Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant.
Roughly 53 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of the former president. And yet, when asked about Trump’s ability to handle key issues — or the impact of his policies — voters routinely give the Republican candidate higher marks than President Biden.
In a YouGov survey released this month, Trump boasted an advantage over Biden on 10 of the 15 issues polled. On the three issues that voters routinely name as top priorities — the economy, immigration, and inflation — respondents said that Trump would do a better job by double-digit margins.
Meanwhile, in a recent New York Times/Siena College poll, 40 percent of voters said that Trump’s policies had helped them personally, while just 18 percent said the same of Biden. If Americans could elect a normal human being with Trump’s reputation for being “tough” on immigration and good at economics, they would almost certainly do so.
Biden is fortunate that voters do not have that option. But to erase Trump’s small but stubborn lead in the polls, the president needs to erode his GOP rival’s advantage on the issues.
Genojoe does not win if that’s who you decide to run in the end.
Your move, DNC.
Edit: Libs always exercising their ability to down-vote but never their ability to vote for an actual candidate 😂
Who is this “actual candidate” you keep blustering about? You’re all “fuck genocide joe and the neolibs” but never once have any of you offered a viable alternative. Special, urgent emphasis on viable, by the way. Otherwise, I am going to assume you do want Trump to win as some sort of accelerationist gambit so the proletariat revolution can finally begin… well, guess what, in the power vacuum you want so bad, you’ll be surprised to see who actually ends up against that wall.
Make sure you renew your passport bby
Bull puckey, dumps would in no way definable be “on track to win a historic landslide”.
He didn’t win by a landslide in 2016, he lost in 2020, and he’s in a far weaker position today than in either of those elections.
He lost by an extremely thin margin in 2020 and that was on the back of COVID and before people had a chance to experience four years of Biden. I have no idea how you’re this confident. Does this look promising to you?
And before you all jump down my throat thinking I want Trump to win: I hate that fucker and hope he dies before the election.
Has a chance? Sure.
“On track to win a historical landslide”? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.
That picture does not look promising or relevant.
Don’t cast your assumptions on me to attack them; make up whatever throat-jumping stories you like, but leave me out of them.
“On track to win a historical landslide”? Not at all. Zero evidence for that.
The article doesn’t claim that. It claims that a generic Republican would be on track to win a historical landslide. But not Trump because of his unfavorability.
I don’t know which article you read, but:
“Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November — if so many US voters didn’t find him personally repugnant.”
That’s exactly the case the article is making, and that case has no legs to stand on.
What? Did you read it? It shows generic R polling vs. Biden winning big but Trump v. Biden polling low. That indicates that the majority of Americans would be open to a Republican Presidency, just not a Trump presidency. They make the case with polling data.
Wow, hyperbolic polling “data” that is consistently inaccurate and being constantly manipulated and interfered with hypothesizing a fictional republican representative with zero adverse character traits?
Weird that people aren’t giving that more weight…
Wow, hyperbolic polling “data” that is consistently inaccurate
Citation needed.
Slightly off-topic, but I really hate that the Rs are so goddamn horrific that the Ds can just gesture at how bad the Rs are and not actually do much tangibly for their voters compared to… say… like how LBJ did with the passing of the addition of Medicare and Medicaid to Social Security or FDR with the “Rural Electrification Act”… because they know that the alternative for voters not voting for them = enabling of fascists who will speedrun the 4th Reich.
I really wish the left was even half as powerful as what the demagogue-spouting right-wing news stations pretended.
Obama floated a single-payer option for healthcare, he was stopped by Republicans. People also need to realize that the Democrats scraping by means they have to compromise to survive.
You want them to do more? They need a mandate, not a razor thin slice. The Republicans have gerrymandered the fuck out of your country and made it so that even when they aren’t elected, they can control or block everything. They’ve made it impossible for Democrats to get a landslide, blocked absolutely everything they can, stirred up as much voter apathy as possible, so that even when they lose, they win. And you’re buying right into it.
This is also why everyone should vote Democrat. You only have two parties in your country. If the Democrats always win because the Republicans are too right wing, they will forced to abandon their most repugnant social policies to save the golden goose, tax cuts and cutting social programs.
This will force Democrats to move left to differentiate themselves, and so forth. Short of electoral reform which will never happen, it has to become political suicide to be against abortion, LGBTQ issues, etc like it is in other countries.
Obama floated a single-payer option for healthcare, he was stopped by Republicans.
You might want to check that one out again. The Ds had a majority in Congress and managed to fuck themselves on that one.
Single payer will never pass, big insurance owns too many congress people on both sides of the isle. A couple million dollar payoff for a dissenting vote is much cheaper than the billions they’d lose if either ACA is repealed, or we cut them out of the game with something like universal healthcare.
Stopped by republicans and republicans cosplaying as Democrats. Is that better?
Point is, slim majority at best. Look to any parliamentary democracy to see what a real majority is.
republicans cosplaying as Democrats
but we need to vote for the republicans cosplaying as Democrats so that they can continue to be the reason we don’t get anything instead of Republicans. The fatal flaw in the idea that people like Manchin, Sinema and other blue dogs are another obstacle the Dems need to overcome is that Dems. Chose. Them. Those people are in congress getting in the way of the democratic agenda because democrats put them there.
Too long since I’ve said this:
Fuck you, Republicans!
Socialism 2024
Fuck blue maga and their genocide
The message is clear. Republicans want to raise the retirement age to 69, outlaw abortion on a national level. Vote Republican at your own peril.
Socialism 2024
Fuck blue maga and their genocide
If you read the article, it says the Republicans are proposing raising the age to collect full Social Security benefits to 69 (it is now currently 67). That’s not quite the same as ‘cutting’ social security.
BTW, the surplus SS currently has in its account will run dry in about 10 years. Once that happens, Social Security will become a pay as you go program if nothing changes, which means benefits will be reduced by about 25% (i.e. the amount of money coming in from SS taxes will only cover about 75% of projected outlays).
Not to defend their stance, but you obviously have no idea what Social Security is and the reasoning you won’t be getting a single dime.
I did read the article. The current age to collect full benefits is 67. They are proposing it be raised to 69. Please illuminate for me what I am missing.
So when you paid into it, you were told you would get money out at 67.
You will no longer be getting paid for those 2 years, thus are getting less money back from the gov (and forcing 67-69 y/os potentially back into the work place).
I’m not a fan of raising it but you’re just incorrect and ought to look into how this works.
You can start pulling benefits out at 62 but you can collect more per month the longer you wait.
There is nothing stopping you from deciding at age 62 to start collecting if you’re fine with the lower amount.
Next, the amount provided is never promised. You pay into Social Security for current benefit recipients and Social Security gives you an estimated amount of benefits you may see. This is called out many times, and I implore you to utilize the information on its site effectively.
Here’s the disclaimer:
We can’t provide your actual benefit amount until you apply for benefits. And that amount may differ from the retirement estimates because: …
- Your estimated benefits are based on current law. The law governing benefits amounts may change. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time.
Bro they hope you fucking die before you take it out. It’s a “cut” per OPs question you dork.
Now who has no idea what Social Security is? If this proposal passes, I can still retire at 62 (with reduced monthly benefits). The proposal is to increase the age at which you receive ***full ***benefits.
“You will no longer be getting paid for those 2 years” - That is absolutely not true. I would not receive full benefits for those two years if this proposal passes.
One additional fun fact I gleemed from the article that no one here has mentioned: according to this article, if this proposal passes, it would amount to a 14% cut. But if nothing changes, the Social Security trust fund will become insolvent in 2033 (just 9 years away!!) which will result in a 23% cut.
Care to edit the OG comment that you were wrong?
It literally doesn’t matter, unless people go out and vote. Seriously, if you don’t vote, you deserve 4 more years of that loser.
I don’t think “not voting” should lead to what trumpers will do to this country. BUT, voting is easy enough that if they really care they better make the little effort it takes.
Just throwing this out there: it’s not so easy for everyone, red states in particular love to add roadblocks to it including closing so many polling places that voters at the remaining places will likely face many hours of standing in line, particularly in areas more likely to vote blue, and have even passed laws making it illegal to shuttle people to the polls or pass out water to people waiting to vote.
I don’t live in a swing state. Voting for President is literally pointless for me.
You can get me to the poll if the vote is for abolishing the electoral college, or if ranked choice/instant runoff becomes the method used to determine the winner.
Not going to bother otherwise.
President is just one of many things you’re voting on. Passing on voting because of that is a very bad idea.
President is just one of many things you’re voting on.
Uh, yeah, that’s why I specifically said “voting for President”.
Plus this whole thread is specifically about the Presidential race.
You can get me to the poll if the vote is for abolishing the electoral college or if ranked choice/instant runoff becomes the method used to determine the winner.
Not going to bother otherwise.
You said you won’t go to the poll, meaning you won’t vote for anything. It’s all on the same ballot.
Bad word choice, what I meant is that I’m not interested in voting for President unless that particular vote also came with one/both of those things ‘attached’.
