are saying. And by the way, he's a smart lawyer" etc. etc. He doesn't even have the balls to own it. One White spokesperson said something along the lines of "these are very serious questions and she should answer," implying Harris is somehow being less than transparent. The facts of her birth and citizenship are entirely known and to argue she is not a citizen can't even be described as a fringe position. Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for ever printing the original article.

The attacks on the USPS are deeply concerning - though they also seem to be making people even more determined to vote.

[TobyD]

What's especially gross about the Kamala Harris "birther" smears is that it's all by his normal innuendo - "Well, I don't know but some people are saying. And by the way, he's a smart lawyer" etc. etc. He doesn't even have the balls to own it. One White spokesperson said something along the lines of "these are very serious questions and she should answer," implying Harris is somehow being less than transparent. The facts of her birth and citizenship are entirely known and to argue she is not a citizen can't even be described as a fringe position. Newsweek should be ashamed of themselves for ever printing the original article.

The attacks on the USPS are deeply concerning - though they also seem to be making people even more determined to vote.

I suspect that both of these, and the Iranian sanctions issue are a strategy of gaslighting to distract as many people as possible from the bald fact that while the Don has been playing golf and exhibiting gross incompetence, hundreds of thousands of people have been dying and the economy has been disappearing down the toilet.

[mrjonathanr]

In other news, a full blown QAnon conspiracy theorist (and raving racist) won a primary for a safe Republican house seat in Georgia last night: this lunatic will almost certainly be in Congress in November - I think large swathes of even the GOP are dismayed at the prospect.

Well he’s come right out and given it his usual slippery endorsement now, hasn’t he? He puts me in mind of Nero. Bananas.

[TobyD]

I'm increasingly even more convinced that Trump will win a second time. It's looking like 2016 all over again, and the Republican convention was just the sort of insane reality TV that draws attention. He's willing to lie and completely make up accusations about Biden.
I just don't think that he can make any worse gaffes than he has already, Biden would have to do something pretty special at this point to win, it's not going to be enough to be affable, presidential and sensible. Sadly, I don't think any of the other Democrat candidates would have been any better.

I seriously hope I'm wrong.

[mrjonathanr]

I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

[IanP]

I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.

[TobyD]

I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.

You're ignoring the distribution of voting. This is unbelievably disproportionate, the popular vote doesn't earn anyone any prizes. Also, in some circles saying that you will vote for Trump is socially embarrassing; when they poll who people think that their neighbours will vote for Trump does much better.

There was a political strategist on Americast who said that the undecided portion of the population who will have vast amounts of money thrown at them in the form of advertising is about 2.5%; and that given the expenditure, it'd actually be cheaper to buy them all a steak dinner and a glass of wine as a bribe instead.

[IanP]

I hope you are wrong too, but admit it is perfectly possible.

Agree that its possible but a long way from a certainty.  I don't want to be over optimistic but the numbers for Trump look significantly worse than they did in 2016 so I hold on to hope.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/ - Clinton's lead was generally around 3 to 7 points and she was never at more than 46%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/national/ - Biden's lead since mid June has been generally been between 8 and 9.5 points and he's only dropped below 50% for a couple of short periods.

Obviously lots of time to go and Trump will bring all his lies and madness to bear but don't think we need to despair yet.

You're ignoring the distribution of voting. This is unbelievably disproportionate, the popular vote doesn't earn anyone any prizes. Also, in some circles saying that you will vote for Trump is socially embarrassing; when they poll who people think that their neighbours will vote for Trump does much better.

Not ignoring distribution of voting, it's clear that Trump has an advantage in the electoral college but that doesn't mean he can win the election whatever happens.  In 2016 Trump lost the popular vote by 2% as against polls which had him around 3-4% behind.  In the current situation if the same happened and he lost the popular vote by 6-7% improving by 2% on polls which have him 8-9% behind his electoral college advantages almost certainly wouldn't help him.

Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!

[TobyD]

Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!

But... a proportion of people who will vote for him won't admit it. He's doing his utmost to exploit the BLM protests, repulsive though it is, as hes tweeting his sadness about the shooting of members of white supremacist groups but not about black people who have died.  This will, horrible though it is, gain him a few more votes. I doubt if it'll lose him any since anyone who really dislikes him decided that long ago.
Biden has to do a lot more than hoping that people are sick of Trump and after a bit of  P&Q.

[Oldmanmatt]

Just to repeat - I'm not saying Trump definitely won't win, but to say he's definitely going to win seems pessimistic and not supported by the current evidence.   I know the bookmakers got it wrong last time but they currently have it neck and neck which doesn't feel miles out to me - I won't be putting my money either way!

But... a proportion of people who will vote for him won't admit it. He's doing his utmost to exploit the BLM protests, repulsive though it is, as hes tweeting his sadness about the shooting of members of white supremacist groups but not about black people who have died.  This will, horrible though it is, gain him a few more votes. I doubt if it'll lose him any since anyone who really dislikes him decided that long ago.
Biden has to do a lot more than hoping that people are sick of Trump and after a bit of  P&Q.

There is a significant change in the attitude of many:
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/08/31/as-trumps-popularity-slips-in-latest-military-times-poll-more-troops-say-theyll-vote-for-biden/

For instance, amongst the enlisted ranks of the military, he enjoyed a great deal of support a few years ago. Several high profile incidents tarnished that recently, for sure, but the housing and health care scandals of the past months (both for serving and veterans) have seriously eroded his popularity.

[andy popp]

Toby, I think you are probably overestimating the numbers of genuinely undecided voters and underestimating the willingness of many to voice their support for Trump. Doesn't mean your prediction is necessarily wrong though.

[Sasquatch]

I think there is a big difference between Trump 2016 (who was an unknown from a political perspective) running against Hillary (who was actively disliked by many moderates), and Trump 2020 vs Biden. 

Those who were uncertain of Trump are no longer uncertain.  The DNC's actions in 2016 pushed many away from Hillary and they were willing to take a chance on an outsider.  I think it is foolish to underestimate the number of people who voted against Hillary (or just didn't show up) as opposed to those who voted "for" Trump.  Now Trump is a known commodity.  Those who vote for him are doing so because they support his policies. No longer is it a "lesser of two evils" question. 

Toby - you say his tweeting may gain him a few votes.  I don't see it.  Those people voted for him already and aren't in the swing votes. 

[TobyD]

I think there is a big difference between Trump 2016...o
Those who were uncertain of Trump are no longer uncertain.  The DNC's actions in 2016 pushed many away from Hillary and they were willing to take a chance on an outsider.  I think it is foolish to underestimate the number of people who voted against Hillary (or just didn't show up) as opposed to those who voted "for" Trump.  Now Trump is a known commodity.  Those who vote for him are doing so because they support his policies. No longer is it a "lesser of two evils" question. 
Toby - you say his tweeting may gain him a few votes.  I don't see it.  Those people voted for him already and aren't in the swing votes.

However,  you and I might actually pay attention to a politician or party's policies before voting for them, but many, many people don't.  They pay little or no attention to politics or the news, and make a snap decision based on whatever they most remember.  Trump's booming that he's the president of law and order and the ceaseless tweeting will have some cut through. I actually quite like Biden and think that he would be a decent president,  I just don't think he's doing enough.

[TobyD]

This analysis is interesting:
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2020/08/new-statesman-s-2020-us-presidential-election-forecast-explained

One can only hope they're right... I'm not optimistic though

[IanP]

Fivethirtyeight favour Biden as well, but have it significantly closer (70-30)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

Methodology

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/

[moose]

Fivethirtyeight favour Biden as well, but have it significantly closer (70-30)

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2020-election-forecast/

Methodology

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeights-2020-presidential-forecast-works-and-whats-different-because-of-covid-19/

IIRC the 538 had a 70/30 probability for Hilary Clinton versus Trump.  So, they didn't predict the result but were one of the only polling sites to give Trump an appreciable chance at all.  They also always maintained that because of the precarious nature of swing states, a Trump victory was within the margin of error.

Personally, I have a horrible feeling that the US Postal Service /  mail-in votes issue will prove scandalous, and preclude a clear-cut victory - litigation ahoy and "hanging chads" all-over again.

[teestub]

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/09/trump-americans-who-died-at-war-are-losers-and-suckers/615997/

Found this pretty fascinating/horrifying.

[andy popp]

So, people may have seen Trump has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

But much more importantly, as a by-product, I've just discovered that as a professor of history I'm on the relatively restricted list of people eligible to make a nomination. Now, who should I choose?