Dude you said it was fairly uneventful and alluded to it not having a high turnout. These were your words. "2020 as a campaign was fairly boring/uneventful. I can imagine 2024 being even worse." What did you mean by being even worse, as if the turnout in 20/20 was bad? So you don't think Trump being on the ballot would be a new existential threat, the same way it was in 20/20. Do you really think voters will say maybe he will be better this time?
Who here is ignoring anything? Who said Incumbency is a magical shield. We just are not thinking it's doom and gloom and cherry-picking things to be afraid of.
I would agree. I think there is very good chance Trump would still be President if not for COVID. He might still be President if he had been less chaotic and focussed on his response to COVID.
Whereas saying that the 2024 election is all but over is not just pessimistic but is an inability to think beyond just current conditions.
, no one has said anything about "incumbency is some magical shield"; in fact, i made reference to Bush Sr, the incumbent w a ~90% approval rate who then ended up losing re-election
You seem to have a lot of certainty about the result of the 2024 election and that the Biden Presidency is doomed. IS that not your position?
Speaking of having an argument with someone who doesn't exist have I said that incumbency is a "magical shield"?
No, it isn't. Here are the two statements I've made regarding Biden's 2024 chances. "Back to water level" is slang for back to 50/50. I'm forecasting a bit here because we don't truly know who Biden's opponent will be, but I do not see the smooth sailing back to the Oval Office most everyone else is assuming if it's Trump. That will be another insanely close race and more difficult than last time IMO because Trump won't have the COVID meltdown hanging around his neck. Everything else I've said in this thread is in regards to how close things were and still are despite some people's insistence to the contrary.
Well, your response to basically every shred of evidence about the closeness of the race that was and the race that will be has been some version of "but incumbency". Magic shield, engage! Pew pew!
Fair enough and if you reread my post you will see I've largely agreed with much of what you've said and have gone to pains to say I'm not giving in guarantees. The difference I see though is you're claiming I'm "wish casting" when I state certain possibilities. If that is your view then you might want to reconsider claiming having a debate with someone who doesn't exist.
Do you not grasp how much of a fart on the wind 40,000 votes is in a Presidential election? The "Ifs" here are not large or numerous. They are microscopic and vanishing in number. A change in the weather in a few counties last November could have altered the outcome, that's how close it was.
Really... Again I even agreed with you a race between Biden and Trump would likely be very close. I even cited several other reasons why Biden could win including COVID being over and inflation being under control by 2024. Your response is a cartoon about a magic shield? Who is really having an argument with someone who doesn't exist?
How Biden Lost The Plot Listening to interest groups and activists is no way to get re-elected. https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/how-biden-lost-the-plot-312 excerpt: Another aspect of the problem is that so many Dem activists and groups have deeply imbibed the notion that America in 2022 is a “white supremacist” country, designed to suppress non-whites, and that we are now living in a system of de facto “legal fascism,” with a minority “white” party holding the country in its undemocratic grip, perhaps forever. The Democrats and elite liberals really seem to believe that we are back in the 1960s or 1890s or even 1860s, that we live in a black-vs-white world of good vs evil, and that the choice today is literally, in Biden’s words, between backing Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis. This is as self-righteous as it is ludicrous. It’s MLK envy. It’s an attempt to recreate the moral clarity of the civil rights movement, in a country no one from 1964 would begin to recognize. The Democrats also increasingly view the Constitution itself as a problem for democracy. Notice how frequently they bring up the anti-majoritarian nature of the Senate and the Electoral College, as if that’s a bug and not a feature of the American republican balance. Notice how adding seats to the Supreme Court is also popular among Dems, because they have been outmaneuvered by the wily and shameless McConnell in the Congress. And how many more columns in the MSM do I have to read by people who believe the next election will be our last if the Republicans win? I remember when Norm Ornstein and Ron Brownstein, for example, were solid pillars of centrist conventional wisdom. Now, they both appear to believe it’s 1933 in Weimar, and without a federal takeover of elections, our democracy is over. Our democracy isn’t over. It’s our liberal democracy that’s under threat, and this kind of morally pure Manicheanism is one reason why. more
eg of someone who is math/data-challenged, as it relates to electoral votes an incoherent response to my post that had cited Biden's comfortable electoral win against the incumbent, 306 to 232
